zoning variances and or special exceptions housing in dangerous structures this board must try to interpret each application as it relates to city ordinances this board empowered to rezone or to take any action that could be considered rezoning variances must meet for crucial tests in order to be granted those of you who are here for a variance have already answered questions about the tests on your application we will be asking you about those answers again tonight this is the procedure we follow we ask that you come to the microphone and speak to speak in state your name and address we will hear the applicant first in anyone supporting the application then anyone in opposition to it typically will hold the public hearing an application and then deliberate and decide on the application before moving on to the next application you are welcome to stay for the deliberations but there is no opportunity for further public comment if you elect not to stay for deliberation and decision you can call the city clerk's office after eight thirty tomorrow morning to learn the results we will hear the applications in the following order construction zone and housing data structures with it so will you please read the first application tom weaver on our property at one eighty four east thirty fifth street is requesting permission to create flag law the board is authorized to grant such permission when certain conditions are found to exist mr chairman i'd like to let you know that because of an improper notice you away at m forty where a maximum setback of one hundred twenty feet is allowed to to have one thousand point two percent of window area on the front of the building or twenty five percent is required three to install chairman i'd like it to be informed that book variance request number four was also improperly noticed and will not be able to hurt be heard tonight ok thank you and we'll just proceed with the remainder of the request number five to install a menu board sign with a size of forty point twenty eight square feet or a maximum of thirty to forty feet is permitted six to install building a wall sign each in the amount of one hundred forty eight point four thousand square feet  one hundred twenty six square feet is allowed seven to reduce require much for a forty foot landscape buffer to m forty to thirty one point five feet to reduce the requirement for a thirty foot landscape buffer to i one ninety six to twenty five feet nine to reduce required amount of landscape planting from seventy five trees to fifteen and from one hundred ten shrubs to seventy one thank you very  much before we go through the procedure the hearing a due to the number of requests what will do is asked for an application opposition and this is the standard of requests that we put out there and then will close the public hearing and then the board will go through in delivery and each request separately and vote on each request separately before proceeding to the next so with that as the set up is there an applican thank you yes sir there are a number of variances that we have requested and i'm sure you're aware we're we're looking to build a new pilot travel center here and in holland and the piece of property that we have found that it is a  good fit for what we want to be i think it's also a good fit for as far as a years ago is being in a relatively industrial area the zoning is good but because of the m forty overlay district  are going to have to request the specific of the setback type variance as the buffer you are variances the only variances that we would need and even not all of them would be signage if we were in the the m forty overlay district all of the  most of the things that we're asking for would fit in the underlying zoning of c two of them forty pushes us to see five on on several things as far as and you've got the packet of information that we  far as the the setbacks in the buffer there's not really anything else we can do and still make the site work if we scooted back any further we're going to start losing parking and safe operational space for for cars and trucks to m in the within the facility which is just going to cause traffic problems for everyone from a signage standpoint again we would comply with the underlying zoning the overlay says that we're allo single free standing sign a five feet high fifty square feet for the type of business that we have that caters to the motoring public with a very heavy emphasis obviously on interstate  traffic that is not enough to to pull customers into our facilities to adequately notify them hey that's the pilot that's where i want to go so that they can make the appropriate maneuvers to to get off of the interstate to get into the site we're looking for this far as the building signs go we're looking for additional signage really because we have so many offerings within our building if it was just a pilot and we just made a pilot sign that would be one thing but there's a pilot there's an arby's there's our our deli food offering the peach a fresh there's a scent of bonsa there's a lot of different things in there a lot of different offerings and we want customers and we think that it's safer of customers can see what what they're coming up to before they and before they get to the site so that they can so that they can come in from a freestanding signage standpoint we're actually asking for two signs and  part of the discrepancy one sign would be along in forty within the overlay district of twenty five feet in height and one hundred nine point two i think is the square footage for that sign the other sign which is further back on the side which would only be really visible from the interstate is eighty feet in height and five hundred and eighty ish square feet so we will have to come back for another on another that sign even though we can't actually officially hear it tonight that would be great because it would let me know if it's even worth applying for right right so just to give you kind of a concept of what our role as within the city you know specifically we decide anything there relates to city ordinances we can't rezone we can't take any actions considered rezoning and we can only answer questions that are posed to us so we can't necessarily push information to you with regard to what you just said we can only review the application that you put before us and you know i apologize if that you know mechanically doesn't doesn't help you and during the time i got the copy of the notice it was too late to read notice so we'll deal with that i guess we can just table that went over to a future hearing but you know that's that's really kind of my of my presentation i'm happy to answer any questions in have parameters outside of those so what we're going to do is go through those questions as the as they relate to each of the requests that you have made you know again that's the set up but i'll leave it to the board task any questions that they have with regard to the tests that we have to file was it bred yes or you know were like like michael said we're going to be going through each nine requests looking at the standards that we have now in your application  i understand you know what pilot is and what they want to do but some of these standards really haven't been addressed all that well for example the first one where it says that the need for this request of variance is due to the unique circumstances or physical conditions of the property involved which would be something unique to this property why it requires a variance and this in a variance would be something that would go with the land forever so it wouldn't be specific to a current user or proposed use would be something that would be unique with his property that requires a variance for the property on its own another one of the standards is that strict compliance with regulations governing setback frontage high ball density or other dimensional requirements would under reasonably prevent the property owner from using the property for april mid purpose so as we're looking at this we're not really thinking you know for pilot we're thinking you know how does this property stand on its own for any one of the permitted uses that are possible to go on the property and how could that you know if need for a variance would be the same for any possible permitted you so i don't know if you want to talk to those a little bit ok well that is force unique to the property it is surrounded on three sides by rote that defines the shape of the property and then when you consider that there is a ditch that runs through the property that is considered waters of the state that further restricts what any type of development on the property can look like because it defines the shape and when the setbacks are imposed upon that it it creates a situation where when you start to lay out  business a permit in use and we are permitted use when you start to lay out a business and you have specific requirements not just self imposed but also through through the zoning code of types of only the overlay district that has created a majority at least of the setback in a no buffer we are very sure and just be clear when we can only look at the ordinances with regard to the overlay i understand yeah i understand i know the variances have been granted to other businesses in that same court or since the overlay was put into place if you look at what we're doing is very consistent with the other development out there so i don't think it's unreasonable to say that what we're asking is within  within the power of this board and also with within what's to be done miss has been is there an overhead where we where we can see what the site plan looks like within that piece of property to help this is just kind of view of the area and the m forty corridor which is the overlay goes all the way down and forty to the city limits between on both sides of the highway  this is the subject property right here uses building supply of a large variety of different uses thank you so for the sake of a hypothetical if we were to look at this property and say hey we're going to put up a building supply  would the with the shape of the land impact another business let's just pretend that it wasn't pilot let's say it was another business cycle building supply shop for  because the building is so big our building is not that big but there are three buildings with it and that's one thing as far as the you know as far as the setbacks go you know our gas canopy is certainly within the minimum and maximum front yard allows the minimum maximum for a yard but i guess the interpretation of the code says that all structures must fall within that setback that for this type of business that that that's facebook's you have to have space for be able to circulate you have to have parking you have to be able to comply with eighty eight codes in all those things so one of our structures the foremost of our structure to meet that that require so how many parking spots are available in this p roughly forty five i think that includes the handicap if i ever had that correctly for cars for trucks you're looking at seventy three patrol specific reason you have so many spaces for trucks out there we cater to the motoring public including truck drivers and you know that that's a bulk of our car a lot of our customer base and when they come off the road when they're when the federal guidelines mandate that they have to come off the road because they've been driving for the set amount of time they have to have a place to park so and that way they can come in they can take their showers they can get something t others and still meet the objective stricter size and was shrink the size of of the whole facility the facility or cut out some parking place isn't moving back well it's not back we would actually have to move or anything closer to him forty and no we could not do that it it would not work for our business safely for the motoring public and we would not build that at impact do you think this will have an surrounding neighborhood i think it will have only a positive impact it's more services for people in the area it's more services for the for the industrial facilities that are out there already in the area as far as places to fuel if you look at it what's around is an interstate interchange this is kind of an expected type business and i don't think it'll have any negative impacts we will meet all of the buffer yard of carmen's i think the only place that that's in you don't think it will create a surge in traffic no sir we have done the traffic studies  and we should move those to the city and to the d o t the traffic study very clearly shows that this works in fact it's in conjunction with the with what the d o t is doing in the areas as part of their upcoming project there's going other building shapes or is the footprint that you have shown a standard protocol that's used across the united states it is standard we have two options and it all depends on what side of the building with these you can be it whether it's in the front or on the side of this one is on the side so it's a standards force that  frankly we try to keep the buildings are small as we can and still have them in a tease that we need for our customers because we want to control costs but this is this is about the size that it needs to be there in the questions with regard to the setback  i have one question here eric kind of glanced on it and i'm not sure that we necessarily got to it but the test of a use is that your opinion that this property cannot be used for one of those uses that cindy listed off their i cannot comment on all those other uses because i'm not familiar with the design of all those other uses but i think the other way you can interpret it is this is  permitted use so we're seeing can this property be used for this use yet unfortunately that's not the test that this board has to go by well you know what i guess what i'll rephrase that for you in essence i think what we need to hear somehow someway some argument that says it cannot be used for one of those reasons because that falls on you as the applicant not on us as the board to and so i'm trying to say that as gently as possible right that's correct yes i think the second part of that is or will strip compliance macon formative with those regulations unnecessarily burdensome i think that's the other part of the us you know you're talking about going away from standard design doing things that don't fall could i move everything forward yes but there's no way that that you could circulate on the side so it would it wouldn't be possible to have cars going around  you wouldn't be able to have trucks getting in and out of fuel can be so could i put everything there yes but that would create a burden of a site that doesn't work which is a problem for us but it's a problem for everybody else that that might try to use the site i think that's the second part of that question since it's an either or can't be used for one of those uses sure i can't say that it can but compliance with this could easily make it too burdensome for you want to build the if it were a nice rectangular piece of property that probably wouldn't be a question but since it's kind of skewed due to the road angles the situation is created by all three sides at least by i think that there's maybe a point that hasn't been addressed then that would be moving the buildings that are shown in purple there on the other side outside of the buffer zone then they wouldn't have that minimum setback you're saying to move the buildings within the the there's still work there's not room for circulation given the dish that you would not be able to get you would not be able to get vehicles in and out it also would not work from a business standpoint but the property gets narrower as you go back plus you're dealing with a ditch so if that would not work and brad i think your response is reasonable in the context of pilot travel center but you know again is within the context of any reasonable use does that argument still hold hold and it's my sense that i think that's that's a struggle for members on the board and so we're just trying to figure out which i would say this first off i understand the test you've got but this is a real use that's coming before you now it's not a hypothetical what could it be done but if you want to say that everything has t could you push everything any of those a big box retailer essentially back behind that and make it work behind that buffer yard what about a small hardware local hardware shop eisel dike with holland engineering majors two two zero hoover boulevard thank you i guess to say could there be a small establishment put on this piece of property that would fit within the buffer yards yes but why would someone buy a ten acre site and only be able to utilize two or three acres of it that that would be a waste of the site then at that point the person is better off leaving that part adjacent to them forty vacant and just building on the back of the site outside of the m forty overlay district and i think that defeats the purpose of the m forty overlayed history is my understanding it was to beautify am forty and make it the gateway of the city and in order to do that you would need buildings they're not what's there today which is leftovers from the previous business and then dots crushing plant and everything else that's what's on the site today and if if a small retailer were to buy it they're not going to probably be able to comply with all these requirements and still utilize that that portion of the property so there is going to move to the back and they're going to leave what's they are there and you know that doesn't serv purpose of of the overlay of beautifying the entrance way to the city i think another factor that makes this site somewhat challenging and kind of ties any facility that would go here is hands is the fact that this is a controlled right of way  the process that's in place currently without doubt in there traffic safety stuff improvements that are happening there are going to be severely limiting any driveway access from m forty to this property our driveway access is being controlled by that and very prescriptive where we have to put in how we have to put it which again further makes the property more challenging to utilize by anyone and if if  someone else were to go there they would have to comply with the same requirements remember that which basically is going to give them very little driveway access to that front porch of the site so if someone were to develop outside of the overlay district on the property the front would then if someone wasn't developed whole site the front becomes undeveloped wall because there's no way to get to it i guess to address that i would certainly say that nothing we're asking for is are we trying to in any way do anything detrimental to the public welfare health and safety and i think we can all agree that nothing we're asking for is detrimental and i'm looking i holland deems the standard necessary in order to achieve the quality of the goal of creating high quality gateway entrance to the city and high quality mixed use neighborhood for these lands overlay district fights gateway qualities are supportive of commercial and industrial activities which we fall under assures a quality and character of the first going vironment that will be supportive of vehicular and non motorized access to these to those commercial industrial areas and supportive of nearby residential neighborhood commerce and institutional church yet i have that and that that speaks to the landscaping any other questions from the board minimum requirements for for landscaping beautification ten or stand and what we're requesting as far as landscaping i think is frankly above and beyond anything else you see up and down the corridor and  causes two problems one those trees would never survive they would starve each other out and two you would never be able to see our site or any whatever use it was you'll never be able to see what's there so you're not promoting a business as far as our commercial or industrial activity because nobody's going to know that there's even a business there so we just because staff and we thought when we came in that let's go with something that's clustered let's try to meet the intent of the orders to make it look good to provide something that's going to allow us to operate the business and have the access and the visibility that we need but still make the area look and again what we're proposing is as above and beyond anything else you see other including stuff that has very recently gone into the questions from the board with regard to any of the requested variances if you're variances get denied what are what are the plans and moving forward if all of the variance is good enough oh well it depends on which one they are if you deny something to do with the the window openings on the front of the building could i put more windows in it yes i could i would argue that since our gas canopy is the building in front it's one hundred percent ninety seven percent open i would say that we more than comply with the visibility especially with all the cameras and things we put in but that's not that big a deal the buffer or variances the landscaping probably precludes development of the site because we have to push things or if there's no for the questions from the board i'm going to continue the proceeding thank you very much is there anyone else in the audience that would like to speak in support of the application and if not i'm going to close the public hearing and ask the board to debate each of the variants variances as requested and then we'll take a separate vote any any comments amongst board could say it at least from myself with some of what was presented i think pilot travel centers in state in their case a lot of what they said makes sense for their use and i think  as the laid out how they want to use it to me a lot of that makes sense but the hard part that i'm having is removing the pilot travel center equation from that piece of land and then applying t tests you know we could come up with hypotheticals all day you know i mean could you put a landscaping company there that would require you know mounds of barkha etc they would use the full entire lives and still not  have a need for the requirements that are being asked of us tonight and those are just some of the things that are going through my mind to kick off conversation as it is or yeah the other commentary i think  first test where it s about unique circumstances or physical conditions of the property i do the the three sides of roads count as unique circumstances does the creek that runs through the way i think it could be i mean i think it could depend on the variance request so when it comes to the individual use from the equation and start to weigh that that's when i get a little bit challenge i personally am challenged with in essence the that the adverse impact aspect of this and specifically relative to some what and dots trying to accomplish in think iran is just strained nature of this corridor not just at this particular intersection but stretching downward through whether we love it or hate it that through that overlay district and so as the chair states it is in place it's something that we have to use as a reference point and when i consider that overlay district and the multiple use aspects that we're looking for there and try to consider some of the safety aspects i'm having a tough time getting past that aspect in their comments with regard to any of the request looking at the overall plan of the of the size of the project site and i think there's probably there might be other options to meet the requirements of the it you know as was mentioned earlier the size of the building and the placement of the pumps in the locations where they are are standard and they may not so in the sense that hey these are standardised in and we're going to try to shoehorn these in regardless of the site rather than correct taking a unique approach that's correct  is it would anyone like to make a motion on any of the requests available to the applicant for this particular property i think the list is is relatively long there again it's debatable as to what those may be but ultimately i think we did establish strong argument on the that the adverse impact on the neighborhood on the first task did you say you did find it unique or i didn't i think in this particular instance it is fair to say that the that the shape and the the the position in the roads is that this variance appears to be they want to go further away from the road than what's allowed so i don't really think that the side the reason they want to do that is for trucks to be able to get around  permitted purpose or will render conformity with these regulations unnecessarily burdensome and that is a or statement yet again it may be unnecessarily perceived as burden some relative to this particular use however i don't believe that's the test that that we need to move forward with what we need to figure out is can it be used and would  turned around i think i'm a little bit turned around too i heard some that there is do uniqueness but it does not relate to the application is that all there was there was a motion to the presumption a number one was there were the nine of because it's not unique but i'm hearing you say that it is unique no it is the basis for my denial is actually number three and i've just presented to you in instances of denial we only by the applicant did not convince you that compliance would be burdensome correct ok i don't think there is a uniqueness number one i do not think there is uniqueness to the property that i mean if we eliminated parking spaces in move things around i think we could very easily accom vote to if the motion is to deny i think i think the way that i read the findings for number one are there is some uniqueness to the parcel but it does not have impact from ok with regard to the section does anyone have any comments like to make a motion to make a motion motion by davis to deny second second by henderson findings of fact place i don't believe that property that warrant this type of variance and i do know that strict compliance with the regulations would be all necessarily burdensome or rent the property from use for one of the permitted uses i would like to call for a vote please yes yes i thought yes yes yes yes  to number four on our list the freestanding signage it fifteen point eight three square feet in the area directional signs where the maximum permitted size of a directional sign is six square feet i don't think there's any unique circumstances on the property that state that you know this this cannot be the law cannot be followed mr compliance is possible in my opinion and there aren't any out of the ordinary circumstances of the site that warrant having to have a larger sign in my opinion so my findings thank you like to that was our number for it well before we made a motion to postpone and then on the she is you listed here it is number four it's number four on your list of variance kathy law did you get that last one miss has been it was that good enough that the fact that it's in the overlay district does not cause a reason to grant a variance correct instead what number was  yes yes yes require increased in the the allowed wall signage and i don't believe that strict compliance with these regulations were reasonably prevent the property owner from using the property for me to purchase or be unnecessarily burdensome my next one is to reduce the landscape requirement for forty eight foot buffer down to the a to thirty one point five feet and i would like to speak to that request yes yes yes and i want the next one is to reduce their quire meant for thirty foot landscape buffer down to twenty five feet next with regard to one  the last one was regard to reducing to fifteen trees where seventy five is required and reducing to seventy one troubles where one hundred  unfinished business and what i would like to do would like to make a motion to prove the minutes of february twenty second two thousand and fifteen i'll make that motion motion to prove minutes by  support by seller on favor say aye aye aye all those opposed and our next meeting day is april twenty three two thousand and fifteen and with that i would like