I see the pick up truck with the trailer in the left came out as a darkish blob, but it is there. Sometimes enough is enough. Going to court after hiring a PI, winning the case, then to have to continue trying to get a neighbor to be a good neighbor without relief qualifies as enough. Lots of companies to choose from in Cleveland for towing away vehicles, and they'd love to have more business. I googled and came up with these folks, but take your pick. They even have a blurb on Ohio Revised code. Bet some neighbors in the area could let you know when vehicles are  on this private property. Tow companies work 24 hours.

	M
m		m

 These folks are who I have used, and they are near by. This keeps the money in the near west side, and it a family owned business.

There are other, bigger companies to choose from.  You may need a bigger company.......

we had posted private property signs which had within a couple days been torn down

They are actually neighbors of my brother.  I had to have my car towed twice lately and both times they came to my assistance within a few minutes.  Good people.

While I was in Tremont today I drove by the Treehouse to see the property in discussion - I take it your land is what wraps around the corner Treehouse property...

I don't understand where the Treehouse has any parking - they have a building and a gated bricked patio and they have cars parked on the land to the right of the property, which I assume is TremontSoul property...

So they are in violation of even minimum code requirements, even with their current exemptions, and they are trespassing on private property and causing $1,000s in damages...

Is this correct?

Disrupt IT

You are correct in the private property issue.  I too saw the vehicles parked on tremontsouls property.  We also had patrons parking on College blocking private driveways.   The police was called after one car blocked a driveway for more than two hours and around 4:00 p.m., the police did arrive and had the thing towed away. 

The Tree house does have 10 parking spaces across the street right by the power station but that is not nearly enough to adequately take care of their patrons.  That patio you saw, there are two seperate sections.  The first section adjacent to the building is a legally permitted patio but the larger section is built in the site that was required in the variance granted by the Zoning board to be additional off street parking. 

I can tell you this, it is NOT residents or anyone in the neighborhood parking on that property.

I have had a number of meetings with Councilman Cimperman, I have been to TWDC meetings, I have written numerous articles and I have attended many hearing before the Zoning Board bringing the fact that these lawbreakers are skirting the system and should be held accountable.  I am currently in the process of gathering further information on how some of the businesses (bars/restaurants/nightclubs are favored over others.  Some of the businesses have received variances even though they clearly do not meet the standards in the best interest of the residents or are permitted to circumvent the system at the detriment of the residential citizens.

There are several members of this community who have been screaming enforcement for years but the Dept. of Building and Housing and the Zoning Board continues to hand out free passes.

Last night as well as on other occasions a member of the Zoning Board was spotted leaving a bar on Professor six sheets in the wind - the establishments he's been seen staggering out of are as guilty as others when it comes to non-compliance.   I am sure this is something he overlooks since he helps to pass out these "conditional" variances knowing full well they will not be adhered to.

Nearly every single establishment in this community has been supported by TWDC at the zoning board which is listed as evidence in the Ratified Resolutions.  Where is the code enforcer/inspectors on any of these matters?

People have dubbed me a muckrucker, a trouble maker, a hate monger and probably worse but if a poor resident who has lived in this community for most of their life or a handicapped individual IS REQUIRED to go before the zoning board and obtain a variance/permit before they can build a deck (patio) or an access ramp to their home and follow the laws, these high-end enterprises can be held just as accountable - and they shoud do it without whinning so much.

People have dubbed me a muckrucker, a trouble maker, a hate monger and probably worse but if a poor resident who has lived in this community for most of their life or a handicapped individual IS REQUIRED to go before the zoning board and obtain a variance/permit before they can build a deck (patio) or an access ramp to their home and follow the laws, these high-end enterprises can be held just as accountable - and they shoud do it without whinning so much...

AMEN sister!  AMEN!

additionally - tremont soul should take the worry right out of his/her head.

Contact a good towing company, post a sign indicating that any/all unauthorized vehicles will be TOWED.  Send a certified letter to perps advising them that they will be liable for any and all damages, contact Commander Sulzer and make a request that any vehicles parked on this property will be parked there illegally and that a request is being made that any officers patrolling the area keep an eye out for these trespassers (citations) and then just sit back an enjoy the ride.

Keep the returned receipt for the certified mail and start assessing damages. 

I'm sure the towing company will appreciate the fruits of their labor and the city should appreciate any revenue from tickets handed out.  It's a win win.

But it seems the Lenahans(owners of treehouse and tremont development group) want a rezoning/variance to expand their bar and kitchen and encroach on our property they do not even own and want the city to allow them to in essence take away a good portion of our property rights and not only create an even more congested parking situation then already exists but inessence make our property useless for any future to benefit the neighborhood or residents. When this rezoning/variance appeal was filed by them I didn't notice any block or residents input.

NOTE: Reread Mr. Gernaga's comment above and: yes we were notified only 1 week prior the hearing taking place. Isn't there a time frame that is set from asking for an appeal to actual hearing? contacted BZA only to find councilman Cimperman had postponed the hearing to June 1. and we were notified by the BZA after the fact. Tried to contact councilman Cimperman to discuss why this is on the agenda to begin with, if there is an expanded agenda and if so why aren't the property owners notified or even included in such discussions as required by due process? as of yet no response

Councilman Cimperman--you read this blog--please provide an explanation.  I am sure that Treehouse owners will try and use adverse possession to claim this property.  What justification do you see for this land grab??

While there is unauthorized use of tremont soul's property I think there is some confusion about anyone attempting to claim the property.  The kitched expansion is planned for building of 820 College Avenue.  The parking (patio) request is to make the second "already existing" patio conforming.  What they are asking is to be forgiven or exempt from the parking spaces that this "illegally existing patio" occupies.  Having this second patio (which is already built) permitted by a variance, would also add additional seating capacity and more required parking. 

With the expansion of a banquet room to the up-stairs of 820 College (Tree house) this would add to their seating capacity  and in turn be a requirement for additional parking.   (1 space for every 4 seats as well as 1 space for each employee). 

The miss-use of Tremont Soul's property has been on-going for some time and with the request to add to their seating capacity I'm sure will create more of a congestion problem and necessary space for parking which most likely will cause further miss-use of the adjacent properties.

The Zoning Board allows three postponments - 1 by the Councilperson, 1 by the Appellant and 1 by the board it'self.  We needed the 1st postponment to gather facts and fully look into the requests made by the Tree House owners.  We do not want that hearing to go forward without being prepared.

Please remember to read the appeal carefully and the rules the BZA has to follow  via the ordinances. BZA does not have the authority to grant appeals for nonconforming use in some cases.

If that is the case here, it needs to be stated and read into the record to serve as a basis for appeal of a BZA decision later. Just because it is NOT read into the record doesn't mean that it can not be appealed later, it just is helpful as they must consider it at the time that BZA considers everything else.

Question here is how many near by property owners will send letters or go to the hearing to oppose the granting of the variance? How important is this to near by owners?

Jerleen says the BZA appeal pertains to: The parking (patio) request is to make the second "already existing" patio conforming.  What they are asking is to be forgiven or exempt from the parking spaces that this "illegally existing patio" occupies. 

I am asking: Doesn't this still amount to a taking of Tremont Soul's property by undermining his future use and value of his property? 

Where are the allotted parking spaces for existing capacity to the Treehouse to be counted? 

Does the lease of St. John Cantius parking lot allow the Tree House to keep illegal patios added? 

All very confusing by design.  One standard for the right people, and no standard for others.  Counting on the average Joe giving up on how to figure out the "rules."

It amounts to trespassing on private property.  There is no way this property can be claimed by  adverse possession.  Tremont Soul pays the taxes,  has someone that keeps the grass mowed and everyone in the community knows that the owner has not abandoned the property not to mention the time doesn't run on adverse possession for 21 years.

The Tree House currently has only 10 spaces located across the street at 811 College Avenue.  These spaces are not enough to support their current seating capacity although the Zoninging Board in 2002 granted them a parking variance conditional on them providing 14 spaces.  After they were granted the parking variance, they built the second patio on the site of the four spaces connected to the first patio.

There is no lease of St. John Cantius parking lot.  They have refused to lease their lot for years due to the many problems some of these bars create.  We have been told that TWDC has recently secured the St. John Cantius lot, however, inside sources have stated that this is not so.  Cimperman and Sammy Catania recently went to the Diocese and worked out a possible contract which has been submitted to the Diocese Legal Department, however, there has been no acceptance at this time.

In the St. John Cantius church bulletin dated April 26, 2009 the following statement appeared.

 "There have been some questions raised as to why the St. John Cantius parking lot cannot be used to ease the parking issues of the neighborhood, particularly with respect to customers of restaurants and other establishments in the area.  We have consulted with the Cleveland Diocesan Legal Department regarding this matter.

First there is the issue of liability.  If the parish agreed to allow people to park in the parish parking lot, and someone was injured on the parish property and/or their vehicle was damaged or stolen, the parish and the Diocese of Cleveland might be held liable.  Second, there is the issue of maintenance.  It would be necessary for the parish to hire someone to pick up trash such as beer bottles, cups, broken glass, etc. and to hose off areas of the parking lot.  Finally, there is the issue of security.  The parish would need to hire a qualified security guard to patrol and police the parking lot.

As you can see, there are too many issues and costs associated with making the parish parking lot available for public use.  Therefore, the use of the parish parking lot is strictly limited to people attending church worship services or other parish events."

Imagine arriving for Mass on Sunday Morning, opening your car door  and having to step over the drunken puke or kick beer bottles out of your way on your way into pray.  Or having your nostrils invaded by the stench of alcoholized urine.  For those who have no problem disposing used condoms on our public streets, I can't see them having an issue with tossing them out in a church lot.  Kinda puts a damper on Sunday Brunch.

  Great explanation of the circumstances.  Can someone publish the appeal to be reviewed by the Board of Zoning Appeals on June 1st?  I am sorry--if I missed it here.

POSTPONED TO JUNE 1, 2010