DRAFT
Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes
March 11th, 2004
MINUTES
CALL TO
ORDER: Robert
Bender, Chairman
ROLL
CALL:
Robert Bender called the meeting to order.
James Rinehart, Cherry Linder, Robert Bender, Brian Leary, William Heckman,
and Alternate James Klatte was present.
Also present was township attorney, Doug Miller. Mr. Bender welcomed Mr.
Heckman as a regular board member and Mr. Klatte as the new alternate.
MINUTES: There
was a motion by James Rinehart to approve the minutes of the
January 8th, 2004, meeting.
There was a second by Cherry Linder.
Roll Call William Heckman-Yes, James Rinehart-Yes, Cherry Linder-Yes, Robert
Bender-Yes, Brian Leary-Yes The motion was approved.
Robert Bender did a swearing in of those who
would be giving testimony tonight and gave them instructions.
CASE 2004-092
Kings
Island Resort,
5691 Kings Island Dr., Requesting a Sign Variance to Section 22.10
Staff
Presentation
Mayank Kumar explained that the proponent is requesting a sign variance to
reface the pylon sign at the Kings Island Resort. He said their property has 2
signs, a billboard sign along I-71 and a pylon sign along Kings Island Drive.
The proposed sign has 151.35 square feet and by removing the reader board and
adding the “coaster” sign the size is reduced from 192 square feet. The maximum
height allowed for the ground mounted sign is 7 feet and this one 23.5 feet.
The existing facility has over 900,000 square feet. Mayank said the site was
visited by the staff on March 2nd, 2004, and the property was well
maintained. He said that a number of large trees had been cut down along I-71
in the public right-of-way of I-71 near the Kings Island Resort sign. It
appears they were cut to create better visibility of the billboard sign. Mayank
said this board can approve, approve with modifications, or deny the variance
request based on Section 6.06 (D) of the Deerfield Township Zoning Resolution.
If the board approves the staff recommends two conditions.
1)
Prior to the approval of a zoning
permit for the proposed re-facing of the ground mounted sign, applicant shall
submit a letter from the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) approving the
demolition of the number of trees already demolished in the right-of-way of I-71
along the northwestern property line.
2)
Additional landscaping shall be
provided to compensate for already demolished trees. The location, number, size
(calipers), and type (species) of the additional landscaping shall be decided
mutually by the applicant, ODOT, and Community Development Director of Deerfield
Township.
Robert Bender asked Mayank if they said they cut down those trees. Mayank said
to ask the applicant. Brian Leary asked how long the original signs have been
there. Mayank did not know. Jim Rinehart asked if where it says “additional
landscaping,” will we outline those additions based on our code. Mayank the
additional won’t be the exact trees which were demolished but we need to find
out what ODOT wants. Robert Bender asked the applicant to come forward.
Proponent David Bowles,
5691 Kings Island Drive, Kings Island, OH 45034,
said it is our purpose to secure approval and get closer to what is acceptable
in Deerfield Township. Mr. Bowles said he has
intentions to complete the job they started along I-71 cleaning the area out.
Jim Rinehart asked him when he realized they were on the wrong side of the
fence. Mr. Bowles they knowingly went over there but they did not realize ODOT
had to approve what was done. Bob Bender said this board needs to focus on the
property and sign in question. Mr. Bowles said they have intentions to correct
the situation along I-71. Brian Leary asked him when the sign was originally
put up. Mr. Bowles said approximately 1972 was the original date but maybe the
sign was replaced once since that time. Brian Leary said at one time there was
a sign near the cinema. Mr. Bowles said he doesn’t believe that sign is still
there. There was discussion on the change in the sign with the round coaster
sign from the original reader board sign. Bob Bender asked for other persons
who wanted to speak for or against this sign. There was none.
Discussion/Recommendation Doug Miller said
the bill board was not in compliance and he asked Mayank if there is indication
that the billboard sign was approved. Mayank said he didn’t have that
information. Doug said our zoning inspector could go out today and write a
citation. Bob Bender said if it was approved previous to our zoning, the
inspector couldn’t do anything about that. Doug said it may very well have been
in compliance with the county code when it was put in. Bob Bender said what if
it was put in place previous to 1997. Doug said if you don’t have a problem
with this sign you might as well approve this. Cherry Linder said if we are
never going to get more information and probably at the time this sign was
approved, there probably wasn’t very many regulations regarding signs at that
time even on the county level. Jim Rinehart said Doug is trying to say, if we
include that tonight, we don’t have to deal with this the next time. Doug said
if we do want to deal with this the next time, just leave it alone. Brian Leary
said the only reason he brought that up was the total advertising use at this
site. Cherry said we a looking at signage in general on this property and we
could approve both signs and it would be on the record.
Jim Rinehart said he has a concern about this applicant just arbitrarily doing
things. Doug Miller said we should make some mention because they are not
allowed to have 2 ground mounted signs, but they do. Mayank said the location
of the outdoor signage is a concern. There was not enough information on the
billboard, regarding measurements, etc. Jim Rinehart asked Mayank why didn’t we
look at all the signs on this property? Mayank said the intent is to bring out
information on the property. Jim Rinehart said if we are going to do it for one
(sign case), we should do it for all, and we should have information on all the
signs. Bob Bender said most of the time they are changing more than one sign
but in this case they are only changing one. Bob Bender said we don’t have
enough information on the billboard. Mr. Bender said we couldn’t approve that
sign if we wanted to. Doug Miller said the large sign is not an outdoor
advertising under our code because it doesn’t meet the definition. Cherry
Linder said it is unrealistic to expect someone to find the old permit. That
would probably involve someone digging around in a basement for some old files.
Doug Miller said they shouldn’t presume the county has that. Bob Bender again
asked Mr. Bowles when the sign was erected. David Bowles, 5691 Kings
Island Drive, Kings Island, OH 45034, said probably in the mid 1970’s.
Bob Bender said we can deal with the landscaping on their property. Brian Leary
said the wording in the conditions that the” applicant contact ODOT,” is
appropriate. Mr. Bender said he does not believe that this should be our
decision. Cherry Linder said ODOT should take care of this. Mr. Bender said
the applicant can deal with this on their own. Mr. Miller asked Mayank if ODOT
is aware of this. Mayank said he doesn’t think ODOT is aware of the trees being
cut. Jim Rinehart said he is uncomfortable that this property owner did this.
Mr. Rinehart said they did something they should not have done. Jim Rinehart
asked if the resort had gotten a permit for the temporary banner. Mayank said
no. Jim Rinehart said that is a zoning violation. Doug Miller said we have the
ability to give them the nudge to correct this. Doug Miller asked if the board
wants to delete Condition 2. Doug Miller said the proper way is have Public
Works take care of it.
There was a motion by Cherry Linder to
approve Resolution 2004-092 and in Section #1 deleting the 1st line ,
and starting it to read “That the application submitted by David Bowles , etc”
and omitting Section 2. There was a second by Brian Leary.
Roll Call Brian Leary-Yes, William Heckman-Yes, James Rinehart-No, Cherry
Linder-Yes, Robert Bender-Yes The motion was approved.
At
this time Bob Bender said that Cherry Linder is removing herself from the next
two cases due to a conflict of interest.
CASE 2004-117 Real Estate Office,
2321 Montgomery Rd., Requesting
a Sign Variance to 22.02
Staff
Presentation
Mayank Kumar said they are asking for a 7 feet high sign which will be 5 feet
from the current setback. The setback requirement is 15 feet. The planned
widening of Montgomery Road complicates the situation. They want a landscaping
island with a double faced, 2 panel sign with a total sign face area of 35
square feet on each side. The top area of 30 square feet is the sign and the
bottom 5 square feet is for a red LED time and temperature. Both Warren
County and ODOT recommended the sign be located off
the proposed right-of-way. Mayank said the
applicant has not obtained an Occupancy Permit since they moved in and suggested
they get this and be in compliance. Mayank said the board shall approve,
approve with modifications, or deny the variance request. In the event the
board approves the staff recommends 4 Conditions.
1)
Reduce the total height of signage
to 6 feet and remove the “Red LED Time and Temp” 5 square feet from the proposed
signage structure. The signage structure shall be located south of future
right-of-way of Montgomery Road as shown on the Exhibit A.
2)
Prior to the approval of zoning
permit for the proposed ground mounted sign, applicant shall obtain an Occupancy
Permit for the subject property and a site plan review shall be conducted at the
staff’s level in compliance with Chapter 8 of the Deerfield Township Zoning
Resolution.
3)
Prior to the approval of the
zoning permit for the proposed ground mounted sign, applicant shall provide a
letter of approval for the proposed improvement by Deerfield Township Fire
Department. Also, a letter of approval for the proposed improvement shall be
required by the Warren County Engineer’s Office and Ohio Department of
Transportation (ODOT) if the proposed ground mounted sign is located with a
setback less than stated in Section 22.02 (A) of the Deerfield Township Zoning
Resolution.
4)
The variance will expire upon the
commencement day of the ODOT, Montgomery Road improvements or by March 10, 2008,
(4-Years from today), which ever occurs first.
After Mayank read the above 4 Conditions, Bob Bender asked him why the staff is
asking him to remove the Time and Temperature feature on the sign. Mayank said
the staff doesn’t think the bottom portion, time and temperature is directly
related to the use of the property. Bob Bender asked Mayank about Condition
#4. Mayank said to his understanding ODOT must clear the land then start
construction. Jim Rinehart said he understands that the zoning department has
been having meetings on what is going to happen with the ODOT widening and he
asked why would they want to put the sign up and then take it down? Mayank said
it is up to the applicant to go through all the construction. Doug Miller said
here is Mayank’s proposal to set it back 10 feet, but it doesn’t get it out of
the way of the construction limits and then it is going to have to come down.
Doug suggested that if the applicant wants it there, they must pay for the
removal and re-installation. Mayank said Warren
County or ODOT will not spend public dollars to remove it. Doug said it
doesn’t make sense to allow something to go up which we know must come down in a
couple years if we must pay for it. Bob Bender asked the board for more
questions. There was none. He asked for the proponent to come forward.
Proponent
Kevin Hildebrand,
2321 Montgomery Road, Maineville, OH 45039,
said he is fine with the 6 feet high sign, with
a 10 feet setback. Mr. Hildebrand said in Condition #4 he is not opposed to
paying for the sign being taken down later and moved.
Bob Carpenter, Carpenter Signs, 2026 Vine
Street, Cincinnati, OH, said he
is the contractor for the sign. He said in regards to moving the sign, there
are anchor bolts which will make it easy to move. Mr. Carpenter said a 6 feet
sign would be fine with them and explained the foundation / pad for the sign.
Mr. Carpenter said a 2 by 6 makes the form for the concrete pad. Doug Miller
asked him if they are going to move it back 10 feet and make the sign 6 feet.
Doug said if that is what they are going to do, why are we here? The 6 feet
would comply. Doug said but if the base raises the sign up, it will be higher
than 6 feet and he will need the variance. Brian Leary asked Mr. Carpenter if
the west end of the pad will be equal or below grade, the east end towards the
house above grade, and in the middle 3 or 4 inches above grade. Mr. Carpenter
said yes. Bob Bender asked if there are any others who want to speak.
Kevin Hildebrand, 2321 Montgomery Road,
Maineville, OH 45039, asked if
he could get the 5 feet set back. He said with the road the way it is now, the
other signs along there are much closer than that to the road. Bob Bender
closed the public portion of this case. Doug Miller said 5 feet will be in the
right-of-way and 10 feet will be in the construction area. Mr. Miller said the
applicant must pay for the moving the sign when the road get widened and must
give us a letter stating that fact.
Motion There
was a motion by James Rinehart to approve Case# 2004-117 including the 4
Conditions and changing Condition #1 to read
“The sign structure shall not be
located closer than 5 feet from the existing
right-of-way and shall not exceed 7 feet in height.
There was a 2nd_by William Heckman.
Roll Call Robert Bender-Yes, Brian Leary-Yes,
William Heckman-Yes, James Rinehart-
Yes, James Klatte-Yes
Doug
Miller reminded the board that they do not have authority to allow anyone to put
something in the public right-of-way.
CASE 2004-116 Medical Office @
2091 Montgomery Road,
Maineville, OH, Requesting a Sign Variance to Section 22.02
Staff Presentation
Mayank Kumar distributed Warren County
Engineers’ comments and ODOT comments. Mayank said the medical office is
requesting a medical office sign be located 10 feet inside the right-of-way and
be 11 feet high. Our code requires 7 feet height maximum and that it be a 10
feet minimum set back outside the right-of-way. Mayank showed photos and
drawings which showed where the public right-of-way is located. He said the
board can approve, approve with modification, or deny this case. In the event
the board would approve he suggests adherence to 5 Conditions.
1)
The signage structure shall be
located outside the current proposed right-of-way as shown in Exhibit A. The
maximum height of the signage structure shall not exceed six (6) feet. Sign
face area of each side shall not exceed thirty-five (35) square feet. This
signage structure could be removed without any compensation if located with a
setback of less than ten (10) feet from the right-of-way by the Warren County
Engineer’s Office or Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) for Montgomery
Road improvement plan. The owner shall incur the cost for removing the signage
structure if required by the Warren County Engineer’s Office or ODOT.
2)
Removal of the signage attached to
the mail-box structure.
3)
Prior to approval of zoning permit
for proposed sign, an occupancy permit shall be obtained for the subject
property. A Site Plan Review shall be conducted at the staff’’s level in
compliance with Chapter 8 of the Deerfield Township Zoning Resolution.
4)
Approval from Warren County
Engineer’s Office and the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) for the
proposed improvements.
5)
The variance will expire upon the
commencement day of the ODOT, Montgomery Road improvements or by March 10, 2008
(4 Years from today), which ever occurs first.
Bob Bender asked the
board for questions. Jim Rinehart said that he believes that Condition #5
should go. Bob Bender asked for the proponent to come forward.
Proponent Dr.
Thomas Ritter, 2091 Montgomery
Road, distributed some paper
work. He thanked the board for hearing the case. He showed a permit that he
had gotten from Warren County. Mayank said that this paper is a building permit from
Warren County but he said Warren
County Building Department should have requested a Deerfield Township Zoning
Permit from the doctor. Dr. Ritter explained how the 55 mile per hour speed
limit makes it difficult for people to see signage and be able to stop. He said
at that speed, it takes 265 feet to stop. He said his right-of-way is 60 feet
off Montgomery Road. He had photos of many signs of other businesses along the
road showing they are not in compliance. The doctor said they are improving the
appearance of their property. The doctor said they have hired a professional
landscaping firm, Envision, from Dayton to do the landscaping in the Spring. He
said the new sign that they would install would be made to move easily when the
road widening occurs and he plans to pay for that. The doctor suggested that
Condition #5 be deleted. Bob Bender stated that this board cannot allow a sign
to be put in the public right-of-way. The doctor said his sign will not be seen
if it is that far from the road. Doug Miller said that a variance could be
created for anything but the right-of-way. Doug said this board does not have
the authority to allow a variance which would be in the right-of-way. The
doctor said the right-of-way in front of his place is 60 feet but 2 houses down
it is 20 feet. The doctor said at 60 feet off the road, it is very difficult
to see a sign. Bob Bender said he knows this board cannot do what the doctor
wants. Doug Miller suggested the doctor call District 8 and talk to Chris
Hillbert. Bob Bender said we can try and make the best decision we can, but if
you want to talk to ODOT, we could continue the case. Doug Miller said all this
board could do is say that he can be 10 feet off the right-of-way. The doctor
said he didn’t want to get approval from ODOT and then come back and have this
board deny. Doug Miller said the other issue is that the drawing shows that
ODOT is going to extend the right-of-way to 70 feet. The doctor said that is in
error on the drawing. Bob Bender asked if he would like the case continued so
he could talk to ODOT. The doctor said if this board would allow it to be as
close as possible and allow the sign to be higher for better visibility, that
would help. He said the sign is more visible if it is higher. The doctor said
they have a lot of elderly patients and they need to be able to see the location
before they turn in. Jim Klatte asked him how much higher he would want it?
The doctor said he hasn’t really thought about it but it would help if it was
another 3 or 4 feet higher. Doug said he could come up with some language which
would make the sign to be moved when the road is widened. Doug said we don’t
want to create a hardship. Doug Miller said he doesn’t know when the road is
going to be widened and how wide. Doug said the necessity of having a higher
sign, closer to the right-of-way may go away. The doctor said he may be able to
approach his neighbor and ask him to remove some honeysuckle vines. Brian Leary
said, in general, would you be willing to entertain some language which says,
“at such a point in time that the road is complete, that you would relocate your
sign within the current zoning requirements set forth under the township code.”
The doctor said, “yes.” Bob Bender closed the portion and asked for board
discussion.
Board Discussion
Bob Bender said the property has a unique setback. He said he would agree with
the staff conditions except for #5 with the expiration date. Jim Rinehart said
he understands they are a good business in the township. Brian Leary said given
the situation we have, if we could grant the sign as it sits today and word it
saying once the construction is complete, they bring the sign back to this
board. Bob Bender said what if the board would make them take down their sign.
Brian Leary thinks it should be reviewed after the road widening. Doug said we
say if the road is widened directly in front of their property, they must come
in compliance with the code.
Motion There
was a motion by Brian Leary to approve Resolution 2004-116 including Section
1, Section 2, and Section 3 and changing Condition #1 in Section 2 from 6 feet
to 11 feet. There was a 2nd by Robert Bender.
Roll Call Robert Bender-Yes, Brian Leary-Yes, William Heckman,-Yes James
Rinehart-No, James Klatte-Yes The motion was approved. Doug Miller said they
need to be aware that they can put that sign up and the next day the township
could go say take it down. Jim Rinehart said they need to know what their
alternatives are. Doug Miller said they could file an appeal in a Common Pleas
court in 30 days. Doug suggested they get an attorney if they decide to do
that. Doug said the way this is written and you can acknowledge in writing
that you understand that.
Bob Bender asked Cherry Linder to rejoin the board for the remainder of the
meeting.
Old Business
Since Mark Pyles moved, the board needed to
elect a Vice Chair Person. James Rinehart nominated Brian Leary to be the Vice
Chair Person. William Heckman seconded the motion. There was a unanimous yes
vote. The motion was approved.
Mayank Kumar told the board there would be a special meeting of the Zoning
Commission on March 22nd, at 7:00 to discuss zoning codes and invited
them to attend.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion to adjourn by Robert Bender. There was a 2nd
by Cherry Linder.
Roll Call Willliam Heckman-Yes, James
Rinehart-Yes, Cherry Linder -Yes, Robert
Bender-Yes, Brian Leary-Yes The motion was
approved.
|
