Ganley files suit against city
over proposed dealership rezoning
By Jeff Gallatin
North Olmsted
Published Oct. 6, 2004

Officials representing the proposed $2 million Ganley Volkswagen dealership, which city council narrowly defeated in the spring have taken a new road by filing a civil suit against the city.

Attorneys for Ganley Real Estate Co. filed the suit Sept. 14 in Common Pleas Court, with city officials being served with the documents last week.

The lawsuit alleges that the Ganley property is zoned unconstitutionally and asks the court to make a declaration that the current split zoning is unconstitutional and should be changed.

ADVERTISEMENT

Ganley also filed a writ of mandamus, which would compel the city to commence appropriation proceedings in probate court to determine the amount of compensation, if any, Ganley is due as a consequence of the city's alleged taking of the Ganley property as a result of North Olmsted's refusal to rezone the residential portion of Ganley's split-zoned parcels to general retail as the VW project developers wanted.

Monday, North Olmsted Law Director Jim Dubelko said he'd asked council to hold an executive session at its regular meeting last night to discuss the lawsuit, as allowed under the sunshine law. In addition to council, Dubelko asked Mayor Norman T. Musial, City Planner Kim Wenger and City Engineer Gary Durbin to participate in the executive session.

"I want to discuss city litigation strategy and what additional resources, if any, will be required in order to effectively defend the lawsuit," Dubelko said.

Shedon and Jordan Berns, the attorneys for Ganley, could not be reached for comment.

In the spring, council held several meetings pertaining to the proposal for the property located near the intersection of Lorain Road and Ranchview Drive. The proposed dealership drew fire from residents of the area, saying it would cause a drop in property values and cause traffic and noise problems as well.

Councilman-at-large Michael Gareau Jr., chairman of the building, zoning and development committee, twice got council to postpone final action on the proposal while the Ganley development team tried to work out compromises to satisfy residents and council members opposed to the proposal.

Gareau declined comment on the suit while it is still in the courts, citing advice from Dubelko. But he noted that some members of council - including himself - had thought the matter could end up in a courtroom. At the May 26 special council meeting, where council by a 4-3 margin rejected the rezoning, Ganley officials had a court reporter present taking down all the comments at the proceedings. Other council members also declined comment, citing Dubelko's advice.

Those council members voting against the rezoning at the May 26 meeting were: Carolyn Kasler, Dean McKay, Paul Miller and George Nashar, while John Dailey, Gareau and Duane Limpert voted for it.

Court officials assigned the case to Common Pleas Judge Daniel Gaul. The city's answer to Ganley's allegations must be filed with the court by Oct. 25.