Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fairport Harbor council rejects rezoning request for 1002 Second Street after residents oppose industrial designation
Summary
The Fairport Harbor Village Council voted down a request to rezone a 1.67-acre parcel at 1002 Second Street from C-2 (community business) to I (industrial) after a public hearing where nearby condominium residents urged denial and the planning commission had recommended denial.
The Fairport Harbor Village Council defeated a proposal to rezone a 1.67-acre parcel at 1002 Second Street from C-2 (community business) to I (industrial) following a public hearing and public comment from multiple nearby residents.
The parcel owner, Carla Lawyer Mills, said the owners seek industrial zoning primarily to allow operation of a self-storage facility once outstanding easement litigation is resolved. "Our intent of the property has always been to leverage it as a storage facility," Mills told the council, adding the owners bought the property from Lake County in 2019 and have spent years cleaning up and repairing the site.
The planning commission had recommended denial of the rezoning. Neighbors who spoke at the hearing said an industrial designation would place industrial uses too close to residential buildings, risk increased traffic and noise, and reduce property values. Allison McCallum, a Harbour Town Condominium resident, said the neighborhood is a "beautiful, serene sanctuary" and asked council to "please uphold the Planning Commission's recommendation." Other residents described concerns about access, potential truck traffic and odors, and said condominium property lines and private drives complicate access to the parcel.
Village Solicitor (recorded as "Mr. Lyons") told council the village is not a party to existing litigation over access and easements; the lawsuit is between the property owner and the condominium association and need not be decided for the rezoning vote. The council also heard from speakers who said historic easements exist, and from residents who said no legal access through private condominium drives is currently available.
After debate, council took up Ordinance/Resolution 2025-43, described in the meeting as "a resolution amending the official zoning map" to rezone the 1.67-acre parcel (permanent parcel number 14A-0050000410) from C-2 to I. The motion to adopt failed. Recorded votes on the rezoning were: McKinney — Nay; Birknick — Nay; Heitz/Heights — Nay; Shaver — Abstain; Saracic/Sorescribe — Abstain; Bertone/Berton — Abstain. The council president declared the ordinance defeated, noting the abstentions were cast by three members who live near the property and that the majority voted "nay." The meeting record shows the planning commission had previously held a public hearing and recommended denial.
The owners, Jason and Carla Mills, told council rezoning to industrial is intended to enable a low-traffic self-storage use and to permit them to fence and clean up the site once easement issues are resolved. Several condo residents disputed the claimed access path and said traffic would likely traverse private condominium drives or the marina property. One resident, Mike Scruggs, a former planning commission member, said rezoning to industrial so close to residences would be "inappropriate." Residents repeatedly asked the council to maintain the property's C-2 classification.
The council did not adopt the rezoning; the ordinance was defeated. Council did not direct additional action on the parcel during that meeting beyond taking the vote.
