My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01/25/1966 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1966
>
1966 Planning Commission
>
01/25/1966 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:36:38 PM
Creation date
1/31/2019 9:20:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1966
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
1/25/1966
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
C <br />. ? . . ? ??k .. .. , <br />JanuaT-y 25e ???? ? Page 6 <br />Ctn?irman Pro1kasy stateld that h? and mr. 5paid1i?? h&d discussed <br />thi? ???blem of r??onia?g w?th ?embers of the ??gional Planuning <br />C 3???ion anc? thefact tfl??? ???ryon is awaxe of the sexies of <br />continual r'c??????? ?????olving ?? parcebs adyacent fio <br />Lmrain Roadm ???? ?????c'u9??? ??quest is or?? ?? muAti??amily <br />usee , whereasa the other' ?equests wc??? for emtc??sion . c?? camm marcial zoningQ <br />b? was CI?airman Prokasy°? ??el??? that t&n? ?omimi?sion shonlc? <br />??? ?????? thi? ??????y i? that the Planning C ommi?sion an¢? <br />???? Council fl??ve- .:Attei??tc?c? to estab1?,sI? vari?s c?istra?c?ts oan <br />the Z ona??? ??? ?o'r couin??cial9 apar'???t and residentia1 uses. <br />3?e Ch???? als? ?tated *that tt??? ???????? ??ea Vas.. posZtiorieai <br />iih s??? ? way: as to still have ingre?s and ? egress ?d t?ac? ?:a?ad <br />c?ld still be us?d?, diseugging the var?,?s pm?sLbilities of <br />??????s and egress. . <br />Mr. Ford in?????ct0cd a bit of his4??ry in? that when this particu- <br />lar lanc? was zoned ,back for commerc3al9 ?? was febt theane before <br />?t went intu 0rdinance, that a,t .??? ????? ???? ???thi?? could -be <br />deveAopedo ?? 6ould also &c? ?s a buf£er s?ri? ?? whatever is <br />developed a n the rear portionm Mr. stated the Comi?sion fe1t i? ?ould not request <br />4ny c?aik-g(k. in the.:property abong the line unti]? ??ch tiffie as <br />_?????? mijbe a rec????t in change f?? the ????? ?omunity be- <br />.cause of the redtangubar bots that butt up against this particu- <br />lar lota - <br />Mr. ?ol?hamc?r., of..PrecaLsion Yt?altya indicated t1?? ?partnents would <br />serve as a buffer-strip9 stressi$?? ??? ?eq???t is for apartm??? <br />zoning rather than, comercial9 thereby.pr?viding a builtmin lxuf£er <br />between tI?? comercial and resident???? ??e i? the back, <br />Mrm GoldI??? ??ther stated hi? ???t as to whc?ther the P]Laxaning <br />?????sion or City C?uncil ?ould, by ??eir own motion rezoame this. <br />He stated in his opinion it e?ouAd not be a bad move to rezone this <br />]Land multimfmffiily to the 1??? ??cause it wouA? inherently be a <br />buffer s?ri? ?etwec?? the residentiaA and commerciaYm <br />Further di????sion. was ha? ?etween Membp-rs of the Commission and <br />the repre?entatives of Precision Realty¢ setting forth Precision <br />Realty°? ?hougfl??? ? ?ehalf of ??eir particular request.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.