Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission

Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, August 6, 2024 7 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers Members Present: David E. Weiss, Mayor Sean P. Malone, Council John J. Boyle III, Member Joanna Ganning, Member Jason Russell, Member Others Present: Joyce G. Braverman, Director of Planning William M. Gruber, Director of Law Daniel Feinstein, Senior Planner The meeting was called to order by Mayor Weiss at 7:00 p.m. * * * * Approval of the July 2, 2024 Meeting Minutes It was moved by Mr. Malone and seconded by Dr. Ganning to approve the minutes with corrections. Roll Call: Ayes: Weiss, Malone, Boyle, Ganning Nays: None Motion Carried * * * * Mr. Russell joined the meeting. * * * * #2263. JAKOB/BARRETT RESIDENCE – 15709 FERNWAY ROAD: A Public Hearing was held on the request of Sally Levine, Levine Architecture, on behalf of Linda Jakob and Stephen Barrett, 15709 Fernway Road, to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance to the garage height and side yard setback regulations. The applicant proposes to replace their garage with a new garage that includes a storage area above. The 2-car garage is proposed to be set back 3 feet from the side property line and 10 feet to the rear property line and be 23 feet 10 inches tall. Code requires a 10-foot side yard setback for a garage over 17 feet tall. The maximum height allowed for a garage is 20 feet tall. The new garage replaces the old garage in the same location. The new garage has a higher pitched garage roof to accommodate the storage space. Mr. Feinstein showed pictures of the site. He stated this is a request for a variance to the garage regulations in order to replace the existing garage. The applicant proposes a replacement garage with an upper storage area. The garage height and design has been revised to be 20 feet tall instead of 24 feet tall. Code allows a 20-foot tall garage, but requires a 10 foot setback to the rear and side property lines. The proposed garage is 10 feet off the rear property line and 3 feet off the side property line. The Architectural Board of Review approved the revised garage design, at 20 feet tall, at their August 5, 2024 meeting. Staff suggests approval of the revised, 20-foot tall design, with the requirement to replace the tree being removed due to construction. Sally Levine, Levine Architecture, said this garage design is inspired by the house design to reflect its architecture. The front gable has a Tudor design. The existing driveway is not being moved, so they want to keep the existing setback of 3 feet at the side property line. Dr. Ganning asked if the height of the roof has been confirmed at 20 feet tall. Ms. Levine said yes, the revised design has a 20 foot roof peak height. Mayor Weiss asked if the existing garage has the same setback locations. Mr. Feinstein confirmed the existing garage location is three feet off the side property line and 10 feet from the rear property line. Mayor Weiss opened the Public Hearing. No comments were received in regard to this request. Mr. Boyle noted it is a variance to one side only as the 20 foot height is allowed and has been established. It was moved by Mr. Boyle and seconded by Mr. Russell to approve the request based on the findings of fact and conclusions of law as set forth in the Action Sheet with the following conditions: 1. The garage height is limited to 20 feet tall using the design approved by the Architectural Board of Review; and 2. The tree removed during construction must be replaced somewhere on the property. Roll Call: Ayes: Weiss, Malone, Boyle, Ganning, Russell Nays: None Motion Carried * * * * Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission 08/06/2024 Minutes Page 5821  CITY PLANNING COMMISSION #2261. LUDLOW SCHOOL – 14201 SOUTHINGTON ROAD: A continuation of a Public Hearing was held on the request of Aaron Rodebaugh, GPD Group, on behalf of the Shaker Heights City School District, Ludlow School, 14201 Southington Road, to the Board of Zoning Appeals and City Planning Commission, for variances in order to relocate the playground and enclose the dumpsters and generator as part of the renovation of the building into a district-wide pre-school. The application was continued from the July 2, 2024 meeting in order for the applicant to revise the playground design and tree preservation plan, and to submit drawings of the retaining walls. The applicant now proposes a small play area with a 4-foot tall ornamental aluminum fence in the Keswick Road front yard, set back 23 feet from the sidewalk. Code allows a 4-foot tall fence in the front yard setback 33 feet. The two playgrounds originally proposed will be redesigned and submitted for review at a future meeting. Dumpsters and a generator are proposed to be enclosed with an 8-foot tall brick screen wall located in the Ludlow Road front yard, set back 20 feet from the Ludlow Road sidewalk and softened with landscaping. Code allows dumpsters and generators only in the rear yard. Walls are not allowed to be over 4 feet tall and must be set back 33 feet in the front yard. Mr. Feinstein showed pictures of the site. He stated this is a request for variances for fencing, playground, utilities, and walls for the renovation of the Ludlow School building into a district-wide pre-K school. The request was continued at the July 2, 2024 meeting including the playground location and protecting existing street trees along Keswick Road. The applicant now proposes a small fenced play area in the Keswick Road front yard, with a 4 foot tall fence, set back 23 feet as a temporary playground. Code allows a playground in the rear yard, and a fence must be set back 33 feet from Keswick Road. A full playground plan is proposed to be brought back for review after working with an independent arborist. The dumpsters and generator are proposed in the Ludlow Road front yard screened with an 8-foot tall brick wall set back 20 feet from the Ludlow Road sidewalk. Code allows utilities in the rear yard and a wall of 4 feet in height, set back 33 feet from the sidewalk. The wall is proposed to be screened with evergreen and deciduous shrubs. The Architectural Board of Review requested the City Planning Commission review and provide comments about the proposed pick-up and drop-off procedure especially as it relates to the steps, ramp and walkway at the new entry. The applicant has widened the walkway from 8 feet to 12 feet adjacent to the entry and has provided information on other local school drop-off and pick-up procedures. Staff supports the variance requests with a list of several possible comments to relay to the Architectural Board of Review. Aaron Rodebaugh, GPD Group, said the major change is to the playground. The proposed variances for an enclosed play area in the Keswick Road yard meet the requirements for a required large motor play area. The area is required for the school so as to not delay meeting state licensing requirements. The schools and GPD will continue to redesign the playground and work with an independent arborist. They will return with a more informed playground design. He described the parking flow with stacking for 6 cars at a time along the building. They expanded the walkway along the building at the entry from 8 to 12 feet in width for more room for staff and parents. He described the parking lot layout and showed where 4 -5 buses or vans will drop off. The parking lot expands 20 feet in two directions from the existing parking lot. The asphalt expands, but the number of parking spaces is reduced. The parking lot is for staff, visitors and accessible vehicles. He explained drop-off procedure at other nearby pre-school locations. There are currently two different areas for drop-off at Onaway School for the existing pre-kindergarten program. He explained the drop-off procedure and number Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission 08/06/2024 Minutes Page 5822 of parking spaces for several other nearby preschools. The variance requests include the fence and playground in the Keswick Road yard, set back 23 feet, where 33 feet is required. They request a variance for the mechanical and trash enclosure. The location and wall height do not meet code requirements. The utilities are critical to renovation of the building. Code compliant locations in the back yard would conflict with where parking and ball fields are located. Mr. Boyle asked if the playground is approved, are they going to build it? Mr. Rodebaugh said the play area would allow the school to open if needed and continue with state licensing. They do not intend to build it. They intend to redesign a full playground. Mr. Boyle asked when the school is planned to open. Mr. Rodebaugh said next fall. It will be some time before site work beings. The playground and parking lot will be reconsidered in the future redesign. Mr. Boyle asked who requires the playground. Mr. Rodebaugh said the state licensing body requires the large motor play area. The play area is sized for 3 classrooms of children at a time. Mr. Malone said this application is not much of a change besides the playground. The temporary playground concerns him. No one wants to delay the renovation of the building. Mr. Gruber said in order to get a license to open the school they need the large motor skills area. Dr. Ganning asked about the timeline for the plans and construction. Mr. Rodebaugh said they have 100 percent interior construction drawings complete and contractor work is planned for the interior this fall. The exterior work will be scheduled for next spring. Jeff Grosse, Assistant Superintendent, Shaker Heights City Schools, said the interior renovation requires the utility area to be constructed. The exterior playground and parking lot work wouldn’t happen until spring and is not required for the interior work to begin. Mayor Weiss asked the size of the utility enclosure. Mr. Rodebaugh said the enclosure is 36 feet by 28 feet 8 inches. The doors are for trash containers. This is the minimum space for the transformer and generator. Ms. Braverman asked about drop-off and pick-up. How many cars will be involved in drop-off at a time? They need more information to better address questions raised by the Architectural Board of Review, which requested comments from the City Planning Commission. Mr. Grosse said six cars can stack next to the building at a time. Staff will greet students at the cars. Then staff walk the children to the building and classrooms. They anticipate about 120 students will attend with some as ½ day and some full day students. Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission 08/06/2024 Minutes Page 5823 Dr. Ganning said there is still a lot of pavement on the site. The community has been concerned with the amount of pavement. The site design could include more green space. Mr. Grosse said they have listened to the neighborhood. Their staff recommends this procedure for drop-off. They will revisit the exact parking lot layout when the playground is redesigned. They have heard the direction on safety and have taken steps to address it. Mr. Russell said there is not enough information on pick-up and drop-off and stacking. What is the number of expected cars and could they stack on Ludlow Road? He understands the 22-foot wide aisles have been changed to create more space in the walkway. The Board needs to focus on the utility area variances to avoid delaying interior work. Mayor Weiss opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Feinstein summarized the submitted letters received before the meeting. Cara Berg, neighbor, writes that the project has the opportunity to provide a place for community in the Ludlow Neighborhood. The schools and city need to plan and implement together. It is disappointing to read that the “playground” will be for pre-k and will not have permanent equipment. The community is used to street parking. She asked the parking lot not take priority in the site footprint. Rosa Hand and Matthew Dowling, 3175 Ludlow Road, writes that they have an Onaway School pre- K student and a child they hope to send to pre-K at Ludlow. They do not believe a temporary playground is an appropriate solution. They strongly support the neighbor’s insistence on a traffic study. They are also not aware of any efforts by GPD or the district to reach out to the Ludlow Community to co-create solutions after the last meeting. Frederick Freer, 3267 Aberdeen Road, writes and asks if the district has presented a fully designed site plan, including a community playground, with adequate time for review and consideration by the community? He asked if the District identified a certified arborist to map the trees and create a plan to ensure tree protection? Have construction zones been identified and delineated to manage the construction process? He asks how the School District plans to address controlling damage to the substantial trees. Has traffic data been gathered and a traffic plan created? He asks how the plans as presented prioritize protecting green space in the neighborhood? Has the School District presented plans to address these matters which directly affect the community? Chris Cheraso writes that adding a playground now that will be removed later is a poor use of tax dollars. He asks that they wait until they have all of the information and plan from there. He writes that he understood from the last meeting that the design team was to look at best practices/general standards for queuing and what is presented is the existing school queuing description. He said section plans are not shown to a meaningful scale and renderings are more sketch-like. Materiality, colors, and images of plants and materials should be presented. Could the generator be positioned partially below grade? Has noise from the generator been considered? He said Ludlow School is the first of many renovations and should be given proper due diligence. Allison Lim writes she would suggest that caregivers drop-off/pick-up children in the half circle near Ludlow Road. The student unloading/loading area could be in the area in front of the fire hydrant on Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission 08/06/2024 Minutes Page 5824 Keswick Road. Staff could be incentivized to take a designated school van, car pool with at least another person, cycle or walk to school if they live in or nearby Shaker Heights. She writes that a traffic study must be done to comprehensively understand the issues around drop-off/pick-up. From resident unput, drainage concerns and muddy sidewalks must be addressed for the safety of Ludlow residents and students. She indicates she participates in the District’s Facilities Advisory Committee as well as the Recreation Strategic Planning group. She encourages the City and School to coordinate community engagement. Alison Lim, 18019 Fernway, asked to increase green space and redo the limited parking lot differently. Use the semi-circle and utilize Ludlow for stacking. Could Keswick also be used? Guidelines for pick- up and drop-off are also important to distribute for parents and caregivers. Beth Friedman-Rommell, 3029 Ludlow Road, is excited for the district pre-school at Ludlow. She is concerned with the impervious surface and the eventual playground. Could a one-way street be appropriate? Sylvester Bell, 3063 Becket Road, said the architects are not listening or taking public input. He grew up there and does not want to have there be wasted tax dollars. Colby Gallagher, 3111 Warrington Road, said all the pick-up and drop-off is designed for cars. Twenty (20) percent of other district school children arrive by walking and biking. He does not see that has been accounted for. Use the streets for parking cars. Kevin Dreyfuss-Wells, 3021 Ludlow Road, said he understands there are schedule issues. There are important elements like trees, parking and the playground area and gross motor skills area. He is concerned with the parking lot. Is this vehicle parking area design temporary? Code requires no on- site parking with the amount of street parking available. They need to allow for additional planting. This is a pre-school building. It has been submitted as a primary school. A child day care use requires a Conditional Use Permit. The permit for the interior work should go forward and allow the site work to be comprehensively studied. Susan Rotatori, 3169 Ludlow Road, said the school was closed and now it is promised with a playground. She has waited 37 years for this change. Richard Cissell, architect, said nothing has changed but kicking the playground design down the road. The amount of process needed for this design concerns him. This is the precedent for future school work. He is sympathetic to their schedule. Marika Emerson, 2994 Ludlow Road, said Shaker is a treasure and thanks the Board for concerns and appropriate efforts. One-way street traffic is OK with her. Leah Markowitz, 3542 Townley Road, said she and her children have tried almost all of the pick-up and drop-off styles at various schools. The pick-up/drop-off procedure is not the reason to decide on which school to attend. Sara Schiavoni, 2940 Morely Road, reiterated that there needs to be room for the ball fields to work. They could approve the utility variances so the interior construction can begin. The City should not Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission 08/06/2024 Minutes Page 5825 be rushed on the rest of the design. The exterior design should continue to get arborist input so the playground and parking lot design can be figured out. Mayor Weiss said the only variances required for interior construction seems to be for the utility enclosure and location. Mr. Gruber said Mr. Dreyfuss-Wells did submit an appeal of the determination that the pre- Kindergarten use is a primary school. That will be decided at a future meeting and does not impact the variance considered at this meeting. There are no variances under consideration for the interior or the parking lot. A piecemeal, or one step at a time approval is up to the City Planning Commission. There is precedent for approving a partial plan and continuing to review other aspects of the plan later. Mayor Weiss indicated this case is similar to another applicant on this agenda who has returned for further review after 2 years. Mr. Russell asked the height of the existing gas house building. Mr. Rodebaugh said he does not know the exact height, but it is about the same height as the proposed 8 foot tall wall. Mr. Malone said he agrees the location of the utility and screen wall is appropriate. He agrees with the Mayor on partial approval. He asked for additional information on how stacking is in other preschool locations including how pick-up works. He suggested the southeast front yard as a location for the future community playground. Dr. Ganning said she agrees to focus on the gas house and supports these variances. She thanked the residents for their input. Where should cars go and impatient adults will not all wait in the drop-off line. She asked about the pick-up procedure. She remembers going into the classroom for pick-up. Mr. Russell said he supports the variance for the dumpster/generator enclosure and the height of the wall. Mr. Boyle said he also supports these variances as well. Ms. Braverman asked if they are ready to give feedback to the Architectural Board of Review regarding pick-up and drop-off procedure and the entry. Mr. Boyle said he is not ready. More information is needed. Mayor Weiss said he supports splitting up the variance requests. They can then make progress on the interior building renovation. He is more worried about the Keswick Road trees. There are issues with the ball field area and the parking lot. He agrees the Southington Road front yard could be a location for the community playground. Balance needs to be attained with all these elements on site. The school is important and he is confident the design will get there. Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission 08/06/2024 Minutes Page 5826 It was moved by Mr. Russell and seconded by Mr. Boyle to approve the request for the dumpster/generator utility enclosure to be in the Ludlow front yard and for the enclosure wall height and location based on the findings of fact and conclusions of law as set forth in the Action Sheet. Roll Call: Ayes: Weiss, Malone, Boyle, Ganning, Russell Nays: None Motion Carried The Board continued the variance for the playground location and fence. Request additional information regarding the pick-up and drop-off procedure. * * * * #2262. BR KNEZ – 3558 HILDANA ROAD: A Public Hearing was held on the request of Gillian Hall, BR Knez Construction, 3558 Hildana Road, to the City Planning Commission for site plan review for a new single-family house. The applicant proposes to construct a new three bedroom house on this vacant lot, with a two-car detached garage located at the rear of the lot. The house will have an open floor plan with a front porch and basement. The property is 45 feet by 159 feet and 7,155 square feet which meets code requirements for a single-family house lot in the TF-Two Family Residential zoning district. All location and setback requirements are code conforming. Site plan review is required for all new houses. Mr. Feinstein showed pictures of the site. He stated this is a request for site plan review for a new house on this vacant city-owned lot. The applicant proposes a new single-family house with a detached 2-car garage. The 3 bedroom 1,800 square foot house meets the location and setback requirements in the SF- 3 Single Family Residential zoning district. The applicant has a Development and Use Agreement with the city to build on the lot. The applicant has developed several other similar houses on Ludgate Road. The Architectural Board of Review approved the house design at their July 1, 2023 meeting. Staff supports the request with the conditions of tree protection fencing and utility realignment to protect the existing street tree. Gillian Hall, BR Knez, said they have worked with the City to build other homes. They have built and sold 6 homes on Ludgate Road. This house is pre-sold. The air conditioning condenser is screened with lattice. They have moved the house 8 feet to the 40 foot front setback for the foundation. They will fence off the tree and work to minimize the impact of construction on the tree. The Architectural Board of Review approved the house design. Dr. Ganning asked where the air conditioning unit is located and how will it be screened. Ms. Hall showed the location and said it is proposed to be screened with lattice that matches the lower porch lattice. Mayor Weiss opened the Public Hearing. Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission 08/06/2024 Minutes Page 5827 Vicki Elder, 3557 Hildana Road, said she lives directly across the street. She is excited to see new construction and looks forward to meeting new neighbors. She has enjoyed the house design on Ludgate Road. Does the porch need to be enlarged to go with the wider porches on the neighboring houses? Ms. Hall said the houses next door are wider. Their house is 25 feet wide. Their porch is sized in relation to their house. Ms. Braverman said a former board member made a change to deepen the porch on this house design. Ms. Hall said the porch was 6 feet deep and is now expanded to 8 feet. They need to keep it affordable and allow aging in place in this neighborhood. It was moved by Mr. Boyle and seconded by Mr. Russell to approve the request based on the findings of fact and conclusions of law as set forth in the Action Sheet with the following conditions: 1. Tree protection fencing is installed for the tree lawn tree before construction; and 2. Utility lines are installed so as to reduce the impact on the tree lawn tree. Roll Call: Ayes: Weiss, Malone, Boyle, Ganning, Russell Nays: None Motion Carried * * * * #2178. HATHAWAY BROWN LOWER SCHOOL – 19600 NORTH PARK BOULEVARD: A continuation of a Public Hearing was held on the request of Dr. Fran Bisselle, Hathaway Brown School, 19600 North Park Boulevard, to the Board of Zoning Appeals and City Planning Commission for variances in order to redesign and reconstruct the playground. The applicant was approved in 2022 to renovate the early childhood and primary school wing of the building facing Courtland Boulevard including an addition on the southern end of the building. The review of the new playground was continued at that meeting. The applicant now proposes to extend a new 4-foot tall black mesh fence along South Park Boulevard. The fencing is proposed to be located 10 feet behind the South Park Boulevard sidewalk and existing landscaping. The code restricts fencing in the front yard of this Institutional property to be set back two thirds of the required 75 foot setback, which is 50 feet from the sidewalk in this instance. The playground area is proposed to be redesigned including three (3) play structures within the 75-foot required front yard building setback from Courtland Boulevard. Code does not permit recreational structures in the front yard. Mr. Feinstein showed pictures of the site. He stated this is a continuation of a review of the playground redesign and reconstruction. The application was approved for an addition to the primary school wing with the playground being continued for more information. The building is substantially built and they are now presenting the playground design. Three play structures are proposed within the 75 foot front yard setback from Courtland Boulevard. Code requires the structures not be within that front yard. The structures are just over 60 feet from the sidewalk. A new fence is proposed along South Park Boulevard Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission 08/06/2024 Minutes Page 5828 to continue the Courtland Boulevard fence and enclose the playground. The 4 foot tall black wire mesh fence is proposed 10 feet behind the South Park Boulevard sidewalk with landscaping hiding it from view. Code requires a setback of 50 feet. The Architectural Board of Review approved the general playground design and the storage structures proposed on site. Staff supports the request. Dr. Fran Bisselle, Hathaway Brown, said the new playground is in essentially the same place as the existing playground. They hope to increase the use of the area and keep the natural landscape. The community uses the playground after hours. Two year old children can run, so they need a fence to keep them off of South Park Boulevard. Mayor Weiss asked how the fence terminates at the South Park Boulevard corner. David Zenk, Gund Architects, said the perimeter fence is located 10 feet inside the sidewalk and terminates into the athletic field drainage area. Dr. Ganning asked about the black mesh material for the fence. Dr. Bisselle said the black mesh is transparent. It is intended to view the landscaping through it. Uma Sekar, landscape architect with Arcadis, said it is 85.5 percent transparent. There will be vegetation in front and behind the fence so as to make it invisible. Mr. Malone said this is an impressive playground design. How can the community access it? Is a gate left open? Dr. Bisselle said for 20 years the playground has been shared with neighboring residents after school hours. The gate is open. Mr. Malone asked if trees will be removed. Dr. Bisselle said trees were removed with the addition and are now being replaced. They will not remove any additional trees. Mayor Weiss opened the Public Hearing. Keith Kerman, 2760 Chesterton Road, said this is a great addition for the school and the city and he supports the request. Mr. Feinstein highlighted an email received from Diane Banyard, 2761 Sherbrook Road, who supports the variances, saying the site drawings demonstrate Hathaway Brown’s commitment to the neighborhood and to the educational goals of the school. Mayor Weiss asked about the two variance requests. Mr. Feinstein said one variance is for the fence location to be closer than 50 feet to South Park Boulevard and there are three play structures that are closer than the 75 foot setback to Courtland Boulevard. Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission 08/06/2024 Minutes Page 5829 It was moved by Mr. Boyle and seconded by Mr. Russell to approve the request based on the findings of fact and conclusions of law as set forth in the Action Sheet. Roll Call: Ayes: Weiss, Malone, Boyle, Ganning, Russell Nays: None Motion Carried * * * * 17300 VAN AKEN BOULEVARD – EAST VIEW UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST – LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION: A consideration of a request by the Landmark Commission to the City Planning Commission was reviewed of a Local Landmark Designation Report. The City Planning Commission will review and provide a recommendation of the proposed designation of 17300 Van Aken Boulevard as a local landmark. The Church, built in 1934, is now home to East View United Church of Christ at the corner of Van Aken Boulevard and Winslow Road. The City Planning Commission is responsible for reviewing the effect of the proposed designation upon the surrounding neighborhood and any other planning considerations. Within 45 days of receiving a response from the City Planning Commission, the Landmark Commission is required to schedule and hold a public hearing regarding the proposed designation. The recommendation would then be forwarded to City Council for consideration. Mr. Feinstein showed pictures of the site. He stated this is a request for review and recommendation of the proposed designation of East View United Church of Christ as a local historic landmark. The Landmark Commission recommended consideration of the designation at their June 26 meeting. The designation process requires City Planning Commission review for any effect on the neighborhood and any other planning consideration. The Cleveland Restoration Society wrote a designation report for the church. The designation process includes this review by the City Planning Commission, a Public Hearing by the Landmark Commission and Council action. Staff supports the designation and does not find a positive effect on the neighborhood and no interference with any planning considerations. Anna Mates, Planner, said she is staff to the Landmark Commission. She provided background information on 17300 Van Aken Boulevard and reviewed the designation criteria met by the proposed landmark building. The church, now home to East View United Church of Christ was designed by architect Junior W. Everhard and constructed in four phases over a period of nearly 30 years, beginning during the Great Depression. The sizeable brick building, which occupies an entire ‘island’ block between three streets, features prominent classical characteristics and details in white, such as a front portico with four Tuscan columns, Palladian windows that line the sanctuary, and a large tower at the rear corner of the sanctuary. In the late 1950’s and early 1960s, church leadership and a small number of congregants became interested in Civil Rights issues and local housing integration issues that Shaker Heights was facing. Some church members organized a visit from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., in 1965. Dr. King’s appearance at the church was only his second appearance in a Cleveland suburb. It drew major opposition from a large group of the Heights congregation. Unwelcome inside the sanctuary, Dr. King spoke on the church porch to a crowd of thousands on July 28th, 1965. Dr. King’s visit to the church has impacted the Shaker Heights Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission 08/06/2024 Minutes Page 5830 community and the legacy of the church and its value in a diverse community. Pastor Jeremy Wanton and the current East View congregation are seeking Landmark status because they appreciate the legacy of the building and the important event that took place on its grounds when Dr. Martin Luther King came to speak. The criteria for designating a landmark or local landmark district are set forth in Section 1213.10 (A)(5) of the Codified Ordinance of the City of Shaker Heights. A proposed landmark or landmark district must meet one or more of ten criteria in order to be recommended for designation. East View United Church of Christ, at 17300 Van Aken Boulevard, meets five (5) of the ten possible designation criteria because it is the site of a historic event which contributed to the legacy of the former Heights Christian Church, which is now East View United Church of Christ, and the congregation and the community made an impact on the social, cultural, and historic heritage of the City. The 5 criteria met by the proposed landmark building are: 1. Its character, interest or value as part of the development, heritage or cultural characteristics of the City of Shaker Heights, the State of Ohio, or the United States. 2. Its location as a site of a significant historic event. 3. Its identification with a person or persons who significantly contribute to the culture and development of the city. 4. Its exemplification of the cultural, economic, social, or historic heritage of the city. The City of Shaker Heights is home to a National Register District called the Shaker Village Historic District, which encompasses 75% of the city. There are also four national register landmarks in Shaker Heights. Local designations made by the City include two local historic districts - the Shaker Square Historic District and the Winslow Road Historic District – and 46 local landmark designations. East View United Church of Christ is located within the Winslow Road Historic District and if designated a local landmark, it will become the 47th local landmark in the city. It is already subject to design review by the Landmark Commission because of its location within the City’s local historic district. A local landmark it would continue to adhere to the Landmark Commission Design Guidelines which are based on the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. The Landmark Commission supports this designation Mayor Weiss said he supports the review. He knows the Pastor is enthusiastic about the prospect of Landmark designation. Mr. Malone said this building and property are certainly worthy of designation. Mayor Weiss said he recommends approval be considered further. It was moved by Mr. Russell and seconded by Dr. Ganning to recommend continued consideration of the designation by the Landmark Commission since the project has a positive effect on the neighborhood and does not interfere with any other planning considerations. Roll Call: Ayes: Weiss, Malone, Boyle, Ganning, Russell Nays: None Motion Carried * * * * Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission 08/06/2024 Minutes Page 5831 There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next meeting will be September 3, 2024. _________________________________ _________________________________ David E. Weiss, Chair Daniel Feinstein, Secretary Board of Zoning Appeals Board of Zoning Appeals City Planning Commission City Planning Commission Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission 08/06/2024 Minutes Page 5832