Friday, August 12, 2011

The August Pause

After holding a special meeting last week, Highland Heights Council adjourned for its annual August break, leaving some unfinished business on the table.
City Contracts

Given the current economy, you’d think that contractors would be beating down Highland Heights’ City Hall doors to submit bids for one of the many contracts that the city advertised in July. Or maybe not…

Not a single bid was submitted for the city’s 2011 sidewalk replacement project or for Recreation Director Dave Ianiro’s proposed Park Party Barn Pavillion. The city received a single bid for resurfacing the park roads and one over-estimate bid for a gazebo in the new municipal center greenspace.

Council decided to re-advertise three of the contracts more broadly (the park road contract excepted) by placing notices in both local weekly and daily newspapers. That did the trick--at least as far as the sidewalk project is concerned. Council accepted a bid for that project during its pre-recess special meeting.

A second round of bid openings for the other outstanding contracts is scheduled for later this month.


Refinancing City Bonds

Late in July Mayor Scott Coleman informed Council that the city could save approximately $500,000 over 12 years by “calling” or redeeming some outstanding city bonds and replacing them with a single, lower interest rate bond issue.

The old bonds (due to be fully paid off in 2023) financed the building of the new pool and paid for other major infrastructure work throughout the city.

The lower interest rate means that it will cost the city less to pay off its old debt.

While refinancing the bonds is a good idea---and it’s good that Mayor Coleman is pursuing that plan---I’m disappointed in his lack of leadership. The mayor could have leveraged the bonds swap as a means to generate new revenue to pay for some of the city’s current, significant infrastructure needs.

Given the lower interest rates, for the same payments it’s making now on the old bonds, the city could have obtained additional money to finance necessary things like major street repairs and replacing some of the city’s aging water lines.

Service Director Thom Evans warned the mayor and Council several years ago that the city’s major water artery---the Highland Road water main---is failing and needs to be replaced. Two weeks ago, a major water line break in a different part of the city caused significant damage to a city street.

Although the clock is ticking---loudly---on the city’s aging, underground water mains, Mayor Coleman has turned a deaf ear to the issue. He has not set aside any money or even begun planning how to get that vital, but expensive, infastructure work done.

Maybe his mind has been focused elsewhere---like Dave Ianiro’s Party Park Barn Pavillion. Certainly that’s what Mayor Coleman’s 2011 budget seems to indicate, as demonstrated by the $200,000 he set aside to pay for that item this year.

Who needs water, and who cares about deteriorating streets, as long as you can party in the park---right?

The mayor’s plan to swap the city’s old, high interest bonds for a lower interest rate bond is a no-brainer. It’s a move obvious to any resident who has refinanced a mortgage in the last couple of years.

Taking the no-brainer route, however, does not necessarily translate into good financial leadership. Taking the no-brainer route is not the same thing as doing what is right and necessary to get things done in the city.

Taking the no-brainer path is, however, a better political move for someone trying to keep his seat in a contested mayor’s race.

After all, if you were running for mayor, wouldn’t you rather brag about saving the city half a million dollars? Wouldn’t that be easier than explaining to residents why you decided to take on new debt---even if doing that benefited the city more in the long run?

Are We Get-Go?

Lance Osborne recently unleashed a battalion of out-of-towners to collect signatures for his Get-Go related initiative petition. One signature collector admitted to a resident that he lived in Sandusky. Two other collectors told me they came here from the Akron area. They also claimed that they were “volunteers” for a group that supported “small business.”

If you buy that, I’ve got a bridge I can sell you.

Although Osborne told Council that he was simply trying to “update” the “local business” rules, his initiative would effectively gut the city’s zoning code. Not only would it enable Giant Eagle to put a mega Get-Go (and alcohol-selling convenience store/café) on the Catalano’s property, it would allow gas stations and car washes to be put on any business-zoned property in the city---in places they aren’t currently allowed.

Osborne rushed to bring his initiative petition to City Hall before Council went into recess, hoping to get his proposed new zoning laws on the November ballot.

Since Highland Heights is a Charter city, our charter controls what happens next. According to Charter section 8.01, Council has 40 days after an initiative petition is submitted to accept, reject or amend it. That leaves plenty of time for Council to act on the Osborne petition after it returns from its August recess.

If Council doesn’t approve the petition, Osborne can either rethink his approach or press ahead---essentially forcing Council to put his proposed legislation before the voters.

According to the Charter, initiative issues go on the ballot of the next general or regular municipal election held more than 90 days after Council files the issue with the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections.

Depending on whether Council takes the full 40 days provided by in the Charter, it could be mid-September before Council files Osborne’s initiative petition downtown---well after the Board of Election’s August 10th deadline for putting local issues put on the November 2011 ballot.


And the Race Is On

There will be just three contested municipal races this year: the mayor’s race and races for Council-at-Large and the Ward 4 Council seat. Councilwoman Cathy Murphy and Councilmen Leo Lombardo or Bob Mastrangelo are unopposed this time around.

The mayor’s race is no surprise. Council President Scott Mills threw his hat into that ring several months ago.

A surprise entry in the Council-at-Large race is Attorney Ken Rapport-Messinger. He joins Mayfield Heights Service Department employee Chuck Brunello and incumbent Councilmen Ed Hargate and Frank Legan, all of whom are vying for three available at-large seats.

I wasn’t too surprised to see Ted Anderson’s name in the Ward 4 race. Anderson--who was soundly defeated by Councilwoman (and assistant County Prosecutor) Lisa Stickan two years ago—pledged in a November 26, 2009 Sun Messenger story that he would run again in 2011.

Two years ago Anderson was nothing but sour grapes about his loss. He seemed particularly bugged that Stickan, an active Republican, received support from Ward 4 Republican voters. A declared “independent,” Anderson claimed, “This shouldn’t be a Republican-Democrat race. There should be one side.” Ironically as the Sun Messenger pointed out, Anderson was himself actively supported in the 2009 Ward 4 race by two prominent Republicans---Councilman Frank Legan and former Councilman Jamie Pilla.

In 2007, Anderson walked in, unopposed, to the Ward 4 council seat. He was able to do that after his predecessor, Jim Austin, decided to file petitions in the city’s at-large race, rather than seeking reelection in the ward. (After the election, Austin was appointed to a newly created city position, that of acting Building Commissioner.)

Anderson seemed to expect that the Ward 4 seat would be handed to him again in 2009---especially after former Councilwoman Ann D’Amico pulled out of the race at the very last minute. (D’Amico was later appointed, post-election, to a paid position on the city’s Planning & Zoning Commission).

Anderson’s bitter and accusatory comments indicate just how flummoxed he was in 2009 when he found that, instead of another cakewalk, he had to compete against Stickan in a contested political race for the Ward 4 council seat.

“We should all be here for the same reason” Anderson was quoted as saying, which for him meant “…further(ing) the process of having the former pool house at the Highland Heights park made into a (day camp) facility …(and a) facility for residents’ parties and events.”

As a former Park & Recreation Committee member, it’s not at all surprising that building a new Park Party Pavilion would be at the top of Anderson’s priority list for the city.

Ward 4 voters will have another opportunity in November to tell Anderson just what they think of his priority list.

Monday, July 25, 2011

Lance Osborne/Giant Eagle's Plan to Gut Highland Heights’ Zoning Code

Lance Osborne informed the Highland Heights Planning & Zoning Commission tonight that he and Giant Eagle intend to petition to put a zoning issue on the ballot, so a mega-Get Go Gas Station, Car Wash, and Convenience Store/Cafe can be operated on the Catalano’s property.


The zoning issue, as described by Osborne, would effectively gut the city’s zoning code.

The Catalano’s property is zoned for “Local Business,” which is currently the most restrictive business classification in the city---buildings can’t exceed 10,000 square feet in size and all business activities have to be conducted “wholly” indoors.

  
Osborne stated that the issue that he and Giant Eagle intend to put on the ballot will:

  • Increase the size of buildings in Local Business districts from 10,000 to 25,000 square feet; and

  • Remove the “wholly” inside activity restriction to allow gas stations and car washes to be operated as “accessory uses” of grocery and convenience stores.


What does this mean?

  • Because the city’s less restrictive “General Business” classification includes everything permitted in “Local Business”, the Osborne/Giant Eagle zoning issue, if passed, would allow gas stations and car washes to be installed on every single business-zoned property in the city, no matter where they are located.

  • The Osborne/Giant Eagle zoning issue will also effectively gut the city’s “Motor Service District” zoning classification ---along with all the important restrictions currently imposed on the location and operation of gas stations in the city.



Based on what he said tonight, it appears that Lance Osborne and Giant Eagle have declared war on the city’s zoning code.

 And since the zoning code is designed to protect Highland Heights residents, that means they’ve declared war on us too.



Grin of the Night:

Osborne told P&Z there would be “no degradation” of the Brainard/Bishop/Wilson Mills intersection if a mega-Get-Go, car wash and convenience store/cafe is put on the Catalano’s property. He also said the “city won’t have to pay anything” to improve the intersection.

Good news---if you believe it.

  
Of course Osborne didn’t discuss how residents living in the northwest corner of the city would be impacted by all the new traffic flowing in from surrounding communities. He didn't claim that residential neighborhoods (and residential property values) wouldn’t be degraded by the Osborne/Giant Eagle zoning issue and development plan.

By then again, why would he?

Monday, July 18, 2011

Drink-N-Drive?

I caught only the tail end of the presentation given to Council last week by Lance Osborne and a Giant Eagle (GtE) rep, describing their joint development plans for the former Catalano’s grocery store property.
After talking to a couple people in the know, however, I can share these details:

  •  Lance Osborne’s company plans to purchase the entire Catalano’s property and lease the northern portion (along Wilson Mills Road) to GtE.
     
  • GtE wants to install and operate 24/7 (24 hours a day, 7 days a week) 8 gasoline pumping stations and a combination convenience store/café, selling grocery items, prepared food and alcoholic beverages----ideal, I guess, for consumers who like to drink n’ drive 
  • The Catalano’s property is currently zoned “Local Business,” (LB) a fairly restrictive classification that permits only, “retail stores and (consumer) services conducted wholly within enclosed buildings”--- i.e., conducted indoors. (Ordinance 1131.04(c)(B)). Drive-through restaurants and gas stations don’t qualify as permitted uses because they aren’t conducted “wholly” indoors.
     
  • Although Osborne apparently suggested that the city’s Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) could simply grant him a “variance” to use the Catalano’s property as a Get-Go gas station, that claim is belied by Ordinance 1113.10(E) (“Standards for Granting Variances,”) which reads:
    “The Commission shall have no powers to authorize as a variance, the establishment of a principal or an accessory use which is not specifically permitted in the district in which the use is intended.”
    Translated, this means that P&Z couldn’t grant Osborne a variance to use the Catalano’s property as a gas station even if it wanted to because “service stations” are not a “specifically permitted” use in LB districts.
     
  • Because gas stations can’t be operated in LB districts, the Catalano’s property would have to be rezoned in order for GtE to put a Get-Go gas station there.
  • Because the Catalano’s property has to be rezoned, the fate of GtE’s Get Go plan will ultimately be decided---as it should be---by Highland Heights voters.
·     There are two questions that Mayor Scott Coleman and Council are facing at this point: 1) what is the proper and/or best way (if any) to rezone the property; and 2) should Council put the rezoning issue on the November ballot?
·   
·   Question 1: How to rezone the Catalano’s property

The rezoning issue presents a very thorny issue for Osborne/GtE---and not just because Highland Heights voters will have the last say on whether the property is rezoned or not.
Highland Heights has a specific zoning classification for gas stations. Not surprisingly, it’s called: “Motor Service District” (MSD).
According to Ordinance 1131.04(e)(1)(B), (D), (E), the stated intent behind MSD zoning is: “ To provide Motor Service Districts in convenient areas directly related to the freeway interchanges…;” “To promote the most desirable and beneficial use of the land in the interchange areas; “ and “To protect nearby residential neighborhoods by restricting the types of nearby uses, particularly at their common boundaries, which would create objectionable influences”.
It’s questionable whether the Catalano’s property qualifies for MSD Zoning given that it is not close to “freeway interchanges,” it does not sit in an “interchange area” and rezoning it as a MSD would not “protect nearby residential neighborhoods” from “objectionable influences”.
Even if it is an option---an issue that the city’s law director has yet to weigh in on--- voters would also have to agree to amend 1131.04(e)(4)(B),  which prohibits “the sale of intoxicating liquor and beer” in MSD.
That restriction is a death knell for GtE’s proposed drink n’ drive plan.

As an alternative rezoning route, Osborne and GtE could ask voters: 1) to change the Catalano’s property from the more restrictive LB classification to a more liberal “General Business” (GB) one; and 2) to add “motor service” to the list of acceptable uses on GB properties.
The problem with that option is that the change in permitted use (to allow gas stations in GB districts) would apply to all GB-zoned property in the city, not just the Catalano’s site. That means present and future owners of GB-zoned property could put gas stations throughout the city whenever they felt like it.
It also might not be legal to add service stations as a permitted use in GB areas because it would effectively render the city’s MSD zoning classification redundant and irrelevant, thereby significantly undermining the city’s entire zoning scheme.

Bottom line, rezoning the Catalano’s property to allow for a Get-Go gas station appears to conflict with both the stated intent and provisions of the Highland Heights’ zoning code.
For that reason alone, the mayor and Council need to take the time to obtain some expert legal advice and to think things through, carefully and deliberately, before responding to the Osborne/GtE proposal.

Question # 2: Should Council place the rezoning issue on the ballot?

There are two ways to put a zoning issue before the voters: Council can either agree to put it on the ballot or a property owner can get it on via petition, by collecting signatures from Highland Heights voters asking it to be placed on the ballot.
It’s faster and easier for property owners to have Council put a rezoning issue on the ballot---and it has the added benefit of showing Council’s approval of the issue.  Needless to say, Osborne and GtE are hoping that Council will agree (within the next two weeks) to put a Catalano’s property rezoning issue on the November ballot for them.
I’m hoping just as hard that Council won’t do that because I think it’s a rush job.
I think that there needs to be a lot more discussion and deliberation before any issue is put before the voters.
Why do I say that? Here’s the timeline:
GtE reps spoke with Council about the Catalano’s property for the first time on December 14, 2010.
At that time, they said that a GtE company was going to develop the entire Catalano’s property and that they were hoping to put a rezoning issue on the May 2011 ballot. When Council wanted more details, the reps told Mayor Scott Coleman and Council that they would return “within the next 1 to 2 months” with a more concrete proposal---including some sort of commitment regarding whether the existing grocery store building would be renovated, torn down or reduced in size.
A month later, Building Commissioner Dale Grabfelder reported that GtE hoped to have a necessary traffic study “done within the next couple weeks”.

At least once a month after that, someone from Council would ask Mayor Scott Coleman and/or Building Commissioner Grabfelder for an update on GtE’s plan. The answer was always the same: there was no news; the city was still waiting to hear back from them.
Months and months went by: still nothing.
Suddenly---just weeks before the deadline for placing issues on the November ballot---GtE reappears with Osborne in the mix and it’s all “hurry, hurry” and “quick, quick” ---as if they weren’t the ones dragging their feet for the past five months. 
Osborne/GtE tell Council that they want a rezoning issue on the November ballot---even though Council has not had time to digest the details of their newest proposal for the Catalano’s property, traffic issues have never been discussed and there is no agreement on the rezoning.
They also inform Council that 24/7 operation on the Catalano’s site is “non-negotiable”.
The Get-Go gas station is likely to draw drivers from at least a 10 miles radius. (I have friends in Euclid who are already vibrating at the thought of a Get-Go in Highland Heights.)
You’ve seen Field of Dreams: “Build it and they will come.” That’s Get-Go on the Catalano’s site.
 Traffic study? Who cares! Hurry, hurry. Get it done.

I don’t know about you, but I always see red flags when people rush in at the last minute insisting that controversial decisions have to be made “right now, immediately, can’t wait.” I figure people who do that are probably trying to pull a fast one---trying to get away with something that they couldn’t otherwise, if they showed up early, with enough time to discuss things all the way through.

Like I said, when that happens I usually see red flags.
Right now, though, all I’m seeing is red.