17 DECEMBER 1996

7:30 P.M.



The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M. by Chairman William Mitchell.


Members Present: Councilwoman Marge Boice, David Okum, Thomas

Schecker, James Squires, Councilwoman Kathy

McNear, Barbara Ewing and Chairman William Mitchell.



Mrs. Boice nominated William Mitchell and Mr. Schecker seconded the motion.

There were no other nominations and Mr. Mitchell was elected by acclamation.

Vice Chairman

Mr. Schecker nominated Mr. Squires and Mrs. McNear seconded the motion.

There were no other nominations, and Mr. Squires was elected by acclamation.


Mrs. McNear nominated Mrs. Ewing and Mrs. Boice seconded the motion. There

were no other nominations, and Mrs. Ewing was elected by acclamation.


Mr. Okum moved for adoption and Mrs. McNear seconded the motion. By voice

vote, all voted aye, and the Minutes were adopted with seven affirmative votes.


A. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - 12 November 1996


A. Report on Council Activities - Marge Boice

Mrs. Boice stated we will be closing out the end of the year. The judging of the Christmas lights will be next week. Looking at the financial figures, the City is still in very good stead, it is debt free. It has been a good year on Council; we have been blessed with some very wonderful people who work in the City such as this board, which I am very partial to. The Planning Commission also is just loaded with talent. All of our boards are really tremendous, and as we end this year of 1996, I personally would like to say that Springdale is very fortunate. We have people who volunteer and take their time; I think your elected officials try as hard as they can to be as fair and as equitable with everyone as possible. I for one am very proud to be a Springdale resident, and I want to extend to all of you a happy holiday season. I am very honored to serve on this board with each and every one of you.

B. Report on Planning Commission - David Okum

Mr. Okum reported that we had a request for a Conditional Use Permit for a 360 foot cellular telephone tower to be equipped at the GEEAA Park. It was a judgment based on the court decision that it be allowed on that site.



Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 December 1996

Page Two


Mr. Okum reported that Community Management requested additional parking spots for Wimbledons Plaza. They have a Dairy Queen going in and they wanted to facilitate additional parking spots in the lower area of the parking lot. They requested approximately 15 parking spaces, some of which would not have worked. There was some discussion, and an agreement from the owner to widen the entrance off Glensprings Drive which is quite difficult, dangerous and very narrow. Unfortunately this was not brought to staff prior to the Planning Commission seeing it. Since we had a break in the weather, Planning opted to go ahead and hear the issue and allowed 10 parking spaces positioned on the site, provided the city engineer reviewed and approved the location of those spots

Mr. Okum stated the Kerry Ford requested approval of proposed signage for Kerry Ford and Subaru for the redesign of their building. They presented new signage for the face of the building and were within our limits of signage allowed for the site. There was quite a bit of discussion, because Mr. DiCastro had indicated at a prior Commission meeting that he would consider some adjustment to the pole signs on Northland Boulevard. When the request came in, their attorney and partner in the organization questioned where statuatorially we could request the removal of the pole signs. All the intention presented to us by Mr. DiCastro at a prior meeting didnít come forward with their presentation. We had no other alternative but to consider their request and approve it by a six to one vote.

On the Sterling House final plan approval, Mr. Okum reported that Ms. McBrideís review had been totally ignored by the developer and we gave it back to them; this was tabled to January.

Mr. Okum added Lanco Development was not present; they requested that this be considered in January, so this was tabled.

Mr. Okum reported that we had a request for a Conditional Use Permit for The Vineyard for a General Industrial site to have an office as a main use, building to be constructed on 3.50 acres, which was approved.

On Jake Sweeney Chevrolet GEO, quite the opposite of what was presented by Kerry, Mr. Sweeney came to the meeting with their plan for re-signage and I have the photos which will be presented as to what they intend to do with the front of Jake Sweeney Chevrolet. They had several options for us to look at. We will be reviewing those this evening; it was referred to our board for signage consideration, but the site plan approval for the redesign and the new site was granted.

Jiffy Lube requested 70 square feet over the existing code on their signage at Sears Auto Centre; it was not ostentatious or bold and it was approved.

Mrs. Boice asked about The Sterling House, did I understand that they were given things to review and ignored them? Mr. Okum responded yes, there were 10 issues from Ms. McBride that were not addressed. The gentleman here representing them was totally unknowing of that information. It had been sent to their director of development and was never conveyed to him. On the other hand, some of the other issues from Mr. Shvegzda and Mr. McErlane were considered in the review.


Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 December 1996

Page Three


Mrs. Boice continued we did pass that at Council and I did raise some concerns, having had great experience with an aunt over seven years of going from one level of care to another, but having looked at their plan and pictures, I felt very comfortable with it. I find it very distressing that they chose to ignore that, and I would expect that Planning will be riding herd on that very closely. Mr. Okum added the gentleman was given a copy of that review and he said he had no problem with most of the issues and comments from Ms. McBride; it was just that he was unaware of them. I believe they will be in at our next meeting with their changes.



A. Steve Buffington requests variance to allow him to sell customized Sting-Ray bicycles in garage @ 232 West Kemper Road. Said variance is requested from Section 153.029(C)(7) "No merchandise or commodity shall be sold on the premises."

Mr. Mitchell stated that as a friend of the family, Mrs. Ewing has elected to abstain from participating in this appeal.

Mr. Buffington reported I build little bikes like this in my garage (showed model). I built one and ride it around with my wife and everyone wants one, adults and little kids and I want to be able to make them in my garage and sell them there. You can buy all the parts from California; the parts are made in Taiwan but you never see any like this around here; you canít buy them in the store. All I want to do is sell specialty Sting-Ray bikes.

Mr. Buffington stated I have some good reasons why I want to do this.

Would you rather buy something from your neighbor or from a big retail store? I would rather buy something from my neighbor.

Everybody loves these bikes which is something you canít buy

around here. Itís something all my neighbors want; I got all their

signatures and they are gung ho about the idea.

Mr. Buffington continued the parts for the bikes wouldnít come to the house; they would be shipped to the UPS Center Customer Pickup, so there would not be trucks stopping at the house.

Mr. Buffington added we have a large yard, so I am not imposing on anybody. I was born in Springdale 38 years ago and I care about this town as much as any of you. I am not out to litter the neighborhood. My motherís and my house are very similar and very presentable. A lot of businesses started in their garages (Cincinnati Microwave). I didnít have to come in here, but I want to do everything in the proper way. Those are the reasons I came up with.

Mr. Buffington stated it is up to the neighborsí discretion as to what they want in the community. I think the neighbors have a good opinion about what should be in the community and a lot of times they are stricter than you would be.


Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 December 1996

Page Four



Mr. Squires said you and your mother live adjacent to each other, but the business would be located at 232 West Kemper, in your garage. Do you know the size of your lot? Mr. Buffington answered it is about 360 feet long. Mr. Squires wondered if the garage were detached and Mr. Buffington indicated that it was connected to the house and is heated. Mr. Squires asked if he envisioned customers parking there to come see these bicycles, and Mr. Buffington answered I guess I do expect them to park in my driveway, but my driveway could hold five or six cars. Mr. Squires wondered if they could get in and out very easily; or if people would have to back out to let others out. Mr. Buffington responded I doubt that there would be six customers at once, but they could use my motherís driveway. There also is a spot to turn around in the driveway.

Mr. Okum commented you indicated that you would have no tractor trailer delivery, that all the parts would come in through UPS. Would the bicycles would be on display for the motoring public to see, and Mr. Buffington answered no, not unless you would allow that. I am not asking for that, because I donít want to distract the people driving by. Mr. Okum wondered if he had considered building them in his garage and selling them elsewhere. Mr. Buffington indicated that he had thought of that, adding that if the board wouldnít allow him to do this, he was going to ask if he could do that. Mr. Okum asked the number of bikes he intends to build in a year, and Mr. Buffington answered maybe 10 or 12. Mr. Okum asked if anyone helps him build the bikes, and Mr. Buffington said no.

Mrs. McNear commented I am not in favor of the sign at all. The City has been trying to preserve that section of town with a residential flavor, and I donít want to start slapping signs up on that road. If we put one up, the second one will go up and before you know it, up and down the street we will have signs. Signs are something we are very cautious about.

Mrs. McNear continued personally I donít have a problem if you build bicycles in your garage, but I donít want to have them advertised on the street. It is a very busy street, and it is difficult to get in and out of any of the houses on that section of the street.

Mrs. Boice added that is a matter of concern to me. Over the years on Planning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals and Council, we have had many approaches, some of them more major than this one. It is well known that some of those pieces of property on Kemper have been bought hoping that strip will go commercial. The Councils, Boards of Zoning Appeals and Planning Commissions that I have served with have held strong on that. That is a residential area that backs up to another residential area.

Mrs. Boice said I understand what Mr. Buffington wants to do and it sounds like a small scale type thing, but I really do have deep concerns about opening this up. I think we could run into a domino effect. There has been much pressure over many many years to open up that strip to commercial. We have had endless people in on endless different things, and this does bother me. I am very leery that we could go in this direction, particularly with the sign. Mr. Buffingtonís request appears to be small scale, but that does open the door, and my concerns do lie very deeply there.



Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 December 1996

Page Five


Mr. Okum commented I tend to agree with Mrs. Boice. If this were to be considered and approved by this board, I would have some strong reservations about it. If there were a variance granted, I certainly would make it clear that there would be no tractor trailer delivery, that there would be no display, that there would be no employees associated with the business, no sign, and I would feel there would be no on site pickup. If you would build bikes in your garage and took them elsewhere and delivered them, I donít see a problem with that. When you become a retail business and customers come in and leave, that changes the atmosphere. I think the items I stated are to keep that away from being a retail consideration and more of a hobby for you.

Mr. Buffington responded I understand and I feel the same way since I do live there, and my neighbors feel the same way. I guess it is up to the discretion of the neighbors and what they feel. You say if I do this the neighbors will do that, but actually the neighbors decide what is going to happen, and surely the neighbors arenít going to let something busy or ugly move in there. I am pretty picky about my neighborhood. I trust my neighbors and they trust me and they all agree about this. I really donít need a sign; it would just be nice for people to know where I was. I still would like to be able to sell.

Mr. Mitchell said I would like to commend Mr. Buffington for coming forward; you could have just worked out of your garage, although eventually Springdale would have come along and stopped you. Some of the points Mr. Okum made about no displays meaning if you sell bikes we donít want to see five or 10 bikes on your front lawn, no signs, no employees and no on site pickup would put you into the hobby category. All your sales would be offsite or word of mouth, and maybe thatís not bad. We donít want to see that part of Kemper Road a commercial area; we would like to keep it a residential area. Would you be open to this?

Mr. Buffington indicated that he would.

Mr. Squires commented they are asking if you would reword the nature of your variance and perhaps reapply; is that what we are saying? Mr. Schecker said if Mr. Buffington would agree to those stipulations that Mr. Okum outlined, we could consider that at this point.

Mr. McErlane reported that the applicant is requesting a variance to selling merchandise on the property. If he decides to deliver it offsite, he is no longer selling merchandise on the property and probably would not require a variance. We have had situations in this city where sales offices are in the home, where people do crafts and sell them at Comers Craft Mall and those are legitimate home occupations. The problem here is selling the merchandise at the location.

Mrs. Boice said I understand what you are saying, but my concern is that in the meantime, you are referring to people who do crafts; they do not have people coming to their home to look at them and then go to Comers to buy them. We are still dealing with traffic coming to look at it, and I cannot imagine a purchaser coming and if they are ready to buy a bike, they would want to pick it up and put it in my car right then and there. That is a whole different aspect. Mr. Mitchell said if you sell crafts in your home, they could purchase it right there and leave. The only difference is it might be a larger object, but the principle is the same. Mrs. Boice commented the average craft maker doesnít have a sign in their yard; they make it specifically to sell elsewhere; they do not make sales out of the home.


Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 December 1996

Page Six


Mr. Mitchell said so what Mr. McErlane was saying was if we said no employees, no displays, no signs, no onsite pickups, he doesnít really need a variance. Mr. McErlane confirmed this.

Mr. Squires said I would like to state for the record that Mrs. Boice and Mr. Mitchell both eloquently stated my position on this, that there would be no variance needed if you intended to do as he suggested, if you think you can live with that. Mr. Buffington commented that is why I did apply for the variance, to allow people to come over and look at the bikes and see what I had to offer. Itís not like I am turning a quiet street into a busy street. I do not think there would be a domino effect, because the neighbors wouldnít approve of something else. All the neighbors are probably more gung ho about it than I am. They thought it was a great idea and saw no reason why I shouldnít be able to do it. If I do not need a variance, I can build them and take them somewhere else to sell, and thatís what I am going to have to do.

Mrs. McNear said I want to explain to you that it is not a neighborhood decision. These types of decisions are made according to the laws and ordinances of the city and thatís how we have to make a judgment on this. Even though your neighbors surrounding you have signed that form, it doesnít say they are in agreement, it just says they are aware that you will be here and if they have anything to say regarding the situation, they can come and say what they want to say. Itís not like we are trying to keep you from doing a legitimate business; we are trying to protect the quality of your life in the neighborhood as it stands now. That part of the street is being squeezed out by businesses at both ends. If we vote on a variance to have a sign in the yard, I will be voting no.

Mr. Okum commented based on what we have heard, I think we need a motion on the floor so we can have a vote; I move for adoption and Mr. Squires seconded the motion.

On the motion to grant the variance no one voted aye; Mr.Okum, Mr. Squires, Mr. Schecker, Mrs. McNear, Mrs. Boice and Mr. Mitchell voted no. Mrs. Ewing abstained, and the variance was denied with six negative votes.

B. James OíBrien and Brad Johnson request variance to allow them to place a 7í x 14í temporary trailer/building and sell flavored ice (snow cones) @ 318 Northland Boulevard. Said variance is requested from Section 153.082(C) "no main or accessory use shall be permitted in a trailer or other nonpermanent structure".

Mr. OíBrien stated Mr. Johnson and I are partners in a small retail operation which we want to put on the site located on Northland Bouelvard near the Spinning Fork Restaurant. This is a 7í x 14í temporary mobile structure which is solidly framed and once on site appears to be permanent, but it can be mobilized on site. Once on site all we would be retailing is flavored shaved ice. There are a lot of these going up around Cincinnati, and my partner managed six of these so he is very knowledgeable about how to run these.

Mr. OíBrien continued the structure would be very appealing to the eye so that it will not interfere with any other businesses in the area. I talked with the property owner Mr. Shenk, and he has no problem with it. I think you received his signature of approval.



Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 December 1996

Page Seven


Mr. OíBrien added the height of the structure would be roughly 10 feet. There would be no large signage or anything of that nature. I have two illustrations; one is a typical building and the other is an illustration of the artwork we will place on the building.

Mr. OíBrien continued obviously kids love this stuff, but you would be amazed how many adults fall in love with it also. In managing these other six, Brad has never run into a problem with loitering or vandalism or anything of that nature.

Mr. OíBrien added if granted a variance, I would like to give something back to the Springdale community. We would put Santaís mailbox in front and have kids put their letters to Santa in the mailbox. There would be a 50 cent donation and we would give that money to the Springdale Recreation Commission.

Mr. OíBrien stated that the operation is seasonal from April through September. The hours would be from 1:00 p.m. until 9 or 10 in the evening, depending on the crowds.

Mrs. McNear said I see a picture of the ice machine outside your building. Would that be present in this building? Mr. OíBrien said yes. Mrs. McNear continued I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I donít look at this as a positive improvement for this site and I will be voting no.

Mr. Squires commented you said April through September are the months of operation of Santaís Snow Cone.. Will we be looking at the advertisement with Santa on it from April through September? Mr. OíBrien answered yes. Mr. Squires wondered if the power came through the utility poles. Mr. Johnson said we would be too far away to draw from the shopping center light, so it would be a conduit run along the ground.

Mr. Squires said I am reading from the sheet you gave us which says, "The aesthetic appeal of the building will attract a large volume of customers to the property, some of whom may not have otherwise entered the grounds. Increased traffic will have a positive effect on all businesses located on the premises, and will not deter from current operations." Would you elaborate on that for me?

Mr. Johnson stated it has been my experience that a lot of business owners were concerned about the amount of traffic and how it would affect their businesses. In Delhi Township, we were on a K-Mart lot adjacent to a Buffalo Wings and Rings, and we developed a symbiotic relationship between the Buffalo Wings & Rings and the K-Mart in terms of traffic flow.

Mr. Squires commented we have two eateries in there right now, one is the Spinning Fork and the other is Marx Bagels. There is a Hoxworth Blood Center, an Arthur Murray Dance Studio, some offices; this will have a positive effect on all of those? Mr. Johnson said you will draw people into the lot and might pique their interest. That has been the case in the other locations.

Mr. Okum stated I was on Council and I believe Planning when this went through, and we were very concerned about the impact of this development on Oldegate and how aesthetically it fit into the blend that was the entrance into Oldegate Condominiums as well as the brick features on the buildings. We even approved the roof panels a bronze color for the blend so it would tie in.


Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 December 1996

Page Eight


Mr. Okum stated we were very concerned about the mounding and the landscaping. There was an enormous amount of discussion about even the signage in front of Oldegate Plaza. This would go completely contrary to all the work that went into that original approval by the previous Council and Commissions that reviewed it. I compliment you on your interest in locating in Springdale and wanting to go forward with your business venture, but quite honestly I think this is entirely the wrong site for it and I could not in all honesty go against those previous people that spent a lot of time reviewing this development. The residents were very concerned about how it developed as a commercial entity and I could not consider approving this tonight, Iím sorry.

Mrs. Ewing added in your description you say there is no waste that will be generated. Could you explain the health aspect of it? There is one on Winton Road, and I think they may even have running water. How would you go about cleaning off the juice bottles and so forth?

Mr. Johnson answered our buildings are self-contained. We have a 30 gallon portable water tank inside the building, actuated by waste sump pumps. We have a 45 gallon waste tank near the sink and they are accessed through two gray plastic barrels that we transport. The water is transported in 55 gallon drum. The waste is picked up by our delivery van and disposed of into a health department approved site.

Mr. Mitchell commented it appears that you have located this facility somewhat in the center of the parking lot. Mr. OíBrien answered where it is located is to the rear of the unused portion of the lot. There are very few cars in that area. It would be located in the parking space itself, so it wouldnít cause any traffic problems or safety concerns. We are concerned about safety also, and that is why we have tried to locate it in a safe spot. Mr. Schecker commented there was some talk in the literature about a drive up window. Is that one of the features? Mr. OíBrien answered no, we would have two walk up windows. Mr. Schecker wondered how far they were from Northland Boulevard. Mr. Johnson answered it would be parallel with the front of the Spinning Fork Restaurant. Mr. Schecker continued so there would be one row of available parking at the front, and your unit in the next row. Mr. Johnson said we try to locate our buildings next to utility poles or lights on the parking lot so traffic around the building wouldnít be an issue. Mr. Schecker wondered how they serviced this location, and Mr. Johnson answered we have a delivery truck. Everything is automated. The flavors and syrup are transported and pumped into an interchangeable holding tank inside the building. Water is then pumped into the building also; there is no exposure otherwise. Mr. OíBrien added as far as the delivery truck is concerned, it is a pickup truck; that is sufficient.

Mr. Squires moved to grant the variance and Mrs. McNear seconded the motion. No one voted aye, and Mr. Squires, Mrs. McNear, Mr. Schecker, Mr. Okum, Mrs. Boice, Mrs. Ewing and Mr. Mitchell voted no. The motion was defeated with seven negative votes.

Mr. Johnson asked the board if the main concern was the aesthetic appeal of the building itself. Mr. Squires and Mr. Schecker said yes, and Mr. Squires added as Mr. Mitchell expressed, the safety of the children. Mrs. Ewing said the location concerned her. Mr. Squires said looking at Santa from April to September was not that appealing either.



Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 December 1996

Page Nine


C. Jake Sweeney Chevrolet GEO, 33 West Kemper Road requests variance to allow installation of a 195.2 s.f. wall sign and total signage of 734.8 s.f. Said variance is requested from Section 153.092(E)(1) "..A single wall sign shall not exceed 150 square feet in total area." and (D)(1)(b) "...Maximum gross area of signs = (W x 1.5) + 40 square feet."

(Referred by Planning Commission)

Dale Beeler of ATA Architects stated this is the final phase on Kemper Road, to bring the Chevrolet store up to the 20th century and bring his dealership in line with the Chevrolet corporate national signage program that they have adopted for all Chevrolet stores around the country. We also are tearing down the last of the free standing used car sales and reconditioning buildings and moving all used car sales into the main showroom so they stand on relatively equal footing. The used car reconditioning is being moved to Hartwell. We will be tearing down slightly more square footage than we are building.

Mr. Beeler stated that the Chevrolet program relies heavily on their name and their logos showing on the building. We realize that what we show on the building is more than we are allowed on the site. This site has been operating under a variance since 1966 or 1968 when we had four pole signs, two on Princeton Pike and two on Kemper Road. What we are proposing and what Planning Commission seemed agreeable to was if we could get this signage approved by your board, we would take down two of the three remaining pylon signs, the OK Used Car pylon which is 137 square feet and the GEO pylon on Princeton Pike. This would leave one pylon sign on the site, the Chevrolet GM brand sign which Mr. Sweeney is required to display for his franchise. That was a compromise that we worked out with Planning Commission that everybody seemed extremely happy with. Mr. Sweeney was comfortable with it and we also agreed that we would not use window signs any more. That is basically what we are asking for, a little more building signage and we would get rid of some of the pole signs.

Mr. Mitchell said the total allowed by the Code is 571.8 square feet, so we are looking at a variance of 163 square feet.

Mr. Squires said in Mr. Okumís report from Planning Commission, the signage for Kerry Ford Subaru was approved, and they are within the code requirements. Mr. Okum confirmed this, adding they have 11 square feet available. Mr. Sweeney utilizes the two signs on Princeton Pike, the BMW and Mazda dealer in their signage package. Because of their location and their exposures, they have about equal frontage on both sites and that gets calculated into his total, where Kerry Ford is strictly one dealer and one type of vehicle. Mr. Squires commented I donít want to be out of line in asking this, but are we giving Mr. Sweeney an unfair competitive advantage with a larger sign?

Mr. Beeler responded I cannot answer that, but Sweeneyís building is nearly twice as far from the road as Kerry Ford. It is 200 feet off Kemper Road and 300 feet off Princeton Pike. Our Princeton Pike signage is 20 inch high letters and from 300 feet that is not any type of advertising advantage. Right now he counts on his pylon signs on the street to make up for the fact that the building sets a long way back and has no signage. He is required to have the GM. They give him a little latitude on the OK Used Cars and Trucks Service and things like that. They want him to display them but if they donít get approved itís not the end of the world, but he canít take that pylon down with the GM brand sign. Mr. Squires wondered if the total square footage included the sign on the building as well as the pylon and Mr. Beeler indicated that it did.


Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 December 1996

Page Ten


Mr. Beeler added what we are proposing is taking down nearly 190 square feet of pylon signage. Again, you need to remember that with pylon signs they really are double that square footage, so we are taking down more signage than we are asking to be approved. The signage is hundreds of feet back from the street; Planning Commission felt that was an excellent compromise and Mr. Sweeney felt he could live with that proposal. Mr. Squires asked if he would eliminate the window signage, and Mr. Beeler reported that he would.

Mr. Okum said regarding window signage, it is code now and all the businesses have been notified of it. Mr. Sweeney was happy to see that it would put him on equal ground with other businesses that have done window signage, including other competitive dealers adjacent to him.

Mr. McErlane said you spoke a little about the Kerry Ford situation with signs. Kerry Ford was in three times to talk about signs, and the majority of the discussion was to try to cause Kerry Ford to remove some of their pole signage. Planning Commission has pretty consistently tried to do away with pole signs and move to ground and wall signs. That is really why Kerry Ford was in three times to talk about their signs. Mr. Okum added Mr. Galster commented in the Commission meeting that he would not have any opposition to putting more signage on their building if they would work with us and eliminate some of the road clutter sign they have. The gentleman here representing Kerry Ford vehemently rejected that and said they are within the allowable, this is what we have and take it or leave it.

Mr. Okum continued, Iím not saying we are over signage or under signage; that is for this board to decide, but we saw an intent by Mr. Sweeney to eliminate those two major pole signs on Kemper Road and Princeton Pike, which is a plus to the community. He did increase signage on the building. Mrs. Boice was commenting to me that she can see Jake Sweeney enough times that she doesnít need to see it two times across the face of the building. Iíll let her speak to that, but from the point of view of the Planning Commission, we were strongly pushing for the elimination of pole signs to eliminate some of the clutter along Kemper Road and Princeton Pike, and we believed this applicant had done that. His building does set considerably back further from the street than the Kerry Ford building.

Mrs. Boice said Jake Sweeney has been a landmark for a long long time, and I do not see the need for Jake Sweeney here twice. Cutting out that one big Jake Sweeney on the used car building, which is attached to the other buildings, would knock off 64.5 square feet and would bring you into a more reasonable area with 57.2 square feet over, versus 136 square feet. I think it is a little redundant.

Mr. Beeler responded I disagree with you simply because you are looking at the building as a small model, and you cannot see Jake Sweeney at the same time on those two faces. Mrs. Boice answered I understand that. Mr. Beeler added you would miss the curb cut; this Jake Sweeney would face Kemper Road. It would replace a 137 square foot Jake Sweeney OK Used Car sign, which nailed down the location of the used car facility. If this sign goes away, then the OK Used Car sign would need to stay. Mrs. Boice commented Jake Sweeneyís advertisements pinpoint their location very well. We can agree to disagree; I do not see the need for it and you feel that you do, so weíll leave it there.

Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 December 1996

Page Eleven


Mr. Beeler reported Iím an architect and I specialize in car dealerships. Iíve done all the dealerships for Mr. Sweeney, I did the original master plan of the Kings Auto Mall, and I know how to retail automobiles. That used car building needs a face looking down towards their lot. The majority of their stock is setting down on this side of the lot. That is why that building is clipped off, and that is a primary face of that building. That part of the building is 275 feet from the road. Mrs. Boice commented I can walk to it, so I am very familiar with the lot.

Mr. Mitchell wondered if Planning pretty much approved what we have before us. Mr. Okum added they did, with the referral to Board of Zoning Appeals for their consideration on the signing variance.

Mr. Squires said in the compromise we were talking about with the Planning Commission, what signs would come down? Mr. Beeler answered there are three pylons. The one on the center of the drive lane, Chevy, and the Used Car sign on Kemper, andthe GEO pylon on Princeton Pike. Mr. Squires said the GEO pylon on Princeton Pike will come down as well as one of the two on Kemper Road. Mr. Beeler added the Used Car sign that is furthest to the west, so there will be only one left on Kemper Road. Mr. Squires continued and the name Jake Sweeney will appear three times on the building. Mr. Beeler answered no, twice, showing the drawing.

Commenting to Mr. Beeler, Mr. Mitchell said I understand that this is your occupation, but is there any compromise from your end? Mr. Beeler answered I am not authorized to make any compromises tonight. Mr. Sweeney appeared with me before the Planning Commission, and we hammered out a good compromise, a good deal for the City of Springdale and a good deal for Mr. Sweeney. He is not prepared to go any further on this. If this were to fall apart at your board, we would stick with the three pylon signs and come back with a smaller Jake Sweeney on the building. I donít think thatís a good deal for him; I donít think thatís a good deal for your board. Mr. Mitchell responded you do understand that coming here this is a give and take and if Mr. Sweeney didnít give you any room for compromise, maybe Mr. Sweeney should have accompanied you here tonight. Itís not productive for him to send you here for you to say accept that and that is it.

Mr. Beeler responded no, thatís not the reason at all, and I donít want to be rude to you sir. We presented the entire thing to the Planning Commission and got a 7-0 approval on it and commendations. Mr. Mitchell commented this is a separate committee sir. Mr. Beeler answered I understand that sir. I asked Mr. McErlane if he saw anything particularly controversial about this. If so, I would call Mr. Sweeney and have him attend, but we both felt it was not necessary; that was the proposal we were making. If you are not comfortable with this proposal, we can come back to you in January, and Mr. Sweeney will be here. He has no problem coming before the board, but he will not give up that name and then take down both of his pylons. That is asking more of him than you have asked of any car dealer that he competes with on that strip

Mrs. McNear said sir, I donít appreciate your inference; itís coming off as a threat. Mr. Beeler started to respond, and Mrs. McNear continued please let me finish; you were allowed to have your say; please let me finish and donít interrupt me. We have been a good neighbor; Jake Sweeney is a good neighbor; I have been on many boards and we have worked with him many times and approved variances many times. I think you are out of line sir, and I donít appreciate it. If they donít give you the latitude to make decisions, then we should table this until someone who can make the decision can be here.

Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 December 1996

Page Twelve


Mrs. McNear continued I think to give us a threat saying it is this or nothing, I donít think that would be justice to Jake Sweeney or to the City. I recognize that that you are probably an expert in your field; thatís all well and good. We feel we are experts on Springdale, and we are here to look out for everyoneís best interests. Maybe we should consider tabling, because I think emotions are running rather high right now.

Mr. Okum commented I agree with Mrs. McNear, considering Mr. Sweeney isnít here this evening and obviously things arenít going in the vein you intended. Iím going to move to table until next month when Mr. Sweeney can be here. Mrs. Boice seconded the motion. On the motion to table, Mr. Okum, Mrs. Boice, Mrs. McNear, Mr. Schecker, Mr. Squires, Mrs. Ewing and Mr. Mitchell voted aye. The item was tabled to January 14, 1997.


Mr. Mitchell asked if everyone would be at the January meeting. Mrs. Boice and Mr. Schecker both indicated they would not be at the January meeting, and Mr. Schecker added he would not be present in February either. Mr. Okum suggested getting comments from both of them.

Mr. McErlane reported that the Planning and Zoning Seminar will be held on January 4th. I will be meeting with Anne McBride tomorrow to develop an agenda which we will mail out to you. Mr. McErlane said there will be a continental breakfast and lunch will be catered.

Mr. Squires commenting on the seminar held December 13th, said that it was long and if he had to evaluate it on a scale of one to 10, I would not go much past six. I think their intent was an 11. Dr. Alor had some good things to say, but he never got through the agenda. Mr. McErlane commented he is one of our speakers. Mr. Squires added I think I would like to meet with Anne McBride. Mr. Okum said I strongly suggest it, because your input would be invaluable.

Mr. Mitchell commented on the last applicant this evening who had been before the Planning Commission, I feel like Planning had spent a lot of hours and were in agreement with it and then it came before us tonight. My impression was yes it looked nice, but when the gentleman came off it was like he put the credentials out first and no compromise. He was pretty much rigid and when I saw that and then he started name dropping and wanted us to vote yes and get it over with, it rubbed me the wrong way.

Mrs. McNear said maybe Bill should call there and suggest that someone else should come in his place, because I am so angry I am still shaking.

Mr. Mitchell added in his defense, he didnít have any decision making ability there. Mrs. Boice said he needs to read How To Win Friends and Influence People. Mrs. McNear added by saying he didnít have any latitude to make decisions, he was saying this is all you are getting.

Mr. Okum commented we had the same thing happen with Kerry Ford, in which we had them come in without any representation and then they sent us their attorney and he came off exactly the same way as this individual, except their attorney asked the staturatory background, and he was right but he was wrong too. The Board clearly pointed out to him that he only has 11 square feet to spare.


Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes

17 December 1996

Page Thirteen



Mrs. Boice moved for adjournment and Mr. Squires seconded the motion. All present voted aye, and the Board adjourned at 9:10 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,



________________________,1997 __________________________

William Mitchell, Chairman



________________________,1997 ___________________________

Barbara Ewing, Secretary