TO: City of Shaker Heights, Ohio
FROM: Sean Suder, ZoneCo Todd Kinskey, ZoneCo
DATE: April 25, 2025
RE: City of Shaker Heights, Ohio, Lee Road District Zoning Analysis with Recommendations
This memorandum provides options and recommendations for a proposed zoning framework for the Lee Road corridor between Van Aken – Library - Chagrin Boulevard to the southern municipal corporation line (the “Lee Road Project Area”) It assesses how the existing zoning in the Lee Road Project Area impacts the city’s ability to effectuate the strategic actions related to zoning & land use in the Lee Road Action Plan (the “Plan”).1 This analysis informs proposed zoning options for the Lee Road Project Area along with the area along Chagrin Boulevard and the west municipal corporation line (the “Chagrin Area”). Once a zoning structure is determined, specific standards can be calibrated to implement the Plan’s recommendations.
Analysis:
For purposes of the Plan, the Lee Road Project Area has been divided into north-south segments: (a) Van Aken – Library – Chagrin; (b) Chagrin – Lomond; (c) Lomond – Scottsdale; and (d) Scottsdale – Walden. For purposes of this memorandum, the study area is separated into two components: (i) the Lee Road Project Area; and (ii) the Chagrin Area. This memorandum primarily focuses on the Lee Road Project Area but also includes some options and recommendations for the Chagrin Area.
The following summarizes the private properties within the Lee Road Project Area:
• There are approximately 60 parcels within the Lee Road Project Area. Approximately 23 parcels are located on the west side of Lee Road (39%) and approximately 37 parcels are located on the east side (61%).
• The average parcel area on the west side of Lee Road is approximately 43,750 square feet (~1 acre). The average parcel area on the east side of Lee Road is approximately 7,000 square feet (~1/6 acre).
• The average depth of a parcel on the west side of Lee Road is approximately 350 feet. The average depth of a parcel on the east side of Lee Road is approximately 140 feet.
1 Plan at p. 98.
• The average frontage of a parcel on the west side of Lee Road is approximately 125 feet. The average frontage of a parcel on the east side of Lee Road is approximately 50 feet.
In summary, lots on the west side are average six times larger than lots on the east side and the size of existing buildings located on the west parcels are scaled accordingly.
Upon a review of existing lot dimensions and development patterns, the north-south orientation of the Lee Road Project Area is less meaningful to the future zoning framework than the east-west distinctions. Lot dimensions are determinative of development patterns. Building width, depth, location, along with location and extent of parking, opportunities for open space, landscaping and buffering, and opportunities for amenities are all determined by lot dimensions. Currently, buildings along the west side of Lee Road are situated along the street right-of-way with parking in the side or rear of the parcel. This configuration creates substantial distance between the buildings and the adjacent residences to the west. Buildings along the east side of Lee Road are set back further from the street right-of-way with parking primarily in the front of the parcel. This condition leaves little room between the building and the adjacent residences to the east.
Form-based or hybrid zoning relies heavily on determinations of building location, scale, and massing. In addition to parcel sizes and dimensions, the scale, mass, and location of adjacent buildings, the dimensions of abutting public rights-of-way, and the location of public amenities such as parks, plazas, and other open spaces, all influence the zoning standards.
The following variables will determine the future built environment within the Lee Road Project Area
Frontages and Building Location:
The existing Lee Road curb-to-curb width ranges from 72 feet at its widest to 48 feet at its narrowest.2 The planned curb-to-curb width along the Lee Road Project Area will generally be approximately 34 feet.3 The overall right-of-way, including travel lanes, planting strips, cycle track, amenity zone/planting strips, and sidewalks will be approximately 80 feet in width.4 There will be 16 feet of open space buffer between the front of a building at the right-of-way line and the edge of the travel lane on one side of the street, and a 31-foot open space buffer between the front of a building at the right-of-way line and the edge of the travel line on the other side of the street.5
The Plan depicts new buildings as wider than they are deep and located on the right-of-way line. This configuration relegates parking primarily to the rear of the building or in limited cases to the side of the
2 Plan at p. 22.
3 Plan at p. 68.
4 Id.
5 Id,
building.6 (Rear yard setbacks necessary to accommodate parking will be addressed under the heading “rear yards” below.) Because parking will be at the rear or side of a building, there is no need to require any front yard setbacks. Rather, in furtherance of the city’s interest in creating a vibrant walkable district, the zoning code could require that at least 75% of the front building façade be built to the right-of-way line. This is a “build to” line rather than the more common setback, or “build from” line. Allowing up to 25% of the façade to be set back from the right-of-way line will allow for facade articulation and additional areas for amenities such as outdoor dining and seating
Side Yards
The Plan depicts new buildings in horizontal rows attached by party walls at parcel lines 7 To accomplish this development pattern, side yard space will have to be maintained at certain intervals for vehicular and pedestrian access to rear yard parking. This pattern is only possible if parking is shared by way of cross access and shared parking easements. If not, then each parcel will require a side yard setback on at least one side of the property wide enough to allow access to rear yard parking.
For new buildings, shared parking should be required so that a continuous street wall along the right-ofway can be established for a minimum distance of 150 to 200 feet. This distance assumes an amount of seven to ten, 20-foot-wide storefronts. For comparison, the uninterrupted building street wall at Shaker Square on Chagrin Boulevard (across from Heinen’s) consists of six buildings and is 377 feet in length. If a side yard setback is desired, it should be at least 12 feet in width to comfortably accommodate a vehicular travel lane between buildings. Rather than requiring any side yard setbacks, the city could simply allow a side yard setback up to 15 feet in width where necessary to accommodate a vehicular drive.
The following compares the current zoning districts within the Lee Road Project Area to those offered for consideration herein:
Side Yard Setback CM Commercial Mixed Use C3 General Business For Consideration
Minimum 0’ 1/3 height of principal building, or 5’; abutting residential then 20’ + 10’ buffer + 6’ high wall
6 Plan at p. 67.
7 Id.
None, but if provided, not less than 12’
Maximum 1/3 height of the principal building
Rear Yards
None If provided, then not greater than 15’
In the context of a commercial corridor adjacent to single-family residential uses, the rear yard is an opportunity for open space buffering albeit in the form of parking rather than greenspace. The following are minimum dimensional standards to accommodate rear yard parking:
Parking Type:
One row of parking, one-way drive aisle
One row of parking, two-way drive aisle
Two rows of parking, one-way drive aisle
Two rows of parking, two-way drive aisle
Total Depth of Parking With Lot Line Buffer (10’)
Total Depth of Parking Without Lot Line Buffer
There is ample room for rear yard parking on most of the parcels located on the west side of Lee Road. The east side lots are shallower and accommodating on-site parking will leave approximately 80 to 100 feet for a building to be located in the front portion of the parcel. This should be ample room for a smallto-medium-size building, which generally have the following range of dimensions:
• Width: 20 to 60 feet
• Depth: 40 to 100 feet
These dimensions allow for both commercial use on the ground floor and residential units above, promoting walkability and density without overwhelming the neighborhood.
For west side parcels, the depth of the parcels will allow for much larger buildings that can accommodate additional amenities like open space, swimming pools, sports courts, structured parking, etc
Rear Yard Setback CM Commercial Mixed Use
Minimum 20’ or abutting residential districts 40’ + 20’ landscape buffer + 6’ wall
C3 General Business For Consideration
20’ or abutting residential districts 40’ + 20’ landscape buffer + 6’ high wall 32’
Maximum 1/3 height of the principal building None None
Height, Scale, and Massing:
If buildings are allowed, or required, to be located on the right-of-way line, then an appropriate maximum height for buildings along the corridor should be approximately 80-85 feet to achieve a pedestrian-friendly 1:1 ratio to accommodate up to seven stories above grade. Building heights may be varied for visual interest and may be stepped down from the right-of-way line toward the adjacent residences.
Building Height CM Commercial Mixed Use
Minimum 2 stories
Maximum Per figures in Zoning Code; compatible with surroundings and per site plan
C3 General Business Proposed
None Lesser of 35’ or 2.50 stories + 10’ for rooftop mechanical equipment
Lesser of 35’ or 2.50 stories + up to 10’ for rooftop mechanical equipment
Greater of 7 stories or 85’
Use Mix
Ground floor uses will determine the street life along the corridor. While many will still access these uses by automobile, the planned improvements to the right-of-way will allow for greater access by bicycle, on foot, and by other means of personal mobility
Currently, the permitted uses in the C3 Business Commercial District are not broad enough to allow for the desired mix of uses in the Plan. For example, restaurant uses are not currently permitted as of right or conditionally. The mix of permitted uses in the CM Commercial Mixed Use District are much broader and allow for more as-of-right uses that are in line with the Plan. Some of the existing conditional uses may be recharacterized as permitted uses to achieve the desired use mix in the Plan.
The Plan calls for upper stories to be residential. The C3 zoning district does not allow for such uses. The CM zoning district specifically allows for upper-story residential uses. Not all buildings should have ground floor retail or commercial space. As such, it is important to allow for a mix of uses, including residential uses, on the ground floor.
Generally, with modifications, the CM zoning district’s uses are more in line with the Plan for the Lee Road Project Area.
Zoning Approaches:
Based on our review of the existing zoning districts within the Lee Road Project Area, namely the CM and C3 districts, we conclude that the C3 zoning district as currently written will not allow for the implementation of the recommendations in the Plan. Based on our review of the current zoning map, the C3 district is only mapped in the Lee Road Project Area and is not mapped elsewhere in the city. Modifying the C3 zoning district would have few, if any, impacts on parcels elsewhere in the city.
The CM district is mapped in portions of the Lee Road Project Area and is also mapped in other areas of the city such as the Van Aken District. This district is more closely aligned with the Plan implementation than the C3 district; however, we do not recommend amending the CM district as it could create nonconformities elsewhere in the city.
Additionally, there is currently a PUD district overlaying the Lee Road Project Area. We recommend eliminating the PUD overlay district as it could allow for unintended results if the new base zoning is bypassed. The following provides options for zoning approaches for the Lee Road Project Area:
Options for Lee Road Project Area:
The following four options relate to the zoning for the Lee Road Project Area:
• Option 1 – Rezone all parcels in the Lee Road Project Area to a new zoning district specific to the Lee Road Project Area. This approach would allow all C3 and CM zoning to be replaced with a custom-calibrated set of regulations for the entire Lee Road Project Area. The downside is that the parcels are not homogenous throughout the Lee Road Project Area as the east and west parcels are of a different size and configuration. This will make it challenging to establish a singular set of standards for the various conditions in the Lee Road Project Area.
• Option 2 – Establish a new zoning district specific to the Lee Road Project Area with two sub-areas: (a) Gateway West; and (b) Gateway East to account for the distinct development patterns on each side of Lee Road. This would allow for the creation of a single new zoning district with two distinct sets of regulations custom-tailored to the unique development patterns on each side of the street.
• Option 3 – Establish two new zoning districts; one for the east and one for the west of Lee Road This would allow for the Lee Road Project Area to be treated differently depending on the location of a parcel but would create unnecessary complexity considering that the same ends could be achieved through more efficient means – see Option 2.
• Option 4 – Establish subareas in the existing CM zoning district specific to the various conditions in the Lee Road Project Area. This could cause confusion and added complexity to the existing CM zoning district but would avoid the creation of a new zoning district.
Options for the Chagrin Area:
• Option 1 – Maintain the C3 zoning district where it is currently mapped in the Chagrin Area and modify it to reflect the desired development outcomes. This approach maintains the C3 zoning district in the event that it is eliminated from the Lee Road Area.
• Option 2 – Rezone all C3 zoned parcels within the Chagrin Area to a CM district, which allows for a more pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use environment. This would be the
simplest option if the CM as currently written reflects the desired development patterns within the Chagrin Area.
• Option 3 – Rezone all C3 zoned parcels within the Chagrin Area to a new district created for the Lee Road Project Area. Chagrin Boulevard is not planned for the right-of-way improvements that are planned for the Lee Road Project Area. As such, a new zoning district for the Lee Road Project Area would not be calibrated properly to the Chagrin Area.
Recommendations:
Based on our review of the Plan, the existing zoning, our site visit in April 2025, and discussions with Planning staff, for the Lee Road Project Area we recommend Option 2 – establish a new zoning district for the Lee Road south gateway that replaces the C3 district and the CM district in the Lee Road Project Area. The new district could be designated as the LRM – Lee Road Mixed District or the LRG – Lee Road Gateway District.
Option 2 would result in the elimination of the C3 district in favor of a new district customized for the Lee Road Project Area. It would also allow the CM district to remain unmodified and not affect other properties in the city currently within a CM district. A new district specific to Lee Road would include building location, form, and use standards that are custom calibrated to the desired outcomes in the Plan.
With respect to the Chagrin Area, we recommend Option 2 – rezone all parcels within the Chagrin Area to a CM district. The benefits of the CM district are well known, will provide benefits irrespective of the existing right-of-way configuration, and will require the least recalibration.
Thank you for your review of this memorandum. We look forward to discussing this further with you at your earliest convenience.
.