Sunday, October 7, 2012

GIVE ‘EM AN INCH AND THEY’LL TAKE A MILE: MONDAY HEARING ON GETGO SIGN VARIANCE REQUESTS



Although the GetGo development agreement allows developer Lance Osborne to install 2 gigantic monument signs, Osborne isn’t stopping there, as reflected by his sign variance requests.

OCTOBER 8TH PUBLIC HEARING

The Highland Heights Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) has scheduled a public hearing on October 8th (8 pm, City Hall Council Chamber) to discuss developer Lance Osborne’s requests for exemptions from the city’s sign ordinances.
P&Z will vote on those requests that night.

Osborne’s variance requests go beyond the gigantic monument signs listed in the GetGo development agreement.
Having already received special treatment, Osborne apparently wants more…..much more.

THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

Paragraph 3c of the GetGo development agreement, lists 4 specific zoning variances that the city agreed to give developer Lance Osborne.
With regard to sign variances, 3cii states:

Variance from the sign regulations set forth in Section 1145.06 and 1145.08 of the City’s Zoning Code as necessary to allow for signs substantially in accordance with the signage plan attached hereto as Exhibit “F” (the “Signage Plan”).” 
Emphasis added
.


“Exhibit F” contains only one item:  a drawing of the gigantic monument signs that Osborne plans to install along both Wilson Mills and Brainard Roads.
That’s it.
That’s the only sign variance actually listed in the development agreement.

OSBORNE’S SIGN VARIANCE REQUESTS

Although the city usually limits free-standing signs to 20 square feet, Osborne’s gigantic monument signs measure 46.7 square feet.
Therefore Osborne is requesting two 26.7 square foot variances, one for each monument sign.
By my reading, those variances are both “necessary” and allowed by the GetGo development agreement. 

Osborne’s third sign variance request, on the other hand, isn’t mentioned in the development agreement, nor do I think it meets the definition of “necessary”.

As I always reminded my kids, wants are not the same thing as needs.

In his 3rd variance request Osborne is seeking P&Z's permission to install 205.2 square feet of total signage for the mega Get-Go, which fronts on Wilson Mills Road.
City law allows only 120 square feet.
In other words, Osborne wants to install almost 75% more total signage than is allowed by law.

Talk about junking up the intersection…

Will P&Z give Osborne more special treatment by approving his 3rd variance request?
Will P&Z exempt him from signage laws that are intended to limit commercialization in the city, laws that other business property owners in the city have been required to obey?

I guess we’ll find out on Monday night.

CORRECTIONS---BOTH MINE AND P&Z’S

My Correction

In my last blog I reported---based on the actual variance request submitted by Osborne—that the side yard variance granted by P&Z would allow the developed area of the GetGo parcel to end, “a mere 2’2” from Brainard Road.”

Council’s P&Z rep, Bob Mastrangelo, told me that I didn’t quite get it right.
According to Mastrangelo, the variance that P&Z approved will allow the GetGo parking lot to end 2’2” from the Brainard Road sidewalk, not Brainard Road itself.

How close is that? Go look at the new Mayfield Heights Sonic and you’ll get the idea.

That variance---and Osborne’s landscaping plan---spell doom for all of the mature trees currently standing along the front and sides of the Catalano’s property. 
Osborne plans to get rid of all of those trees.

P&Z’s Correction

According to P&Z Chair Vince Adamus, P&Z will make a correction to the front yard variance given for the large metal canopy that Osborne proposes to install over the planned 16 GetGo gas pumps.
As I reported in my last blog, that variance stated that the GetGo canopy would end “53’ 6½” (versus 110’) from the center of Wilson Mills Road”.
Adamus indicated that P&Z made a mistake by using the center of Wilson Mills Road to measure the variance; they should have used the edge of Wilson Mills instead. 

Although the canopy is still as big and will be just as close to the street as before, P&Z is planning to modify the variance to reflect the proper measuring point.

GROUPS ORGANIZED TO SUPPORT AND OPPOSE GETGO REZONING ISSUE 58.

The advent of voting-by-mail has really moved up the campaign calendar in the city.

This week residents received a glossy postcard sent by “Citizens for Improving Highland Heights” in support of Issue 58, the GetGo rezoning issue.
The treasurer for that group is identified as Steve Passov---Osborne’s leasing agent.

Hilariously, the postcard seemed to go out of its way to divert attention from the crown jewel of Osborne’s development plan---the 16 pump mega GetGo gas station that Osborne wants to install along Wilson Mills Road.

One statement on the postcard engendered some anger on the part of residents and Council members alike.
Above conceptual drawings of a retail strip and a convenience store is the message:

“These plans are approved by the Highland Hts. City Council, Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board.”

“Approved” could easily be read to mean “endorsed”---perhaps the intended message?

Council President Cathy Murphy has repeatedly made clear that although Council exercised due diligence by working with Osborne on the GetGo development agreement, Council has NOT endorsed Issue 58, the GetGo rezoning issue.
Murphy said that Council wants to leave the rezoning decision entirely up to residents to decide.

If proof of the truth of Murphy’s statement is needed, one need look no farther than “Residents Against GetGo,” which began distributing a “Vote No on Issue 58” flyer this week.

Councilman Ed Hargate believes that the proposed mega GetGo will hurt nearby residential neighborhoods and undermine the city’s residential property values. He organized the group opposing Issue 58.

The treasurer for “Residents Against GetGo” is not a developer or leasing agent. She’s a concerned Highland Heights resident, fighting to preserve and protect Highland Heights’ reputation as an upscale, high quality residential city.

Developer Lance Osborne's First Signage Variance Request

Developer Lance Osborne's 2nd and 3rd signage variance requests

Paragraph 3cii of the GetGo development agreement addressing sign variances

"Exhibit F"--the signage plan referred to in the development agreement