Civil War Timeline.

VILLAGE OF CHAGRIN FALLS
FACILITIES AND SERVICES COMMITTEE
July 7, 2008

Members present: Patton, Watterson, Milko
Also present: Himes, Bloom, Mayor Brick, Byron, Rogoff, Edwards, Subel

The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Steven Patton.

CHAGRIN FOUNDATION FOR ARTS & CULTURE REQUEST TO USE RIVERSIDE PARK FOR CHAUTAUQUA-IN-CHAGRIN

Mr. Himes said the Chagrin Foundation For Arts & Culture is planning four concerts in Riverside Park. Everyone should have a copy of their application for use of the park. He said this was informally run by the Parks Commission and there were no objections.

Steven Thomas said the concerts will take place at 9:00 p.m. on Tuesdays, July 15, July 22, July 29, and August 5, 2008.

Mr. Patton said this is going to be right next to the hardware store. He asked if there were any issues from any of the residents on West Orange Street? Mr. Thomas said they bring in a portable stage, which is about 2' high and about 20' by 20'. It goes up the afternoon of the performance and it comes down the next day. He said there has been no complaints about the music.

Mr. Subel said he is concerned about the noise, in terms of the residents. Mr. Himes said the Village did not receive any complaints from last year’s events.

Moved by Mr. Milko, seconded by Mr. Watterson that based on the fact that the Chagrin Foundation for Arts & Culture did this last year and this is for Tuesdays during the Summer for the enjoyment of the visitors and residents to come into town, I propose that we allow for the concerts in the area next to the hardware store for this year and then we can review it next year as far as any changes. Carried. Ayes: Patton, Watterson, Milko. Nays: None.

STARBUCKS AGREEMENT AND BLAKES AGREEMENT

Mr. Himes explained that when Starbucks came into town they applied for a variance and were granted a variance by the Board of Zoning Appeals; this was in 1998. The BZA granted the variance, it went to Council, and Council reversed the BZA’s decision denying the variance and sent it back to the Planning and Zoning Commission to come up with some type of parking plan. An arrangement was worked out where Paul Seegott gave the Village an easement on a strip of land in front of the River Street property where Blake’s is housed that allowed the Village to create 13 head-in parking spaces there. Those parking spaces are partly on the public right-of-way and partly on private property. Nine of those spaces were credited to the Starbucks use for their seating. Since 4 spaces were eliminated for what was Joey’s Restaurant, or Leonetti’s Restaurant at the time, 4 were dedicated to that use. The area to the east of the restaurant, which was the concrete and gravel pad, was turned into a small mini park open to the public, also on private property. That was all part of the agreement for Starbucks tenancy. Following that, Leonetti’s went out of business and P&Z wanted to change the agreement that allowed Leonetti’s use so that the agreement for parking was with the landlord. The off-site parking and the office building, that Blake’s is required to use, became part of the agreement with Paul and that was prior to Blake’s tenancy. So, you end up with two agreements, the Starbucks agreement and the Blake’s agreement. Those two have to come together to allow both Starbucks and the restaurant use at Blake’s.

Mr. Himes said the parking garage at 33 River Street, both decks were required to be leased for Blake’s use. The lower deck was supposed to be for employees and the upper deck for valet parking and patrons. When Blake’s became a tenant they realized that they could not comply with the employee parking on the lower level because their employees arrived before the office staff at the office building left. There was an addendum to the agreement that allowed their employees to park elsewhere in municipal lots and areas in other places.

Ray Bell said he has a copy of the lease and there is also an inscription on when Blake’s could use it. The restrictions were after hours on the evenings except for Saturdays; it was for lunch. Mr. Himes said that was due to the availability of the parking at the office building. It is only available after 5:00 p.m. so the Planning Commission linked that time restriction to the use of the building so Blake’s was only allowed to be open for dinner.

Mr. Milko said all that was done to put together a plan that adhered to the Village’s code at the time. Mr. Himes said it was basically a parking plan approval. It was written up as a conditional use agreement but it was really the parking approval by the Planning Commission and because it was off-site parking that was at their discretion they were able to put conditions on it.

Mr. Watterson asked if the whole thing isn’t contingent upon Starbucks staying in existence? Paul Seegott said yes, if they leave it is all null and void. Mr. Himes said the Starbucks agreement goes away and when that goes away the parking in front of Blake’s, the easement goes away. The two are tied together.

Mr. Watterson asked about when the Mayor and Mr. Tomko said that the workers could park in the Village lot after 3:00 p.m. until 5:00 p.m.? He said it was his understanding that that was not supposed to be. Mr. Himes said that was a part of the addendum. Mr. Bell said the private property would be contracted but the public property could not be included in a private contract. Mr. Himes said the addendum was in April of 2000.

Paul Seegott said in the original agreement a lease was supposed to be signed; which was never signed. A lot of things were never done and that is why he is here to see if they can find a way to correct this. The only real good use for that building is a restaurant because he is limited to what he can do with it.

Jordan Berns said the lease that Paul is referring to is a lease with the Village for the area that is being utilized as a park. As it stands, real estate taxes are still being paid by the owner of the property, for that property even though it is a public park. The property is just outside of the central shopping district so the other properties that are in the central shopping district, if there is a change in use they aren’t required to comply with the parking restrictions. He said what they would like to present tonight is a plan for reconfiguring, changing some of the parking allowing for and maybe even increasing the public’s access to a view of the falls from the property while still allowing the property to be used for a restaurant, which is clearly the appropriate use for it.

Joe Saccone presented his proposal. He specifically asked that the park area be allowed to be used as a bar/patio area with outdoor seating. He asked for a variance to the parking requirements and he asked to eliminate the lease for head-in parking on River Street. He also asked to be relieved of the requirement for valet parking and relief from the limitation of the business hours.

There was lengthy discussion and comments were heard from the audience. Ray Bell spoke in concern of the Village giving away park space. He said the natural falls is the drawing point to the Village, not restaurants.

BERTSCH PROPERTY, 97 WILLIAMS STREET - OFFER TO SELL TO THE VILLAGE

Mr. Himes said the Mayor and Council received an offer to sell this property to the Village and the Mayor has referred it to this Committee for consideration.

Mr. Bertsch explained that the property is situated on the edge of the commercial district in downtown and accommodates nearly a half of an acre. If the zoning on the property was changed it would be suitable for parking fifty cars on it. It would be an opportunity for the Village to expand its pool of parking.

Mr. Milko asked if that is fifty spaces with the house torn down? Mr. Bertsch said yes. Mr. Milko said there may be some questions of the historical significance of the home. It was suggested that this property could be re-zoned to office use.

There was lengthy discussion and comments were heard from the audience. It was agreed to refer this to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their input.

ARB CHARTER AMENDMENT

Mr. Byron said the issue has come up regarding architect members who have been presenting plans before the Board that they have designed and received remuneration for. There is an Ethics Commission opinion on that that says that is a conflict of interest and it is not something that can be resolved by an abstention. He said the Mayor directed him to come up with a solution and the solution that is currently before the Committee that is being proposed would be a change in the composition of the ARB so that they would have three voting Board members, who may or may not be architects, and then they would have non-voting architect advisors. There was discussion and comments were heard.

Moved by Mr. Watterson, seconded by Mr. Milko that they recommend to Council that they adopt this ordinance that provides the submission to the electors of the proposed amendment to the Charter for the composition of the ARB and declaring an emergency and see what Council thinks. The motion carried unanimously.

The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.

____________________________
Steven Patton, Chairman
lgb
 

Waste Management’s Solar Powered Compactor is built to last! It is 100% made in the USA with 99% U.S. manufactured parts. Read More