"PAINESVILLE CITY HALL UNDER FIRE"
No really it caught fire! Looks like the golden dome took most of the fire damage. No reported injuries and there must be heavy water damage to the second floor. Listening to those on the street it is believed to be caused by an electrical fire.
Many fire department responded, Willoughy, Mentor, Mentor-on the-Lake, Chardon, Eastlake Perry, plus more.Channel 3 News reported Painesville City Fire Department was first on the scene. Really they reported that when you can see the fire department is connected to city hall?
posted by terminator1 @ 3:34 PM
27 Comments
27 Comments:
Do you think that the reporters did not know that the FD was connected? Not all cities are built the same. You were doing good with the positives till you threw in that last line. Always the negative.
My parents and I are celebrating this fire.
Our TEN YEAR effort to develop condos in this city may have ended this week with a decision from Judge Lucci, who upheld the city's argument that - for a project in which NO public road construction is proposed - the city can deny a final plat as "incomplete" if it does not include construction detail drawings of the public roads to be constructed, certification that the (never proposed, unnecessary) public roads have been constructed and/or surety bonds to guarantee the completion of the fictitious public roads. Apparently to the city and Lucci, the city's instruction to us to NOT build a public roadway - it would be a private driveway forever - is insufficient to excuse our project from the ordinance which requires that all necessary public roadways be either built or completion bonded as a prerequisite to final plat approval.
I think the city hall's spontaneous combustion is a sign from above, an instance of Karma maintaining balance - I'll be curious to see how the value of the City's loss compares to the property value lost by my parents this week - we're out about $250,000, I'll laugh again if the damage repair estimate approaches that number!
If anyone in this town ever wonders why Rita's "master plan" is failing to turn Painesville into Hudson, anyone in my family will be glad to explain how "investing in Painesville" has turned out to be the biggest mistake of any of our lives!
Oops I forgot- what is the positivly Painesville blog?
Has it been around long? Good to see some friendly competition,eh?
One can only hope that they are in a non-conforming zone? It would suit them right.
I wonder if it was electrical, I hope the electrical inspector we have now did not inspect it,
someone needs to check that guy out.
The negativity and poor character of some of the posters really came out on this topic.
That City Hall is part of our City, it doesn't just belong to the people you dislike so much that you wish them ill here.
That City Hall is a reminder of everything this city has been and will be, 5:28 and 8:03, you must live a terrible life to be so negative and hateful.
steve66oh: I am wondering if I talked to your father a few years back. I don't remember the name, but I have it in my records. He and his family were trying to develop land in Painesville and were being given nothing but problems. Remember, there is an election coming up, and we are hoping to have some new people in office. If enough of the right people get into office, then maybe we can get rid of McMahon finally. If we can get rid of McMahon finally, then maybe all is not lost for your family?
2:59: I understand where you are coming from, but if you go back and read the posts from steve66oh, you can see how poorly they were treated by those in charge in Painesville, and when you have the courts go along with such ridiculous nonsense (that isn't such nonsense when it ends up ruining peoples lives) then I could see how they would be so bitter. I believe the court in this city does just what they want to - to hell with the law, and I had a fast-one pulled on me by the court here, so I think it's all pretty scary how this city works, and my sympathies are with the people trying to work with the entities here. Sounds like they've had nothing but trouble from the electrical inspector to the city to the court.
To 6:07pm,
What makes me wonder, they have been trying for 10 years, the city said no and gave them the exact reason why and they challenged it in court, the court agreed and said no.
That is enough for me to think they were trying to build something outside of code or zoning regs. I really don't care if they spent $250,000 and feel like the city hates them, they are not special and deserve to build outside the law. I don't for one minute believe the city is anti builders when you look at all the other developers that have put projects in.
They spent their money unwisely, want to be treated special, and are crying about it when it didn't happen.
Yanish are you kidding me, they better keep an eye on everything, we lost a lot in our fire do to them.
6:04: Again - go back and read the post of exactly how the court shut them down - on what premise - it sounds like just more of the sick-in-the-head stuff that McMahon/Hada, etc. pull on people all the time in this city. I'm siding with steve66oh, and just based on what the city has pulled on me, and what I have seen happen in the courts here, I can pretty much count on the fact that I am right.
We never asked for special treatment. We ask only for the ordinances to be applied in a way that makes sense. Our plan was denied as "incomplete" because we did not comply with the ordinance which requires all proposed new public roads and sewers be built or completion bonded prior to final approval - but there ARE NO new public roads or sewers proposed in our plan.
Everything we propose to construct will be forever privately owned - and all private construction in the City requires a building permit, which the Building Dept won't issue to us until Planning Comm approves our plan, which PC won't do until we build our private driveway, private sewer conn and condo building.. which we can't do until BD issues us a building permit.
If we were developing a "Heisley Park" - proposing a new road and seeking to sell new lots only accessible from a not-yet-built road, OF COURSE we should be required to actually build that new road before the plat is approved - but for a small condo project with no new roadway needed or proposed, the requirement to build the roadway is misapplied.
We're not asking for special treatment. We're asking to be treated THE SAME as all the little condo projects we've seen built in this city in the past decade - the only explanation we can offer for the city's "special MIStreatment" of our project is to speculate that, because of our land's proximity to the bike path, the city hopes to bankrupt us so that it or Metroparks can buy our land at a distress sale price. THAT will never happen.
5:13, this is 8:07: After I wrote my post, I wondered all night what would be "in" in for McMahon/Hada, etc. The more I thought about it, the more I thought that there must be some underhanded explanation why they are giving your family so much horrible trouble. You have proposed one possible explanation. I don't know if that is it, but there must be some devious reason.
If I believe this development is close to the new Harvey. I believe your family was given to the understanding by a certain city offical that the plan would be approved? This employee is no longer with the city and I will tell you I have heard from many builders and developers dealing with Painesville's administration is a nightmare. Mentor and other surrounding cities are more welcoming and helpful.
I attended another city meeting Tuesday evening and heard from another group of Painesville residents. All these meeting had a common thread. All mentioned of being treated very rude by one city employee or another. It is across all departments, to be honest many have expressed great feedback from other city employees. I think it's time our city manager took afew to the woodshed, it's making it increasingly hard to get thing accomplished at these meetings.
I'm not sure I believe this story. Usually construction regs refer to "improvements" and require completion of or bonds guaranteeing completion of.
Improvements are a lot more than public roads and sewers. It includes tree lawns, joints between public and private, any need electric, water, etc.
I think maybe this is just an inexperienced builder who probably pissed off every person they talked to with their attitude.
Yes, and "improvements" has a slightly different meaning than "infrastructure". But the only "improvements" that CAN be built prior to receiving a building permit are the public infrastructure improvements. Which do include more than just roads & sewers - the complete list is given in sections 1111.03 and 1111.05 of Painesville's Code. But 1111.03 refers to "essential improvements", not "all improvements" - and the only improvements in which the city has any legitimate interest to justify its requirement, are those for which the city would need to pay to install if a developer didn't do so. As in the case of a Heisley Park - where granting a final plat prior to road construction would allow the developer to sell lots with no street access, and the buyers could ultimately demand that the city build the new road to their new lots. But that scenario does not apply here - ALL of the improvements proposed for this site are private improvements, which are the jurisdiction of the Building Department.
By what authority does the city demand that ANY private construction be completed as a prerequisite to plat approval... when an approved plat is a prerequisite of the building permit which authorizes the private construction to begin?
According to the Planning Commission's ruling, upheld by Lucci, if you wanted to grant a gas line easement for a line to be directionally bored under the back corner of your yard - granting an easement is included in the definition of "subdivision"... but since the easement will not result in a division of your land into "two to five" parcels, it's not a "minor subdivision", so it must be platted as if it was another Heisley Park... and your plat must conform to all the requirements of 1111.03 and 1111.05, including completion of the new roadway (what roadway? That's been our problem..) before your easement plat can be approved by the Planning Commission.
It's OK though. We'll sell the land, somebody will build Painesville's next "Argonne" there.... apartment complexes don't require plats.
Term 2:36: I think the problem with rudeness and mistreating the residents comes from the city manager, McMahon. Clearly Hada, etc. have no problem with it, because it is rampant. My experience with the city and its employees is suffering nothing buy lies and abuse at their hands.
2:38: If this is the fault of steve66oh and his family as you suggest, then it must be the same problem that many, many other people have, too. Let's face it, this city can't work with anyone, and reading steve66oh's post just makes me more sure that we need to get McMahon out and get rid of the attitude and legacy of abuse she will leave behind when she is gone. I sincerely doubt that this is the fault of the family.
@2:38 - Imagine I was a city employee, and I asked you to sign a blank piece of paper. And you signed it. And then I said "I don't see your signature". And you said "I signed it right there, just like you told me to". And I said "I can't approve your plan until you sign that paper". How many times would we repeat this exchange before your frustration caused you to say something that I could point to to say "he has a bad attitude"? So.. you appealed to Lucci, who basically said "acting as an appeals court, I can not look at the evidence in the case (the paper you signed), I can only determine whether the official had a right to deny the plan IF the signature was lacking - and he did."
That's where we are. One city official said (among other things) that our plan did not comply with 1111.05(p), which requires "Grading plan showing existing and proposed grades at the corner of each lot." - despite the fact that the second sheet of our plan was TITLED "Proposed Grading Plan", and showed, not just the existing and proposed grades at the lot corners, but existing and proposed grade contours throughout the site. He just refused to "see" it. Our engineer attended two meetings with him, and showed him exactly what he was asking for - and he still reported to Planning Commission that it wasn't there, and they based their denial on his report. And this is just one of dozens of similar "deficiencies".
The same Lucci who was a one time Painesville police officer? Maybe he should have excussed himself? Only purchaser who could use the property Lake Metroparks? Maybe Painesville came up with all this smoke because they didn't want this development? Painesville is impossible to deal with.
steve66oh, this is 4:44. I am very glad that you are exposing what goes on in this city. I hope it helps your family, and I hope it helps us get rid of McMahon and all the shady, shady business that she and her followers bring to this town, the people in it and the poor people who try to do business here.
@ 9/12 2:59 - "That City Hall is a reminder of everything this city has been and will be"...
It's a matter of perspective I guess... to me, that City Hall is just a building - but a bike path where trains once carried supplies to industry... industrial buildings that carry "for sale" signs for years on end... our vacant lot... are reminders of everything this city has been and will be.
I walk by this triangular piece of property everyday. It starts on Walnut and follows the back yards of the homes on Marion Avenue, then heads west behind some rundown apartments [University Apt.?] and then along the bike path back to Walnut. The only frontage is a 20 or 30 foot area on Walnut! Why anyone would purchase this land and then sink a quarter of a million dollars in legal fees is beyond me. I hope the Metro Parks buys the land but I don't know why the would even bother. Oh yea another thing to worry about, Tiber Creek runs on or near this property. There's enough flooding problems in this neighborhood without more controversial building on swamp land. Thank you Judge Lucci.
@4:11 - Yes, that's the parcel.
"I walk by [a dentists office] every day" - would you say that qualifies me to fix your teeth? I'm just trying to measure the "expertise" you gain from "walking by" the site...
The legal PLUS engineering fees total about $30,000 more or less to date. Most of the loss is lost value - the site was purchased with an approved plan for 32 units of apartments - but we wanted to build 27 condos instead, because we thought that the "pride of ownership" of condos vs. apartments, would be beneficial to the neighborhood... but now that the City has demonstrated its resistance to any construction there, it's doubtful that we could sell the property for what it appraised for when we bought it.
The site has no drainage problem - it slopes about 12" to 18" per 100' toward the North. It "looks like" swampland because Metroparks pikepath is artificially high - built on top of the railroad's old (probably contaminated by 150 years of dripping oil & grease) ballast mound instead of being returned to its original grade. That was Metroparks' failure. Our site is no more "swamp" than Harvey's front yard!
But, an amazing thing happens when you excavate 6' of earth for basements on 25% of a site... you almost magically obtain 2' of fill for the remaining 75% of site area. Combine this with a professionally engineered stormwater retention basin (another excavation, and more fill..), and this project could IMPROVE flooding problems in the adjacent neighborhood.
The proposed driveway is as wide as either of Harvey's driveways - though we would have less grass next to it, the pavement would be plenty wide enough.
But, you are entitled to your opinion. If you are opposed to development of the site, there's even something you could do to prevent it... get out your checkbook. There is no other way Metroparks or the city will ever own this land.
Anyway, this blog post is about the fire at city hall - I merely offered my family's experience as explanation of why we are still celebrating that fire. As we've heard from others here, Painesville's mistreatment of developers is not limited to just my family or our site.
We both agree the City or Metro Parks shouldn't buy the land. We both agree that 32 unit apartments are a bad idea. We both agree that the City can be rude to new development. Why not just let the land be "green", cut your losses and celebrate the City Hall fire. You made a bad investment without doing the proper research. We've got Horvath's Lagoon and now we have Steve's Swamp.
4:11
THANK GOD THEY DID NOT ALLOW THAT DUMB A_ _ CONDO TO BE BUILT THERE.
12:21 We all paid for Horvath's Lagoons, Steve's the only one out on the swamp deal. Was he promiised a permit? was he encouraged to proceed with the development at one time by a city offical? As far as "Rude" the city in the past twenty years has gone way out of ir's way to kill development, sometimes not even informing council members. Ms. McMahon has a vision of what Painesville should be, I wish she would share it with us?
12:21 and 3:02: I've got a better idea. Let's get new people in office this November who will get rid of McMahon, and then have reasonable people with good character for people who want to come to and/or build in our city to deal with.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home