02/04/1975 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

,r Council Minutes of 2-4-75 -8- elected officials aren't intelligent enough to know whether this meets the needs of the co~nunity he doubts very seriously if Council or the people want to pay the consulting fee of $50,ppp to sane outsider going to tell you that. Mr. Wilamosky pc~inted-~out that he had resigned from the Citizens Advisory Committee prior to their final recommendations; does not want to deprive anyone of the full use and enjoyment of their property; asked Law Z~traetox Gateau whether ar not individual property owners can be comp/~31sd to dine parcels for development. Law Director Gateau stated no -you do not force people to ¢,~ their parcels so that you can have what perhaps .somebody ~ consider an adequate development and gave examples. Feels what Mx. Wilswo+sl~y is talking about is taking and supssr imposing the new zoning classification on the old soning classification and whither or not it can in fact be developed, Mr. Gateau e~lained certain pxovisions in our Zoning Cvde under non confor~aia$ use; also ~txed use category. Mr. WiLsmasky thinks we should emphasize more concern -not necwssarily to zoning but esthetics and a more stringent control deve t. As far rearming thinks in some areas it is desirable and in other areas it is not base of the fact that some of these parcels are not devlopable - at least ecai~~ically feasible to develop ueader the current recommendations that are being submitted. Mr. Giessen discussed the right to full use and enjoyment of a pascal; when you start going into esthetics and start telling a property owner what he has to put on his parcel in regard to a building ar type of building, you ate then. dmnying him the full use of his land, Mr. Giesler cited examples. Mr. Glasser stated anytime this Council acts on any parcel of lazu~ -any rule on regulation that is set up -you are d~eying the individual property ow~aer some right; sa that we have already d~sd nanny individuals many rights of the full use and enjoyment of their lands, i.e., setbacks, display of merchandise; storage shade, etc. ~ that qau are saying things and yet. we are bending it -where do we stop? Mayor Christman stated over the years it has been discussed. and agrr as with Mr. Kila~ascy's opinion of it - it is basiGa3.ly esthetics and how it looks that is the most objectionable thing, Over the•yeans have dis- cussed this and questioned whether or not ~ architect or board of reverar is legal. save been told in the past it wan tot lie~-1; but understand this perhaps has been challenged and changed in other states and ~ssibly here in Ohio. Mayor knows that Mrs. Muriel Eian of Planning Coui~Kssion is interested in establishing an Architectural Hoard of Review. Mayor tlxi.nks it would be a goad idea at this time to incorporate into the Zoning Ordimanee an Architectural Board of R~sview if, in fact, it is legal. Law Director Gateau feels ~a Coe eb~DaW--ghhis -but he thinks at this time the Supreast Count of the United States has taken into consider- ation things other than the strafght concept that we have always had of $ooing; thinks they have indicated that thane are certain thing: that bear a resanable relationship to the public safety, health & welfare -they are such thixegs as open spaces -trees -cluttering of a nAtighborhvod -crowding of a neighboood - paychalogical effect, so he can a lemming towards such thine. Thine arse many communities that have them. Does not ks~vw of any recently that have been challenged but the bounds that are set would be the detes-mining factor. Mr. Glasser pointed out that he and Law Director Gansau have discussed this. It wan at least Wis. Ei.an's recommendation that there be at- architectural review beard is relationship to this comprehensive plan and there one two segments of it; have not touched the second segment of it and that is ca~,letely changing around cur structure of haw we go about getting permits and the procedure which has not been delved into at this time. Mr. Giessen explained to avoid mass confueian this could be separated; half of it in zoning and then go back and study the fact of architectural r+~wiew boards and procedure, etc. Discussion ce~tiaued. Mr. Wilamosky asked if it is Mr. Gi^.~rer's reconmtendation that Council ~dertake a review of this fallo~ring