Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

2025 planning commission meeting. Second. Motion and a second. Favor. All right. All right. Motion carries. Next item of business is 2025-22 fine platin drainage for the Red Bud Ridge. And I will send back to staff a report. Good morning. Good morning.

So, we've seen this project a few times here at Planning Commission. Um, so I'll just give a brief update. This is the property located at David and Ohio. It is 4.4 acres. It is currently zoned R3 now. The reasonzoning request made it through planning commission and city council. So, it is zoned R3. Um, this is a motion for the final plat and drainage. And I will say there haven't been any significant changes to the plat or drainage since your prelim review back in October. Um, if the planning commission makes a recommendation of approval today, I we are planning to take it to city council for final approval on Monday, December 15th. So, we're going to have a really quick turnaround. Um, and that's because we don't have any protest waiting periods in between. Sometimes we have a 14-day window um for protest and that is not required during the platting process. So, we're able to turn it around quickly and get it to council on Monday. Um, so I will stand for any questions. The developers here with their engineer as well um if you guys have any questions. Otherwise, I'd recommend um approving this and forwarding that recommendation to city council. Um, I'll make one comment on there just because uh Jake wanted to let me know. I know Jake Mccclure is not here today, but he did review it and said he didn't see any issues with it at all.

Thank you. Now, you made a comment. You said no, there weren't any significant changes. What changes would have been then? The only comments I had back to the engineer were some wording in the owner certificates about the reserves. So, it's just um we like to put wording in there to where if the city has to step in and do any maintenance on those reserves and that that charge can be charged back to the property owners. So, usually we do that as like through the abatement process. This just gives us I don't know some more legal wording on the front. Um, so those were the only changes I had.

Oh, it's just a motion and then Okay. To approve the final plat 20 2025-22 approval of the final flat and drainage red. Where is it? Red Bud Ridge. You know what to cut this case. It's It's not Monday, but it's close to it. Second that. I just did. Okay. I have a motion and a second. All in favor? I. All right. Motion carries. You said 12:15. Is that when it goes to

Yes, it'll be Monday 12:15. All right. At this time, um, I need a motion to adjourn on the planning commission so that I can open up the board of zoning appeals. Make a motion to adjourn on the planning commission. I'll second. All right. Everybody in favor? I motion carries. Okay. Okay, at this time I will open up the board of zoning appeals and we will look at a sign variance request for Dillan's and I will turn it back to staff for report on that.

All right. Thank you, commission. Um so the background uh the Dylan's property has a uh sign request in um I think Kim's got the dimensions up there for a sign of 122 square ft. Uh the property is zoned C2 local commercial and that zoning has a maximum sign size of 32 square feet. Uh a sign had previously been installed in the location um that had a sign face of approximately 40 square ft. Um through this process staff noticed that the sign has actually already been installed onto the building. Um so I contacted the applicant who indicated to me that he was not aware that that had actually happened. Um so asked him if he would like to uh contact Dylan's to get a sign that would comply with current regulations or pursue a variance. Um they indicated that they would like to pursue the variance angle. Um for zoning compatibility uh these types of signs are allowed in C2 zones. Uh for non-residential primary use lots signs are restricted to a maximum sign face size of 32 square ft. Uh, properties to the north have commercial uh, primary uses. Properties to the east have residential use. Uh, to the south are a mix of commercial and residential use, and properties to the west have residential use. Uh, I only received one phone call uh, in response to the public notification letters. Um once the caller found out that the um request was simply about the sign size, he indicated he didn't really have any concerns. Public notification letters were mailed out on November 20th of 2025 to properties within 200 ft of 1510 North Ohio and the notification was posted to

the city's website on the same day. the property or excuse me, the um commission is authorized um to review and grant variances uh to the zoning regulations um including uh dimensional assigned provisions and this request uh this requested variance falls within this category. Uh the board is empowered to impose certain conditions or require certain guarantees upon the granting of the variance. Um do okay I was okay so the findings of facts um is variance unique to the property in question uh property is commercially zoned and currently has a legal non-conforming sign that exceeds the maximum allowable sign size in our current regulations. The legal non-conforming sign is the primary Dylan sign and was installed in 2009. It is a sign face of 76.5 square ft. The pharmacy sign being replaced was also installed in 2009 and was 40 square feet in size. The previous zoning regulations did not speak to a specific maximum size face for building wall signs except that they may not exceed four square ft per foot of leased building frontage for this property in question. This would equate to roughly 600 square ft. Under typical circumstances, the setbacks for commercial buildings in a C2 zone would not impair the visibility of a building wall sign facing the street. However, in this case, the pre-existing building setback from the road creates an impairment to the ability of the sign to be readily legible from the intended roadways. Staff finds this to be unique to the property. Is the variance ordinarily found in the same zoning district? Variances to dimensional sign provisions are found in the same zoning district. However, the property is uniquely situated at the corner of two arterial roads and the building is set back further than most

commercial properties. The building face is approximately 300 feet from the street whereas most other C2z zoned commercial buildings along Ohio are approximately 80 to 100 ft from the roadway. Uh the increased building setback makes the maximum sign size of 32 square ft less noticeable than that of buildings that are set closer to the street. These conditions make the requested variant specific to this site and not generally applicable to other C2 properties. Uh is the need for a variance request or or in variance created by an action of the property owners or applicant? The subject property has been developed since 1974. The property to the north was developed in 1980. The building was developed and designed with the regulations that were in place at that time. In 2020, the city overhauled its zoning regulations, which significantly reduced the maximum sign size of a wall sign that the property could install. As a result, the need for a variance is not the result of the applicant's actions. The request is intended to allow a reasonable adjustment of sign size while minimizing potential impacts on neighboring properties. Will the granting of the variance adversely affect the rights of adjacent property owners or residents? Sign size regulations are intended to guide traffic, minimize safety hazards, prevent excessive and confusing signs, and to protect protect public and private investments, and promote aesthetic consistency. Subject property has supported commercial development since 1974 without adverse effects on adjacent property owners or residents. The proposed sign size is consistent with signs already in place and generally aderes to the characteristic of the property and surrounding properties. Based on this, staff finds that the request is not expected to negatively impact the rights of nearby property owners or residents. Approval of the variance is not anticipated to harm the public good, provided that conditions are applied. Recommended conditions include limiting the number

of signs that exceed the current maximum sign face. With this measure in place, the property would be able to add a contextually appropriate sign while limiting the potential for excessive signage at a busy intersection. Will strict application of the provisions of these regulations constitute unnecessary hardship upon the property owner represented in the application? Uh yes, a hardship exists due to the building setback from the road and the change in sign regulations that occurred in 2020. The proposed sign is intended to help direct vehicular traffic on the property to the pharmacy drive-thru. Restricting the maximum sign size will negatively impact the ability of the property to safely direct vehicular traffic. Strict application of the regulations would therefore impose an unnecessary hardship by forcing the property to install signs that are too small contextually and be ineffective at guiding vehicle traffic. Do the reg requested variance oppose the general spirit and intent of these regulations? The proposed variance enables reasonable signage on commercial property on which the building is set back significantly from the street frontage it faces. With the condition, staff finds the proposal remains consistent with the declared intent of the signed regulations. And we have um some visual examples of the we call it proposed sign that's currently on there as well as pictures to kind of compare what was there previously to what is there now. Um so this photo that we have here or this sketch that we have here is the proposed um sign uh that we received as part of the application. So they sent the sketches. Um on this next slide here um I went out and took some photos of the actual sign that they've put up to kind of give you

a visual from that. Uh the top photo is um taken uh facing east on Kelly and the bottom photo is facing north on Ohio. Um as you can see that pickup, forgive my phone's pixel quality there. Um but the uh pickup pharmacy drive-thru uh language there is is fairly legible from the from those distances. Um, I dug into uh the previous sign uh found the previous application uh dimension drawings and um dug into Google Earth to find old photos taken from approximately the same locations. Uh so we can see kind of a comparison of the visibility from the previous sign to what is currently on there. You guys have any questions for staff before I open the public hearing? I need to open that, right?

Yes. Okay. At this time, I will open the public hearing. If anybody has any comments, they want to come up to the podium and talk about it. Sure. Can discuss. Okay.

Eric Grooms, 2500 Lake Point Court. I I just had a question or point of clarification how this differs or comparing and contrasting this to the Cambino's issue um and using a variance opposed to an amendment um to the regs. I I was just curious seems like they're similar in a lot of ways. Um they're both going to face an arterial street. I and my other question was is this treated as a strip center? So, does this sign impact the overall signage then that can be contained within that complex? So, uh like Gambinos would have been affected had the the council not have passed the amendment. So, anyway, just I just point of information. I just want some clarification because I I looked at that case and I looked at this case and I thought, well, there's a lot of similarities here, but yet and and staff suggest at the city council meeting they did not want to use variances on signage and then we're doing a variance today. So, I'm just I was just confused and point of clarification on this.

I would say there are substantial differences. Um, first and foremost, I would not consider the Dylan building to be a multi-tenant strip center. um it's its own standalone building whereas the well I knew there were separation but they're on the same campus so I didn't know how that was treated or looked at so I think there was a need to get this in front of the board of zoning appeals because it was already up there's a lot of work that needs to be done in the sign regulations so to your point I would say this was probably the path of least resistance I just I was just curious I hate to say that but I think there's

a lot the fine regulations, like I've stated before, are like the most the largest section in our book and I like the most intricate. Um, and I don't think they work everywhere. Um, just like I mean, we have these huge buildings, right, in the commercial district and they can't have the same sign requirements as a smaller commercial building in the same area. So, that's something we need to look at. So, I I think the whole section needs to be taken apart and looked at. Yeah. I was just curious. I agree. I don't I don't like to do variances. Um I really don't like to do them, but they seem to be very common now because nothing's fitting into the box.

Um and since the sign was already up, it was just easiest to kind of go this route for it. And it wasn't with the multi-tenant strip center that was a shorter conversation to have um with the board of zoning appeals, the planning commission, and the city council if we're looking at sign require like the size requirements and the whole district. That's going to be a more intensive and probably multimemeating conversation that we'll have to have.

Okay. Very, very good. I was just like I said, I read this and I was like, gosh, nine days ago, we just, you know, we s we just, you know, went on record. We don't want to do variances of post you know as it um pertains to signs lot. So I was confused and then I didn't know again since this was one campus I mean I know it's not technically a strip center there's separation between the buildings between Dylan's and and Troy's building and then Dollar General but I didn't know if they were treated collectively and so then one sign would impact the you know like would be the case. So that would not be the case. They're platted separately. Okay. Um, so they're separate lots, so they would not be treated collectively. Okay, very good. Thank you. Thanks, Eric. Thank you.

Come to you after the fact or did somebody

I just want to know what came first, chicken?

Um, a little bit of both. Um, so they submitted their application. and I was working with um the applicant who was with the sign company themselves. Um we had to have some discussions internally uh amongst staff to kind of figure out. There were some other complicating things that we had to get um adjusted and figured out first. Um by the time staff kind of came to our uh determination on that and we're ready to proceed forward. Um, we noticed at that time that the sign was up, reached out to the applicant and informed him, hey, by the way, did you know the sign was up? Um, at which point he communicated to me, no, I didn't know that. So, that's the rough timeline there.

At this time, I will close the public hearing and then entertain a motion. recommend if you have any conversation around the findings of facts just like during a conditional use or um these are very similar to that. Yeah, I closed I closed the public. Is that what you're wanting? Yes.

Yes. Just to kind of walk through them and see if there's any comments from the board of zoning appeals. Does anybody have any comments on the findings of facts? I agree. Now we can look at a motion. Kroger company

for dimensional sign to increase the maximum size.

Second. Motion second. All in favor? I. Motion carries. All right. Next item. Um, do I need to close the the board of zoning appeals? Yes. Okay. Uh, at this time I need a motion to close the board of zoning appeals. All right. Uh, motion carries.journed. And then, um, now I need to reopen the planning commission meeting. So, now here we are again. Hi guys. Um, and we're going to look at the 2026 planning commission calendar.

Yes. So, we've drafted a 2026 planning commission calendar. What is in your packet is to keep the meetings on the second and fourth Wednesday of the month at 8:00 a.m. just like they currently are. Um, so that's what those dates are. We will need to reschedu um and meet the first meeting in November due to Veterans Day and then the second meeting in November and the second meeting in December will be cancelled due to the holidays. Um for the submission closing dates, I tried to get around 45 days prior to the planning commission meeting um to have pack to have applications submitted. Um but I reduced it to 37 because it was just adding so much time um to the overall time frame and getting a case through. Um, so by keeping the meetings the same as they are right now, the average time to get through from application to city council approval would be approximately 60 days. Um, if we did look at moving them back to the to Monday and having them on the same Monday as city council, so the first and third Monday, that would reduce your overall time frame to get through the process to 54 days. Um, but I know you don't prefer Mondays. Um, so I just wanted to throw it out there as a comparison. Um,

I thought at one point we went to once a month.

So, we did. That's also an option. Um, the reason staff brought back the two meetings a month was just so we could have some more flexibility with developers as they're submitting their documentation, like they're getting through the platting process and then in this case the PDO process. It just kept it moving a little bit faster. Um, we are one of the only municipalities of our size that has two planning commission meetings a month. Um, so most only have one. Andover has one. Elorado has one. So Derby has two. Like I said, Belair, Elorado, Park City, Valley Center, and Andover only have one. um if we don't have two meetings on the schedule, then if we did want to still accommodate some of those developments and trying to move a little bit quicker, we would have to call a special meeting. Um or we could just stick to the once a month and the packets come in and they have the schedule and we have one meeting a month.

Just my two cents. I I prefer the once a month it every at twice a month but we discussion if it's a variance for a carport or setback or something like that that that can wait. Yeah. So here every just what I call pibly, but I'm sure for whoever,

right? So my issue with having it published on the calendar then is that if they're published dates on here, then those are dates that we should be able to use. So while I agree like I want to be able to have the discretion, I also somebody like called me out and said, "Well, there's a meeting already published on that date. Unless we didn't have a quorum, um, we could reschedu it. I' I would personally almost rather have the one meeting and call a special meeting, but that's going to require some effort um from the commission to come and sign our paperwork to have those special meetings if we needed them. And it could be something when we get developments in, we create a timeline of when we're hoping those meetings will happen and when we'll get submissions. So, it's something if we're working on a development and that's what we want to have special meetings for that we could know about that in advance.

I would rather have one meeting a month. Yeah. Okay. Then I would request I will if we need a special meeting for a development I will try and schedule them on that Wednesday the fourth Wednesday of the month. So if you could just like personally kind of keep it tentative on your calendar I guess. Um that way we're not sometimes it's Monday, sometimes it's Tuesday, sometimes it like we'll just if we need a special meeting it'll be that fourth Wednesday of the month. So we could Is there more developments?

I don't have anything active right now. Um, just hopefully yes, just, you know, fingers crossed, thinking positive, throwing it out there. Okay. I would agree with Cammy. It's it's important to keep the, you know, keep the process going. And so I like the idea flexibility to call a special meeting and have concerted effort, you know, amongst the planning commission members to attend those to keep, you know, keep it moving. So, I think that's important. I think probably echo the same sentiment.

I I would agree, but maybe you put a criteria with your first special,

right? I will say on the flip side of the carports and the variances um for those approvals is that keep in mind we're working with residents of Augusta that are wanting to move forward with getting their builds done. Um so sometimes having to wait a month or a month and a half to come back before the board of zoning appeals. Um just just keep in mind we are holding them up um even longer. So well and what not might be not as important to us is very important to them.

It's very important to everyone that comes into our office. So just keep that in mind when but again the standard is one meeting a month for most municipalities. Um and honestly I can only think of one and it was right around Thanksgiving the Wednesday before Thanksgiving that we weren't going to have a quorum and we couldn't right. So, I mean, we all are very Yes. Um, what's the word? Flexible. You're not flexible. We're very We can We try our hardest to get there and to make it work.

So, I can I don't I can bring back a revised calendar for you. Um maybe if you want to make a motion that our next meeting will be January 14th. Um, and then I can bring a revised copy with the one meeting a month and include some criteria on there as well. So you can see what we'll be posting on the website. hospital, right?

Yeah. Everybody's request on that one. I think flexibility is opportunity, right? planning commission, but you're flexible. That's use some point if you're working with client. Hey, can this wait till the get in the hospital?

Yeah. I mean, I think in emergency situations, we probably already have wording where we could like um we would just bring it back like let them proceed and bring it back afterwards. Um, and we've done that on some of our cases this year to where we've tried to allow people to start with their builds to a certain point, um, or start with their groundwork or something while we're working through the administrative part and bringing stuff to this board as well, so we're not holding them up. Um, yes. Do we have to have a motion to

um, so it's not this? We've only published through 2025 for the meeting dates. So, since it's not I don't have a published I haven't published anything on the website, I would like a motion to have a meeting on January 14th. And

yes, that's good. Second. Motion second. All in favor? I. Motion carries. Any other items you want to discuss? Cammy, I have a question for you, Cammy. What's going on with the car lot that we passed? You know, we had a special meeting to get that one done because they were in big hurry and I don't see anything happening. Um, I can try and reach out to the applicants but or to Kelly. I did talk to Kelly. You talked to Kelly. The forly sign is back up there. Okay. I haven't noticed that. And and so it is those guys have backed out and one of them's wife is expecting

so that that building life circumstances that building is back up for lease. Yes. I mean that was another instance of moving fast and furious through the process and Yes. So I like you could open the car lot there, Dave. You could open the car lot there. You know, you're a car guy. It's already what I need to do. you the city council.

There was a lot of conversation from the bench um when that item went before city council, when those text amendments went before city council. Yes, we still received their paperwork though for their state licensing and filled that out for them after it was a couple weeks or a month afterwards. Um, so I completed that and gave it back to him, but then nothing materialized after that.

Any other items you need you want to discuss? No, we're trying to wind it down for the end of the year. Trying to close everything we have on our white board for this year. And uh second motion in a second to adjurnn. All in favor? All right, Ninja.