Members present:                                                            Aletha Magyaros
                                                                                            Donna Conaway
                                                                                            David Benner - Recused
                                                                                            James Bauder
                                                                                            Stephen Bergman
Alternate member:                                                            Nancy Detwiler

Zoning Inspector:                                                            Joni Poindexter
Zoning Coordinator:                                                        Lori Foutz

AMENDMENT #549-05 – Hammontree & Associates, LTD, 5233 Stoneham Rd, North Canton OH  44720, applicant, for SRS, Group, LLC, 11197 Cleveland Ave, Uniontown, OH 44685, property owner, proposes to rezone from R-R (Rural Residential District) to R-1 (Single Family Low Density Residential District) parcel 16-27189 which consists of approximately 27.81 acres, more or less.  Property location is north of Beatty St, south of Fulton Dr, and west of Amherst Ave, Sect. 20 SW Jackson Twp.

Ms. Magyaros read into file the recommendation for approval from Stark County Regional Planning Commission.  The following facts were considered by the Commission in its decision.

1. The tract proposed for rezoning is in an area of the township that was fairly rural in character until the last few years, when the township rezoned approximately 10 acres to R-3 for multifamily condominiums and 21 acres to R-1 for single family homes, south of this tract.  The single family condominiums to the north and the majority of the homes on the east side of Amherst were developed under the existing R-R zoning.  Approximately 17 acres, southwest of the said tract, were rezoned to R-1 for another 41 homes in December 2005.
2. The permitted uses in the R-R and R-1 districts are identical; however, the minimum lot size and frontage requirement change from 20,000 sq. ft. to 14,500 sq. ft. and from 100 to 80 ft., respectively.  Approximately two units per acre would be permitted in the R-R district, while the R-1 would permit approximately three units per acre.  Due to the smaller lot size, the availability of sewer is desirable for an R-1 district.
3. A sketch plan approximately 56 lots was included with the proposed zone change.  Any proposed subdivision would need to be in compliance with the Stark County Subdivision Regulations.
4. The extension of the proposed R-1 district should not have a detrimental effect on the surrounding developing area.

Barbara Bennett, registered engineer and surveyor with Hammontree & Associates, 5233 Stoneham Rd, North Canton, is representing SRS Group, LLC, which is the developer and owner.  Skip Ray was also in attendance, representing that partnership.  Nathan Paige, a registered engineer with Hammontree & Associates, is in attendance to assist in answering any questions.  Ms. Bennett reiterated the intended use is a residential subdivision.  She went over the map, showing the surrounding area.  To the north is R-R/PRD district, and is currently being developed as a condominium, south is an R-1 district, east is an R-1 district, with a small section of R-R.  There is sewer and water capacity in this area to accommodate residential lots.  Regional planning recommended approval, with a side note an R-R allows 2 units per acre, and an, R-1 allows approx. 3 units per acre.  In their proposed preliminarily plan, their lay out shows 57 lots.  Ms. Bennett calculated this to 2.01 units per acre.  She stated with that calculation they are not asking for a significant increase in density compared to the R-R zone.  The reason they are asking for the R-1 is due to the curves in the road layout.  Curved roads make your lot sizes very irregular.  The lot sizes in this plan vary from the smallest being 13,750 sq. ft. to the maximum size being 20,000 sq. ft.  R-1 zoning states the average lot size must be 14,500, and they far exceed that average.  The Comprehensive Plan states that they want to keep this area residential, and they intend to do this.  She stated that last year, Regional Planning approved more conservative draining regulations and they will abide by those regulations.  All drainage must be approved and bonded by Stark County.  The majority of the subdivision will drain to the north.  Ms. Bennett stated that she would also like to address traffic concerns.  According to Stark County Regional Planning, approximately 5900 cars travel on Amherst Avenue each day.  With there proposal of 57 lots, with an average of 2 cars per house, and an average of 4 trips a day, they would be increasing traffic approximately 4 percent in that corridor.  In her opinion, that is not a significant increase in traffic.  They are proposing one road on Amherst Avenue.  There will be adequate site distance to the north and south and this must be approved by the subdivision and county engineer’s office.

Skip Ray, SRS Group partner stated they have developed all the property in the general area.  They are doing the building along with the development.  They have actually lost lots by putting in curved roads in this plan, but they are committed to this plan.

Mr. Bergman asked Ms. Magyaros about the legalities concerning the plan.  If the board approves this proposal, what guarantee can they make that this layout goes through.

Ms. Magyaros stated that they are unable to restrict their approval on this exact layout.  There will be no guarantees.

Mr. Bergman stated he applauds the design.  He is concerned if they had problems and had to pick another grid pattern, what they would choose.  He does not want another 81 units going up in that area.

Mr. Ray stated they are committed to this plan.  The road on Amherst has to go right where it is.  They are not planning on changing this plan.

Ms. Bennett stated that the developer group has done much work in Jackson Township, and plan to continue working in Jackson Township.  This will not be the last time they will be in front of this board.  That is the best guarantee she can give.

Mr. Bauder asked if they had a road going into Serenity Shores.

Mr. Ray stated that they do not because that is a private area.

Ms. Conaway stated that she liked that plan because the only reason you would be going into this subdivision is if you are visiting someone or live there.

Mr. Ray stated they had meetings with the county on sight distance on Beatty due to concerns from neighbors at last meeting.  They will pay for humps to be taken out of the road in the area to help improve sight distance.

Ms. Detwiler asked if they will have 56 or 57 lots.

Mr. Ray stated there are 57 lots.  They had to make a slight change and it added another lot to the plan.

Ms. Poindexter asked if the bubble on lot 16 will be constructed.  Zoning has problems if it is shown on the plan and not constructed.

Mr. Paige stated that it will be constructed.

No one else in the audience spoke in favor or opposition.

Ms. Detwiler asked if by adding the 57 lot, if anything significant was being removed.

Ms. Bennett stated it is farm land and it is pretty clear.  No significant trees or environmentally sensitive areas will be removed.

Mr. Bergman was concerned if a sign was posted on the property, he drove by and he did not see a sign.

Ms. Magyaros stated she drove by and a sign was posted.

Mr. Ray stated the sign blew down yesterday from the wind and he had it put back up.  The sign is posted where the new road will be coming out on Amherst.

Mr. Bergman stated he is happy with 57 units.  He also noted they will be in front of the board again, and they will be counting.

Mr. Paige stated explained how they came up with the 57 lot, when the original plan had 56 lots.  There was a cuddle sac in the plan which created a problem with lot frontages.  They took out the cuddle sac, which created the extra lot.

Mr. Bauder stated that he thinks it is an innovative way to change zoning and keep the intent.

Ms. Conaway stated that she thinks it is an awesome plan.

Mr. Bergman stated with the different lot sizes, maybe they will be able to offer a range of prices for the homes.  Hopefully this will allow more affordability to younger couples.

Ms. Magyaros asked what the price range of the homes will be.

Mr. Ray stated they will range from $250,000 to $350,000.  He stated people are driving the prices up due to what they want in their homes.

Ms. Conaway stated she appreciates them working with the residents and addressing their concerns.

Mr. Ray stated they met with all 3 people that were upset at the last meeting.  They have explained this plan to them and addressed their concerns.

Mr. Paige stated that with the Beatty project, they had 41 lots on their plan and they reduced it down to 35 lots to make lots bigger and reduce water run off.

Ms. Magyaros stated the various lot sizes in the R-1, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.  She also is in favor of the plan and appreciates the fact they are working with the residents and addressing their concerns.

Ms. Conway made a motion to vote on amendment #549-05.

Mr. Bauder seconded the motion.

The vote was: Ms. Detwiler–yes, Mr. Bergman–yes, Mr. Bauder–yes, Ms. Conaway–yes, and Ms. Magyaros–yes.

Ms. Magyaros stated that this will go as a recommendation of approval for the amendment change.  The Board of Trustees will set the meeting date on January 23, 2006.  Notices will be sent out to adjoining property owners with a meeting date and time.

Respectfully submitted,

Lori Foutz
Zoning Coordinator