10/27/1998 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Tallon asked if there were any questions regarding Ordinance no. 98-111. Mrs. O'Rourke questioned why the ordinance had been drawn up to begin with. Mr. Dubelko suggested he would give the history. It was sponsored by Councilman Nashar who had received word that a large franchise that boards dogs and cats (kennel) was coming to North Olmsted to purchase property on L,orain Road for their Kennel. The supposed organization would house 200 cats and dogs. Council members became concerned about the effects a kennel this size would have on near by residents. The law department was then ask to draw up an ordinance which would require such businesses to locate only in industry districts. To limit their location in the City, to require a certain distance between themselves and residents, and to limit them to having only a certain number of animals per acre. Mrs. O'Rourke questioned if there wasn't an ordinance that covered the amount of animals per acre now. Mr. Dubelko indicated he didn't think there was a section in the zoning code that covered this topic. There is a section that is within the retail business district chapter, that covers veterinary hospitals, and pet shops which will be effected also. Those that are in place now will not be effected but those type of businesses in the future will be effected. Councilman Nashar is concerned about the amount of noise that will be coming from these types of business as the animals do have to be let out on a regular basis. Mrs. O'Rourke suggested limiting the amount of animals that could be boarded in the kennels. Mr. Dubelko indicated that would not fit under the zoning law as it is designed for lot sizes, and location of the buildings. Mr. Spalding asked where the 700 feet requirement came from. Mr. Dubelko indicated it is taking a typical lot size on Lorain Road and a standard setback and the 700 hundred feet is not carved in stone. Mr. McDermott indicated that lots on Lorain Road in certain areas are zone divided. Mr. Dubelko suggested the Planning commission take a further look at the ordinance if the 700 feet looked too stringent. Mr. Tallon suggested he didn't have a problem with it, and asked if the Law Department had any concerns. Mr. Dubelko suggested the Law Department put in the figures that were suggested to the Law Department by the Councilman, but it is always helpful to get input from other boards, Engineering, and Building Departments with respect to whether or not this is going to work in practice. Mr. Tallon indicated for all practical proposes it will eliminate it. Mr. Dubelko suggested that is not a good result, and that is not the purpose of the legislation. The legislation was drafted with the thought that the typical lot on I,orain was between 900 and 1200 feet deep. If it is not, then this Commission should make a recommendation that perhaps it be reduced to 500 or 400 feet or something you'd think would be acceptable. The intent was not to eliminate this use but to regulate it. Mr. Tallon suggested maybe this should be tabled, and asked Mr. 1VIcDermott if he could produce a parcel map. Mr. McDermott indicated he had a parcel map with him that the board members could review. Mr. Brennan indicated this seem to be pushing things off on the industrial lands again, and since we don't have a lot of industrial land now wouldn't it be best to use it for industry so we don't lose out tax wise. Mr. Dubelko replied there is a lot of history in the law using limited industry or industrial areas to have uses which are considered more obnoxious, and impact more on residents then typical uses permitted in retail. It may be the way North Olmsted is set up zoning-wise that retail and limited industry mix has a lot of differences which makes for plenty of residential blending. Mr. Brennan suggested we don't have a lot of industrial zoned land, and seem to be commercially top heavy. He would prefer optimum use made of the industrial land. If we keep putting kennels, storage facilities, and indoor soccer fields, we're losing personal property tax, higher dollar revenue off of payrolls. Mr. Dubelko suggested 3