Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Call this evening's meeting of the planning commission to order. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Roll call, please. Jamie. Mrs. Clancy, here. Mr. Wagner, here. Mrs. Chupto, here. Mr. Basik here. Mr. to Kulak.

All right. Uh, we have two sets of minutes to approve. I'll address the October 14th minutes first. Make a motion to approve u minutes from October 14th, 2025 PC 101425. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Uh, any discussion? Roll call, please. Mrs. Clancy, yes. Mr. Wagner, yes. Mrs. Trepto, yes. Mr. Basik, yes. Motion carries. Uh, now the October 28th minutes.

I motion for approval of PC 102825 meeting minutes. I second. It's been moved and seconded that we approve the minutes from October 28th. Uh, roll call, please. Mrs. Clancy, yes. Mr. Wagner, yes. Mrs. Trepto, yes. Mrs. Derby, yes. Motion carries. Any old business? All right, let's get into the uh new business. First is consideration of the 2026 planning commission dates.

Yep. So, you should have a print out of the uh schedule in front of you. Just typical meeting dates. uh second and fourth Tuesday of every month. I'll give you notice. I will not be at the January 13th. Okay. Thank you. All right. Motion to approve. I motion to approve the uh 2026 planning commission dates as presented. Second. It's been moved and seconded that we approve the dates. Any discussion? Roll call, please. Mrs. Clancy,

yes. Mr. Wagner, yes. Mrs. Trupto, yes. Mr. Basik, yes. Motion carries. All right. Uh, on to number two, please. Zach.

Thank you. Uh, this application is PC25-31. This property is at 4149 Steels Point Drive, which is at the corner of Steels Point and Steels Corner on the northwest corner. Uh, this property is just over one acre and zone C5 for highway service. This is for a uh conditional use for a canvas dispensary, uh, site plan approval and couple variances. Um on the zoning map, just do want to point out since it'll be coming up in one of the variances that this property butts an R1 district uh to the west of the property. All right. So the site plan uh this includes a 2400 ft building uh 27 parking spaces which includes two ADA compliant spaces. Access to the site will be provided off of Steel's Point. uh two-way access towards the north of the property. Uh for building setbacks and parking setbacks is does comply with all of those. Uh the building itself will be located about 56 ft from the west property line which is probably the residential uh 60 ft from the north and then from the uh there's corner lot. So there's two front yards. Uh the south end that'll be 117 ft and to the east is 77 ft. uh parking setbacks complies with that as well. Um 20 feet along the front and 25 feet to the rear, 10 feet on the side. So they comply with all the required setbacks. Uh landscaping plan which has been approved by the city arborist. Uh this includes 9.3% uh interior parking lot landscaping which is almost double of our requirement of 5%. does include 12 new trees, 103 shrubs. Um, also includes uh shrubs along the

front of the parking to the south to screen the parking spaces from the street which is required as well. And then renderings of the building. I can come back to these if you have any questions. They did include a floor plan. Uh, so the way it works is there's a check-in lobby. When you walk in, um, applicant is here. They can probably better describe the operations, but check in, provide your ID, get a badge to come in the sales floor. Um, all the product will be at the back of the building in a secured vault. And just a few more renderings of the inside. All right. And then so the supplemental regulations for cannabis facilities. Um so starting with a uh this this is in line with the state requirement that no facility shall be within one mile of another current or proposed facility which it complies with. Uh section B does require a variance. states that a facility shall not be within 1,000 feet measured from parcel line to parcel line um in which there is situated a school, place of worship, public library, public playground, a public park or an opioid treatment facility. Uh this facility is uh 955 ft from a daycare which is at 4117 Bridgewater Parkway. uh daycarees do they fall under the definition of a school under the state uh code. So they do need a variance from that. Um C, D, and E is no outdoor storage, no outdoor sales, and no drive-through facility, which they comply with. And then section

F is that they are also required to be 1,000 ft from a residential district. Um this property, as I mentioned, is a budding residential district. So it has a zero foot setback basically. Uh this is the radius map that was supplied by the applicant showing where these locations are. Obviously residential to the west. Um do want to point out that property is vacant. So the nearest dwelling is the property uh over which the dwelling itself is about 600 ft from this property. And then the daycare facility is southeast. It's all around children which is 955 ft from this property. I do want to talk about the existing code. Uh so right now based on these uh 1,000 ft buffers, everything in blue is 1,000 ft from residential or schools, parks, playgrounds. Uh so really under the existing code the only locations that are compliant compliant with those setbacks are in the northwest corner of the city which are industrial properties and we are going through the process of updating our code. We have our third reading at council um on December 4th. We'll see how that goes. Um but that code does propose to change those regulations. So it would limit the number of dispensaries to just one in the city. So, if this project is approved and the code is approved, it would just be the only one in the city. Um, still have to meet the onem separation. Drive-through and outdoor storage would be prohibited. Um, and then we would eliminate the 10,00 foot setback from residential and reduce the 10,00 foot back 10,00 foot setback uh from the

schools, churches, libraries from 1,000 ft to 500 ft. So, under the proposed regulations, the site would comply with those. But, um, I will leave this up for review. Again, this for a conditional use for a dispensary site plan approval and variances from the uh school setback and the residential setback. Um, the applicant has a whole team here and they have a presentation as well. So, happy to take any questions.

Who's going to be presenting? Uh, can you turn that on? Just push the button down at the bottom and then if you could state your name and address. Yes. I'm Chris Nikcamp, an attorney with Buckingham D and Burroughs. I'm the attorney for the applicant and the applicant is Juicy Spa LLC. The property owner is Courthouse Square Investment Group LLC and affiliated Endy. And your address?

My address is 3800 Embassy Parkway sweet 300 Fairlon 44333. And if you could raise your hand, what you are about to say will be the truth. I agree. Okay. I would like to introduce my client to speak and same thing, sir. Name and address. Good evening. My name is Justin Kerry, uh, head of real estate for for the applicant. Uh, my address is 301 Yamato Road, uh, sweet 3250, Boca Raton, Florida 33431. And you swear that what you're about to say will be the truth? I do.

Very good. Go ahead.

Yeah. So, uh, we brought a presentation for you. It's many pages long. I'm happy to answer any questions but in the interest of everyone's time I I'll I'll give the very high level summary of who we are and what we do and what we would are ambitious to do here in Stow. Uh you I work for a company called Jushi. Jui is is the parent company. You'll hear me use the term the company Jushi uh the company name Juicy uh interchangeably with uh the name Beyond Hello. So, Beyond Hello is the brand name or the retail uh name for our dispensaries. Uh and Jushi is the parent company uh above above all of them. We have 42 uh compliant regulated dispensaries throughout the US. We operate in eight states uh in the regulated cannabis uh markets um including Ohio. We have a a history of operating in Ohio. Uh that's now going on for years. We have uh uh six dispensaries open in the state of Ohio currently. Seventh is due to open uh just before Christmas. And so if we're fortunate enough to you know obtain the approvals we're looking for uh and ambitious for we you know Stow would would be the eighth uh dispensary which is the maximum allowed under under the state regulations. Uh so we're ambitious towards that. Um we have been uh working to identify uh real estate and and an overall opportunity in Stow for for some time. We've digested and and understood the current set of regulations and have made you know multiple attempts uh on on properties and and had discussions with landlords and property sellers throughout throughout the city um and have settled on the property that is you know part of this application for for a number of

reasons. Um at a high level um you know why Summit County, why why Stowe, we look to uh for this ETH store uh you know we look for markets that we believe are underserved. Um there are are a number of dispensaries. I think close to 200 in the state right now and a lot of them are heavily concentrated in Cincinnati and Cleveland and Columbus and and other large um metropolitan areas. And then you have a you know number of dispensaries dispersed throughout uh the rest of the state and and and in Summit County. But as we looked at at Stow as just a a general marketplace, you know, there's there's a a dense population not only of just, you know, general citizens, but of of cannabis uh customers and and medical cannabis uh patients that that live in Stow who currently don't have a local uh establishment to visit. Uh they currently would need to drive to to Kent or to Kyhoga or or Akran or or elsewhere. Um and so the the the high level uh drive to to find something in Stow uh w was primarily because of that. We can look at some some some data that tells us that this is an area where um we believe, you know, the population of cannabis users would be pleased to have somewhere to go uh that's safe, that's accessible, that's uh you know, convenient and, you know, saves them however many minutes of traffic every week or or month depending on the type of of of customer or patient that they are. Um, we settled on this property, uh, because we think it's, uh, you know, checks a lot of the boxes that I just mentioned in terms of accessibility and and safety and and and accessibility, uh, sizing. Um, we we are often limited

in terms of the the types of landlords that are um, have the capability to rent to us. We're not able to often uh lease space in large shopping centers because of deed restrictions or lease restrictions from their anchor tenants or sometimes their banks have prohibitions against uh cannabis in spite of the fact that we're you know legal and state regulated and licensed and compliant organizations. So the fact that this property was for sale was advantageous to our to our efforts. Um and so we were able to negotiate and have and do have the property under contract. the applicant or the you know property owner is referenced as the current uh owner but they are the seller and we have the property under contract and hope to close on that property and construct uh what what you saw in the renderings. Um happy to discuss anything uh about our operations uh as pertains to the variances that that we are seeking. You know once we identified Stow as a market that we would look to to uh hope you know hopefully uh open in eventually. We are guided off, you know, by the state regulations in terms of setbacks, which all six of our other dispensaries are compliant with in terms of being 500 feet from schools, daycarees, churches, places of worship, public parks, uh, etc. So, this uh property uh in under discussion today meets those requirements that that the state regulator, the department of excuse me, the division of cannibus control um implies on us. And so um we you know we have confidence that that the the state regulator will will look favorably upon this uh property because uh it meets those requirements as well as the fact that it meets a need where there you know from from the demographic perspective that that I spoke to earlier. Um and so we are requesting a variance um uh you know as relates to the current

set of guidelines which you know are challenging um with respect to the residential zone we we you know and as that kind of pointed out there's not really anywhere you can go in Stow that would meet that you know requirement of being a thousand feet from a res residential zone but for a few uh industrial areas which you know we we have not uh opened opened retail establishments in an industrial zone doesn't uh quite meet the standards that we you know require of ourselves in terms of safety, accessibility, etc. And so uh we are requesting variance there. Um and then as you know relates to the the the school uh daycare setback you know we are requesting a variance given that the you know the state guidelines uh will be met at the five foot 500 foot measurement. Um also the state regulator measures from excuse me um the exterior of the premises not the property line. So if if you look at our where we intend to uh hopefully build you know a structure um that premises is is in in excess of the thousand feet from the property line of of the school in question. So, it's a matter of of 40 or 45 feet that um we believe um in the long run would be immaterial to the operations of our business, the safety of the constituents and citizens of Stow and um respectfully request variance on both. Happy to answer any questions you may have.

Any questions? So, you mentioned that the actual building structure needs to be those distances, but it looks like in the map that you showed, you're actually going by the property line, correct? So, the building is going to be further away. Correct. By building, building to building, correct? Okay. Yep. Yeah. the the the exhibits that we produced for this presentation are measured based on the the guidelines from the the STO workings property line to property line. But

okay, um if we were to produce an exhibit that measured uh by by means of the state uh requirements, we would measure from the building and the distances would be slightly different. Thank you. You're welcome. In the residential district though, that's not the case. Correct. It's It's correct. There's no getting around it that we abut the R1 uh uh zone, which puts us a thousand feet off from the requirement. Um uh like like it's previously been discussed, there's there's not anywhere that you could

buy, lease, or develop uh in the city limits that wouldn't uh have an issue of a being a,000 ft from a residential zone. You know, we feel that as far as residential zones go, these are fairly uh light in terms of the number of dwellings and, you know, the the you know, the potential for uh you know, neighborly interaction is low. Although we welcome, you know, our neighbors to to be uh uh you know, part of our organization and us a part of their neighborhood. But nonetheless, um, yeah, and the zone that we directly abut actually doesn't have any dwellings on it. And and I believe it would be, anyone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it would be challenging to to develop a house or or dwellings on the the R1 that's directly abuing against this just because of the water. But um as you know given that you can't identify a property that doesn't have an R1 zone within a thousand feet, we feel like this one has the least amount of challenges to it given the circumstances

and you're totally against industrial area. I I we we are my you know we have a security team and a compliance team that and a retail operations team that um just doesn't you know doesn't it doesn't doesn't fit their their requirements and criteria for for operating a you know a regulated business.

What is your proposed timeline for development for building? Uh so the floor plans and the renderings and the submissions that we we we brought to you today are still early stage and I I suppose uh subject to to slight uh alteration depend of course within the guidelines of of code um and we have to go to council and and you know go through some more steps here at the local level. So, you know, we we predict that from the time that we receive the final approval on our use and can close on the property, nine months to to to develop the the groundup build uh project and hopefully cut a ribbon.

Okay. Thank you. Anyone else have any comments they'd like to make? State your name and address, please. Phil Herman, 677 East Steels Corners Road. And do you swear that what you're about to say is the truth? I do. Thank you.

Good evening, uh, Planning Commission members. Thank you for uh your service first of all, and thanks for hearing my comments tonight. Um, as I uh share with you, um, I live at 677 East Seals Corners Road. the house that was pointed out as the closest um residence uh there. Um my mother and I collectively own that 50 acres that you see there in the uh in the yellow. Um this is immediately west and north of this parcel that we're talking about here tonight. And while a port uh portions appear vacant according to the description, that land is all our family home. It's where we raised our kids. Um it's where I was raised um as a kid. Um, it's the property um where my brother uh lives in a third home uh uh here. Now, I'm here tonight to respectfully ask you deny the variances requested for the uh adult use cannabis cannabis dispensary um proposed on that property. Um the last time I addressed this commission was during the reasonzoning of this parcel to C5 um highway use or highway service. At that time, I shared concerns about the types of intense commercial uses that could be placed next to our home. Uh but despite those concerns, I did take comfort knowing that the city had put clear protections in place um regulating the use of the property um around it. Those parcels that you see is um C5 there. Um and then I was especially glad to see ordinance 2024243 that was passed in Stow in January. Um and that ordinance was adopted specifically to guide the placement of adult use cannabis facilities and to shield the residential areas, the schools, the sensitive uses from incompatible adjacencies to residential. Um and so tonight the applicant's asking the city to disregard those protections and to um put the very first um test of that ordinance um to the test. Um so first the applicant's requesting a zero foot setback as we know from residential district um where the ordinance

currently requires 1,00 ft and that's not a minor variance going from 1,000 ft um to to zero. It's a complete removal of uh of an ordinance. Um to put this in context as you know um my home is approximately 600 feet from the parcel. Um the nearest school bus stop is uh that serves those children is about 310 ft away from that parcel right across the street there um on the other side of the McDonald's. Um and we were described as the closest residence, but I believe the closest residence um is in the Bridgewater Park apartments that are approximately 450 ft from uh from the parcel. um inside the 500 feet um that has been referenced as a proposed um ordinance or proposed change. Granting a full waiver of the thousand foot residential buffer would effectively place the dispensary inside of what is our established neighborhood. It's where we live um whether or not C5 um is considered residential or not. Second, the applicant seeks to reduce the thousand foot school set back to 950 ft. Council chose a thousand foot buff buffer, double the state requirement because Stow wanted stronger protections for schools. If 950 ft were adequate or the desired, um I think council would have written that into the ordinance. They didn't. They wrote a thousand. Um third, granting variances of this magnitude would set an interesting precedent um uh in the in uh in Stow. If the viances are granted, future applicants will understandably argue that the residential and school setbacks in that ordinance are they're flexible. They're negotiable. Um they're optional. I don't think that's how they were intended. Um uh certainly not eliminating them from a th00and ft to zero feet. I feel like the commission has an important responsibility tonight. Um and let me make it clear whether or not one supports adult use cannabis is not the issue. Um the issue is whether planning commission um would uh approve

the elimination of um of an ordinance from a thousand feet to zero ft where abuts residential and that's a concern. Um Stow does have multiple commercial and industrial areas um uh where a dispensary could operate. Um well it's not ideal for the dispensary. It's also not ideal for our families to have it that close um to where we live. Um, for these reasons, I respectfully ask the commission to uphold the intent and the original uh uh intent or integrity of the uh ordinance that was passed just this year in January. Um, and uh, thank you for your time. Thank you. Anyone else care to make comments?

Hi, Hannah Mink. Um, 200 Uklid A. I swear I'm about to tell the truth. Okay.

Um, so I just wanted to reiterate that what Zach had talked about earlier and what we had also presented is that the 10,00 variance is just the 10,00 variance for the schools is actually 500 ft at state law. And so when they're proposing that for the revision, it's to mirror the state law. So the state of Ohio has determined that 500 feet is sufficient protection. Not that Stow has to follow that. They can are free of course to make that more stringent if they choose. But the 500 ft is state law. And then as state law there is no residential limitations either. So the proposal was to mirror state law and state requirements. And so that is what the state of Ohio has determined is necessary for cannabis dispensaries. And so, thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Anyone else?

Hi. Hi. Uh Ian Jones, uh 907 Fairline Corporate Parkway. Um and I do swear to tell the truth. Pretty good.

Um so, uh I work for Avid Architects. um and we are uh who put together the vicinity map um for the application. Um and so yeah, I can speak to we we also did a similar test that uh Zach had shown where you know trying to find an applicable um parcel within the city. Um and and yeah, just with uh the residential radius being a thousand, it it pretty much shuts down everything except for a few spots that um you know, couple that with only being permitted in a C4 C5 and then also um the the restrictions around the thousand foot around schools and and whatnot. Um there's really not um a compliant spot in the city. So that it kind of wipes out the possibility of um you know

well there are compliant spots. You can't say there are no compliant spots in the city. Well um yeah I I could go through the map in detail I guess but yeah generally um there's there not many. I'll agree with that. Yeah that there are compliance spots in the city.

Yeah. According to what I've put what we put together, there's there's a location that is currently like a Dick Sportings good store and you know technically within you know if that were to be redeveloped there would be a spot that you could put a dispensary um or similar to Kohl's um and then there's a similar property uh with just a sliver that it seems like that there's one possible green field spot that could fit a small area of a of that parcel. Now, would it be the highest and best use at that point? Probably not. But um but yeah, it's um it's a handful that it basically makes it extremely challenging to um find compliance within the city of Stow. Um so, so yeah. Yep. So, just figured I'd kind of go over that.

Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions? Jamie, was there any input from the community? Okay. Motion

the new code.

Um, again, third reading is December 4th. I don't know. We'll see if if it gets approved that night or if it gets dragged on into next year. Uh right now the legislation it we have it set to be effective February 9th. And I will I will just say that uh from my reading of the zoning code when I was putting together legislation after you guys approved it, u this board has already removed the residential uh zoning requirement uh to the zoning code that is going before council now. Uh so obviously that is not in effect at this moment but if it were to go into effect uh that residential has been entirely removed. There's no 500 foot there's no 150 foot. It's gone completely in uh to match the state code.

Yeah. But we are under the current law now though. Correct. So, an application has to match the current law. Correct.

Anyone care to make a motion? Other than the, I assume, potential loss of revenue, what would that do to you to postpone and move into February? where an application where we wouldn't have to deal with any of these variances.

Two answers to that question. Excuse me. Um, one, we don't own the property. We have it under contract. We have it under contract for a period of time that doesn't go forever and doesn't necessarily go until February. So, could lose the property. Secondly, uh as the state regulations and the state licensing scheme is designed, there are uh only a certain number of uh state licenses that have been awarded. Um and not all of them have been cited and developed and opened as of yet. So, um, the Summit County, so they they break the the state regulator has broken the state up into a number of different regions. I think it's A through maybe H. I think uh Summit County is its own region, region G. And each region has a certain number of licenses and dispensaries that could be allowed within that region. Um and Summit County uh because of the fact that there are certain number of dispensaries open in the county already has one spot left. So um we're aware that the code is potentially changing and up for discussion and um third reading and what have you. So, uh, it sort of begs the question, um, well, can you just hang around and wait and then, you know, you'll be compliant. The the the reason we decided to to go for the variance is that last point that I made. I we're not in control of uh our other licensed uh, you know, colleagues and competitors and what they're up to. So, um, we we wanted to, um, I don't want to say aggressively, but we wanted to to put forth the variance

request timely because if someone else were to open uh, uh, get a license, take their license, go to the state, and say, "Hey, I have a property. We want to put it here." And the state says, "Good for you. You're you're 500 feet from schools and daycarees and etc., etc. uh you're you're you're the license um then then there's there's no chance for us to to develop you know here here in Stow so Akran uh cannabis uh dispensary adult use cannabis dispensary is a permitted right in most you know certain commercial zones uh with no caps no limits on how many you can put in Akran same thing with Kyhoga Falls um there are already some dispensaries there in those two municipalities that I just mentioned so you know hey why don't you just find something inac. That's also not not what we really uh would intend to do. But again, not not knowing the inner workings of my my other colleagues in the industry, um the minute somebody opens a store that's buy in in Kyogre Falls, even if you you know granted me the variance, if they beat me to the to the state and put in the pin in the map and getting, you know, then then you've even when you change your code your ordinance in February, the opportunity to open in in Stow is now gone. So that that's the reason we didn't just sit sit back um and wait and why we we requested the variance. No.

Any I know you mentioned the gentleman mentioned about other locations to put this that wouldn't be necessarily as good as or as favorable I should say to what you're looking at here. Where are those locations? have you when you were going through that process of determining other opport I just meant to say that we made you know we have real estate brokers and uh you know a team that that as I you know there are properties that are on the market on camp road and on on Graham you know any number of reason I mean a property on on Graham code, you know, looks like it meets some of the setbacks, but not all of them. And but it's also in the C3, so you'd have to res, you know, reszone the the property. So you know I just I mentioned that to say there are you know it's not to say that there are no properties you know uh in in in so there's some degree of uh of a denominator of saying okay well they're literally all going to require a variance you know except but for up in you know the small sliver of an industrial zone uh so you know this one for all the reasons I mentioned mentioned accessibility, safety, convenience, you know, the fact that it's for sale, that we can reasonably acquire it, all all those reasons factor in. So, we there are, you know, we we've made the calls, we've done uh the diligence and made the efforts to canvas Stow, but it's not as if I have a a 1B, you know, property. We have this one under contract.

Okay. Mhm. Chris Namp again on behalf the applicant. Uh the property is one of the least intrusive properties to residential. You currently have the buffer with all due respect to the gentleman that spoke the the one parcel as a buffer and you have steel's corners across the street as a barrier to the daycare. It's actually as far as location, you know, one of the most ideal locations for this for this type of use and the least intrusive for residential in in the city and you have designated that you are going to allow one and there's possibility that they won't get it if this is not approved. And so you you have the tax income and other issues there as well as you're I'm sure you're aware of. Uh so I thought I'd add that. Um make a motion to approve application PC25-31 as presented. A second. It's been moved and seconded. Uh, is there any other discussion?

Roll call, please. Mrs. Clancy. Based on that, we need to follow the current code as it is written. Now, I vote no. Mr. Wagner, no. It doesn't uh con conform with current code. Mrs. Chapto.

Yes, Mr. Basik. We've had a lot of this uh happen, a lot of variances we've in in cases that we've seen and we keep variancing everything out. And I while I agree this is I mean I love the the facility. It's great looking facility. You guys did a great job of building up. I think at this point because of those criteria not in place I would have to say no. Motion fails. All right. We're on to uh PC 2025-033. All right. Uh, next application is PC25-33. This property is at 4420 Kent Road. Uh, property is 1.19 acres in zone C4. This is for a conditional use for a drive-through facility. Uh, site plan for site modifications and a couple variances. Thanks. All right. So, existing conditions. Um, this property is currently vacant. This used to be a Kentucky Fried Chicken. Uh, I think this closed back in 2012. EBA guys might have a better history about that. Uh, then it turned into a Sleep Outfitters, which recently closed in the last year or two. Uh, so this would be a 77 credit union, which would reutilize the property and the building. The building itself is just over 3,800 square ft. uh will contain 25 parking spaces. This property uh or this use they would reutilize the drive-through lane. Um so it was in operation during during KFC

and then they didn't use it during sleep outfitters. Um they do need a variance for the side step back. They are adding a small drive-through canopy on the east end of the property. Uh sticks out about 7 ft from the building. So be 13t 3 in from the from the uh from the side property line code requires 20. Uh so they're requesting a variance of approximately 7 ft. Uh a couple other modifications on the existing conditions. Probably notice this parking directly behind the building. Uh they'll be taking those out, filling it in with landscaping. Um turning these parking spaces into angled spaces. Um adding a dumpster in the back which will be fully screened with masonry uh surroundings. Uh landscaping again everything behind the building this whole portion be fully landscaped. Uh few new trees plenty of new shrubs. Uh this been approved by the city arborist. Um all the other landscaping that you see is existing on the site. uh renderings showing what it looks like currently and what the what will look like if approved. And then uh so drive-through facilities is conditional approval in the C4. We recently approved supplemental supplemental regulations for drive-throughs, which basically states that they have to have a 10- foot bypass lane uh for any drive-through facility that's intended so that there's emergency access around the bypass around the drive-through lane in case it gets clogged up there or if there's an emergency. Uh say obviously this has been, you know, pre-existing feature of the property. Um, so they just want to reutilize it, open it back up for the drive-through. So, but they

do need a variance since it was not used for in the last 10 years. Uh, so with that, I'll leave this up if you have any questions. Um, the applicant is here though, but happy to take any questions. Is there any room for the bypass lane? There's not. No. All right. My name is Matt Shening. Uh my address is 628 Now Portland Road. We're in Ohio. And you swear what you're about to say is the truth? I do. Thank you.

Just kind of want to elaborate a little bit on the variances that we're requesting today. Um the first one being the setback from the side with the drive-thru lane being what it is. Um, you know, we're right against the property line, so we have no room to go. If that we weren't there, it's existing condition. We definitely would abide by that. If we could make a lane, it' be only be 9 ft wide with we'd have enough room for 9 ft wide. Um, which is enough to get a vehicle through. Some different jurisdictions have parking spaces are 9 ft wide. So, you can move a car through obviously not at high rate speed, but enough that you could safely pass the car if need be. Um, also the canopy, the setback of encroaching on that 20 foot setback. The canopy is there to protect the equipment that's going to be in that wall as well as the person utilizing it. So if you're there and it's raining, I know we have beautiful weather here majority of the time. Um, but you know, so as you're sick and as you're um so as you're utilizing that equipment, you know, you're not getting your arm wet and anything going in and out of that of that machine. So

So there is nine feet that you could do a bypass.

Yeah, we could do a nine feet on both of them. Yeah. So as you're sitting at the ATM or the after hour deposit, you would have a 9 foot lane for both. we can get around it and it could be striped as such. Um yes, but we um plan commission they can make that condition of approval if that's what you guys want to do could require a 9 foot bypass lan include on the site plan um with a variance from section 1145.15. So I if that's what you guys decide on, I would just make sure

it's a unique situation. The building is in existence, but that's a pretty important piece of legislation that would just pass, right? So if there's a way we can do it and if 9 ft works, and I think it would for vehicles. Yeah. So yeah, so if that's the case, if I can let you guys discuss more, but uh just make sure you make that in your motion. refer to the code section. Yep. Um and we'll get that plan revised.

So in that um is that like an ATM or is it a person is it a somebody in there doing the transaction with the person at the at the car? So it's an ITM during the day and then after hours it turns into an ATM. So there's no person there. Correct. And there's no person at the remote ITM, right? Correct. I was looking at this and I was struggling with it as well and it require you building something. That's the only problem is that putting a one in the lane that you currently have there that's shown as that, you know, you have to actually have a building, you know, attached and there's a lot of investment there. I know

to build something off of your current the existing building into that lane that's on the south side or the picture, you know. Yeah. And but that's the only other option that I thought about coming up with. But it sounds like if we got the room up there and we can make that part of the uh the motion, I'm I'm okay with that. I just didn't you know how much you wanted to get involved in because that does definitely have a bypass lane. Right. Absolutely.

Thank you. Uh, anyone in the audience care to comment? Any other questions? I move uh we pass PC 2025-033 with the addendum that we make a variance on section 114515 to include a 9 ft bypass lane that works at Yes. Thank you.

Okay. I second that. We need to support Megan's way out. It's been moved and seconded. Is there any other discussion? Anything from the uh I should have asked this before anybody? No. Thank you. I'm sure you would have told me. All right. Roll call, please. Mrs. Clancy. Yes. Mr. Wagner, yes. Mrs. Shepto, yes. Mr. Basic, yes. Motion carries. Anything else? No, sir. Have a good Thanksgiving.

Happy Thanksgiving to everyone. U motion for adjournment. Motion to make an adjournment. I second. It's been moved and seconded. All in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Motion carries. Meeting is adjourned. Everyone have a good Thanksgiving.