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 19th, 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 6th .
There are only 3 regularly scheduled Council meetings remaining before Council begins its annual August recess.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 11th.
During his first appearance on April 23rd, 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.
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 11th, 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
