My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02/22/1966 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1966
>
1966 Planning Commission
>
02/22/1966 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:36:39 PM
Creation date
1/31/2019 9:21:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1966
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
2/22/1966
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
????uary 22a 1966 - Page 5 <br />l <br />? Mro M???al mac?? the u??emr???on, that an-Y tkuiu the school <br />board wished ?? ??panda 'th?? woulcol -c??panc? ?? Lthe pxc?pexty easiIly <br />accessibb? ?? themawh?ch woulc? ?? the recrc?????nal area adjac?ent <br />t?? the sc????? ???? ?nd thaagk?? ??? woubd be Morc? adc??????acomus to <br />locate recreatat?al sites in the cunfines o? the- p??ticular <br />developmente ????ilmm West. ?ndic?????? th?? the ????? ???s an agTement <br />with the sch?ol ?oarc? ???? the land V.&s, never to bca ugsc? ??r <br />an?thing oth?? ?han rec??eatic?nala Councilnialm West? ?ndicated <br />that 'tYaey ha?? th?s agreement o, land ab?????ide uf the claest- <br />nut sc1??ol si?e and Park Ridge schoo1? siteo <br />Mre ??si?? ?gain made thc? ??&?Tv??ior? tha? th?s lan)d <br />in Parfl? Ridge was rathe? ?maLl and couLd not perfiwps lbc? util???? ?s i? ?xistso ?????? ?ounc?ilmam ???? ?n(dic&ted that <br />be£??e a ?ch?ol is b?itte the band has to be regxo??sd9 part <br />O€ tha? ???ch the C?tY c?? ?? ?ext ?? which the school board. <br />?wnsa Th? ????? would buy I,anc? ????? woubc? ???? th(a money _ <br />to "?????? ??? th?g outa aa <br />?.. Mro Kanareff iaadicatec? ?hat rec????ti?naIl? ??cil:1ties weLre <br />?--, ????en? ?etwe?? ????ton Ric??e and the schoolo Mro M?sial statec? <br />-that9 if ??ch ???????lar develapment. were to have the xecrc??ti?nal <br />???? ??thLn its cor?????s a? was c??? ???? ??? P.-mk Rid?? ?ivic: <br />?????La??on ??? ??zuaILze su??h an assocLatLun to expedit(e the <br />ia???al?tion of rec??ea??onab ??? maLm??en- <br />ance c?? the ?uLpmenta Lt would be a good ideaa ???-LtLeubar?y <br />10'???????in? ?? the su????? ?????sal. <br />Mra Kanareff stated that they werc? ?????? ??? ??bic??vi?ion <br />as presentec? ???h the thought in minc? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? <br />wanteda tu expanc? the a?ea on t1?? ??? an? ????? paxcel9 ??t <br />matec? ???? woubd be amenable to reco?endations from the Planm <br />?ing Commi????n an a different pc???tion or locat?ion of the <br />re????????al ??eae <br />I3c? ??????? ?tated there was s.tilL the po?si?ila?ty of purm <br />ch????g m??? ???? land fto? some of the ownerqe mre Kan'areff <br />stated thc?? ?oulc? ?? ???y happy to wmIl? ?ith the Pbannin? Com_ <br />mi?sioa? ?? ????? ???? ???ommcndede <br />Mre ???? ??????? ?? ??? ?uane Avenue pbans, if anyfl <br />for estabbisha??? ? ???????? ???? ?? ??? ?????rtya W. DiBen- <br />? dletto iandicated thc?? had appruachcsd Mre GT??? Limpext with the <br />propositic? whereby he wou1d rc???? hi?,l??s and th'a developersx
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.