My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/05/2007 Meeting Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Minutes
>
2007
>
06/05/2007 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2014 8:50:16 AM
Creation date
1/6/2014 10:09:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
North Olmsted Legislation
Legislation Date
6/5/2007
Year
2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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 6/5/2007 <br />needed during the summer construction season. Also, it was decided that this <br />would allow fora 12 month record of the costs for engineering services. <br />2) This evening during caucus, the Finance Director asked Council to consider passage of <br />Ordinance 2007-54 under suspension of the rules. Also, she reported that she had <br />contacted bond counsel on the transfer of monies in the Sewer Bond Retirement Fund, <br />and he said there were other options for use of the sewer funds. But the Finance Director <br />stated it was her opinion the use of the funds as per Ordinance 2007-48 is still the best <br />way to proceed. <br />Councilman Ryan, chairperson of the Environmental Control Committee: 1) The <br />committee met on May 22 to interview Ms. Angela Williamson, the Mayor's <br />appointment to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Ms. Williamson will fill the vacancy <br />created by the resignation of Joseph Burke for the term of 1/1/06 to 12/31/10. The <br />committee unanimously recommended the appointment of Angel Williamson to the <br />Board of Zoning Appeals. Councilman Ryan made a motion that City Council approve <br />the appointment of Angela Williamson to the Board of Zoning Appeals to complete the <br />term of Joseph Burke from 1/1/06 to 12/31/10. The motion was seconded by Council <br />Member Dailey Jones and passed unanimously. <br />Councilman Barker, chairperson of the Recreation, Public Parks & Buildings Committee: <br />1) The committee met on May 22, 2007 to discuss Ordinance 2007-41. The meeting was <br />held in the Council Chambers to accommodate the number of guests present. Present <br />were committee members Barker, Gareau and Dailey Jones; Council Members Miller and <br />Orlowski; Mayor O'~'rrady, Safety Director Terbrack, Service Director Limpert and John <br />Syndyla representing T-Mobile; many residents from the area of the proposed location of <br />the cell tower at Fire Station No. 2. Ordinance 2007-41 is an ordinance authorizing the <br />Mayor to enter into a ground lease with option agreement with T-Mobile and approving <br />site development to locate a Cellular Monopole Tower and facilities at Fire Station No. <br />2, and declaring an emergency. This ordinance was discussed previously on April 24, <br />2007. There were many questions from that meeting for the administration to address. <br />Those questions are as follows: <br />Chestnut School Site: T-Mobile notified the city that they cannot accept this site as a <br />replacement for the proposed Fire Station site because it is a half a mile away from their <br />target area and would not serve the purpose of filling coverage gaps in North Olmsted. It <br />also abuts a greater number of residents than at the Fire Station site. <br />Crocker Stearns Corridor: The western side of the corridor is primarily owned by the <br />Metroparks, and they informed the city that it is not their policy to allow wireless <br />facilities on their properties. Another drawback is the site along Crocker Stearns would <br />also affect a greater number of residents than Fire Station No. 2. Both areas also would <br />not produce any financial benefits to the City of North Olmsted. If installed on city <br />property, the city would receive $1,800 per month from T-Mobile. If other providers <br />decide to locate on this tower, T-Mobile would pay the City '/z of the amount negotiated <br />by T-Mobile. The funds coming from this tower would be split, with 75% going to <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.