PZ - October 5th 2015

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Mayfield Village
Oct 5, 2015

The Planning and Zoning Commission met in regular session on Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 7:10 p.m. at the Mayfield Village Civic Center, Loft Conference Room. Chairman Farmer presided.

Roll Call

Present: Mr. Jim Farmer (Chairman), Mr. Vetus Syracuse (Chairman Pro-Tem), Mr. Bill Marquardt, Mr. Garry Regan, Dr. Sue McGrath, and Mr. Paul Fikaris                                                          

Also Present: Mr. Joseph Diemert (Law Director/arrived 7:20 pm), Mr. Tom Cappello (Village Engineer/arrived 7:15 pm), Mr. Ted Esborn (Economic Development Director), Mr. John Marrelli (Building Commissioner), and Ms. Deborah Garbo (Secretary)

Absent: Mayor Rinker and Mr. Joseph Saponaro (Council Alternate)

Consideration of Meeting Minutes: Aug 3, 2015

Mr. Regan, seconded by Mr. Syracuse made a motion to approve the minutes of Aug 3, 2015.              

ROLL CALL

Ayes: Mr. Farmer, Mr. Syracuse, Mr. Marquardt, Dr. McGrath, Mr. Fikaris

Abstain: Mr. Regan

Nays: None                            

Motion Carried. Minutes Approved as written.

PROPOSALS:

  1. Conditional Use Permit
    Pre-Owned Vehicle Detailing Center
    Deacon’s Chrysler Jeep Dodge RAM
    Frank Woods, Inc
    740 Beta Dr.
  2. Lot Split & Dedication Plat
    Campus III Drive
    Progressive Insurance Company - 520 SOM Ctr. Rd

OPEN PORTION:

Conditional Use Permit
Pre-Owned Vehicle Detailing Center
Deacon’s Chrysler Jeep Dodge RAM
Frank Woods, Inc
740 Beta Dr.

Chairman Farmer called the regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission to order. We’ll vote on both items tonight.

Chairman reminded everyone of the upcoming APA Cleveland Planning & Zoning Workshop Conference on Nov 13th. If you’re interested in attending, get your RSVP in by this Friday. I have a legal seminar that day and will not be able to attend.

Chairman asked John if there’s anything to add on Deacon’s conditional use permit since the workshop.

Mr. Marrelli said, I sent a memo to you guys with four suggestions on conditions for the detail shop.

Mr. Regan said, they were using this space temporarily during construction. Did they have a conditional use permit at that time?

Mr. Marrelli replied, they had a temporary occupancy permit.

Mr. Regan asked, do they understand what a conditional use permit is?

Mr. Marrelli replied yes, they do.

Mr. Cappello arrives 7:15 p.m.

DECISION:

Mr. Syracuse, seconded by Mr. Marquardt made a motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit request for Deacon’s Chrysler Jeep Dodge RAM Pre-Owned Vehicle Detailing Center at 740 Beta Dr. with conditions as noted:

  1. Maximum hours of operation Mon – Sat 8 am – 6 pm.
  2. No mechanical work permitted on cars.
  3. No Tune-ups, oil changes or repairs.
  4. No more than 5 cars inside at one time due to Building Code Regulations.
  5. Only washing, waxing, cleaning materials may be stored inside.

Chairman Farmer asked if any further discussion.

Darrell A. Young Enterprises states, on behalf of the owner, those are conditions we would also stipulate with Deacon’s. Those conditions are fine.

ROLL CALL

Ayes:   Mr. Farmer, Mr. Syracuse, Mr. Marquardt, Mr. Regan, Dr. McGrath, Mr. Fikaris

Nays:   None                                      

Motion Carried. Recommendation to Council.

***************************************************************************

Lot Split & Dedication Plat
Campus III Drive
Progressive Insurance Company
520 SOM Center Road

Mr. Marrelli said, we talked about this at our workshop. There were many questions that I could not answer.

Mr. Cappello said this is something memorializing what is already in the Agreement. There was approximately a 3 acre piece of property that we got deeded back when they did the final split and land swap. There was roughly 57 acres for Progressive, 5 acres was carved out for the Library and they have the street. As part of the Agreement, we’re supposed to have access to this back property via this 3 acre parcel. This is more to document a future right-of-way to get back to their property. This property was already split out before. There’s going to be two residuals, a Block “A” and Block “B” and a dedicated right-of-way for the roadway.

Mr. Syracuse said, that’s what we had thought. The question I had at the time was we didn’t know what it was pursuant to. We didn’t get a copy of the actual Agreement from Mark in the e-mail that was sent to you and forwarded to us. But you and the Law Dept are saying it’s in the Agreement. My question was do we need to do an easement agreement, is there already one? The fact that there’s already an easement agreement, everything’s been cleared up.

Mr. Cappello said this is basically for access to the back of their property when it gets developed. The thought was if this ever does get developed that they would then widen it and make it the size it needs to be for whatever size development is in the back.

Mr. Marrelli asked, does this have to get recorded?

Mr. Cappello replied yes, it’ll go to Council after Planning & Zoning. The Mylar needs to get signed and goes to the County to get recorded.

Mr. Regan asked Tom to show the Commission the lot split on the drawing.

Mr. Cappello points out the 3 acre parcel that belongs to the Village. This here is the new dedicated 110’ wide right-of-way. You have two residuals. We take this parcel and split it into basically 3 pieces;

  • One is for the dedicated roadway (currently called Campus III Drive).
  • Block “A” residual parcel. There’s an easement over this for parking for the Library.
  • Block “B” another residual parcel. These are also areas where there’s big wetlands.

Mr. Regan states, so you separated the roadway from everything else.

Mr. Cappello said correct.

Mr. Regan said the other issue that was an e-mail contention was that Progressive in this 3 acres contributed as part of the Agreement in consideration for all the good work that the Village did.

Mr. Cappello said, we got 8 acres out of the deal, 5 of which went to the Library and then this 3 acre piece.

Mr. Marquardt said this belongs to the Village and we’re putting an easement in it.

Mr. Cappello replied, a dedicated roadway.

Mr. Marquardt asked, why do we need an easement if it’s our property?

Mr. Cappello replied, it’s more or less to memorialize it.

Mr. Marrelli said or they get landlocked.

Mr. Marquardt said, o.k. now I got it. The easement is for Progressive.

Mr. Cappello said correct. They do have a piece of land that goes out to Metro Pk Dr. We don’t want them to put a driveway at Metro Pk. Dr. The land next to the Library they own up to SOM but it goes up to the backs of the Highland properties across from Metro Pk Dr. Theoretically they could put an access there. This makes more sense as to the distance, we want to keep it across from the intersection from traffic way, further down SOM.

Mr. Regan said, however it was done, this 3 acre parcel belongs to the Village and the Village is granting an easement dedicating that as a roadway.

Mr. Cappello clarifies, this doesn’t grant the easement. It was already there. This memorializes the right-of-way mentioned in the Agreement. This happens in a lot of subdivisions where they would get access to back properties in the rear.

Mr. Marrelli asked, is this what we call a paper street?

Mr. Cappello replied, yes, it is a paper street because we’re not putting anything in. It memorializes it and for the most part, we don’t know what’s going to happen. If it ever needed to be, it could always be vacated. Hopefully they develop it sooner. But if it doesn’t happen, stuff gets lost over time.

Chairman Farmer said, I was looking back at old stuff and there was discussion of a possibility of another road off of SOM going into that Campus if they developed it.

Mr. Diemert arrives 7:20 p.m.

DECISION:

Mr. Regan, seconded by Mr. Syracuse made a motion to approve the Lot Split & Dedication Plat for Progressive Insurance Co. Campus III Drive.

Chairman Farmer asked if any further discussion.

There was none.

ROLL CALL

Ayes:   Mr. Farmer, Mr. Syracuse, Mr. Marquardt, Mr. Regan, Dr. McGrath, Mr. Fikaris

Nays:   None                                      

Motion Carried. Recommendation to Council.

****************************************************************************

ANY OTHER BUSINESS:

Chairman Farmer asked, do we have a workshop this month?

Mr. Marrelli said the workshop’s been canceled. No agenda items.

Chairman Farmer reminded everyone tomorrow night is Mayoral Candidates night in Reserve Hall from 7:00 – 9:00 p.m. Seating is limited.

  • Rezoning for Assisted Living
    730 SOM Center Road

Mr. Diemert said Dr. Moyal has raised the issue of getting his building and property on SOM Center rezoned in order to allow for Assisted Living or Senior Residential, similar to Governor’s Village. He’s got a lawyer who has approached us. We’ve got sidewalk easements, he brought it up. He’s serious about going forward with it now.

The question is whether or not we should create an Assisted Living District or a Senior Residence District which allows more density, allows for proximity of services for elderly people. I have some sample copies from other cities that I represented where this type of zoning has been used. It’s attractive in older communities like Chagrin Falls that have a larger senior population. Maybe we have that coming here, I don’t know. It likes a transition neighborhood for people to move into for Assisted Living then progressively to nursing care.

This is something he’s brought up. He wants to push it. It’s all been visited by you back in 2004. There were a million studies that were done back then. We’ll get those together. I just want to give you a heads up. Ted’s been talking with him regularly. They want to do a nice job. They want to be serious about it from the beginning. We’re going to be talking to their lawyers tomorrow. It might be something on your next agenda.

Dr. McGrath asked for clarification on the location.

Ted Esborn states, the front lawn of the Georgian Center, 730 SOM Ctr.

Mr. Marrelli said, if I understand, they want to rezone it to Office/Lab, correct?

Mr. Diemert replied, they’d like to do that because it could be done more quickly. We’re recommending to maybe create a new zoning district. It seems to be a popular thing. It’s a cleaner way to do it than conditional use permits. We’ve been trying to get away from that kind of stuff. It makes it worthwhile for people to put money into development. If he did get it rezoned, went on the ballot in March we could do that still. That would require expedited review by Planning Commission, but it could be done. It could be on the ballot to change it to Office/Laboratory. But it’s really not a permitted use there either. It would have to be then a special use exception granted by Planning & Zoning. Or, if the Charter amendment passes, a variance in that new district.

Mr. Marrelli said we don’t have a district, a code for Senior Living.

Mr. Diemert said, it’s probably about time we have one.

Mr. Syracuse said, if the amendment passes, they could request a Use Variance to permit this instead of rezoning it. What would be the procedure for rezoning if they were to do that?

Mr. Diemert explained. Council would get an application which they may have tonight. That would be referred to Planning for your review/report and recommendation. Once you made your report and recommendation, Council has to have three readings. They have to after the second reading publish an advertisement, 30 day notice of a public hearing. Then hold the public hearing, then hold the final 3rd reading. Then send it to the Board of Elections 60 days before the March 15th Election.

The Board of Elections has been pushing us, and I wish they’d pushed us before our Charter Review Commission finished, but they’re really pushing to get 90 day notice of Charter changes or anything on the ballot. Federal laws have required them to do certain things for giving people the right to vote in different languages and the printing has become a problem. The 60 days is almost impossible for them. Absentee ballots, they have to get them out earlier. Right now we have 60 days, the Board of Elections is asking us to consider closer to 90.

Mr. Marquardt said the drawing looked like it was a 3-story building. Isn’t that above our height limit?

Mr. Diemert said that was the 2004 proposal.

Mr. Marrelli said, they may need a variance for height.

Mr. Regan asked, wasn’t that going to be a conditional or special use permit?

Mr. Marrelli replied, it’s zoned residential, you can’t do a conditional/special permit on residential property.

Mr. Marquardt thinks the 3-story might be significant if that’s part of their business plan. I’m not sure if that’s going to be so great looking right up front on SOM.

Mr. Fikaris asked if their access would be from Beta.

Mr. Marrelli replied access is from SOM. Their long driveway goes back to the University Hospital building in the back. The proposal is for a building in front of that.  

Mr. Diemert asked, were those some of the concerns back in ‘04’?

Mr. Marquardt said, I think the major one was that it’s residential, but I think 3-stories seems a little bit much in that location.

Chairman Farmer said, I remember it was being looked at favorably back then.

Mr. Marrelli said the ‘use’ was being looked at favorably with the aging Village population.

Mr. Marquardt said I think the height issue came up and they said if they couldn’t build it with 3 stories, it’s not going to be economically viable.

Mr. Marrelli said, I don’t know if I buy that. Normally you try to step up as you go back, not tower over the back.

Ted Esborn asked, is max height 35’ for office/lab?

Mr. Marrelli said yes. Depending on their roof pitch and where they come out of the ground, they could exceed that.

Mr. Diemert said we’ll have preliminary talks with their lawyer tomorrow. We’ll get somebody to start looking at my samples and see how it would fit in with your code. We’ll let them know right away the 3-stories could be an issue because we already have a use similar that’s not 3-stories and it wouldn’t be fair.

Mr. Marquardt added, and since you’re infringing on residential on both sides.

Mr. Marrelli asked, how do we delineate what the zone would be?

Mr. Diemert replied, parcel it up like we did with Krenzler’s PRDD.

Mr. Regan thinks the 3-story issue should be brought up in discussion tomorrow.

Mr. Diemert states, that’s why I wanted to bring it up tonight, to get you guys thinking about it.

Mr. Marrelli states, maybe 8 years ago the 3-stories wasn’t viable, but let me tell you, Governor’s Village is doing just fine with 2-stories.

Mr. Marquardt said, amazingly Governor’s Village prices on the new addition are about the same as when my Mother was in there.

Mr. Marrelli asked, they didn’t go up?

Mr. Marquardt replied, no. I was amazed.

Mr. Regan said, I was paying $3,000 ten years ago.

NEXT STEP

Ted Esborn said, we could have two things on the next agenda. The language for the new district and if the applicant is ready to move forward.

Dr. McGrath said the Oct 15th workshop has been canceled. Is it back on?

Mr. Diemert said not yet, hold the date.

Mr. Marrelli asked, are you considering running parallel paths?

Mr. Diemert replied, we’re going to discourage it, but if the property owner wants to pursue it.

Mr. Marrelli said, I think that’s faster doing them simultaneously and I know they want to go fast.

Mr. Regan said, we better do an economic study on the two floors vs. three.

Mr. Marquardt said, I don’t think we should be rushed into this kind of stuff.

Mr. Marrelli said, the rezoning could make or break the whole case, whether we have an ordinance or whether you do a conditional use permit. When you rezone, the people see what you’re doing.

Mr. Regan said if you’re working hand in hand with the owners with some thought and consideration for everyone, then it will generate support, but if he’s going to fight.

Mr. Marrelli said when people see a rendering and elevation, that’ll be yes or no. The pictures will tell the story.

Mr. Regan said 3-stories never goes away.

Mr. Marrelli said it changes the landscape.

Mr. Regan said my point is, the owner/developer needs to decide if they want to work with the Village or whether they want to fight the Village on this.

Mr. Marquardt states, if they try and push it through, their chances of getting a zoning change is going to be slimmer than if they take their time and convince people that it’s a right thing. I think they’re unrealistic on their March deadline.

Mr. Diemert thanked the Commission for their feedback.

ADJOURNMENT:

Mr. Regan, seconded by Mr. Fikaris made a motion to adjourn the meeting.

 

ROLL CALL

Ayes:   Mr. Farmer, Mr. Syracuse, Mr. Marquardt, Mr. Regan, Dr. McGrath, Mr. Fikaris  

Nays:   None                          

Motion Carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m.