Laserfiche WebLink
Council Minutes of 11-37T74 -4_ .?° <br />r--. --- <br />,CauaciL.gr?npcrsals for legigiat3,n?,. tu be'•rarnsid+cred:( Said petitian resulted <br />``-'"fnom-uotfces of violatinn issued by the Buildtng Departaent in conneetion with <br />setback areas and temporary signs.) <br />President 0'Neill asked for Law Director's c ts cm reQuest submitted by <br />businessaeen regarding legisl.ation that is on the books. <br />Law Director Kitchen stat.ed the legielatiosi hae passed; the Building Cammissian- <br />er and all members of Ccuncil have sxortt to uphold the ordinances of the City <br />of North Olmeted, in addition to the CQnstitution - so that any actiam that <br />Council would take at this time wew2d be iilegal. The only actioa that Council <br />can take is to amend the Zonfng Ord3neuce, but Council cannot cotne up with <br />any agreement to cvithhold the terms af Che Ordinance. <br />Mr. West cammented that ordinance wae passed last February - had a publlc <br />hearing, at wh3ch no one objected to it, had full readings, etc. The Building <br />Commiss3.oner has been working on it since that time; has been in commuuziication <br />with the business people. This is nat aomething that suddenly came up. It <br />does not, hcrwever, prevent Council fram putting into a Committee a study for <br />revoking Chis temporary sign ordinsace. The whole intent of this was to <br />prevent so many businesses that were overdoing this, i.e., one temporary sign <br />ou top of another temporary siga, etc. <br />Mr. Prokasy asked Mr. Cutler, regarding petition and letter from Chamber of <br />Conmerce, if objection is to enforcement of setback area, or objection to <br />enforcement of the elimiaation of temporary signs, or both? <br />Mr. Cutler, Lorain Rd., said the first cosmr.tnication whereby the people were <br />really affected by the$e were when Chey received the violation notices. <br />Mx. Prokasy pointed out the setback ardinance caas acCually passed in 1964. <br />It was amended in 1969 and streAgthened, but the ordiuance deAqing the right <br />of 50 ft. for this purpose was gassed in 1964. .As far as notification, every <br />property owner in the City of ATorth Olmsted was notified. Mr. Prok$sy spoke <br />in front of many groups, includf.ng the C'liamber of Comerce, and discussed <br />proposal. <br />Mr. Otto Jirecek, 23370 Lorain Rd., was issued a violation in regard to the <br />50 ft. setbatk of inerchandise, so he feels that Halleen Ford should be made <br />tv move all cars back. <br />Mr. Prokasy painted out that Mr. Jirecek has the asme right that Halleen Ford <br />made use of, to appear befare the Zoning Board of Appeals and request an <br />exenption. Halleen Ford w8s grst?ted a variance snd City Council aor any other <br />body has the right or power to overrule the variances granted by the Zcming <br />Board of Appeals. Also, ot'her businesses have been granted variances - they <br />are specifically granted in each case. Mr. Prokasy would grefer to see a <br />clean 50 ft. setback but the Zoning Board of Appeals does have this gower and <br />.everybodq has the right to make a request. <br />Discuesion coretinued as to Paradise Pant3ac, and other places of bualness <br />which have received varianees.