My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/03/2007 Meeting Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Minutes
>
2007
>
04/03/2007 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2014 8:50:19 AM
Creation date
1/6/2014 10:18:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
North Olmsted Legislation
Legislation Date
4/3/2007
Year
2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
City Council Minutes of 4/3!2007 <br />LETTERS AND COMMUNICATIONS <br />Tl1e Clerk: of Council reported that on Friday, March 29, the Clerk of Commissions had <br />presented the determination of similar use report of findings for the Tattoo Faction where <br />they are asking to allow body piercing. City Council members have received copies and. <br />will have 30 days from March 29 to make any determination on it. This should go to the <br />BZD Committee. Councilman Gareau confirmed that the BZD Committee would take up <br />the issue at its next meeting. <br />AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION <br />l) Donald Pangrac, 23470 Sharon. Drive, is concerned about Ordinance 2007-28, the sale <br />of $112,000 of bonds for Springvale. He feels the 2006 $1.4 million end-of--year surplus <br />should have been used instead. Councilman Tallon explained. the administration had <br />already incorporated the surplus into the appropriations budget that was presented to <br />Council. Regarding the Mayor's plan to include artificial turf on the school football field <br />in the Recreation. plan., Mr. Pangrac feels it would be wrong to intermingle city and <br />school. governments issues. He asked. for a legal opinion from the Law Director. Law <br />Director Dubelko said that would be premature at this point when there is no bond issue <br />before City Council. That legal opinion will. be rendered by the city's bond counsel if <br />that is a component part of the bond. issue. Mayor O'Grady said the Recreation Master <br />Plan that is being assembled is in an evolutionary stage-----it is going to change as new <br />ideas and suggestions come up. He would not consider including something in any type <br />of proposals to our taxpayers for recreation if he did not believe it had. a public purpose. <br />2) Tom. Lee, 200 Public Square, Cleveland, OH, 44114, attorney for PetSmart, noted. that <br />neither Council nor the BZD committee has unanimously supported Ord. 2006-1.22. <br />There's a diverse range of opinions. However, he has been very impressed with the <br />repeated courtesies the BZD and Council have granted, and. the extraordinary amount of <br />time and patience that both have shown this issue. He extended thanks on behalf of <br />PetSmart for the attention and thorough hearing this issue has been given. Thanks to Law <br />Director Dubelko and Planning Director Wenger for their professionalism and patience. <br />LEGISLATION <br />Ordinance No. 2006-122 introduced by Mayor O'Grady was given its third reading. An <br />ordinance amending Section 1139.01 of the Zoning Code in order to eliminate the <br />locational and density requirements for pet stores and animal hospitals in General Retail <br />Business Districts as twice amended. Councilman Gareau moved for adoption, and the <br />motion was seconded by Councilman Miller. Roll call: Gareau, yes; Miller, no, with <br />comment. First, he would like to return the compliment to Mr. Lee on his <br />professionalism and the representative that he brought in from PetSmart who gave an <br />informative presentation. However, in our city we have numerous vacant storefronts that <br />abut residential property. While this particular program is targeted for one property, it <br />doesn't mean that other competition couldn't come into the city or that this project would <br />not relocate. He doesn't believe it belongs in an area that would abut residential <br />property, which the ordinance includes. Roll call continued: Jones, yes; Orlowski, no, <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.