Laserfiche WebLink
yJ <br />from the property values in this area. Mr. Tallon requested a legal opinion from the law <br />department on lot 156. Mr. Dubelko shall include in such legal opinion the issue of whether or <br />not the city is bound to permit the owner to develop these lots with the 48 foot frontage. <br />Councilman Nashar agreed with the plauning commission that a concrete road should be required <br />in conjunction with today's standards <br />R. Tallon moved to table the Broxbourne Road Extension (east): Improvement Plans till the next <br />meeting at which time a report will be provided from the law department on all the legaliries of <br />this proposal and the developer should return to planning commission with a design compatible <br />to those requirements. The motion was seconded by T. Herbster and unanimously approved. <br />V. COMMUNICATIONS: <br />None. <br />VI. CONIlVIITTEE REPORTS: <br />None. <br />VII. MINOR CHANGES: <br />None. <br />VIII. NEW BUSINESS: <br />None. <br />IX. OLD BUSINESS: <br />Per Cou.ncilman O'Grady's request, Chairman Tallon reopened Ordinance 97-57 for discussion. <br />Gu.rrently the city requires a six foot fence around in=ground swimming pools and a fence along <br />the top of above ground pools to create a six foot barrier. Ordinance 97-57, if approved, would <br />require a four foot fence around in-ground stvimming pools, however a fence would not be <br />needed for a four foot above ground swimming pooL At the previous meeting the members had <br />some safety concerns about changing this requirement. Councilman O'Grady advised that he sent <br />out an information letter to the- planniug commission members explaining his reasoning for <br />requesting that planning commission reconsider Ordinance 97-57. He requested that the plauning <br />commission , look at what is the objective of the current standards and what is the impact on the <br />citizens of North Olmsted. The Ordinance was drafted by Mr. O'Grady after investigating a <br />complamt received by a resident. Councilman O'Grady advised he contacted the building <br />department and it was originally believed the fence requ.irement was part of the building code. <br />Later it was noted that this requirement is not a building code requirement but is in fact a zoning <br />requirement. Councilman O'Grady wondered why the zoning code requires six feet. Mr. <br />O'Grady has done extensive research in this area and advised the following organizations all <br />recommend a minimum barrier height of four feet: The National Swimming Pool Institute; The <br />Council of American Bu.ilding Officials; and The Ohio Building Officials Association. The <br />Council of American Building Officials and The Ohio Building Officials Association are two <br />documents that Municipalities often use to determ'ine their own regulations. Councilman O'Grady <br />added the neighboring communities of Bay. Villa.ge, Westlake, Rocky River, Olmsted Falls, and <br />Olmsted Township all require a mivimum barrier of four feet. He advised, after speaking with <br />Building Comnvssioner Conway, he was told that the fence restrictions are something that is most <br />often questioned 'm relation to swimmning pools. Councilman O'Grady wondered why North <br />Olmsted and only North Olmsted has this requirement. Mr. O'Grady advised after extensive