Bza Meeting - Regular Meeting

hearing of the board of zoning and building code of appeals is now called to order at 6:32 on December 17th. I ask the recording secretary to please call a role for attendance of members on the board. Mr. Colado, yes. Mr. Shalo, yes. Mr. Freda, Mr. Scott, yes. Mr. Felman. Yes. Also present from the building department is zoning inspector Chris Hall and law director Marketti. All persons in the audience are required to sign in. Did you sign in by any chance? I guess so. I signed both. Okay.

Uh required to sign in on the registration sheet. If you have not done so already, please do so. If you wish to speak at the hearing, you will be required to be sworn in as in any court hearing. Uh we're not going to go over the minutes this week from last meeting. We're going to wait till next meeting and do all of them all at once. All persons wishing to speak on the issue will please raise your right hand and affirm this. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will be giving before this board is to the best of your knowledge and accurate and truthful presentation of the facts? If so, say I do.

I do. Now in turn, please state your name and relationship in the case to the recorder of voice recognition. I'm Jeff Snow. I'm the attorney for the applicant. Mr.11.

Thank you. The hearing will be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the state of Ohio sunshine law. The notice of the hearing was duly published in a newspaper in general circulation in the city of Macedonia. The notice is available for review upon request at the building department. The rules of the board require affirmative vote of three members in order to pass regardless of the number of members present at the hearing. The hearing is conducted in an informal manner to review the evidence and to respond to questions. However, there is an outline of steps that will be taken in order. The appellet does not have to be present for the board to hear the case as publicized. Each case number and request will be announced as a turn arrives. The first case number today will be 10.

Is that right? No, it's 722. The case number. Yeah, Chris, we don't have that. 722. 722 is the case. It's at the top, but it is 722. Okay. Um each case number will be announced as a turn arrives. The first case number is 722 and the appeal form is in order to the secretary and any is there any correspondence from a notified adjacent property owners? No, there is not. Is there any unsolicited correspondence regarding this case? No, there is not.

Will the zoning inspector please state the city's position? This is a continuation of the November 19th, 2025 meeting uh case number 722. The Board of Zoning and Building Code Appeals will hear a request for a variance at 1011 East Aurora Road. The variance is to section 11711 E2A. Parking and access drives shall be set back from the street rightway a minimum of 20 ft. The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the setback from the rightway to 10t 8 in a variance of 9 ft 4 in.

Does the board have any questions to the city?

I have one question. What was the variance on la last meeting? If you could just kind of uh bring me up to speed. Last last month it was a variance of what? 10 feet 8 in and now it's it's a variance of 9 feet in 4 in. The setback would be 10t 8 in. The request tonight is a 7 foot variance based on the drawing of the oneway. I'm sorry to interrupt sure that's clear. The variance was 9'4 in. We've decreased that by 25% based on the suggestion of a oneway and side load parking. It does save um approximately 3 ft. So we're asking for a 7 foot variance

instead of an I4 which means the front yard would be 13 ft. Okay. The board will now allow the presentation from the appellet.

Sure. I think we summarized this in our letter. We were fortunate enough that the architect got it to us one day before the due date and we were able to bring that to you. Um this is a decrease from 9 f' 4 in to 7 ft which was a 25% decrease uh for the variance. Um he's also decreased the number of parking spaces because of the side load. So we go from 17 spaces plus one handicap to 14 spaces and one handicap another decrease. The variance is consistent with the neighborhood. I carefully went over what the other ones are. Uh there's there's setbacks of those areas that vary from the 20 ft of 2 and 1/2 ft to 13 ft along the uh eight properties in this area. There are only two properties that actually comply with the setback. Dr. Bodies is one of those and the car wash is the other. We are um you know I don't want to belabor it. We are seeking the variance of only seven feet based on the suggestion of rerouting this the and making it a oneway the um factors that you look at here these are based on the city's ordinances and also a case out there called Duncan versus Middlefield and that's to set up to question what are practical difficulties as I said initially last month our practical difficulty is we cannot move the building back 7 ft in order to avoid a variance. We can't get parking in the front. We brought the realtor. We didn't bring them again, but you know, he's been marketing the property the entire time. We were close with a financial services um client, but they didn't want to pursue the property and pursue the build because they were concerned about parking in the front of this property. It is a practical difficulty with the

property. We cannot move to the building. Gordon Food Service next door has this identical thing, a seven foot variance. I brought that last month. We are consistent with what's in the neighborhood. This is the minimum amount that we need. Um we have had a long journey in this matter and we a very too long and we hope that Dr. her older buddy is actually excited about building this out and getting rid of those drive-thru lanes and putting parking in the front. We have onethird of that building which is not rented. It is not usable space as it sits because we cannot put parking in front of it.

That's the new the new section you're talking about. No, no. Part of our existing building, a third of our building is not used. It is you may not realize it, but it's walled off. to the drive. Okay. Nobody want nobody wants it. It has a part of the drive-thru. We want to rehab that and extend the space underneath the roof and then put in the parking. Your suggestion of trying to minimize the variance was helpful in getting the architect to kind of Gentlemen, I apologize. Oh, no problem. First time in three years. Um, I'm going to stop you right there. Y Chris, would you do another roll call, please? Sure. Mr. Palato here. Mr. Shel, yes. Mr. Ayafredo, speaking.

Mr. Scott, yes. Mr. Fawson, yes. Thank you, sir. I'm sorry. Go ahead. No problem. So, we have diligently tried to market the property to find tenants. We were very close with service tenant. The issue is the parking and being able to easily access it. We have tried various ways of finding other ways to get parking there. um next to the building, but that driveway limits what we can do on the west side of the building. I see you take you took Mr. Scott's ideas and put them to good use.

I think we I hope we did. Um I think he did a really good job. We didn't have a lot of impact. We we you told him what to do. That's the good thing that he has background good background with construction. So that never came to my mind otherwise I would Does the realtor have any concerns with So we're losing a few parking spots. Does that impact your potential? Well, the idea is we need we need we need something this way. This way this way you have immediate access to the to the property. But

I think answer your question, Bryant France. Okay. This property without the new parking spots has more parking spaces than needed. Yep. So, yeah. So, I got that, but I know we're just the front parking was was an issue. So, I know you're losing a few, but is that an issue with the realtor? We asked him, he said it's still better than nothing. Yeah, right now we have nothing. And so, we are happy with something. We are losing about what what amounts to three spaces. It's 16%. I did the calculation of it, but we can work with it and and you gain you gain basically almost three feet.

Um so we're trying to minimize that variance. We also have um landscaping here. We still go to the planning commission. He brought his original plans um just brief. Those plans were originally approved. Dr. Alabati sat with the mayor before he bought the property and talked about this. That was Mig Joe Miglerini at the time. He went before the planning commission. This plan was approved. exactly like we have it. But then he didn't build it within the year. So that plan expired, right? So we had to start again and that's what created the variance issue. And that's created this is what it's going to be right now.

You have an opening here. You're going to have to move the the um entrance. Okay. And this is going to be all one way all the way around. Correct. Well, you have to open up this this driveway across the street from Tractor Supply. You're widening it. You're widening it. We're not changing the alignment. No, no, the alignment straight with with Tractor Supply. I mean, uh, Gordon Food Ser. I'm sorry. Yes. And then the rest of the landscaping. I see that you put a a block garbage garbage can in the back in the corner. Yeah. Yeah. all the new landscaping all around. You're going to have to go through planning commission to get that all approved.

Okay. But they'll like that probably and they may give you some more suggestions. Um yeah, I thought Mr. Scott did a pretty good job here and it really did save some some space and I really don't think you're losing much to be true. Okay. The only problem I have, and I know that this has been from day one, you don't want your customers or patients to walk, okay, far. Okay. I don't feel that one handicap parking space up front is sufficient. I would like to see all three of these spots as handicap. Okay. The existing door that you have now, entrance to the dentist office, there is no handicap there.

No, there is no I drove through it. There are there are codes that govern that also. I understand I will have three parkings handicap park for the property. One in the front here and two out here they are existing. But your suggestion is that these turn into handicap. That's absolutely right. Yeah. That's was your main thing coming in here. You didn't want people walking 200 feet. Okay. So, if you're only going to give one handicap for the person that can't make it 20 feet, all right, make all three of these up front. All right. Handicap. All right. You have 17 or

But that limits that that limits the customers that can park there. So, I Well, they can park right across the street right here. Well, but I can again that's not exactly exactly what we're not here to discuss. codes that we have to go before the the planning commission here. Correct. And we will be there to discuss it once if you grant a variance. We will talk to them about handicap spaces and what should or shouldn't be handicapped because this over here might also function as a handicap space because it has a side load.

Um you'll see that this handicap space has a side load area. So a handicapped van could unload. There's minimum require requirements uh you know for these type and we're not we're not looking we're not here to discuss anything outside of that. Uh so any any codes that govern that is outside of this meeting to be quite Chris. What is the code on that? Do you know? Excuse me. the code the code on hand no

like I said the thing is you know I just we're we're we're talking about what the layout is and this is what we talked about last time in the last three times. Okay. So I rather get it out on the table here. Okay. If I have to go to the planning commission meeting, I'll go to the planning commission meeting and bring it up to them. Okay. But your main thing when you came in here from day one was your problem, okay, of handicap or not handicap but the walking distance. Okay. And I don't feel one parking spot for handicap is sufficient is what I'm telling you. Okay?

So you could do that on your own or wait to the planning commission, whatever. But I'm going to recommend it to the planning commission. Okay? It's a good recommendation. Y whether it gets somewhere or not is what we're here to vote on. I'm here to discuss about not other codes. So, we don't have anything further unless any of you have questions. We appreciate your time and we want you to earn your $5 quicker. I didn't even know that you guys are paid $5. Yeah. So, I appreciate your time and your energy in looking at this and we appreciate the suggestions that you've made all along the way.

Well, I I will say this. I'm glad you took the suggestions and I'm glad we were able to meet again. Uh and this has been a long time coming. I wish I I wish I would have been here, you know, in the beginning of this. Um you know, not having parking in the front along the street seems absurd, especially when everybody else does. I see you took my suggestions. I am a little bit disappointed that your architect chose 60° versus 45° which would then minimize the impact on the road. So I not to beat a dead horse, you know, we're talking, you know, you're saying 16% that would decrease that to about 14%. If you went from 60% uh to 40 60° to 45° uh but you know I I think this is long overdue. I I think in my opinion um there's been a compromise on both ends. Um but once again bit disappointed that you guys chose 60 degrees versus 45 degrees when we're trying to minimize the impact. Okay. That was a choice you guys made. Just saying it's disappointing.

Give us more parking spots. It' be less. So So what what the it wasn't the amount of parking spots that you were coming here for. it was front parking. There was never anything specified on the amount of parking, but we're trying to minimize the impact on the city, right? So minimize would be 45° versus 60. So what we did is we instructed the the uh architect to come up with a plan that had siloed and we didn't have a I I didn't know there was a difference with regard to it and I appreciate it and we can certainly talk to them as we get to a final plan.

Yeah, I think that would be more appropriate than the 60° because we are trying to minimize.

All right. And and the reason why we went with the side load parking is to minimize and we all agreed on that. Okay. So this is like almost there but then a half a step back, right? So that's a little disappointing that he chose that knowing that we're trying to minimize the effect. Well, I I appreciate the the words and what I do want to say about these factors so we're clear. These are factors that no single factor controls this and you don't have to meet all of these factors. Does that make sense? So I know one of the factors is um whether the inentral character of the neighborhood would be changed uh whether it um you know it could be minimized in some other way. Those are all like as a group not one not every one of them necessarily has to be met. What we will do is we will work with the architect and the planning commission to come up with a plan that would meet all their expectations too.

Yeah. And usually what dictates whether you're going 45° or 60° is the lane traffic that you have to approach that. And this I believe you have 19 18 ft 19 ft which is plenty uh to go to 45° and it actually makes your approach even a little bit more comfortable to be quite honest and it makes it minimize uh the depth that you have on the property. It's better use of the space. Could you do that on both sides? You can do it here and you can do it here because you wouldn't want to make one. And then you got this double hashed here for next to the handicap. It would get pushed that way and you don't lose anything here because

I'm just I'm just wondering if from your expertise could we do it on could they do it on You should do it on both sides. Yeah, you would want to. Yeah, that's all I'm asking. I I would tell him that if this pass today, I would tell them to see if he can revise it to be 456 contingent on that change. I I I would recommend the board approve this contingent as drawn contingent on that change. I don't know how to properly do that discussing this because this angle and you go this angle you need more more space like more this more variance like instead of being

it'll be less variance you'll need less variance trust more this once it's strong you'll see you'll need you'll need less we did not have a lot of an impact with the architect we basically said this is You're lucky you got it back that quick. Well, we were amazed that we made the day and then that week we didn't think we were getting it and then we just for like we need it at 60% we're at we're at 7 ft 60° 60° I'm sorry at 40° probably going to be where about 6 foot

45 degrees. So that that that that's a change of what are we looking at 25%. So 15 30 45 60. So it's a 25% change in the tangent. So you know you're going from 60° to 45°. So you're just changing that a little bit. So we went from 9 ft to 7 ft. That'll bring us probably down or whatever the math was that we're asking last month. This month it would drop down a little bit. We get more in line with our bylaws or whatever it's called that you know minimum necessary. Any other questions? So are you looking to make a motion then? I don't know how to properly do that. So what I would suggest for the motion if I if you don't mind

go ahead. Um based on your discussion would be a motion to grant the amended variance request of a of a 7 foot variance subject to compliance with any applicable regulations imposed through the Alexandria Square Association and contingent on the parking angle being reduced from 60° to 45°. And if you want to do the handicap parking handicap parking, if you want to put it in, if not, I'll go to planning commission. I mean, that's so somebody can say so moved if you want to make that motion. So moved. Absolutely. Unless you have anything else to add to that.

So moved, which what you talked about, or the handcap, what I what I just read. So if you make the motion, if you say so moved, so moved. Then somebody can second it. I second. You can make a motion to amend to add on the handicap if you want and then you guys can vote on the handicap aspect afterward. Right now I would like to add on the handicap to the extra handicaps in the front on the

I just need to bring your attention if we're going to do three handicap in the front and the other two handicap the property will have five handicap. It's from 42 to from 42. I already have existing two hand by the this by this door here. You're telling me you have two at this door here. I have at the existing entrance to the dentist. There's two. There are two in the rear. And that's how I saw one side to each other. There's two each other. Well,

okay. So, so Chairman Plato, if I'm understanding correctly, you want to make a motion to amend the main motion to recommend to the planning commission that they consider requiring handicap parking as you've stated. That's correct. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. So, you can say so moved. So move. If somebody wants to second it, you guys can then vote on it. If there's no second, then there's no second and you just vote on the main motion. I'll second that motion. Chris, you take a roll call, please. Hold on. This vote for everything.

This vote is only on adding the handicap recommendation to the planning commission. Okay, Chris. Mr. Palado, yes. Mr. Shela, no. Mr. Hya, yes. Mr. Scott, no. Mr. Fossil, no. So the motion to amend fails. So now the main motion is in front of you uh to grant the variance request as amended subject to the Alexandria Square Association regulations and contingent upon the parking angle being reduced from the 60° to 45°. We can have discussion or call vote. Mr. Pado,

is there any discussion? Anybody want to add anything to that or discuss anything? Okay, Chris, go ahead. Mr. Shel, yes. Mr. Alfredo, yes. Mr. Scott, yes. Mr. Fossil, yes. You didn't do me. You referred to I don't I didn't say anything. Oh, did you call? Yes. Did you say? No, I said yes. Oh, okay. Thank you so much. So, case 722 has passed and you'll be going to the planning commission. Thank you very much.

Yes, you're welcome. We'll consider all your thoughts here. That would be great. Thank you. How long has this been going for? Three years. Years. Merry Christmas everyone. We appreciate that. This is the fifth time this Thank you so much. Have a great holiday. You too. Merry Christmas everybody. Okay. And happy new year. And I'd also like to thank the service department and the rec center. Okay. For the lights in Longwood Park and the service department for keeping these roads

clean. All right. And the safety forces because they're on top of Santa Claus and all. So, thank you very much. Merry Christmas to everybody. Happy New Year. And um I guess we'll set up a meeting for January for officers. Chris. Okay. We'll see what's going on there. All right. I will not be here. Okay. Anybody else? I have grand jury duty for two months. Yeah. Have a good time. Um well, we'll see. Um we may just set it up anyhow because it's not going to be no big deal. Um, if you guys need a secretary, I can come in for that, too.

Okay, I'll let you know. And the only thing is is the minutes. If you got them done, send them to me or drop them off at the house and I'll sign them and we'll go from there. Okay. Um, motion to adjurnn. Thank you all of you very much. Thank you. Merry Christmas.