The Board of Zoning and Appeals tonight approved a parking variance request that could help clear the way for the addition of another restaurant to the 15600 block of Detroit Ave., between Merry Arts Pub and Grille and Route 6 (formerly Niko’s), as soon as January 2010.

Project architect Charles A. McGettrick, representing Arberia LLC, owner of the building at 15613 Detroit Ave., said his client was close to signing an agreement with a nearby church that would provide 26 valet parking spots — half of the 52 offstreet parking spots that are required by Lakewood’s zoning code. One offstreet parking spot is required for every four restaurant seats.

The municipal parking lot behind the building has a total of 40 spots, but 10 slots are leased to the federal government for military recruiters and are occupied 24×7. The city has already given notice that the agreement will not be renewed when it expires at the end of the year.

McGettrick said Arberia LCC, controlled by Kujtim Dauti of E.47th, paid $210,000 cash for the building, has no mortgage and is very determined to proceed with the project.

The owner of Merry Arts Pub and Grille objected to McGettrick’s request. “We have big concerns about this going in,” he said. He said he has been going back and forth with the city regarding the issue. His number one concern was that there wouldn’t be enough parking to serve all three businesses. When Niko’s reopened as Bar 2 “parking was a big, big concern,” he said. Now with Route 6 ready to come to life, his worries remain.

The proprietor was also unhappy because the city played hardball with parking spot requirements a few years ago when he wanted to take over an adjacent laundry mat and expand Merry Arts, relenting only when he involved his lawyer in the situation. In addition, he felt slighted when the city, in his view, was lax in enforcing the offstreet parking spot-to-seat ratio with Bar 2 – a place that became a “nightmare” for the area.

When all three businesses are open, he fears potential Merry Arts patrons will become frustrated by the filled-to-capacity parking lot and visit a competitor instead. “It’s going to kill the business,” he said.

The board listened to his concerns, but approved McGettrick’s variance request. The valet parking proposed by McGettrick will be free of cost to customers of his client’s restaurant. He didn’t mention what kind of restaurant it will be, but said there was a lot of work to be done. “It’s a disaster on the inside,” he said.

As a side note, I checked out the parking lot after the meeting and understand why the Merry Arts guy is concerned. It was around 7:45 p.m. and the parking lot was at capacity — and Route 6 wasn’t even open. It’s going to be a zoo when all three businesses are open at the same time — valet or no valet.

Board says garages must be replaced

In Lakewood, if you tear down your garage, you must replace it with another garage. It’s an easy concept — unless you’re broke. Two different homeowners appeared before the board seeking permission to postpone garage construction for a one year period. The board has magnanimously handed extensions out to several homeowners recently. But these particular residents had already been given one-year passes and were seeking an additional one-year extension.

Karen Romeser, of 1336 St. Charles, and Linda Korth, of 1437 Maile,  each cited financial difficulties as the reason they could not rebuild their garages.

I saw Korth in Judge Carroll’s housing court several weeks ago. She caught my attention because unlike many of the people I observed in her situation, she didn’t seem to be everything thing in her capability to improve her situation.

The judge was deservedly beating up on her for not clearing out the debris from her yard (someone called the prosecutor’s office and anonymously complained about the appearance of her property, too). She wasn’t even cutting her own lawn; her neighbor was doing it for her. She had excuses for almost everything and an unhelpful flippant sort of attitude. She applied to the board for a second extension at the request of the judge.

The board explained the rules prohibited them from taking the quality of someone’s financial situation into account when rendering a decision. Korth was a bit bewildered when her appeal was declined, sending her fate back into the hands of the judge. Her house is currently in foreclosure and she’s been out of work for a year and a half.

St. Charles resident Karen Romeser’s appeal was also denied. She said she’s twice avoided foreclosure in the last year and is working seven days a week to try and stay afloat. She explained she’s got some building materials for the garage, but needs several more months before she’ll be in a position to get something built.

The city’s residential housing guru noted Romeser had been in housing court for other issues in the past, and successfully corrected violations. He said the city originally issued a garage demolition permit in 1991, but “dropped the ball” and didn’t follow-up for more than ten years.

One board member inquired if Romeser was living in the house. She acknowledged much of her time was being spent with an ailing relative, but she did still live in the house.  “It is what it is,” she said right before the board issued their denial.

Central air units approved for Warren Rd. duplex.

Owners  Joseph and Bonnie Kunzelman, property owners, received a variance of three feet and eight inches to put two air conditioners on the south side of their yard.

Joseph said the house was built more than 60 years ago by his wife’s grandfather. They recently put $20,000 in improvements into it and were in the process of signing a lease for one of the houses two units.

The federal lawsuit initiated late last year by Hidden Village, LLC against the City of Lakewoood alleging violations of the Fair Housing Act has been withdrawn.

According to Richard C. Haber, the attorney representing the owner of the apartment building at 11849 Clifton Blvd., the complaint was withdrawn in order to permit the parties to complete discovery. Haber said the case will be refiled.

Hidden Village is home to a Lutheran-operated youth re-entry progam. You can read the original complaint, the revised complaint, and the latest decision to withdraw the case.

With Lakewood’s regularly scheduled city council meetings on hiatus until September, I decided to check out the goings-on at another inner-ring suburb, Cleveland Heights — just to see what’s in the air. Issues or laws bandied about in one city inevitably migrate to another city.

Cleveland Heights City Hall

The meeting was held at Cleveland Heights City Hall, built in 1986, located across from Severance Town Center. The building has a friendlier feel and more modern appearance than Lakewood City Hall. Oddly, their council meeting room is small, less than 25% the size of Lakewood council chambers. There was seating for about 30 people. Department heads were seated in the audience along with other spectators.

There were about 12 people present in the audience. The low turnout could have been attributed to the fact that the meeting was broadcast live on a local cable access channel (something sorely lacking in Lakewood).

Cleveland Heights’ city government is strikingly different from that of Lakewood. Residents elect seven council people, who then select one of their own to serve as mayor. Council also hires a city manager who is responsible for running the city.

On the whole, Cleveland Heights council members appeared more wizened than their Lakewood counterparts.

Land Bank: Lakewood 1  Cleveland Heights 0

The docket (.pdf) was relatively light and the meeting ran for a little over an hour. It was somewhat surprising to see that no citizen was present for public comment, which they handled right off the bat.

One bright spot evident from this meeting –Lakewood is well ahead of Cleveland Heights in the establishment of a land bank. Cleveland Heights is only now moving to form a land bank to assemble properties foreclosed upon due to delinquent property taxes. Without a land bank,  ownership of those properties would slip to control of the county and who knows what fate.

During budget hearings last year, Lakewood’s director of planning and development warned city council that the city would be demolishing many more houses than it had in previous years. The prediction didn’t reach fruition because the city had a tougher time than expected in acquiring eligible houses (in fact, an argument can be made they are too gung-ho right now, trying to rip down homes that deserve to be saved.)

House Demolitions: Lakewood 1  Cleveland Heights 1

Cleveland Heights has no such issues. Their city council gave the green light to demolish three homes as nuisances. One house was in estate, another house was owned by an unresponsive out-of-state bank, and the third house was a duplex long owned by a couple of elderly sisters who moved to a retirement facility. The councilperson held up color photographs of the homes and outlined their respective housing violations.

The city manager also reported back on the winning bids to demolish three other houses in the city. The price to demolish a small-sized house was around $8,500 and $12,000 for a medium-sized house.

Tattoo Parlors: Lakewood 2  Cleveland Heights 2

In a surprisingly bold move, Cleveland Heights City Council unanimously approved the first reading of an ordinance to overturn a 90-year-old law prohibiting tattoo parlors within city limits. The councilperson who introduced the ordinance explained the tattoo industry is heavily regulated at the state level and safe enough to be considered mainstream.

Believe it or not, Lakewood allows tattoo parlors, but you’d be hard-pressed to find one anywhere in the city. There is a pretty strict ordinance on the books that states “tattooing must be performed by a medical doctor licensed to practice medicine in the State of Ohio, or by an operator under the direction and supervision of a medical doctor licensed to practice medicine in the State of Ohio.”