My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/06/2005 Meeting Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Minutes
>
2005
>
12/06/2005 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2014 8:49:28 AM
Creation date
1/6/2014 9:02:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
North Olmsted Legislation
Legislation Date
12/6/2005
Year
2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
Council Minutes of 12/6/2005 <br />we're going to do with these proposals when they come forward. Somebody can come <br />in, then can present to City Council the concept of seeking a conditional use permit to put <br />in a medical office in a senior facility, senior residence district. Council can analyze it <br />and ask the hard questions: Does it impact on traffic? Does it impact on adjacent <br />properties? How does it impact the way of life? All the hard questions can be answered <br />then. If Council says no tonight, we don't have to answer the hard questions. Roll call <br />continued: Tallon, yes, with comment that he has the opposite opinion of Mr. Gazeau. <br />This conditional use, as mentioned, is for medical offices. What it basically allows is a <br />medical office that takes in outside patients other than from the nursing home. We would <br />be infringing on the security, the serenity and the quality of life of the senior residence. <br />The doctors in these offices can no way guazantee that they are going to be the doctors of <br />the patients in that facility. There is no way the city could guarantee that. Basically, <br />what you would be doing is opening up these offices for anybody who wanted to come <br />in. The conditional use is here, and yes we could answer the hard questions later on. <br />But, as in anything else, once you do that and once you give the first one away, it will be <br />difficult not doing it the second time. This is a senior residence ordinance. It means they <br />are residents. Protect their homes. Let's not commercialize it. The only reason for these <br />offices would be another revenue stream for the developer. The quality and quantity that <br />this would offer to the seniors would be minimal. Roll call continued: Miller, yes, with <br />comment. He agrees with Mr. Ryan that this is probably not in the right place at the right <br />time and that a conditional use in this situation is inappropriate. Mr. Ryan has been <br />validly concerned whether we put conditional uses in places such as this. Roll call <br />continued: Orlowski, yes; Ryan, yes, commenting the only reason he is voting yes is <br />because it's redundant. Roll call continued: Barker, no; Nashar, no, with comment that <br />conditional use had been discussed at length at the last BZD meeting and the hard <br />questions were asked and answered. He feels comfortable with the wording the way it <br />stands and leaving the ordinance the way it is. The motion to amend Ordinance 2005-95 <br />to remove Section 1138.03 (b) passes with four yes votes and three no votes. <br />Councilman Gareau made a motion to change references to the Planning Commission and <br />Architectural Review Board in Ordinance 2005-95, Chapter 1138, to Planning & Design <br />Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Barker and passed unanimously. <br />Councilman Miller made a motion to amend Ordinance 2005-95, Chapter 1138.05 (a) to <br />read the minimum development area in the Senior Residence District shall be 8 acres. <br />The motion was seconded by Councilman Ryan. Roll call: Miller, yes; Ryan, yes; <br />Tallon, yes; Barker, yes; Nashaz, yes; Orlowski, yes; Gareau, no. The motion passed <br />with six yes votes and one no vote. <br />Councilman Tallon, chairperson of the Finance Committee: 1) The committee met at <br />7:15 p.m. on Tuesday, December 6. In attendance were the Mayor, all of Council, <br />Director Limpert, Councilperson-elect Jones, Director Terbrack. The committee <br />discussed Ordinance 2005-168, the notes in anticipation of bonds for Clague Road. After <br />a lengthy discussion, one of the questions was the cost of the notes. The cost will be <br />approximately $2,000 to $3,000. The reason for the notes is to fund the project on <br />Clague Road. The committee recommended 2-1 for passage. <br />9 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.