11/21/2000 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 11/21/2000 • Law Director Gareau said that Mr. Burns' concerns regarding Ordinance 99-113 and the County Treasurer as the tax collector are valid. Also, there is validity to people who are not paying taxes because they have appealed to the Board of Revision. He believes the ordinance should go back to committee to address those issues. Regarding Ordinance 2000-118, he would challenge Mr. Burns to drive up and down Lorain Road in August and you can't miss who has a sprinkler system and who doesn't. He does not believe it makes any sense to require people to go before the ARB, the Planning Commission and this Council and have landscape buffer provisions and not have any provisions to make sure that those are maintained. The property maintenance code will not help when trees are dying when, in fact, that could have been prevented through an irrigation system. • Mr. O'Grady agreed with the Law Director and said he felt it might be prudent to send Ordinance 99-113 back to committee for review. With regard to Ordinance 2000-118, his thoughts are similar to what Mr. Burns had stated. He said that the Planning Commission had pointed out that there are already existing laws within the city that require people to maintain their landscaping and asked the Law Director if that was accurate. Law Director Gareau said it was not accurate. It is general and not specific. We can make people cut their grass if it is unsightly, but we cannot make them sprinkle their lawn and we cannot make them maintain the buffering between commercial and residential property to be sure that it stays green. Mr. O'Grady expressed concern over the cost of the irrigation systems. Law Director Gareau said he put in irrigation on property he owns on Lorain Road for $1,800, and it has three zones. Councilman Gareau noted that the BZD Committee and the administration recently requested that the proposal for Dillard's include an underground irrigation system to ensure that the landscape plan is maintained and that it stays at the same quality as when it is installed. There was nothing unique in the plan that caused the city to do that-it was the desire to see the landscaping maintained and to ensure that every effort is taken to maintain up front as opposed to waiting until later on. He believes, if we are going to continue as an administration and as a Council to request that applicants do things, that we should do it with the force and effect of law. Mrs. Kasler said it seemed to her that we have an opportunity here and in the future to enforce through legislation some respect for the city, some consistency in development and some clean and well-maintained properties of which we can all be proud. We should be courageous enough to expect this of people. Paul Barker, 23629 Carriage Lane • He had irrigation installed in his front yard with four zones for $1,200. He finds it interesting that Flanning Commission voted against this ordinance but asked Dillard's to put in an irrigation system. He thinks Ordinance 2000-118 is a good idea. Mr. Miller commented on Ordinance 99-113 by saying that the ordinance requires a statement be provided certifying that the property taxes are either paid or that an agreement has been entered into. He had asked the Assistant Law Director if a paid tax bill serves the purpose of certifying that taxes were paid and was told that it did. The legislation doesn't ask for a certified statement, rather a statement certifying. The wording was supplied by the Law Department. If it is in error, it should be addressed. 10