Back Index Home Contact Us!

Boston Heights Overlook

This is a publication of Boston Heights Overlook. Not an official public document by, of or for the Village of Boston Heights OH.

Click on items or parcels for more info.

On the agenda of the 01 December 2004 7PM meeting of the Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals for the Village of Boston Heights, Ohio Charles & Betty Cooper Modular home on Akron-Peninsula Road. Advisory review by Planning Commission; see below. Liberty Harley-Davidson Review of a sign application for 334 Hines Hill Road. Deferred by Board of Zoning Appeals; see below. Carse Investments LLC Request for plat approval at Meghan's Lane subdivision. Approval refused by Planning Commission; see below. Spa Palace Application for use and sign at 5837 Akron-Cleveland Road. Approved by Planning Commission; see below. Amendment to Zoning Code Review of sign regulation changes. Sign regulations approved by Planning Commission; see below. Other Links: Boston Heights Zoning Code Boston Heights Business & Location List

General Notes
Deputy Solicitor Ed Muse acted as legal counsel for the Planning Commission and BZA. Zoning Inspector David Himes was also in attendance, as was Engineer Steve Schreiber. Minutes for the November meeting were not available for either the PC or BZA.

Charles & Betty Cooper
Review of a modular home on Akron-Peninsula Road.

The Coopers own a residential property at 7292 Akron-Peninsula Road, a 2.7A lot, parcel #1200022.

Mr. Charles Cooper, and his daughter, Mary Cooper addressed the PC. The Coopers wish to demolish the existing home on the property (built in 1956, according to the county), and replace it with a modular home on a block foundation. Chairman John Codrea asked Solicitor Ed Muse whether the PC had any jurisdiction; it appeared not. Neither Zoning Inspector David Himes nor Village Engineer Steve Schreiber reported any contact on this matter. The Coopers stated that they had been advised to clear the idea of a modular home with the PC; Mayor McFall reported that the Building Inspector saw no problem with this kind of building. Members of the PC confirmed that the Coopers were to demolish the existing house, and were not intending to pass off a mobile home as a modular home; beyond that, they were advised to work with the Building Department, so long as the size and placement restrictions of the Zoning Code were met.

Note: Appeals on application the Building Code go to Council, not the PC or BZA (VBH CO 1385.05).

Liberty Harley-Davidson
Another signage request for Liberty Harley-Davidson at 334 E. Hines Hill Road (charter #1349013 & RN98120).

The company had previously received approval for elevated signage, at the 3 Dec 2003 BZA meeting, and for building signage, at the 5 Nov 2003 Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Ernie Passeos (owner) had also appealed, at the PC/BZA meeting of 4 Feb 2004, for larger elevated signage, but withdrew that request when the Solicitor pointed out that current Zoning Code did not permit it.

Last month, Mr. Ernie Passeos resubmitted his earlier application for a large elevated Harley-Davidson logo sign, about 171 sq.ft. on each of two sides, to a height of 40 feet. The BZA voted to defer Mr. Passeos' sign application until this month (and possibly beyond, depending on when a new Sign Code was enacted).

This Month
With the agreement of Mr. Passeos, the Board of Zoning Appeals voted to defer this application again, with an eye to upcoming changes in the Village's sign regulations.

Carse Investments LLC
Requesting the approval of the plat and acceptance of improvements at the Meghan's Lane subdivision, on the former Donley Farm at 7657 Olde Eight Road, parcel #1400026 et al.

Mr. John Carse, of Carse Investments LLC (charter #1394246), had earlier received preliminary/conditional approval of the "Preliminary Street Plan", and frontage variances on three lots. The company has also received approval of various signs and a gatehouse. At the recent Council Finance Committee meeting, Engineer Steve Schreiber noted that he had given the developer's engineer a punch list of issues remaining to be resolved in the improvements -- road, drainage, sewer, etc. There appears to be a continuing debate over the developer's use of stamped concrete paving around the entryway to the subdivision.

This Month
The Planning Commission considered whether to recommend that Council accept the roadway and utility improvements, and the subdivision's plat, for the Meghan's Lane subdivision. Engineer Steve Schreiber reported that the improvements were "pretty much done", but that there were some open issues and an incomplete punch list. He felt that these issues could be handled by requiring sufficient bonds from the developer, rather than holding up acceptance. Mr. Schreiber had also not yet received a formal acceptance of the water mains system from Cleveland Water Department, nor of the sanitary sewer from Summit County Health Department. (Mr. Carse stated that he, however had been notified of these approvals). There had been some confusion over lot addressing that caused some drawings to show an additional public roadway in the subdivision; this had been resolved so that there was still only one roadway. However, Mr. Schreiber noted that there was still a question about the stamped concrete pavement that the developer had installed in the entrance roadway.

Mr. Schreiber further noted that approval by the Planning Commission did not constitute acceptance of the plat and improvements by Council, which could require further progress toward completion. The Engineer could not give the final approval until Council had accepted the plat and improvements.

Mr. Carse explained a letter he had sent to the Village (30 Nov) promising that each lot owner, and successors, would be required to sign an affidavit testifying that they understood the common area maintenance requirements and that the homeowners' association would be responsible for that funding. This was to include maintenance and future replacement of the controversial stamped concrete pavement. There was some discussion with the Planning Commission as to whether this would have any effective force.

In answer to an unrelated question, Mr. Carse stated that certain defective areas in the asphalt roadway would soon to be repaired by his paving contractor.

At this point, Chairman John Codrea labored to extract a formal resolution of acceptance from members of the Planning Commission (as required for discussion under Roberts Rules of Order). He had to explain this point to members of the audience more used to any formal resolution being immediately rubber-stamped. However, no member of the PC offered such a resolution. Mr. Codrea then called for a resolution to refuse acceptance of the improvements and plat. Councilor and PC member Mike Cheung offered such a resolution, which was duly seconded. Mr. Codrea then allowed debate and discussion to proceed.

Mr. Carse introduced a spokesman from Tri Mor Paving, who extolled the virtues of concrete roadway paving in general, and this installation in particular. This led to a long-winded discussion on both sides of the issue. Mrs. Jane Robinson voiced concern that any bonds would expire or be refunded well before any improvement or roadway failures came to light. Further commentary from Councilor Bill Goncy, Clerk-Treasurer Carol Zeman and Mr. Charles Robinson evinced concern that the Village would eventually be "stuck" with very expensive repairs and maintenance for a roadway that did not meet Village requirements -- as had happened in the Ashbrooke West development. There was a further concern that the future residents of the subdivision would hold the Village responsible for cosmetic and incidental damage to this pavement, due to snowplowing and other maintenance.

The counterargument was that this pavement was better than the usual Village requirements, not worse, and would last far longer than mere asphalt. The pavement was compared to the recent stamped concrete paving of the traffic circle at Mull and Hawkins in Akron, with neither side convincing the other.

A member of the audience pointed out that Codified Ordinance 1121.04(s) required that the Planning Commission cite the exact violation that was grounds for refusal to approve. After some discussion, the motion on the floor was amended to cite 1121.04(m) for this purpose -- specifically, that all necessary improvements were not completed, as noted by the Engineer in his opening report. (The PC thereby declined to instead require bonds to ensure completion, as permitted by 1121.04(q); also noted by the Engineer.)

The motion to decline to approve the plat and improvements of the Meghan's Lane subdivision, citing 1121.04(m), was passed by the Planning Commission. Chairman John Codrea voted "nay" and all other members "aye".

Spa Palace
Review of proposed use at 5837 Akron-Cleveland Road.

Spa Palace (charter #1246094), currently located in Tallmadge, is asking the Planning Commission to review its proposed use of, and signage at, the former Mahnen Power Machinery (John Deere) facility.

Rhonda _____, the General Manager of the business' current Tallmadge location, addressed the Planning Commission in place of the owners, who were out of town. She explained that the company sold and serviced in-ground and above-ground swimming pools, and spas. It also sold maintenance equipment and supplies for those installations.

The company planned to open this location in December, as soon as possible, while maintaining their existing location until June 2005. Then they planned to move entirely to the new location, and buy the building from the current owner. They expected to have three full-time, and two part-time, employees. There would also be additional temporary employees during the summer months, for installation labor. They expected to hold to hours of 9-5, with longer hours in the summer. In response to a question from the audience, Rhonda stated that she expected that this would be advertised as the "Boston Heights location", as opposed to the all-too-common alternative: "Hudson location".

The company expected to use the existing sign frames, with new content: 40x48 inches on the front, and 40x48 + 24x96 inches on the rear of the building. They also expected to later request a free-standing sign along Route 8. Furthermore, they wished to exhibit sample pool liners along both Route 8 and Akron-Cleveland Road.

The Planning Commission voted to approve the use and the existing signage, with the stricture that pool liners could only be exhibited as follows: one pool along Route 8, and two along Akron-Cleveland Road, of a specified limited size, and to have their long axes parallel to the ground. The pool liners along Akron-Cleveland Road could only be in the southernmost part of the parcel, away from the building.

Consideration of Sign Regulations in the Zoning Code

The Planning Commission has been considering new Sign Regulations for the Zoning Code, during earlier meetings and various work sessions. The PC, with some input from the BZA and the audience, finalized a draft of these new regulations. The PC then voted to recommend that Council adopt these Sign Regulations as Codified Ordinances Chapter 1179 in the Zoning Code . It is expected that Council will consider an ordinance to that effect next week, and hold a public hearing on 12 January 2005.