Bza Meeting - Regular Meeting

Public hearing for September 15th, 2025. Can we get a roll call? Mr. Westbrooks here. Mr. Cox here. Mr. Roberts here. Miss Musky here. Mr. Wallenhurst is late or absent. I'm not sure. So, uh, on the public hearing agenda tonight, um, is a proposed conditional zoning certificate, uh, approval to build an oversized garage R2 residential district located at 9042 Valley View Road. Um, is there anyone here for the public that wishes to speak for or against this issue?

It's for me. I don't know if I'm supposed to talk or not. You don't have to have to. Just if anybody had a issue with it. Okay. Um, appears that no one uh wishes to speak to this. So, with that, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. I'll second it. All in favor? I I So, I think that meets the requirements of that. I don't think it's even on the regular agenda. I fully understand the whole process. Explain. Look, it's not on your agenda, is it? No, because it was on the agenda last time. Was it continued to this meeting?

I don't believe so. Nino said it didn't explained it to me that um I don't they had a ruling, you know, an opinion from the law director that it could be allowed the way to be proposed or it should be allowed, but it required a public hearing. Yeah, I'm not familiar with

two of them had talked. I thought he was going to forward me information just to kind of fully understand it. But you seem pretty confident after talking that allow I think I I don't want to speculate some of the details, but We can follow at some point. I think that it my understanding you're good tonight. You're good to go. Thank you, sir. Thank you, everybody. Um I don't know if we want to try to wait for Scott.

I would love to just roll into the meeting, but I think he's playing here. He probably just Let's give him a few minutes. We'll start the radio meeting shortly. Okay.

Yeah. Yes.

I haven't seen her. Yeah. So [Music] reduction ready.

With that, I will uh call to order the regular uh scheduled September 15th, 2025 planning commission meeting. Uh can we get a roll call? Mr. Mr. Westbrooks here. Mr. Roberts here. Mr. Cox here. Mr. Wallenhorse here. Miss Musky here. All right. Uh, first item is approval of the July 23rd public hearing minutes. Any comments on that? We'll make a motion. We'll move to approve that. All right. I'll second. All in favor?

I. And next is approval of the July 21st uh regular meeting minutes. Comments. Make a motion. I would approve it as submitted. All right. Is there a second? All right. All in favor? I I All right. Now, first agenda item is ProQu sign located 850 East Town Road. Come on up.

And you were here before, but I think Susie's Mark. So I know you guys submitted new plans, some changes on including that base. Um Mr. Francis reviewed that. Um would you like to go over your your thoughts?

Sure. Um my report day is September 7th. So the issues uh discussed at the last um the last time we discussed this at plane commission related to the aesthetics of the um plastic cabinet as well as the base and then finally landscaping around the base of the sign. Um the revised proposal includes uh a brick base um to uh match the building and then um perennials uh for landscaping around the base and then the plastic cabinet remains. So in my report I just state um the commission the brick base is a nice addition. commission just needs to decide if the plastic cabinets acceptable. And then um landscaping wise just felt that some more year round landscaping. So maybe just the addition of some boxwoods or lowline shrubs would be um good to add to that base. And then just note um the additional signs on the property. They may or may not be there anymore. I'm looking at an an aerial photograph, but um or actually this was Google uh Google Street View, but there was some some temporary signs and then an additional ground sign. Um so just felt we should uh talk through those. If they're no longer there, then they're not an issue.

All right. Anyone else have any comments? All right. Um you guys have thoughts? plastic cabinet. I personally probably okay with it. I assume that's a good material. Whatever you're using for the for the cabinet itself. Yeah, I talk the cabinet, not the not the base. The cabinet is not it's going to be a relief to it now. So, it's going to be a quarter inch raised quarter graphics text. It's not.

So there is everything. Okay. White background. Okay. Just background. No. Are you open to provide some additional different landscaping? Will something that's year round? Mix in with that. for like a box of wood on either end of the sign. This mix of perennials is great. It's good summer through or spring through fall color. So that mean no problem with

what's I just want to make sure. Yeah. No, I think it was it's a very good um uh plant palette. I would just add maybe two shrubs, one on either end of the sign. I think that would just be enough to kind of hold it for something there.

So, you said the background's going to be a gray color, not Okay, because it says it shows up as white on ours and it says cream, black, orange, and white is being used for the colors. So, I just want to confirm that. Yeah, this kind of gray gray cream. Okay, it's fine.

Looks nice. I guess with that um Oh, I guess any idea the existing signs are shown in that uh the Google Street View is shown your existing sign is the same. You're replacing this one? Yes. Is that one still there? It is. It's on the other sign is not there, but the the 5050 sign is up. So, was that something that was planned to be temporary or what was

it? Was it was temporary, but it were trying to keep up on a property, you know, around for a while. Yeah, we've been changing it every years, I think. So, so I guess it's something like that not allowed to be on that additional signage.

Yeah, the only way you can have um two ground signs is by being a corner lot. I was looking there's some additional allowance areas for signs with larger setbacks, but that's to give you more square footage. You could um you could incorporate that message from that sign into a larger cabinet sign. You could even make it um changeable if you wanted to change out the like the faces so every five years or whatever and have one larger ground sign. But um yeah, you're only you're only allowed to have one total ground sign being it's not it's not a corner lot. Something like that could go on the building though, too. Could it changeable?

Yeah. I don't know if there's building signage now. You're allowed building signage. Yeah. There's no building signage. Yeah. You could I mean, you could have a sign on the way the Macedonia code is written, you could have signage on each of your facade. So, one sign per facade and it's based on your um total building area. So, what did I say? You're allowed 40 square feet on the identification side and then it's two square feet for each foot of building high. Yeah. And I think you have a pretty big building. Yeah. Right. So, yeah, you could easily do wall signage, too.

So, something that's on standoffs more that easily can be switched out. Yeah. So wall signage being changed out it's a little more difficult than like a ground sign because you know we you can make provisions to change things out on a ground sign. It's kind of maintenance but wall sign you'd have to come back each time I think. Yeah. But if you're changing it on the ground is I mean we would have to come back. No because we allow ground signs that have changeable messages. So what you're saying is on the brick that Yeah. Put it on the brick. Put something on here. Something small that says

you do that 50 years. Cuz I love the message. That's also been in the community in the business. Right. So something that could be added as a small little piece just underneath. Yeah. Like an emblem or something. Yeah. One like one layer brick down or so. Yeah. You're spending a lot of money on attractive signs. So, um, not that your other one isn't attractive, but

this one my dad wanted to keep the original sign forever, but no longer there. We're getting We're trying to I'm actually trying to update a lot of it. The inside's been updated. I intend on doing even more landscaping than this. This is kind of pushing me to do some other stuff. So, which is good. We're trying to make things a little bit nicer. So, you have a lot of room. um you know you're sitting at like 20 just under 24 square ft for your ground sign. So you have

you know 16 square feet till you get to your 40 and you probably have a provision for um they could give you more area. How big is a lot that you sit on? I'd have to look acorage wise. Mhm. Total acreage. Yeah. Yeah. Well, we own the property next to it, the lot that the building's on, but that we that we physically own total acreage. Yeah. And and more importantly next to it, too. It's probably over it's close to 10 15 acres.

Okay. And then what do you know what your frontage is on your existing lot? I'd have to check. I don't know. These guys all have fancy. I don't have it in front. I wasn't expecting it. Yeah. So, so I'll say this. If you keep it below 16 square feet, which is big, you're still within the 40 for the monument sign. They could approve it subject, too. I think if you go over 40, you just have to provide documentation. There's provisions that allow for more. I have no issues. Yeah, I do, too. We want to make a motion.

Yeah. The front is probably 280. Yeah. So they would they qualify for additional. So, I would say again if you keep it below the 16 square feet, the additional to keep your message 40 square feet or less, which is basically your cabinet, right? Like I feel like you could do that. Um, you can get creative and add some of that messaging from the other one in and only have one one compliant sign, right? And height limited to what? 8 ft.

8 ft. Yeah. So we could go up literally making the cabinet bigger, adding below the the the orange swishes the area that put it on on like the standoffs that he could swap out. Can they see the swishes? Either that or just raise that whole thing up and put something underneath. Yeah. Yeah, you you could. I mean, what's your cabinet is the top part? It's uh Yeah, it's a little over 3 ft by 7 and 1/2 ft. So, you could

sure you could make that slightly bigger to to fit a message in there. You could adjust your switches. I'm sure they're not trademark switches. Yeah, there's lots of things you could do and then incorporate that into your message and have one sign, which I mean I'm a big proponent of. It's just less sign clutter. Looks nicer on the property, right? We just weren't in a position to change out the other one till my dad was gone. like he's slow to change.

What's that? He's still with you. Yeah, he's not in favor of these drop off the old one that's put it in the lobby. I'll make a motion to approve the sign. Um, knowing that there will be modifications, uh, to add this additional panel, um, as long as you still meet the code requirements, uh, it could be approved administratively to add that. And then also note to add, uh, shrubs to the landscaping at either end.

I would second that, France. I think it was a solid motion. I think I heard um shrubs at both ends. So, two shrubs and then um I'd be glad to if the commission wants me to I can review that and send out a little email to the chairman let him know it's compliant. That would be great. Any other comments? All right. All in favor? Thanks, guys. Thanks. That's good. That's awesome. Thank you.

Next up is uh proposed signs for EVM eye care.

Good evening. How's it going? Got sign here and then we'll start. Thank you. your name for the record. Melinda,

are you with sign? Okay. All right. So, uh this is pretty self-explanatory. Guess which this is going to the existing yeah tition. Okay. Um if you don't mind we'll just jump into the planner for that.

Sure. U my report date is September 6. So um this is new signage for EBMI Care replacing the prior tenant unit 52. Uh the proposal is just under 25 square feet of sign area. Unit 52 um by my book measures 18 feet. The applicant shows it at 20. The 18 comes off of the original signing plan um for the commons. But regardless, 36 or 40 ft, they're proposing just under 25. So area-wise it's fine. Just some technical details and and believe it or not, I don't think you'll ever hear me say this. So this is a first. We need to make the sign bigger. Did make some edits per your notes. Okay.

I brought it with me if you guys want a copy. I think this is the first time I said you have to increase the sign height. I was surprised it's too, but it's not a bad thing. Yeah, we have a requirement that says it has to at least be um 24 in 2 ft tall. So slightly less than 2 feet tall at one point about 1.8 almost. So just need to increase that sign area. I felt it was possible to do with some area to give on the on the allowance. Sure. Um side returns and trim cap are shown as black. They need to be bronze. Got it. Assuming you probably already made that change.

And then um the sign color, the colors green. Um that just needs to be approved by the planning commission pursuant to the 2014 amendment to the commons. Um, and then the only other issue is the bottom of the sign has to be at least 15 inches from the bottom of the fascia band. There was no information to to determine that. I'm assuming you provided that. Great. So, if those changes are made, then the commission can approve it subject to those changes and I can quickly look at the area just to confirm it's within the allowable.

Can I have one of those as well, please? Thank you. That's a question, Brian. Yeah. Is is green sort of the color for for that company? That's Yeah, the sham kind of And you have other other branches somewhere else, you know? I don't know if they're a chain or not. I see. That was the color they requested. Yeah. But that that's the color they like, but Okay. Probably go along with it. No problem.

I think just specifically math there. Any other questions or thoughts? Looks like you can sign. I just made some notes. So, I know you typically sign them. So, I just dated that submitted by the applicator.

No, I have one. You gave me one. Okay. I just made a fraction. You can have 36 square feet, not 32. Oh, okay.

If you're okay with that, uh I'll make a motion to uh approve the uh plan resubmitted this evening on 9:15. Um as marked on the plan by Mr. France. Um and specifically note that uh the green color be approved and added to the shopping center colors. There any second? All right. Any other discussion? All right. All in favor? I. All right.

Would you want us to use this? Do you want me to use that? We're all said they have their eyes. Appreciate it. Thanks. You too. Yeah. Let me just write on it. Oh, you want to sign it first? Go ahead.

Okay. Next item is uh Optimus Solutions the ATM. Any comments?

Oh yeah. Anyone hear from that?

Start a little early. I saw there were like third or whatever. Um we allowed to just come back there or do we need to make a motion to move it? Um I think just note the record

continuing on and we'll come back to that item. Okay. Yeah, Davy tree with a proposed lot split for the enclave.

Good evening. Get your names for the record. Sure. Zephania Bradford resource group. Can you repeat that? Zephaniah Bradford. It's the first and I I think we've had chairman last month to remember. Why don't you uh explain what you've got going on here?

Sure. So, our um neighbor to the north, uh Dylan Mesh, I think is how you pronounce it. Uh he reached out to us and asked if we would have an interest in and selling this portion to him. He would like to expand his yard essentially. Um and I told him we'd be more than happy to look into that form. I said it's going to require um you know, not only a lot split, but we do have a a loan on our Redwood development with Fanny May. So, we're in the process of working with them on lender approval as well. They they've seen the draft and they're looking at this. So, we would need, you know, a lender to sign off on that collateral to release it. So, you know, I told them there were some steps I had to work through. Um, first things first was I reached out to our surveyor um to put together, you know, this exhibit and then we wanted to submit that to the city and get thoughts on it. So, that's why we're here today. So,

all right. Uh, Mr. France, I don't know if you knew any of that. purpose was. I didn't when I reviewed it. Um it makes me feel more comfortable that it's not like trying I thought they were trying to fit a building lot in like me too.

So there's a whole um let me go to my report states September 5th. Uh and this is for a split as described just now by the applicant. So this particular development was um subject to and developed under uh effectively a reszoning by the Summit County courts and I provide that judgment entry and so that set the density it set everything. So when I looked at it that that's why I was initially concerned. So this makes more sense, but I still have some um just some questions as it relates to, you know, does the reduction of this area, this amount of acreage change the overall permissible density? I don't think it does, but I would want to feel more comfortable about that. Also, like the lot coverage percentage, percentage of open space that was required as part of the development. and then four lots since it's for the neighbor to the north um it needs to comply with essentially under 111703 the planning and zoning code blocks and lots all those requirements have to be met. I presume they probably are just quickly looking at it, but I don't know the I'd have to take a look at the overall length to the width for the width to depth ratio, length to width ratio. Those are things that we would need to just make sure they meet those standards. Overall, doing what you're describing gives me less heartburn for sure.

Yeah. And I would I would also point out too that there is floodway and also I believe a repairing setback. So you can't really develop on it anyway even if it was. So you know what I mean? So that so there's that too. I wanted I didn't know if you saw that. So I did. Okay. Yeah. So um my experience is as communities that are sought after have less and less land developers find more and more creative ways to try to put things there. And I thought this one was just trying to be very creative.

No. No. So could this can the new owner build something garage and creek handles a whole lot of water already? So I'm sorry. Go ahead. I'm just saying it's something concrete on the big roof that's going to funnel a lot more water in and out. Yeah. So Jason, to that point, almost the entire parcel in question here is located within the repairarian setback. Okay.

Uh and that part of our code carries with it all sorts of restrictions uh as to what can or cannot be built in there. Basically, if you want to build anything, you would need an approval from uh well actually from the BCA, not from this body. Um and While I would never say you can ever build anything in there, it would be difficult. And I guess I would the neighbor to the north who's interested in the parcel I is obviously not here tonight, but I hope he recognizes that as well. Um, there really isn't much he can do with it. So, if he wants to expand his yard,

that was the first thing I pointed out because he define expand yard. I'm not asking you, but yeah. And I didn't know who he was. He just reached out. So when I called him, I said, "Yeah, like you realize you can't really cuz I thought it was somebody trying to do like a commercial outlet or something like that, right?" And I'm like, "Well, you got fluctu." He's like, "No, I just want a bigger backyard for me and my dogs." So I was like, "Okay, well, I'll see I'll see what I can do for you." So yeah. Yeah. So by code, he's permitted to uh walk in the repairarian setback and that's about it. Uh I think there are some uh some there is some language if you have a dead tree in certain instances. No, you're well you're not supposed to.

So can I ask you a question? So, you didn't locate his his structure, Dylan's structure on the survey or your surveyor didn't. And I I mean, I generally see where it's located on the little aerial I provided, but um you know, it's conceivable that he has some space to do an out building if he were to combine these staying out of this right away. Well, maybe not. that goes right up to the repairarians, I think. Close to it. Yeah. Yeah. Maybe a dog house. Fit in there. Where is his house? I don't see his house.

Just his his house is a different parcel. That's why it's not on. It's just Tony, if you look on Brian's map across the road or something. No, just directly to the Oh, I couldn't see that. How big a parcel is this that he wants? Couple acres. 2.1 acres. Yeah. And do you um I mean I see Davey's name is on here, but the split isn't it's not for Davey, right? No, we are just a surveyor.

Yeah, you're just a surveyor. So this is being done to affectuate a desire of a northern property owner. Um and so the land is owned by Enclave. Correct. It's owned by the Redwood entity. Yeah. And you have a um you have standing to act on your behalf. On whose behalf? The Redwood. Yes. Yes. I'm vice president of acquisitions. Yeah. Okay. So you have standing to act on your behalf. You can you can make this request. Yes. Yeah.

So my concern is that do we have anything from Dylan that um is requesting this? Do you have anything from him? The commission should have something counter signature on the application and then they would need to know. Again, I don't have necessarily a problem with it at all knowing this. But I think there's some standards that have to be at play here that make me just just a little unsettled that we just want to follow all those like what's the overall total width including his property and depth including his property and does it affect those other things that I mentioned? I don't know the answer to it.

Yeah. Yeah. And I don't know if he's planning on just keeping this parcel separate or if he wants to like combine it into his existing parcel like a recombination. I don't know what what he wants to you know I would leave that up to him. I mean our so the other wrinkle in this too is like I said we have to have lender approval and I believe um that you were telling me once you know if this were to get approved we'd have 30 days to record. Is that correct? That's what

that's what the standard said. So, so I'm just saying if that's true, I would want to make sure that our lender approval is already, you know, all taken care of because I wouldn't want to have a situation where it were to get approved and, you know, we're waiting at lender approval and I can't meet that 30-day deadline. Um, so I'm working through sorting that, too. So, I mean, it sounds like sounds like we need to come back anyway because you want some more details sorted out. I mean, I do. That's the commission. Yeah, I think if you got concerns, could he come with you? So, I invited him tonight, but he didn't he didn't have a time. He wasn't available. So, his plans for it.

I I mean, would it help to if he can't make the meeting just to have like something in writing from him just saying like he has an interest in p purchasing it for this reason or what? I mean, my recommendation to to the commission is that he's here at the meeting. And I'll I'll tell you why. because um if he's not combining it with the parent parcel, in his case his house property, what's the purpose? And we're effectively creating a non-buildable lot, which in the eyes of the BCA, they may say, well, the city approved it. Why wouldn't we grant a variance? And I'm not sure we'd be wanting to grant variances on this thing for structures given the physical limit, the environmental limitations. So,

or any type of construction Yeah. Any kind of So, you know, for me, I'd feel more comfortable on behalf of the city to have some kind of restrictions placed on the lot as well. I was just just going to ask if you could do restrictions. Yeah. Yeah. Mhm. Would would it help to mark on the face of the survey lantern made too?

I think that um he would need some a deed restriction to make that, you know, really just because it's on there, it doesn't matter. to change that. So something that's a little more in perpetuity like a deed restriction would be what I would be looking for if that's his true intent. If his true intent is just to run the dog out there and he owns the property, I'm not sure he probably could do it without owning it. But um but nevertheless, if that's the intent, then deed restriction simple and it shouldn't be a problem adding that to it. I just don't want the city to create a lot that's going to create more problems down the line.

Yeah. So it sounds like then from that standpoint it would be more beneficial for him to combine it with his existing lot that he owns with his home so that you're not creating a separate lot that's just sitting there. And Go ahead. I was going to say just the opposite. You're going to place a deed restriction on the new parcel. It probably should stay its own parcel. He doesn't want the deed restriction on his parent. If we do if we do do a deed restriction. Yes. That's why I was trying to figure out what would be a preferred path, you know, and I I don't want to speak for Brian, but I think to Brian's point, he's concerned that

why would you need a deed restriction if there's no way you could ever build anything on that property? I mean, repairing rights. Why would you need a deed restriction?

Well, you can go to BCA and request variance to build on the property. And Brian's point, I don't want to speak for you, is thinking. Uh, I don't think Brian wants this board to uh approve this lot split because then that's uh I don't want to say ammunition. That's a bit of a strong word. But in the future, it would help in this case Dylan if he did appear before the BCA would help his case. Hey, you guys approved this lot split for me in this manner. Now you got to give me the variance. And then it puts our BCA in a tough spot. So, which I agree. Yeah,

that's that's a good point. I mean, I I hear the um I hear Joe's concern about the parent parcel, but I think you could add language to this description that says so many feet off of the house begins, you know, a 2.1017 acre parcel of this current parcel that's restricted to the following in the following way. So, you could do that, too, as opposed to I mean, I get it. You don't want to try to restrict your parents, but there's legal description that could be added that would at the end of the day, I don't want this board to create something that's a headache down the line for the city.

That's all. And then in addition, do does there need to be uh any proof that they're not violating uh coverage or lot acreage? Is that was that what you were asking? that should be submitted. It's probably not, but you know, I don't know. I'd have to go back and look at the original platform, which I'm assuming because these are rentals, it's probably is it one just one parcel? The rest of the correct, it's it's it's one parcel with one owner. Yeah, one parcel, one owner, one step back to property lines. So there's probably less of a concern.

But yeah, I think you probably have all that information you could just submit with the the original development plan. Yeah. And it'll spell out what was approved and and the city probably the city has. It's been some time since we did that. Unfortunately, does not predate me. I remember working on it. I just don't remember what it I remember all the particulars. So,

so it sounds like yeah something with Yeah, if we can get some information on that' be helpful. But the big thing is either a deed restriction on a combined lot or keeping some some kind of restriction to protect but not you know hurt him in the future for his own home property. Um but I think that is what you're looking for. Yeah, I mean you can keep it separate and just have a restriction on that property just again to cover the the city. So if you guys are okay with that um right

I'll make a motion to continue this to the uh October meeting sounds commission once a month. Yeah. Yeah. Is there a second? I'll second. Any more discussion? All in favor? I. So hopefully you get your You can still get your lender. So while while we're waiting, you can get the lender. That's what it's worthless land. the lender anyway

and luckily it's HUD because HUD HUD would say they would look at even though it's worth say it's worth XY the release

since uh the 18 guys are not here still uh let's discuss the uh next item which is the proposed amended language for orders 51 2025. Yes, if you don't mind excuse myself person if you don't think you got anything you can share but I'm not on the in this particular one. We thought you did. What's that? We thought you did. I'll leave it up to you. All right. Thanks.

You have it. All right. So, this this was we discussed it a little bit last month. Um was about the driveway modifications. I think this originated uh with the building department um about wanting to get a uh hard surface back to any additional garages. We have a lot of discussion about distances and what have you costs and all all kinds of stuff. we were gonna think about it for the next month. I know Tony's got some thoughts.

Sort of down up my alley, you know, legal. But anyway, I uh I think I said that at the last meeting that uh uh Macedonia isn't the only one trying to upgrade their uh their driveways and their roads and all that. And a lot of them uh would like uh no more gravel driveways. And so I'll pass this around. I have city of North Homestead and Sheffield Lake and the the point I was trying and that they make it uh rather clear. Uh the word grandfathered in comes into this. Uh in a criminal case, it would be exposfacto law that you can't uh make something a crime that wasn't a crime when it was committed. If you if it was it was not a crime and all of a sudden you make it a crime, you make it criminal. and the one in uh that transformed to civil law is uh grandfathered in. And so they we'd run into that. And I see a bit of problem with uh the ones that were proposed. I don't know if they enacted this without looking at other code. Everybody slavishly copies everybody else's code. What I've noticed and uh uh so so I'll pass these around. you'll see all these uh Sheffield Lake and Northolmstead, they all make sure that things are grandfathered in. And what we saw, and Mr. Roberts noted the same thing that uh if your driveway is not repaired, in other words, uh if if you haven't repaired your driveway, uh all residential driveways and parking areas installed after the effective date of this section shall be hard surfaced aluminum, free of concrete and dust. That's repaired. So, the repaired kind of bothered me. uh if you already have your gravel driveway in there and it's in sad need of repair and then they

enact this statute with was the thinking of Macedonia to go out there and say well uh we're not going to let you repair it unless you put in cement and I think you'd run into this uh the statute uh which uh is a civil statute I guess I cited it might have cited it in there 71315 Ryan you might look up that one revised code and there's, you know, a whole bunch of cases that uh and and that that is under non-conforming use. Land use of any building as existing in at the time of enactment of a zoning ordinance uh may be continued. That's what the statute reads. And so, uh, that would that would be run into that if we're if we're not careful when you put these in here to make sure that somebody that has a driveway and maybe an old garage in the back of it uh, for years, all of a sudden they enact the statute and you're saying, "Well, uh, now you got to put the you got to put a a concrete driveway in because uh, we can you can house a car in that in that building back there." And that's the way ours sort of reads. uh it's not real clear that uh that it would be the non-conforming use uh it would be grandfathered in. So that's the only thing I worried about when I read that uh those two amendments.

So I think what yeah you're looking at and I circled that word paired as well and maybe it's because we talked about it last time I was just reading it again today. Yeah. And you know that could be you know somebody's got their gravel driveway going back to the back your back garage. had for 50 years. It's, you know, the gravel's just disappearing and they have somebody bring in another load of gravel. Just dump it. Same footprint. Nothing changed, right? And that's repairing now. Oh, you dropped some gravel on that. Now, you would need to concrete this whole thing. Even though you causing problem

that would be not grandfathered in. If if they you tried to enforce that against if they took you to court, you might have a jack problem for the city of Macedonia. I think is way too general there. Like the one example, thanks for bringing this to me that you provide said um it said that as long as it stays in compliance with other ordinance such as those for exterior property maintenance, etc. But if they would expand it or change it, then now it could repair. And I don't know if there's more discussion, but we talked about kind of sending the message that we're going to take this and own this and potentially have a work session and rewrite it and send it back to city council. I just think there's a lot of problems in this. If that's still an option on the table, I think we need to do that. Feel like I think there's there's some definitions and discussions of different scenarios that I think we need to work through. I agree with you that the repair component is pretty vague. Just one of the ordinancing like gravel over gravel is a maintenance not a repair.

I mean

if you make if you if your driveway or if your gravel path we'll call it whichever is 8 foot wide you all are going to make it 12 foot that's expansion you're making it larger at that point and that should comply current standards. when um when I was talking with Nino about about this very thing. He had two two things that he added. He said when it comes to uh repair or something like that, it should be maybe a percentage maybe added on to that if you do, you know, certain percent or more than then it would have to be hard surface. But he's talking about just from the road to the garage. And if there is an out building that branches off that, it could be u you know gravel if necessary, but he believes that it should be outlined so that that gravel does not expand from whatever width that it is originally to several feet wider in a couple years.

I think Nino probably should look at uh ordinances from other cities and see what they've done

to try to create something out of your head. It's really not done when you write a statute or an ordinance uh that I know of picking something out of your even the first one here is a little day. Uh that's one of the other one talks about repair. But this one says a minimum of one detached garage where the detached garage is sized to allow storage of a vehicle. A standard concrete driveway shall be installed. Well, uh okay. Uh there's a garage back there in the back. It's been there for 20 years. its size to allow storage of a vehicle. Now, do you have to have a concrete driveway in there even though there's no driveway or gravel for the last 20 years? I mean, so that I think this statute is a little vague, too. These other communities have have gone through this before. That's the way I think Nino should look at instead of trying to create something out of his head.

I think the first part of this I don't want to speak for everyone. I think we're all mostly, if not all, that the the primary from the road, the street, whatever it is to the primary residence, then going forward that should be paid. Correct. Um where we're having a lot of problem is the additional language as we scroll down in our in our copy. It's highlighted yellow some of it, but now we're talking about secondary structures and all that. So, I just think we need that. I do know in talking with Nino he he brought up the idea of being grandfathered and he's the he's the existing drivers obviously would be can't you know add a hardship to something that's existing you know but um like I was saying before

Northstead uses the word grandfather right in their ordinance which you know is helpful I think can I just say on that we're not going to use that term in our code there's no such term in legal in the legal sense they call in layman's term grandfather. Yeah. Yeah. That it's not a legal term. Grand grandfathering is not a legal term. It's legal. That's a copy of their code. So they use

you know I know some people who in the winter jump in the freezing lake. I wouldn't do that either. But it's just not a legal term. So the legal term is legal nonconforming. And we have a non-conforming chapter that addresses legal nonconformities. Um, and I do agree that there's a lot of language in here that's kind of fraught with some issues. Um, and it was left at the last meeting because the way amendments are done under 14103. The message was, you know, can council, can you just nyx this because we don't have time to review this and then we will initiate an amendment and write it differently, work with administration. It's is I don't know if it's back as still ordinance 51. I don't know what happened to that, but you're past your deadline to act on it at this point, which is 30 days.

So, have to you can't do anything to this. I I I guess I wonder our recommendation to them was to Yeah. to pull it back and let us do our own thing and submit it to them. I don't know. Does anyone know if that happened? Yeah. And council. Okay. So, they they they they pushed it back to you guys. Okay. So there is no more ordinance 51. What what it is is I basically told them that you guys are going to be looking at it further. Okay. That's why we left it. So do you know how what action they took on ordinance 51? Brian, why don't they let the let the law department draw something what Nino wants? Draw it up and so draw it up properly.

Yeah. What this didn't come from Nino directly. This also sp this was sponsored by one of the council people, Finley. Is he is he the legal lawyer for for it was more of a but he he um they divide up the legislation so they all have opportunities to sponsor certain stuff. I don't know if he's personally attached. I think his name just because he Gotcha. Who wants to take this one? That's what I mean. As a sponsor of that legislation, I had a conversation with the city council president said how that happened. It just kind of divided up in the pre.

Yeah. So, set aside ordinance 51. That's a council thing. They can figure out how to deal with that. So, it's tasked back with the commission. you can um under 11401 initiate an amendment um to the code and so you can do that come up with language work with Nino and staff to determine what what exactly you want um if the I didn't know this it sounds like the main issue or a significant issue is from the road to the to the principal house or principal garage if that's the case you could just do a sunset clause and you know make give people time to eventually get rid of their gravel and turn it into concrete. I thought the issue really was on secondary structures or outuildings that was the drive or crux of the language was to go from the back of the main house to that structure in the rear or the side and make that hard surface. And then the issue that um was raised was, well, it could be way back on some of these large lots and do you really want this large gravel or large paved road driveway leading all the way stretching across property? I think that's kind of what was talked about.

Yeah, that was some of it. And I think what it was is there was a discussion of um those properties that do have that condition. I don't think the issue was that it was gravel. I think it was that there was nothing. That's where some of this came from is that it was then it becomes a city issue because somebody's trekking something from way back on the property with no driveway and they're pulling out of the street and leaving mud and dirt and everything like that all over the place. It's causing an issue. I think that was part of what some of that discussion was as well.

Yeah. And I'm, you know, we can see that in lots of communities and you have ordinances to pro tracking of mud on the road. Um, you're probably still going to get some of that. The issue is really the aesthetics and the practicalness of requiring that connector point from the back of the house to to service that garage that is by definition is sized to allow a vehicle for storage. So there's lots to talk about I think with staff and how to write it. Um, and I agree repair is very dubious. And what percentage requires then a full if I read this thing the way it's written, um, anyone who if you ex if you repair or expand it, you have to take your entire driveway and make it hard surface. And that's, you know, that's pretty costly. I think that's that's the problem trying to create this out of our heads without having the legal law department that that advises Macedonia or any community help write this thing. You know, there's a statute 713.15. Lawful use of any building as existing and lawful at the time of enacting a zoning ordinance may be continued. That's exactly how it reads. So, how do you crawl around that one?

You're stuck with that one. So, you can't we can't have the upgrading of all of our driveways. Somebody could be there 50 years with a gravel driveway and uh uh and uh throw that statue that ordinance right in your face. Yeah. But if you look at 1173, we have that language in our code right now. Well, okay.

Nonconformity. So, how we deal with non-conformities, I think we probably want to beef this language up. It's a bit old. I think it's written from 1982. But I think we ought to incorporate that in in this and uh you know sort of upgrade. But somebody that has a gravel driveway, I don't see how you uh you can force them ever to change their driveway as long as they're living there. Now when they sell the house, maybe that's something else again. Yeah,

you could do point of sale inspection. I don't know how the city handles that, but those are things you can do. But again, it's it's the cost, you know, how you deal with that and the practicalness or reasonleness of requiring that standard. And you could one approach could be you could have um a lawyer write it or you could um you know do it here at the planning commission level. I mean, that's what you have me here for and we could talk through these things and we can write language that makes sense. However you want to do it.

This might just because we're on the record here. I if I may be looking at the minutes wrong from the most recent city council meeting, which I believe was on September 11th, but the ordinance still shows that it went through a second reading there. So, like would there be something? I don't know. I'm asking would there be something that they formally withdrawn it? Well, you you have to read likely in the charter. You have to read it three times when it affects property and then you can't sus you can't act on it as an emergency. I'd have to look at the charter. Um so if it read that means it's still on the agenda pending for a third reading.

You know, I don't know what their intent is. Uh you could they could remove it. Um they could put it on an inactive agenda. There's lots of ways to let's say kill an ordinance, but um it sounds like they read it for the purpose of it continuing forward. So is there a formal way we can request them to remove it so it doesn't get to their reading at the next meeting? You could do it through the chair, I suppose. What would I Well, if that's what the commission wants. If you want it to

um be born by this body, just pen a email or a letter that says, "Hey, ordinance blank 51 still remains as a you know for a third reading at your next agenda." As chairman of the commission, um we are requesting that this item be uh continued indefinitely, put on an active agenda, squashed, however you want to word it, and then we'll take up the matter working with staff to prepare a document for council consideration because again, you have three ways to amend the code. You can initiate it, council can initiate it or res a group of residents can initiate it.

One or more resus.

How's it feel?

How about I got you want me to read that? I got sent email. What was after that? If you if that's if that's what the commission wants. Yeah. So, there's five of you. If that's what you want, I'd be glad to help you prepare that email. That's fine.

Yeah. You guys would like to spend I guess you know if we want to do something with it, do we set up a separate meeting, a work session? Um, you really come to spend a couple hours on this and read up the language and ideas that we got and you I think there's a couple of bigger issues in the thing. We'll probably all kind of agree on it. Um, just find the best way to we think I mean I don't know when Yeah. I think it's just harder to figure out when it actually do it. Um, do we need to pick a date now or

would probably be a good I was thinking like, you know, midway between meetings, but I know that the next like, you know, we know what we do at our meeting. I don't quite I kind of missed it. So, I think like if we had a special like a work session just to spend time just with this us to be drawing up our own uh ordinance. Yeah, we could bring some stuff in like you're talking, you know, look at look at some other ordinances, bring some language. I don't know why uh I I I asked the last meeting why our board a bunch of amateurs here are writing ordinances. I I the whole thing mind. Normally you send it to the law department. I was in 12 years I was in the board at Hudson. Yeah. But and we did everything with the law department. They they were there and they drew up stuff.

We could ask them to attend session. Well that's well they should be drawing up these things rather than us get our thoughts on it at least. I mean, it's tough to, you know, if it's just said, turn this into more formal language or something, it still might not have our thoughts of, geez, I don't think we should make them do that or I don't think, you know, whatever it is you or we can't do that, you know, legally you can't. That that that's sort of where I was coming from. I don't think legally you can. Would it be possible to set up a meeting and outline kind of what we feel should be in there and then hand it off to legal? Yeah, that's what I would maybe like or maybe decides they would attend the meeting. I don't know how that works, but just spending my taxpayer money.

If you don't tell him what you want, he's going to write something that you're probably not going to want. So, you need to tell them what you want. Have a work session with with with just this group plan here. Um, get our thoughts together. Our recommendations, shoot it to legal, say, "Hey, can you can you can you turn this into something?" Turn it into something would would pass muster. I won't get the Macedonia into a jackpot. So, is that all of us? It should be here. All five of you. Yeah, all five of us. And if you guys are available, I don't know. Tell me what you want me to do.

I would prefer that you're there. And is somebody from Billy View or you know, or something like that? I'm but a humble servant to the planning commission. But looking at looking at you know time so that we're at September 16th and next you know if we did two weeks from this I am out of town two weeks from this Monday. Let's see. I'm out of town too. What's our next actual planning commission? 20th of October. Two weeks before that is the 6th of October of October. I should have brought my calendar, but I don't I didn't

think you know if you have the six available. Yeah, I I can be here. Normal meeting time or is that a pain in the butt? Uh Would you rather go home and have dinner? The chair typically provides food. When are we going to be in Idaho? Give me the dates. We're leaving on the first and I think coming back.

No, it's an open meeting, so you do have to use it. Do it here. It's a public building. Yeah. Kevin, 1st to the 8th of Ott there's nothing that says we have to do this like in the next four weeks, right? You know, you can't find something until November. It's not like a problem, right? Neato said last meeting it wasn't something that was like burning the earth. There's a lot of concrete being poured after moving. I have business travel for the week of the 13th. So what about

do you want to consider putting it on the 20th and then have a fallback position your normal meeting put it at the end and talk about it? You could do that. I mean you go into a separate you just leave it as an item and put it on your agenda. That's all at the end of the meeting. do that after we get 27 things. Yeah. When's Thanksgiving Thanksgiving? So, we're thinking about just doing it at the next meeting at the end as long as it as long as the meeting is not too too long. Build another hotel or something. Yes. We we could move to the next meeting or something.

So, maybe Yeah, maybe have some more formalized ideas for that meeting. You guys are already here. Um, unless that that agenda is looking really long, maybe plan on being around for an extra hour or so to really try and get some of this on paper. It'd probably be good if the building department could bullet point what they what their issues are. Yeah.

And then having that will be a basis to determine how to amend the code. So if you know what the main issues are as a commission from the administration, it's easy. write the code. I um I've written a few of them in my time. It's not present like a few specific cases. What brought this to be like you know without naming names but you know this address and you know like who who these like nuisance homes are that are putting a lot of mud or whatever in the street like what brought this?

Yeah. supposedly there's something going on that brought it. What I would say the most important thing is um what are the issues? So is it from the street to the main house? Is it from the house to the out building? What's a priority of the administration? Is it both those? What's an acceptable um uh what's an acceptable alternative? Can they can somebody do grass instead of a asphalt. What triggers the need to upgrade a property? Those are all things you you want to start to think through aesthetics or is it Yeah.

And then what's the, you know, are there outliers? So, we had a planning commission member last time say, "Look, if there's one in the way back, I don't want concrete drive or whatever going all the way back or it's too expensive." So, are there as you as a committ things that are sensitivities to you that draw the line like no this isn't going to work we can make some changes but this is what we think is reasonable at the end of the day council is the elected body that has to agree or disagree or modify what you're requesting okay I'll let you relate that all that's fine

let's plan on uh discussing this in more detail on And you know you may also want to we don't know if Mr. Finley is just a sponsor because, you know, he handles planning commission as part of his duties or maybe he's on board with something has to be changed and he feels strongly about things. You could invite him to the meeting to talk if he has, you know, Vinnie's been here, right? Vinnie's had issues that he feels strongly about. Surprising that

we have too. No, that's a good thing. You want to support the engine? GoPro. One of our rigs are driveway. You don't Yeah. You don't regulate or get involved with residential. So, so you wouldn't even have to attend that portion, would you? Well, I guess we're having a regular meeting, so he's going to be here. But yeah. Yeah, I got you. You may be like the engineer asked to leave. Okay, let's plan on doing that next meeting.

Yeah, if that's okay, put it on the agenda. Um, agenda, but we don't have the ATM folks here. But I would like to maybe circle back to it if that's appropriate just for brief discussion. Well, um, so I can I just ask a question? Yeah. So, um, Susan, were they notified of the meeting? Yeah, they made application. They were notified of the meeting. Um, I think you have it on your agenda. You can act on it or you can do what you want with it. They were notified. I have some comments. I would like Why don't you go over your comments for us and I got a thought on it. Sure.

Yeah. My report say it's September 6. So, so basically the ATM is not not an issue. There's one there already is I provide a little snippet of the Chase Bank one, right? It's zones um B3 drive-in banks as interpreted or permitted to the right. So, it really comes down to the aesthetics, the look, and then the height of these these signs because that's basically they have a lot of signage on here. They don't have a separate sign application. It's always historically been that the commission wants these as a separate signa application. So, they should do that. And if their intent is to have those signs at the elevations, you'll see in my my report, they're too tall and then it's just not attractive. And so, all of those reasons, um, my suggestion was, uh, they need to redesign this thing. And I felt a little more aligned with what we did with the Chase Bank ATM.

Right. Do you have any idea why they wanted the taller so trucks can maybe get some big trucker can get his It's not that. It's this piece. It's that piece. Oh. Oh, a different piece. Yeah. I have no idea why they do that. They should have kept the old one. Just changed the name. I could speculate First National Bank um isn't located by around the corner down the street. So I imagine if I'm in the marketing department, I want as much advertising as poss if you know that they actually removed the stuff that's out there. It's gone now.

Oh, the chase stuff is gone. Yeah, the driveway still there, but yeah, I didn't realize the ATM physically once they open their new location, they it was there for a couple months and then it's gone. Did Did um Chase have a a facility bank in the Commons, Rexville and Twinsburg, they had now they have one in Yeah. Yeah. Over there. Do they have one here? I thought they had a unit in the Commons at one time. used to be what's what's the the bank that's got the other now except from the Tesla station. Yeah. Yeah. Something star star.

Well, my my thoughts on this is is I feel like after last time after we approved what was out there before, it hit me that geez, I wish we would have had them do something closer to what was down there by by the the other the other ATM at the by the Outback did their signage a few months ago or the one that exists from Chase just changed the name but they took they took it all out. But yeah, the Flagstar one. Is that a Flagstar one? That's what it is now. But we have we have a question from our fire department. I'm sorry. There's a new Chase Bank over in Golden Link.

Yeah. And they have an ATM there. But I was just we were talking about did they have a location where this where the old ATM used to be in the mess area. I don't think they did. I think they had the ATM. I don't remember it because the one over here what used to be Ohio savings now flat Flagstar. Flagstar. It was a you know it's a significant it was okay. Yeah. Yeah. You know that's what we had those guys jump through some some moves you know it's kind of significant. It's more architecturally pleasing than than what was,

you know, built. The old one you can see in Brian's memo is basically a couple of hunks of metal and a blue little canopy. Um I would like to see them do something. Maybe it's encase it in brick or something. I I don't know. But that's what I I was saying something. Maybe just continue it. Have them come up the next meeting instead of Yeah. I don't think we'll make any decision. There's a lot of stuff that they could read comments. Maybe that would be the way it might be. I don't know. Or just at least break it in or something.

I don't know. Something something to make it look better. But but there's definitely there's things that have to be done. Burns count. I mean, it's just absolutely just too term in the middle. And that doesn't really match the aesthetics of every other building. in that entire shopping area. Yeah. So, Susie sent the comments. Yeah. As far as you know. Okay. I'll I'll make a motion to since the applicant's not here and there's significant comments on their application. I'll make a motion to continue this to the next to the uh October meeting.

I'll second that. All in favor? Hi. Okay. I think besides one thing I wanted to bring up. Um, some of you might know Mr. Cox has asked to for us to try to find a replacement for him. Yeah. Right. Um, so potentially this could be his last meeting. But whatever. I think even if it is, I would invite you to come to the Okay. to the next one to at least for the discussion on you got some ideas. Yeah, you guys seem to get excited. Um, we might have to but but this is your last meeting, Tony.

Thank you for being on the commission. I don't How many years has it been? Quite a few. Quite a few for 12 or 15 years. And appreciate your experience and your what you've contributed. Um, but hopefully we got you. You know, it be nice if we had you for another month. Um, officially, but uh, I'm sure they're going to start trying to look, but thanks for being on the commission. Sure. With that, I'll make a motion to adjurnn. Second. All right. Tony. Yeah. Sure. Did you go? You seconded. Wow. I'll vote for it, though. Okay. All in favor? All right.