Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I now call this meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. May get a roll call of members

here. Here, here and here. Uh, Mr. Hudson's gone and I don't know who's over there. Okay. Uh, moving on to approval of the agenda. Uh, I would move that the agenda be approved as printed. Support. Okay. I have a motion and a second. May I get a vote? Motion to approve the agenda. Approved. Call a roll. Robert,

yes. Miranda, yes. Yes. Edward, yes. Yes.

Agenda is approved. Moving on to the next item is the uh first hearing of the public. If anybody wish to speak, I'd ask that you uh please state your name and address if you're an East Point resident and limit it to three minutes. Being no one wants to speak uh for the hearing of the public. Moving on to the approval of last month's minutes or last meeting's minutes. and place a for place forth a motion to approve last meetings minutes as presented. Support have a motion in support. May I get a vote, please? Uh Robert,

yes. Miranda, yes. Cliff, yes. Edward, yes. And Robert, yes.

Minutes of the previous meeting are approved. Moving on to the ZBA preface. The city of East Point Zoning Board of Appeals. ZBA primarily addresses practical difficulties based on lot size, location, shape or contour and or location of existing buildings. Article 17 of the East Point zoning ordinance guides our decisions. There are seven members on a ZBA plus two alternates, five members constitutes a quorum. A majority vote of the those present and voting is required for a motion of approval or denial. Each appeal before the ZBA will first have a public hearing at which time the appellent will first present their case and then any public comments regarding that issue will follow. During this time, members of the board may ask questions of clarification. If a particular point gets belabored, the chair has right to limit comments. When the public hearing is closed, the board will move on deliberate onto the deliberation phase. If a appellant should disagree with the board's decisions, they have the right to appeal to the Mcome County Circuit Court within the time frame established by statute or ordinance. When the agenda item concludes, the applicant is welcome to leave or stay for the remainder of the meeting. Moving on to the public hearing for the specific agenda of 1 19001 9 mile sheet the variance and then we will open new business which will have uh the sheets representative appent uh stating their case

Jennifer Nicholas East Point resident um I am reading through this variance request the first question I have is there is a statement here in Sheets's response about um patrons need to see gas price decide whether to turn and safely maneuver onto a site within a distance of 180 ft. This is the minimum safe distance a consumer has to perform these tasks. Is that a city ordinance or state regulation or federal regulation? I've never heard of anything like that before. Perhaps um we could get some clarification on that. Um the issue of this is a problem that um I feel is self-created. Um Sheets put together this site plan. Um actually back in August of 2024 when it was presented to the planning commission. It looks like the monument sign was actually 11 feet away from the rightway on Nine Mile Road at that time. So, I'm not sure what happened to uh reduce that distance to, you know, 5 and 1/2 ft, which is not um in compliance with our our ordinance for monument signs. Um they speak about, you know, that their um a unique circumstance. um their property is no more unique than anyone else and their issue with them having screening for the residential neighborhood. Um that's that other other stores don't have to do in that strip mall. That's because the other stores do not have parking. They do not have a two-way drive aisle behind the store. um this particular property sheets has 16 extra parking spaces than we normally would allow there. So them

saying that the only way that they can comply with our sign ordinance is to move all of the buildings north and reduce the buffer to the residential area. I'm I'm just surprised, you know, with a this large of a company with, you know, 14 billion dollar uh net worth and 750 gas stations and a team of engineers and designers and architects and attorneys that they can't figure out some other way to have this sign meet our ordinance. And as you know, 30 seconds,

we are uh updating our master plan this year. We are trying to get everything in compliance. Um we've spoken on this before. It doesn't matter if some other business has a sign that's out of compliance. We're trying to stop that and the only way to do that is to stick with our ordinances for new businesses that are coming in here and building here. And I think it benefits the residents and the businesses too to have a more consistent community. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Mary Hall Raford East Point. I keep hearing people wanting variances for things that they apparently didn't understand to start with. I'm not sure why, but I think at some point in time, the city needs to really stop even considering these types of things when they're trying to change site plans after they've been approved. That makes no sense to me. And I think Miss Barone said it best before when she said when you move into want to start a business in city, you ought to understand the rules. And when I was reading that information earlier today, I thought once again, people don't want to abide by the rules and think they are an exception when they haven't really presented one. So, I hope that you everyone will listen accordingly and we'll do what's right. Thank you.

Is there any other members of the public wish to speak on this? Going once. Going twice. Uh, moving on. Would the appellent for sheets care to speak? Make the presentation.

Yes. Thank you. My name is Kyle Lombati of I'm from Finley, Ohio, not an East Point resident. Here on behalf of Sheets. Uh hopefully I can address some of the concerns of the citizens tonight and kind of explain where the the thought process is coming from. On a typical Sheets location, they are much larger and this is a more narrow site than we would typically be building on. And some of our stores come with a even larger services, drive-through lanes, other different amenities that would make them larger. And we're already kind of condensing down a little bit. So the narrow lot is a little difficult for the typical convenience store layout. Uh second, as you did address, there is the screening buffer required in the back, which rightfully so when there are residents involved so directly close to it, that 20 foot setback that's required in the code is not sufficient. So even though the code does have a 20 foot setback, the landscape buffer is much more substantial. It's actually going to be a larger increase in the buffer area than the four and a half feet we're asking for to move the sign closer to the road. So, that's kind of where when you read the wording that we're moving closer to the road as opposed to moving backwards. We're maintaining that buffer zone in that residential uh enjoyment of their property. Uh third is the position of the sign and the fueling gas station. And so if you look at these signs right here, or not the sign, but the site plan, you can see this location where the loading space is positioned. Now, trying to have adequate maneuvering space for a semi-truck or a tanker truck to pull in off of NineM Road or either of those roads and safely be able to maneuver completely around the building is what necessitates the two lanes of traffic on both sides of the or on all sides of the facility. And

then we have the gas station islands themselves. So with you can see how close the fueling station refueling area and the canopies for the trucks and cars are right now. So by moving the sign down a little bit it remove it creates a larger radius and a larger safety buffer. We thought the 4 and 1/2 foot buffer into the well closer to the rightway really helped improve the overall safety of that lot. And while I understand trying to bring everything into compliance is the ultimate goal at this location in a lot like this, having that closer to this to the street is very similar to other properties in that area. So just based on the nature of this property and how we're trying to lay out kind of a already a smaller lot, the entire fueling service, fueling station and maintain all of that safety and maneuverability is where we are today looking for this variance. And it's never the intent of sheet to come in and try and diminish the look of a neighborhood. Actually, sheets tends to scale back the signage or keep very limited signage with brick facades and natural stone face to try and enhance their neighborhood with their convenience, food, and the gas station. Just a I am here on behalf of Sheets, but something I did want to include. Of all the gas stations I've worked for, not including Sheets, they do put the most emphasis on maintaining the beautifification and safety in the neighborhood that I have experienced. Any questions from the residents or the board?

Uh, yes. Could you please explain what the practical difficulty would be if we do not grant this variance? It would create a hardship on the flow of the lot as I was describing. So, moving that sign back into the asphalt is going to encroach on where the fueling refueling service will be. And the best practical option to keep that safe radius would be to move back further into to the buffer zone scooting the entire site backwards. So that's what we are trying to avoid is to maintain that landscape buffer that is required.

Very well. Anybody else have any further questions? So what you're what you're explaining right now is the sign where it would be in compliance. What you're saying is it would create a a hazard when it comes to fueling or trying to refuel the pumps and stuff for the rad the turn radius of the semi.

Yes, it'll it'll compact the entire site which is already rather tight right there for that radius for a semi. And there's no other location for the refueling site in the site plan.

Not in a position that would be close to the canopy or really realistic without a large financial hardship that other fuel line stations might not experience. I'll kind of speak to you were asking about the size of this the lettering. That is a national sign Association standard for readability of a sign. So with the size of those letters, that distance is what is calculated not in a local ordinance or a federal law, but just the National Sign Association's readability. And if you can read it from that specific distance, it provides a driver an opportunity to make a decision as opposed to seeing, oh wow, their fuel is 40 cents cheaper than the next guy, and then they slam on their brakes at an intersection. It just that is where that standard comes from. We could go with a even larger sign possibly further back or pylon signs, but for a monument sign that's typically how they're positioned,

which is what we are trying to do is keep a monument sign, not a pylon sign. Thank you. Any further questions? Thank you. I have a question. So, um I don't know. It It's pro probably on here, but I'm trying to figure out where the location of the sign is. Plan. Are you planning to put it? Where are you planning to put it? I don't know. Maybe the uh sign. Yes. Do we have that sheet? Yes. I don't see it. I don't see it

right there. There he is right there.

Okay. Thank you. Yep. Any further questions for the applicant? Thank you. Thank you. Uh being none, I have a question for uh the city planner. Uh I'm looking at this drawings of this and it looks to me like this is right on the corner of nine and Beaconsfield and would obstruct vision. Can you explain to me how that's affecting the the field of vision and the right of way?

Sure. Um so the um I would say that the intent of the setback from the right ofway that is in the ordinance is to preserve vision down corridors um which increases safety. It also contributes to aesthetics. So there's um an orderly public realm and then there's the developed sites behind it. Um so that I would say that the ordinance right uh provision as it exists is designed to preserve safety and clear vision. Um so when this this application was rejected when it was applied because it does not meet that setback if that does that address your question. So, uh, the sign as proposed would, uh, say, "I'm coming out on Beaconsfield Gingry to make a left turn. I look to the right to look for oncoming traffic. Am I going to be able to see what's going eastbound on 9 mile?"

I would say that that the sign will obstruct that view as it's currently proposed.

Interesting. So it would obstruct No, I I'm saying I I believe that it would impair that view. Would impair that view. Yes. From beacon field looking at at looking to the west with trying to check eastbound traffic. So correct. Okay. And that's why it was originally denied. That's why the sign application was denied. Yes. Okay.

Thank you. Any discussion on the variance? Any questions? Uh, Mr. Chair, I would move that we deny the variance uh based on it does not meet the ordinance. councelor. Yes. could make the motion just be more specific to sections through various requests due to unique circumstances of the property. Examples of unique circumstances include properties with odd dimensions or unusual easements. Unique circumstances do not include business, family, or financial reasons. B. The variance request is due to unique circumstances of property is not shared by neighboring properties in the same zone. If the circumstances for which a variance is warranted are shared among numerous properties in the same zone, then the variance request should be denied. It may be better to consider amending the zoning. For instance, a historic portion of a community developed around the turn of the C 20th century might have 50 foot lots throughout the neighborhood of single family homes. This neighborhood is subject to the same zoning standards as neighborhoods developed later with 70 foot wide lots. Projects not requiring a dimensional variance in the newer neighborhood will most likely require variance in the historic neighborhood. Proper solution is to create a new zoning district for the historic neighborhood that is more reflective of the existing character. C. the problem is not self-created either by the

applicant or an applicant's predecessor. Proper interpretation is to ask whether the applicant took some affirmative action that created the need for the variance such as making an unusual land division shape, filling the entire building envelope so that a porch must necessarily extend into the setback area, digging a pond, etc. A practical difficulty cannot be self-created. Uh at the same time, the court, this isn't applicable to this case, it just talks about a court of appeals case. And then uh section D, strict compliance with area setbacks, frontage, height, bulk, or density would unreasonably prevent the land owner from using the property for permitted purpose and would thereby render the conformity unnecessarily burdensome for other than financial reasons. And then E, the variance would provide substantial justice to the applicant as well as to the other property owners in a district. And F, no lesser variance options are practical. And uh to the uh members of the board, those standards are also set forth in the planners report. Those standards are uh begin on page three of the planners report. And again, if the maker of the motion could just uh in making the motion to deny just state uh the specific reasons or findings why you are making the motion, please.

Mr. chair, you might also want the planner to give more detail in his report verbally so that you guys can hear how he wrote it and what he sees and and what he might be recommending in in the variables. Mr. Chair, also to the maker motion for instance could say that um uh I do not find that uh the variance request is due to any unique circumstances of the property. Um uh I I believe that the the problem is uh self-created and uh so reasons like that. Okay. Yeah. Uh if uh we could pause for just a moment. I believe we needed some clarification from

Mr. verbal. Um some suggestions that you had. So I guess this is the question. Sorry. Can you clarify what the question is? Uh we need clarification on why it was originally denied.

Um so it was denied it was denied because um there is an ordinance provision that requires that 10 ft from the right ofway which um is is the front property line of this property. Uh within 10 ft of that there cannot be a ground sign. So this ground sign is proposed less than 10 feet from the front property line. Um so the the um what the board is being asked to consider is whether a practical difficulty has been established by the um applicants presentation and by the written u the written material in the application. So there are in our report there are several standards or we enumerate the standards and uh just make comments based on uh our observations um and quote the applicants uh the applicants uh reasons that that were provided in the in the application. Um so the um I I think that it is true that the self-created standard is a it's the definition of self-created is whether or not an affirmative action was taken. The site was designed for this um the property and the site plan was designed for this site. um is not clear to me how that is not an affirmative action that causes the difficulty. Um there there was also some commentary about the signs up and down 9 mile and there wasn't specific evidence. I think

I would acknowledge that from my field observations there may well be other signs that are non-conforming to this requirement and they exist. Um there are also signs that do conform to this requirement in the vicinity. Um and then uh I guess just the other thing I can say about that is none of those signs were permitted um in the last several months to my knowledge that um that were granted some sort of leniency or uh or discretion that this applicant is seeking.

Okay. Uh, one more question. As I read this, they want to put a monument sign up. 12 feet wide, 8 feet high, and how close to 9 mile? 5.4 in. 5.42 ft. Where? 10 feet is required. So, they're asking for a variance of 4. Mhm. Yeah. 4 uh 66 68 58

and moving it back four feet would cause all that problem with the loading. Well, I I think I think and the applicant can maybe clarify, but I think the applicant's contention is that um if this sign was to um to to move in its current orientation to that 10-ft setback, it would impair the loading which happens here. Um I imagine that there are several other design solutions other than moving that the sign in that configuration. Um maybe that does not meet the they may or may not meet the um the goals that the applicant is trying to achieve with the placement of the sign, but they would be ordinance compliant. For example, if it was rotated 90 degrees, um it could be put in there. It appears that it could be put in that um lawn panel in a way that um complies with the ordinance, but but there are ways that the sign could be redesigned in that area and not obscure line of sight.

I think that that's I believe that's true. Yes. That's I'm sorry, what? I believe that that is true that there are design alternatives Thank you. Any other questions or discussion on variance?

So, can I clarify one thing, Mr. Euro? When you said the request of the sign as currently written in this statement, I mean in this uh request from the um sheets representative is as they're requesting it right now. The way it sits, if you're coming off of Beaconsville looking west on 9 miles to see oncoming traffic, it would obstruct the view. Is that what you're saying based on what they're requesting right now in this plan? I'm saying that it would it's closer to the nine mile right of way than is allowable by the ordinance and the ordinance provision is to protect clear sight for that sort of situation when you're approaching an intersection so that as you are looking for oncoming traffic you have a view as well as um views within the within the right of way um and like I said to preserve some aesthetics and to pres preserve some room for things like landscaping.

Okay. And Mr. Kyle, you can go.

What what you're saying is the reason you all want it placed where you're requesting it to be placed is because of visibility. Am I right? So the reason we're that's kind of two parts to that answer. Yes, ideally it will be oriented along nine mile drive in a position that can be seen with adequate time to break. The reason we are asking for it to be in the position it is today as opposed to in 2022 further back was the overall design of this lot because of the narrowness of the lot where the driveway is the where the fuel and restation pieces and how the entire lot is compiled. We feel that this is the best alternative that will not cause a visual impairment and that's what we're asking here. that 10 foot setback is established as a guideline to easily determine like preserve the safety and we do not believe that this will be an issue. So we're asking you as the board to hear that case and if you agree with us approve this variance and if not deny it.

Okay. Because well Any further questions or discussions?

Mr. Mr. Chair, I would move that we deny the variance request based on that these are not unique circumstances to the property and they are not shared by neighboring properties and it appears there has not been enough evidence presented that to indicate that it is not self-created and there would not that strict compliance uh would prevent the land owner from using the property for the permitted purpose. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Support.

Who was it? Uh Troutman made the motion and Mr. Williams supported. I have a motion in support. May I get a vote? Robert, yes. Miranda, yes. Cliff, yes. Uh, Edward, yes. And Robert, yes. Okay. Motion to deny has been approved.

Moving on to unfinished business. There is none. Next item, a second hearing of the public. Is there anybody that wishes to speak? Um, I just happen to go there's a shoot that's opening up at 23 mile and I 94 and that also is a smaller location and if any of you happen to be out that way, um, I would encourage you to take a look at that. um that is set up where there is no parking or drive aisle behind the building. There is uh the Woods condominiums that is right behind sheets there. There's a 30 foot buff buffer. There are evergreen trees that are 18 to 20 feet tall. Um you know there is a way that this site plan could have been done that would have given them more room. There's no reason for a two-way drive aisle behind this location. There's not a drive-thru yet. Um hopefully they're not going to be asking for a drive-thru at at any time because that would be another special land use and that would be incompatible with the residential neighborhood right behind it. So that's, you know, again, my point with this is that there are a lot of things that they could do. They could remove that drive aisle behind the building. They could remove that parking. They they have 16 extra parking spaces. They could have eliminated that, moved things back, still provided plenty of buffer, and they wouldn't need so much of a buffer because there wouldn't be cars driving between the back of sheets and people's backyards. So again, thank you for making um what I feel is the right decision tonight.

Mary Hall, Raford, East Point. I also agree that right decision was made primarily because when we had a public hearing here not too long ago, the room was packed. There were people in the lobby. None of this was an issue at the time the proposal was made for Sheets to even move into the city. So I guess when I look back at those types of things, I begin to wonder where the issue was that was not fully exposed or revealed to council at the time of that original proposal. I remember that very well. Um I try to make sure that I keep on top of things with whatever is going on in the city so that I can have that reference. So tonight, thank you for doing the right thing and hopefully she's because I do believe sheets should be here, don't get me wrong, but um a little more attention should be paid to how you present information so that it won't create problems with an attempt to justify an alternative position. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Uh, anybody else for the hearing of the public? Being none, we will move on to board member comments. Oh, one moment. There we go.

Hi, I'm an owner of 11026. Um, I have a problem. I had a big problem yesterday. um in my room. Whatever they're doing behind there, it shook my whole house. My chandelier balls fell down on my table. I'm very upset right now. I didn't approve it. It was already approved. It's very hard for me to even explain how I'm feeling right now. I'm just upset by the whole situation. I felt this decision was made only based upon East Point. They didn't care about the residents. No one came and talked to me. I'm directly behind this. I'm having enough problems with living in an older home, having to make repairs on my own myself, and now I can't afford to even go through this anymore. It shook my whole house. What about our foundation? I was already having problems with the floodings. Now it's another problem. I think it's disrespectful um for this big company with all this money to come in and just crash our neighborhood like this. We had no say off for nothing, but we paid the most taxes than anyone else in this. I'm very upset with this. That's all I got to say. Cuz you guys going to do what you want to do. We have no say. So I'm done.

Hello. Thank you for your decision this evening. Um, I'm her neighbor. We're neighbors. And I just want to reiterate off of what she said. Yes. The jackhammering and the Excuse me. Yes. Could you give us your name, please? My name is Patrice Kraton. January. Thank you.

Um, I just want to reiterate off of what she said. We're neighbors and it's a lot going on. Um, they tore the wall down. They left my yard uncovered a whole night. They didn't put anything up. I have pictures and everything. Um, so I had to call that construction company to ask them what were they going to do as far as covering up my backyard. So they came out the next day and they did cover it up. I'm sorry. Um, it's just a lot. I have a sick husband and he has to listen to all this stuff that's going on behind the home. It's just a lot. But thank you for your decision tonight. And um, I'm not in agreeance with the what's going on, but it is what it is. But thank you. Have a good All right. Is there any other public comment? Is there any other p public comment for the hearing of the public?

Uh being none, moving on to uh board member comments. Mr. Rasco, good evening. Just wanted to uh praise the community in engaging this this matter. I think it's huge. Uh, our community is important and I hope uh things get better with the construction and um at the end of the day I believe we're going to come to some type of cohesiveness where uh we can greet them or to the city but uh with with the ordinances of the city. Money.

Um I wanted to speak to the two ladies in the back. Um, I'm sorry for the inconvenience. Um,

I understand. We work hard for the things that we have. Um, but I I do want to say that just like you guys came here tonight and um spoke up and addressed your concerns, continue to do that because your voice does matter. And there's times and times where you can come in when new businesses come into the city or want to make a change like today for to come and your voice can be heard. Let your voice be heard. So don't let this be the last time. continue to come and participate in the meetings and and get your point across because it does go on record.

Mr. Troutman, uh I have no additional comments. Mr. Williams.

Um, I'm very concerned about the uh the uh construction and everything. We have to make sure that the uh com the the zoning board compliant are compliant and we have to look out for our neighbors and our our families that are around the construction site. So, I was happy to hear that they came out and took care of your yard the very next day. So, that's a good sign. And like one of the other commissioners said, we will continue to work. We welcome you out into the area, into the neighborhood, into the city, but we still have to be compliant. And at the end of the day, that's that's our job. So, thank you.

And I'd like to uh thank the members of the board for coming to another meetings. We've uh we've had a couple of difficult uh variance requests and uh we sit in a very tight spot where we have to uh balance the judgment between the wants and the needs of uh the applicants and uh our need to uh enforce the uh zoning ordinances and uh make sure the rules are followed. And I thank you all for coming out and listening and being fair and coming to the judgments you do. Thank you very much. That being said, I make a motion to uh join the meeting. So, a motion by Wilson, second by Rosco. May I get a vote?

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Thank you very much for coming.