Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Rules and law committee minutes/report 5/9/2011

These are the minutes of the rules and law committee, which met on Monday 5/7 at approx 8pm to discuss construction work hours.

In attendance were Joe miller, Dennis Wolter, Dan Policastro, Dennis Malone, and Cortney Scheeser. I shared two points of view: Realestate developer Rick Greiwe told me 7:30AM-8PM M-F, 8:30AM-6PM Sat, 9AM-6PM Sun. Also shared was a resident's pov (Paul Wright). Paul suggested 7:30AM-7:30PM M-F, 9:30AM-5:30PM Sat, 12-5 Sun. Dennis M clarified the current hours which are actually 7:30AM-7PM M-F, 8:30AM-6PM Sat, 9AM-6PM Sun.

We all talked about construction vs landscape noise and we decided to not overly complicate the language. We believe landscape noise is short lived, vs longer term with construction. We believe specifying power tool is limiting due to noise of a hammer or instnace. We also believed a later start on the weekends was reasonable especially if we add time later on Saturday. After good debate we came to the following conclusion and recommendation:

Hours for permitted consturction and/or permitted home improvement are:
7:30AM-7PM M-F, 9AM-7PM Sat, 10AM-6PM Sun
No work on Christmas, Thanksgiving, Easter, and New Year's Eve

The meeting ended at approx 830pm.

-------------------
Report

The Rules and Law Committee met on Monday 5/7 at approx 8pm to discuss construction work hours. In attendance were Joe Miller, Dennis Wolter, Dan Policastro, Dennis Malone, and Cortney Scheeser.

After good debate we came to the following conclusion and recommendation: Hours for permitted consturction and/or permitted home improvement are:
7:30AM-7PM M-F, 9AM-7PM Sat, 10AM-6PM Sun
No work on Christmas, Thanksgiving, Easter, and New Year's Eve

Respectfully Submitted,
Cortney Scheeser
Joe Miller
Dennis Wolter
-------------------
Cortney

Monday, May 16, 2011

Attended Council 5/9

I attended Council on 5/9 and here's what I saw

Biowheels presentation. I think a cyclocross style bike race in Jan 2013 could be a great fit, however we need to factor in SIGNFICANT destruction to the parks and tree-stands on the route. Unless frozen, the ground will suffer. A good idea, and it promotes a great lifestyle, so I'm supportive, as long as we recognize and plan for signficant cleanup and restoration.

New Garage door. I think the new door makes sense. I like that it's insulated as well. Will be a help when/if we replace windows.

Electric Buying. All upside, no real risk to the Village. Significant savings today.

"Box Score" on Trees planted and removed by the village. I love that we're finally investing in Arborist services again. This is an ongoing need in the Village. I asked John S to provide a YTD trees planted and removed and he agreed. i'm looking fwd to measuring this important metric.

Inheritance tax risk. We should plan now for 8% reduction in revenue. I have no data other than Republican rule in Columbus across House, Senate and Governor, and a campaign promise to eliminate it. Will be a big hole for us to fill.

I voted in the affirmative on all votes as all were procedural in nature.

icrctv.com


Cortney

Attended Econ Develop. Committee Mtg 5/2

While i'm not a member of Econ Development, I attended the meeting on 5/2 due to the sensitive topic: West St Parking. Here's what I saw

The good - I learned some valuable info.
-I got to hear from Gary Goldman (MM Theater), stating 1)he'd renewed the lease for 5 years and 2)he wants to expand to 2 more screens = 310-315 seats = 150 parking spaces. Having real data, rather than opinion and rumor is very helpful. I appreciate his attendance very much. The Theater is the the hub of our Village, and it needs to succeed.

-I also got an appreciation for the pinch that seems to occur mid afternoons near the Executive Building

-The Village did a parking study in 2001 that has been mothballed. I think we should look at this and pay to update it concurrently with any money spent on West St.

My takeway - we need additional parking, (however "more" isn't yet sufficient to act - more data, data, data is needed)


The bad - this idea lacks planning and comprehensive study. It's being undertaken in a backwards way.

-This idea concentrates unsightly, dangerous, expensive parking unnecessarily. It doesn't help the theater. There are much cheaper options to consider first - re-add parking on Madisonville Road? Diagonal parking on West bound Wooster pike east of Graeters, Diagonal parking on East bound Wooster Pike near the Administration building, more spots on the center island (I easily can see 2-3). Here's a picture of the area around the theater that could be "optimized" with existing asphalt:



I can find 100 parking spots within this circle.

-We're jumping to Engineering Drawings too quickly. We're not ready for step 3, not sure we're ready for step 1.

-I've shared more of my objections in a previous posting.


Unless we attach full, holistic study to the Engineering request, I will vote no to spend Permanent Improvement fund money.

Cortney

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

West St Parking concerns

I am very concerned about the proposed 70ish parking spaces on West St between Wooster and Madisonville. While I have very little concrete info to go on, here are some of my concerns.

Safety – more parking is less safe. I don’t understand the logic of this improves safety. Concentration of surface parking can not be a safety improvement. Concentration is bad, and the only way I would support uber concentration is via a limited access deck. As a parent, I want to decentralize parking, for instance reopening West St south of Wooster.

Trees - We will lose >10 18" or greater trees. As planned, we will lose both heritage oaks on West. We are fair weather fans – the minute a tree is inconvenient, we eliminate it. “Gum Trees drop bad, slippery fruit”. “They’re not street trees”. These are two arguments you’ll hear. That’s fine, then what’s our plan to plant this species off street (I’m assuming they’re originally part of the Nolen plan). And what’s our plan to plant a more desireable tree in between the less desireable ones, so that we have a few years of maturity before tearing down? Ginko trees near the tennis courts have awful, rotten smelling fruit. Deciduous trees drop their leaves EVERY year. Where does it end? We live in a place that is defined by trees, that benefits from trees, and I’d like to see more loyalty to them.

Cost – this will cost the Village $200,000 when all is said and done. The Village, which has run deficits for each of the past 3-4 years has other priorities.

Government Involvement – should the Village play mediator to this dispute? It seems better handled by the property owners.

Environmental – parking lots are heat sinks in the summer and have storm runoff issues. We will see congestion jump during business hours as cars jockey for spaces. I’ll take lawn over parking any day.

Process – we conducted a feasibility study for 11 spaces in 2006. We conducted a needs assessment in 2001 which has been mothballed. How many spaces do we need in the Village? How far away from the Square should they be? We have no architectural/planner point of view. We are jumping right to Engineering drawings. Engineers (I am one) are great at efficiency and yield, not livability, not appropriateness. Finally, why is this not part of the MPF Vision Plan?

Urban Planning - Surface parking is a failure of Planning. We need more parking. Don’t think lateral, think vertical. We need a deck in the Village to not waste our precious/small acreage

Aesthetic – we are designing a sprawling Parking lot. Trees (really little ones that won’t mature during our lifetimes) will help, diagonal will help. But it’s still a parking lot.

Pedestrianism – Sidewalks are at the “discretion of the Owner”. Does this mean we might not have them? How do bicycles navigate a street like this? Are they permitted to ride on the sidewalk, assuming it exists?

Nolen Plan – this may very well be the biggest change ever to the Nolen Plan. It doesn’t feel at all historically appropriate. Shouldn’t it warrant careful consideration, expert opinion, and lots of input?

Street Parking – we could paint parking spots on Madisonville Rd and for cost of materials, we could have up to 38 parking spaces. West Street had parallel parking until 2006 – why not re add them? Why not search out every opportunistic spot FIRST.


Cortney

My drawing of real impact to the street



Initial drawing done by the Village