Members present:                                                            Ted Deremer
                                                                                            Edward McDonnell
                                                                                            Richard Dodson
                                                                                            John Juergensen
Alternate Member:                                                            Eric Oldroyd
Absent Member:                                                               Jim Giulitto

Zoning Inspector:                                                              Joni Poindexter

Mr. Deremer stated that the first matter of the meeting is the conclusion of fact for appeal #1964.

Mr. McDonnell made a motion to approve the conclusion of fact for appeal #1964.

Mr. Oldroyd seconded the motion.

The vote was: Mr. Deremer-yes, Mr. McDonnell-yes, and Mr. Oldroyd-yes.

APPEAL #1977 – Emmco Corporation, 3681 S. Green Road #201, Beachwood, OH 44122 agent for Tri Development Corporation, 3681 S. Green Road #201, Beachwood, OH 44122 requests a variance for a zero ft. north side yard parking setback where a 5 ft. setback is required per Art. IV Sect. 411.8 of the zoning resolution.  Property located at 5021 Whipple NW, Sect. 24SE Jackson Twp.  Property zoned B-3.

Mr. Deremer read the file application signed by Ivan Socloc with reasons being as stated by the applicant, “In order to reconfigure the existing building and install a drive thru lane for a new restaurant.  It provides the optimal traffic flow.  This plan has been reviewed and approved by the fire prevention bureau.”  The file contained a tax map of the property in question, a site plan, and comments from the Jackson Fire Prevention Bureau.  Mr. Deremer stated that there is a letter in the file from a township resident that would remain in the file but would not be read into the record because it is not sworn testimony.

Mr. Deremer asked who would like to speak in favor of this appeal.

Mr. Deremer swore in Roberta Wasserstrom, 3681 South Green Rd. Beachwood, Ohio.

Ms. Wasserstrom stated that she is with Emmco Corporation and is in attendance to get approval for the redevelopment of the building that she thinks will be a better asset to the community.  Ms. Wasserstrom stated that the letter in the file was faxed from Robert Deville stating that he is in favor of the request.  Bill Garrett is in attendance to answer any questions regarding the site plan.  The purpose for the request is to put in an Italian restaurant.

Mr. Deremer swore in Bill Garrett.

Mr. Garrett stated that the property is currently vacant and the proposed restaurant needs a drive thru to operate.  The problem is that there is a cut through at the rear of the parking lot to the plaza.  The proposed plan is best for traffic flow.  It would require another curb cut and they have enough room for 8 back up spaces.

Mr. Deremer asked if the building is an existing structure.

Mr. Garrett stated yes.  The building currently has a bump out for the drive thru on the south side of the building so they would not be adding onto the building.

Mr. Deremer asked how wide the new curb would be.

Mr. Garrett stated that it would be however wide is required by Jackson Township but the road itself would be 10.7 ft. for the drive thru.  Mr. Garrett stated that there is a grass strip along the north side of the building with four to five trees that are about 10 ft. tall and is adjacent to the parking lot along the property line.

Mr. McDonnell asked if any other options had been looked at.

Mr. Garrett stated that the there is a north entrance and the exit is the south entrance.  They looked at reversing the entrance & exit and putting the drive thru on the south side of the building but then traffic would have to cross each other.  The way it is laid out is best due to there being no traffic congestion.

Mr. McDonnell asked Mr. Garrett if he knew what the typical width of a drive thru is.

Mr. Garrett stated that he wasn’t sure.

Mr. Deremer asked if the request is to eliminate the 5 ft. landscaping strip.

Mr. Garrett stated yes.

Mr. McDonnell asked if there would be a problem if the board required a curb be constructed between the two properties.

Mr. Garrett stated not that he knows of.

Mr. McDonnell asked if the grass strip is on the property in question.

Mr. Garrett stated that he is not sure where the grass stops but assumes it is on the property line.

Mr. McDonnell stated that it sounds like they aren’t sure where the property line exists so they aren’t sure how much of a variance is required.

Mr. Garrett stated that they went by the original site plan which is assumed to be correct and it shows 10.8 ft. from the building to the property line.

Mr. McDonnell asked if it is Mr. Garrett’s testimony that the property line is 10.8 ft. from the building.

Mr. Garrett stated yes to the best of his knowledge and going by the original site plan.

Mr. Deremer swore in Ross Scianna, 3760 Fawn Dr., Canfield, Ohio.

Mr. Scianna stated that the restaurant would not have any alcohol and they do need a drive thru.  They are asking for a variance so they can come to Jackson Township and the Belden Village area.

Mr. Scianna stated that in talking to the owner of the property the current site plan is correct where it shows 10.8 ft. from the building to the property line.

No one else in the audience spoke in favor of this appeal and no one in the audience spoke in opposition to the appeal.  Mr. Deremer closed this appeal to public input.

Mr. McDonnell stated that he believes the applicant has demonstrated a practical difficulty with the building existing and the buildings location.  However, he doesn’t like seeing properties with no curb between them.  If the board grants the variance he would like to make a condition that there is a curb between this property and the property to the north.
Mr. Oldroyd stated that the only question in his mind is if they don’t know how far the neighbor has pushed their parking toward pizza hut then he is not sure where everything is going to end up.

Mr. McDonnell stated that they have had testimony that the 10.8 ft. is from the building and is based on the site plan.  They are asking for a zero ft. setback so it doesn’t really matter where the grass strip is.

Mr. Deremer stated with the traffic flow and the existing building he believes the practical difficulty has been met so he does not have a problem with the request.

Mr. McDonnell made a motion to approve appeal #1977 with the condition that a curb be located along the north property line.

Mr. Dodson seconded the motion.

The vote was: Mr. Oldroyd-yes, Mr. Juergensen-yes, Mr. Dodson-yes, Mr. McDonnell-yes, and Mr. Deremer-yes.

APPEAL #1978 – Ed Huarte, property owner, 4294 Caraway Circle NW, Massillon, Ohio 44646 requests a conditional use permit for a mini storage facility and a car wash where a conditional use permit is required per Art. IV Sect. 411.3 of the zoning resolution.  Property located at 9750 Portage St. NW, Sect. 18NW Jackson Twp.  Area zoned B-3.

Mr. Deremer read the file application signed by Ed Huarte with reasons being a conditional use permit is required.  The file contained a tax map of the property in question, a site plan and the answers to the criteria for the conditional use permit.

Mr. Deremer asked who would like to speak in favor of this appeal.

Mr. Deremer swore in Ed Huarte, 4294 Caraway Circle NW.

Mr. Huarte stated that they are in the process of trying to get a conditional use permit for the property to convert it into self storage units and a car wash.  Mr. Huarte stated that he has been through three different site plans in order to meet the regulations.  The car wash will have four bays but he is not sure how many will be self serve verses the full service car wash.  They are leaning toward two and two.  Mr. Huarte stated that the buildings would be pre-fabricated material and it shouldn’t affect any property values.  Mr. Huarte stated that the existing building on the property would remain.

Mr. Deremer asked if the same entrances would be used.

Mr. Huarte stated yes.

Mr. McDonnell asked if the parking along the south and east portion of the property would be utilized for people using the storage units.

Mr. Huarte stated yes.

Mr. McDonnell reviewed the criteria for the conditional use permit.

Section 431.2
Mr. McDonnell asked if it would not be detrimental to property values in the immediate vicinity.

Mr. Huarte stated that it would not.

Mr. McDonnell asked if it will not restrict or adversely affect the existing use of the adjacent property owners.
Mr. Huarte stated that it would not.

Mr. McDonnell asked if it will be designed and constructed so that all access drives, access points to public streets, driveways, parking and service areas shall meet the approval of the Township Trustees, or county or state agencies where applicable.

Mr. Huarte stated that the drives currently exist.

Mr. McDonnell asked if it will meet the requirements of EPA for stormwater runoff, when applicable.

Mr. Huarte stated yes.

Mr. McDonnell asked if it will be properly landscaped according to Section 411.9 where applicable pursuant to Chapter 411 or when specified as a condition for approval.

Mr. Huarte stated yes.

Mr. McDonnell asked if it will be constructed and maintained in a neat, orderly and safe condition.

Mr. Huarte stated yes.

Section 431.3C
Mr. McDonnell asked what the hours of operation would be.

Mr. Huarte stated that the car wash would be open 24 hours a day.  The mini storage would be fenced with a key pad entrance and would not be open after 11:00 p.m. and would probably open at 6:00 a.m.

Mr. McDonnell asked if the fence is shown on the site plan.

Mr. Huarte stated no.  Mr. Huarte showed the board where a fence would be located and stated that a privacy mound is around the south and east portion of the property.

Mr. McDonnell asked if the existing access drives are over 100 ft. from the intersection.

Mr. Huarte stated that the drive currently exists and believes it is over 100 ft.  Mr. Huarte stated that Mr. Crick could answer some questions.

Mr. Deremer swore in Mr. Roy Crick, 13046 Diagonal Rd., Salem, Ohio.

Mr. McDonnell asked what type of lighting would be on the property.

Mr. Crick stated that they will use a 250 watt lighting along the building perimeter to the light the drives.  The car wash would have similar lighting with a top cap to limit the projection to the ground.  The lights would be on dusk to dawn.

Mr. McDonnell asked if there would be any floodlights, searchlights, loudspeakers or similar structures.

Mr. Crick stated no.

Mr. McDonnell asked if there would be any trash receptacles.

Mr. Crick stated that there is none shown on the site plan but there would be one at the area by the car wash bay and it would be screened.

Mr. McDonnell stated that all grading and surface drainage provisions shall be prepared by a registered engineer and reviewed or approved by the Stark County Subdivision Engineer, where applicable.

Mr. Crick stated that currently they have not been reviewed by Stark County but it has been reviewed by their engineer.  Upon the granting of the permit they will proceed to submit to the Stark County Engineer.

Section 431.6A
Mr. McDonnell stated that all activities, except those required to be performed at fuel pumps, shall be carried on inside a building; if work is performed on a vehicle, said vehicle shall be entirely within a building.

Mr. Huarte stated that nothing would be done outside the facility.

Mr. Deremer asked if there would be any vacuums.

Mr. Click stated only if permitted but they are planning on only having the car wash at this time.

Section 431.6Q
Mr. McDonnell stated that all parking and service areas shall be paved improved with gravel, concrete, asphalt or equivalent.

Mr. Click stated that they will have a gravel base.

Mr. McDonnell asked what the maximum size of the individual storage compartments is.

Mr. Click stated that the maximum they have is about 350 sq. ft.

Mr. McDonnell stated that such uses shall be located on an arterial street, adjacent to nonresidential uses or in sparsely settled residential areas and the spacing of storage buildings shall comply with Section 411.6, which indicates they need to be 30 ft. apart.

Mr. Click stated that they are 30 ft. apart.

This concluded reviewing the criteria for the conditional use permit.

Mr. Oldroyd stated that it was testified in as to being gated and asked where the gates would be located.

Mr. Huarte stated that there would be three gates with one being between each building.

Mr. Click drew the gates on the site plan.

Mr. McDonnell asked if all the storage would be inside the buildings.

Mr. Huarte stated yes.

No one else in the audience spoke in favor of this appeal.

Mr. Deremer asked if anyone in the audience spoke in opposition to the appeal.

Mr. Deremer swore in Rocky Halter, 8922 Portage St. NW.

Mr. Halter stated that he owns property at 6813 High Mill.  He is not really opposed but had some concerns.  You go by any storage units and it looks like blue tarp city and he’s afraid there will be boats and R.V.’s lining up in the parking lot.  The three gates are fine, but if someone pulls in front of his house and runs over the mound and gets their stuff out then what is the point.  His concern is that it should be fenced.

Mr. Deremer swore in Charles Gross, 6690 High Mill NW.

Mr. Gross stated that he owns the farm south of the property in question.  He was always concerned with what would happen to the property and but was told by the previous owner that he didn’t have to worry because once he was gone the land would revert back to residential, but that didn’t happen and the property is zoned B-3.  Mr. Gross stated that there is no fence on the southwest portion of the property along the commercial area.

Mr. Deremer asked if there is a fence around the tower.

Mr. Gross stated that it is only around the tower itself.  Mr. Gross stated the he thinks there should be a fence along the property and he is concerned with the water drainage and wants to make sure it flows correctly.

No one else in the audience spoke in opposition to the appeal.

Mr. Click stated that the fence is not drafted into the site plan because they wanted to keep it more pleasing but if it is necessary they could put a fence up but the mound is 4 ft. in height with trees so it is high enough for a barrier.  The parking will be gravel so it only sheds approximately 60 % as compared to 100 % if it were pavement and the lighting will have caps and be directed downward so it will not shine on other properties.

Mr. McDonnell stated that one of the items that was brought up was a lack of a fence at the southwest portion of the property.

Mr. Click stated that there is fencing around part of the structure but there is no fence or mounding at the southwest portion.  If it is determined by the board that this is needed then it would be acceptable.

Mr. Deremer asked if a 4 ft. mound is adequate for security around the rest of the perimeter of the property.

Mr. Click stated that it will be secure as far as blocking the visual aspects of the site.

Mr. Oldroyd asked if the regulations would still be met if the parking spaces were removed at the southwest portion of the property.

Mr. Click stated that they could eliminate 4 spaces and move 3 spaces to the north property line if needed because currently they have 55 spaces and are required to have 51.

Mr. Deremer asked if it would make sense to put a fence along the southwest property line.

Mr. Click stated yes.

Mr. Deremer closed this appeal to public input.

Mr. McDonnell stated if granted, he would like to see a condition that a fence be installed where no mounding exists on the southwest property line that is adjacent to the commercial property.  Mr. McDonnell stated that he is not sure the conditions have been met in the fact that the conditional use permit is not to be detrimental to the surrounding area and he thinks it is.  A car wash and mini storage facility is not the right type of facility for this area.  Mr. McDonnell stated that one of the reasons why the trustees make certain things a conditional use or permitted in certain districts is because by their nature they are more offensive to the surrounding area than other uses.  If this were an industrial area then a conditional use permit would not be required.  Mr. McDonnell stated in his opinion it is not in keeping with the district as proposed.

Mr. Juergensen asked Mr. McDonnell what aspects of the business are offensive.

Mr. McDonnell stated that the car wash and mini storage facility will be in the middle of a rural residential area and is inappropriate.

Mr. Juergensen asked if it would help if the hours were restricted.

Mr. McDonnell stated no.

Mr. Deremer stated that he understands Mr. McDonnell’s concerns but the property is zoned B-3 and there isn’t an issue as to how it got to be B-3.  There are islands that appear out of place within the township but this an intersection of a major highway within the township.  Mr. Deremer stated that he disagrees that the use does not fit in with the property.  Being B-3 some of the things that would be permitted without coming before the board could be a financial facility with a drive thru, a hospital, theater, funeral home, hotel, motel, clubs, wholesale outlet and veterinary hospital just to name a few.  There are worse things that could be put on the property if the request is denied that could have a greater affect on the property.  Mr. Deremer stated that he is in favor of the request with the condition of better security.

Mr. Juergensen stated that conditional use permits are more restrictive but the conditions are contained within the conditional use permit, so he does not have a problem with the request.

Mr. Oldroyd stated that he has the same concerns as Mr. McDonnell but the issue of what the property is zoned is something the board has no authority over.  Mr. Oldroyd stated that he believes it should be zoned differently but it isn’t and they have to go with what it is zoned, so he thinks it should be approved.

Mr. McDonnell stated that he doesn’t have a problem with what the property is zoned but the trustees do give the board some additional discretion to use their judgment.  With that respect he believes the proposed use is not appropriate for the area.  Mr. McDonnell stated that he looks at the general area as opposed to the small two or three acres in which this is located.

Mr. Juergensen made a motion to approve appeal #1978 with the condition that a fence be utilized along the perimeter where there is no mounding at the southwest section of the property that abuts the adjoining commercial property.

Mr. McDonnell seconded the motion.

The vote was: Mr. Oldroyd-yes, Mr. Juergensen-yes, Mr. Dodson-yes, Mr. McDonnell-no, and Mr. Deremer-yes.

Mr. Oldroyd recused himself from appeal #1980.

APPEAL #1980 – Thom Kalb, 5944 Fulton Dr. NW, Canton, Ohio 44718 requests a conditional use permit to conduct worship services at Strausser Elementary School where a conditional use permit is required per Art. IV Sect. 401.3 of the zoning resolution.  Property located at 8646 Strausser St. NW, Sect. 8NW Jackson Twp.  Area zoned R-R.

Mr. Deremer read the file application signed by Thom Kalb with reasons being that a conditional use permit is required.  The file contained a tax map, a site plan labeled primary level and intermediate level with the areas marked that would be utilized for the church, and the answers to the criteria for the conditional use permit.

Mr. Deremer asked who would like to speak in favor of this appeal.

Mr. Deremer swore in Thom Kalb, 7507 Hawksfield Ave. NW, Canal Fulton, Ohio.

Mr. Kalb stated that they currently meet monthly at the Church of the Lakes.  Starting August 1st they would like to meet at Strausser Elementary School for Cross Point United Methodist Church which is a church that is coming out of Church of the Lakes.

Mr. Deremer asked what area of the school they would be using.

Mr. Kalb stated that the main area would be used for worship, which is the cafeteria, and they would use some of the classrooms for the Sunday school.  Mr. Kalb stated that the areas are marked on the site plan that was submitted.  Mr. Kalb stated that they would be signing a contract with Bob Glassburn who is the assistant superintendent of the school.

Mr. McDonnell reviewed the criteria for the conditional use permit.

Section 431.2A
Mr. McDonnell asked if it is Mr. Kalb’s testimony that it will not be detrimental to property values in the immediate vicinity.

Mr. Kalb stated yes.

Mr. McDonnell asked if it is Mr. Kalb’s testimony that it will not restrict or adversely affect the existing use of the adjacent property owners.

Mr. Kalb stated yes.

Mr. McDonnell stated that “C, D & E” are non applicable because the existing building is being used.

Mr. McDonnell asked if will be constructed and maintained in a neat, orderly and safe condition.

Mr. Kalb state yes.

Section 431.3
Mr. McDonnell asked what the hours of operation would be.

Mr. Kalb stated that they would hold Sunday school at 9:30 and worship would be at 10:30.  They would actually use the school from about 7:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

Mr. McDonnell stated that item two is non applicable.

Mr. McDonnell asked if there would be any lighting.

Mr. Kalb stated no.

Mr. McDonnell asked if there would be any floodlights, searchlights, or loudspeakers.

Mr. Kalb stated no.

Mr. McDonnell asked if they would be adding any trash receptacles.

Mr. Kalb stated no.

Mr. McDonnell stated that item six is non applicable.
Section 431.6F
Mr. McDonnell stated that item one is non applicable.

Mr. McDonnell asked if there would be any outdoor children’s activities.

Mr. Kalb stated that there is a playground at the back of the school and they would use what is currently on the property.

Mr. McDonnell stated that item three is non applicable.

Mr. McDonnell asked if all activities, programs and other events will be directly related to the conditional use permit.

Mr. Kalb stated yes.

Mr. McDonnell asked if the plan shows the parking and emergency entrances

Mr. McDonnell stated that the emergency entrances and exits are on the original development plan.

The concluded the criteria for the conditional use permit.

No one else in the audience spoke in favor of or in opposition to the appeal.  Mr. Deremer closed this appeal to public input.

Mr. Juergensen stated that he believes the applicant has met all the conditions that are required for the conditional use permit so he has no problem with the request.

Mr. Dodson stated that he agreed with Mr. Juergensen’s comments.

Mr. Juergensen made a motion to approve appeal #1980.

Mr. Dodson seconded the motion.

The vote was: Mr. Juergensen-yes, Mr. Dodson-yes, Mr. McDonnell-yes, and Mr. Deremer-yes.

Mr. Deremer asked for a motion or comments on the minutes from March 24, 2005.

Mr. McDonnell made a motion to approve the minutes from March 24, 2005 and Mr. Dodson seconded the motion.

The vote was: Mr. Juergensen-yes, Mr. Dodson-yes, Mr. McDonnell-yes, and Mr. Deremer-yes.

Mr. McDonnell made a motion to adjourn the meeting and Mr. Juergensen seconded the motion.

The vote was: Mr. Juergensen-yes, Mr. Dodson-yes, Mr. McDonnell-yes, and Mr. Deremer-yes.

Respectfully submitted,

Joni Poindexter
Zoning Inspector