DEVELOPER LANCE OSBORNE’S PROPOSED GETGO SIGNS: SO BIG YOU CAN SEE THEM FROM SPACE

The proposed development agreement that Lance Osborne presented to Council this week was incomplete and lacking in exhibits, but it did include one new item:  gigantic, 18-foot-tall, illuminated/LED GetGo signs.

Even if Osborne’s 270+ square foot signs aren’t actually big enough to be seen from space—okay, maybe that’s a little bit of an exaggeration---his proposed signs would be big enough (18’ x 15’2”) and brightly lit enough to be seen from Richmond Heights, from I-271 and from planes flying to and from the Cuyahoga County airport.

Heck, not even Mayfield Heights allows signs like that, even along heavily commercialized Mayfield Road.

Where does Osborne thinks this GetGo will be located----Lake County?

The Bishop/Brainard/Wilson Mills intersection is a well-established commercial area. The businesses in that area---the Shell gas station, the Brown-Flynn building and the large professional building ---use tasteful ground signs to advertise their businesses.
Those signs reflect the established aesthetics of that commercial corner.  

Obviously Osborne doesn’t care about those aesthetics---or about fitting into the neighborhood.

He might not care about those things, but Council should.

Highland Heights Ordinance 1145.01 lists five “purposes” for the city’s sign ordinances, including:

•  “protect property values” ( #1)
• “protect and enhance the appearance and character of all areas of the City (#3) 
•  and “protect …the visual environment along City streets (#4)

1145.01 also directs that those purposes are to be accomplished through “restriction of the total sign area per sign.”

Ordinance 1145.08 limits “free-standing” signs in Motor Service districts (the proposed new zoning classification for the mega GetGo gas station, subject to voter approval in November) to:

 “a single free-standing sign, not to exceed thirty square feet in area”.

Of course a 30 square foot sign isn’t big enough to be seen from space...

Osborne dismissively called the Highland Heights zoning code “antiquated” when discussing his gigantic mega GetGo outdoor advertising signs with Council this week. 

  

Osborne's beef with the Highland Heights zoning code is that it's designed to protect residents and residential neighborhoods instead of enabling his"development at all costs" project.

Boo hoo. 

If he can't follow the rules, maybe it's time for him to come up with a different plan.

Ground sign outside of professional building at Brainard/Wilson Mills intersection

Ground sign outside Brown-Flynn building on Wilson Mills Road

Ground sign for Shell gas station at Bishop/Wilson Mills intersection

Osborne's proposed illuminated 18' x 15'2" ( 270+sq. foot) GetGo signs
Look at the size compared to the natty-looking guy at the right

COUNCIL TO HAVE “COMPREHENSIVE CONVERSATION” ABOUT PROPOSED MEGA GETGO DEVELOPMENT PLAN THIS WEEK

MEGA GETGO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

Council President Cathy Murphy wants to have a “comprehensive conversation” with developer Lance Osborne about his proposed mega GetGo development plan during this week’s Committee of the Whole meeting (June 19^th, 8 pm, City Hall).

Murphy has warned Osborne---several times---that the details of the development agreement (and its many appendices) have to be nailed down before Council votes to put a GetGo-related zoning issue on the November ballot.

The Board of Elections’ deadline for approving the zoning issue is August 6^{th .}
There are only 3 regularly scheduled Council meetings remaining before Council begins its annual August recess.

Tick, tick, tick.

When asked where things stood, Law Director Tim Paluf reported that he had met with Osborne recently and that Osborne’s lawyer sent some materials to him, but he hadn’t had time to look at them.

Meanwhile, as a sign of good faith, Council heard a first of three required readings of the zoning issue legislation.

Some residents seemed confused about Council’s involvement with the proposed mega GetGo development.

It’s pretty clear to me that Council is simply doing its duty, trying to protect residents’ Charter rights with regard to the zoning issue and trying to get the best possible deal for the city.

Their official involvement doesn’t mean that Council members personally support or endorse the project—far from it. Like the rest of the community, Council members appear to be split on the issue.

Bottom line, the only opinion that really counts is the opinion of Highland Heights residents.
Ultimately it will be up to them to say Yes or No to GetGo.

 ROAD WORK CONTRACT

Council unanimously approved the $599,620 bid submitted by Specialized Construction for 2012 road work and miscellaneous concrete repairs.

Council did not go along with the suggestion that Service Director Thom Evans put forth last week: that Council authorize engineer Brian Mader to order “nonperformance” of the over-estimate concrete repair work and allow Evans to informally award that work (i.e. without public bidding) to a contractor of his own choosing.

FINAL WORK ON THE NEW CITY GAZEBO REMAINS UNDONE

Last September, Council accepted Monarch Construction’s $ 85,376 bid to construct a gazebo on the municipal center green space.

http://www.highlandhts.com/docs/city_council/minutes/2011/09-13-11_council_minutes.htm

It’s been 9 months, and the contractor still hasn’t fulfilled its obligations to the city.
The area around the gazebo needs to be reseeded, and the waffling and/or hole-ridden sections of the exterior soffits need to be fixed and/or replaced.

Council President Cathy Murphy was quite perturbed that the contractor was taking so long to satisfactorily complete the small and relatively simple project. She told engineer Brian Mader:

“Please talk to the law director. I’d like to see some activity on it. It’s been along time.”

Monarch also won an above-estimate contract to install the Community Park’s new Party Barn.
Mader told Council he would develop a final punch list for that project soon.

Mayor Scott Coleman already had one item to add to that list:

“The inside sliding door facing the parking lot has only one locking mechanism. Someone could pry the door open and squeeze in there. There needs to be a locking mechanism on both sides.”

It is easy to see the waffling in the overhang soffit covers

A closer view of the soffit covers, showing one of the holes.

This is the current condition of the "grass" surrounding the gazebo

REAL ESTATE INVESTOR INTERESTED IN LAND SOUTH OF HAWTHORNE DRIVE

           

Ken Janik of Janik Investments appeared before the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) for a second time on June 11^th.

During his first appearance on April 23^rd, Janik pitched a plan to squeeze 19 houses on the approximately 12 acres of land for sale off Bishop Road, south of Hawthorne Drive.
Janik seemed surprised when P&Z Chair Vince Adamus informed him that P&Z did not have the legal authority to grant the huge variances that the plan required.

On June 11^th, Janik presented a rough drawing showing12 homes on larger, but still nonconforming, lots.
Significantly, the drawing did not show a water detention basin or other flood control measures, which presumably would have to be installed because a large portion of the property sits on a FEMA-identified flood plain and the property sits higher than the adjoining Hawthorne neighborhood.

The city’s zoning code for residential property requires that each lot have a minimum of 3,300 square feet and a depth of 200 feet. The property that Janik is interested in developing is buildable under the current zoning code---but only as a one-sided street. That’s the rub.
Janik would make more money if he could squeeze more houses onto the parcel.

According to his drawing, Janik’s most recent plan calls for lots that are only 168 feet deep and average only 29,700 square feet. Significantly, the “building envelope”---the actual area available to build a house in, after taking into account required front, rear and side yard setbacks---would be a fairly modest 37.5 by 40 feet for all except a  couple lots, which would have even smaller building envelopes.

A representative from the real estate company that is trying to sell the property pitched to P&Z that it should think of the property as a “transitional parcel”---i.e., that it should allow smaller lots than required by the city’s current zoning code because the older homes around it---on Hawthorne and across the street---sit on smaller lots.
Although he seemed to be a pretty sharp salesman, coming up with that line, I’m not sure that P&Z bought it.

What Janik really wanted from P&Z was its:

“…tentative approval (of his proposed 12 lot development) so we can go forward. If P&Z approves it as to concept, we would be prepared to go forward.”

P&Z Chair Vince Adamus turned down that request.  He said,

“I am not comfortable doing that because it (preliminary approval) doesn’t mean anything.”

Councilman/P&Z member Bob Mastrangelo told Janik:

“We can’t grant a variance based on economics….(just because) it means you won’t make as much money (per) lot.”

Janik currently has an option to buy the 12 acre property. It is listed in the $300,000 range.

Janik’s next step, if he decides to pursue developing the property, will be to present a detailed, engineered drawing to P&Z along with a request for variances.

P&Z shouldn’t grant the variances unless Janik meets the 7 legal factors required for variances----none of which (as pointed out by  Mastrangelo) have to do with maximizing Janik's profits.

QUICK CITY ROUNDUP

Things tend to slow down as the summer approaches. The Mega GetGo, the Community Gardens and problematic Road Work bids dominated city doings this week.

COMMUNITY GARDENS LAUCH

It was a mighty fine day for gardening on June 9^th---the opening day for the new Highland Heights Community Garden.

Grande’s Garden Center brought healthy, good-looking vegetable and herb seedlings from their garden center on Wilson Mills Road for gardeners to purchase.

Noreen Paradise and members of the Highland Heights Garden Club gave assistance, advice and encouragement to would-be gardeners.

Although he didn’t rent a plot, Mayor Scott Coleman made an appearance and arranged for water to be brought onsite---which proved to be a tremendous help, as the original arrangement with the city requires gardeners to haul water, in buckets, from a key-required water spigot at the rear of the Community Center. 

Council President Cathy Murphy and Councilman Leo Lombardo were busy talking with residents when not tending to their own plots (if truth be told Murphy’s husband, John, did most of the planting work in the Murphy plot).
Lombardo seemed absolutely delighted to be working in a garden again. He told me that he had a huge vegetable garden in his old house, but his current yard is too shady. If all goes well, Lombardo will have plenty of fresh tomatoes and peppers to enjoy this summer.

Deacon Joe and members of St. Paschal Baylon’s Helping Hands Ministry were busy tending to 2 plots, hoping to provide local soup kitchens with fresh produce this year.

All in all, it was an excellent start for this long-awaited project.

Checking in at the Community Garden gate

Residents---young and old---get busy planting

The mayor (with Cathy Murphy and Noreen Paradise) at the water truck

It will be fun to watch things grow

CONTRACTING ISSUES---AGAIN          

Service Director Thom Evans is responsible for maintaining the city’s physical facilities. It’s a huge job. Because of his job, Evans exercises a great amount of contracting power in the city.

State law requires that all projects over $25,000 be awarded using formalized, public bidding procedures. That requirement serves several important purposes: it cuts down on corruption and ensures that taxpayers get the best price for contracted work.

In the past, Evans has expressed a clear preference to use “informal” bidding, which allows him to hand-select contractors who do business with the city. Evans tries to use informal bidding whenever he can. One of his favorite techniques is to divide up large projects into smaller ones, to avoid public bidding requirements.

I wondered if that technique was at play again, when I listened to Evans discuss the bids for the city’s 2012 road projects last week.
That project involves two very different types of work---1) repaving several streets using asphalt; and 2) making concrete repairs at miscellaneous locations throughout the city.

It turns out that the lowest overall bidder’s price for the concrete repair portion of the contract is twice the engineer’s estimate and almost twice what other bidders proposed to charge for that work.

Evans called the price discrepancy “egregious”.

Because the concrete repair work wasn’t bid out as an “alternate” part of the contract, the city doesn’t have the option of accepting or rejecting the bids for just that work. Evans informed Council that unless it wanted to fall way behind by rebidding the project, the city might be saddled paying for overly expensive concrete repairs.

Evans did offer one other creative---but in my mind, questionable---solution. He suggested:

“We could non-perform some of that (miscellaneous concrete repair) work. We could award the contract (to the lowest bidder) but give the engineer discretion to back the concrete repairs out. (By keeping it under $25,000) We could then go out and get informal proposals to do that work. We do not have to formally bid it out. We could do informal bids with local concrete people.”

So to make up for the city’s mistake in putting the bid together (i.e., for failing to make the concrete repairs an alternate part of the street repaving concrete), Evans proposes having the engineer unilaterally cancel parts of the contract (I have no idea if that is legally possible) and letting him, Evans, hand-select contractors to do the concrete repair work instead.

I keep wondering if the city---and taxpayers---would be better served if Evans focused less on trying to beat public bidding requirements and focused instead on improving the city’s public bidding practices to avoid this kind of situation in the future.

MEGA GetGO UPDATE: REQUIRED LOT SPLIT STILL PENDING 

The Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) held an unusual Tuesday night meeting on May 28^th to accommodate developer Lance Osborne, who is pursuing a “lot split” of the Catalano’s property as a precursor to putting a Mega GetGo zoning issue on the ballot in November. 

Once again, for the second P&Z meeting in a row, Osborne---“Mr. In a Hurry” when it comes to the city taking action---didn’t have all his ducks in a row.

Osborne needed 3 things in order to get approval from P&Z: 1) a detailed legal description of the new parcels created by the lot split; 2) a detailed drawing accurately depicting those parcels; and 3) a letter from the city engineer’s office approving items # 1 and # 2.

Osborne came to P&Z with only the first required item. 

While he has previously been a cool customer when dealing with both P&Z and Council, Osborne was visibly angry after P&Z refused to approve his requested lot split and instead put it down on the agenda for the next P&Z meeting.

Personally I was gratified to see P&Z following the rules and holding Osborne to the same standards as everyone else for a change.

If all goes as planned, Osborne should (finally) get P&Z approval of his lot-split request on June 11^th.

OSBORNE’S SIGN—THE ONE THAT DOESN’T MENTION THE MEGA GetGO

As I discussed in a prior blog, P&Z previously approved a “leasing” sign for developer Lance Osborne’s mega GetGo project.

There were quite a few problems with P&Z’s action: 1) P&Z approved the sign before Osborne even applied for a sign permit; 2) the sign doesn’t conform to city code; 3) P&Z didn’t hold a hearing before approving the sign----something that is supposed to happen before any “variance” from the city’s zoning code is approved; and 4) the sign is misleading to the public because it advertises retail space that doesn’t currently exist (and may never exist) and it doesn’t mention the mega Get-Go gas station/café, which is a key piece of Osborne’s proposed development project at the Catalano’s site.

Apparently Law Director Tim Paluf was unconcerned with the appropriateness of P&Z’s action.
After consulting with Paluf, Building Commissioner Dale Grabfelder issued a permit authorizing Osborne to erect his non-conforming, misleading “leasing” sign at the front of the Catalano’s property, along Wilson Mills Road. You can see it there now.

BTW, don’t be fooled by the “Yoga Studio” or other businesses identified in the sign.
The drawing is a “conceptual” one only.
Osborne has made no commitments as to the actual tenants that would rent the “may-never-be-built” retail space he is advertising.