11/28/2006 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Public Hearing, Ordinance No. 2006-164 November 28, 2006 understands the intended use might be to have a telecommunications office and company run out of the building, and perhaps some future expansion. Council Member Dailey Jones asked the Planning Director, would a building that was possibly going to be sold that is currently being used in one particular way, under this new zoning would the people who purchase the building be able to then also use that building in the same way? Planning Director Wenger answered only if it were continued as anon-conforming use and the same type of business were to continue. In this case, the building they are referring to has been vacant, so that would be the particular challenge in this case. 2) Therese Sweeney Drake, attorney for Mr. McGee and ATL Holdings. They hired Alan Weinstein, who is a professor of law at Cleveland State University, to examine the Master Plan and the ordinance and its application to their property. (Distributed the opinion and Professor Weinstein's resume.) In professor Weinstein's opinion, the restrictions imposed upon this property by rezoning it and making it anon-conforming use really outweigh all the economic goals set forth in the city's Master Plan. The Master Plan says primary goals are economic development. By rezoning this property to Office Residential, it is basically condemned and is made non-usable. The property, including the addition authorized and permitted in 1995, cannot be renovated to office use. They believe and in their expert's opinion, rezoning imposed restrictions on the building making it anon-conforming use clearly outweigh all the benefits that the city is trying to achieve through the Master Plan. From an economic standpoint, the current value of the property is about $700,000. Restricting it to office use will severely reduce the value. Please consider all of those interests along with limiting the ability of this property to be sold on the open market. ATL Holdings acquired the loan and tried to resell this property; but, because of the foreclosure process involved in this county, it took them almost five years to get it out of foreclosure. ATL has been using that building-there has been a phone, there have been people there. They have maintained the property in an attractive condition. In answer to a question from Councilman Gareau, Ms. Drake noted that their property creates a U shape and surrounds another vacant property. 3) Mike Petric, of Grubb & Ellis, is representing Mr. McGee in the sale of the property. They do have a very interested buyer who has signed a letter of intent. There are other interested parties, but all are interested in the property with its current zoning. The reason the building is very marketable is because it's very hard to find a small building in today's market. If the property were rezoned to office, it would be extremely difficult to sell for the following reasons: The building was obviously built as a light industrial building. To convert to office use would cost about a half million dollar investment to add windows, lighting, walls. What you would have then is an 11,000 square foot office building. In today's market, there are not a lot of 11,000 square foot office users. Another problem is the location of the property is not in an office environment. Most office users want to be right off the highway. The property is not easy to find. If the property is rezoned, there would be a drastic price reduction. It would be very difficult to find a buyer. The property worth about $750,000 would be worth a half million dollars 2