Planning Commission rejects sign variances for Kent Road Sheetz development

The Stow City Planning Commission on an unspecified meeting date rejected variances sought for a multi-tenant freestanding sign at 4285 Kent Road, a parcel recently split into Lot A (Sheetz), Lot B (Chick-fil-A) and Lot C (future retail). The motion to approve the variances failed on a 3-2 roll-call vote and the matter will advance to the Stow City Council on Sept. 25 for further consideration.

The variances sought were tied to a proposed freestanding sign on the western corner of the development. City staff summarized the departures as: a sign area of about 106.8 square feet where the code maximum is 50 square feet; a freestanding sign height just over 20 feet where the maximum is 8 feet; a side-yard setback of 5 feet where the code requires 20 feet; and a masonry perimeter for electronic message centers of 7 inches instead of the 12 inches the code currently specifies. Staff also noted a recommended condition that the sign include address numbers per Section 1183.06.

The developer's representative, Rebecca Patton, defended the proposal as a response to site constraints and visibility needs. "I don't think that it is such an overkill," Patton said, arguing the tall sign and the smaller monument sign serve different purposes: "I don't think the both signs is is is too much of of what you would say a distraction." Ellen Celli, identifying herself as a Sheetz representative, described constraints created by a 25-foot sewer easement and grade changes at the site, saying the easement "complicates things" and limits where sign foundations can be placed. Diane Kalt, land-development counsel for Sheetz (Manser Gavin), said the multi-tenant sign is a developer-proposed feature that the tenants do not control: "We're not asking — this isn't our application." Owen Wolf, also speaking for Sheetz, said the company preferred a standalone sign but that parceling and topography prevented that and left the developer's multi-tenant sign as the practical option.

Several commissioners and members of the public raised concerns about competitive advantage and visual consistency with nearby stations. One commissioner observed that most local gas stations display prices on low monument signs and said an elevated price display would be "an advantage that I don't think is fair when no one else has that." Staff showed comparables, including a Meijer sign at 25 feet and a Stow Community Center sign at about 32 feet, which had been approved under prior site-plan processes.

During discussion, applicants offered adjustments: Sheetz representatives said they would remove pricing from the smaller, already approved monument sign if the larger sign carried the pricing, or alternatively reduce the electronic pricing-surface dimensions to better match surrounding signage. City staff suggested tabling the item to allow the applicant to submit alternative designs; commissioners ultimately voted on the application as presented.

A motion to approve the application (PC25-24) with the condition that the sign include address numbers per Section 1183.06 was made and seconded; the roll call produced two affirmative votes and three negative votes (see Actions). The motion therefore failed.

Because the Planning Commission denied the variances, the application record will proceed to the Stow City Council hearing scheduled for Sept. 25, per staff announcement at the meeting.

Ending: The record on the sign variances will move to Council on Sept. 25. The applicant indicated it may revise the proposal and return with alternative sign configurations if the Council or the applicant requests further review.