Question
Submitted by gary on Mon, 01/14/2008 - 04:36
I read the papers and listen to the conversations and have the following questions…how are we better today as a community for not owning the Kraner land and what is the negative impact of the Cleveland Hall additon?
»
- gary's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1442 reads
Good questions... Here are some thoughts.
It would be wonderful to own the Kraner land as well as a number of other pieces of property for that matter. The only problem was the price. $10,000,000 was just too much for property that the townships own appraiser appraised at less than $6,000,000. We cannot afford to buy up every piece of property and we particularly cannot afford to grossly overpay for pieces of property. It is unfortunate that a better price was not negotiated. The key is to take the money we would have spent on that overpriced property at the then market top and spend money now on more appropriately priced property.
The Cleveland Hall addition… As I understand it the neighbors are concerned about having a modern building that “glows” in the night among the 19th century structures in the area.
The biggest concern I have about the addition is the approval process. It was repeatedly marked by failures to follow the village’s own zoning ordinance. This apparent inability of the village itself to understand and follow its own ordinances means that we will all suffer when other development plans come before the village.
For example, inability to understand and apply the village zoning code led to years of delay in considering the development plans brought by Jack Lucks and Metropolitan Partners (for South Main Street). Their original plans would have fit well into the existing Suburban Business District, a mixed used zoning district developed by the Comprehensive Plan group years ago. Instead of offering such a ready-made solution, the village decided to spend two years creating some new district. Finally at that point they realized the mistake and tossed the new district. In the meantime we have lost what I believe was an opportunity to work together with a developer.
Another serious problem with the village’s approval of Cleveland Hall was that they approved it in a manner that essentially eviscerates the Architectural Review Overlay District. By approving the modern structure they have made it very hard, if not impossible, to not approve the next modern structure in the district. The community benefits tremendously from the 19th century nature of the district. That nature is part of what maintains the level of property values in the district and what attracts tourists to spend their dollars in our community.
Clarifying...
Let’s make it clear that there was no misunderstanding with regard to the village zoning laws. The Village was never going to sign off on the submitted zoning proposal, and the SBD zoning laws did not fit, and still don’t fit the desires of the landowners. My understanding is that the landowners were working with the Village to create a new zoning district and it was Thornborough, Wernet and Cauchon who suggested the SBD zoning… Since Thornborough had already built out his land beyond the SBD zoning, it served his interests best to dumb down any future development. Sad, really, that a faction on village council is is being led around by their willy by a guy who hugs trees one day, then pumps raw sewage into the ground in defiance of EPA orders the next. Gotta love the hypocracy of these folks.
Pumping raw sewage into the ground in defiance of EPA orders???
NoSpin, now you have me curious. Who has pumped “raw sewage into the ground in defiance of EPA orders?”
I have heard, seen, and smelled nothing of this.
Please tell us more.
Paul
It's a matter of public record
Of Public Record from the Ohio EPA:
In a letter from the Ohio EPA to former Village Manager, Joe Hickman, the EPA states, “upon inspection of this site [The Shoppes at 7 Pines], it is our opinion that the series of septic or leech fields we observed, which were installed without a permit, would not be adequately sized for the… businesses.”
In a follow up letter to Mr. Thornborough, the EPA continues, “… the most recent tankage (grease trap) was installed without a Permit to Install… We also noted that the most recent downstream leeching tank was completely full with a layer of grease/scum floating on top.
“The plumbing connections show… that you intend to convey additional sewage into a system that was installed without a [permit] that was not sized to accommodate even the current hydraulic and organic loadings…”
It goes on to give Notice of Violation, list Ohio Revised Code Violations, and deny use, etc…
It’s taken a few years to bring this to a temporary resolution / agreement, which will be end when water and sewer arrive.
This is a rathole and a distraction, but let's be accurate
I know something about this one. Thornborough had to pay for someone to come in and dig up a bunch of soil with the EPA watching to see if there were any such “plumbing connections.” Much to the surprise of the EPA, they were mistaken. The soil was dug up and just as he had said, he had not connected any system as he was awaiting EPA approval. Amazingly enough sometimes the government, despite its best efforts, gets it wrong…
And, there certainly was never any pumping raw sewage into the ground after any notice from the EPA. There couldn’t have been. There were no toilets, sinks, or anything in the building involved.
wordsmithing
We’re mincing words. If he was pumping waste into an undercapacity grease tank that was installed without proper permit status, and that sewage leeches into the ground, whether it happened before any notice from the EPA or not, is still an issue, and speaks volumes in my opinion.
Hopefully, we’re saying the same (similar) thing in a round about way.
NoSpin43023's name "speaks volumes in my opinion"
The apparent intentional alignment with Bill O’Reilly is strange. Why would anyone do this?
The “if he was” language sounds like an old smear tactic meant to accuse someone but avoid legally slandering or libelling them. Let’s try this on. “If NoSpin43023 was stealing money from the church collection plate and then pays it back after he gets caught, this is still an issue and speaks volumes in my opinion.”
If you’ve got evidence of Jack doing something wrong, then bring it forward. Otherwise, you’re simply…
Why is Bill O'Reilly attacking Jack?
I wonder why Bill O’Reilly (pardon me, I mean NoSpin43023) never seems to make an argument about the issue, but instead merely attacks Jack.
Whoever he is, NoSpin43023 seems to prefer to resort to name-calling instead of thoughtful, clear discussion of the issues - the Kraner land and Cleveland Hall controversies.
Jack is out in the open with his opinions and, on Granville Press, permits anyone to voice their opinion, even those like NoSpin43023 who chose to hide behind a ridiculous nickname.
Who are you NoSpin43023? Don’t you have the courage of your convictions?