being recorded. Sorry. Good evening, everybody. It is May 21st, 2025. We are here for B a 25-004s. An application by Creative Edge Signs for a Sign Variance. The petitioner's name is Markl Amaranto and sir I need to I'm gonna give you the floor and I need to swear you in first. Okay. Alright there we go. Alright could you raise your right hand please? Thank you. I saw let me swear a firm under the penalties of perjury that the response is given and statements made should be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth Yes, I do yes, thank you. Would you please state your name and business address? My name is Michael and Miranda and it's 7609 Air Park Road. And that is Heathersworth, Maryland 20879. Thank you. All right, this is your application. What would you like to say? Correct. Well, the application is for a monument sign. For, I'll get it all here on my spec, open my screen. It is for what we call a Delphine Shopping Center. And that is at 8654 Baltimore National Pike. I don't know if you're familiar with that area, but that is right there by the H. Mark, there's a right aid across the streets, a couple other businesses, there's a card either ship next door, and then there's a car max behind it. So my client is looking, the issue we're having is the height of the sign. That's allowed. Unfortunately, there are some obstructions that limit the field of view and also, well, what the order is to say is that because they are not considered a four shopping center because they do not have six tenants or more that they are only allowed to have a sign. I believe it was a four or five feet tall, I believe four feet tall, which we believe is inadequate. Although right now there are two tenants, one Abou Shorma and Highpoint Laundromat, and that is the two tenants that are there now. Highpoint takes up, I believe, five units and Abou Shorma, one unit. The issue is that down one, the first one, the first one, the first one, down the road, you know, they were approved as a six unit shopping center. When they put in their initial building application submitted, the initial plans, it was for six units. So one tenor happened to come in and take up five of those units. But down the road, if that tenant ever leaves, they want to be able to have six units. So one tenor happen to come in and take up five of those units. But down the road, if that tenant ever leaves, they want to be able to have, you know, multi-tent multiple tenants on that monument. And they believe that a four-foot height restriction would, you know, severely limit visibility. Other issue we have there is there is a huge berm, which is about 11 foot tall from grade that leads down into a retention pond right in front of the center and that berm runs along the highway. So anything coming from, anything coming from West would not be able to see the monument on till they got right up on it. The other thing we're looking at is that there are many businesses around that are single tenant that have some of them monuments up to 20, 25 foot in height. We know that they're probably grandfathered in around older ordinances, but limiting this one in comparison to where all the neighbors have the taller monuments is another reason we think that it'll you know limit their visibility and so we're looking from the board to be able to grant a variance for them to have a taller monument. So how much of a variance are you asking for? Four foot to 18 feet. Which clears the burn, allows for multiple tenets. And it's still at that height much shorter than their neighboring. Neighbors who are single businesses who have same kind of pylon signs, similar pylon signs. So I'm a little confused. Are you asking for a size variance or a setback variance? Height variance. You are asking for a height variance? Yes, actually for the height variance based on setback. Correct. So I still don't understand what you're asking for. We're asking for them to be given a taller sign. The neighbors are even closer to the, their signs are even closer to the road. And they're like a set of much taller. So we're asking for a height variance to be a that's are multitenant and b that the present berm and just overall visibility is limited. So what section of the code are you asking for a variance from for the height? I need to look at the exact section of code, but I was told that it couldn't be any more than four foot. Because it's because of the number of tenants that are currently in the shopping center. Okay, the reason why I'm confused is I don't see a request for a height variance. I see a request for a setback variance based on your proposed taller height. Correct. Yeah, that as well because apparently it would have to be at that height, it would have to sit in the middle of the parking lot. And that's another reason too. All right. So you're not really are? Are you asking for a height variance? Correct. We are acting for a height variance. Okay. I don't see anything in this paperwork requesting a height variance. I see that you are proposing a sign of 18 feet 4 inches from grade to top of sign. Correct. But I don't see a variance. Is that a good one? Am I a variance application? Actually, it says, let me see here. And because of your new height, you are requesting a setback variance from Baltimore National. I need you to tell me how much that variance you are requesting is. Okay, so how much setback? Well, I am just looking at your paperwork and it appears that the request before me is limited to a setback variance which is necessary based on the height that you are proposing of eight feet four inches. So that's why I'm confused. So, correct. That was your you are absolutely correct. I was one of the reasons because this at 18 feet, they said that it should be 18 foot back into the parking lot, which there is a parking lot there. So you're correct. We're asking for that height variance and the importance to the setback as well. Have you read the report issued by DILP with regard to this application. I have not read any report. So I haven't, I don't believe I was given any. So what staff found was that the monument sign has a proposed 21-foot setback from the right of way, and that's the right of way of Baltimore National. Per the sign code requirements, the sign would require a setback of 36.66 feet from the right of way, two feet setback for each foot of sign height from grade. This is a difference of 15.66 feet from the required setback. Do you agree with that statement? I agree with that statement. All right. So do you agree that you're requesting a variance of 15.66 feet from the required setback from Baltimore National? I agree with that statement. Yes. I apologize. I didn't receive that report. Yeah. No, that's okay. I just I'm trying to verify. Hanners sorted out here. So the report also references that there may be issues with the sign illumination. And any approval of variance would be contingent upon the sign meeting the illumination requirements of the sign ordinance. Correct. Okay. So it would make it meet the illumination requirements. Right. You won't get a permit until it meets whatever those requirements are. All right, so in order for me to grant a variance, it is your, meaning on behalf of your client and yourself, that you have to meet certain variance findings. I have to make certain findings. Okay, so the first finding is are there unique physical conditions or exceptional topographical conditions peculiar to the property on which the proposed sign is to be located, including the location of existing buildings and other structures, irregularity, narrowness or shalowness of the lot, irregularity of the road right of way, location or location on a highway that has a dependency on non-local use. How do you meet that finding? That required finding. For how do you mean what do we meet? Are you saying? Right. I have to make these findings and you have to provide the facts for me to meet. Okay. Okay. So how do you meet that requirement? There's the berm that is along the roadside That is in places well at its max height about 12 foot But average is about 10 foot in height the parking lot lot also sets down. The building is set perpendicular to Baltimore National. And with the edge of the building being 28, let me see your So it looks like six, 18 feet from the property line. So the monument itself would sit behind the building. So it would be blocked by the building, it would be blocked by the berm, and the parking lot that sinks lower than growth. Lower than growth. Okay. If you have a copy of the site plan, you can see see how the building sets. Great. I've got pictures too. Yes. All right. The second finding that I have to make is are there obstructions such as excessive grade, building interference, structures or landscaping on a butting property or properties which seriously interfere with the visibility of the proposed sign. On a on a budding properties well yes there's the sign the heights of their signs and that would be well from coming from the west you you would be able to see it all because of the burn. But then coming from the east, it's, you have those signs starting with the, well, yeah, with the car, the worship signs tall. so it would block anything set far back and short that the shopping center would have. All right, is there some issue with the bio retention pond? The retention pond? Right. No issue with the retention pond itself. It's the berm. The hill built up around the retention pond along the road. Like I said, at Max Hight 12-foot tall, that would block the view of the sign. Okay, anything else? No, that's it. Okay. The next finding is, are there historical, architectural, or aesthetic characteristics, which I need to consider? Not with that building, yeah. And then if the variance is granted, will it adversely affect the appropriate use or development of adjacent properties or result in a dangerous traffic condition? No, ma'am. All of your, the subject property is owned be to as are all the adjacent properties correct I apologize. I was expecting other people here to help you with this. My own I had to kind of get with the role with everything. Right. The property owner is here. Oh, he is. Okay, great. Great. Yeah. So he'll get to test it. He'll get to test fine next. The last finding that I need to make is is the required variance the minimum necessary to afford relief and cannot be granted without substantial impairment of the intent, purpose and integrity of the code. Yes, it's a both. Okay. Is that a work? All right, then, is there anything further that you would like to say at this time about your application? No, that's it. All right. Then I'm going to just ask you just to stay there and I'm going to turn to the property owner and I'm going to throw you in and let you testify, sir. Yes, thank you very much. I swallow and we swear a firm under the penalties of perjury that the responses given in statements made should be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Yes, I do. Thank you. Please state your name and business address for the record. My name is Hola Oyefussi. My business address is 8654 Baltimore National Park, Elicoas City, Maryland, 21010, this is for $30. All right. So you are the property owner? Yes. Okay. And what would you like to say on behalf of your application here today? Well, just the size of the lot. It is probably, I think I heard one engineer say that this is probably one of the most difficult projects because we had to actually excavate like about 25 feet from the top of the hill down and there's currently a private somewhat ammanagement sitting in different parts of the parking lot on the ground that we are required to put in place. And you mentioned the retention point, but the retention point is really wide. So the remaining space that we can, we can actually put a sign is very limited. So a setback, if we have to add to strictly to a setback, there's really not, it will not fit within the area that the civil engineer actually designed the sign would be, which is just a narrow space in between the big E. pole and the retention point. It's probably I would say maybe like about six feet in maybe diameter area to put the So if we have to now follow strictly the variance as required in response to the application, that will put us outside that area. There will be no space to put us in. We will have to be in the parking lot which will be where it depends to the property and and the purpose of putting up a sign will be to fit at that point. There will be nobody will be able to see the sign on this on the road. So my co-order dimension, the hip next to the power attention point, which is blocking the view. Before you can see anything, you have to, I mean, that's even the sign that we are proposing. It has to be before people coming from 29, on Route 40, before they could see that sign. Even at the 18 feet, they would have to be a little bit closer with that. So a shorter sign, like five feet, nobody would be able to see coming from that sign. They were passed before the CNS sign. People coming from Baltimore County, and they will have, they will probably have to reach the entrance of our parking lot of our shopping center before they could see any fourth side because the Honda sign is a barrier. There are some trees also in front of Honda dealership that will also be blocking view. So a fourth or five-feet sign will just be, we just spend the money to make any difference through the business. And we've been open now more than a year. This is probably one location that has been very slow picking up. Customers come and they say, well we didn't know when did you open. So we've been open more than six months. Yes, there was one one man said he would drive back on foot. He's been driving back on foot several times for six months since we opened. It didn't even know if we saw us. But finally, maybe I think we put some banner sign that was flying and managed to come in. So we've been actually losing customers because of the fact that we could not put up a sign yet. And it's a busy road, cars driving fast back back and forth. It's something that people can see we help the business a little bit. Excuse me. Do you understand that I do not have an application in front of me with regards to the height? So there's nothing in front of me asking for a variance from the height. I just have a proposal for 18 feet four inches, an 18 foot four inch sign height, which is driving the current request for a setback variance. Yes, I heard your discussion with Michael earlier. And we've actually left everything to him and his consultants to drive. But I'm hearing that for the first time. But coming here, I was coming with the understanding that we are trying to request a variance so that we can put up a 18 foot plus sign. I do not really, I have not paid much attention to the details about what the variance, what the variance between the variance we are requesting and the height of the sign. But my hope is that if there's something that we need to amend into the request, we can do that. But the purpose of this request is for us to be able to put up a sign that is tall enough or people able to see. And I understand that part one of the limiting factor was a conclusion that we have two tenants. Yes, we do have two tenants currently. One tenant is taking this base of five because of this size requirement. And I believe that happens a lot in Shabin Center. One tenant will come and join spaces together. And when tenant lives, the landlord can still subdivide that space again for multiple tenants. So this building was approved for six tenants, six units, and that was what we built. One tonight just comes back space. Okay. All right. You heard me ask Mr. M. Ronto with regards to the variance conditions. Yes. Is there anything you would like to add as to how your property meets these variance conditions? Do you want me to reread them to you or do you think that? That would help. Okay. Okay. So the first one was, are there unique physical conditions or exceptional topography conditions peculiar to the property on which the proposed sign is to be located, including the location of existing buildings and other structures, irregularity, narrowness, or shawlowness of the lot, irregularity of the road right of way, location on a highway that has dependency on a non-local use. So what this question is asking is what is it about your property that your property is unique in such a manner that is requiring you to locate this sign at this location which then necessitates the setback? Yes. The topography of that property is unusual. I started by telling you that we excavated about 25 feet down. For us to be able to build that structure. There were requirements to put stone water management, private stone water management, which kind of limits the areas that is actually left for a sign. The bow retention point is there. We will not be able to put any sign in that whole area, except for the limited space that remains. The hip, next to the bow retention point, is a limiting factor. It will be blocking the view of any sign that is not tall enough. So the topography, the narrowness of the land, of the parking lot, of the actual the actual property, and the requirements to have other structures in the property, in order to meet other ordinances by the county. It's those are limiting issues that we had to consider in the Viennese. Did you create the bio retention pond? Yes, it was part of the requirement. You required to construct it. Yes. And it was constructed where you were told to put it. I did exactly what I was told. Yeah, okay. And the county came, they inspected it, it was approved. So. Right. Okay. All right. The second finding I have to make is that are there obstructions such as excessive grade, building interference structures or landscaping on a butting property or properties which Are there obstructions such as excessive grade, building interference, structures or landscaping on a budding property or properties which seriously interfere with the visibility of a proposed sign? Yes, there are trees on both the two neighboring businesses. There are mature trees already in place. They have quite tall sons. There are mature trees already in place. They have quite tall signs white that ours will be buried if we don't go tall as they are. Those are the things that I remember now. If we put the sign too far back into the parking lot, the building from the dealership will block any visibility from that point because that building came really very close to the road that setting our back too far will be outside the view of anybody that is coming from the Baltimore County side of Ravford. Okay. Would you agree with this statement that Mr. Amaronto made? He indicated that there was no visibility from Westbound traffic due to the berms and there was little to no visibility from for eastbound traffic for your property because of the existing commercial uses and signs along the road. Yes. All right. Are there historical, architectural, or aesthetic characteristics which should be considered? No, for that building. If the variance is granted, will it adversely affect the appropriate use or development of adjacent properties or result in a dangerous traffic condition. No, it will not. Okay. If the is the variance, the 15.66 feet, the minimum necessary to afford relief and can it be granted without substantial impairment of the intent, purpose, and integrity of the code. Yes. Yep. Okay. The right answer. Okay. Is there anything further you would like to say on behalf of your application? No. I think we've covered everything. Just that from a business owner standpoint, it will be a big relief for us to be able to have visibility and for the advertisement from design for people to know that we are there. All right. And this is directed at both your self-ster and Mr. Amoranto. And that is the staff report that was prepared by DELP contains two issues. One is the issue of the sign illumination. So if this variance were approved, it would be conditioned on your complying with the sign illumination portion of the code when it was constructed. And the other is that the Division of Public Service and Zoning Administration appended a lengthy list of items which needed to be considered as this application moves forward through building permit. And so if this variance were to be approved, it would also be conditioned on all of those items which would have to be addressed in the building permit process. We will address them as the outcome. And you'll do that. Okay. All right. Then either, sir, either you or Mr. Amoranto, do you, either one of you have anything further that you wish to? No, I do not have anything. No, thank you, sir. No. No, okay. And we had one other attendee, which is, let's see. Mr. Glass, does Mr. Glass, is he on behalf of? Yeah, he was actually the architect of record for the construction. So would you like Mr. Glass to testify? Sure. All right. Okay. Let's elevate Mr. Glass. Hi. Good evening, everybody. I hope you can hear and possibly see me. All right. Let's see. Yeah. Okay. So, I need to swear you in. Here. Thank you. I sell them. We swear a firm under the penalties of perjury that the responses given in statements made. Should be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I do. Okay, thank you. Please state your name and business address for the record. For my name is Brendan Glass. I work with Bracer Design. We are located at 5560 Starritt Place in Columbia, Sweet 300. Zipco 21044. Thank you. And what would you like to say? Well, I don't really have anything that that rebuffs or conflicts with anything that has been set up to this point. You know, I'm sure that in the application materials you were provided a copy of the site development plan that locates the sign on the site. Proximate to the building property line. while I've been listening here, I've been looking at street views from the various different approaches to the site and concur with pretty much everything that's been said. I do think perhaps you may have East and Westbound traffic transposed. It would be traveling west, which would be obstructed by trees, buildings, and signage as you come up the hill toward the top at approaching 29. And then as you're traveling east from 29 toward Baltimore County, there is, you know, as you probably see in a large, large berm that sub, you know, kind of subdivides the road bed from the building site. and you may also have noticed that this was an extremely complex site to develop in order to provide access to the parking lot and comply with grades that the fire department requires and so forth. We had to excavate into the hillside quite a bit just to get the approach into the parking lot to a reasonable degree of slope. And the consequence was that we have a large berm between the site and the road bed. So it's entirely true that a small marquee type sign, three or four feet high in the position that it's indicated on the site plan would be all but invisible. Let me clarify something. If I am leaving Baltimore County and I'm driving towards the site and on to Route 29, I am going westbound. Correct. Okay. So westbound, the view is obstructed by the berm. Westbound, the view would be obstructed by buildings trees and existing signage. That's what I had. Okay. Okay. I might have stated it backwards. I'm sorry, but that's my understanding. Okay. What I got that now. What anything further sir that you would like to say? No, I would also like to, you know, again reiterate that the center was developed as a six-bay retail building. You know, it's gone through design advisory panel approvals, you know, for a six-bay retail building. It's only a matter of circumstance that it ended up with two tenants initially, but there's no reason to believe that at some point in the future, it might not be six tenants or more. Okay. And you understand that my jurisdiction here tonight is limited to the request for the setback of adher. I do. All right. Anything further, sir? No, ma'am. No, okay. Thank you very much. All right. If there is nothing further, I will determine that the hearing in this matter has been concluded and the record is closed and a decision and order will be shortly forthcoming. All right, I wish everybody best of luck and thank you all for coming tonight. Thank you. Thank you.