Here.

Here.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

We're gonna jump right into it.

Good morning, everyone.

Or just number eight sixty dash twenty twenty-five by council member Slife, an ordinance changing the use area and height districts of parts of the land at north and south of Lorraine Avenue West of Rocky River Drive map changed two six seven eye.

How about you?

Good.

I'll make sure you don't disappear today.

Yes, yes.

All right, the floor is yours.

All right.

Good morning, Chair.

Good morning, committee.

Shannon Leonard, Chief Zoning Administrator.

This is map change 2679.

And as you stated, it's changing the use area and height districts of parcels of land north and south of Lorraine between Rocky River Drive and Valley Parkway.

It's to ensure future development meets the community's needs, and it's to align the institutional investments with the proper zoning that complements the residential and mixed use character of the neighborhood.

And I'll talk a little bit about that.

So what you can see here is the current zoning of the area.

It's a mix of single family A1, multifamily C1, local retail C1, and C4.

So what you see on the southern campus of Fairview Hospital is C4.

Four height district is for 250 feet.

And then the lines, yes.

Can you speak directly to the mic as well?

I'm so sorry.

Yes.

Let me turn this a little bit.

Okay.

Is that better?

Okay.

The lines that you see running along Lorraine, the brown line is a 15-foot specific map setback.

And then the yellow line that you see also running along Lorraine is the current pedestrian retail overlay district.

This is a current context.

You'll see the Fairview Hospital to the south and to the north of the site of Long Lorraine between the Valley and Rocky River Drive.

You also see the shopping center at the corner of Rocky River and Lorraine.

And then you'll see a variety of mixed-use businesses the west of, I mean east of uh the hospital campus, as well as a few parking lots uh in residential dis uh neighborhoods.

Uh the proposed zoning here, as we stated before, is to really consolidate a lot of the institutional uses that are actually happening into one district, uh, which is different height districts.

Um, and that's really to complement as it moves down through closer to Rocky River to bring the height back down to match the context of the residential to the north and to the south.

Uh the institutional research uh that you're seeing being proposed here on the north side of the campus.

Um, you'll notice that it was split zone multifamily and single family, uh, but the entire parcel is institutional.

Uh, and so the proposal is to change it to institutional research D3.

Um the south side of the campus is local retail C4.

So four height district allows up to 250 feet, whereas the three only allows up to 115 feet.

Uh on the south side of campus, they are bringing down that parking garage, um, which was really the impetus, I believe, of the north side, as well as the expansion of the uh cancer center on the north side um of Lorraine here.

Uh so the institutional research will allow uh well continue to allow multi-residential family buildings as well as educational medical developments, research facilities, professional offices, uh, museums, libraries, schools, places of worship, parks, playgrounds, and play fields as well.

Uh what you see here currently is the context along this area of the institutional research that's being proposed on the north and south side, and really to consolidate those districts.

Uh on the northwestern view of Lorraine at West 178th Street, you can see the current medical building.

Uh, then you also see the southwestern view, Lorraine uh looking down at West 179th Street.

On the lower uh building here, the uh picture here, you see the northwestern view is uh taking a picture from Lorraine at West 179th, and then in the far uh right-hand corner, you'll see the western view at 179th.

Uh the next section that you see is in the light blue that we're proposing.

That's currently a zoned local retail C1.

We are proposing institutional research D2.

So this brings the height down from that three uh height district down to 60 feet.

That really allows for mixed use um buildings as well as multifamily residential, any type of educational medical developments, um, really offices and other um entities that would support the campus that's being located here, as well as allow for uh local and uh mixed-use neighborhood amenities uh that will uh cater to the neighborhood.

Uh again, this is just giving context of this section that's being proposed to be rezoned uh to Insta Institutional Research D2.

You looking down Lorraine, the northwestern view, um at West 178th Street, uh on at all corners.

So northwestern view, uh where you can see the employee parking at the old used car lot, uh, and then the southwestern view is also currently employee parking.

The next proposed uh rezoning here is uh where you have the pedestrian retail overlay, and that's really local retail D2.

Um, and again, that allows for residential uses of all types, but it also allows for food stores, shoe stores, uh drug stores, eating places, professional offices, really neighborhood amenities, um, any type of um uses that really are complementary to the neighborhood and not conflicting with the neighborhood.

Um then again, this is just giving a view at this corner at Southwestern View along Lorraine, and then a southeastern view as well along Lorraine.

So this is the proposed rezoning here.

Again, it's a mix of institutional research uh districts to complement the institutional research that is already uh uses that are already existing, uh, but also to ensure that um any future development and is an alignment with a master plan that city planning can require during the design review process for this expansion, um, that really gives the city and the neighborhood a more control over the process um and a more community-involved process.

Um additionally, the um this did go to planning commission back on April 4th uh for the rezoning.

Uh, then schematic occurred at planning commission on May 2nd for their expansion.

Um, and so we are here before you all today for the rezoning, and again, this is really to consolidate the split zoning districts uh into institutional research and then ensure that there's local retail um that's available for to all existing businesses will be grandfathered in, uh which means that they will make be able to continue to operate uh in perpetuity.

This rezoning will not affect them.

Thank you.

All right, uh thank you, Mrs.

Leonard Director.

Did you want to add anything?

I'll just add that our zoning team as well as our neighborhood planning team has been working with the community as well as Cleveland Clinic on this proposed rezoning and the work that the clinic is doing to upgrade their cancer care facility on the north side of Lorraine to the west of West 179th Street.

And so this is all in context of that, and also looking forward um to potential future plans.

As Miss Leonard said, this institutional research zoning really sets the table for a more comprehensive planning conversation with the clinic so that future plans can be adopted by planning commission before we're in um specific construction conversations.

Gotcha.

Okay.

Uh thank you.

Um Madam Clerk, do we do we have the sign-in sheets?

Before we go to the committee for questions, we'll open it up uh the public comment portion of the meeting.

We'll go in order um uh of those who have signed in.

Thank you so much.

Uh we've also received to the committee on your tablets, you have the public comments and in your emails.

Um several comments from residents whose um I believe most of them were against the uh the project, and that you all have received in your uh inbox, and I believe that they also receive some that were in favor as well.

Um so you have in your on your tablet and in your inbox, you should have all the comments that we have received by uh email from residents who are near the uh Fairview Park uh facility.

And then we also have a number of people who have signed in to not a number, but we have some people have signed in uh to speak uh this morning regarding the uh proposed zoning change here uh this morning.

And we'll go in order with the first person we had.

Well, before we go there, uh we are going to allow uh three minutes apiece.

We will have three people who signed in for public comments, so we'll allow for some additional time.

Uh and we will start with uh Douglas Bayard.

Douglas, come on up.

You can sit here.

I'm all right.

Yep.

And just hit the button on the microphone, and it'll turn green.

Oh sure.

There we go.

Hello, my name is Douglas Baird.

I bought my property on West 179th Street over 30 years ago.

And we have encouraged and are happy that the hospital continues to grow and thrive.

Unfortunately, this zoning change affects the formerly residential parcels along the west side of West 179th Street.

Those are zoned single family and two family.

The hospital acquired those houses, demolished them, and built an open surface parking lot.

And we went to the Board of Zoning Appeals.

We secured a legal document requiring and acknowledging that the neighborhood deserved protections.

Now the clinic has incorporated those formerly residential plots and lump them in with this greater institutional research.

And we're asking that the parcels along West 179th Street that were residential when we bought our homes, that we have watched demolished, that a brick wall 10 feet high has been built, landscaping has been planted, be protected, and that our residential street, West 179th Street, does not become the driveway for a thousand-car parking garage.

We still live on this street.

George and his family live across from this construction project.

I just feel that these Board of Zoning Appeals documents need to be upheld, and that someone needs to say, listen, it's fine for you to build, fine for you to rezone the commercial areas, but this will be a death thrill to our entire neighborhood if they're allowed to drive not just 995 cars in, but back out, back in, back out every day.

And the hospital says, oh well, we could close off your street.

They don't care whether or not a thousand cars are driving up and down our roads.

We're going to be trapped, our property values diminished, the livelihood and vitality of our neighborhood completely obliated, and the clinic is just going to keep marching through.

We should have some protections for being a residential community.

And at the former meeting, we were told, oh, this restriction, this change would actually help you.

Well, it won't, because the West 179th Street, those homes were front-facing, that was a front elevation, and that needs to be upheld.

They cannot rezone it and then say suddenly, well, we're making it a side elevation because we're calling Lorraine Avenue the front.

I just don't understand what protections we have.

We've fought endlessly simply to protect the character and integrity of our neighborhood.

So please take that into consideration and provide some protections just for those residential lots along West 179th Street.

Sure.

Thank you, Mr.

Bayert.

Thank you for your comments.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We have George Corzy.

Corse.

All right, George, come on down.

I'm not as good a speaker as Douglas.

Hey, listen, we had to write it out.

No, no, you are fine.

Okay.

You know, the fact that you showed up here today.

Uh we always show up.

Absolutely.

And most often it feels like it's for a feudal effort.

We're hoping for a better outcome today.

Thank you, George.

Is this on?

Yes, it's on.

I probably don't even need it on.

So I'm George Gorzet.

I live on 179th, directly in front of the six-story parking garage that's proposed.

First off, I would like to thank President and members of City Council.

Thank you for this opportunity.

Again, my name is George Gorzay, my wife Terry, and our two sons, George and Simon are homeowners on West 179th Street.

We also own the business on the corner.

You can see the cutout in yellow on the corner of 179th in Lorraine.

We have we have been included in the process, but only in ways that avoid addressing the real issues.

Key realistic and impactful concerns from our neighborhood have gone unacknowledged and unaddressed.

We have been asked to attend meetings hosted by Councilman's Life, Cam's Development Corporation, and the hospital.

But these have been staged sessions designed for the hospital to check a box, not to genuinely engage with us or address the concerns of residents.

Cam's Development Corporation and Councilman's Life have not acted as advocates for our Enclave, but as facilitators for the hospital's goals.

We ask you, with the full weight of your public trust to pause and think about what's at stake.

On May 2nd, the planning commission granted schematic approval for a 995-car six-story parking garage using West 179th Street, a narrow city-owned residential street as its primary entrance and exit.

Excuse me.

That approval should have never been granted.

At the time of the vote, the zoning for this project was not yet written into law or codified in the city charter, meaning the legal framework necessary for such an approval simply did not exist.

We were given seven days' notice for that hearing.

We did have the plans presented to us, but no real understanding beyond simply looking at them and no explanation of how the process works.

We have repeatedly asked multiple times for guidance.

Meanwhile, we are given three minutes to speak while the Cleveland Clinic presents for as long as they want.

Where's the fairness in that?

Our formal grievance filed May 29th went unanswered for more than two months until 9 24 p.m.

last night, just 12 hours before this council meeting.

I was already asleep when the email arrived.

So I did not see it until this morning.

That timing is not a sign of a healthy, transparent process.

We still have no comprehensive traffic study assessing the real world impact on our enclave.

We still have no enforceable requirement that hospital-generated traffic be contained on hospital property.

And this is not about minor inconvenience.

It is about property values, public safety, emergency vehicle access, and whether a public street can be functionally privatized without your informed consent.

In 1999, a memorandum of understanding protected a neighborhood just south of the hospital from a 400-car surface lot.

The city and the hospital both agreed such a project warranted safeguards for residents.

While we are north of the hospital and not part of that MOU, it still set a clear precedent for how future hospital expansion projects should protect adjacent neighborhoods.

That precedent was carried forward in 2010 when the Board of Zoning Appeals in case number 10-136411 ruled specifically on our neighborhood north of the hospital.

That ruling addressed traffic and neighborhood impact impact concerns and strictly prohibited hospital-generated traffic from using residential streets while requiring screening and buffer protections for nearby homes.

Today today, we face nearly triple the capacity of the 1999 project, stacked six stories high, yet those protections have been stripped away.

Council members, the law is not a technicality.

It is the guardrail that keeps decisions fair, transparent, and accountable.

We are not asking, we're not asking you to kill this project.

We are asking you to insist it be done right.

Postpone your vote.

Require that our grievance be fully addressed in substance, not just acknowledged.

Require a genuine analysis that covers our entire enclave and demand that hospital traffic be contained entirely on hospital property.

Require a memorandum of understanding and a community benefits agreement that provide real enforceable protections for our neighborhood.

And let us be clear.

It is because there is a common belief that the Cleveland Clinic always gets what it wants and that it manipulates our neighborhood organizations, our council members, and this very process.

Transparency is not optional.

Without it, public trust will continue to erode, and that is far more damaging than any delay to a construction schedule.

Thank you, Mr.

Corzette.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Thank you.

All right.

Next we have Barbara Hass.

Good morning.

Good morning.

My name is Barbara Haas.

Okay.

Hi.

Good morning to everybody.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Can everybody hear me okay?

Yes, with the mic a little bit closer to you.

Okay.

Um, so I am a resident of um West 179th Street and have participated in many meetings on this topic.

And um as the other um residents have stated, I agree with completely with what they have um said so far.

And uh I feel like, you know, my my biggest offense here is that I chose a house in a beautiful neighborhood by the Metro Parks.

I love it there.

I chose to move into Cleveland, and I hope that you'll protect our neighborhood.

Um it's really alarming that this project is going to take away so much of what we enjoy.

Our um our tranquility, you know, stu uh neighbors who can go walk their dogs in peace and kids at play in the street.

Um that's all in jeopardized by this project.

Um having all these cars going down our street, the um the noise pollution, you know, we have helicopters and um ambulances going all the time, and you know, we do put up with that, but this is just a next level for us to really have some concerns about our quality of life there.

Um and I feel at this point it's almost like our option is to um just kind of put up with it or to move, and that's just really a shame because I'm a resident of Cleveland and I'm a proud resident, and I don't want to move.

I would like to stay.

But this project is really, you know, challenging for all of us.

Thank you for your attention.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

And again, committee, uh, we have all of these in on your tablet and also receive them electronically as well.

You have also had comments from Walter and Luda Gross Grossman.

Uh instant Maria and Catherine Shepherd and Mary Washburn uh as well, uh, were all received uh to the council regarding um their um comments or concerns regarding the project.

All right.

Uh Madam Clerk, is anyone else who signed in or anyone else who's who wanted to speak but did not sign in.

I got here late.

Okay, no one?

All right, we'll close the public comment portion of the meeting.

We'll go to the committee uh for questions, Councilman Slife.

Would you want to go now?

You would like to go after the committee.

I'll go now and kind of kick it off.

Um excuse me.

I'm gonna pass down and then if at the end we could give it to the clerk so people can see what I passed.

But uh it's two graphics just to kind of give the context of what the larger project that's uh kind of the elephant in the room in all of this is.

Uh but in brief, uh, if you've been to Fairview Hospital, uh you uh turn in and there's a parking garage that's connected to a medical office building that's connected to the hospital.

And uh those buildings are at end of life.

Um so they need to be demolished at some point simply because they will become structurally unsound or very expensive to keep up.

I think we can all understand that they're old and everything has a lifespan.

Um what's being proposed on the second sheet is the the current parking garage essentially becomes a surface lot and on the north side of Lorraine Avenue, uh we build a replacement parking structure and medical office building that's connected over Lorraine Avenue.

Um now a question that's come from the community a lot is why why across the street, and really it comes down to hospital staging.

There needs to be a parking garage in existence while one is being constructed, there needs to be a medical office building in existence while one is being constructed and it becomes a staged project.

Um and then in the end of it creates an opportunity for future development immediately adjacent to the hospital on what would essentially be a surface lot uh for the time being.

Um the Cleveland Clinic structures its non-main campus facilities into geographies and uh west of the Cuyahoga River all the way out to Sandusky is considered basically Cleveland Clinic West.

Uh my words, not their words, but essentially Fairview is more or less the flagship hospital of Cleveland Clinic West.

And the challenge has been predating my time in office, recognizing a need to recapitalize Fairview Hospital in a dense urban environment against a cliff.

Um about 10-15 years ago, the clinic constructed Avon Hospital uh where there is substantial land available for easy green field development.

And um prior to my time in office, prior to this administration, it's been the understanding that uh the best interest of the timing.

The best the best interest of the city of Cleveland is to maintain health facilities and and jobs in the urban core um for a variety of reasons that I think you all understand.

There's about 2500 employees at Fairview Hospital.

Uh the clinic does not give exact numbers, but if I use averages from you know the internet anticipate about over 150 million dollars of payroll, which translates to about four million dollars of taxes.

So a concern has been all along that if there's not an opportunity to reinvest and really do a one-to-one replacement at Fairview Hospital, that incentivizes the transfer of health services and uh and employment outside of the city of Cleveland.

Um respectfully, I I do not agree with the idea that the clinic gets whatever they want because they've already scaled down this project to the extent that they've already begun moving services to a facility in Rocky River and out to Avon Hospital.

Um so I think it is important to understand that while this is a tough project and there's a need to balance the needs of an institution and the services they provide against the residential uh aspect of the neighborhood.

It's not simple, it's not so simple in my opinion to say this can be scaled back.

That ends up reducing the structure of the hospital, the services it provides, and I don't need to tell all of you what the history over the past decades has been about hospital downsizes and even closures in the city of Cleveland.

Um there's been a um multi-year planning process that that continues.

Uh but uh generally the plan is that cars would enter uh the a parking garage from West 179th Street.

Uh it's the determination of the city's traffic engineer that that street and Lorraine are able to accommodate the traffic and there's precedent for it with other hospitals in the neighborhood.

A very understandable concern that I share is the desire for people to maybe cut through the other side streets in lieu of traversing directly to and from Lorraine and to that end the city has uh is is comfortable, it would not be a hospital plan, it would be a city plan uh to essentially uh put a barricade or some other design along West 179th Street.

So if you wanted to access that cul-de-sac up at the very north, you would have to, you would come from the other streets, we can put in new signals, and that would put prevent clinic traffic from drifting beyond where it's supposed to go.

Um what's not shown in this rezoning also is across West 179th Street on the east side is a green space buffer uh that the the all of that side of the streets save for Mr.

Gorze's property is owned by the Cleveland Clinic.

It's not included in this rezoning, so it would retain its current zoning.

Um but uh suffice to say there's a very understandable anxiety, I think, about uh uh clinic continuing to expand into the residential areas.

And in speaking with planning staff, the reason we came to the mutual conclusion that an institutional zoning district would be the most advantageous for the clinic portion is because it allows the planning commission to compel a master plan to be submitted to the city, which does not currently exist, that we can hold them to, and if there's an intent to go beyond the scope of what their master plan is, then we can deny things based on its nonconformance with a master plan.

Uh so I I do I do think that this is more advantageous than it is now.

We're also bringing down the height district of the main hospital building uh to kind of conform with what it is now.

As I see it, if the simultaneous goals are to maintain one-to-one medical services and limit the effects along West 179th Street that pushes a building up higher, uh, which I don't think is advantageous to the neighborhood uh or is just uh non-feasible and and and uh fails to fails to achieve the the desired outcome at the beginning, which is to achieve the one-to-one.

Um there's a lot of conversations that are ongoing about uh not just the design and planning and how we can step back, how we can uh best do our best effort, not a perfect effort, but our best effort to uh not have an imposing structure or a aesthetically uh non-pleasing structure, while also doing right-of-way improvements and other things along Lorraine to better funnel traffic to get cars in and out, uh to make safer intersections at the intersection of Lorraine and Old Lorraine, uh, and to look at this as a holistic um improvement for the neighborhood.

Um but the reason that I am supportive of this is because this is the best option that we can have for how to how to respect the residences while also ensuring that there's hospital services on the west side of Cleveland.

Uh the other items going down Lorraine, I I haven't focused on as much because I I really they are just aligning the current uses with the zoning, uh, which I I don't think people have seen any any issues or had large questions about it.

It's really sort of logical.

I'm happy to answer any questions about the larger project, but I would ask my colleagues to support this.

This continues to go through design review.

There's been no final determination, so we have had touch points along the way, but the city of Cleveland has not made any uh formal acknowledgement of of what the project definitively would be at this time.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Councilman Sly, did you have something else you want to add?

You good?

Okay.

Uh thank you, Councilman Slive.

Uh, anyone else else on the committee questions?

Councilman McCormack.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you.

Um, I just I wanted to uh speak in favor of this ordinance.

Um, and I'll just say that you know, uh really want to reflect what the councilman said.

We are in a city where health services are becoming more and more and more sparse that are on bus lines that are walkable, that are accessible to our residents in the city of Cleveland.

I know folks that live in this neighborhood that use this hospital.

And I will tell you right now, you know, I know the Cleveland Clinic is investing significantly in main campus, which is great, but there are significant investment happening in Avon in Beechwood, all over the Xurbs in the city of Cleveland.

What that means is jobs are not accessible to our residents, health care is not accessible to our residents, and we lose that access.

So, you know, if you've got the you know dollars that have private health insurance and a car, good for you.

Many Clevelanders don't.

And they rely on the bus line that gets to the hospital, they rely on the access that gets to the hospital.

So I just I I want us all to think about why it's important to have hospitals in the city that are accessible to city residents.

And you know, listen, Avon Lake will open their door to the Cleveland Clinic to do whatever they want out there.

It is a lot harder to build in the city of Cleveland than it is in Avon Lake and other places.

And so I just want us to be thoughtful around being a person that born and raised in the city.

I grew up next to a Cleveland Clinic Hospital in Collinwood, and every year we're afraid that thing's gonna close.

And if that thing closes, all those residents in Collinwood are gonna lose access to that health care.

So I just want us to be thoughtful when we think about investments of hospitals and health care in Cleveland.

We think about all Cleveland residents and their ability to have access to high quality health care in the context of what we're talking about.

It is not easy to get 30 minutes outside the city to get a doctor's appointment or health care, and that's what a lot of folks uh have to face uh in the city.

I talked about this actually in a previous ordinance regarding our health insurance, about my concerns about health care going outside of the city of Cleveland.

And again, I appreciate uh councilman Slife's diligence.

I know this has been discussed uh Mr.

Chairman to Councilman Slate for how many years.

How many?

Three days.

53 days.

No, no, this this the previous.

There was a um through the chair, there was there was uh plan to uh do this capitalization project uh sooner that conflicted with COVID essentially.

Okay, so for years, it's easy to say for years this has been discussed in the community.

Um, you know, and I'll tell you just from the neighborhoods I represent, my residents would be thrilled if a parking garage went in uh on West 25th Street or somewhere in Ohio City.

They would love it.

So uh to hopefully alleviate um traffic in the street.

But again, Mr.

Chairman, I understand this has been discussed for years, there's tensions here, but I just want us to think holistically about health care access in our city for city residents that need to utilize bus lines or have them accessible to them, uh, that they have them here.

And again, if we make it so hard for health uh care providers to invest in the city, of course they're gonna go to Avon and pull a permit in a two weeks and build.

So I just want us to be thoughtful about that uh in contrast when we think about institutions investing in the city.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Mr.

McCormick.

Uh Councilman Harsh.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um I just want to get a better understanding of the current lay of the land.

So I don't know if this is through the chair to the councilman Slife or or whoever.

Um but it looks like I'm looking at the Google satellite map.

I don't know from when, but it looks like the entire eastern side of West 179th is populated with houses and the western side is the parking lot.

But then I think the hand, the the picture that was passed out shows those houses on the east side aren't there.

So through the chair, what is the current status of the east side of 179 from I'm going to say is that is it all in?

Aline.

Aline, okay.

From a lean down to Lorraine.

What is the status of those?

Yeah.

So through the chair, uh incrementally over years, the Cleveland Clinic purchased all of the houses on that street except for one, um, Mr.

Gorza's home.

Uh last year uh they demolished all of those homes.

Um uh which that's that was not in a design review district, so that the permits were granted.

They uh the their intent is for that to act as a a green transition zone between the houses on West 178th Street and uh medical structures on the west side of West 179th Street.

There is a um thank you, thank you, George.

Um there is part of the um design review process is includes how to turn that not just into a passive space but into a um actual more park-like green space um and we're kind of leaning on the community on what the specific design aspects of that would be some before.

And and so then is the concern then um through the chair for traffic that um people exiting the garage will head north up 179 into the residential area um or that the residents left in the call de sac up there will have harder time accessing because of these 178.

So yes, so through the chair of those three streets, the there's only a traffic light right now on West 179th, so residents will generally very often, especially during busy times of the day, exit via 179th because it's easier to turn left.

Um what we have discussed with traffic engineering is the uh real kind of teeing up the intersection of Lorraine and Old Lorraine, which is the fork in the road that would allow for the installation of a new traffic light at West 176, so that where there's a new access point.

I see.

And then um being able at just before the intersection of 179th and U-Lean, putting in some sort of uh you know uh uh blockage or whatever it is that uh would require that that is a section of 179th would essentially be like a no outlet.

Um then so if the light through the chair were to stay at 179, then traffic exiting the parking garage could be directed south only.

There would be some way to restrict them from turning left heading north, thus preventing them from going into the residential.

That that would be the thought, and um through the chair at a community meeting, um a show of hands, uh the uh a good majority of people thought that that would be uh a useful improvement to this to the street network.

Uh there are there are others who um uh don't see favor in it or or feel that it's essentially de facto giving the road to an institution it would remain a public road.

Okay.

I understand my questions are answered.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Um Councilman McHarsh.

Uh any other questions from the committee?

Any other thoughts, any of the concerns, any of the questions?

Councilman Sly.

So I'm uh thank you.

Thank you to our attorney Vishnu.

Um he is asking uh the administration is asking that we do uh make a kind of minor technical amendment to section three, which I will read in a second, but it's basically as you do the legal descriptions, the legal descriptions always reference back to an I the attached map, and in the section there's no midst the line of referring back to the attached map.

Um so the amend the if I I could make a um if I can make a motion to amend section three to add the following uh at the end of the section.

And as identified on attached map, uh shall be changed to a local retail business district, uh a D area district and a two-height district.

Is that correct, Vishnu?

Okay.

And this is this is referring this is referring uh I believe to the parcels uh closest to Rocky River Drive.

Is that the case, Mrs.

Lennon?

Uh through the chair, yes.

All right.

Uh any any questions uh before we uh get a formal um because that wasn't a formal motion, right?

No.

There was okay.

All right, no, no, no.

It's a technical issue.

Uh just a technical.

It's just a technical.

I I left it out.

It was a typo.

Is it typo?

Yes.

Okay.

So we have a motion and second.

Um discussion um so normally when we make these changes to the zoning, uh this has to go back to the commission.

So why wouldn't this have to do this have to go back to the planning commission?

No, this is just a typo in the legal description.

So at the end of every section, it says, and as after we've done the complete legal description, it says, and as identified on this attached map, adhere by should be established that this is X district.

And so the map isn't changing.

It was it I just left out local retail in the um in the legal description, and the law department just now caught it.

So there's it's not changing anything, the map's not changing.

The legal description is the same.

All of the parcels are the same.

It was just that one line that was left out.

So there's nothing changing that needs to go back to be reviewed.

It was just a typo in the actual legislation.

Sure.

Description.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

There's a motion and second.

Um any further discussion on um ordinance eight sixty.

Uh discussions, all in favor.

All right.

All right.

All opposed.

All right, the motion the pass and support the amendment.

Um we'll come back to the committee for any additional follow-up, uh thoughts and discussions, Councilman's life.

Anything?

No.

All right.

Um, and I know that Mr.

Gorze did have another question in the in the back.

If you can chat with him, uh, Mrs.

Leonard, uh, to uh address any of the questions that uh Mr.

Bayer, Mrs.

Haas, and Mr.

Corze had Gorzay has I'm sure that would be appreciated by the residents, you know, and if there's any any additional confusion maybe that has been created today.

One thing when you are in a meeting the set, and then you come to hear these presentations and something maybe jumps out at you that you weren't thinking about before.

That would be helpful if you can stick around and have a discussion with uh the residents who came down uh today.

All right.

All right, see no further questions, orders number 860-2025 as amended stands approved.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are you here for the next one as well?

Basically, this is like a like a public walk path.

All right.

Ordinance number 726.

There's 2025 by Mayor Bibb and ordinance to amend sections 352.01, 352.13, 401.34, 457.01 to 457.04, 45709, 4571.12, and 457.99 of the codified orders of Cleveland, Ohio, 1976, as amended by various ordinances to supplement the codified ordinances by enacting new sections 459.991 and to reappeal section 457.05 as enacted by ordinance number 1684 dash 76 passed June 29th, 1976, all relating to public garages and parking lots.

All right.

We have a presentation here uh this morning.

We'll hear from planning, public safety.

Uh about what they want to do.

All right, good morning.

Who wants to start uh good morning uh chairman, uh members of the committee.

Uh my name is Lucas Reeve.

I am a senior advisor in the mayor's office.

And uh today we're here to talk about ordinance 726-2025, which concerns paid parking facility legislation.

Uh in terms of the goal here and the attention behind the amendments that are being proposed to the existing ordinance, uh, really it's centered around uh public safety uh and efforts to reduce crime uh that has been occurring in paid parking facilities across the city.

Uh the main goal here is to be working proactively with the uh facility owner operators.

Uh you'll hear um, especially in terms of the safety and securities provision that is a new provision that impacts uh lots in downtown Cleveland.

Uh, that the goal here uh is to work collaboratively, uh taking an all of government approach uh with the CDP for the first time uh being a part of the licensing process uh in uh an attempt to work with the facility owner and operators collaboratively to get uh safety and security measures in place that can help reduce crime that occurs in those lots.

Uh and really I think generally here the the main benefit as we all know is that when we have safer parking lots, we have stronger communities, uh we have a positive impact on the local businesses, and really what we're trying to do here is keep both the users of the parking lots as well as the folks that work there and operate them as safe as we possibly can uh just a general review of some of the changes.

Just a general review of some of the changes.

One, uh, this is a citywide change that's reflective of some uh legislation that was adopted in 2024 that helped to increase the lighting uh regulations for parking lots.

Uh, we're building upon that a little bit here, establishing a one-foot candle requirement for all walking surfaces and walking areas, as well as an increased lighting requirements uh that's specific for stairwells and landings, just knowing that uh particularly within uh parking garages, there are certain areas that we want to have much more well lit to help keep folks safe, and so this particular change is an effort to do that.

Uh as well, we've added some language here uh for the lighting to be shielded.

There have been some issues that have come up uh time to time with local residents who live nearby or businesses nearby where the lighting is not appropriately angled or shielded, and it's causing some issues for them.

So we've got some language in here that helps to address that issue as well.

On the licensing side, and you'll notice we kind of go through the conversations this morning that much of this is utilizing that licensing piece as a mechanism to help uh ensure greater levels of public safety in these parking lots.

Uh one applications would need to include a certificate of occupancy.

Uh they would also need to include accurately scaled and dimensions images, scaled and dimensioned images of all signage to help with review by uh Cleveland city planning.

Uh and second, um for downtown designated districts, and so within the codified ordinance, uh there is a definition for various parking districts here.

We're highlighting the downtown core, the warehouse, eerie view, and gateway as districts within downtown Cleveland that would have a specific provision related to the license applications, uh, whereby uh operators of uh lots, both surface and uh parking garages, would need to identify the security measures that they have or plan to have in place.

And then these security measures would be reviewed and approved by the Cleveland Division of Police.

Uh so this is a new process flow and pathway that now includes the Cleveland Division of Police.

So license applications would still go through division of license and assessments.

Uh but the first stop for any of the lots downtown would be that case-by-case review by the Cleveland Division of Police.

Uh on the maintenance side, uh, we're just sort of updating the language here, uh, pulling it in from other existing ordinances that speak to the requirement for proper grading and draining, uh, the use of approved surface materials and the requirement to keep the facilities free of trash and debris.

We're just bringing that over and highlighting that within the maintenance section of this legislation.

Um, also uh under the maintenance section, this is related uh to signage and the accuracy of signage.

We've got some language in there that speaks to owner and operators uh having to maintain signage in a way uh that is directing folks that are using those lots uh to be paying the operators themselves and not any fraudulent third party.

There have been some instances in the past whereby uh folks have gone in and put up signage that's inaccurate and is requesting that folks are making payment to someone that does not own or operate the lot, and so this is just in an effort to help ensure that that uh those types of incidences are reduced as well.

Uh just a quick highlight on the penalty side, no real changes to any of the other penalties that are within the existing ordinance, including the the civil penalties, uh, but a slight increase from 100 to 150 dollars uh for criminal penalties related to a few sections within the ordinance.

I want to dive a little bit deeper into the downtown requirement that I mentioned earlier, um, just kind of highlighting how uh what the intention is behind it and how we see it working.

Um, as I mentioned earlier, the parking facility operators would be required to identify the safety and security measures that they have or will have in place at their lots.

Um, this is done through a questionnaire that the applicant for a license renewal uh would complete uh as part of that license application process.

Um this particular document, uh, and I sent it over to council staff as well.

Hopefully, you have had a chance to see it.

If not, I have a few copies with me this morning, uh, is really endeavoring to help create a baseline level uh and and pull from industry best uh practices and standards for the types of safety and security measures that should be in place uh at a baseline level for these paid parking facilities.

They include things like perimeter security, uh levels of staffing, um surveillance of the lots, including cameras.

So we're asking folks to uh not only identify how many cameras they have in place, but uh whether or not those cameras are uh registered with with public safety in an effort to encourage more folks to be registering their cameras cameras with public safety.

Uh they ask for some information about signage, uh what their access control looks like, uh, what their lighting is, uh, and any other safety features that they might have in place that would be helpful uh for CDP's review of their safety and security measures.

Uh Cleveland police would then uh review those measures on a case-by-case basis.

Uh so they are looking at a whole host of things uh to make a determination as to whether or not the safety and security measures that have been identified are adequate for that particular uh lot, whether it's a surface lot or a parking garage.

Um they're doing it on a case-by-case basis to look at both the location of the facility, uh, some of the uses that might be nearby, uh, frequency of use, uh, and they're also taking a look uh from a yearly perspective.

They'll do a year look back on uh any reported criminal activity and crimes that have happened in those lots over the past year.

They would then uh Cleveland police would then have up to 60 days to go through that review process um and approve uh the security measures that were submitted as part of that license application.

They can approve uh or um the applicant may be requested to supply additional information, either to uh close the gap, uh some questions that that might uh come about as as part of the review.

Um or if those safety and security measures are uh insufficient, they may be requested to submit a revised security measures plan for a second review.

Uh they can add uh you know to to what they had previously submitted uh in an effort to get to that place where um the division of police believes that uh what they've identified are are adequate and in place.

Uh as part of the enforcement process, uh if Cleveland police identify three or more nuisance or criminal violations within a six-month period, um the operator could be required to submit an updated security measures plan uh with enhanced security features.

I think it's important to note also that they may require may be required to do nothing.

Uh if the previously approved safety and security plan is still sufficient and adequate, uh they would not be required to add anything else at that time.

I would also note then that um there is uh some due process here from an owner-operator perspective, and so um if the plan is deemed inadequate and no agreement can be reached between the Cleveland Division and Police and the owner operators, uh they do have a pathway towards a hearing.

Uh they can request uh a hearing uh or a meeting with Cleveland Division of Police, or they can move on to the Board of Zoning Appeals to have have their um concerns heard at that level.

A couple of amendments that I just wanted to note.

This was introduced uh to council back in June.

Uh, and since that time, we have a couple of amendments that we'd like to draw your attention to this morning.

Um is in section 45703C, uh, which endeavors to change uh a few places where we're describing um the safety and security measures previously as adequate, and we are now updating that and requesting that it's updated to use the term reasonable.

Uh I will note that part of the change here is due to some engagement that we have done from the administration standpoint with owner operators of these paid parking facilities.

Uh we had three separate meetings um hosted and convened uh by the folks at downtown Cleveland's uh alliance to help us to engage with not only the uh owner operators of lots across downtown, uh, but also hear from some of the concerns uh that were raised from property owners and business owners related to reported incidents that have impact uh impacted them or or or their customers downtown.

Uh and so this change here is really in an effort to uh double down and emphasize that the Cleveland Division of Police uh really cannot be imposing any unreasonable demands on folks in terms of the safety and security measures that they're requesting be in place.

Uh and again, kind of harken back to what I had mentioned earlier around that due process that exists for folks if they believe that that is something that is being requested of them.

And then the second amendment that I will note um is a provision that would require the director of public safety um to produce a report for city council after two years, uh, specific to the effectiveness of the safety and securities provision that's being proposed here to make a determination as to whether or not it is it is effective, uh, whether or not it should be enhanced uh or changed in any way.

Uh and I will note that that also there's a possibility that the safety and security measures provision is working well, that we may want to actually look at deploying that in other areas across the city.

Uh and I will note that that also there's a possibility that the safety and security measures provision is working well, that we may want to actually look at deploying that in other areas across the city all right.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Lucas, what's your title?

Uh senior advisor in the mayor's office.

Senior advisor, okay.

I felt like you were somewhere else in the city.

Were you yes, previous to joining the administration?

I was working at the old Brooklyn CDC as their executive director.

There it is.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

All right.

Um thank you for the presentation.

Ms.

Lind is anything you want to add uh regarding this piece as well?

Because I know you stayed around.

I'm just here for questions if anything relates to zoning or the certificate of occupancy requirement.

All right, thank you.

Anything from our uh the safety director or chief.

Just here for answering any questions as well.

Same here.

Okay.

Thank you, Chief.

Um we'll go to the committee for uh questions, Councilman McCormick.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um I want to start by thanking Lucas for his being the quarterback on this and um trying to get a hold of his councilman during the summer session, which has not been easy on his behalf.

I like to self-shame myself when I know I haven't called someone back.

Makes me feel better.

I put it into the atmosphere a little bit, you know.

Speak speak it in the universe.

Anyways, uh Chairman, uh, fully support this legislation.

I really I want to recognize uh Lucas and the team uh for really going back, we've pausing this, stopping this to uh engage back with stakeholders, and I think those were really fruitful conversations, led to some amendments.

Um downtown Cleveland Alliance, who I know is with us here in the room.

Good morning, DCA on their phones.

Um wanna thank downtown Cleveland Inc., excuse me, uh, for their engagement on this as well.

Uh I'm just thanking you.

Thank you guys, appreciate it.

Um Chairman, uh also to the the director of the chief and the um assistant chief deputy chief.

Deputy chief who participated in a lot of those uh meetings with stakeholders pertaining to this ordinance.

I know this uh uh our chief um is a former third district commander, uh so she is familiar uh with a lot of these issues that are being presented here today.

Um so uh really important piece of legislation.

Chair, what this does is really uh re-emphasizes a lot of the rules that are already on the books.

But uh for those parking lot operators that are doing a great job and and you know keeping their lighting up and keeping their places clean, great.

Uh we love you.

Uh we know though that there are some that do not do that.

And uh this is really an effort, uh, Mr.

Chairman to say that if you are a resident of downtown uh or if you are visiting downtown or you work downtown and you pay to park in a paid lot, you deserve to know that there's gonna be lights on, that they're gonna care about cleanliness, they're gonna keep the lot up, and they're gonna uh keep a coordinated safety plan uh for your vehicles uh in those lots as well as for the folks that are using them as a pedestrian or otherwise.

So um, and I'll I'll just say in short, Mr.

Chairman.

I had a uh few years back, and I'll I'll leave specifics out of it.

I got a complaint uh from parking lot owner in downtown and my ward um about some issues that happened there.

And um I went that evening to that parking lot, Mr.

Chairman, and not a single light was working.

The fence was falling over, the bushes were overgrown, and there wasn't one camera in that lot.

Now I don't wish crime on anybody, Mr.

Chairman, but there were so many things that that lot could have done to you know either prevent or deter that type of activity in their lot.

Um but because we didn't have an intuitive system to address that that was reviewed by our folks in public safety, um it wasn't caught on the front end, and uh we didn't have a policy that was thoughtful enough and comprehensive enough to address it.

So again, Chair, uh the point here is that if you're entrusting your dollars in a lot, uh again, visiting working living, you should have the reasonable accommodation of basic uh lights, public safety and cleanliness in that lot, just as we would expect out of any business in the city of Cleveland.

So I think that this ordinance update um is smart, intuitive, and uh on time to help ensure um and I I think a lot about downtown because uh that's really um a big chunk of my word, but uh to ensure that those places are safe for everybody that involved.

So I support this legislation, Chair, and again I appreciate the amendments and changes that were made in response to community feedback.

Thank you, Councilman uh McCormick.

Um ready?

Councilwoman Santana.

Yeah, thank you.

Um Councilman McCormick for your remarks.

Um quick question why aren't we implementing this across our city?

Why just downtown?

Mr.

Lucas, directly um through the chair and to the councilwoman.

Um through the chair and to the councilwoman.

I think part of the reason why we're not influencing this at this moment across the entire city is endeavoring to use this as a prototype downtown to really understand its effectiveness.

Uh I think that's also one of the great reasons that we've got that two-year review provision in there as well to be able to make sure that we can implement it in the right way and it's being effective before we think about rolling it out uh citywide.

Okay, so that's your thought through the chair that you will roll it out once you guys uh prove that it that it works.

Basically, okay, thank you.

Councilman Harsh.

Uh Mr.

Chair, that was my question as well.

Um I do want to say though, I I guess well, through the chair, I'm only familiar with the concept of a foot candle from the good work of our colleague, Councilwoman Moore, who brought this to my attention that year.

Um I think because of a situation at a parking garage down in her ward, and my same question was why are we rolling out safety measures for downtown and not for the neighborhoods where these problems were discovered?

Um, and so I guess my follow-up question to Councilwoman Santana's question, which was going to be the question, um, is uh two years.

Does that mean that uh in two years we will come back with uh a recommendation to go citywide or a recommendation to go commercial or a recommendation to go lots over a certain size?

What exactly are we hoping to find out in the next two years to determine the effectiveness of a of a program like this?

Uh through the chair to the councilman, uh I'm not entirely sure if your question is related to the lighting provision or the security measures provision.

I would bundle it.

Okay.

Uh so first the lighting provision does uh is a citywide uh provision, so it's not specific just to downtown Cleveland.

That particular element is citywide of increased lighting uh standards, particularly for those uh stairwells and and areas of of public um egress and ingress into the lots.

Um and then to your second question, um we just want to be able to determine the effectiveness of the security measures provision.

There are a little over 300 uh lots that that are licensed on a yearly basis across the city, uh and so uh a little over 150 of them, I think about 160 are located downtown.

Uh so we're kind of biting off here what we feel like is a reasonable um uh number of lots to work into this two-year uh process and also targeting the area with the highest frequency of criminal activity, so really putting uh an emphasis on the areas that need the most help currently.

Okay, and so lastly, I don't see a map here, but does this zone include all 160 that you just mentioned the downtown through the chair to Mr.

Reeves?

Uh through the chair to the councilman, it would be just just shy of that 160.

I I don't know the exact number of lots that are within the zone, but it's it's still a significant number.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Councilman uh Harsh.

Uh, any other questions from the committee members?

Oh, yeah, Chairman.

Councilwoman.

Thank you very much.

Um I'm I'm very excited to see this bill come forward um and just want to draw the connection between the surface parking lot requirements that uh this committee uh supported last year and the downtown parking garages.

I know it seems a little unusual to have uh things separated out by neighborhood, but what I really appreciated from working with Lucas and with public safety is that there is a higher density of paid parking garages in downtown and they pose unique challenges.

Um and so establishing this for those parking garages uh is really taking a significant bite at the problem and and really gets to our areas of highest need.

Um I think that this is building off of sort of common sense reforms that we got into place last year.

Uh and I'm very excited to be enthusiastically in support of these upgrades, uh safety upgrades to paid parking garages downtown.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um the committee?

Councilwoman.

Uh good.

Uh well, good morning to the chair to the team here.

Um so you know, when this came to me, I had a very initial conversation with Lucas, then I followed up with um Chief Director Drummond, um, because the first thing I said is that I mean I understand our connection to our businesses.

We are very appreciative of our businesses, financial.

Within that though, there are the um many of the parking lots that have been hit, you know, um, in our residential areas and many of our uh housing complexes, and I was very clear with Lucas from the onset.

I'm like, if there is no pathway for residential, I will not be supporting this, right?

And uh from that time, I have had the conversation again with uh with Lucas um Chief Director Drummond, and we have put forth a pathway to ensure in the coming months to have um uh I would say um some more strength to be able to hold uh residential property apartment complex holders accountable.

Uh we know many of our residents, especially our seniors are getting hit very hard financially because of the car break-ins, and we are hopeful, you know, working with our policy team that we will be able to come up with some solutions that our residential um community members will also have some relief working with property managers because again, I I just encourage people, but just when it gets dark to drive around our communities and look at our open lots, they are so dark, many of the lights aren't working.

There is the back and forth between utility departments, we don't own the lights.

It is a mess.

And we absolutely have to fix this, and it is come the time for people to stop making excuses and for the city of Cleveland to have real enforcement efforts in place to hold people accountable.

Regardless of your socioeconomic status, you deserve for to be invested in, and when there's a problem to have your local government and other community partners to react.

So I'm looking forward to uh bringing that forward and working with our partners to ensure as we are starting downtown because of the concentration, things of that nature, looking forward to also bringing that relief to our residential partners.

So thank you so much.

Thank you.

Uh just a couple questions, uh uh, Mr.

Lucas and Director.

When you talked about the maintenance, uh having these um landscaped areas and and other aspects of the uh lots, are you expecting uh the property owners to install all of these things or you know, whatever type of uh landscaping that they have, you want them just to maintain it uh and keep it free of uh trash and debris?

Uh so the the maintenance that we reviewed this morning, uh all of those things that are listed there are already exist on on the books.

There's no there's just just to highlight there are no changes uh on the maintenance side of things, and so any uh owner operator uh of a lot would be still required to to either install or maintain the elements that are currently required of them.

So if they've been operating without a landscape and buffer of some sort, and we have been issuing their permits to them, and now we come back and say, wait, we've been issuing your permit, but now we want you to install a landscape buffer or some sort of uh strip of uh greenery um that's gonna cost you 15, 20,000 to install after we have been issuing your your permit and your license to operate the facility and did not require this previously, is that that's what I'm hearing?

That we't that's that's what we intend to do.

That's not necessarily what what um happens.

So any existing lot that's already built up and has a legal certificate of occupancy can continue to exist as is, um, even if they're being given a license from the division of assessments and licensing.

Um if a new use comes to the city and they don't meet the landscaping requirements like the front end strips and the buffers, or for the paid surface lots, for instance, you want to establish a new paid surface lot and you don't have an occupancy permit, you will be required to meet the zoning code and 457 um as well as if you're in a design review district, go through the city planning or landmarks process.

So if you current if you're currently licensed but don't have an occupancy permit, and you want to now uh receive an occupancy permit, and you don't have this landscape and buffer, whatever whatever the requirement is, then you'll be required to install all of those things before you can get your occupancy permit.

Even though we've been issuing the license to this facility to operate, yeah.

So even if there's been a license being passed out without be making sure that the city, you've always needed an occupancy permit before this ordinance, after this ordinance, you're gonna need an occupancy permit to operate a business in the city of Cleveland.

Um the legal ramifications can be sorted out with the law department, but essentially if you are in a legally operating business, you need to become compliant by receiving an occupancy permit and you would need to install the landscaping or seek a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals.

Out of these hundred and fifty, hundred and sixty lots that are located within this area, how many have you done the research to see who don't have an occupancy permit?

Mr.

Lucas.

Yeah, we've we've looked into um from a citywide perspective, uh, and there certainly are a large number of folks that do not have an occupancy permit that's currently uh on file in in a cellula, uh, but that doesn't mean that there isn't an existing occupancy permit that exists sort of in a paper form that hasn't made its way to to a cellar, and I believe maybe I'll let Shannon comment on this as well.

There are other circumstances that that may have led to these folks not having a certificate of occupancy in place for parking.

Yeah.

Through the chair to the committee.

So essentially the occupancy permit wasn't required until 1990 through the city of Cleveland and the state of Ohio.

And so anybody that's been existing and operating prior to that date or after that date and has some legal record of established use on file.

So it may not be an occupancy permit, but through our division of records, we can establish use, we can look at maps, we can look at the licensing, things like that.

So things like that can sometimes be grandfathered in, but they would need to like get their occupancy permit moving forward.

The other thing to think about is under 35203 and our landscaping code is that if you have that existing lot and you can show that this has been, you know, whether it's through the licensing and assessments office or through maps or Google or things like that, that this has been an operating use.

We've been using this as a paid parking lot.

The City Planning Commission can waive some of those landscaping requirements.

Um but it would be up to the planning commission to do so.

And there's a standards or set of standards.

Does this create a bigger conformity if we non-conformity if we um waive these standards, things of that nature?

And then they could also go to the Board of Zoning Appeals to appeal those other standards from 457 for the paid parking lots themselves.

Sure.

Thank you for that.

I mean, you know, and I asked the question because not everyone has received an occupancy permit.

You know, there's been other ways to establish use alone on alone the years.

And I've run into that issue many times, even businesses in my ward uh that in fact you and I have looked into uh who are just operate just cars everywhere, weeds growing all I mean it's just a mess, right?

Right on the main corridor, that we uh unfortunately were not able to address adequately because they established the use along the way, right?

Didn't have occupancy to operate the the repair and facility, but they established the use for deck for decades, right?

Well before my time.

Um the uh reported crime issues, you know, and and Councilman Cormac, uh he knows this as well, and as you know, and you know, from representing the area for for a number of years now, and just with many of us, you know, out and about throughout the city, and particularly on some of those days where you have these these these very celebrated uh days during the year, some of our holidays, right?

Um when it's just like um I think of uh of even uh some homeowners, right, where yes, the nuisance law is absolutely necessary and appropriate to address issues that they are consistently uh having or reoccurring problems at the location.

They've done nothing to uh address those issues.

But do you have places where really are out of some folks' control, right?

Where if I have a hundred people show up, right, uh to downtown or and just take over a street and they had they don't bust bottles, they they're fighting in my parking lot, they are just having a time, right?

And we pull a call for service to determine whether this place is has been a nuisance or they should be required to do X, Y, and Z.

How are we differentiating the calls, right?

Are you are you really in you know looking into those calls in a in a deeper way to determine whether this was something that could have been prevented, right?

Something that was just allowed to happen, whether it was something that was just inevitable because of what was occurring uh at that time.

Through the chair, uh that's a great question.

Um this ordinance along with uh ordinance which is a criminal activity uh uh nuisance is something that we'll look at.

Uh for example, uh like you just stated, if there's a call for service at a property or properties, uh my staff and the uh Parmi of Public Safety will review those calls for surface for service, make an assessment um based on those calls with surface, break those down because it's just not looking at the call itself.

It's important that you dig a little bit deeper into those particular calls uh to go exactly to the point that you're talking about.

Um not just that it was a call for service, but what was the call for service?

Was it a call for loud music and you get there, there's a hundred people that's out there doing whatever you just described, um which is out the control of that particular property owner.

That's all taken in consideration uh relative to and more specifically the nuisance um uh activity which is six uh six thirty oh one uh ordinance.

So we take all that in consideration, so we just don't uh penalize the property owners.

We have to make an assessment of the situation before that's uh put into place.

And even with that, we work with the property owners um to uh set something up again.

We don't want to penalize them.

We want to work with them to make sure they're doing everything they can to prevent some of the activity from taking place.

Sure, and and I thank you for that.

I know we've we've you know we can point to break ins and a lot of the you know facilities, right?

But I have the same issue at schools in my ward where people are uh and in with many of us have across the city that folks uh at at a at a crazy point in uh all of our lives, you know, these past couple of years with folks stealing their cars, the Kiyas, the Hondas, right?

They were uh I was at a meeting last week at a at a school with the new uh principal, and one of the first things they discussed was you know the issues they had in the past with their parking lot, folks, you know, uh checking the doors, busting windows, right?

Um, you know, as we look at rolling this out into neighborhoods and others, you know, I'm thinking about uh places and people like that, right?

Who, you know, do we do you penalize the school district, right?

Uh for not being able to protect every single car, right?

And if that was the case, we'll be penalizing ourselves as a city because we're not protecting from every single break-in, every car uh uh theft that uh that is occurring across uh the city.

Um I'm just you know just asking this question to make sure I have a a good understanding about how this is going to be uh uh looked at, how it's gonna be rolled out.

And I think at times, you know, folks think because these honor is the operators of these facilities have a lot of money, they they can take it, right?

You know, whatever whatever we want to do, that they can handle it.

Well, I don't think that's necessarily always fair and that's the case, but really should um to be to be uh fair across the board as it relates to how we are going to and who we're going to uh target uh with uh uh these new uh changes.

Just going on to my last question.

Uh on the on the attendance that you mentioned that that was had with the uh the operators uh in this particular area.

How many uh when did those meetings occur and how many folks attended those meetings?

Uh we had three separate meetings.

Um I have the dates here.

We had June 10th, June 17th, and then July 17th.

Uh I believe the first meeting, we actually had a very significant uh attendance.

Councilman McCormick was there as well.

I think a couple of other uh council representatives were at that meeting.

Uh there was a little over 50 people, I believe, at that that initial meeting.

Yeah.

Um so those included uh paid parking facility owner operators uh as well as some other property owners and and business owners downtown.

Uh and then the two subsequent meetings uh had less folks in attendance.

They were more focused on the owner operators themselves, uh, I think twenty twenty or less at at the subsequent meetings.

Okay.

So out of okay, great.

All right.

Um the timeline uh for CPT to re to review these uh questionnaires that come in is is that w is that gonna hold up the licensing and issuance of their um their certificate to operate because they have to apply what every year, correct?

Uh every year to operate.

Uh to the chair.

Uh so our process is similar to what you would look at, like with an F2 permit or the liquor license applications, we have a designated amount of time uh to review those and get those back.

It has to be a reasonable amount of time.

Uh one point that I want to make sure that we clarify with the enforcement portion and the crime stats for these uh operators.

You talked about everyone knows when there is a big event.

And what we don't want to see happen anymore is they collect the everyone's money who's down here for a large event and then they all go home.

It's not fair to those visitors uh that that happens.

And that's when we talk about when we look at the crime stats.

You know, if you're not doing your part, you know, crime is gonna happen.

The car break-ins are gonna happen, litter is gonna happen.

It's not that that it's about, you know, they have to contribute to the safety as well.

It cannot be just a division of police issue to patrol and monitor all these lots.

So it will be the you know, there's a timeline that's set in the ordinance um, and it will not be an issue for us to comply with that.

Sure.

And what is it, 60 days, 30 days, 45, 60?

60.

60 days, okay.

All right.

Um we also discussed, you know, the appeal process, uh BZA, and then after BZA, if you don't agree, uh uh you mentioned that is it it goes is that in the ordinance that it goes to common police and why not the municipal court.

To the chair goes to common please, and that's part of the Ohio Advice Code.

Um that uh those uh appeals will go strictly and directly to the uh Court of Common Please.

Okay.

All right.

Any other questions from the committee?

All right.

Um I would suggest one change.

I know you have in here in section five after two years.

Uh and as you discussed with us, you intend to roll this out quickly, right?

You know, not sit on this.

Uh I would suggest that maybe after one year you come back to this body, uh, you know, with um uh with the report on this effectiveness so that way uh we don't get too far down the road.

Uh I would suggest that maybe after one year you come back to this body, uh, you know, with um uh with the report on is effectiveness so that way uh we don't get too far down the road, and again, as we look at how we roll this out into neighborhoods, that'd give us a uh uh uh uh you know uh more sooner uh insight on um how it's going so that way we can sooner put some of these provisions in the neighborhoods as well to address some of the issues that we were having in the parking lots and parking garages uh that's within the uh residential areas of the city.

With that amendment amending it to one year.

All right, Councilman McCormack.

Here you go, sir.

Thank you, Chair.

I was trying to open it up on my iPad, but it's glacial.

Um all righty.

So Mr.

Chairman, I would like to move to amend ordinance number 726 2025.

Uh okay, I guess a clarification to our uh assistant law director.

Have these amendments in front of us already been read in?

No.

So I would need to read them in.

Read them both in, and I'll just change the second amendment.

Yes.

Is that what I should do?

Okay, great.

All righty.

Um, so uh in the first amendment, Mr.

Chairman.

Um, at amended sections 45703 division C lines four, ten, and eleven.

Strike adequate and insert reasonable in the in all three places, and in line ten after measures are insert or will be.

And line eleven, strike not in place and insert insufficient.

Mr.

Chairman, the second amendment insert new section five to read as follows.

Section five that after one year, after the effective date of this ordinance, the director of public safety shall report to council on the effectiveness of the security measures affected by this ordinance.

So to the assistant law director, that is one year instead of probably what's in front of you.

Third amendment, renumber existing section five to new section six.

All right, is there a second?

Second.

All right, we have a motion and second.

Any uh discussion?

Signal discussion.

All in favor?

Five.

All opposed.

All right, the amendment passes.

Uh any uh uh follow-up discussion from the committee.

Sendle for the discussion, ordinance number seven two six-2025 stands approved.

Thank you all.

All right.

This ends his only portion of the meeting.

Madam Clerk, please call the roll on the red regular on our regular agenda.

Yes.

Is that sound?

Chair.

Here we are.

Present.

Thank you.

All right, we're gonna start with ordinance number 818-2025.

Um get the ordinance.

All right.

All right.

Good morning, Carl Runges.

Cleveland Landmark staff.

I am joined here with uh the driving force behind this legislation and gay cane with the congregation.

We're also joined by other members of the congregations with us in the audience too.

So we welcome them.

Would you like to come up and sit as well?

I'll just I'll just announce them.

Okay.

I'll just introduce one.

There you go.

Okay.

I'll just introduce them so they can raise up their hand.

Absolutely.

We have China Washington.

We have Violet Clemens, Elizabeth Briscoe, Laura Harris, and our pastor Lynn Wood Knight.

That's it.

Thank you.

We are here for, as mentioned, Greater and Calvary Baptist Church, the former first congregational church of Collinwood.

This is located in the South Collinwood Census District.

Collinwood is split between East Cleveland and Euclid Townships.

It is named for Car Charles Collins, who was the chief engineer for the Lakeshore and Michigan Southern Railroad for 30 years.

Although the name Collinsville appears on the 1874 map, it was quickly changed as that there was already a Collinsville in Ohio, about eight miles east of Oxford.

The encyclopedia of Cleveland history notes that in 1874, at least 500 engineers, firemen, brakemen, conductors, and other employees made their headquarters near the yard to handle the 72 freight trains arriving daily.

As the railroad grew, so did the village of Collinwood, with its population reaching about 3,200 in the 1890s.

The congregation was founded as an outgrowth of the Free Congregational Church of Colomer, which is East Cleveland, with 18 charter members.

Ford Chapel was named in honor of Horatio Ford.

Though records were not specific, it is believed to be after Horatio Cyrus Ford, who had died in 1876, not long after the founding of the church.

His son was Horatio Clark Ford.

The deed was filed in 1891, groundbreaking in 1893.

It took only two years to construct the building, as in a Romanesque revival style with an Akron plan layout.

Thank you.

The architect was William Warren Saban, active in Cleveland for more than three decades.

He has more than 50 buildings currently attributed to him, with the first Church of Christ, Euclid, Ohio, aka the first United Presbyterian Church of East Cleveland, the Henney Grave House in Sandusky, Ohio, and the Dr.

William Gifford House in Cleveland listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

The Bolton Avenue Presbyterian Church, now known as Antioch Baptist Church, was a designated Cleveland landmark and was completed immediately before First Collinwood in 1894.

In 1910, Collin was annexed by the City of Cleveland.

1914, Collinwood Congregational Church incorporated officially.

There was an addition in 1913 and alterations in 1914, but those permits are missing.

The church formally, and a few years later, after their incorporation, they looked to add a new gymnasium.

Unfortunately, this permit was also missing, but the church records mentioned the architect's name once.

Architect Herman Maurer was born in Cleveland and graduated from the Case School of Applied Science in 1907.

Nearly two dozen churches have been attributed to him thus far, including Cleveland Landmark's Emanuel Presbyterian, first Hungarian Reformed, and one of our more recent designations, the East Glenville Methodist Episcopal Church, which he designed with his partner, Mr.

Mills.

At the Golden Anniversary, the congregation, there were 500 members and 600 attending Sunday school.

Carl, before you go back, let me interrupt you.

East Glenview, uh East Glenville Methodist Church, I went there for a head start.

Uh down in the basement, as you on the enter on the left-hand side there.

It's funny because that, you know, I used to tell the teachers, I'm calling my granddad on you.

You know, man, that that brings back uh just so many members.

In 1970, 36, the YMCA began using the parish house and gymnasium for their facilities.

This arrangement would continue until 1957, when they moved into new facilities around the corner.

In 1957, we had the merger of three major congreg or denominations together to form the United Church of Christ.

And then in several years to complete that merger, and the name changed to the Collinwood United Church of Christ in 1961.

That same year, Reverend Dwayne L.

Day was installed as pastor, and he would be a part of the civil rights activities in the area that would affect the church long term.

I'm going to ask you to please excuse the brevity of a very extremely complex period in the cities and country's history.

And I just need to, I just want to hit some basic information.

During the 1950s, urban renewal projects, including Area B, Area K, and the inner belt construction forced thousands of African Americans further east into neighborhoods near and in Collinwood.

This was coupled with the second great migration of Southern Blacks and Appalachian whites also coming to the area.

Collinwood experienced rapid demographic changes that led to increased racial conflicts at the time.

The landmark case of Brown versus Board of Education ruling in 1954 ended legal segregation in the educational system, asserting that separate could never be equal and mandated the desegregation of public schools in America.

The bussing of black children to white receiving schools heard protests from both black and white parents.

Reverend Day was an ardent supporter of civil rights and school integration and was a member of the Emergency Clergyman's Committee for Civil Rights, serving on its executive board, formed about 1964.

The school integration issue reached a breaking point in April, with the accidental death of Reverend Bruce Clunder, who was crushed by a bulldozer at the construction site of the elementary school on Lakeview Road.

The clergyman's committee included about 230 Protestant and Jewish clergymen in the Greater Cleveland area.

Dr.

Jeffrey K.

Haddon noted in his book, The Gathering Storm in the Churches, 1969, that at least a dozen of them lost their pulpits due to their involvement, including Day.

Day tendered his resignation in an effort to keep the congregation together, but with everything happening in the neighborhood, it was too late.

A report by the Collinwood Community Service Center noted 90% of the population of South Collinwood was ethnic Europeans, and about five to ten percent was black in 1965.

By 1968, they estimated the black population had grown to 30 percent.

The ethnic population fallen to 40 percent, and Appalachian whites had established themselves with 30 percent of the population.

The church quick lost membership quickly.

In 1962, the church had 479 members.

By 1964, it was down to 298 with weekly attendance about 52.

Following the annual meeting in January 1966, the trustees noted some of their issues facing the future.

Members were leaving the neighborhood and transferring to other churches.

They were aging out as there was only four members in attendance under the age of 30.

There was an increase in churches in their census tract.

The expenses were exceeding the income, and as noted by one member, the church was in the throes of what was happening across the country, and that was being in a changing neighborhood and not changing with it.

In an effort to continue, they investigated the possibility of merging with another congregation.

After nine months, it came down to one possibility Grace United Church on Westdrop Avenue, but the Collinwood congregation would have to move there.

On January 18th, 1967, the membership voted overwhelmingly to disband, with the final day being March 31st, 1967.

The property transferred to the Western Reserve Association of the United Church of Christ.

In March, pardon me.

In March 1968, the building became the site of the Collinwood Multi-Service Center, funded by a three-year grant from the Greater Cleveland Foundation.

This house offices for various agencies seen on screen.

This facility and other service centers became an important part important local support center as in May 1968.

Mayor Carl B.

Stokes launched the Cleveland Now Initiative.

This is to be a 10 to 12 year program designed to cure physical and social ills, including housing, jobs, and health, remaking Cleveland into a thoroughly livable city.

In 1971, at the end of the three-year grant term, the now named Collinwood Community Service Center moved to 741 East 153rd Street.

1971 was also a new beginning for the property.

On January 3rd, a new congregation was formed.

The day began with a Sunday school class and a morning sermon.

Everyone reassembled in the afternoon to organize the church.

It was during this meeting that Greater New Calvary was named, and Minister H.

H.

Hardy was called to be the pastor.

There are two days deeds in late 1971, transferring the property to the new congregation.

Less than a decade later, they were able to burn the mortgage.

The congregation has been together for more than 50 years.

They provide for the community with their food pantry and clothing programs.

For a number of years, they also housed the South house the South and West Community Center, providing a safe place for the youth of the neighborhood to participate in supervised activities while the Collinwood Recreation Center was in development.

The Collinwood Rec Center opened in 2012, but this facility remained in use until the pandemic in 2020.

Music has been a large part of the congregation.

There have been at least seven different choirs throughout the years, and they contributed to make a mark in the neighborhood.

We have our significance.

Beautiful stone.

And the interiors.

Nella Morgan, 1876 to 1937.

There was not much information on her.

Her family was from Ashabula, could not find her connection to the church outside of her mother's funeral, was held there in 1923.

Jay Odell was a member of the church, was involved in the temperance movement, including a stint as the president of the Ohio State Anti-Liquor Alliance, and was a member of the Prohibition Party.

There's the South and West Basketball Court.

List of our sources.

And thank you very much.

All right.

Thank you for the presentation.

Um in that in the Green Building with Councilman Coates with his uh his uh holiday food bags.

Used to have to come in come there and moving the bags around, placing stuff inside of those.

We play basketball down in the uh in the gym there as well, you know, growing up as a as a kid there.

So when I got this request, I was absolutely happy to uh to support it and and submit this uh request for um for the designation uh today.

I'm in fact I'm gonna call them up when I leave Councilman Coates and just share with him uh kind of what uh what was discussed here uh today.

Um and the place served as a as a as a secondary rec facility for many years in Collinwood because South Collinwood didn't have a recreation facility or anything uh that could uh have you know uh uh organized uh activities like basketball and and and football and other things, and so this place uh this church here uh serves uh many purposes besides a food pantry and uh a place where folks can come and get clothing items, but they really serve you know uh all generations of people here in the neighborhood, and so uh, you know, very happy to see again that this is happening uh today.

All right.

Would you like to add any uh any comments?

Well, you kind of took some of my comments.

Okay.

I was just gonna point out again that our church first off, thank you all for your time and consideration in this whole process of recognizing our church's contributions to the spiritual and physical well-being of the community.

And in keeping with that, we always knew it was something different about our church as a structure because of everybody coming in and coming on the woodwork, or they somebody would say something about the date of the uh cornerstone.

And it they'd always come in and say something about something with the construction design.

We knew there was something different, and that gave us the catalyst to enlist the commission and especially Carl, thank him for this effort in this whole process.

And just thank you all again for just recognizing our church and the fact that we've been in the community for so long, and that it is truly a landmark here in the city of Cleveland.

That's all.

Absolutely, thank you for that.

Uh truly a landmark.

Absolutely.

I I couldn't agree with you 100%.

I see one of my one of my other favorite residents are is here with us uh today.

Uh Ms.

China in the back there.

All right.

Um any questions from the committee?

Yes, Councilman McCormick.

I just wanted to um uh thank you for your hard work in Carl and our team here from the church, and just um it is absolutely beautiful church, um, really stunning.

Um, but it seems like the spirit and service of its congregation is just as beautiful.

So, congratulations and thank you for your hard work on this.

Uh really a great piece of legislation.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman.

All right, so no further questions.

Ordinance number 818-2025 stands approved.

All right, thank you.

I reach out and we'll do something in the neighborhood.

Okay, all right.

You all take care.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh I don't know.

Uh can you ask about King's thank you.

All right.

Ordinance number 819-2025 by Councilmember's Conwell Harrison and Griffith by Department of Requests and Emergency Ordinance, authorizing director of economic development to enter into a favorable loan agreement with Famicos Foundation or designated to provide economic development assistance to partially finance acquisition and redevelopment and development of interior and exterior improvements at a mixed-use building located at 1355 East 15th Street and other associated costs necessary to redevelop the property.

We have Mr.

Annalifo, the great Mr.

Annalifo of the historic Famicos Foundation.

Mr.

Khalid Hawthorne.

All right.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh, and thank you for uh the partial introductions.

Uh also joined here by Ms.

Fome Zepway from our staff who has been doing uh a lot of work on this and here today to talk about the rehabilitation of 1355 uh East 15th Street.

Uh this is a building uh along East Hundred and Fifth Street, kind of uh across the street of and about a half a block from uh the Glenn Village project, uh which is about a 16 million dollar redevelopment on East 105th Street, uh which has been rehabilitated.

I think you can see here by the condition of this building, uh long since disrepair.

I think we all know the psychological effects of having disinvestment like this uh in our neighborhoods, and we think also an incredibly important project for continuing to set the market on East 105th Street uh so that there can be kind of some continued infill like Glenn Village uh to come through here.

Uh, you know, working with the Famicos Foundation, this is about a 1.55 million dollar project.

Uh we are looking at extending a $500,000 forgivable loan uh through the neighborhood transformation initiative funds that are still left and designated for uh this part of Glenville uh going on.

Um it's about 2700 square feet on the ground floor uh that would be rehabbed as commercial spaces with apartments above.

Um and again, commitment of four jobs that will come with this and about a 1.55 million dollar project.

Uh I am happy to turn it over to Mr.

Annalifo to add a little bit more color um go from there.

Thank you, Director.

Mr.

Chair and Member Subcommittee.

I just want to quickly give um an emotional background about this particular property that most of us might know or remember that uh in 1984, one of our daughters, Gloria Pointer, um was more that in the particular building.

Um elements of the community have asked that it be turned down, but her mother felt differently, wanted that to make sure that we keep the building to provide uh facilities for people that leave in our neighborhood, but instead to put have a marker on the uh next to the building, something like the chair that will bear the memory of uh Gloria Pointer.

Um and so it is one of two remaining storefronts on that path of face 105 between With Park and uh Superior Avenue.

This important for us motion of us um to do the work to put it in good use.

Um, and we I will be um asking Kiddish Council to uh uh consider favorably ordinance 819 2025.

I'm gonna turn over to Khalid, Mr.

Horton, to uh present the project to you to the count to the to the committee.

Good afternoon.

Okay, uh so uh just to reiterate uh on the fact that this is one of the last storefronts along this corridor.

It was once called the Gold Coast uh because uh it was the second largest retail district outside of downtown.

Uh just imagine imagine how many storefronts were along here, and which now consists of vacant lots, churches, and parking lots, what we discussed earlier today.

Um but for the most part, like that, and that's one of the things that's driving this.

This I see this project as one like a pebble and a stone for this area.

You've had uh initial investment in Glen Village, the city has put in, but in order to start what we're trying to do is rebuild this corridor.

And uh this is like bridging across the street, but then we're there's also other things that we have planned across the area uh in this community, of course, other projects that we presented in the past uh to to the city, uh still in motion, things that we work on every day as a CDC trying to piece piece these projects together for the community.

Um this one in particular, uh being a 1.5 million dollar investment.

Uh we're looking at four apartments uh top, and then uh st and then re-vent uh white box in the storefront.

Um I was actually involved in that in uh actually with Lucas.

Uh we were we started on a citywide initiative to start a white box program because of the uh storefronts like this, very much needed throughout the city.

Um there's been a lot more funding put towards the middle neighborhoods uh commercial quarters have what by white box programs.

Um CMP has been working on a white box program as well.

And so uh that that's the way we get these buildings.

They're small but hard to develop buildings.

Um and so support with for money sources uh such as this helps us uh move move these buildings back to productive use.

Mrs.

Zapway, anything you'd like to add?

Thank you, thank you.

Okay.

Anything else, Director?

That's all, sir.

All right, thank you for the um for the presentation.

You know, I couldn't agree that this building uh, you know, um, you know, has a lot of history uh here, history that some want to forget, history that some want to preserve, as we heard from Miss Annalifo, the rector of Famikos Foundation.

Um, I remember this stretch as a kid, you know, the vibrancy, right?

Uh then it used to then you begin to see the decline over the over the years.

Uh and then now you see the the area, you know, making a rebound and a comeback.

Uh since you know uh Mayor Frank Jackson and yourself, um uh Miss Analifo, the work that has went into this community.

Um and I commit for Microsoft Foundation for never giving up and not letting off uh the gas pedal uh when people told you that it was impossible that it couldn't be done.

You know, he'd look at them with that with those glasses, and he says, No, councilman, it can be done, right?

Uh or or no, whomever it can be done, you know, and having the support of uh Mayor Jackson at that time and then coming in and having this continued support of Mayor Bibb uh has has truly um you know been helpful to the work that has is gone in and will continue to happen in this neighborhood.

I'm glad that we are continuing to to get the rest of the dollars that we have in these pots and these funds out into the neighborhood.

We've seen this in Buckeye uh was it Buckeye Woodland, Buckawoodland neighborhood.

We see it in Glenville, we see it over in Clark Fulton and monies that were set aside for this communities.

It does no good sitting it sitting in a pot somewhere, right?

Where it does good is being out on our streets, you know, in our uh neighborhoods and where the money was intended to uh to to go and to help.

And so I'm glad that we are pushing these dollars into the streets again, and so uh fully supportive of uh this piece here, although a bit out of the side of the the areas of uh of 10.

Uh but the work that happens here in this part of Glenville helps uh the other parts of Glenville and the surrounding communities uh as well.

All right.

Uh any questions from the committee?

Councilman Harsh.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I'm just curious, I'm just trying to understand the footprint here.

Is the picture on the screen looks like there's not a building next to it, but uh I'm looking at the Google and there's like a building on the other side of that one.

Is that building still standing or is that building on?

That's uh old Carnegie Library store.

So it's still doing it's still there and it's right, but it's not part of the development side through the chair.

No.

Okay.

And then my only other question through the chair.

How many apartments are in here?

Is this just a four-unit or they run from the front all the way to the back?

Yeah, they're sizable units, about thir twelve about thirteen hundred square feet.

Yeah, that's pretty nice.

Yeah, yeah.

Two bedrooms, three bedrooms in there.

Or two ish.

Two-ish, maybe a third.

Okay.

Uh so in a nursery.

Got it, got it.

Okay, thank you, Chair.

All right, thank you, Councilman uh Harsh.

Any further questions with the committee?

All right, seeing none.

Uh ordinance number 819-2025 stands approved.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you all for that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Old school, yes.

It's Dome Elementary School.

Yes, they would eventually.

It is, they redid it.

Oh, nice.

Beautiful school.

Yes.

Famikos is getting it done.

No, I think I think it's interrump passed.

Ordinance number 800-2025 by Councilmember Harrison and Griffin by Department of Request and Emergency Orders to Amend Section 1 of Ordinance Number 1167-2024 passed January 13, 2025, relating to a contract with Stan Tech Consulting Service Incorporated to provide professional service for on-call planning services.

We have Director Merksman, Assistant Director.

No, come on now.

You know, she knows I know her name.

She's supposed to, you know how we, you know, you key it up in a in the in a day brought up their name.

Okay.

Yeah, like I didn't know her name.

Come on now.

She whenever that's changes, she steps in and she keeps the ball rolling.

We thank her for all of her commitment to the city.

All right.

Uh assistant director Fields.

Okay.

Um, actually, I'll let Callie go ahead and start.

Director.

Thank you.

Um, thank you, Council members.

Not quite good afternoon yet.

Um, we're here before you to request updated authorization to add already budgeted funds to the on-call contract with Stantec Consulting.

A little bit of history about this is that um city planning first issued an RFP for this on-call contract in 2023.

We came to council for authority to sign a one-year contract that included three one-year options to renew with additional legislative authority.

Um, and that is what the ordinance that was passed in January was.

Um interim director Fields was here at that time to get that authority to extend the contract terms.

Um at that time we were before budget season, so our our um 2025 budget year had not yet been appropriated, and council at that time asked that we come back to add the 100,000 dollars uh of authority to the contract after the budget had been passed.

And so that is what we are here today to do.

Um, I'm happy to go into details of the projects that we've done through this contract if you'd like to, but that's the basic layout, and we're happy to answer any questions.

Yeah, thank you.

Uh yes, I recall the conversation.

Hey, once it's actually a budget, come back to us and we're we'll be we'll amend the ordinance to allow for um for the additional uh dollars.

Yeah thank you yes I recall the conversation hey once is actually a budget come back to us and we're we'll be we'll amend the ordinance to allow for um for the additional uh dollars any questions from the committee we we added the uh they requested a higher amount anticipating we give them more amount but we told them to come back once we actually passed the budget and added the amount which we end up ultimately so we ended up adding that okay thank you I I do recall this conversation okay all right no other questions from the committee uh yes director can you put together a list of projects that you have had Stantec consulting services work on uh that we could be presented tomorrow at uh committee of the whole yes sir they're included in the summary that's with the ordinance all right and I can't I have a copy if you would like to it's not shown on my tablet but we can uh all right thank you all right and this is everything that they've worked on yes council chair there's a list from 2024 and then 2025 all right sounds good we'll make sure the committee has that center for the questions ordinance number 800 as 2025 stands approved thank you all right thank you for the