My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02/08/1966 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1966
>
1966 Planning Commission
>
02/08/1966 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:36:38 PM
Creation date
1/31/2019 9:21:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1966
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
2/8/1966
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
. <br />? <br />????uary $9 ???? ? Pa?? 5? <br />Mra Bauer statec? th? ?????ol ?o=d has ned?r mac?e an offc?? <br />?? him regarding the prc_??????? anc?, stated ti??t Mro ? ????h <br />knew o€ ??? ????? on the pr;Dpext?? ??????e Mxa B???? ad- <br />viseda Furthc?? ??????sion was had and Mro ???e'r. stated <br />he di? ??? want to be In thc? ????tioon of kc??ping.the band <br />?va?la`??? ??r an indefinite pc???od of t?ime but wauld be <br />open £or a certain numbc?? ?f days, aftc?? ???ch hc? ?ould <br />ask £?r a????vab of the Pbato <br />Mre ????r indicated there were a coupbe o£ blocks of band <br />that had to be clar ifiec? ?????? the c??????on ?ould bc? <br />?n a ??sition to approve the Flate <br />Mra E?gar9 aftc?? ?????? .disc???sion9 suggested9 i?? his <br />opiniona that Mrm Bauer direct a letter to the Sc??ol <br />?oard a???? ??? ??ta??? ?? ?ritten f??? in ??ying to <br />estab9??sh a ????onal??? tims periac? ??ther than pc?rs??al?? <br />?alling the inda?vi&also . , <br />??on queery of Mro Kit.cheno Law Directorfl by Mre Forc? ?? <br />?? ???t h?? ??????? ???? wi?? ????rd t?? th? situationa <br />he indicated- that the. P??ni?? ?ommi?sion either accept <br />or reject it9 and what the SchooA ????? has in minc? has <br />no e??ight in ??? ?????sion° s c???????nationse <br />The mota,on beir?g dub? ma?e and secondec? was put to ? ???e <br />ancd passed as- followso "yeasp8 a ?paldinga ??sial9 LaPa¢?ma9 <br />Pr?kasy a Forda ??gara F.abeka - (c) San v Rid ,?? ?prover?c?n?ts b?oso I ??l 2o <br /> <br />Ch?irman P??ka?? inc??cated he hac? ?alkec? with ??? ???? Enm <br />gineer before the meetit?? ?? ??s i??ormed thc??? ???? ?til? <br />?? ??tails t? ?? ????ed ??t anc? ???ed ? oppo?tunity for <br />reviewa <br />Chai=an Prok?sy-moved that the Commission co?tinue Sandy Ri¢??e <br />Improvements Nose I; anc? 2 in Comittee and request of ??eib <br />• 30-day extension-on the improvemea?? ???s u???? ???ei?? ?f <br />• £immab Ci?? ??gineerB s rc????? ? ??conded by Mrs LaPonzae <br />Mra Spalc??g asked _whether or <br />cdelayed `??cause of :the ldmpin?g <br />ia??r(ovemp-ffit pbans and whet1??? <br />?? ???????d a? ???? timo <br />n?? this c?????opment was beian? <br />???????? ?? ??e group of the <br />or a??t a ???tion o£ i? could
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.