[00:00:02]
          I'M READY. I A OR TWO. YEAH I JUST JUST CHECKING, MAKING SURE WE GET THIS STAFF READY. OK? OH, 
          [I. Call to order]
THAT'S ALL RIGHT. I LET COLDER. THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FOR MONDAY. APRIL 15TH. CAN I GO, PLEASE? MISTER KIRBY. MR WALLACE PRESENT, MR MR LARSON BRIGGS HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER WILL TRY HERE. I HAVE FIVE PRESENT FOR THE APRIL 1520 24 PLAN COMMISSION MEETING. THANK YOU 
          [III. Action on minutes: March 18, 2024]
TAKES US TO ITEM THREE ON OUR AGENDA. ACTION ON THE MINUTES FROM MARCH. 18TH. DO I HEAR ANY CORRECTIONS? NICE SO HERE DOWN HERE. DO I HEAR A MOTION FOR THE MARCH 18TH MINUTES? UNDER TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE MARCH 18TH 2024 MEETING. IN A 2ND 2ND. A DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. HEAR THE ROLL, PLEASE. MR SHELL? YES, MISS BRIGGS? YES MR LARSON? YES, MR WALLACE. MR KIRBY. I HAVE FOUR YES VOTES AND ONE ABSTENTION ON THE MOTION TO ADOPT THE MINUTES. THE MINUTES ARE ADOPTED. THANK YOU. I WAS NOT PRESENT FOR THAT MEETING. MOM TAKES US TO ITEM FOUR ADDITION TO CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA. DO WE HAVE ANY NONE FROM S. OK? UM I TAKE IT STAFF IS ONLY FOLKS TALKING TO US TONIGHT . ALL RIGHT. SO MUCH FOR THAT, UM ACCESS TO HEARING THE 
          [VI. Cases]
VISITORS. WE HAVE NONE. AND OUR FIRST CASE, WHICH HAS BEEN REQUESTED AT THE TABLE. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN MODIFICATION EIGHT OF 2024 FOR THE DRIVING RANGE IN THE LEGS. UM, DO I HEAR A MOTION TO TABLE NEED TO MOVE TO EXCEL. UM, I WAS GONNA DO IT AT THE MEETING. WE ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT THEM IN CASE THEY CHANGE. WELL, I JUST NOTICED IT'S ON THE AGENDA, SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WERE OK. I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORT DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD FOR FINAL DEVELOPMENT MODIFICATION. EIGHT OF 2024. DO I HEAR A SECOND ON THE DOCUMENTS MOTION A SECOND. SINCE I RAISED THE ISSUE, MR KIRBY, UM HANG ON. UH, ANY DISCUSSION ON THE DOCUMENTS MOTION? CAN YOU HEAR THE WRONG MR KIRBY? YES, MR WALL ? YES, MR SHELL? YES MR LARSON. 
          IS BRIGGS YES, YES VOTES TO ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORTS TO YOUR MOTION TO TABLE. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE APPLICATION FDM 0082024 UNTIL THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING BASED ON THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT. 20 OR A SECOND. SECOND AND DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO TABLE HEAR THE ROLE, PLEASE. MR LARSON. MS BRIGGS? YES MR SHOW? YES MR WALL? YES YES. FIVE YES. VOTES TO TABLE FDM 008 2024 UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING. THANK YOU. OTHER BUSINESS CENTER CODE. FROM 
          [VII. Other business]
STAFF, PLEASE. SURE. THANK YOU. SO UH, THIS IS REALLY JUST KIND OF ON THE OUTSIDE I. I HOPE YOU ALL HAD A CHANCE TO READ THE MEMO. UM IT HAS A LITTLE DENSE TO KIND OF GET THROUGH RIGHT NOW. UH, SO APOLOGIES FOR THAT. BUT I REALLY THIS IS KIND OF MORE OF A REALLY A CODE CLEAN UP MORE THAN ANYTHING MORE THAN A CHANGE, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU GUYS. SO DURING SOME, UH RESEARCH, UH BY CITY STAFF. WE FOUND THAT THERE ARE ACTUALLY TWO PARK AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS THAT APPLY TO PROPERTIES IN THE VILLAGE CENTER . UM AND OUR SOLUTION TO THAT, UH, WOULD BE TO MODIFY URBAN CENTER CODE, UM, SO THAT A SINGLE PARK LANE AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT APPLIES TO PROPERTY IN THE VILLAGE CENTER. UM, INSTEAD OF THE TWO UM, I WILL COME BACK TO THESE TWO SLIDES HERE. SO I CAN WALK THROUGH. THIS IS, UH, MENTIONED IN YOUR MEMO. I PULLED THE KIND OF THE HIGHLIGHTS OUT OF THE MEMO. UM, THERE ARE TWO PARKLAND AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS THAT THAT APPLY IN THE CITY OF NEW ALBANY. SO UH UH, IN OUR CITY CODE, UH, PARKLAND AND OPEN SPACE IS NOT AN ESTABLISHED SENDING DISTRICT FOR THE MORE USE BASED OR EUCLIDEAN ZONING CODE THAT APPLIES TO ALL THE LAND OUTSIDE OF THE VILLAGE CENTER. UM SO THAT INCLUDES, YOU KNOW, LIKE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS, VARIOUS PROPERTIES AND, UM THE BUSINESS PARK. UM REALLY ANYTHING THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE VILLAGE CENTER ARE EUCLIDEAN ZONING CODE APPLIES TO THOSE PROPERTIES. SINCE THERE IS NOT A ESTABLISHED ZONING DISTRICT FOR PARKLAND AND OPEN SPACE AND CITY CODE, UM PARKLAND AND OPEN CITY STANDARDS ARE PROVIDED FOR THESE AREAS. UM VIA, UM SEPARATE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN CODIFIED ORDINANCE, 1165 10. UH, THIS MAY LOOK, THIS CHART HERE MAY LOOK A LITTLE FAMILIAR TO FOLKS. I'M SURE IT DOES, IF YOU GUYS SPECIFICALLY, BUT, UH, FOR TRADITIONAL, UH, SUB UH UH, SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE DEVELOPED IN OUR COMMUNITY. UM, THERE'S A REQUIREMENT THAT 2400 SQUARE FEET OF PARKLAND B DEDICATED FOR EACH DWELLING UNIT AND THEN 20% OF THE OVERALL. UM GROSS, UH, ACRES OF THE LAND SHALL BE DEVELOPED OR PRESERVED AS OPEN SPACE RATHER OR IN AN URBAN CENTER CENTER CODE. IT IS A 
          [00:05:07]
LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, SO OUR URBAN CENTER CODE APPLIES TO PROPERTIES JUST IN OUR VILLAGE CENTER, AND THIS IS A FORM BASED CODE RATHER THAN A USE BASED CODE. I KNOW YOU GUYS START DEALING WITH THE URBAN SIDE OF CODE TOO. TOO MUCH, BUT, UH, FORM BASED CODE. REALLY UM, I IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE, UH, THE, UH, WHAT BUILDINGS LOOK LIKE HOW CLOSE THEY PLACE UP THE STREETS AND REALLY CREATING MORE OF AN URBAN FABRIC SPECIFICALLY WITH OUR, UM, URBAN CENTER CODE DOCUMENT RATHER THAN BEING USE BASED, UH, ARE YOU EUCLIDEAN? UM CITY CODE STANDARDS. SO IN OUR URBAN CENTER CODE, THERE IS A SUBDISTRICT THAT IS CALLED PARKS AND PRESERVATION. AND THESE, UH SO THE SUBDISTRICT IS IDENTIFY SPECIFIC AREAS OF LAND THAT SHOULD BE, UM, PRESERVED AS PART OF AN OPEN SPACE IN THE VILLAGE CENTER RATHER THAN RELYING ON UM A CERTAIN METRIC. UH, LIKE THE ONE THAT WE JUST WENT THROUGH FOR THAT'S NOT IN OUR CITY CODE, SO IN THESE AREAS, ONLY GOVERNMENT AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS CAN BE DEVELOPED. 
          HERE'S A MAP OF THAT FORM BASED CODE. UM, YOU CAN SEE IN GREEN. THOSE ARE THE AREAS UM, THAT ARE, UM WITHIN THE PARKS AND PRESERVATION SUBDISTRICT THAT I JUST DESCRIBED. SO JUST TO CALL ATTENTION TO SOME OF THEM. I KNOW EVERYONE IS WELL AWARE OF, UM, SOME OF THESE AREAS IN OUR VILLAGE CENTER, BUT LIKE ROSE RUN PARK. THAT IS, UM AN AREA THAT IS A, UM, THAT IS SIMILAR TO THE PARKS AND PRESERVATION ZONING DISTRICT. ANY FUTURE PHASES OF ROSE. RUN, UM ARE ALSO KIND OF LOCATED IN THAT PARKS AND PRESERVATION DISTRICT. THIS IS THE GANT PROPERTY. IT'S KIND OF LIKE REFERRED TO AS, UH, HERE AT THE CITY. UM THERE IS A SETBACK AREA AND SOME SETBACK AREAS ARE ARE SETBACK AREA AREAS ALONG 161 AND THEN UH, DE GRANVILLE ROAD THEY IDENTIFIED AND THAT PARKS AND PRESERVATION ZONE AS AREAS THAT SHOULD BE, YOU KNOW, PRESERVED, UM, AND ACHIEVED LIKE A SETBACK TO SORT OF PARKS, PLAYGROUNDS. OTHER UM, UH, DIFFERENCE. UH, RECREATIONAL FACILITIES CAN BE DEVELOPED IN THOSE SPACES. UM THE, UH, O DOT WETLANDS OVER HALF OF FOOR AND THEN SOME AREAS ALONG, UM, OR WITHIN THE SCHOOL CAMPUS ARE ALSO IN THE PARKS AND PRESERVATION. UH, DISTRICT. SO THE ISSUE REALLY IS KIND OF COMING BACK TO THE ISSUE. AND WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS. THE PARKS AND PRESERVATION DISTRICT AND THE URBAN CENTER CODE SERVES THE SAME PURPOSE. AS UM, UH UH, CODE SECTION 1165, HOWEVER, THE URBAN CENTER DOES NOT EXPRESSLY EXEMPT THE VILLAGE CENTER FROM THE OPEN SPACE REGULATIONS IN THAT THAT CITY CODE SECTION STRICT, STRICT INTERPRETATION OF, UM CURRENT CITY CODE OR OTHER URBAN CENTER CODE WOULD RESULT IN REQUIRED TWO PARK AND OPEN SPACE REGULATIONS TO BE APPLIED WITHIN THE VILLAGE CENTER, THE FIRST AGAIN BEING THAT PARKS AND PRESERVATION ZONE AND THE URBAN CENTER CODE AS WELL AS THE INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARD FOUND IN CHAPTER 1165. UM ADHERENCE TO BOTH. THESE SETS OF STANDARDS WOULD UM, WOULD RESULT IN OUR COMPROMISE OUR ABILITY TO KIND OF CREATE THE URBAN URBAN DESIRED URBAN FORM IN OUR VILLAGE CENTER, AND WE BELIEVE THAT, UH, THIS THE CODE SECTION NEEDS TO BE UPDATED, SO THE SINGLE REGULATION APPLIES TO PROPERTIES IN THE VILLAGE CENTER. SO WE PROPOSE AGAIN. THIS IS KIND OF REITERATING IT HERE. I HOPE THIS IS MAKING A LITTLE SENSE. I KNOW IT'S A DENSE TOPIC, BUT UNDER OUR CURRENT URBAN CENTER, PARK, LAND AND OPEN SPACE ARE PROVIDED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE URBAN CENTER FOR SUBDISTRICT DESIGNATION, WHICH IS PARKLAND, PARKS AND PRESERVATION. HOWEVER UNDER THE SAME URBAN CENTER CODE REGULATIONS, IT IS SILENT ON WHETHER OR NOT THE ADDITIONAL PARKING THAT WOULD BE STANDARDS OF CITY CODE SECTIONAL 1165 APPLY IN THE VILLAGE CENTER. IF IT IS SILENT, WE ASSUME THAT BOTH REGULATIONS WOULD APPLY. SO UNDER OUR PROPOSED URBAN CENTER CODE, WE WOULD LIKE TO, UH, THE PROPOSED CENTER CODE WOULD EXPRESS EXEMPT PROPERTIES IN THE URBAN CENTER CODE FROM MEETING THE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 1165. WE ALSO INCLUDED SOME ADDITIONAL STANDARDS TO HELP STAFF EVALUATE PARK IN OPEN SPACE THAT'S BEING PROVIDED IN OUR VILLAGE CENTER. THIS WAS INCLUDED AT THE ACTUAL CODE WAS INCLUDED IN THE BACK OF THE MEMO OR ATTACHED TO YOUR MEMO. UM, WITH THAT SPECIFIC LANGUAGE, UM THERE'S UM A SHOULD BE A PART ON THE FIRST PAGE, WHICH IS THE ADDITIONAL EVALUATION TOOL THAT STAFF CAN USE, UH FOR POWER AND OPEN SPACE IN THE VILLAGE CENTER AND THEN THE SECOND PAGE UNDER THE REFERENCE REGULATIONS. UM THAT'S WHERE THE EXEMPTION IS PROVIDED. UM FROM MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 1165 AGAIN. I KNOW IT'S KIND OF ALL OVER THE PLACE A LITTLE BIT PRETTY DENSE TOPIC TO KIND OF WRAP OUR MINDS AROUND, BUT, UM, WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE. 
          YEAH. UM HOW DID THE LINES GET DRAWN? HOW DID THE LENS GET DRAWN FROM WHERE WE HAVE THE DOTTED LINES ON THE DIAGRAM SAYING APPLIES HERE? WHAT WAS THE RATIONALE FOR THEM GOING 
          [00:10:02]
WHERE THEY GO AND WHERE THEY DON'T GO? THE ACTUAL URBAN THE REGULATING PLAN. NO, I'M I'M LOOKING AT UM THE HEAVY DASH LINE, WHICH IS, UH, IN TWO SECTIONS, ONE OF WHICH IS G IN THAT PART, AND THE OTHER IS DOWN ON MARKET STREET. I MEAN, A BIT DIAGRAM, RIGHT? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THIS THIS PAGE SO THIS THIS HAS ACTUALLY BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 2009 2008 2009. WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY CHANGES TO THIS AT ALL. THIS IS MORE JUST ILLUSTRATIVE JUST TO SHOW YOU WHERE THESE REGULATIONS APPLY AND WHERE THEY DON'T LET ME ASK. DOES THE MY MADNESS RECORD THEN? UM DOES THIS APPLY TO ALL URBAN CENTER DISTRICTS OR JUST SOME OF THE URBAN CENTER DISTRICTS? IT APPLIES TO EVERYTHING THAT'S COLORED IN HERE ON THIS MAP. OK, UM OK THAT THAT GETS RID OF ONE OF THE PUZZLEMENT, OK? UM YES. MAPLEWOOD CEMETERY, CONSIDERED PART OF THE VILLAGE CENTER ON THIS AS IT'S IN GREEN. IT. IT IS. YES. MHM. ALL RIGHT, UM TO GET THANK YOU THAT THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION. UM, I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT GET THE BIG URBAN UNDER THE, UH, RURAL RESIDENTIAL PART OF CANTON. UM AS OF THIS AFTERNOON WHEN I CHECKED, OUR WEBSITE IS EFFECTIVELY ZONED R ONE. IT'S UNDER THE 1998 PUD SUB AREA 3D AND THEY PERMITTED USES ARE R ONE UM AND I FIND IT HARD TO EXEMPT AN R ONE DISTRICT FROM THE PARKLAND REQUIREMENT. WE DO THIS FOR OUR TWO AND OUR FOUR ISH DENSITIES ELSEWHERE. YEAH SO THERE ARE ACTUALLY A LOT OF AREAS OF THE URBAN CENTER CODE THAT EXISTS OR EXISTED. UM UNDER THAT, 1998 NICO PIA THE APARTMENTS BEING ONE OF THEM THAT GRAND LAND WAS ALL IT IS ALL IN THE 1988 NPUDE. HOWEVER THERE IS A PROVISION IN OUR CODE THAT ALLOWS SOMEONE DUE TO THIS OVERLAY DISTRICT, WHICH IS EVERYTHING COLORED IN THIS MAP. YOU CAN EITHER DEVELOP UNDER YOUR EXISTING PUD STANDARDS. 
          WHERE YOU CAN DEVELOP UNDER THE URBAN CENTER CODE, WHICH IF YOU DEVELOPMENT OF THE URBAN CENTER CODE. YOU FOREVER LOCKED INTO THOSE REQUIREMENTS AND URBAN THAT ARE GOING TO DOCUMENT SO IN THE IN THE FORM BASE. UH, I DON'T HAVE THE FORM BASED PART OF OUR CONSIDERED COMMITTED TO MEMORY TERRIBLY. WELL, UM, EVEN THOUGH I LIVE IN IT, UM BUT YOU COULD DEVELOP. I PRESUME YOU COULD VERY NEARLY DEVELOP R ONE UNDER THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL PART OF THE URBAN CENTER CODE. SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOUSING IS AVAILABLE UNDER RURAL RESIDENTIAL. OK, I HAVE A REAL HARD PROBLEM WITH EXEMPTING. MANY ACRES. OF EFFECTIVELY ARE ONE ZONING, WHICH COULD BE UNDER CENTER CODE DEVELOPED R ONE STANDARDS BEING EXEMPT FROM PARKING LAND, SO WE DID LOOK AT THAT AS WELL. AND IF YOU LOOK AT G AS A WHOLE, AND THEN THE PROPERTY LINES AREN'T ON HERE, BUT ALL OF THE AREA IN GREEN IS, UH, PARKS AND PRESERVATION. SO IT'S NOT EVEN IF SOMEONE CAME IN AND DEVELOPED IT IN THE 1998 PUD THAT DOES NOT FULLY EXEMPT LIKE AN EVALUATION OF THE URBAN CENTER CODE WHEN THEY COME BEFORE THE A RB OR THE PLANNING COMMISSION. IN THAT CASE, UM SO WE WOULD TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. THERE ARE STANDARDS IN THE EXISTING G TEXT THAT TALK ABOUT PARK LAND IN OPEN SPACE IF THEY WERE TO CHOOSE IF SOMEONE WERE TO CHOOSE TO DEVELOPMENT OF THOSE EXISTING STANDARDS. UM I THINK ONE OF THEM IS THAT THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE PARKING SPACE WITHIN 1200 LINUX FEET OF AND THAT'S ACTUALLY A PRETTY INTENSE STANDARD. UM YEAH, 900 FT WAS OUR BOGEY. 1200 IS NOT BAD. I'D SAY ABOUT A FIVE MINUTE WALK. SO EVEN USING THAT CENTER IS PROBABLY BLOWS ANY. UM YOU KNOW, EXISTING CITY CODE REQUIREMENT UNDER WATER. YOU KNOW, I, I IT IT'S THE YOU SO IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY WE'RE A RESIDENTIAL UNDER URBAN CENTER. MHM. CAN BE DEVELOPED. REGARDLESS OF THE UNDERLYING PREVIOUS ZONING YOU COULD DEVELOP UNDER URBAN CENTER CODE, UM AS SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED ON LARGE LOTS. OK? IN MY OPINION, AND NOT TRYING TO INFLUENCE PEOPLE THAT REALLY SHOULDN'T BE EXEMPTED FROM THE PARKLAND REQUIREMENT. NOT AT WHAT HOUSES GO FOR IN THIS LAND IN THIS IN THIS, YEAH, AND MAYBE I DIDN'T WALK THROUGH IT CLOSE ENOUGH. BUT THERE IS WE DID KIND OF COPY AND PASTE OVER. SORRY IT WAS A AROUND HERE. IT'S HARD TO READ ON THE SCREEN, BUT WE DID. WE DID THINK ABOUT THAT, AS WELL AS WITH SPECIFICALLY WITH GETTING IN MIND, BUT THAT 1200 LINEAR FOOT REQUIREMENT ALSO IS ADDED INTO OUR CITY INTO THE URBAN CENTER CODE. BUT THESE REVISIONS, SO IF SOMEONE WERE TO COME IN AND PUT THAT TYPE OF, UM DEVELOPMENT PRODUCT THERE THEY WOULD NOT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE. THEY WOULD HAVE TO STILL PROVIDE MOST LIKELY, UM, SOME PARK I AN OPEN SPACE TO MEET THAT REQUIREMENT IN THERE, ALTHOUGH THEIR PERIMETERS COME CLOSE TO MEETING THAT HOW MUCH OF CANON IS 1200 FT FROM ALL OF G'S 
          [00:15:02]
BORDER. I'M SORRY. HOW MUCH OF THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL PART AGAIN IS MORE THAN 1200 FT FROM SOME PIECE OF GRAIN. ON OUR MOUTH. YEAH I MEAN, IT'S A BIG CHUNK OF LAND, SO I BET IT WOULD BE MORE. 
          BUT I THINK IF THERE IS A JOKE, A CHUNK OF IT THAT IS WITHIN SOME OF THOSE AREAS. AND I THINK THAT THAT THAT IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENT, RIGHT HOW THOSE THINGS ARE MONETIZED IF PLAYGROUNDS ARE PUT THERE OR SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD EVALUATE, UM, BUT THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO DEVELOP. PARTLY ENDED UP IN SPACE IN THOSE AREAS. UM BUT 2.4 0.8 SAYS THEY'RE NOT RECORDED TO BUT TWO OR 1.15 SAYS YOU DON'T HAVE FEET YOU'RE EXEMPT FROM THE REQUIREMENTS IN CHAPTER 1165 SO THAT 100 SQUARE FOOT PER UNIT 20% OVERALL OPEN SPACE, YOU'RE NOT EXEMPT FROM BERDING PARKLAND IN OPEN SPACE AS A WHOLE. WE STILL WANT THAT TO BE WITHIN 100 , LINEAR FEET OF EVERY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING. UM SO LET ME TO TAKE YOUR POINT A LITTLE FURTHER, SO WHEN I READ THAT I? MY QUESTION WAS, HOW IS THIS DETERMINED? IS THAT WITHIN THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DISCRETION? AND IS THAT RIGHT? YEAH. SO I GUESS THE NEXT QUESTION IS, IF SOME SORT OF AN APPLICATION ALONG NEAR THE HYPOTHETICAL NEIL'S DISCUSSION COMES ABOUT, COULD WE IMPOSE THE OLD PARKLAND REQUIREMENTS ON A DEVELOPER THAT WAS GONNA COME IN IN THE AREA THAT LIKE NEIL WAS DESCRIBING WOULD WE HAVE THE DISCRETION TO IMPOSE THAT EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT REQUIRED, BUT DOES 1.11 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 GIVE US THAT DISCRETION? AND WITHOUT SOME GUARD RAILS. COULD COULD A DEVELOPER COME IN AND SAY, I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT? THAT'S TOO MUCH. IT'S GONNA COST ME TOO MUCH MONEY SO UH, YEAH. I'M GONNA TAKE YOU TO COURT AND THEN WE'LL FIGHT ABOUT YOU KNOW WHETHER OUR PARKLAND REQUIREMENT THAT WE WANTED TO PUT IN UNDER 1.1 0.5 IS SOMEHOW TRUMP BY 2.4 0.8. YEAH, I THINK CITY STAFF FELT COMFORTABLE WITH THE 1200 LINEAR. BUT AMOUNT MAKING THAT A REQUIREMENT AND THOSE AMENDED THE AMENDED OF THOSE AREAS A REQUIREMENT AND EVALUATION FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION. BUT MOST LIKELY THE A B. I'M NOT SURE SO TWO THINGS. SO ALSO KEEP IN MIND THAT YOU CAN REZONE AREAS OF THE URBAN CENTER CODE TO DIFFERENT SUBDISTRICTS. SO IF SOMEONE WERE TO WANT TO PAY YOU KNOW, MORE DENSE HOUSING TYPE, LIKE TOWN HOMES OR SOMETHING AND THE GANON AREA THEY COULD COME IN AND REZONE THAT TOWER RESIDENTIAL UM, WHICH MAY POTENTIALLY ADDRESS SOME OF YOUR GUYS' CONCERNS. I'M NOT SAYING TOWN HOUSES SHOULDN'T HAVE ACCESS TO PROGRAM AND OPEN SPACE . BUT WITH THAT IN MIND, THAT'S WHAT WE THOUGHT THAT THAT MORE BROAD BLANKET REQUIREMENT FOR, UM EVERY BUILDING TO BE WITHIN 1200, LINEAR FEET OF SOME FORM OF PARKING UP IN SPACE WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE. UM I'M NOT SURE AGAIN. THIS IS A HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION IF SOMEONE WERE TO COME IN AND WANT TO DEVELOP THE GANT LAND UNDER THE 1998 P MAKEUP PUD NUMBER ONE. THIS LANGUAGE IS IN THERE. 
          NUMBER TWO. I'M NOT SURE. IF THEY DEVELOPED. THERE'S A LOT OF KIND OF INTERPLAY WITH OUR CODE WITH IF SOMEONE CHOOSES TO DEVELOP UNDER THEIR EXISTING TEXT OR THEIR URBAN CENTER CODE, AND HAVE THOSE REGULATIONS KIND OF RELATE TO ONE ANOTHER. UM I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO USE THIS AS AN OUT I'M GONNA HAVE TO RESORT TO URBAN CENTERS ON IT. THEY WOULD HAVE TO EITHER RESERVE TO URBAN CENTERS OR ANYTHING WHICH SAYS THIS OR REVERT TO THEIR OWN. 
          ZONING TAX. THE 1998 NPD, WHICH SAYS THIS BUT I THINK THAT 1165 MIGHT STILL APPLY IF THEY USE THEIR EXISTING ZONING TAX. IT. IT DID WHEN THEY WROTE IT. IT. WHAT I'M PRETTY SURE IT DID EITHER. 2400 SQUARE FOOT DID OR THE 1200 PREDECESSOR. ONE OF THOSE TWO DID APPLY AT THE TIME OF THE 9888. YEAH. I THINK THIS IS REALLY VAGUE. IT SAYS SOME SOME FORM OF OPEN SPACE. I COULD DEVELOP IT BECAUSE I MEAN TO SAY YOUR ENTRYWAY WITH PLANTINGS AND YOUR YOUR MOST TRIPS ARE UP IN SPACE, AND YOU HAVE NO OTHER OPEN SPACE. BEING BIG IS VERY INTENTIONAL BECAUSE IT APPLIES NOT JUST TO THE G PIECE BUT THE LARGER REST OF THE URBAN CENTER. SO YEAH. THE WHAT TYPE OF OPEN SPACE OR PUBLIC SPACES USED IT KIND OF DEPENDENT ON THE SURROUNDING URBAN CONTEXT. SO LIKE HERE BESIDE THE HIGH CENTER , A PATIO SPACE IS TECHNICALLY OPEN SPACE. IT'S PROBABLY NOT THE OPEN SPACE THAT WE ALL THINK OF LIKE AN OPEN GRASS FIELD WITH A PLAYGROUND. BUT WE WOULD STILL WANT THOSE SPACES TO BE PROVIDED BECAUSE THAT'S APPROPRIATE IN THIS URBAN CONTEXT, AND WE WOULD WANT THAT TO COUNT TOWARDS MEETING THAT REQUIREMENT. UM VERSUS PUTTING SOMETHING LIKE SUPER HYPER SPECIFIC WHO WAS IN CHARGE OF MAKING THOSE DECISIONS , THOUGH OF WHETHER OR NOT IT'S 
          [00:20:01]
APPROPRIATE. LIKE THE REQUIRED OPEN SPACE FOR THAT WOULD BE A PICNIC TABLE VERSUS REQUIRING OPEN SPACE WOULD BE YOU KNOW, A PARK BENCH? YEAH, SO THAT'S YEAH , THAT WOULD BE ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE EVALUATED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD. IN MOST CASES, IT'S INCLUDED ON ON THAT TYPE OF, UH, APPLICATION SHOULD BE APPROPRIATE IN THIS APPLICATION, RIGHT? SO IF SOMEONE PUT A LOVELY LITTLE GAZEBO AT THE CENTROID OF GENTS, RURAL RESIDENTIAL THEY COULD PROUDLY CLAIM THAT ALL OF G NOW IS 1200 SQUARE FEET FROM A PARK AND DOESN'T APPLY TO US. WE DON'T NEED ANY PARK AT ALL. I WOULD DEBATE THAT IT WOULD STILL BE OPEN TO DISCUSSION AND ITERATION AND CONSIDERATION BY DIFFERENT BOARDS, LIKE LIKE ALL PARK SPACES. I HESITATE TO LOSE A NUMBER WHERE I CAN POINT AT A THING AND SAY. THIS MANY, ACCORDING TO THIS MHM. UM AND HERE, ESPECIALLY RURAL RESIDENTIAL, ESPECIALLY WHICH IS A DIFFERENT PIECE THAN LIKE THIRD STREET. THIRD STREET IS HAS AN EXISTING CONDITION HAS SMALL LOTS. THERE'S NO WAY YOU CAN PUT WHAT THIRD STRING WANTS, WHICH IS DENSE URBAN COOL. WITHOUT AND SAY, OH, AND COUGH UP. 12, YOU KNOW MORE THAN YOUR LOT SIZE VERY NEARLY IN PARK. HE PUT TWO APARTMENTS ON A 50 BY 50 LOT OR WHATEVER. AND YOUR LOT'S NOT BIG ENOUGH, RIGHT? I THINK THAT'S A GOOD EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE WANT. WE ALSO WANNA WE WANNA AVOID THAT. UM AND THEN WE WANNA RATHER THAN DOING THAT IN A LOT BY LOT BASIS, OR LIKE LOOKING AT THEIR TRADE AS A WHOLE. IF SOMEONE WERE TO COME IN WITH A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WE WOULD WANT TO KIND OF ZOOM BACK OUT AND SAY OK, IS YOUR YOU KNOW, ARE THE LOTS ON SECONDARY OR THIRD STREET WITHIN 1200, LINEAR FEET OF THE PB OPEN SPACE? YES OR NO. 
          IF THE ANSWER IS NO, WE NEED TO PROVIDE SOMETHING AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THE RUN CORRIDOR HERE THAT'S SOUTH OF DUBLIN, GRANVILLE AND EAST OF 605. IS THAT A CURRENTLY A PARK OR IS THAT GREEN LINE ASPIRATIONAL? THAT GREEN LINE IS NOT ASPIRATIONAL. IT IS A ZONING DISTRICT. SO IF SOMEONE WERE TO COME IN AND DEVELOP THAT PROPERTY, THOSE ARE REGULATIONS THAT WOULD APPLY TO IT DOES IT IS THE IT'S NOT DEFINITELY NOT IMPROVED. UH, WHAT I WAS GETTING TO WAS, UM CURRENTLY IT'S IN PRIVATE HANDS, OK, AND THERE'S AN UNDERLYING ZONING THAT EXISTED PRIOR TO THE IS THERE AN UNDERLYING ZONING SIMILAR TO THE PUD THAT THEY COULD DEVELOP UNDER? THERE'S AN UNDERLYING ZONING FOR MOST OF THE AREA THAT'S SHOWN ON THIS MAP. OK COULD THEY REDEVELOP THE GREEN AND IGNORE THE URBAN CENTER CODE BY USING THEIR EXISTING BY RIGHT STONING THAT'S ON THE LAND FROM 98 NOT SUPER CUT AND DRY NOW. SUPER CUT AND DRY ANSWER. OK WOULDN'T WE BE BETTER OFF JUST LEAVING IT THE WAY IT IS, AND THEN IF A DEVELOPER COMES IN AND SAYS I'M DEVELOPING AN URBAN CENTER PROJECT, AND I REALLY DON'T WANT TO MEET THE PARKLAND REQUIREMENTS. AND THEN WE COULD SAY YEAH, PARKLAND DOESN'T REALLY MEET OUR URBAN CENTER REQUIREMENTS IN OUR FORM. SO, YEAH, WE'LL LET YOU OFF THE HOOK FOR THAT. BUT IF THEY COME IN AND SAY WE WANNA DO WITH MANSIONS OR SOMETHING. THEN WE CAN SAY WELL, IF YOU WANNA DO THAT, IF YOU'VE GOT IF THEY'VE GOT THE RIGHT UNDER THE ZONING AND YOU GOT TO PUT THE PARK LANE IN, IT SEEMS, I THINK THE PROBLEM NAILS IDENTIFYING IS SOMEBODY COULD COME IN AND CIRCUMVENT THE PARKLAND REQUIREMENTS WITH CERTAIN TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY WOULD MAYBE BE ALLOWED TO DO, AND WE LOSE THE TOOL THAT WE CAN USE TO REQUIRE, REQUIRE IT, SO I THINK THAT MY CONCERN IS THAT WE'RE MAYBE SOLVING ONE POTENTIAL PROBLEM BUT CREATING ANOTHER PROBLEM AND I THINK WE'RE BETTER OFF WITH THE PROBLEM. WE CURRENTLY HAVE. SO WOULD YOUR POINT. BE THAT IF THE DENSITY THE PROPOSED DENSITY IS HIGHER THAN WHAT WE PROVIDED FROM THE ORIGINAL CODE? NO IT'S JUST SOMEONE'S GONNA WALK IN THERE AND PUT A TON OF R ONE R TWO R. 
          FOUR ISH HOUSES ARE ONE THAT COULD DO RIGHT NOW BY, RIGHT, RIGHT. OK NOW YOU YOU ARE NO. 
          BEFORE I FINISHED SORRY I DIDN'T FINISH WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY. SO IF THE DENSITY IS HIGHER THAN WHAT WOULD BE PROVIDED THAT THE DENSITY WOULD ONLY BE PROVIDED FOR BY THE URBAN CENTER CODE, THEN YOU COULD OPT INTO THESE URBAN CENTER CODE REQUIREMENTS. BUT IF IT WAS A LOWER DENSITY THAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO DO UNDER THE WHAT IS IT? THE 1919 PUD, THEN? THE 1165 WOULD APPLY. 
          LET ME TAKE WHAT EVERYONE'S SAYING, AND MAYBE TRANSLATE THAT INTO LIKE HOW OUR BRAIN WORKS THROUGH LIKE YOU KNOW WHICH ONES ARE APPLIED, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU GUYS WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE. EXEMPTING PROPERTIES THAT ARE DEVELOPED UNDER THE URBAN CENTER CODE. 
          THEREFORE, THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW THIS RIGHT. VERSUS EXEMPTING FOLKS THAT DEVELOP UNDER PROPERTIES THAT ARE WITHIN THIS BOUNDARY, BUT THEY CHOOSE TO USE EXISTING ZONING RATHER THAN URBAN CENTER CODE THAT THAT IS ONE OF THE E. THAT'S THE THAT'S THE LOWEST HANGING PIECE OF FRUIT IN THE DISCUSSION THAT'S DOABLE. IT DOESN'T SOLVE MY CONCERN, THOUGH, BECAUSE YOU CAN 
          [00:25:05]
REPLICATE MY CONCERN UNDER THE VILLAGE CENTER CODE. UM AND THAT IS THAT YOU CAN DEVELOP. RURAL RESIDENTIAL WHICH EVERY OTHER PLACE WE DEVELOP AT THAT DENSITY . WE MAKE THEM PONY UP BECAUSE THE PRICE POINT WILL SUPPORT IT, EVEN IN IN WHATEVER THE MARKET'S DOING TODAY YOU, OR PRICE POINT WILL SUPPORT PARK THAT REQUIREMENT. I'VE NEVER SEEN ANY DEVELOPER OH, THAT THAT COULDN'T QUITE DO IT. NEITHER WAS OUR CODE AND SAY, DO IT OR DON'T DEVELOP AND THEY'LL SOMEHOW MAKE IT THEY ALL DO. UM FOR ALL OF OUR DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY. UM EVEN IF THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO BY URBAN CENTER. PER SE. WE SHOULDN'T TURN IT TURN THE LOOSE OF THAT. I MEAN, THERE'S ALL IF THEY SAY OK IF HE IN LO OF FINE WE COULD BUY THE GREEN PART OF ROSE RUN. THAT EASTERN CHUNK OF ROSE RUN FROM WHOEVER OWNS IT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THE VILLAGE WOULD HAVE. THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY FOR THE C IN LIEU OF THAT THEY DIDN'T WANT TO. THEY SAID. OK WE'VE GOT A PARKLAND AROUND US, UM I REALLY HESITATE FOR THAT, UH, FOR THE THIRD STREET STUFF WHERE THE GUT SMALL LOTS. 
          YEAH. YOU CAN'T DEVELOP IT WITHOUT RELIEF. AND SO WE HAVE A CASE FOR RELIEF, UM, SYMPATHETIC TO IT AND WANT IT TO BE THERE SO THAT PLACE WAS LIKE THIRD STREET AND ALL THE TIGHT PARTS SECOND, YOU KNOW, HIGH STREET ITSELF. ANYONE REDEVELOPS ANY OF THOSE PIECES ON HIGH STREET. ONE OF THE HOUSES GETS A DISREPAIR OR SOMETHING. UM, THERE'S ONE TOWARDS THE EDGE OF THE VILLAGE CENTER. I THINK THAT IS PROBABLY YEAH, IT'S IN THE VILLAGE CENTER. THAT'S BEEN NEGLECTED AND THEY'VE TAKEN THE METER OUT, AND IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO GO AWAY IF THAT GETS REDEVELOPED. 
          UM IT'S TOO SMALL FOR ME TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD A PARK. UM OK, WE HAVE REASONS FOR THE VILLAGE CENTER TO BE DENSE AND DENSE TO THE POINT WHERE YOU CAN'T DO PARK LAND. IF IT ISN'T BEING DEVELOPED THAT WAY. DANCE WHERE DENSITY NEEDS TO BE. MHM THEN NO RELIEF WOULD BE MY PERSONAL OPINION. SO AND UNDER OUR UNDER THE WHAT IS IT? THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL UM VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL CERTAINLY THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL AND WHICH IS THE BIG WORD, BECAUSE THAT'S G. YEAH. 
          WELL, THAT'S ACTUALLY I THINK BE RESIDENTIAL, UH, WHICH IS LIKE THE SAME HOUSING PRODUCT TYPE AS LIKE WINDSOR. UM THAT ONE TOO. WELL. BECAUSE WINTER WASN'T EXEMPT FROM FROM THE PARKING REQUIREMENT WERE THERE UH, THE URBAN CENTER OR WINDS ARE PREDATES ANY OF THIS REALLY OK, SO IN NEAR PROXIMITY TO THE VILLAGE CENTER, THEY CAN DEVELOP , UM A REASONABLE DENSITY AND PUT THE PARK LAND IN AS FAR AS I KNOW, THEY HAD NO TROUBLE THROWING WINDSOR OUT. I DON'T LIVE THERE, BUT YEAH, I. I DIDN'T LOOK WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE I DIDN'T LOOK AT THE SPECIFIC NUMBER SO I CAN'T. I DON'T KNOW FOR SURE IF THEY MET ALL THOSE REQUIREMENTS. SO THE DARK RED YELLOW YEAH, AND THE MEDIUM RED. WE CAN MAKE THE CASE FOR HEY, CHRIS, JUST ON CLEAR. 
          THE WHO OWNS THE LAND AGAIN. THEY STILL HAVE OWNERSHIP AND ABOUT THE OTHER GREEN SPOTS IS THAT A LOT OF THEM ARE STILL PRIVATELY OWNED. UH, LIKE ALL OF THIS THAT AND DOWN HERE. YEAH TOP LEFT. OH, THAT'S YEAH. THIS IS ALL FUN ITSELF. AND ALL THIS IS ON TO ALL PRIVATELY AND IN THEIR COHEN SCHOOL. I HAVE ONE OTHER, UM, SORT OF PET PEEVE TO RAISE. AND THAT IS THE WORD MENIS. I WASN'T FAMILIAR WITH THAT WORD. SO I KIND OF GOOGLED IT AND APPARENTLY, IT EXISTS IN THE OED. WHICH IS THE OLD ENGLISH DICTIONARY, BUT IT WASN'T IN WEBSTER COULD FIND IT AND I DIDN'T LOOK ANY OTHERS. I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT USING A WORD IN OUR CODE THAT DOESN'T HAVE A DEFINITION THAT WE CAN GO FIND READILY, UM AND I THINK THE GIST OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET ACROSS BY AMEN TIES COMES THROUGH, BUT I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED. LIKE I SAID WITH USING THE WORD THAT THAT THAT YOU CAN'T LOOK UP AND SAY THIS IS WHAT IT IS AND IN ENGLISH IN AMERICAN ENGLISH, AS OPPOSED TO WHATEVER THEY DO ACROSS THE POND, DAVE, WHERE WHERE IS THAT LOCATED? AND, UM NO, I ONLY SPENT FIVE MINUTES GOOGLING IT SO EVENTUALLY YOU CAN PROVE ME WRONG. I STAND CORRECTED, I THINK, BUT I DID LOOK AND I DIDN'T SEE I LOOKED AT MY DICTIONARY. AND IT DID POP UP ON. UH AND THEN I TRIED TO GO FURTHER, BUT I COULDN'T GET THROUGH OE DS PAYWALL SO I DIDN'T EVEN GET A DEFINITION OF IT UNDER NEW ENGLAND. SO JUST JUST THE THOUGHT THAT MAYBE THERE'S A WAY TO SAVE WHAT WE'RE DOING DIFFERENTLY THAN USING A TERM THAT ISN'T REALLY READILY. UM THE FINAL. YEAH WE COULD EASILY USE THE WORD PROGRAM PROGRAMMING OR PROGRAMS AND THAT GETS THE SAME MESSAGE ACROSS. I. I HAVE A QUESTION FIRST OR IN 
          [00:30:03]
MY, UM THE DARK RED AREA OF THE OUR. THAT'S PROBABLY OUR TIGHT DENSITY. UM, IS THERE ANY THOUGHT THAT THAT REGION SHOULD BE LARGER OR DO WE WANT IT TO BE EX? EXACTLY THIS BIG? I THINK THAT WOULD BE DEPENDENT ON A DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL AND THEY COULD GO THROUGH A REZONING PROCESS, OK? WOULD ANY OF THE BACK HALF OF G BE SUITABLE FOR THAT DENSITY? I WOULD SAY THAT IT UNDER THE CURRENT UNDERLYING UNDERLYING 1988 ZONING. AND THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT THEY'RE ENTITLED TO DEVELOP. BUT YES, IT COULD BE. THEY CAN'T UNDER THEIR CURRENT. I MEAN, THERE ARE THERE ARE MANY, MANY UNITS THAT ARE ENTITLED BACK BEHIND THAT, IN THAT PROPERTY THEY COULD DEVELOP AND THEN THE BUT THE HOUSING TYPE. YEAH, THE UNIT TYPE. YEAH, CERTAINLY. MHM. HOW CAN THEY DO THAT ON ONE TO THE ANCHOR? I THERE ARE NO DENSITY REQUIREMENTS UNDER URBAN CENTER CODE. YOU CAN BUILD A DENSE AS YOU WANT IN THE CENTER RIGHT RIGHT IF THEY SWITCH FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL UNDER URBAN CENTER TO VILLAGE CORE. OK RIGHT. MY THAT WAS HERE'S MY FIRST QUESTION. WOULD THAT BE SUPPORTED? DOES THE VILLAGE WANT MORE AREAS WHERE WE'VE GOT HIGHER DENSITY. YEAH, OK. IS THAT A PLACE WHERE IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE? WE THINK SO, YES. 
          AND SO GIVEN THAT THAT'S WHAT'S GONNA PASS FOR AFFORDABLE NEW ALBANY. UM JUST BECAUSE UNIT SIZE IS SMALLER PRICE HAS TO BE SMALLER, NOT QUITE A UNIVERSAL TRUTH. THEN THEN YOU COULD TALK ABOUT COULD WE HAVE RELIEF FROM THE PARKLAND DISTRICT BECAUSE WE'RE PUTTING IN A PRODUCT THAT DOESN'T ALLOW IT. UM YEAH, BUT I SAID, I THINK WE WOULD STILL WANT AGAIN. GOING BACK TO THAT OTHER REQUIREMENT OF THE 1200 FT. WE WOULD STILL WANT THAT. THAT IS A THAT IS A PRETTY THAT'S WHERE THAT WE WANNA HAVE IN THERE. THAT'S PRETTY A FROM ALL VARSITY STAFF. NO, I JUST I WANT TO POINT OUT AS I AS A HYPOTHETICAL BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE AN AREA THAT IS CLOSE TO THE BENCH SCORE. UNDER VILLAGE UNDER URBAN CENTER CODE. AND I. I CAN'T READ THE TWO YEARS BUT WHATEVER IS NEO IS THINKING AND THEY CHANGED FROM TIME TO TIME. UM WOULD WE WANT HIGH DENSITY? YEAH. AS LONG AS WE CAN FIND A NEARBY PARK SOMEWHERE. YEAH. GOT IT. YEAH. OTHERS. ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO SOMETHING? I WAS JUST MAKING SURE THAT'S MY QUESTION, TOO, IS WHAT ARE WE TAKING ANY SORT OF FORMAL ACTION ON THIS TONIGHT? OR HOW? HOW DOES THAT WORK? YEAH I SEE. I IDEALLY RIGHT. WE WOULD LIKE YOU GUYS TO BUT IF AND IF THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT IF YOU GUYS ARE THINK, WHAT'S AT A POINT WHERE WE CAN WORDSMITH A COUPLE OF THINGS TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP? UH, WE CAN DO THAT ON THE FOUR TONIGHT. UM AND TAKE THIS FORWARD. THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION THE CITY COUNCIL AND CHANGES WE'VE MADE BETWEEN NOW AND THEN. UM BUT IT'S ENTIRELY UP TO YOU GUYS. I DON'T KNOW THAT UNLESS WE'VE GOT SOLUTIONS AT HAND. I HAD COME UP WITH ONE WHERE I'M NOT GONNA I PERSONALLY I'M NOT COMFORTABLE. 
          WRITING, REWRITING THE WORDS, UM AND I WANNA MAKE SURE OTHER PEOPLE BESIDES ME THEIR ISSUES GET FOLDED IN I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE ROUGH. I'D LIKE TO SEE IT AGAIN. COME BACK WITH WITH SOME AND CONSIDERATION OF THE THOUGHTS THAT WE'VE GIVEN YOU TO SURE. AND IF WE COULD GO THROUGH THOSE AGAIN HIGH LEVEL SO WE CAN WRITE THEM DOWN AND JUST UNDERSTAND FULLY AND GIVE ANY FEEDBACK TO YOU GUYS TONIGHT THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED. YOUR CONCERNS LINE BY LINE. OK? UM FOR THAT. FOR ME. IT'S 2.4 0.8. WHAT ABOUT THAT? UM. DOES NOT UNIVERSALLY APPLY TO ALL OF THE URBAN CENTER CODE. SO YOU PREFER THAT IT WOULD NOT APPLY TO ALL OF THE URBAN CENTER CODES. 
          SPECIFIC SUBDISTRICTS. UM THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL AND THE, UH THE OTHER, I THINK RESIDENTIAL. 
          IN OTHER WORDS, WINDSOR AND RURAL VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL. SO WHAT? A REVISED WORDING THE PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN THE REGULAR REGULATING PLAN BOUNDARY, EXCEPT VILLAGE, RESIDENTIAL OR RURAL RESIDENTIAL ARE EXEMPT FROM THOSE REQUIREMENTS. EXCEPT YEAH. AND THEN WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT IF YOU WANT RELIEF FROM THIS SWITCH TO THE HIGHER DENSITY. 
          FORMS. YOU DON'T NEED RELIEF IF YOU'RE DOING HOUSES. SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE. I. I YEAH. WE DON'T WE CAN BUILD SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES WITH PLENTY OF PARK LAND, AND THEY'LL SELF SUSTAIN IT. 
          THEY'LL SELF FUNDED. MHM. UM THE . UM, THE HISTORIC CENTER IN VILLAGE CORE DISTRICTS. BECAUSE 
          [00:35:02]
OF THE DENSITY AT WHICH THEY DEVELOP. THIS MAKES SENSE. UM. AND QUESTION FOR STAFF IS UNDER THOSE TWO SUBDISTRICTS. THE FORMS DON'T ALLOW LOW DENSITY AS I RECALL. AND I WANT TO CHECK THAT ASSUMPTION. BECAUSE THIS IS THIS IS AN AREA WHERE IT'S CONCEIVABLE THAT WE WILL GET HIGH DENSITY, MODEST PRICE HOUSING. WHICH THE VILLAGE NEEDS. UH, AND IF WE'RE NOT GETTING THAT, THEN THEY DON'T NEED RELIEF. IF WE'RE NOT GETTING, WE'RE NOT GETTING THAT PARTICULAR. PRODUCT WHICH IS RA RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL. WELL, THOSE ARE THE TWO THAT DON'T NEED RELIEF. OK, BUT IF YOU'VE GOT A SMALL CHUNK OF LOT THAT'S UNDER THE DARKER REDS. YOU REALLY DO NEED RELIEF. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE THERE ARE 100 BY 150 BY 50 FT LOTS ON THIRD STREET AND SECOND STREET. MHM OK, THERE'S NO WAY THEY CAN BE DEVELOPED. THEY CAN'T PUT A NEW DU OR TWO D US ON THERE. YOU KNOW WHEN THEY'VE GOT 500 SQUARE FEET, AND THEY OWE US 1200 SQUARE 2400 SQUARE FOOT OF PARK. YOU JUST SEEM TO LIKE, GO AND DO IT. YEAH. IT. IT SEEMS TO ME TOO, THAT IF WHAT I HEARD HEARD YOU SAYING EARLIER WAS THAT THE CITY IS LOOKING FOR MORE HIGHER DENSITY. UM HOUSING IN THESE AREAS, SO IT SEEMS TO ME THE CODE OUGHT TO ENCOURAGE THAT, AS OPPOSED TO WHAT I THINK HAPPENS HERE, WHICH IS DOESN'T ENCOURAGE ANYTHING EXCEPT POSSIBLY PROVIDES AN INCENTIVE TO COME IN AND PUT BECAUSE WE'RE TAKING THE PART REQUIREMENT AWAY, SO I THINK MAYBE YOU CAN ALSO RETHINK IT IN TERMS OF HOW DO WE RIGHT THIS CHANGE IN THERE. TO ENCOURAGE WHAT WE WANT, AS OPPOSED TO WHAT THIS SEEMS TO BE. AND THE EXEMPTION. UH, 2 TO 498 TO BE SOMETHING THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS TO MAKE THE CASE FOR CODE TO ENVISION IT. AND FOR IT TO BE ALLOWED TO BE RE SEND IT, BUT NOT MIGHT GET RESCINDED. AND THAT MIGHT BE ON A PER DISTRICT BASIS. BUT I'M NOT SURE WORKED OUT QUITE YEAH, THE MECHANISMS THERE JUST SO THAT IT'S SO WE DON'T GET CHALLENGED IN COURT. AND SO WE HAVE GUIDANCE, AND THAT WOULD BE FOR ALL SEWING SUBDISTRICTS, RIGHT OR JUST THE ONES THAT THEY SO JUST TO SET EXPECTATIONS THE RIGHT WAY. SO THOSE. THE REQUIREMENTS OVER 65 ARE ONLY TRIGGERED WHEN LAND IS SUBDIVIDED. SO IF SOMEONE COMES IN ON 2ND AND 3RD STREET AND PUTS LIKE A HOUSE ON ONE OF THOSE EXISTING LOTS. THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO DO ANY OF THAT. NOW, IF THEY TAKE A HOUSE OFF AND PUT IN A DUPLEX. AS LONG AS IT FITS THE FORM. YEAH. THEN THE PARKLAND SPACE WOULD NOT BE OF 1165 WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED. ANYWAY. I JUST WANT YOU GUYS TO THINK THAT LIKE EVERY INDIVIDUAL LIKE YOU KNOW, LIKE THE LIKE THE APARTMENTS. THAT ONE. BE REQUIRED TO BECAUSE IT'S NOT TAKING US UP. OK THEY'RE PROBABLY A LOT OF INSTANCES IN THE VILLAGE CENTER OUTSIDE OF CANTON, WHICH IS JUST BECAUSE IT'S LARGELY UNDEVELOPED, WHERE THESE REQUIREMENTS WOULD NOT NECESSARILY APPLY. UM UNTIL THEY SPLIT THE LOT. UNTIL IT WAS SPLIT A LOT ENOUGH TO TRIGGER THE SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE IT ISN'T JUST SPLITTING A LOT, EITHER. OK, JUST BE CREATING 55. YEAH. 51 LOTS. SO, CHRIS AND MAYBE SOMEONE IS GOING OVER MY HEAD, BUT IF A DEVELOPER WANTS TO COME IN AGAIN AND PUT SOME SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED TO DO THAT. WHY? WHY WOULD WE TRY TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR THEM. TO NOT HAVE. TO PUT IN THE REQUIRED GREEN SPACE IN PARK LANE. SO WHEN I STARTED MAKING IT EASIER FOR THEM TO NOT PUT PARK PARK OPEN SPACE THERE WHAT WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO DO WHEN WE GET BACK TO THIS MAP. IS WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO GET BACK TO THIS AS A WHOLE. SO IN INDIA, THERE ARE PARK AREAS ALREADY DESIGNATED AS PARKLAND AND OPEN SPACE. SO IF SOMEONE WERE TO COME UP WITH A DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL UNDER VINCENT CODE AND SAY, HOW TO PUT, YOU KNOW TOWN HOMES OR A WINDSOR TYPE, SINGLE FAMILY PRODUCT THERE, WE WOULD EVALUATE THE PROPOSAL TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE AREAS ARE BEING PRESERVED OR PROGRAMMED WITH APPROPRIATE, UM, PLAYGROUND, YOU KNOW? CASTLE PHASE. WHAT HAVE YOU SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE TAKING THAT AWAY COMPLETELY OR OR MAKING IT EASIER FOR SOMEONE 
          [00:40:04]
NOT TO PROVIDE THOSE THINGS OR JUST KIND OF REALIGNING EVERYTHING. UM SO THAT ONLY ONE STANDARD THIS STANDARD THE OVERALL VISION FOR THE VILLAGE CENTER IS BEING APPLIED. RATHER THAN TWO STANDARDS, WHICH IS THIS THIS OVERALL VISION, THE URBAN CENTER CODE DOCUMENT. IN ADDITION TO 1165 STANDARDS. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? KIND OF LIKE IF YOU WANTED TO BUILD IN THAT TRIANGLE OR WHATEVER THE MIDDLE OF THE AVOCADO, RIGHT AND YOU HAVE A HUGE PARK AROUND YOU. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO MAKE THERE WOULD BE THIS 20. PARKLAND IN THAT INSIDE THE AVOCADO RIGHT BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALL OF THE OTHER PARKLAND AROUND IT. YEAH BECAUSE STRICTLY LOOKING AT CODE . THAT'S WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO. PART OF. THAT'S THE BUT IT'S REALLY RIGHT AWAY TO A FREEWAY. 
          YEAH I WAS GONNA SAY IT'S REALLY NOT PARKLAND. IT'S JUST GREEN AREA BECAUSE IT'S NON BUILDABLE OR REQUIRED ON A RIGHT AWAY OR SETBACK. SO I DON'T I DON'T I DON'T KNOW. I STILL THINK THAT THAT LITTLE YELLOW TRIANGLE I THINK WE NEIL WAS GETTING AT IS BIG ENOUGH. THAT YOU KNOW, WE COULD END UP WITH WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE HIGH POINT AREA ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT'S WHAT WE WANT, BUT WE DON'T REALLY WANT BUT AND JUST JUST TO JUST TO REMIND THE PEOPLE LIKE JUST TO TAKE IT BACK IS THE AREAS THAT ARE AWAY FROM THAT, WHATEVER. WHAT IS IT 1200 FT THAT THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS TO SOME GREEN SPACE AND I. I THINK THAT WE COULD DO SOME WORD SNIPPING IN THAT SECTION TO GIVE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE TEETH. BUT UM, IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE GONNA BE IN A DESERT WASTELAND TILL THEY GET TO THAT EDGE. YEAH, BUT I, I HAVE TO PUT, UM. WE DON'T DO THIS TO ANY OTHER DEVELOPER. THAT DEVELOPER WHO DEVELOPS NEXT TO A PARK DOESN'T GET CREDIT FOR THAT PARK IF THEY DIDN'T PUT IT THERE THEMSELVES. IN NO OTHER DISTRICT DO WE PRE WE GIVE THEM A PART MHM. YOU'RE PLAYING, THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY EXTRA TO LIVE RIGHT? IF THEY DIDN'T GIVE US 1200 OR 2400 SQUARE FEET PER DU. THERE WAS MONEY, SO WE SURRENDERING THE RIGHT TO GO BACK TO HIM FOR THAT INLAND. YEAH, YEAH. AND UNDER RURAL RESIDENTIAL, YOU COULD DEVELOP THIS RIGHT HAND SOME BAD WITH THAT. THINK SO, TOO. AND THE OTHER PROBLEM. THE GREEN SPACE IS IT ALLOWS GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES SO THAT GREEN SPACE CAN OVER TIME GO AWAY. SO I MEAN, THAT NEEDS TO BE A CONDITIONAL NOT ALLOWED. WELL, I THINK WE'RE THINKING THINGS LIKE AMPHITHEATER LIKE LIKE THINGS THAT ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC THAT ARE USED BY PEOPLE NOT YOU KNOW, I'M SURE THERE'S INSTANCES WHERE THOSE THINGS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. WHICH WAS PROBABLY MAKING A CONDITIONAL USE, NOT IN GIVEN USE. WELL, WE'RE NOT. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE TOUCHING WITH THIS CODE CHANGE AT ALL. IS THE USE OF JUST THE I TOTALLY GET WHAT Y'ALL ARE SAYING, THOUGH, LIKE WHY ARE WE EXEMPTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPERS FROM THE LONG STANDING MAINLAND GREEN SPACE REQUIREMENT. SO I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE THE DISCUSSION IS DO WE WANT TO HAVE IT SEPARATE CODE FOR THOSE AREAS WHICH I THINK IS KIND OF WHAT YOU KNOW IS PROPOSING, AND SINCE NAO OWNS AS FAR AS I KNOW, ALL OF CANTON, INCLUDING THE PARKLAND AND HAS A GIANT PARK BANK THAT THEY'RE WAY POSITIVE ON. MHM IT MAY BE MOOT UNLESS SOME UNLESS THEY SOLD IT TO SOMEBODY ELSE WHO DIDN'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE MALE PARK BANK. OR WHO WHO THEY SOLD OFF LIKE THE MIDDLE OF IT AND DIDN'T SELL THE EDGES OR SOMEONE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH OF THE EDGES AND COULDN'T CLAIM IT AS THEIR PARK. 12 2400 SQUARE FOOT NUMBER. BUT THERE'S A LOT OF SQUARE FEET IN GREEN IN THAT PERIMETER. AND SO WE MIGHT NOT BE GETTING ANY MORE PART, BUT WE CERTAINLY GUARANTEE THAT THIS I'M JUST I'LL REPEAT, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO INCENTIVIZE WHAT WE WANT SO I THINK THAT TAKE AWAY FOR TONIGHT, PLUS PLUS, LET'S USE WORDS THAT PEOPLE CAN FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY WHAT THEY MEAN. OTHERS FROM READ EVERYBODY'S CONCERNS. WHAT DO YOU WHAT? WHAT ELSE DO YOU GUYS HAVE? I SHOULD BE ASKING YOU GUYS. WHAT? WHAT HAVE YOU BEEN HEARING THAT YOU'VE BEEN WRITING DOWN SO THAT WE'RE YEAH, I MEAN, AS FAR UNLESS THERE'S OTHER LIKE SPECIFIC DIRECTION OTHER THAN THE WORDS IT SOUNDS LIKE WE COULD YOU GUYS WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH PROVIDING SOME SORT OF EXEMPTION. WHAT WHATEVER THE WORDS END UP BEING FOR MOST OF THE VILLAGE CENTER ARE THE URBAN CENTER CODE SUBDISTRICTS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THAT VILLAGE, RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL. UH, I THINK THAT WORDSMITH THINKING THAT SENTENCE PROBABLY COULD GET AROUND THAT PRETTY EASILY. UM, I ALSO THINK THAT IF SOMETHING IS WITHIN THE URBAN CENTER CODE BOUNDARY. BUT IT IS DEVELOPED UNDER EXISTING 
          [00:45:03]
UNDERLYING ZONING. UM THAT MIGHT BE WORTH KIND OF PARSING OFF AND YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE GONNA TRUCK DOWN THAT PATH, YOU'RE GONNA BE SUBJECT TO THE EXISTING REGULATIONS. I THINK THAT THOSE TWO THINGS WOULD REALLY SOLVE, AT LEAST FROM THE CO PER PERSON WHO DOES THIS EVERY DAY'S PERSPECTIVE, I THINK THAT WOULD SOLVE A LOT OF YOUR GUYS' CONCERNS. UM AND WE CAN CERTAINLY BRING THAT BACK TO YOU GUYS. IF THERE'S ANY, LIKE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT YOU GUYS NEED I, I YOU KNOW, HOW DO YOU GUYS FEEL ABOUT THAT LIKE IS THAT BRINGING ANY LIKE RED BELLS IN YOUR MIND? THOSE ARE TWO RELATIVELY SIMPLE CHANGES, UM TO THE TO THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE. IN MY OTHER CONCERNS IN 1.15 ABOUT SO SOME FORM OF OPEN SPACE. I DON'T THINK IT'S DEFINITIVE ENOUGH. I THINK YOU KNOW THAT THEY GIVE YOU ONE SQUARE FOOT. AND SOME COULD COME AND ARGUE THAT I THINK AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT MORE PARAMETERS AROUND IT AND SO IT'S NOT, UM WE HAD A MINIMUM SIZE FOR POCKET PARKS SOMEWHERE. THAT'S BACK IN THE MORE SUBURBAN EUCLIDEAN, BUT THAT GIVES US A IF YOU'RE GOING TO CALL IT A PARK. OPEN SPACE PEACE NEEDS TO BE THIS MANY SQUARE FEET MINIMUM. IF YOU WANT TO USE IT TO SAY I'M WITHIN 1200 SQUARE FEET, 1200, LINEAR FEET OF, UH OF, UH AND SO I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE NUMBER WAS AND HOW MANY SQUARE FEET BUT I DON'T REMEMBER. THERE'S A LITTLE TINY POCKET PARK AT NORTH OF WOODS. I THINK THAT YEAH, SHOVED IN ON IT NEEDS TO BE THIS BIG AND THAT, AND THAT'S THAT. THERE ARE NO LIKE, KIND OF LIKE WE DID A LOT OF, UH, THERE'S A BIG SECTION ABOUT RESEARCH THAT WE DID WHEN WE WERE GONNA PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. THERE ARE NO UNIVERSAL STANDARDS FOR HOW BIG SOMETHING SHOULD BE. UM, IT IS VERY SUBJECTIVE. ESPECIALLY IN MORE URBAN ENVIRONMENTS LIKE THE URBAN CENTER. UM WE COULD CERTAINLY COME UP WITH A NUMBER, BUT I THINK THAT WE JUST ALL KIND OF BE MOVING MOVING TOWARDS THAT UNDERSTANDING THAT IT IS. IT IS SUBJECTIVE. IT'S NOT MIGHT MAKE SENSE TO LOOK AT THE POCKET PARKS IN NEW ALBANY AND GET THE DIMENSIONS AND USE SOME SORT OF, UH YEAH. PERCENTAGE OR WE COULD DO THAT. THOSE ARE GONNA BE TOO BIG TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IN THE IN IN THE VILLAGE CENTER. 
          IN MOST PLACES, MOST LIKELY GET THE MINIMUM SIZE IS LIKE ONE ACRE, WHICH IS PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL AND AN AREA LIKE 2ND 3RD STREET. UH, WE COULD JUST PULL THOSE NUMBERS FOR YOU GUYS, IF IT'D BE USEFUL FOR YOU TO HAVE THE NEXT MEETING. UM, HOW BIG ARE OUR SMALLEST PARKS? HOW BIG ARE THE SMALLEST PARTS? THEY'RE ALL PRETTY BIG. THE TOP LAD OR THE LITTLE PLAYGROUND AT OH, MAN. MARTHA WOODS. SO YEAH, I THINK THEY'RE PRETTY. I MEAN, THEY'RE NOT MASSIVE. BUT IN RELATION TO THE PROPERTY SIZES. WE CAN PULL IT FOR YOU GUYS THAT WAS SCREWING LARGER IS THE ONE THAT'S LONG. UM 161. THAT'S THE PARK AT THE END OF BUYING LANE THAT'S A LITTLE BIT SMALLER. A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN, FOR EXAMPLE, YEAH, I MEAN, THAT GIVE US A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES OF SIZES. AND IT MIGHT BE INTERESTING TO FIND OUT I WOULD SAY THE ONE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD IN NORTH OF WOODS. I MEAN, I IT'S RARE THAT I WALK OR DRIVE PAST THAT. PARK AND THERE'S NOT SOMEBODY IN THERE, UH, USING IT IT IT SEEMS TO GET A LOT OF USE LOCKS. THERE WERE POINTS TO ACRES, SO 1/5 OF AN ACRE WAS THE SIZE OF A HOUSE IN THE IN THE TIGHTEST PART OF NORTH OF WOODS, AND I'M THINKING THAT THAT LOT DOESN'T STRIKE ME AS A WHOLE LOT BIGGER THAN THAT. YEAH, WE COULD ALSO PULL JUST LIKE AGAIN UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S SUPER SUBJECTIVE, AND THERE'S NOT REALLY A RHYME OR REASON TO IT. WE COULD PULL SOME EXAMPLES OF OTHER TYPES OF PUBLIC SPACES OR OPEN SPACES THAT ARE PROVIDED IN A MORE URBAN AREAS. YOU THINK IF YOU GUYS WERE IN LIKE THE SHORT MAR OR BRIDGE PARK? UM EVEN SOME AREAS YOU WOULDN'T EVEN PROBABLY THINK ARE PUBLIC OR OPEN SPACE AREAS JUST LIKE A LITTLE TINY, SMALL COURTYARDS SMALLER BUT SIMILAR TO LIKE THE PATIO HERE AT THE HEIGHT CENTER. THOSE ARE SPACES WE WANT, UM SO WE COULD PULL SOME EXAMPLES LIKE THAT, UM, THAT MIGHT BE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR YOU KNOW THE MORE URBAN CORE PART OF THE VILLAGE CENTER. JUST GIVE YOU SOME CHARACTER IMAGES FOR THOSE YEAH, BECAUSE ROUGHLY SPEAKING, UH 0.2 ACRES IS 800 SQUARE FEET, SO IT'S NOT. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE HUGE TO START BEING USEFUL. 
          MHM, OK? AND FOR COUNCIL WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU ON THIS. OK? ALL RIGHT, SO WE DON'T NEED TO TAKE ANY ACTION. I ASSUME IT AGAIN, OK? I'M GONNA WANT THE TABLE. NO, NO, NO. I THANK YOU FOR LETTING US TALK. VERY INTERESTING. I PULL THAT UP AND THOUGHT. NOW WAIT A MINUTE. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS? SIR THAT WAS THE OF THE BUSINESS. HOW ABOUT PO MEMBERS FOR COMING? I'LL START FROM THE OTHER SIDE, SARAH. NOTHING THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NOTHING HERE. THANK YOU. 
          BRUCE. NO COMING. THANK YOU SO MUCH. RICHARD
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.