Hurry Up and Wait

Life, according to my great uncle John---a crusty New Englander who lived to a ripe old age---boiled down to this: “Hurry Up and Wait.”  Supporters of Lance Osborne’s mega Get-Go project no doubt agree.

GET-GO UPDATE

Developer Lance Osborne and his supporters worked feverishly late last year, hoping to put a Get-Go related zoning issue on the March primary ballot. That effort came to an abrupt halt on January 3^rd, when Osborne conceded that the zoning issue would have to wait until the November 2012 general election.

Although he’s carefully avoided taking a public position on the project, Mayor Scott Coleman has been very involved behind the scenes.  He told Council on January 10^th that he’s been talking with Osborne “and his group” “for a period of time, ” and that his involvement resulted in some concessions---including dropping the car wash which, the mayor said, “was a huge concern of mine.” (Apparently the mega gas station is not).

Coleman showed his activism again on January 3^rd, when he recommended to Council that the city pursue a development agreement with Osborne.  The mayor said that such an agreement,

“…could be part of the issue going to the voters, so the voters know what they are voting on specifically...The project, on its face, has some merit and I think we should undertake a good effort to try to come to an agreement.”

Following Coleman’s lead, Council President Cathy Murphy asked council members to share their questions and concerns about the project with Law Director Tim Paluf, who has been tasked with negotiating on the city’s behalf.

Paluf confirmed on January 10^th that he had received Council’s submissions and that he would be meeting with Osborne and/or his attorney in the next few weeks to discuss a possible development agreement.

It’s not clear at this point just how comprehensive the development agreement will be.

While the city and Osborne might agree on some details--such as the mega Get-Go’s  appearance and lighting--it’s still up in the air whether they will agree on the most crucial issue: the nature and wording of the zoning issue that will appear on the November ballot.

As explained in my previous blog, Charter 8.02.02 requires both city-wide and Ward 4 voter approval if the ballot issue submitted to the voters is a rezoning issue, i.e. if it asks voters to approve rezoning the Catalano’s property (or a lot-split portion thereof) to allow for the proposed mega Get-Go gas station.  

Ward 4 voters will not be provided any special protection, however, if Osborne’s preferred approach is followed, i.e., if the issue submitted to the voters focuses on changing the city’s zoning laws to allow gas stations as an accepted use on all business-zoned properties in the city.

According to last week’s Sun Messenger, Ward 4 Councilwoman Lisa Stickan holds a pretty firm view on which approach should be taken. She is quoted saying:

“Allowing the residents of Ward 4 to have the final say is very important.”

http://www.cleveland.com/hillcrest/index.ssf/2012/01/highland_heights_city_council_2.html

Although he was interviewed for the same story, the mayor didn’t disclose his own position on this “very important” matter to the Sun Messenger reporter. However he has discussed the issue, on the record, in the past. Coleman stated at a June 12, 2011 Committee of the Whole meeting that:

“…he would be concerned with any proposal that takes this proposal out of the vote of the people. That is something they have talked about from the start and he thought it is pretty critical that it remains that way.  They have told the people in Ward 4 that they would have a say in addition to the City as a whole.”

http://www.highlandhts.com/docs/city_council/committee%20minutes/2011/07-12-11_council_committee_minutes.htm

Thus, according to the mayor, a very important promise has already been made to Ward 4 voters:  their Charter 8.02.02 voting rights will be protected when a Get-Go zoning issue appears on the ballot.

That should bring some comfort to those residents, whose neighborhoods and residential property values are likely to be the ones most impacted by Lance Osborne’s proposed mega Get-Go development.

BASS ENERGY LAWSUIT: DRILL OR ARBITRATE?

Rumor has it that Council may hold another executive session to discuss the Bass Energy lawsuit when it reconvenes on January 24^th . That’s the second executive session on that topic this month.

A similar flurry of discussions occurred in January last year.
It’s not hard to know why. If it’s going to drill gas wells in the park, Bass would prefer to do it in the winter, when the park is little used and residents’ windows are closed. (The site-clearing and drilling/rock fracturing operations are conducted around the clock, 24/7, using heavy equipment. It is a lengthy and far from peaceful process.)

Council continues to face the same 3 choices with regard to the lawsuit: 1) proceed to arbitration and fight Bass’s breach of contract claim; 2) pay money to make Bass go away; or 3) throw in the towel and let Bass drill in the park, thereby forever changing the character of the park and potentially endangering Highland Heights residents and the environment.

Mounting scientific evidence has connected frac drilling operations to earthquakes, explosions, underground water contamination and toxic gas releases. Despite that evidence---and voters’ overwhelming approval of a Charter amendment to protect the park from gas wells---some council members apparently still believe that allowing Bass to drill in the park is the easiest and best choice.

If you feel otherwise, now would be a good time to make your voice heard.

Council members’ emails and phone numbers are listed online at the city’s website.

http://www.highlandhts.com/city-council/members.php

Contacting Mayor Coleman wouldn’t be a bad idea either, since he’s the one who rushed to sign the drilling lease that got us into this breach of contract mess.

QUICK HITS

• Jefferson Drive relining project

Service Director Thom Evans reported that the county has awarded a contract for the Jefferson Drive relining project. The work should begin in late February/early March. That’s good news for downstream residents, especially Highland Road residents who experience sewer backups due to storm water infiltration into the Jefferson Drive sewer lines. 

Read more: http://hillcrest.patch.com/articles/flooding-relief-on-way-for-highland-heights 

• Energy Saving Lighting.

Council approved a contract to replace and/or update lighting in the Community Center and other Municipal Complex buildings. Grant money will be used to pay part of the cost. 
Evans noted that the Fire Department was not included in the project because “they received a grant several years ago to update their lighting.” Kudos to Fire Chief Bill Turner and his department for being ahead of the curve and proactively saving taxpayers money.  Read more:

http://hillcrest.patch.com/articles/highland-heights-to-install-new-lights-at-municipal-complex

• FEMA Flood Maps

Last year Council authorized the city engineer’s office to conduct several flood delineation studies in the city after December 2010 FEMA flood maps inexplicably designated several areas as high-risk, 100 year flood zones. Many residents were forced to buy pricey flood insurance as a result of that designation.

The engineer’s work reaped quick benefits for the Williamsburg neighborhood. Last spring FEMA amended their map to restore that neighborhood’s previous low-risk flood designation.

On January 10^th, Engineer Brian Mader reported that his office was about to submit additional data to FEMA concerning several other areas.  Hopefully that will lead to more map amendments in the near future.

Mader’s been pretty tight-lipped about what his office found and which properties are likely to be remapped out of the flood zone. No doubt some residents will still have to buy flood insurance. But if that’s the case, at least they’ll know that the FEMA maps prompting that coverage are accurate.

NEW COUNCIL TERM BRINGS BOTH CHANGE AND MORE OF THE SAME

Highland Heights Council got organized and listened to Lance Osborne’s newest Get-Go presentation on Jan. 3^rd

LANCE OSBORNE’S MOST RECENT GET-GO PITCH

Some Things Change

As 2011 drew to a close, developer Lance Osborne insisted---both in the press and at a December 15^th Economic Development Committee (EDC) meeting---that Council could act on January 3^rd to put a Get-Go related zoning issue on the March 2012 primary ballot.  His claim prompted Highland Heights’ Finance Director, Anthony Ianiro, to “suggest and encourage” that EDC members attend the January 3^rd Council meeting to pressure Council to do just that.

As explained in my last blog, Council couldn’t put a Get-Go-related zoning issue on the March primary ballot, even if it wanted to. 
Osborne and his supporters apparently embraced that reality after singing Auld Lang Syne.  

Osborne certainly hummed an entirely different tune when he appeared before Council on January 3^rd.
Gone was any talk about getting on the March ballot.  Instead he declared that he was there,

“to work with Council about placing it (a Get-Go zoning issue) on the November 2012 ballot.”

A surprise new element of Osborne’s development plan: an outdoor patio located next to the Get-Go convenience store/café---a perfect venue for customers who enjoy breathing in auto exhaust while eating their coffee and subs…

Osborne also revealed that Giant Eagle’s demands had altered. He said that in mid-December,

“We sent a letter to the Law Director (Tim Paluf ) agreeing that the city can…remove the language (in Osborne’s zoning initiative) regarding the size (of allowed businesses)…limit(ing) the hours of operation, and…exclud(ing) the car wash. We’d also be happy to enter into a development agreement to further protect the city.”

Osborne made clear, however, that any

“development agreement would be contingent on a successful (zoning) ballot issue and our acquiring the property (from Giant Eagle). “

The second contingency is a potential minefield. The development agreement—at least as discussed last week---would be between Osborne and the city only. That means Giant Eagle could get around it simply be waiting until after residents approve a zoning issue allowing a mega Get-Go to operate on the Catalano’s property and then refuse to sell the property to Osborne.
 

The reality is that any development agreement between the city and Osborne may be nothing more than an illusion and a public relations stunt ....unless Giant Eagle and Echo (the Giant Eagle-related company that holds title to the Catalano’s property) agree to bind themselves, in writing, to its provisions.

And Some Things Remain the Same

While making some concessions, Osborne made clear that he wasn’t willing to budge on one very important issue:

He doesn’t want any ballot issue that would give Ward 4 residents a special say with regard to using the Catalano’s property as a mega Get-Go gas station.

In 1990, Highland Heights voters amended the Charter to give added protection to the residents most affected by a proposed zoning change.
Section 8.02.02 states that, with regard to any ordinance or resolution that changes how a piece of property is zoned (i.e., changes it from one zoning classification to another), not only must there be city-wide approval, but residents in the ward(s) where the property is located must also approve the change.

Charter 8.02.02 protection was provided to Ward 3 residents a couple of years ago, when an issue pertaining to the business area at the corner of Highland and Miner Roads (where Mulligan’s is located) was put on the ballot.

That protection should also apply to the rezoning of the Catalano’s property---or at least that portion that Osborne wants to use as a mega Get-Go gas station.

 Osborne’s zoning initiative petition was drafted to deprive Ward 4 residents their special protection rights under Charter 8.02.02. 
He did that by framing his zoning law changes to affect all business-zoned properties in the city, not just the Catalano’s parcel.

Council President Cathy Murphy was clearly troubled by Osborne’s approach. She commented,

“Our Charter calls for an independent vote of the (impacted) ward. The way it’s (Osborne’s proposed zoning issue) structured now, that’s being bypassed. A lot of (Council) people went on record saying this was an important component---to put the zoning issue on the ballot so the ward (Ward 4 voters) would have approval.”

When Murphy asked for Osborne’s current position on that issue, he replied,

“We’d like the city to amend the ordinance that we basically put in front of them.”

In other words, Osborne still wants to deprive  Ward 4 voters of their rights under Charter 8.02.02.

He doesn’t want to let Ward 4 voters---the city’s most impacted residents---have the last word on whether or not a mega-Get-Go can be operated on the Catalano’s property.

COUNCIL AND CITY ADMINISTRATION

Some Things Change

In addition to listening to Lance Osborne’s presentation, Council held a special organizational meeting on January 3^rd .

Not surprisingly, the departure of Scott Mills and the arrival of Chuck Brunello meant that there would be some changes on Council.

Ward 1 Councilwoman Cathy Murphy was elected Council President. It’s a familiar role for Murphy; she has served in that capacity in the past.

Councilwoman Lisa Stickan and Councilman Ed Hargate apparently chose to switch committee seats. Hargate decided to serve on the Legislative & Finance Committee with Murphy and Councilman Leo Lombardo this year.
Stickan will serve on the Safety Services (SS) Committee with Brunello and Councilman Bob Mastrangelo.
Mastrangelo will continue serving on the Planning & Zoning Commission.  Brunello will continue to serve on the city’s Park & Recreation Commission (P&R), but change from being a P&R member to Council’s P&R rep.

Councilman Frank Legan was appointed as Council rep to the EDC. That should be a good fit given Legan’s background and interests.

And Some Things Remain the Same

In addition to its own appointments, Council approved Mayor Coleman’s 2012 appointments.

Coleman, who keeps a tight circle and apparently has no problem with nepotism, made no changes to his administrative staff. The brothers Ianiro continue in their roles as the city’s Finance and Recreation Directors.

The mayor also appointed the wife of EDC member Dan Greve (“We are not a lifestyle city”) to a paid position on the city’s Park & Recreation Commission.

The Get-Go Question: Are We (Or Are We Not) A “Lifestyle” City?

An Economic Development Committee member recently justified his support of Lance Osborne’s mega Get-Go development plan by proclaiming that Highland Heights is “not a lifestyle city.” His comment goes to the heart of the Get-Go issue.

The Backstory

The four-meetings-a-year Highland Heights Economic Development Committee (EDC) has met 3 times since September to discuss Lance Osborne’s $8 million development proposal for the former Catalano’s grocery store property.
The centerpiece of that project: a mega Giant Eagle/Get-Go gas station, which Osborne plans to install along Wilson Mills Road, near the Bishop/Brainard Road intersection.

Osborne faces a major obstacle: the Catalano’s property is zoned for “local business.” Since gas stations aren’t a permitted use, the Get-Go can’t go in unless Highland Heights voters approve a zoning code change to allow it.

Osborne, who told the EDC that he’d like the Get-Go to be operational within a year, seems to be looking to Council to carry the water for him after his own flawed and untimely initiative petition drive failed to get a zoning issue on the ballot last November.

Osborne told the EDC on December 15^th that a Get-Go zoning issue could appear on the March 6, 2012 primary ballot if Council took appropriate action during its January 3^rd organizational meeting.

That explains the recent flurry of EDC meetings.

Supporters of Osborne’s mega Get-Go development plan apparently hoped to obtain the EDC’s endorsement of the project by year’s end and then use it to pressure Council to take immediate action to push the project forward on January 3^rd.

Finance Director Anthony Ianiro, who heads the EDC, not only backed up Osborne’s primary ballot claim, he told EDC members:  

“I encourage and suggest that you come and that you speak to Council“ on January 3^rd.

Mayor Scott Coleman expressed pessimism but didn’t throw water on the idea that Council could act on January 3^rd to put a Get-Go zoning issue on the March primary ballot:

“For March, an ordinance would have to be passed at the 1^st (Council) meeting in January. I don’t see that as a practical thing. The whole concept of amending the zoning ordinance has not been discussed by council… The 1^st Council meeting on January 3^rd is more an organizational meeting. It’s possible that Council could discuss it if they are willing to do it…They know it’s pending.  They have discussed meaty things at organizational meetings in the past. There’s precedent for doing that.”

Reality Check
Council could theoretically vote on January 3^rd to put an ordinance amending the Highland Heights zoning code on the March 6th primary ballot, but it wouldn’t be legal.

Council would have to ignore state filing deadlines, city ordinances and the Highland Heights Charter to do that.

Council would have to present the new zoning ordinance for a first reading at a January 3^rd special meeting (during which public comment is not allowed), immediately suspend two additional required readings of the ordinance, and then pass it the same night. Council would also have to include language instructing the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections to put the ordinance on the March primary ballot---in violation of state filing deadlines.

•  According to the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections’ 2012 elections calendar, the filing deadline for getting “local issues” (such as a zoning ordinance) on the March 6, 2012 primary ballot expired several weeks ago, on December 7^th. http://www.boe.cuyahogacounty.us/en-US/election-calendar.aspx

•             Highland Heights law requires 3 separate readings before ordinances are adopted (117.01), it prohibits zoning measures from being passed as emergency measures (117.02), and it also mandates that Council provide 30 days notice and hold a public hearing prior to adopting any ordinance amending the city’s zoning code (1115.04). http://www.conwaygreene.com/Hlandhts.htm
  
  
•         Highland Heights Charter 802.02 imposes a waiting period after zoning ordinances are approved, before they can be voted on.  A 60-day waiting period applies to general elections (a primary is not a general election); otherwise a 90-day waiting period applies. http://www.conwaygreene.com/Hlandhts.htm

Osborne, Mayor Coleman, and Finance Director Tony Ianiro clearly misspoke when they told EDC members on December 15^th that Council could act on January 3^rd to put a Get-Go zoning issue on the March primary ballot.
Council can’t do that----not legally, anyway.

While it is expected that developers might, on occasion, spin facts or present a version of reality that serves their own self-interest, it’s disappointing that, rather than setting the record straight, Mayor Coleman and Finance Director Ianiro not only backed up Osborne’s claim, but also “encourage(d) and suggest(ed)” to  EDC members that they should come and pressure Council to do something on January 3^rd which---as the mayor and finance director should know---Council is not legally authorized to do.

 “We Are Not A Lifestyle City”

 Although no formal vote was taken on December 15^th, 7 of the 10 EDC members expressed support for Osborne’s mega Get-Go project. (Maurice Helou abstained, Mayor Scott Coleman didn’t offer an opinion, and Scott Mills was absent).

Their endorsement might have more weight if the EDC’s review of the project hadn’t been so limited.
Members pretty much just listened to Osborne, looked at his conceptual drawings and accepted, without significant analysis, Osborne’s claims regarding traffic impact (“no degradation” of the Wilson Mills/Bishop/Brainard intersection”), job creation (120 mostly part-time, minimum wage jobs) and new tax revenue (approximately $47,000).  

At the December 15^th meeting Osborne again described his traffic study as a “trip generation” traffic study whose projections are based on (generic) use and the square footage of the proposed project. When asked by EDC member Helou whether the traffic study took  into account “the value of the (Giant Eagle/Get-Go) brand and what it might draw in as far as customers,” Osborne replied, "No."

In other words Osborne’s traffic study doesn't consider the effect of Giant Eagle’s gas points program, which will funnel traffic to the Get-Go from surrounding communities. (Mayor Coleman seemingly confirmed this reality when he commented, “They (Giant Eagle) are desperately in need of a location in this corridor.”) Presumably the traffic study also doesn't count traffic that will be diverted as a result of Giant Eagle’s installation of Get-Go exit signs along I-90 and I-271.

Significantly, the EDC did not consider or discuss:  1) the negative impact (including job losses) that the mega Get-Go project could have on currently operating local businesses; 2) zoning issues; or 3) the impact that the proposed mega Get-Go facility will have on residential neighborhoods and residential property values.

No matter. Most of the EDC members still enthusiastically support the project.  Among their comments:

“The project is above what I expected to see. Every day is a day without tax revenue.” Michael DeStefano.(He’s not quite right.  Giant Eagle pays property tax on the $1+ million assessed value of the Catalano’s property each year.)

 “I lived on Millridge. I remember Catalano’s at Christmastime. It was a mess. That’s the way it was. No one complained.” Janet Schiciano.
(It’s interesting that, after having suffered through it herself, Schiciano so easily dismisses the effect that the Get-Go---which will have far worse traffic than “Catalano’s at Christmastime”---will have on her former neighborhood.)

“We are not a lifestyle city.” Dan Greve.
(So, what does that make us, a low-rent, shabby-town?)

I think Greve’s comment cuts to the heart of the Get-Go issue.  

Are we a “lifestyle city”---one that puts high quality residential life at the top of its priority list and is committed to preserving high residential property values, even during times of economic downturn? Or are we some other kind of city---a “non-lifestyle city”----one that is willing to support commercial development at all costs, no matter how it effects our residential neighborhoods?

Fortunately it is Highland Heights residents---not Lance Osborne, Giant Eagle, or the EDC--- who will get to decide that question, once a Get-Go zoning issue finally gets on the ballot.

It just won’t be in March.