PZ - May 19th 2016
Planning & Zoning Commission
Workshop Meeting Minutes
May 19, 2016
The Planning and Zoning Commission met in workshop session on Thurs, May 19, 2016 at 7:30 p.m. at the Mayfield Village Civic Center, Main Conference Room for a meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Chairman Syracuse presided.
Present: Mr. Vetus Syracuse (Chairman), Dr. Sue McGrath (Chairman Pro-Tem), Mr. Bill Marquardt, Mr. Garry Regan, Mr. Paul Fikaris, and Mr. David Hoehnen
Also Present: Mr. Mark Guidetti (Law Department), Mr. John Marrelli (Building Commissioner), and Ms. Deborah Garbo (Secretary)
Absent: Mayor Bodnar, Mr. Tom Cappello (Village Engineer), Mr. Ted Esborn (Economic Development Director), and Mr. Joseph Saponaro (Council Alternate)
WELCOME NEW BOARD MEMBER DAVID HOEHNEN
(Filling Jim Farmer’s Resignation Vacancy)
- Extension Non-conforming Use
Smokin “Q’s” BBQ Restaurant
718 SOM Ctr. Rd.
Richard A. Lalli, Architect
New Member David Hoehnen
Chairman Syracuse called the meeting to order. This is a workshop meeting of the Mayfield Village Planning & Zoning Commission. We will not be taking a vote tonight. Our vote will take place on Mon, June 6th. First line of business is to welcome our newest Member David Hoehnen who is filling Jim Farmer’s resignation vacancy. I think I speak for all the Members in wishing Jim a speedy recovery. In saying that, we look forward to working with you David. If you don’t mind introducing yourself and sharing some of your background.
Mr. Hoehnen introduced himself. I’m married, I have 4 children and 8 grandchildren. I’ve lived in Mayfield Village for 49 years in the same house on Robley Ln. I graduated from Mayfield High School in 1958. I graduated from Purdue University. I graduated from Washington University Law School in St. Louis. There’re a variety of things I won’t bore you with. I’m happy to be here with all of you.
Smokin “Q’s” BBQ Restaurant
718 SOM Ctr. Rd.
Extension Non-conforming Use
Chairman Syracuse states, next item is an application for an expansion of a non-conforming use, application made by Carl Quagliata for Smokin “Q’s” BBQ Restaurant. Anyone who is here to make a presentation, I ask that you state your name & address for the record.
Richard Lalli, Architect, 1272 Riverbed St, Cleveland Ohio 44113. Carl has purchased Fisher’s which I guess was a very successful restaurant, but it’s lived its life. We’re not quite sure how that kitchen functioned for all these years. The previous owners are very very nice people, but everybody worked on top of one another.
We’re proposing that the small addition added a while ago be removed and then we’ll add a new building form towards the parking lot in the rear to house a more functional kitchen. He’s going to feature BBQ. We had to accommodate a walk-in cooler and also a smoker. That’s the biggest reason for expanding. I also added a bit of a screen wall because currently they have an exit door out the back and when customers approach, they’re looking right in the kitchen. This would be a place maybe where they stack wood. I’m not sure if we’ll be able to put a grease dumpster there or not, because of its close proximity to the entrance, but that’s something we’re going to look at.
The parking has slightly been reduced. At the same time, it’s way over the requirement. I think we’re losing 3 spots.
We’re going to open some walls between the bar and the dining room. We’ll also open a small portion so there’s more direct server path from the kitchen to the outside patio. They’re going to maintain the patio. We’re possibly going to refocus the main entrance from the back, maybe eliminating the ramp and putting steps in the front. Carl doesn’t like the appearance of that ramp in the front. There are a lot of repairs to do in the building, a lot of years of wear and tear.
Mr. Marrelli states, you said you’re going to revamp the server’s aisle way to the patio. Is that straight out the front or through to the side?
Richard Lalli replied, through the dining room. Obviously, in the summertime these tables wouldn’t sit here. We’d have a 4’ aisle way. We’re also revamping the bathrooms to make them handicapped accessible. Depending on what municipality we’re operating in, some count the seating inside as well as the patio. With our revamped restrooms, it’ll accommodate the interior seating as well as the exterior.
Mr. Guidetti states, everybody should have received Mr. Diemert’s letter. Since this parcel does involve a prior non-conforming use, you want to pay particular attention to it, especially since there was litigation that resolved around 1992. It resulted in a settlement agreement. I think the important thing to focus on here is the code does distinguish between an expansion of use and an extension or change in the existing structure. The code does allow for that as long as it’s within certain parameters:
Section 1149.06; “A building arranged, designed or devoted to a non-conforming use at the time of the passage of this section (May 20, 1935) may not be reconstructed or structurally altered to an extent exceeding in aggregate cost, during any ten year period, sixty percent of the assessed value of the building unless the use of the building is changed to a conforming use.”
Mr. Guidetti said, the courts ultimately end up looking to the spirit of the code. I don’t see any issue with what’s being proposed here in that regard.
Mr. Marrelli states, the actual addition is about 240 sq. ft. once you take some out and put some back. It’s pretty tiny.
Mr. Guidetti said it would be a little bit different if you got into more of a use analysis if you were proposing an addition of 100 seats.
Chairman Syracuse said, to clarify, the applicant is not actually trying to alter or change the actual use, just the structure itself.
Mr. Guidetti replied, as I understand it, as he’s explained it, everything relates to the kitchen.
Richard Lalli replied, that’s correct. We’re maintaining the same 78 seats inside and the count outside won’t change. We’re not altering that deck in any way other than proposing to take that ramp out in the front. It’ll be handicapped accessible from the rear parking lot if we’re successful in doing that. We’ll lose 3 spots. But as I said earlier, we’re still well above the required amount.
Mr. Marrelli said, they paved way more area than they needed when they paved the backyard.
Chairman Syracuse said, under our Codified Ordinance Section 1149.02 (c); that allows the Planning & Zoning Commission to confirm by Resolution of Council to permit the extension of a non-conforming use of a building upon the lot that was occupied by such use.
Mr. Guidetti said that’s correct. P & Z will approve and Council will confirm it by Resolution.
Mr. Regan asked, will we see any other type of plans, exterior plans?
Mr. Marrelli replied, no. All you’re voting on is allowing an expansion of a non-conforming use. Architectural Review Board does the rest.
Dr. McGrath said, I like Mark’s terminology better. It’s not really an expansion of the use, it’s expansion of the structure.
Mr. Guidetti said, if you read the code, it generally prohibits expansion of the uses. This is structural alterations, to be specific.
Mr. Marrelli states, they put in that sixty percent thing in Section 1149.06 so people didn’t keep building it bigger and bigger year after year, so that it doesn’t double or triple in size. A non-conforming use is normally something that would live its life out and then be demolished. This one will get some new life now and go on longer.
Richard Lalli asked, do we have a date that we have to comply by? Fisher’s closed March 18th.
Chairman Syracuse replied, we have a section that states:
Section 1149.07; “If the non-conforming use of any building or property within the Municipality ceases for any reason for a continuous period of more than six months then any future use of such building and property shall be in conformity to the uses and regulations specified by this Planning and Zoning Code for the district in which such building and property is located.” So, it would be six months from when Fisher’s closed, and we’re scheduled to vote on Mon, June 6th.
Mr. Hoehnen said, there’s a large exhaust fan on the south side of the building. Do you propose to change the location of that?
Richard Lalli replied, that’ll go away.
Mr. Hoehnen replied, terrific.
Richard Lalli said, it may be totally concealed, depending on what we do with the roof from the back side. But it’ll come out the roof, it’s not going to go out towards the property line.
- Meat Smoker
Mr. Marquardt asked about the smoker.
Richard Lalli replied, it’s a meat smoker to smoke brisket & ribs. I don’t know the full menu. It’s inside, self-contained. Some places have them outside. I work for Mike Symon. I did not do the one that he just did Downtown. They have two smokers on the mezzanine level and there’s four stories of parking garage above him. It exits out a sidewall on the back of East 4th and up the wall.
- Name Change
Mr. Marrelli asked, is Smokin “Q’s” going to be the name?
Richard Lalli replied, as of quarter to eight today. Originally it was The Golden Hog. That’s restaurant people, until the sign shows up, you never know.
Chairman Syracuse asked the anticipated date for opening.
Richard Lalli replied, they wanted to open by summer, but once we got into the building and saw all the needed repairs, they have not set a date. I’ll say fall to be safe. There’s quite a bit of work there.
Chairman Syracuse asked, any other questions? There were none.
- Applicant leaves @ 7:45 p.m.
Mr. Fikaris asked, what exactly are we voting on?
Mr. Guidetti replied, to permit the extension of a non-conforming use.
Mr. Regan asked John, did you get a business plan?
Mr. Marrelli replied, no. Carl Quagliata has been a successful restaurant operator for many years.
Dr. McGrath states, I think we should be very happy they’re considering this location.
Mr. Hoehnen states, it seems to be somewhat competitive with Austin’s.
Mr. Marrelli agreed. Hopefully he did some research to see if there’s a demand.
Mr. Fikaris said, he mentioned the name of the place. If they called it The Naked Hog, would it have to go through an approval? Does the Village have any control of that?
Mr. Marrelli replied, no. It’s freedom of speech.
ANY OTHER MATTERS:
- 6655 Beta Building
Mr. Regan said, right next to the Greenway Trail there’s been some tree clearing. What’s going on there?
Mr. Marrelli replied, there’s going to be parking back there and a detention pond. That belongs to that building, Premier Development. They couldn’t make a deal with the people next door to park on their property so they did it on their own. They’re spending more money.
- 730 SOM - Rezoning
Chairman Syracuse states, next month on our workshop agenda we’ll have a rezoning application matter. I think everyone has seen the correspondence from the Law Department on that issue.
Mr. Guidetti said, if anyone has any questions, we could address it now.
Mr. Regan said, if we say this is a great thing or this is garbage, it still has the right to go to the people.
Mr. Guidetti replied, yes and no. It matters what P & Z does. If Planning decides not to support it, not to recommend it, it’ll still go to Council either way. If Planning approves it, Council passes by majority. If Planning doesn’t recommend it, Council has to get a 2/3rd majority to pass it. It’s ultimately going to be up to Council not Planning, to make that decision. Ultimately if Council decides not to approve it and send it to the Voters, then Dr. Moyal can go out and circulate initiative petitions to get on the ballot. One way or another, it can get there if the people want it to get there. But it is important what Planning does because it affects Council.
Mr. Regan asked, if Planning says no and Council says no, is his next step to go out and get petitions or does he sue you?
Mr. Guidetti replied, you should exhaust all your remedies. He could decide to try to sue the Village at that point. With my experience in these kind of matters, they generally circulate the petitions first because that’s the simplest and least combative thing to do and it’s going to cost less money in the long run than a law suit.
Mr. Regan states, so they go through the ballot and it gets voted down. Does he sue then?
Mr. Guidetti replied, it’s possible.
Mr. Marrelli asked, based on what?
Mr. Guidetti replied, the argument would be that the residentially zoned parcel doesn’t reflect a realistic user, therefore it violates their constitutional right to use.
Chairman Syracuse asked Mark, would you be able to provide us before the next meeting some case law or anything that might help us with consideration in making this determination.
Mr. Guidetti replied, sure.
Mr. Marquardt asked, what happens if we don’t address it at all?
Chairman Syracuse said, we have to address it.
Mr. Guidetti said, it returns to Council one way or the other. One thing Planning could do is take no action. If no action is taken within the 90 day period, by the way that 90 days can be extended by agreement of the Planning Commission & Council, right now I think the deadline is July 15th. If it’s not submitted recommendation by that time, then it’s deemed approved by Planning Commission.
Chairman Syracuse said, there’s a written report that’s supposed to be provided to Council, does our Law Department prepare that?
Mr. Guidetti replied, certainly we’ll assist with it if you need us to do that, that’s not a problem. It’s basically an analysis in making a decision. You’ll look at:
- The proposed plat. Right now it’s the same one from 2004. I have to believe they’ll submit a new plat with a lot more detail before the workshop.
- The proposed rezoned parcel. The size of it, the surrounding properties and what those properties are used for.
You’ll analyze that and then give the recommendation; either you support this or don’t support. That then goes to Council.
Mr. Marrelli asked, how do you come up with a reason that you support or don’t support it?
Chairman Syracuse states, I think we’ll need some guidance from the Law Dept.
Mr. Guidetti said, that’s not something you’re necessarily going to need for the next meeting. I’d kind of wait to see what you get.
Chairman Syracuse said, it’s an analysis we’re supposed to apply, whether it comes from legal precedence and case law or from some other resource. I think that would be helpful prior to the meeting.
Mr. Marrelli states, we have no standard for an Assisted Living Facility. It’s not in our code.
Chairman Syracuse asked, does that create a problem with regulation?
Mr. Marrelli replied, there is no regulation.
Mr. Regan asked, won’t we use Altercare as a precedence?
Mr. Marrelli replied, how could you? You’re going back to something that was court ordered to happen versus something that you’re planning.
Mr. Guidetti said, what they’re planning on doing is trying to rezone it from residential to office/lab and then request a conditional use permit. One thing they could do is propose a new zoning for the Village through the initiative. They could do that simultaneously.
Mr. Regan replied, and they should do that. They want to go from residential to office/lab, but their real goal- It’s a sham on the voters, they’re voting for one thing, and then they’ll come back here potentially for a conditional use permit.
Mr. Marrelli states, it’s like a backdoor approach. They’re saying; we need it to be office/lab, but that’s not what we’re going to use it for.
Mr. Regan said, I don’t want to face those people out there if they’re voting for one thing and they got something else.
Dr. McGrath said, maybe I should know this history but I don’t. Whoever owns this land, when they bought it, knew it was residential.
Mr. Regan said, there was one voice at the Council meeting that said “You guys already decided”. We’ve had zoning changes i.e. Deacon’s and Judge Krenzler. What if we say we’re just deferring this to Council, we’re taking no action.
Mr. Guidetti replied, it’ll be treated as an approval.
Mr. Marrelli states, when the Fire Dept found out there might be another Assisted Living Unit, they were kind of nervous because there’s a lot of calls from them. People fall down, they have to go to the hospital. If it gets rezoned office/lab and then the conditional use part comes in, you’ll need to get input from our Fire & Police Dept on how much of a tax it’ll be on their services.
Mr. Hoehnen asked, are we certain this gentleman wants to build an Assisted Living?
Mr. Guidetti replied, yes.
Mr. Fikaris asked, will there be any variances applied for?
Mr. Marrelli replied, how do you do that? There’s no standard in order to find out that you’re not meeting it to ask for a variance.
Chairman Syracuse asked a procedural question, who has and who will receive notice for the upcoming P & Z meeting?
Mr. Guidetti replied, at least the adjacent property owners. It’ll certainly be published on the website.
Chairman Syracuse asked, will we take a vote at our regular meeting, or do we just prepare a report based on what we discuss at our workshop?
Mr. Guidetti replied, you have to have a vote. The Commission has to reach a consensus, whether they recommend or not recommend it.
Mr. Hoehnen states, assuming this person gets the zoning he or she wants, they’re not obligated to build the building. He might tell us they’re going to build it, but they’re not obligated to build it, correct?
Mr. Marrelli replied, correct.
Mr. Hoehnen said, they could end up with rezoned land which is more valuable to them because it’s office/lab, sit on it and then sell.
Mr. Marrelli said, that’s true and you can’t stop them because it’s a land use change. If Bruce were here, he’d tell you to make them do a Development Agreement which pretty much makes them do it.
Mr. Guidetti said, that’s not necessarily out of the realm of possibilities here.
Mr. Fikaris asked about Deacon’s ballot language.
Mr. Marrelli said, that was part of their Development Agreement. The conditions of the development were laid out.
Mr. Hoehnen said, if I’m an ordinary voter and this issue is on the ballot for rezoning, if I don’t know what that person is going to do with that land, I’m going to vote against it.
Mr. Regan said, he’s going to be selling it as an Assisted Living.
Mr. Marrelli said, I think he’s trying to dovetail it with the Medical Building.
Mr. Hoehnen said, let’s face it, we have a lot of elderly people living in this community, I’m one of them @ 76. There are people who might have to move out of the Village if they can’t live in their home. An Assisted Living Facility here would be ideal for that person if they want to stay in the Village. There’s a growing demand.
Mr. Regan said, Judge Krenzler sold the idea of scaling down to go to his property (Parkledge). That was Governor’s Village thing too. It’s worked.
Dr. McGrath said, Governor’s Village wasn’t zoned residential. This guy’s trying to go from residential to office/lab and office/lab isn’t right and we’re back in the hot seat.
Mr. Marrelli said, be ready for everybody on SOM that’s got residential property to say; I want to do it too.
Chairman Syracuse concluded, the applicant will make a presentation at the next workshop meeting. Does anyone have any other items?
Mr. Regan asked John, when he came to us in 2004, I don’t think that gas well was there, did you mention that?
Mr. Guidetti replied, their current plan would interfere with that.
Mr. Regan states, you can’t drill a well within 100’ of a building. I don’t know if you’d reverse that and say you can’t build a building within 100’ of a well.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m.