REGULAR MEETING OF THE EATON PLANNING

ZONING AND BUILDING BOARD ON JULY 8, 2003

AT 7:30 P.M., IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS

The Eaton Planning, Zoning and Building Board met in regular session in Council Chambers on Tuesday, July 8, 2003, at 7:30 p.m.

The roll was called and the following was found to be:

Present: Ron Coleman

Tim Lane

Harold Geeting – Vice Chairman

Gary Wagner

Joe Renner

Tom Jordan – Chairman

Absent: Pat Kieffer

Also in attendance were City Manager Dave Daily, City Engineer Doug Spitler and City Law Director Donnette Fisher.

MINUTES:

The minutes of the June 10, 2003 meeting were read and approved as written. Ron Coleman made a motion to approve the minutes and Joe Renner seconded. Motion was passed as follows:

Ayes: Coleman, Lane, Geeting, Wagner, Renner, Jordan (6)

Nays: None

SWEARING IN:

All members of the audience anticipating to testify before the Board was asked to stand and be sworn in. The Secretary administered the oath or affirmation to the audience.

AB-03-07 – Eaton National Bank & Trust – Variance – Signage:

Jordan: The applicant is seeking variances from the sign requirements for its branch office, located at 1697 N. Barron Street, in the ‘C-1’ Commercial District. If you would like to come up to the podium and tell us what you have in mind.

Hall: Basically we have a lot of customers and a lot of people in town, if they are coming on Washington Jackson towards 127 or coming out of K-Mart, they don’t know that we are on the other side of the Marathon building. They can’t see us from that point and with the increase of traffic flow in that area, and with what is being built back there, we expect more traffic coming through that way, so we would like a variance to put a sign on the northwest corner of the building. That would be right here. That would be seen coming from Washington Jackson to 127 and it would also be visible as you are coming out of the K-Mart parking lot on Washington Jackson.

Jordan: For the record we need your name.

Hall: Lauren Hall.

Jordan: Do you have anything else you would like to add to that? If not you may be seated. Doug do you want to go over the staff review?

Spitler: In accordance with Chapter 1133.03 (b) (4), Planning Board shall review this request for a variance and make recommendations to the Appeals Board, following the conditions in Chapter 1133.07 on Variances.

Additionally, Chapter 1169.06 contains the requirements for signs in the ‘C-1’ district.

The variance request is for a new sign, 32 square feet in area. It is to be constructed on the north building face at the Marathon North gas station.

Three points to consider from our regulations are:

1.) All business signs must be on the front of the building. This request is for a side other than the front.

2.) The allowable area is 1.5 times the linear frontage of the business or part of the building that the business occupies. The applicant would be allowed 40.5 square feet total; the existing signs total 42 square feet and the proposed sign is for 32 square feet additional.

3.) There are only two business signs allowed – currently they have three; and only one structure type is allowed – currently there are two. It is the pole sign out front and the two signs on the wall of the building.

The variance must meet the conditions (1) through (6) of Chapter 1133.07 for approval.

Jordan: I will open up to the Board for discussion.

Renner: The sign you want to put up, the lettering will be like the lettering on the front now.

Hall: Actually it will be a sign like what is under the Marathon sign on the pole but it will be attached. It will be a lighted sign. This is the sketch. It will be blue with white lettering and white with blue lettering.

Wagner: Did you say it was lighted?

Hall: Yes.

Wagner: Have we set any precedents anywhere else that would require attention or is that a proper question? Is there any precedent set anywhere where this type of application, you mentioned in the application that it mirrors another?

Fisher: KFC made an application last year when they expanded their building. As you know on that building, the Board took the KFC sign and the A&W sign to be one sign. They still have one on the front of the building, one on the side of the building and then their pole. So they were only allowed two signs and they have three, did they put one on the north, too? They have three or four. Most businesses in town have two structure types. Most have poles and a business sign. The one at KFC, we have also exceeded the total allowable area. I put that on there to remind the Board that this was what we saw when we went through the KFC case. In that case they were worried that people could not see their sign because of the tree being there, which is why they wanted to put a sign on the south side of the building. In this case, they are saying that you cannot see our sign if they are coming Washington-Jackson Road, which mirrors it.

Coleman: I think the tree was the big issue. They said they were going to have to cut the tree down. It was a comment in the minutes that we would rather give them the sign to the south facing their parking lot, than cut the tree down.

Wagner: You propose to put the sign on the corner, the north?

Hall: Yes. Actually when A&W was in the same location, they actually had a sign like the one we are proposing, but it was just around the back corner. On the actual back of the building.

Wagner: You going to be above or below the blue line?

Hall: We are going to be below.

Wagner: Those bushes that are there won’t cover the sign there, no problem?

Hall: No.

Lane: What color did you say the sign was?

Hall: Blue and white lettering and the bottom would be white with blue lettering. The reason for the break up is that if our hours change we wouldn’t have to change the whole sign, only the bottom part.

Coleman: This variance is also taking into consideration the sign that is on the building now, on the south side? Am I right on this or not? It says that the applicant needs a variance for the sign already placed on the sough side of the building. Tom, do you understand that?

Spitler: I am going to ask Donnette.

Fisher: I discussed this case with Bob. I am not sure if they had a sign permit for that or not. They may have considered that as a front as well. Bob, of course, considers the front as just the front. I know that they were not aware of that when they put in this application. I don’t think they knew that they were already exceeding the number of allowable signs. The one on the south side are all individual letters, kind of spaced so it takes up more area. They do need a variance there.

Jordan: This is what we call a wall sign, correct?

Fisher: Right.

Renner: Do we need to wait for them to apply for the other variance or do we just move to grant it based on the discussion?

Fisher: Basically what you will be doing if you grant this variance, it is going to cover everything. I just wanted you to be aware of what you were granting a variance for. Not just the sign on the north side, but also the south. It already exceeds so they are just going from the 42 sq. ft. to the 74 sq. ft.

Coleman: When I drive up through there, I made a point to drive up and look. Most all businesses have a pole sign and one on the front. Are we going to set a precedent? They got two over here, they got three on the building, we want another one on this side. I hope we don’t get into this. Another thing that bothers me about it, the bank is not something that a person is coming through town and is going to stop and eat and that business needs attention. This bank is for local people. You could say Lewisburg and Gratis. I would think most people know where the bank is. The main bank is Downtown and that is a branch, the same as the other bank at five points. Its signs are smaller than everyone else. There is a pole sign and two little signs. Maybe it is not a big deal.

Wagner: I see where you are coming from Ron, but if you look at the actual standards in Chapter 1133.07, Variances, they seem to meet the criteria.

Coleman: I know that and the sign does look nice. It is not gaudy and looks real nice on that building.

Jordan: I think if we follow the requirements for granting variances we are not going to be setting a precedent, as long as they meet all of the six requirements. Each case is based on its own merit. That is what you have to remember and look at.

Wagner: I make a motion that finding of the fact that Eaton National Bank applying for a variance, case AB-03-07, meets applicable standards as indicated in Chapter 1133.07, Variances, page 43, that we approve based on finding of facts. Joe Renner seconded the motion and it was passed as follows:

Ayes: Lane, Geeting, Wagner, Renner, Jordan (5)

Nays: Coleman (1)

OLD BUSINESS:

Jordan: Anyone have any old business? Okay we will move on to new business.

NEW BUSINESS;

Fisher: I have one thing. For those of you that came to the meeting tonight, the review planning meeting we had on the rezoning group, just so you are aware, what’s going to happen now is Kim at ACP is going to do a rough draft of a new zoning ordinance. That will come to staff, Bob, Doug, Dave and myself, first. We will go through it, look for typo’s, any mistakes, things that they haven’t caught. We will correct those and get it back to them. What we then want to do is have an actual review committee. It won’t be a big group like this. It will be a smaller group and will be meeting in the evenings, sit down around the table with a copy and go through it page by page, section by section. The committee will vote if there are any issues. What we want to do is to have two members from Planning Board, two members from Appeals Board; two members from Council, two citizens from the downtown revitalization committee, Mr. Daily, Mr. Spitler and Mr. Wehrley will all sit on that committee. There will be 11 members total. What I need from Planning Board is, I need you to pick two of your own to sit on that committee. It will be evenings and there will be homework.

Jordan: Basically, we will be doing the same thing we did with the City Charter. That is what we did with the City Charter, page-by-page and sentence-by-sentence.

Fisher: We will get the sections to you the week before the meeting but you need to have read them so when you come and sit down at the meeting you can say, “okay, I found this on page 7,” “ what is this,” “ explain it,” or “I don’t like this wording.”

Are there two among you willing to do that?

Wagner: I am willing, if I have enough expertise.

Lane: If you need somebody, I will do it.

Fisher: You guys pick who you want.

Jordan: Gary and Tim you are it. There are your two members. Anymore new business?

Fisher: Just so you two know, part of your roles will be, if there are things you see that you are having problems with, to come back to your Planning Board members and ask them what they think of this. You should try to keep your Planning Board members updated on what we are doing. Once we get all the sections reviewed we will come to Planning Board for their recommendation.

Jordan: Anything else?

Joe Renner made a motion to adjourn and Ron Coleman seconded it.

___________________________________ ____________________________________

Secretary Chairman