MEMBERS. YES I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FOR MONDAY, MAY 20TH, 
          [I. Call to order ]
          [00:00:09]
2024. CAN I HEAR THE ROLL? MR. KIRBY PRESENT. MR. WALLACE. YOU HERE? SORRY I'M HERE. MR. SHELL. 
          PRESENT. MISS BRIGGS. HERE. MR. LARSON. PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. WILTROUT. YES. HERE ALL VOTING 
          [III. Action on minutes: April 15, 2024]
MEMBERS ARE PRESENT. WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY, EDITS TO THE MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 15TH MEETING? NONE FOR ME. I DON'T HAVE ANY. NONE HERE. DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE MINUTES FOR APRIL 15TH? I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 15TH, 2024 MEETING. DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND? ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? CAN I HEAR THE ROLL, PLEASE, MR. SHELL? YES MISS BRIGGS. YES, MR. WALLACE? YES MR. LARSON. YES, MR. KIRBY. YES MOTION PASSES. 
          THERE ARE FIVE VOTES TO APPROVE THE APRIL 15TH MINUTES AS SUBMITTED. DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA TONIGHT? NONE FROM STAFF. THANK YOU. WOULD EVERYONE WISHING TO SPEAK TONIGHT TO THE COMMISSION PLEASE RISE. DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU. AND WHILE WE'RE UP, CHECK OUR PHONES AND MAKE THEM SILENT. 
          ITEM FIVE. HEARING THE VISITORS FOR ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. DO WE HAVE ANY 
          [VI. Cases]
SUCH VISITORS? OKAY. TAKES US TO OUR CASES. OUR FIRST CASES FILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN MODIFICATION EIGHT 2024. CAN WE HEAR FROM STAFF, PLEASE? GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. THE PLANNING COMMISSION FIRST HEARD THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN MODIFICATION ON FEBRUARY 21ST, 2024. THE APPLICATION WAS TABLED ON FEBRUARY 21ST AND APRIL 5TH, 2024 TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO MEET WITH THEIR NEIGHBOR. THE DRIVING RANGE HAS SINCE UPDATED THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. AFTER DISCUSSIONS WITH NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS. THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AREA INCLUDES JUST A PORTION OF THE EXISTING GOLF COURSE SITE THAT CONTAINS THE DRIVING RANGE. THE SITE IS LOCATED WEST OF US 62 JOHNSTOWN ROAD, JOHNSTOWN ROAD BEING RIGHT HERE. AND THERE IS A CHURCH ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND A RESIDENTIAL HOME ON THE NORTH SIDE JUST ABOVE IT. JUST AS A REMINDER, THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS APPROVED IN 2009 AND THE PLAN MODIFICATION IS REQUIRED. BECAUSE THE EXISTING LANDSCAPE WAS ALTERED, THE SLIDE SHOW SHOWS THE EXISTING CHANGES THAT WERE MADE AS A REFERENCE. SO THE BOTTOM HERE IS 2009, AND THIS WAS THE LAST IMAGERY IN AUGUST OF 2023. THE DRIVING RANGE HAS SINCE UPDATED THEIR FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH MORE IMPROVEMENTS IN FEBRUARY. THE DRIVING RANGE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS SUCH AS A 30 FOOT WIDE NO MOW ZONE ALONG THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE, A NET SPANNING 200FT LONG AND 50FT TALL. THE CENTRAL IZATION OF TARGETS, AND THE USE OF LIMITED FLIGHT GOLF BALLS. IN ADDITION, THEY ALSO ADDED TWO SIX FOOT MOUNDS WITH LANDSCAPING ON TOP AND THE USE OF THE EXISTING LANDSCAPE. THERE WILL BE. SINCE THEN, THERE HAVE BEEN MORE IMPROVEMENTS IN ADDITION TO THE ONES SPOKEN PRIOR, INCLUDING THE ADDITION OF 50 TREES AND THE ADDITION OF A THIRD MOUND AT 5 TO 6FT TALL WITH LANDSCAPE ON TOP. THERE IS ALSO A NEW DEFINED FAIRWAY, AND THEY WILL BE UTILIZING AIMING BLOCKS TO POSITION THE GOLFERS TO HIT DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE RANGE. THERE IS ALSO THE INSTALLATION OF MAIN TARGETS AND A PROTOCOL FOR COMMUNICATION WITH THE CHURCH FOR SPECIAL EVENTS. SINCE THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER HAS SUBSTANTIALLY BEEN REMOVED, THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED THESE ALTERNATIVES LISTED TO KEEP GOLF BALLS CONTROLLED ON THE PROPERTY AND SHOULD PLANNING COMMISSION FIND THE APPLICATION SUFFICIENT FOR APPROVAL, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AT THIS TIME. THE STAFF WILL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON STAFF REPORT IN ITEM CONDITION THREE, CAN YOU READ OVER THAT? DOES THAT HAVE A TYPO OR SOMETHING IN THERE, THE OWNER MUST ADD FOUR BLACK ADD BLACK FOUR L FENCE WITH BLACK NETTING TO ENTIRE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE TO ENSURE GOLF BALLS TO LAND ON 
          [00:05:03]
CITY PROPERTY OR PUBLIC STREETS. I DON'T THINK THE GOAL HERE IS TO PUT THEM ALL ON ROUTE 62. 
          YEAH, YEAH. SO IT'S. YEAH IT SHOULD READ. YEAH. THE BE BLACK NETTING ALONG THE ENTIRE EASTERN PORTION TO ENSURE GOLFERS DO NOT LAND ON THE CITY PROPERTY OR US 62. THANK YOU. ANY OTHERS ON THE STAFF REPORT? YEAH OKAY. GREAT. ANY ENGINEERING LETTERS? NO COMMENTS. OKAY. CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? CHAIRPERSON KIRBY AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, CHRIS INGRAM, 52 EAST GAY STREET, COLUMBUS, OHIO, ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, NEW ALBANY LINKS GOLF CLUB. I'M JOINED THIS AFTERNOON WITH LUKE BOWERSOCK, THE GENERAL MANAGER OF PGA AND HEAD GOLF PROFESSIONAL OF THE CLUB, ALONG WITH DANA SIMRIL, REGIONAL GENERAL MANAGER FOR KEMPER SPORTS COLUMBUS COLLECTIVE, WHO OVERSEES SIX GOLF CLUBS ACROSS CENTRAL OHIO. APOLOGIES. THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF AN ECHO IN THE ROOM. AND IF I COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A PUD. IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED AN INFIELD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. SO THE QUESTION BEFORE THIS COMMISSION TONIGHT VERY, VERY NARROW BECAUSE THE ONLY ISSUE ON THE TABLE IS AN AMENDMENT OR MODIFICATION TO THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE EXISTING PUD. AND AS STAFF POINTED OUT, SINCE WE ARE BEFORE YOU, THE CLUB HAS CONSIDERED THE FEASIBILITY OF MANY DIFFERENT OPTIONS TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS RAISED BY THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER TO THE SOUTH OF THE RANGE. AND DURING THIS TIME, SINCE WE WERE LAST BEFORE YOU, THE CLUB ACTUALLY VOLUNTARILY CLOSED THE DRIVING RANGE. IT WAS CLOSED IN MARCH. IT WAS CLOSED IN APRIL. IT'S BEEN CLOSED IN MAY, AND IT WENT SO FAR AS TO ACTUALLY PHYSICALLY REMOVING THE GOLF BALLS FROM THE RANGE, GOLF BALL DISPENSING MACHINE, THE CLUB ALSO RETAINED AN INTERNATIONAL EXPERT WHO SPECIALIZES IN ANALYZING, DRIVING RANGE DESIGN AND SAFETY NET HEIGHTS ALONG DRIVING RANGES . THE REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT IS BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING INCORPORATES SIGNIFICANT NEW ENHANCEMENTS THAT ARE ENTIRELY CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING CODE. THE CITY'S STRATEGIC PLAN, AND WILL CONTINUE TO PROVIDE AN OUTDOOR RECREATIONAL AMENITY THAT IMPROVES THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THIS COMMUNITY. AND AS STAFF POINTED OUT TO THE COMMISSION, THESE NUMBER OF ENHANCEMENTS THAT THE CLUB IS AGREEING TO, TO IMPLEMENT ARE LISTED ON THE SLIDE BEFORE YOU, NAMELY, TO CONSTRUCT A NEW TARGET GREEN AREA APPROXIMATELY 150 YARDS FROM THE, TEEING AREA TO DEFINE A NEW FAIRWAY TO THAT NEW LAND LANDING GREEN FOR BETTER TARGETING TO UTILIZE AIMING BLOCKS TO POSITION GOLFERS TO HIT THEIR SHOTS DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE FAIRWAY OR RANGE. I SHOULD SAY. IN ADDITION , WE'RE PROPOSING TO PLANT 50 NEW TEN AND 12 FOOT TREES OF RED MAPLE LONDON PLANE TREE AND EASTERN WHITE PINES, ALL ON OR ALONG OR NEAR NEW ADDITIONAL EARTHEN MOUNDING TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT, AND BY THE WAY, THOSE THOSE TREE SPECIES ARE INTENTIONAL, THEY ARE KNOWN TO BE GOOD GOLF BALL BLOCKERS IN THE INDUSTRY, WE'RE ADDITIONALLY GOING TO ADD SIGNAGE AND NOTICES TO GOLFERS, WARNING THOSE GOLFERS THAT THEY ARE PERSONALLY LIABLE AND RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ERRANT SHOTS. SHOTS ON THE DRIVING RANGE, MUCH LIKE THEY ARE WHEN THEY PLAY A ROUND OF GOLF, AND, AS ADDITIONALLY, AS WAS MENTIONED, WE CERTAINLY WANT 
          [00:10:01]
TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, INCLUDING THE CHURCH. AND WE THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE CLEAR LINES OF COMMUNICATION WITH THE CHURCH SUCH THAT WHEN THEY HAVE, EVENTS, IF THEY COULD PROVIDE THAT SCHEDULE EVENTS TO US OR DIRECT US TO THOSE, THEN WE COULD, MAINTAIN OR CHANGE OPERATIONS, TO CATER TO AND ACCOMMODATE THOSE EVENTS, ADDITIONALLY, IN THE STAFF REPORT, THERE WERE FOUR PROPOSED CONDITIONS WHICH THE APPLICANT AGREES TO IMPLEMENT. AND A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS. AND SO ON. THE NEXT SLIDE BEFORE BEFORE YOU IS, THE PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE SITE PLAN IN WHICH YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE NEW LANDING GREEN WILL BE INSTALLED, THE LOCATION OF THE TREES AND MOUNDING IS VERY INTENTIONAL TO BLOCK THE SIGHT LINES OF GOLFERS AS THEY'RE UP ON THE TEE BLOCKS, SO THAT THEY'RE NOT SEEING WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO BLOCK THE BOTH THE, THE CHURCH AS WELL AS THAT WATER TOWER, INCIDENTALLY, THAT WATER TOWER, I BELIEVE, IS APPROXIMATELY 360 YARDS AWAY SUCH THAT, NO ONE AT LEAST THAT I'M AWARE OF IN THIS AREA COULD EVER FEASIBLY HIT A GOLF BALL THAT FAR, AND CERTAINLY NOT A LIMITED FLIGHT RANGE. GOLF BALL. AND SO WITH THESE ENHANCEMENTS, YOU CAN SEE THE REAL FOCUS IS DIRECTING THE, GOLF RANGE USERS ATTENTION AND AIMING TO THE MIDDLE OF THE RANGE. AND IN ADDITION TO PROVIDING BUFFERING, NATURAL BUFFERING, TO COMPLEMENT THE EXISTING 50 FOOT TALL NET THAT'S ON THE SITE. AND AS I INDICATED TO YOU, ALL, IN REVIEWING THE CITY'S ZONING CODE WHEN IT COMES TO, DEVELOPMENT PLANS WITHIN A PUD, WE'RE ACTUALLY IN CHAPTER 1159 OF THE CITY ZONING CODE SUCH THAT, FOR THIS COMMISSION'S REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO, IT'S SUBJECT TO THE BASES OF APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT PLANS, WHICH ARE SET FORTH IN ZONING CODE PROVISION. 1150 908 AND I'VE INDICATED, THE CRITERIA IN THAT PARTICULAR SECTION, IT'S SET THE FULL SECTION SET FORTH IN THE STAFF REPORT, THE CRITERIA IS A THROUGH S. BUT WHEN YOU REVIEW THOSE CRITERIA, THE ARGUABLY ONLY THE FIRST THREE CRITERIA ARE APPLICABLE TO A MODIFICATION OF A LANDSCAPING PLAN. AND WHILE THERE IS A REFERENCE TO SECTION 1111 ZERO SIX IN THE STAFF REPORT, WITH RESPECT, THAT SECTION PERTAINS TO ZONING AMENDMENTS OR REZONINGS, AS WELL AS AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING CODE . WHAT'S BEFORE THIS? THIS BODY IS MERELY A MODIFICATION TO THE LANDSCAPING. IN A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. EXCUSE ME, ISN'T THE TEXT ACTUALLY THE ZONING? I'M SORRY, IN SIMPLE TERMS, THE TEXT IS THE ZONING CORRECT? THE TEXT BECOMES AS PART OF THE REGULATIONS THAT REGULATE THE PROPERTY THAT IS CORRECT. BUT IF I COULD DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO CHAIRPERSON KIRBY, TO CHAPTER 1111, SECTION ZERO ONE, THAT CHAPTER ENUMERATES WHAT THAT OR THAT SECTION ENUMERATES WHAT THAT CHAPTER PERTAINS TO WHICH ARE CHANGES IN THE REGULATIONS, DISTRICT BOUNDARIES OR CLASSIFICATIONS OF PROPERTY. THOSE ARE POWERS OF CITY COUNCIL. AND SO THE NEXT SECTION, SECTION 11 1102, OUTLINES THE INITIATION OF ZONING AMENDMENTS. AND IT STATES THAT AN AMENDMENT SUPPLEMENT RECLASSIFICATION OR CHANGE IN ZONING MAY BE INITIATED AND HERE WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE ZONING. WE'RE AMENDING THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE LANDSCAPING. SO THERE'S NO CHANGE IN THE USE. THE INTENSITY OF THE USE, OFF SITE IMPROVEMENTS. NONE OF THAT IS BEFORE THIS COMMISSION. AND THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHY THIS DOESN'T RISE TO THE LEVEL OF A CITY COUNCIL REVIEW AND 
          [00:15:02]
APPROVAL. THAT'S WHY YOU'RE IN. 1150 909 FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS OR DEVELOPMENT PLANS. AND FRANKLY, IN MY EXPERIENCE AS A ZONING LAWYER, TYPICALLY WE SEE IN JURISDICTIONS, FOR PUDS, YOU HAVE A SEPARATE PROCESS. SO WHEN YOU'RE AMENDING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, YOU HAVE MINOR MODIFICATIONS IN THE FUTURE TO APPROVE DEVELOPMENT PLANS, WHICH STAFF CAN APPROVE. AND THEN THERE'S AN APPEAL PROCESS TO THE BCA OR A MAJOR MODIFICATION WHERE YOU'RE CHANGING THE USE OR THE INTENSITY OF THE USE, YOU KNOW, BIG CHANGES. THOSE THEN GO TO A PLANNING COMMISSION, QUESTION FOR OUR OWN LEGAL STAFF , CONDITIONS PLACED ON THE OR OR THE LANDSCAPING. THE EXISTING LANDSCAPING WAS PART OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. WAS THAT THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF THE OF THE PUD OR THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. SO, LANDSCAPING THAT WAS PART OF THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. SO BUT IT WAS NOT IN THE PRELIMINARY, WHICH WAS ALSO THE ZONING, NO, THAT'S CORRECT. THERE WAS NO SPECIFIC, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DRIVING RANGE IN THAT PUD TEXT ITSELF. WERE THERE ANY REQUIREMENTS IN THE ORIGINAL PUD THAT ADDRESSED WHETHER AND HOW GOLF BALLS MIGHT BE LIMITED TO STAYING WITHIN THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY? NOT FOR STAYING ON THE PROPERTY. THE ONLY REFERENCE THAT WAS IN THE IPD TEXT THAT'S ON PAGE THREE OF SEVEN UNDER B3. IT SAYS THE NEW ALBANY LINKS IPD ZONING TEXT STATES THAT THE ZONING OR STATES THAT THE DRIVING RANGE IS DESIGN SHALL BE BASED UPON THE NATIONAL GOLF FOUNDATION STANDARDS. AND SO SINCE THE LAST MEETING, BECAUSE WE GOT ASKED THAT, WE HAVE RESEARCH THAT AND THE NATIONAL GOLF FOUNDATION WEBSITE DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. IT'S A MEMBERSHIP ORGANIZATION AND A MARKETING SERVICE PROVIDER FOR GOLFERS. AND SO ITS WEBSITE STATED THAT IT DOES NOT TRACK ANY INFORMATION ON GOLF COURSES THAT ARE PART OF AN HOA, AS WELL . OKAY. THANK YOU. SO ARE YOU. GO AHEAD. SO I'M NOT SURE I NECESSARILY AGREE WITH YOUR CHARACTERIZATION THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS LANDSCAPING AND THE TRADITIONAL SENSE THAT WE THINK OF LANDSCAPING, WHICH IS ESTHETIC ONLY, THERE COULD, I SUPPOSE, IF WE HAD A LONG CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS. THINK OF TIMES WHEN LANDSCAPING HELPS WITH DRAINAGE OR HELPS WITH OTHER THINGS. BUT I THINK THE GENERAL UNDERSTANDING OF LANDSCAPING IS IT'S FOR ESTHETICS. IT'S TO MAKE THE PROPERTY LOOK NICE. BUT THAT'S NOT THE PURPOSE OF THE LANDSCAPING HERE. THE PURPOSE OF THE LANDSCAPING, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, I'LL JUST USE YOUR TERM, IS TO ASSIST IN THE RETENTION OF GOLF BALLS ON THE PROPERTY SO THEY DON'T GO OFF THE PROPERTY. SO WE MAY BE IN A LITTLE BIT OF A CONUNDRUM HERE. IF THERE WAS NOTHING IN THE PUD TEXT THAT SORT OF TIED THE LANDSCAPING TO THE USE. NOW LET ME ASK ONE OTHER QUESTION. THE PUD WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS FOR THE ENTIRE LINKS PROPERTY. IS THAT RIGHT? AND NOT SPECIFICALLY ORIENTED TO THE SPECIFIC USE IN THIS PARTICULAR SECTION, WHICH IS FOR THE DRIVING RANGE. RIGHT. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. THAT'S FOR THE ENTIRE NEW ALBANY LINKS SUBDIVISION AND GOLF COURSE. DID THE LINKS WAS AN IPOD. OR WAS IT A COMPREHENSIVE. SO I CAN DOUBLE CHECK THAT. YOU KNOW I IT MAY PREDATE THE DAYS OF THE IPOD CLASSIFICATION BECAUSE A COMPREHENSIVE THE REGULAR OLD CLASSIC PUD TOOK A LOT OF PAPERWORK TO MAKE HAPPEN. YEAH, THE IPOD STREAMLINES THAT PROCESS. YEAH, IT WAS REZONED IN 1997. WE'RE JUST DOUBLE CHECKING ON THE. SO IT IS A CPD ACCORDING TO THE CITY'S OFFICIAL ZONING MAP. SO IT'S THE SAME OVERALL, APPROVAL PROCESS AS FAR AS WHEN YOU REZONE. IT STILL GOES BEFORE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL, WHETHER IT'S AN IPD OR A CPD AND STEPS. SO THAT ONE MORE STEP FOR CPD, THERE'S A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH IS THE ACT OF REZONING, BUT IT'S THE SAME APPROVAL BODIES LOOKING AT THAT, THAT ACTIVE REZONING. AND BOTH WHETHER IT'S AN IPD OR A CPD, BOTH END UP WITH SOME SORT OF SITE PLAN AND A DEVELOPMENT TAX THAT CAN THAT CONTAIN THOSE ZONING STANDARDS. I WANT TO MAKE ONE OTHER POINT IN WHICH IS THAT . WHEN THIS ORIGINAL PUD OR WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE DRIVING RANGE WAS APPROVED MANY YEARS 
          [00:20:10]
AGO, THE LANDSCAPING AGAIN, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, WAS DIFFERENT THAN IT IS NOW. AND SO TO SOME EXTENT, THE USE THAT WAS APPROVED WAS BASED ON THE WAY THAT THE LAND WAS LANDSCAPED AT THAT TIME. AND NOW WE HAVE A CHANGE AND WE KNOW FOR SURE THAT'S THE REASON YOU'RE HERE, IS BECAUSE IT WAS A CHANGE IN THAT LANDSCAPING AND THERE'S A CODE VIOLATION THAT WAS, I BELIEVE, THAT WAS ASSESSED. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE, OR AT LEAST THERE WAS SOME CODE VIOLATION, REVIEW, AM I RIGHT? YEAH. SO ANY SORT OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WHETHER IT'S FOR A CPD AND OR IPD, A LANDSCAPE PLAN, AS PART OF THAT SUBMITTAL, REQUIREMENTS FOR A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS TO REVIEW AND APPROVE AS PART OF THAT OVERALL APPLICATION, ANY TIME THAT THE LANDSCAPING IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVED FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THAT WOULD THEN BECOME A CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEM, IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT HAS SOUGHT THIS FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT IN ORDER TO REMEDY THAT CODE VIOLATION. OKAY ALL RIGHT. OKAY. THOSE ARE THE TWO POINTS I WANT TO MAKE AS WE START OFF, BECAUSE I, I DISAGREE WITH, AT LEAST ON THE SURFACE, I DISAGREE WITH THE IMMEDIATE CONTENTION THAT SOMEHOW WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPING AND IT'S MORE THAN THAT. IT'S THE BASIS FOR APPROVAL OF THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. AND I WE'RE NOT THERE YET. WE'RE THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE QUESTIONS. I JUST WANT I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP AT THE START BECAUSE I THINK YOU WERE YOU WERE TRYING TO CHARACTERIZE WHAT WE'RE DOING IS TALKING ABOUT LANDSCAPING AND WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S GOING TO BE A MAPLE TREE OR A PINE TREE OR, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THEY'RE INDIGENOUS SPECIES OR NOT, WHICH IS KIND OF WHAT WE TALK ABOUT WITH LANDSCAPING AND HOW, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A ONLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. SO I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THAT'S WHERE I'M COMING FROM. SO I THINK I WOULD THINK THAT OUR ABILITY TO, REVIEW YOUR APPLICATION AND VOT E IT ISONREATER GHAN JU T STOKING LOAT IT  A LANASCAPINGDS PL. OKAYANI'LL. UR LEG O STAFFAL IS SOMHING RETARDED EG ASNDSCAPLAGINIS A F. CE REGENDER CAPINGDS? NOYEAH. .  THEIN TY'S ZCIING REONLATIONGU S,ERE'STHIFFERE DNTTHIS I, 'T UTBO LANCAPINGDSIF THE. 
          FEENCS PART IF THE O DEA, LT .AD OKAY,ND A, MEMB CLEAACE,WAPOLOGI A IFES I WN'TAS REALLR.Y I RIEWED EVE ODE PR CISIONSOVO TRY T TO IDTIFYEN. OKAYWHAT C. TERIARI MYRNSVE TSHI DECISN? ANDIOROM F RIEW OFEVHE ZON TGIN CE ANDOD USEDNGUAE GE AND TMS THAERARET , THSTANDAE S THATRDRE A TO TABLEPLO THE  TDIFICAMOONTI S DEVEHIPMENT,LOINAL F IN 1PMENVEPLAN AT RE SETORTH F 01508. TH 9'SAT ALL IAS TCONVEYO I WASN. 'T YING TTRDIMINIO  ORSH IANY WAN YCHANGE,  THE CRACTERHAATION IZ OFROU ALICATIPP. FAIRONNOUGH E,I DIDN'T I DIDN'T MEAN TO ACCUSE YOU OF THAT AT ALL, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTOOD SORT OF THE LANDSCAPE THAT WORKED WELL, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD. THE LANDSCAPE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, AND WE'RE PLAYING IT. AND IF I CAN HAVE A PAUSE, BECAUSE I GOT SOMETHING FOR STAFF, WHAT THIS TELLS US IS WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT MAKES IT INTO TEXT VERSUS WHAT MAKES IT IN THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, BECAUSE THE ENFORCEABILITY MAY BE DIFFERENT BETWEEN THOSE TWO. CORRECT YEAH. OKAY. SO, WE OFTEN GET TOLD WE'LL HANDLE THAT IN FINAL AND THIS IS WHAT A CASE WHERE OH, MAYBE SOME STUFF SHOULD BE PULLED FORWARD INTO THE TEXT AND SETTLED VERY EARLY. PROCEED. OKAY, BASED ON OUR BACK AND FORTH HERE, I DID WANT TO PROVIDE, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION A FEW EXTRA DOCUMENTS IF I COULD APPROACH. SURE ARE THESE THE ONES THAT WERE PASSED OUT ALREADY? I'M SORRY. ARE THESE ONES ARE. OH. GO AHEAD. 
          DON'T HAVE THOSE. SOHIS IS TN I ADTION TDITHE, DO LARATIECON. BY THWAY, OE URECLARA DONS USTILE SHOUMIION PRSSEEDINGOC ORS. LD TY BE AHEIDAVITFFLIKES GENEND OHIO ERW, INLAOURT C LLY, TRAYHEHOULD  S BEFIDAVIAF. BUTTS I TNKHI I'M N OTRE HOWSUHIS IS TIFFERE D, BUTT M HE'LI'EXPLAIL THATN  I SURE.'M SWORET IT. G GET I IT'BEENS OUTN NDER P UALTY OEN FRJURY.PEUT B AN OH COURTIO WOUD NOACCEPTT  DECLA ATIONRA, AT THAN AFFIDITAV FOR SO.M. 
          THE  SO JUS. BRIEFLT  FORY, CORDRE, I OVIDEDPRHE SF THE  OMMISSICOON TEE 
          [00:25:05]
CORRHENTIRST F IS ANMAIL E SINGENESCEROM RI FARDCH OFER THEATIONA NL GOLF FODATIONUNTO MR., OWERSO BCK WI THE CTHB AND,LU WITRESPECH T TOHE NAT TNAL GOIOLF FOUATION,ND WENQUIRE IOND  BALF OFEHHE PROVEM FORTHHEY,,  PASELE E US WIDHIT ANYTANDAR S DSU HAVEYOITH TH WREGULAE ONTI F ORDRIVINA RANGE,G  TO WHH HISIC REONSESP WAS,  DON'TWEO THAT D. 
          WE'RESOERY CO VUSEDNF ASO TOW E ITSAD WAYNTO TH I IT'SOPMDETENEXT TSO BAS. ALLYIC N I THE BASICRELY WHAALGOTT INRPORATCOED INTO E ENT TEPMXT W NOTHIAS. 
          CORREG.CT TRE'S AHE LEON FROSSMUR DIS ONT PASTA T.S.YE DOENOTS O THAT DGAIN.  AI CULATEIRDWO PHO TGRAPHSTO ,PICTINDETHEG  EASRN SIDTEOF ROPERT PJUST TY SHOWO HE OF THES  COMSSION.MI THE'S A ERESTIONQUBOUT T A HENCING FEERETHS THE  IACK FOBLR CEEN TRE TODHE, WHATAYS I ITTED OM THE BISCKLA NETTI, HAVEWE NO OBLEMPR IMEMENTIPLNG. QUICQUESTIK . OTOGRAPHS,PH WTHA KIND OFMERA ACA.RE SRY, WHOR ISAT THE PEPECTIVRSTHAT TE YHEERE SH W OTTHWI? I. IT WAS JUST AN APPLE IPHONE FROM ABOUT 150 YARDS AWAY. OKAY SO I PRESUME THIS IS WITH THE RATHER WIDE ANGLE LENS. THAT'S THE STANDARD LENS ON THAT PHONE, THAT I BELIEVE. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. SO THIS IS ABOUT TWICE AS WIDE AS WHAT THE HUMAN EYE NORMALLY SEES. AND THIS IS NOT WHAT THE HUMAN EYE SEES WHEN YOU'RE ACTUALLY OUT THERE LOOKING, OH, CORRECT. CORRECT. THIS IS ZOOM. THIS IS ZOOMED WAY IN. IT'S NOWHERE NEAR THAT CLOSE, IS A PERSPECTIVE CHANGE OR IS THIS DIGITAL ZOOM, I'M SORRY, I'M A PHOTOGRAPHER, AND IT MATTERS BECAUSE ONE OF THE FIRST LESSONS I TEACH WHEN I TEACH PHOTOGRAPHY IS HOW TO LIE WITHOUT PHOTOSHOP. BY JUST CHANGING THE PERSPECTIVE ON THE LENS, YOU CAN TELL TWO DIFFERENT STORIES FROM THE SAME SPOT, CHAIRPERSON KIRBY, I'M NOT A PHOTOGRAPHER. OKAY, JUST A STANDARD IPHONE WAS USED TO SNAP THE PHOTO. I'M GOING TO PRESUME THE WIDE ANGLE LENS, AS YOU SAID, AND THE DIGITAL ZOOM, JUST YOUR SUBSETTING. OKAY, SO GO AHEAD. LET ME JUST IMPEACH THE PICTURES. SO MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THE MODIFICATIONS THAT THAT THE CLUB IS SEEKING TO IMPLEMENT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING CODE AND THE CITY'S STRATEGIC PLAN, THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO CHANGE IN THE ZONING. THERE ARE NO VARIANCES. WE ARE SEEKING TO PRESERVE A SIGNIFICANT OPEN, NATURAL SPACE AND TO MAINTAIN THE OUTDOOR, HIGH QUALITY RECREATIONAL AMENITY THAT MANY OF THE RESIDENTS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THIS COMMUNITY, CONTINUE OR WANT TO CONTINUE TO ENJOY, WE'RE ALSO ADDING 50 TREES, AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS NOT A PROBLEM OF OUR CREATION. WE'RE JUST HERE TO FIGURE OUT, THE BEST SOLUTION, TO RESOLVE OUR NEIGHBORS CONCERNS SUCH THAT THE DRIVING RANGE CONTINUES. CAN CONTINUE TO BE OPERATED SAFELY, AND THAT WE ARE CREATING NOTHING BUT POSITIVE EXPERIENCES WITH GOLF, THAT I TAKE IT. THEN THE TREES WERE REMOVED PRIOR TO THE CURRENT OWNERSHIP. CHAIRPERSON KIRBY. YES. AS WE DISCUSSED IN THE LAST MEETING THAT HAPPENED PRIOR, TO THIS APPLICANT'S OWNERSHIP. THANK YOU. DO YOU KNOW APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY TREES WERE REMOVED PRIOR TO YOUR OWNERSHIP, NO, SIR, WE DO NOT. 
          THE BEST WE COULD DO IS TRYING TO REVIEW AN AERIAL, BUT THEY'RE KIND OF BLURRY, AND YOU CAN'T REALLY TELL HOW MANY INDIVIDUAL TREES THERE WERE. DO WE KNOW THE BALLPARK HEIGHT OF MANY OF THOSE TREES? BECAUSE YOU'RE YOU'RE RECOMMENDING, WHAT, TEN AND 12 FOOT TREES TO BE PLANTED. YES. 
          THAT'S THEY'RE GOING TO MATURE TO MUCH TALLER HEIGHTS. BUT WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO IS TRY TO PLANT TREES THAT ARE VERY UNLIKELY, TO CONTINUE TO GROW AND DEVELOP THE, YOU KNOW, THE TALLER THE TREE IS WHEN YOU PLANT IT, THE HARDER IT IS TO KEEP IT ALIVE. I GUESS MY THOUGHT THE SAFETY SEEMS TO BE THE BIGGEST FACTOR HERE, RIGHT? WE ALL LOVE THE DRIVING RANGE. 
          [00:30:02]
WE LOVE THE LENGTHS. AND BUT I THINK THE BIGGEST COMPLAINT, ESPECIALLY FROM THE FOLKS AT THE CHURCH, WAS THE FEAR OF BEING OUT BEHIND THEIR CHURCH AND GETTING A RANDOM GOLF BALL, HITTING A CHILD. I JUST DON'T SEE A LOT. I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE JUST CHECKING BOXES AND REALLY HAVEN'T EVEN EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE SAFETY FEATURE IN THIS. I I, I THINK YOU YOU'VE GOT AN EXPERT TO SAY THIS IS WHAT THEY RECOMMEND, BUT I MEAN, HAVE YOU REALLY ARE YOU REALLY SURE THAT THIS CHECKS ALL THE SAFETY BOXES SO PEOPLE CAN BE OUTSIDE THEIR CHURCH WITHOUT BEING NOURISHED BY GETTING HIT WITH THE GOLF MEMBER? SHELL WE WOULDN'T BE HERE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IF WE WEREN'T VERY CONFIDENT THAT THIS WERE NOT GOING TO CREATE A SAFE AND ENJOYABLE ENVIRONMENT FOR BOTH THE GOLFERS, AS WELL AS THE CHURCH MEMBERS AND THE CHILDREN WHO ARE KICKING A SOCCER BALL AROUND IN THE CHURCH BACKYARD. ULTIMATELY, THE QUESTION BEFORE THIS COMMISSION IS A ZONING QUESTION. THE ISSUES AND THE SAFETY AND WHETHER OR NOT THIS ACTUALLY WORKS, THAT'S GOING TO BE RESOLVED BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORS. THAT'S A NEIGHBOR DISPUTE AND THE CLUB ITSELF IS COMMITTED TO A SAFE ENVIRONMENT. AND SO FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE, WE'RE GOING TO PLANT THESE NEW TREES BECAUSE WE BELIEVE IN AN EXPERT HAS CONCLUDED THAT THIS IS A SAFE DRIVING RANGE DESIGN. IF IT TURNS OUT THAT AFTER EVERYTHING'S PLANTED AND WE SEND IN, GOLFERS START HITTING VOLUMINOUS NUMBERS OF BALLS ONTO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. WELL, THERE'S GOING TO BE A REMEDY FOR THAT. BUT THAT'S NOT A ZONING REMEDY, I THINK THE LAWYERS WILL BE INVOLVED AND, YOU KNOW, THE CLUB HAS AN INCENTIVE TO ENSURING THAT OPERATIONALLY WE DO ADDRESS ANY ISSUES THAT HAPPEN AND THE OTHER COMPONENT OF THIS THAT'S, AGAIN, IS NOT A ZONING QUESTION. IT'S THE OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT. SO THERE ARE DIFFERENT STRATEGIES THAT THAT YOU CAN IMPLEMENT THAT, IN THE OVERALL FUNCTION OF THE DRIVING RANGE. BUT IT JUST, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO GET IT BUILT. HAVE GOLFERS OUT THERE, AND WE BELIEVE THIS IS GOING TO BE A SAFE USE AND ADDRESS ALL THE ISSUES IF WE'RE WRONG, WE'RE GOING TO FIX IT. APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION, AND AS A FORMER LITIGATOR, I LOVE A STANDARD OF REVIEW. LIKE, I TOTALLY APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR HERE. BUT YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO WEIGH IN ON THIS IF THERE IF. 
          LET'S PRETEND WE'RE WE WEREN'T EVER HERE. THE TREES DIDN'T GET DESTROYED. AND THERE WAS GOLF BALLS COMING ONTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD PROPERTY. WHAT WOULD BE THE REMEDY RECOURSE THERE? WOULD IT? WHAT HAPPENS THEN? THE. I WOULD SAY WOULDN'T BE INVOLVING THE CITY. I THINK THE REMEDY RECOURSE WOULD BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES AS COUNSEL WAS STATE DURING HIS PRESENTATION. SO YEAH, IF THE TREES WERE STILL THERE, WE PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE HERE TONIGHT. OKAY. SO THE TREES ARE NO LONGER HERE, RIGHT? SO I, I REALLY WANT TO GET A GOOD SENSE OF WHAT, WHAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO AND WHAT WE'RE NOT ABLE TO DO IS THIS IS THIS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, TO DO A FRESH SET OF EYES ON THE PLAN, TO SAY WHAT'S GOING TO WORK NOW? OR ARE WE JUST TRYING TO REPLACE THE TREES THAT WERE THERE BEFORE? WELL, I THINK IT'S ALL OF THE ABOVE. I THINK IN SOME REGARDS IS THE COMMISSION HAS STATED THOSE IT WAS APPROVED PREVIOUSLY WITH THOSE TREES IN PLACE WITH THAT IN MIND, AND THERE WAS MAYBE THINGS LEFT OUT THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED. SO IN THAT REGARD, IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO EVALUATE EVERYTHING. OKAY. SO WE ARE UNABLE TO EVALUATE THE ENTIRE PLAN, NOT JUST THE REPLACEMENT OF THE TREES THAT WERE DESTROYED. I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S WELL, WHEN YOU SAY ENTIRE PLAN, NOT THE FINAL, NOT THE ENTIRE VILLAGES, RIGHT. THE ISSUE HERE, I MEAN, I THINK, I MEAN, THEY'RE PRESENTING MORE THAN JUST THE TREES. SO I THINK YOU'RE ALLOWED TO CONSIDER THAT AS WELL. THANK YOU. BUT SIMILAR TO ONE, WE HAVE ZONING ISSUES. WHEN YOU TAKE YOUR FINGER OFF OF IT, IT HAS TO BE IN COMPLIANCE. 
          CORRECT OKAY. SO THE WHOLE OF THE THING MUST DO WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO, RIGHT? I HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO, WAS A REFERENCE IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT THE I THINK I SAW IT SOMEWHERE ELSE, BUT, THAT THE APPLICATION PROPOSES TO ADD LIABILITY SIGNS TO WARN GOLFERS THAT ERRANT SHOTS SHALL BE PENALIZED. I WAS WONDERING HOW ERRANT SHOTS WOULD BE PENALIZED 
          [00:35:03]
AGAINST THE INDIVIDUAL GOLFERS. SO, MEMBER WALLACE, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR A GOLFER WHO HAS A MONTHLY MEMBERSHIP, THE CLUB COULD SUSPEND OR TERMINATE THAT MEMBERSHIP. THERE COULD BE BANS FROM THE RANGE, THERE COULD BE BANS FROM THE FACILITY. THERE ARE LOTS OF OPERATIONS. THESE THESE ARE THE OPERATIONAL ISSUES AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES I WAS ALLUDING TO EARLIER. ARE THERE AS THE CLUB DEVELOPED ANY STANDARDS AND AROUND WHAT WILL CONSTITUTE A PENALTY, WHAT TYPE OF CONDUCT WOULD CONSTITUTE THE TYPE THAT WOULD, WOULD, REQUIRE PENALTY PENALTIES TO BE ASSESSED , IS IT AN INTENTIONAL, I DON'T I DIDN'T QUITE IT SOUNDED NICE WHEN I READ IT, BUT WHEN I FOUND, WHEN I THOUGHT ABOUT IT, I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, WELL, HOW DOES THAT EVEN ADVANCE THE BALL, WHAT TYPE OF PENALTIES COULD EVEN BE ASSESSED, AND HOW COULD THAT EVEN BE A FACTOR? SURE THAT WE MIGHT EVEN ADDRESS. YES. PLEASE GO AHEAD. YES. YES, MISS. 65672, PLEASE SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE. DANA SUMRALL SIX FIVE, SIX SEVEN SHADY OAK LANE, MASON, OHIO, IN REGARD TO THE PENALTIES, SORRY. EXPULSION OBVIOUSLY IS THE FIRST ONE. BUT ON ALL OF OUR GOLF COURSES, THE PERSON WHO HITS A GOLF BALL THAT DOES ANY TYPE OF DAMAGE WINDOW CAR DENTS PERSON IS PERSONALLY LIABLE. TYPICALLY THEIR HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT. WE DO OUR BEST JOB TO IDENTIFY THE PERPETRATING PARTY THAT HITS BALLS ON OTHER GOLF HOLES ON THE DRIVING RANGE THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY. SO IN REGARDS TO RAMIFICATIONS, THAT'S TYPICALLY WHAT IT IS. AND I'M NOT SURE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN THEY'RE AIMING A BALL AT THE WATER TOWER TO TRY TO HIT IT FOR FUN, AND THE BALL MAY OR MAY NOT GO WHERE THEY DON'T INTEND IT TO DO. AND IT'S OUR IT'S OUR JOB TO TELL THEM IN REGARD TO THE SIGNAGE, TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY IS AWARE OF THAT, EVEN IF YOU'RE HAVING FUN AND YOU THINK IT'S FUN, IT'S A SERIOUS BUSINESS. 
          AND THE SAME THING ON ANOTHER HOLE. IF THERE'S A HOUSE TO THE LEFT ON A DOGLEG AND YOU HIT THAT HOLE, THE GARAGE WINDOW, YOU'RE YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT DAMAGE. SO WE DO OUR BEST TO TRY TO PUT THE TWO PARTIES TOGETHER AND AS CHRIS MENTIONED HERE, EXPULSION IS, NO LONGER ABLE TO USE THE FACILITIES. NOW, WE HAVE SIX FACILITIES IN TOWN, SO THAT EXPULSION IS KIND OF IMPORTANT, BECAUSE OF SO MANY PUBLIC COURSES THAT WE OFFER. SO WE HAVE THOSE, SITUATIONS THAT CAN HAPPEN. WE DON'T TYPICALLY GO TO THAT EXTREME BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE WILL JUST TURN INTO HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE, AND THAT'LL RECTIFY THE SITUATION. AND JUST ONE QUICK FOLLOW UP ALONG THAT SAME LINE, JUST TO JUST TO CONFIRM IT IS ON THE HONOR SYSTEM. CORRECT YES. BUT WE ALSO HAVE WE MONITOR THAT OUR FIRST HOLE IS ADJACENT TO THE DRIVING RANGE. SO WE HAVE A STARTER THERE THAT DOES MONITORING. SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF BOTH. AND USUALLY 50% OF THE TIME IF A HOUSE WINDOW GETS BROKEN SOMEONE WILL COME OUT AND IMMEDIATELY TELL US THAT SAME AS A CAR IN A PARKING LOT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THAT'S WHEN WE USUALLY TAKE OVER AND TRY TO PUT THE TWO PARTIES TOGETHER. SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF BOTH, BUT WE ALSO HAVE SOME MONITORING THAT GOES OUT THERE ON THE DRIVING RANGE. AND THE FIRST TEE BOX. THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION ON THE 50 TREES. SO THAT YOU HAVE AN EXPERT THAT GAVE A DECLARATION AND HE LOOKED AT, YOU KNOW, THE MOUNDING AND THE TREES AND THE NETTING IN THE DECLARATION OR IN ANY OF THE DOCUMENTS. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THAT TALKS ABOUT HOW MANY TREES ARE IN WHICH MOUND AND WHAT SPACING, MINIMUM OR MAXIMUM. AND TO DO THAT EVALUATION, YOU HAVE TO HAVE IT. DO YOU HAVE THAT INFORMATION. SO THE SITE PLAN IS INTENDED, MEMBER LARSEN THE SITE PLAN IS INTENDED TO DEPICT WHERE THE LOCATION OF THE MOUNDING AND THE SPACING OF THE TREES. OKAY. BUT THERE SHOULD BE SOME TYPE OF MINIMUM OR MAXIMUM BETWEEN THE TREES, RIGHT? IN ORDER TO BE EFFECTIVE. I AGREE WITH THAT. 
          YES. AND SO WE WOULD NEED NOT TO MAKE THE LOGICAL DECISION HERE. AND, MEMBER LARSEN, THE ONE OF THE STAFF CONDITIONS IS THAT IF ANY OF THE LANDSCAPING DIES OR WE, YOU KNOW, FIND IT, WE NEED TO REPLACE IT. SO THE ONUS IS ON US, TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE PROPERLY PLANTED AND DISTANCED, TO, NUMBER ONE, PROVIDE AGAIN THAT BUFFERING OF THE SITE LINE, BUT ALSO TO ENSURE THAT YOU HAVE THE HEALTHY, VIBRANT, CONDITIONS FOR THAT PARTICULAR SPECIES, AND STAFF, IS THERE LIKE A GUIDELINE FOR MAXIMUM SPACING OF TREES FOR THIS TYPE OF SITUATION. IS THAT SOMETHING WE'D HAVE TO GET. SO SOMETHING WE CAN CONSULT WITH THE, CITY FORESTER ABOUT, AT THE TIME OF PLANTING OR REPLACEMENTS NECESSARY. YEAH, BECAUSE WE WANT THEM TIGHT. YEAH. I'LL JUST MAKE A NOTE THAT THE CITY FORESTER HAS NOT REVIEWED THIS PLAN IN PARTICULAR. SO WE WANT TO CONDITION THAT THEY WOULD REVIEW 
          [00:40:01]
IT AND AGREE UPON THE SPACING OF THE PLANTINGS. WOULD THAT BE A FAIR YOU GUYS AGREE A RECOMMENDATION OR CONDITION. AND ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT WE WOULD BE FINE WITH THAT. TOTALLY AMENABLE TO FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITY ARBORIST FOR SPACING PURPOSES. 
          OKAY SO I WANTED TO JUMP IN ON A FOLLOW UP FROM YOUR PRESENTATION, I BELIEVE AT THE END, YOU NOTED THAT WHEN THE CHURCH HAD SPECIAL EVENTS, ETC, THAT YOU WOULD WORK WITH THEM, I WAS LOOKING FOR MAYBE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER EXPLANATION ON WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN. SO LIKE JUST A HYPOTHETICAL ON SUNDAY THEY HAVE A PICNIC FROM 1 TO 4. WHAT DO YOU DO? WHAT DO YOU DO? ARE YOU GOING TO CLOSE THE DRIVING RANGE THAT DAY, OR ARE YOU GOING TO ONLY ALLOW NOW INSTEAD OF ALLOWING TEN PEOPLE OUT THERE AT ONCE? ARE YOU GOING TO ALLOW ONE PERSON LIKE, WHAT? CAN YOU KIND OF TALK US THROUGH SOME OF THE WAYS THAT YOU WOULD WORK WITH THE CHURCH? SURE. MEMBER BRIGGS, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, OUR THOUGHT IS IF WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PARTICULAR EVENT IS, WE CAN PLAN AROUND THAT. IF THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A LARGE GATHERING ON THE FIELD, YOU KNOW, CLOSEST TO THE RANGE, IT MAY WARRANT CLOSING THE RANGE DURING THAT PERIOD. IT MAY WARRANT LIMITING IT TO, YOU KNOW, SHORT IRONS OR, YOU KNOW, CHIPPING OR OR WHAT HAVE YOU, AS OPPOSED TO THE LONGER IRONS THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, IT WILL KIND OF ALL DEPEND ON, ON WHAT WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT, BUT AGAIN, ULTIMATELY OUR GOAL HERE IS TO CREATE A POSITIVE AND SAFE EXPERIENCE, EVEN FOR OUR NEIGHBORS AS WELL AS OUR GOLFERS, BECAUSE THE LAST THING WE WANT TO DO IS TO CREATE A BAD EXPERIENCE FOR ANY CHILD, ANY PERSON, WHO HAPPENS TO BE OUT THERE. WE WANT TO ACTUALLY BRING THEM OVER AND SHOW THEM A GREAT EXPERIENCE AT THE CLUB PLAYING GOLF, TAKING UP THE NEW SPORT, AND SO THAT'S WHAT I MEAN WITH BY, WE WILL COMMIT TO WORKING WITH, WITH, THE, THE MINISTER OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES. AND MAYBE YOU'LL GET TO THIS AND I ASSUME WE'RE GOING TO HEAR SOME FOLKS FROM THE CHURCH, BUT HAVE THERE BEEN ONGOING DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CHURCH? AND YOU'VE PRESENTED THIS PLAN? YES. SO WE PRESENTED THIS PLAN, TO THE CHURCH, AND THEY REVIEWED IT , THEY RESPONDED, I WOULD I WOULD SAY, I'LL LET THEM SPEAK FOR, FOR, THEIR POSITION, BUT I BELIEVE WE'RE AT AN IMPASSE, BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY THE CHURCH WOULD PREFER TO HAVE A TALLER NET. AND, IN VIEW OF, OF THEIR POSITION THAT THE NET SHOULD BE TALLER, THAT'S WHEN WE INVOLVE THE INTERNATIONAL EXPERT ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, TO JUST ANALYZE AND TELL US, ARE WE RIGHT? SHOULD THE NET BE TALLER? IS THE CHURCH RIGHT? WHO'S RIGHT ? AND SO WE INVOLVE THIS THIRD INDEPENDENT, THIRD PARTY, AND I'VE ATTACHED OR I'VE PROVIDED THIS BOARD WITH, WITH HIS ANALYSIS THAT THAT WALKS OR WALKS YOU THROUGH HIS METHODOLOGY, HE IS OUT OF STATE SUCH THAT HE COULD NOT TRAVEL HERE TONIGHT, WHICH IS WHY IT WAS SUBMITTED TO THIS BODY IN DECLARATION FORM, BUT ONE ONE THING I WANT TO, EMPHASIZE HERE, I DON'T BELIEVE, THAT THE SAFETY COMPONENT IS BEFORE THIS BOARD BECAUSE IT IS AN AMENDMENT TO A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE PURPOSE FOR PROVIDING THIS BOARD WITH THE STUDY IS JUST TO ILLUSTRATE TO YOU ALL THAT WE DO CARE, THAT OUR DESIGN WORKS, THAT IT IS SAFE, THAT WE DIDN'T JUST THROW A NET OUT THERE. WE DIDN'T JUST PUT SOME RANDOM TREES BY HAPPENSTANCE. THIS IS ALL AN INTENTIONAL DESIGN, TO PROVIDE A SOLUTION THAT WILL PREVENT GOLF BALLS FROM GOING ON TO THE CHURCH'S PROPERTY, BECAUSE IF IT CAME BACK AND HE SAID WE WERE WRONG, THAT THE NET SHOULD BE TALLER, THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME OTHER STRATEGY. WE WOULDN'T BE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS IS THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT BY THE CLUB. AND THE LAST THING THEY WANT TO DO IS SPEND MONEY ON SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T WORK, BECAUSE WE'RE JUST GOING TO BE IN A COURT SOMEWHERE RATHER THAN IN A ZONING PROCEEDING. PROCEEDING AND SO ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION BEFORE THIS COMMISSION, AGAIN, IS VERY LIMITED BY THE CRITERIA IN YOUR 
          [00:45:01]
CODE. AND SAFETY IS NOT ONE OF THOSE COMPONENTS. AND AND I UNDERSTAND, I UNDERSTAND THE, THE POSITION THAT HAS BEEN CONVEYED AND I SUBMIT TO YOU THAT THE DESIGN BEFORE YOU ON THIS SITE PLAN IS A REASONABLE AND SAFE DESIGN OF THIS DRIVING RANGE. AND I RESPECT EVERYTHING YOU'RE SAYING. I JUST WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY ACCEPTED BACK IN THE DAY, IT WAS ACCEPTED WITH THE LANDSCAPING, THE TREES, THE THAT IT WAS EVERYTHING AT THAT TIME. AND IF THIS WERE THE CASE, HOW MANY YEARS AGO DID WE FIND A DEVELOPMENT PLAN GET APPROVED? 2009, 25 YEARS? THEY PROBABLY THEY WOULD NOT HAVE APPROVED IT, MOST LIKELY WITHOUT THE TREES THAT WERE IN PLACE AT THAT TIME. 
          SO THOSE ARE ALL GONE. AND YOU'RE COMING BACK TO US AND SAYING, WELL, SAFETY IS NOT AN ISSUE. WE COULD PROBABLY PUSH BACK AND SAY, WELL, WE WANT IT BACK. THE EXACT SAME POSITION IT WAS WHEN THEY APPROVED IT IN 2009. SO I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO BE FLEXIBLE, BUT I CAN'T I DON'T THINK YOU CAN SIT HERE AND SAY THAT WE CAN'T BE CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY, BUT AND APOLOGIES, THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M TRYING TO CONVEY. I'M JUST SAYING FROM A LEGAL CRITERIA, THE LEGAL ISSUE BEFORE THE BOARD IS THAT SAFETY REALLY DOESN'T FALL WITHIN THE CRITERIA. BUT REGARDLESS, BE THAT AS IT MAY, EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM IS HYPER FOCUSED ON SAFETY AND WANTS A SAFE DRIVING RANGE FOR ALL INVOLVED. AND THAT'S WHY THE CLUB IS MAKING THESE INVESTMENTS AND ENHANCEMENTS TO PROVIDE THAT SAFE EXPERIENCE. AND THE ONLY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE BOARD IS THAT THIS IS A SAFE DESIGN. AND IF WE'RE WRONG, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIX IT. THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE. SO I'D LIKE A LITTLE CLARIFICATION, THIS IS FOR LEGAL. SO THE STAFF REPORT INDICATES. THAT WE CAN CONSIDER FACTORS UNDER 11 1106. IS THAT CORRECT? SO AND I'LL LET STEVE CHIME IN. BUT I THINK HE GENERALLY, IN TALKING AGREE THAT 1159 IS WHERE WE START OFF WITH THIS, BUT AS YOU LOOK IN 1159 09E WHICH COUNCIL HAS REFERENCED IN HIS DOCUMENTS, ONE, AS TO THE SAFETY ISSUE, ONE OF THE CRITERIA DOES TALK ABOUT THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE MUNICIPALITY. SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DECIDE AND IN PARAGRAPH WAS GOING. YEAH. AND IN PARAGRAPH A ALSO TALKS ABOUT THAT, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BEING CONSISTENT IN ALL RESPECTS WITH THE PURPOSE, INTENT AND APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF THE ZONING CODE, WHICH I THINK YOU CAN PIGGYBACK ON SOME OF THOSE OTHER CRITERIA IN 1111, THAT STAFF INCLUDED WITHIN ITS DOCUMENTS. SO, BUT I DO THINK GENERAL WELFARE IS INCLUDED WITHIN THAT. AND I THINK, PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HAVE SOME DISCRETION TO DETERMINE WHAT THAT MEANS. THANKS FOR CLARIFYING THAT. QUESTION FOR OUR LEGAL, SO THE IF THEY GET IT WRONG, THE RESPONSE IS IT A TORT OR SOMETHING WHERE THEY, THEY TAKE THE COURSE, OKAY. WHICH INVOLVES BOTH SIDES HIRING LAWYERS AND DEALING WITH IT IN COURT, WHICH IS USUALLY A GOOD IDEA. HIRING ATTORNEYS, SO THAT'S THE ATTORNEY'S I UNDERSTAND, AND I'LL POINT OUT TO THE APPLICANT THAT HERE THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THE COMMUNITY IS REPRESENTED BY THE VILLAGE AND BY THIS BOARD, WHICH THEY DON'T GET THAT IF WE GET IT WRONG, IF WE GET IT WRONG, THEY DON'T BRING IT BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION, WHERE A BUNCH OF STAFF PROFESSIONALS AND OUR OWN VILLAGE ATTORNEY GET TO REVIEW IT. THEY'RE ON THEIR OWN. NICOLE, TO DO THIS, MY QUESTION TO OUR STAFF IS, IS IT POSSIBLE TO PUT TIME LIMITS AND OR REVIEW ON THIS? CAN WE SEE IF THIS WORKS IN A YEAR AND SAY, OKAY, IT NEEDS TO BE A 60 FOOT FENCE? THE ANSWER IS I'M NOT SURE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU CAN PUT THOSE. HEY, WE'RE GOING TO PUT IT OUT THERE FOR A YEAR AND SEE HOW IT WORKS AND THEN COME BACK. I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE EVER SEEN THAT BEFORE, AND OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN PUT IN KIND OF A PROBATIONARY PERIOD OF SPEAK, TO SPEAK, TO SEE HOW IT WORKS. WHETHER WE COULD IMPOSE IT IS ONE QUESTION WHETHER THE APPLICANT WOULD AGREE TO IT WOULD BE ANOTHER QUESTION. SO PHRASING THE QUESTION A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. CAN WE REQUEST THAT THE APPLICANT ALLOW FOR REVIEW OF WHETHER THE, SAY, THE PREDICTION OF THEIR EXPERT ACTUALLY COMES TRUE, OR WHETHER THE ACTUAL EXPERIENCE OF THE CHURCH IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WHAT THE EXPERT IS ANTICIPATING WILL BE THE 
          [00:50:01]
SITUATION. I WOULD THINK IN THAT SITUATION, PROBABLY, YES. I MEAN, I THINK THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO HAVE A HEARING. NOW TO GET A DECISION, OBVIOUSLY IF THEY AGREE TO SOMETHING OR THEY'RE WILLING TO PART OF A CONDITION, THAT'S A DIFFERENT STORY. BUT I THINK IF THEY SAY NO, I THINK THEY'RE ENTITLED TO A DECISION. YAY, NAY, OR SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN. WELL, MY SENSE IS THAT BEFORE WE GET TOO FAR DOWN THE PATH, WE PROBABLY NEED TO HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORS AT SOME POINT. BUT, WITHOUT CONFERRING WITH THE WITH MY CLIENT WITH RESPECT TO THAT PROPOSAL. RIGHT AS A ZONING ATTORNEY, I THINK YOU RUN THE RISK JUST LEGALLY OF AN EQUAL PROTECTIONS PROBLEM, WHERE, YOU KNOW, ANY APPROVAL THAT THIS, THAT THIS COMMISSION OR COUNCIL APPROVES AND THERE'S A POTENTIAL, DANGER TO, LET'S SAY. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, AN OFF SITE AND, AN OFF SITE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT. YOU KNOW, THE CITY'S NEVER PUT A CONDITION ON WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S AN ACCIDENT WITHIN THE FIRST EIGHT MONTHS OF IT BEING CONSTRUCTED THAT WE'LL COME BACK AND MAKE YOU TEAR DOWN YOUR BUILDING AND START OVER. I MEAN, THAT'S THAT'S JUST NOT A PRACTICAL SOLUTION. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT PUTTING A CONDITION ON IT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN AGREEMENT THAT YOU HAVE WHICH SAYS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOING TO BE A REVIEW OF HOW IT'S ALL WORKING, BUT THEN SOME PERIOD OF TIME JUST TO GET A SENSE OF, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR GOLF BALL'S STILL LANDING OVER IN THE CHURCH AND IF THEY ARE WHERE AND YOU KNOW, AND HOW MANY AND HOW MANY. BUT YOU KNOW FOR EXAMPLE. JUST I SHOULD POINT IT THE RIGHT WAY HERE. YOU KNOW, IF THE GOLF BALLS ARE LANDING, I DON'T JUST HEAR IT. THEN MAYBE THE FENCE DOES NEED TO GO UP TWO FEET. SO I'M GETTING AT, SURE, BUT IF THEY'RE LANDING, YOU KNOW, OVER HERE, THEN THE CHURCH DOESN'T CARE. SO, I DON'T KNOW. I'M JUST WE'RE. AND AT THIS POINT, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET A SENSE OF HOW WE CAN PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER. THAT AND APPROVE SOMETHING THAT MAKES EVERYBODY SORT OF HAPPY. AND I THINK THE COUNCIL'S POINT, KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD WITH SOMETHING LIKE THAT COULD LEAD TO BIGGER UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. SO I WOULD, I WOULD. APPROACH THAT CAUTIOUSLY. DO YOU HAVE SUCCESS NUMBERS LIKE WHAT IS THE, LIKE EVERYTHING GETS MEASURED, OR AT LEAST LOTS OF THINGS OUGHT TO BE MEASURED, AND NUMBERS WITH UNITS ON THEM ARE VERY EASY TO DECIDE WHETHER SOMETHING DID OR DID NOT HAPPEN, HOW MANY GOLF BALLS IS TOO MANY? WELL FROM YOUR POINT OF VIEW, THAT THAT THERE'S NO I EAT CHOCOLATE. THERE'S AN ACCEPTABLE DEFECT RATE ON FOOD. 
          I WON'T GO INTO ORANGE JUICE AND CHOCOLATE AND WHAT THOSE THINGS ARE, BUT IT EXISTS, WHAT WOULD YOU SAY WE KNOW WE CAN BEAT THIS NUMBER. DO YOU HAVE NUMBERS, I DO NOT. AND ANYTHING I WOULD OFFER UP WOULD BE MY SPECULATION . BUT I FEEL FREE TO CONSULT YOUR CLIENT. BUT, YEAH, THAT WOULD ALSO BE HELPFUL FOR US AND FOR THE NEIGHBORS TO SAY THAT. OKAY PERFECTION IS REALLY HARD WHEN THE PUBLIC GETS TO, YOU KNOW, ANYBODY WHO CAN HANDLE AN IRON AND DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THEY'RE CRAZY GETS AT LEAST ONE SHOT. SO, YEAH, THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SOMEBODY MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET A BALL THROUGH HERE. WELL, THEIR EXPERT SAYS THAT OUT OF 1 MILLION SHOTS, ONLY TWO LAND ON THE ACTUALLY NOT EVEN SURE, FRANKLY, FROM HIS REPORT WHERE IT'S GOING TO LAND, BUT ONLY TWO ARE GOING TO LAND OUTSIDE THE PARAMETERS OF THE DRIVING RANGE. AT LEAST THAT'S THE WAY I READ HIS REPORT. IS THAT THE WAY YOU READ IT? CORRECT MEMBER WALLACE, WITH THE LIMITED FLIGHT GOLF BALLS, RIGHT, OF COURSE. YEAH, YEAH. AND IS THAT NUMBER WITH THE MODIFICATION ONES THAT ARE GOING TO BE PROPOSED, OR IS THIS IS THAT WHAT THE CURRENT PLAN THAT, APOLOGIES BEFORE WE GOT HERE WAS, WAS THAT THE, THE KNOW COUNCIL WILL TROT THAT THAT THAT NUMBER IS, ASSUMING THE NET IN PLACE AND THAT'S IT. ASSUMING THE NET IN PLACE, THE CURRENT, THE EXISTING CONDITION, THE EXISTING CONDITION. SO WITHOUT THE TREES OR THE, THE MOUNDING OR THE ADDITIONAL SIGHT LINES, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. SO THE PREVIOUS, THE PREVIOUS LIKE WHAT WE WHAT BROUGHT US HERE TODAY WAS THAT SAME CONDITION THAT THE EXPERT FOUND HAD TWO BALLS OUT OF A MILLION. THE CORRECT THE CONDITIONS AS OF TODAY, BEFORE THESE MODIFICATIONS ARE IMPLEMENTED. OKAY. AND WERE YOU USING THE LIMITED FLIGHT BALLS THEN MAYBE THAT'S A QUESTION. 
          WERE YOU USING THOSE BEFORE? DID I MISS SOMETHING BECAUSE PARAGRAPH SEVEN OF THE 
          [00:55:06]
DECLARATION SAYS IT'S IN YOUR EXPERTS OPINION, THE EXISTING SAFETY FENCE, THE TARGETS IN THE CENTER OF THE DRIVING RANGE, THE MOUNDING AND THE 50 NEW TREES IS GOING TO PREVENT UNINTENTIONAL ERRANT SHOTS. BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT HIS ESTIMATE OF THE ONLY TWO OUT OF 2 MILLION IS IN THE IS IN THE EXISTING CIRCUMSTANCES . THAT'S MY THAT WAS MY QUESTION . IT'S NOT CLEAR FROM READING THE REPORT. IT'S TALKING ABOUT WHAT IT WAS BEFORE OR WHAT WOULD IT BE. SO THE TWO OUT OF A MILLION IS BASED ON THE DRIVING RANGES EXISTING SIZE, LAYOUT, TBA ORIENTATION, THE TYPICAL WIND DIRECTION FOR THIS LOCATION IN AND THE USE OF THE LIMITED FLIGHT GOLF BALLS. SO ACCORDING TO YOUR EXPERT, THEN TWO OUT OF A MILLION. IF WE JUST DO NOTHING APPROVED IT THE WAY YOU BROUGHT IT IN TWO MONTHS AGO, AND IT SHOULD BE PRETTY CLOSE TO ZERO THEN WITH ALL THESE OTHER CHANGES THAT YOU'RE MAKING. ALTHOUGH HE DOESN'T REALLY SAY THAT. THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY DO YOU HAVE A DO YOU HAVE A NUMBER ABOUT WHICH YOU WOULD SAY, ALL RIGHT. IF WE'RE ABOVE THIS MANY GOLF BALLS GOING ON IN THE NEIGHBORS, WE NEED TO READDRESS THIS. I DON'T HAVE A DIRECT ANSWER TO YOU, CHAIRPERSON KIRBY, I THINK A LOT IS FACTORED IN THERE. LIKE WHERE? ON THE PROPERTY? IT'S LANDING. SO IF IT'S IN THAT NO MOW RANGE WHERE IT'S NOT THREATENING ANYONE, I DON'T THINK ANYONE CARES ABOUT THAT. I THINK WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT BALLS THAT ARE LANDING ON THE AREA BEHIND THE CHURCH, THEIR PARKING LOT, THE CHURCH BUILDING ITSELF. I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE, BUT I DON'T HAVE A DIRECT NUMBER FOR YOU. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE FURTHER THINGS TO ADD TO THE PRESENTATION ON YOUR BEHALF? I DO NOT AT THIS TIME. OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. OKAY GO HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORS. LET'S START WITH THE CHURCH BECAUSE I THINK THEY HAVE. OR THEY PRESENTED STUFF TO US ON PAPER. AND, LET'S START THERE. THANK YOU, IF YOU DON'T MIND, ADAM GATTON, THE DIRECTOR OF NEW ALBANY FC, IS GOING TO SPEAK FIRST BECAUSE HE HAS TO RUN. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JUST MY NAME AND ADDRESS. IS THAT WHAT IT IS? ADAM GATTON FOR 23 TIPPERARY LOOP, DELAWARE FOR 3015, SO I, I LIKE I SAID LIKE THEY SAID, I'M THE DIRECTOR OF NEW ALBANY FC SOCCER CLUB AND WE HAVE RENTED THE CHURCH FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF SEASONS, FALL AND SPRING AND THIS PAST SPRING, UNFORTUNATELY, WE WEREN'T ACTUALLY LAST FALL AS WELL. WE WEREN'T ABLE TO USE THE, THE FACILITY DUE TO, SAFETY CONCERNS WITH THE GOLF BALLS, BUT IDEALLY , WE'RE JUST WE'RE JUST LOOKING TO BE ABLE TO USE THE FACILITY WITHOUT HAVING ANY, WE HAVE KIDS AGES 8 OR 9, UP TO THE 18 YEARS OLD. AND JUST FROM A SAFETY CONCERN. JUST DON'T WANT ANY ANYBODY TO BE HIT WITH A BALL OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. AND OBVIOUSLY WE, YOU KNOW, IT ONLY TAKES ONE BALL TO HIT ONE KID TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE AN ISSUE. SO THAT'S THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. OKAY. SO SORRY, YOU MAY HAVE MENTIONED THIS. AND MY SON ACTUALLY PLAYS FOR YOUR CLUB OKAY. SO I'M I DON'T KNOW HOW HOW THAT MAY CHANGE THINGS FOR ME, BUT HOW LONG HAS NAFC BEEN USING THIS FACILITY, WE MIGHT HAVE SAID THAT I MISSED IT. NO, I DID NOT, SO WE USED IT. LAST WOULD HAVE BEEN SPRING OF 23. I THINK THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME WE USED IT, WHEN WE FIRST STARTED USING IT IN MARCH, I THINK THERE WASN'T A THERE WASN'T A NET UP, BUT THEY WHEN WE HAD SPOKE WITH THEM, THEY WERE IN PROCESS OF PUTTING IT UP. I THINK THE NET WENT UP KIND OF AT THE END OF THE SPRING SEASON OR SPRING SEASON RUNS EARLY TO MID MARCH. THROUGH THIS TIME WE'RE JUST FINISHING UP WITH OUR SPRING SEASON AND THEN OUR FALL SEASON STARTS EARLY AUGUST THROUGH MID OCTOBER, AND IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S TWO FIELDS. YEAH, LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE TWO KIND OF SMALLER FIELDS. YEP. TWO THE MAJORITY OF THE KIDS THERE ARE ARE YOUNGER YOU KNOW 7 TO 10 YEARS OLD. WE DO HAVE SOME OLDER TEAMS BUT TYPICALLY THEY TRAIN. THEY DON'T ALWAYS TRAIN AT THAT FACILITY. SO THANK YOU, I, I WANT TO ASK CHRIS ANOTHER QUESTION. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT THERE HASN'T BEEN A GOLF BALL HIT ON THE RANGE, SAY, LET'S SAY IN 2024 IS ON THE RANGE WAS CLOSED FROM MARCH, APRIL AND 
          [01:00:02]
MAY. WAS IT OPEN IN FEBRUARY AND JANUARY I BELIEVE. YES. OKAY. THE WIND WEATHER PERMITTED. 
          GOTCHA. OKAY. AND I DO KNOW FROM COMMUNICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE CHURCH, THEY'RE CONTINUING TO FIND GOLF BALLS, WHICH IS KIND OF FLUMMOXED ALL OF US BECAUSE, OKAY, WE'RE NOT SURE WHERE THEY'RE COMING FROM. WELL, I KIND OF I JUST WAS I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM THE CHURCH, BUT I JUST WANTED TO GET A SENSE IN MY MIND OF WHEN THE LAST TIME A GOLFER WOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE RANGE THAT COULD HAVE POSSIBLY HIT A GOLF BALL AND ONTO THE CHURCH PROPERTY, AND THAT COULD HAVE BEEN FEBRUARY OR JANUARY OF THIS YEAR. GOTCHA. OKAY. WERE THEY USING THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF GOLF BALLS AT THAT POINT? WE INTRODUCED PLAY BALLS IN AUGUST LAST YEAR. THAT'S THE ONE THAT WAS IN THE LIMITED FLIGHT. 
          GOTCHA. ANOTHER ANOTHER QUESTION. SORRY DO YOU REMEMBER LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO WHEN THEY WERE WHEN YOU GUYS WERE HERE LAST TIME THE CHURCH CAME IN WITH A BIG BUCKET OF BALLS, DID DID YOU GET A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THOSE? WERE ANY OF THOSE THE LIMITED? RANGE BALLS, OR WERE THEY ALL FULL BALLS, OR DID YOU GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THEM AND DETERMINE WHAT TYPE OF BALL THEY WERE? AND TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE BACK AND FORTH, I'D ENCOURAGE HIM TO COME TO THE MICROPHONE. SO, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MEMBER WALLACE, WE DID NOT REVIEW THE BUCKET OF BALLS THAT THAT EVENING, THE CHURCH HAS PROVIDED US A PHOTO OF ONE OF THE LIMITED FLIGHT BALLS. I'M NOT SURE WHERE THAT CAME FROM OR WHEN THAT WAS COLLECTED OR THE CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THAT. OKAY, SO WE SO WE DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, WHEN THE CHURCH CAME IN LAST TIME, THEY CAME IN WITH A, I DON'T KNOW HOW A BIG BUCKET OF BALLS. SURE. WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER THEY WERE REGULAR LIMITED FLIGHT. SO THAT'S RIGHT. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. BUT JUST JUST BY GLANCE, THEY WERE THE OLDER GOLF BALLS. BUT YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THAT THE CHURCH HAS DELIVERED TO YOU SINCE THE LIMITED GOLF BALLS WERE IMPLEMENTED, AT LEAST ONE LIMITED FLIGHT GOLF BALL THAT THE CHURCH IS CLAIMING ENDED UP ON THEIR PROPERTY. THEY PROVIDED A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE BALL CORRECT , BUT NOT THE BALL ITSELF. CORRECT DID THE BALL HAVE THE APPEARANCE OF A OF A LIMITED FLIGHT BALL? IT DID. YES. OKAY. WE'RE JUST UNSURE OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES. I GET IT, I GET THAT PART OKAY, I GET IT. YOU DON'T KNOW. GIVEN THAT THE RANGE IS CLOSED, WE'RE JUST KIND OF LIKE, WHERE DID THAT COME FROM? I GET IT. SO. BUT THE TIMELINE REAL QUICK SO THAT IN THEORY THAT ONE BALL WOULD HAVE ARRIVED ON THE CHURCH PROPERTY BETWEEN AUGUST OF 2023 AND MARCH 15TH OF 2024. WELL, OR AS OF LAST WEEK, FROM AUGUST UNTIL LAST WEEK. 
          YEAH. WELL, I GUESS IT COULD HAVE BEEN ONE OF 2 MILLION. ONE, THE ONLY THING I. WHILE I'M, I'M UP HERE THAT I WOULD ADD, MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT THE SPRING SOCCER SEASON WAS CANCELED, AND THIS GOES TO THE COMMUNICATION PROTOCOL BECAUSE THE RANGE WAS CLOSED. SO THERE WAS NO REASON FOR THE SOCCER SEASON COULD NOT HAVE OCCURRED THIS SPRING. THANK YOU FOR COMING BACK UP. THANK YOU. COMMISSION. MY NAME IS BRANDON PAULEY, 50 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, COLUMBUS, OHIO, I'M A LAWYER ENGAGED BY CROSSPOINT CHRISTIAN CHURCH, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY THAT WE TALK ABOUT. I DO WANT TO PREFACE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT HERE TO MAKE IT A DISPUTE BETWEEN NEIGHBORS THAT, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL PRIOR ALLUDED TO THAT IF WE HAVE AN ISSUE BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES, WE COULD LITIGATE THAT. WHAT WE SEE HERE IS AN ACTUAL ZONING ISSUE, AND IT'S APPLICATION OF THE ZONING CODE, AND IT'S A TOTAL DISREGARD OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT WENT INTO THE 2009 APPROVAL FOR THIS DRIVING RANGE, AND WHETHER IT WAS THE PRIOR OWNER WHO MADE THOSE CHANGES OR THE CURRENT OWNER THAT MADE THOSE CHANGES, HIS DUE DILIGENCE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE TO FIGURE OUT IF THEY WERE STEPPING INTO A SITUATION THAT WE'RE HERE TONIGHT ADDRESSING. SO IT'S A ZONING ISSUE, BUT THE REASON I'M ENGAGED AND THE REASON THE CHURCH HAS PEOPLE HERE THAT ARE GOING TO SPEAK TO THIS ISSUE, IS SAFETY. THIS IS ABOUT SAFETY. THE CONCEPT THAT SAFETY SHOULDN'T RULE OR PERSUADE HOW YOU AS A COMMISSION VIEW THIS ISSUE. I JUST THINK IT GOES IN THE FACE OF COMMON SENSE. IT GOES INTO THE FACE OF YOUR DUTIES AS COMMISSION MEMBERS, AND IT FLIES IN THE FACE OF THE TEXT OF THE ZONING CODE. SO WHETHER OR NOT WE LOOK AT 1159, WHICH INCORPORATES THE GENERAL 
          [01:05:04]
WELFARE PART A ACTUALLY CITES ZONING CODE AND CAPITALIZED TERMS, OR WE GO TO 1111 .06 THAT IN PART DISCUSSES ADJACENT LAND USE. THE RELATIONSHIP OF TOPOGRAPHY, THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE USE REQUESTED TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE. I THINK THE DISCUSSION WE'RE HAVING AND THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU WERE POSING TO THE APPLICANT ARE PERFECTLY ON POINT WITH WHERE YOUR HEAD SHOULD BE IN CONSIDERING THIS ISSUE. SO IF YOU DON'T MIND, IF WE COULD GO TO THE, OTHER TAB. CHRIS. THANK YOU. SO AS I, YOU KNOW, WHETHER I'M RIGHT OR NOT, I CITE 1111 .06 THE STAFF AND THEIR REPORT CITED. 11 1106. THOSE ARE THE POINTS, THOSE THREE WHICH I THINK ARE ARE ON POINT WITH WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE TONIGHT . THERE WAS A TALK ABOUT LANDSCAPING VERSUS CONDITIONS IN THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. IN THE STAFF REPORT. IT SHOWS THE 2009 APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS. AND I HIGHLIGHT THE TWO PARTS ON THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY, WHICH THE CHURCH, IS THE SOUTHERN NEIGHBOR UTILIZE EXISTING TREES IN LANDSCAPING AS A BARRIER. SO IT DOESN'T JUST SAY UTILIZE LANDSCAPING AS A BARRIER, IT DOESN'T JUST SAY LANDSCAPING. 
          IT'S SPECIFICALLY POINTS OUT THAT THE SAFETY OF THE SOUTHERN NEIGHBOR IS PROTECTED BY THE EXISTING TREES ON THE PROPERTY. WE ADD STAGGERED DECIDUOUS TREES WITHIN ONE GAP OF THE TREE LINE. 
          SO AS PART OF THAT 2009 APPROVAL, IT WAS CONDITIONED THAT THEY HAVE TO ADD MORE TREES, NOT TAKE OUT ALL THE TREES. SO IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ADHERENCE TO THE TO THE PLAN, THIS IS ONE WAY THAT THE APPLICANT HAS WHOLLY FAILED. NOW WE PULLED SOME OVERHEAD SHOTS AND I KNOW IT'S DIFFICULT TO SEE. I WANT TO POINT OUT A FEW THINGS. SO, YOU CAN SEE FAIRLY ROBUST, TREE LINE. THE, THE SOUTHERN PART IS THE BOTTOM OF THAT PICTURE. AND THE CHURCH STRUCTURE IS OBVIOUSLY BOTTOM RIGHT. AND THE SOCCER FIELDS ARE KIND OF BOTTOM CENTER TREES SURROUNDING. LOOK, I WASN'T AROUND I WASN'T A MEMBER OF THE CHURCH IN 2009. AND I CAN'T TELL YOU WHEN THIS AERIAL SHOT WAS TAKEN, BUT KODY CLARK, THE PASTOR OF THE CHURCH, WILL GET UP HERE AND TELL YOU THAT THOSE TREES WERE MUCH TALLER THAN 50FT. THOSE ARE ALL REMOVED. 
          NOW, I DO WANT TO ALSO LOOK AT THE TEEING GROUND, AND I KNOW IT'S VERY DIFFICULT, BUT THE TEEING GROUND IN THIS PICTURE, IT'S LIKE JFK'S HEAD BACK INTO THE RIGHT. OKAY. WHEN YOU'RE YOU'RE KIND OF FACING THE RANGE, IT'S SET OFF TO THE RIGHT AND, AND SORT OF IN LINE WITH THOSE FIVE, TREES BY THE CART PATH AGAIN, I KNOW IT'S DIFFICULT, BUT HERE'S THE BUT THAT PICTURE IS VIRTUALLY USELESS. SO IF YOU UNDERSTOOD, IF YOU CAN FIND A DIFFERENT PICTURE TO MAKE YOUR POINT, THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL. THAT ONE'S I'LL MOVE ON. SO WE PULL OUT THE ORIGINAL PLAN IN 2009 AND LOOK AT THE CONFIGURATION OF THE RANGE. IT'S SQUARED THE TEEING GROUND, IT'S SQUARED TO THE ACTUAL RANGE GOING DOWN THE LINE. IF WE LOOK NOW THE CONFIGURATION OF THE RANGE, THE TEEING GROUND IS NATURALLY DIRECTED DIRECTLY AT THE CHURCH. SO WHAT I TRIED TO DO AND PART OF THIS WAS, IN RESPONSE TO THE, TO THE EXPERT REPORT, THE DECLARATION THAT IS NOT NOTARIZED, WHICH I THINK AN AFFIDAVIT WOULD BE NOTARIZED, THE RED DOT THERE THAT I PUT IN THAT PICTURE THAT IS WHERE THE AIM POINT OF THAT EXPERT'S REPORT COURT, ASSUMES. SO HE ASSUMES THAT EVERYBODY IS AIMING DOWN THE DIRECT CENTER OF THE PATH, LIKE GOOD GOLFERS AND ADHERENT FOLKS. THEY'RE ALWAYS GOING TO AIM AT THAT RED DOT. WELL, I DREW A LINE THAT BASICALLY IS PERPENDICULAR TO THE TEE LINE, AND THEN IT GOES OUT TO THIS HUGE MONUMENT, THIS THIS SILO WATER TOWER OUT THERE. AND AND THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE APPLICANT EVEN SAID, HEY, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T CONTROL IF SOMEBODY GOES OUT THERE. LOOKS AT THAT WATER TOWER AND SAYS, HEY, I'M GOING TO TRY AND HIT IT, SHOW EVERYBODY HOW STRONG I AM. AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE EXPERTS REPORT AND SPECIFICALLY FIGURE FOUR, FIGURE FOUR, AS ASSUMES AN AIM POINT. AND THAT'S 
          [01:10:01]
THE BASIS OF HIS EXPERT OPINION, IS IF EVERYBODY AIMS IN THE SAME POSITION, THAT'S THE ASSUMPTION THAT HE'S MAKING. NOT TO MENTION HE'S ALSO ASSUMING THAT THE TEEING GROUND IS OFF THE VERY BACK OF THE TEEING GROUND AND THE DEAD CENTER, THE OVERHEAD SHOT AND ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS, IS LOOK AT THE AERIAL. THE TEEING GROUND IS PROBABLY 15, 20 YARDS IN DEPTH. SO THAT TEEING GROUND CAN BE MOVED FROM THE BACK 20 YARDS UP, WHICH AGAIN COULD POTENTIALLY IMPACT WHERE THESE BALLS ARE LANDING. BUT DIAGRAM FOUR, THE SECOND DIAGRAM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ARCS THAT THE EXPERT SHOWS IN HIS DIAGRAM, THEY ARE WELL IN EXCESS OF THE 50 FOOT FENCE. IT'S RIGHT THERE. AND SO I LOOK AT THIS EXPERT REPORT AND IF ANYTHING IT MAGNIFIES OUR SAFETY CONCERNS AND IT MAGNIFIES THE PROBABILITY OF BALLS GOING ON TO OUR PROPERTY. AND AGAIN PASTOR CLARK'S GOING TO COME UP AND SPEAK. HE HAS A BUCKET OF LIMITED FLIGHT RANGE BALLS, A COUPLE DOZEN OR SO THAT'S GOING TO SHOW UNLESS THEY HIT 30 MILLION GOLF BALLS IT BETWEEN AUGUST. AND NOW THIS EXPERTS REPORT IS TOTALLY INADEQUATE. AND HE'S ALSO NOT HERE TO ANSWER FOR HIS REPORT. SO I TO CLOSE, A COUPLE PICTURES, YOU KNOW, THE TEEING GROUND JUST TO SHOW HOW BARREN THE, REMOVAL OF THE TREES HAS MADE IT PUTTING 15 FOOT SAPLINGS. IT'S GOING TO TAKE 30 YEARS BEFORE THEY PROVIDE THE PROTECTION OF WHAT WAS THERE. SO WE THINK THAT'S INEFFECTIVE. AND JUST INCONSEQUENTIAL TO OUR SAFETY CONCERNS. MOUNDS AND LOW FENCES. WE'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT GROUND BALLS COMING IN AND HITTING SOMEBODY'S SHIN. WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT FULL SWING DRIVER GOLF SHOTS, SLICING ONTO OUR PROPERTY AND HITTING CHILDREN IN THE HEAD. THAT'S WHY THEY ENGAGED AN ATTORNEY. THAT'S WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT TO THEM, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE PRESENTING HERE WITH OUR SIDE OF WHY. AGAIN, THIS ISN'T A DISPUTE BETWEEN TWO NEIGHBORING PARTIES. THIS IS A ZONING ISSUE FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER. AND WHAT WE THINK IS, PRESERVE THE SAFETY AND INTEGRITY OF THE COMMUNITY. HERE'S A VIEW FROM THE CHURCH. AND I'M CHAIRMAN KIRBY. I'M NOT A PHOTOGRAPHER, SO DON'T DRILL ME ON THIS. I ASSUME THIS IS, A DRONE SHOT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT PERSPECTIVE, BUT THIS IS FROM, BASICALLY WHAT? THE ROOF OF THE CHURCH. THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS AT. THE REASON I PUT THIS IN HERE IS BECAUSE THERE IS A NET, BUT THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE OF THE CHURCH IS BEYOND THE, THE SIDE OR THE EXTENSION OF THAT. NET. AND THEN JUST A COUPLE EXAMPLES OF, KIDS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD TO MOVE OUR FELLOWSHIP TO THE PARKING LOT OUT OF FEAR OF BEING HIT, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE, THE, THERE'S BEEN A REPRESENTATION THAT THE RANGE HAS BEEN CLOSED. 
          MEMBERS OF OUR CHURCH HAVE WITNESSED PEOPLE STEPPING ONTO THAT RANGE. AND, MR. KIRBY, WHEN YOU ASK HOW MANY IS ENOUGH OR WHAT'S TOO MANY? I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO BE ENGAGED. LITIGATING A TORT WHEN A KID'S BEEN HIT IN THE HEAD WITH A GOLF BALL, THERE WAS AMPLE CONSIDERATION, ALBEIT MAYBE A LITTLE BIT DEFICIENT IN THE WAY THAT THE TEXT OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT WAS ACTUALLY WRITTEN. BUT IT CONSIDERED THOSE TREES AS THE SAFETY AND QUITE FRANKLY, FOR 14 YEARS, 13.5 YEARS, HOWEVER LONG IT WAS, THE CHURCH DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A BUNCH OF BALLS COMING ONTO THEIR PROPERTY UNTIL THOSE TREES WERE REMOVED. AND I DON'T WANT TO LOSE SIGHT OF THAT TALKING ABOUT AIM POINTS AND, MARK EARS AND MOUNDS AND SAPLINGS, THIS WAS NOT A PROBLEM UNTIL THAT ENTIRE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE WAS DEFORESTED. WHY, I DON'T KNOW. TO MAKE IT LOOK BETTER. SO THE PEOPLE COULD SEE WHERE THEIR BALLS LANDED. THE RESULTING HARM IN THAT IS OUR CHURCH IS NOW UNDER THE FEAR OF LOSING A GREAT PORTION OF THEIR PROPERTY. SO THIS IS WHERE FELLOWSHIP HAS TO HAPPEN OUTSIDE NOW, UNDERNEATH THE ■COVERED, PATIO AND OUTHOUSE. IT'S A PROBLEM WITH A SOLUTION WHICH IS ENFORCED USING THE ZONING CODE. AND WHEN THEY DECIDED OR THEIR 
          [01:15:07]
PREDECESSOR TO THUMB THEIR NOSE AT WHAT THEY WERE ALLOWED TO DO ON THAT PROPERTY AND HOW THEY WERE ALLOWED TO DO IT, YOU TELL THEM THEY CAN'T DO IT ANYMORE. WE TRIED TO WORK. WE THINK HIGHER NETS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE , AS MR. INGRAM STATED, THAT DISCUSSION HAS COME TO IMPASSE. 
          WE DON'T THINK IT'S UNREASONABLE TO PUT UP TALLER BARRIERS. THAT'S THE SOLUTION, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WORKED PRIOR TO US HAVING TO COME HERE AND DISCUSS THIS ISSUE. SO WITH THAT, I WOULD LET, MR. CLARK, IF YOU'D HAVE THEM, TO COME UP AND SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE CHURCH. ANY QUESTIONS? DO YOU HAVE A PROPOSED SET OF REMEDIES THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO YOU? A TALLER FENCE GOT NUMBERS. HOW TALL? 75FT. AND. AND WHAT IS IT CURRENTLY? 50, CAN I ASK? LOCATION OR DIFFERENT LOCATION? SO IN AN ORIGINAL LETTER IN FEBRUARY, I THINK WE WANTED LIKE A GRADUATED IF WE HAD IT OUR WAY , SOME SORT OF GRADUATED FENCE. UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE DOESN'T NEED TO BE, EVEN THOUGH WE'D LIKE IT. WE'RE TRYING TO BE REASONABLE. YOU SEE, TOPGOLF, WHERE IT HAS 125FT WITH THESE INDUSTRIAL STEEL BEAMS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, WITH WHO KNOWS HOW DEEP THE FOUNDATION IS. WE'RE NOT EVEN ASKING FOR THAT. WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ASK FOR IS LIKE 100, 200FT OF, OF 75 FOOT. AND THEN AS YOU GO DOWN, SAY THAT PERSPECTIVE THAT I SHOWED FROM THE CHURCH'S ROOF, YOU KNOW, MAYBE HAVING IT GO DOWN TO 65FT. AND THEN AS YOU GET TO THE WATER TOWER, 50FT, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES. DO YOU HAVE ANY ANALYSIS ON THIS THAT WOULD SUPPORT THE CONCLUSION THAT THIS HYPOTHETICAL 75 FOOT FENCE WOULD ACTUALLY PREVENT GOLF BALLS FROM GOING IN, OR THIS GRADUATED FENCE THAT YOU DESCRIBE WOULD ACTUALLY BE EFFECTIVE. SO, MR. WALLS, HERE'S WHAT I'LL SAY. WE'RE WE'RE HERE AND WE TRUST THE CITY'S ANALYSIS. I HAVE NOT HAD AN EXPERT REPORT COMMISSIONED BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO TAKE MONEY OUT OF THE TITHE PLATE TO PAY FOR SOMETHING WE DON'T KNOW. THE UTILITY OF. WE DON'T KNOW, HOW IT'S GOING TO BE RECEIVED, SO WHAT, WE'RE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON ARE, SOMEBODY FROM THE CHURCH AND I SUBMITTED IT AND REFERENCED IN THIS INITIAL, LETTER, SOMEBODY ACTUALLY CONSULTED A DRIVING RANGE FENCE. AND THEIR SUGGESTION WAS 75FT. WHETHER THAT'S AN EXPERT SAYING YOU NEED 75FT, I CAN'T STAND HERE AND SAY THAT. BUT THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDED, HEIGHT THAT WE GOT A QUOTE FOR, THERE. AGAIN, IF IT HAS TO BE LITIGATED OUT, I SUPPOSE THAT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO DO IF THIS TRULY BECOMES A DISPUTE AMONGST NEIGHBORS, BUT HERE WE'RE TESTIFYING AS TO THE REALITIES OF SAFETY. THE REALITIES OF BALLS COMING ONTO OUR PROPERTY. 
          IT'S PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR AS TO WHAT'S HAPPENING, ON OUR PROPERTY REAL QUICK. I VAGUELY REMEMBER IN THE PRIOR MEETING THAT THERE WAS A NUMBER WITH THAT LARGER FENCE. 
          DO YOU RECALL THE DOLLAR HALF MILLION THAT WAS GEORGE THE MIKE. YOU'RE GOING TO ANSWER QUESTIONS NAME AND ADDRESS. AND THEN GEORGE KIRBY, 7400 BIBLE HAMMER ROAD, I WAS THE ONE THAT PROCESS THAT, INQUIRY TO A NATIONAL FENCING COMPANY THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY DID. AND THEY HAD DONE SEVERAL IN CHICAGO, AND THAT'S WHERE THEY WERE AT. AND I HAD CALLED HIM ON THE PHONE. 
          THEY ACTUALLY DID A, GOOGLE VIEW OF THE PROPERTY, LOOKED AT IT, AND THEY CAME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT ON BOTH SIDES OF THE PROPERTY, BOTH IN THE NORTH SIDE AND THE SOUTH SIDE. THEY WANTED TO SEE A 75 FOOT FENCE RUN THE WHOLE DISTANCE, AND THAT WOULD BE A HALF $1 MILLION. THANK YOU. THEY THEY BASICALLY SAID THEY COULD NOT USE THE EXISTING POST BECAUSE THEY WOULDN'T HOLD UP. THANK YOU. YEAH I GUESS THAT WOULD BE OUR EXPERT. OKAY ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? NO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. DID YOU DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I'M GOOD. THANK YOU. OKAY OKAY. GO AHEAD 
          [01:20:09]
. CODY CLARK SEVEN EIGHT, SIX SIX NEW ALBANY, CONDIT ROAD, WESTERVILLE, OHIO. 43081 I'M PASTOR OF CROSSPOINT CHRISTIAN CHURCH. I WANTED TO START OUT BY JUST THANKING THE CITY FOR LOOKING INTO THIS MATTER AND CONCERNING THEMSELVES WITH THE PLANNING, SAFETY AND FUNCTION OF OUR CITY. AS YOU VERY WELL KNOW, WE HAVE HAD AN ONGOING ISSUE WITH OUR NEIGHBORS IN NEW ALBANY. LINKS DRIVING RANGE. I WOULD LIKE TO START BY SAYING THEY HAVE MADE CHANGES, AND IN MANY WAYS THEY HAVE BEEN GRACIOUS TO US. THEY MOVED TO IONS ONLY WHEN THEY RECEIVED A CEASE AND DESIST LETTER, AND THEY ACTUALLY CLOSED THE RANGE IN MARCH IN HOPES OF FINDING A RESOLUTION WITH US. BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THIS ISSUE IS SO GREAT THAT EVEN THESE CONCESSIONS HAVE NOT FIXED THE ISSUE. SINCE THEY SHUT DOWN IN MARCH. PEOPLE AT LEAST WEEKLY, IF NOT DAILY, WALK ONTO THE RANGE, PULL GOLF BALLS OUT OF THEIR BAG AND DRIVE GOLF BALLS DIRECTLY AT OUR BUILDING. AND MANY OF THESE COME ONTO OUR PROPERTY THIS YEAR, WE HAVE ASKED TO USE 50% OF OUR PROPERTY, OUR BACKFIELD, ONE TIME FOR ONE HOUR. THAT IS THE ONLY TIME WE HAVE REQUESTED IT FOR THIS YEAR. I SENT A MESSAGE TO MR. BOWERSOCK. HE TOLD ME THAT IT WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE, AND WHEN OUR PARENTS AND KIDS WALKED BACK FOR OUR EASTER EGG HUNT, THERE WAS A FOURSOME DRIVING GOLF BALLS AT THEM, WHICH BECAME THE CONVERSATION OF MY DAY, AND SO WHEN OUR PARENTS WERE OUT PICKING UP EGGS, THEY HAD CONTINUAL ISSUES SINCE OUR LAST MEETING, WE HAVE PICKED UP GOLF BALLS EVERY SINGLE WEEK FROM THAT TIME UNTIL NOW. WE HAVE PICKED UP 338 GOLF BALLS. I CAN PROVE THAT TO YOU IF YOU'RE INTERESTED, OVER WHAT TIME PERIOD? PLEASE FROM OUR LAST MEETING, WHICH I BELIEVE WAS FEBRUARY 20TH UNTIL TODAY. NOW, I DO WANT TO BE THE FIRST TO ADMIT THAT PROBABLY MANY OF THOSE ARE OLD GOLF BALLS THAT WERE LAYING AROUND OUR PROPERTY. SO I'M NOT PROPOSING THAT ALL OF THOSE CAME THEN. WE ALSO HAD A PERSON CALL IN TO THE NEW ALBANY LINKS PHONE SYSTEM AND RECORD EVERY DAY THEY WERE OPEN AND ACCORDING TO OUR RECORDS, AND THEY CAN GO AGAINST THIS IF THEY WOULD LIKE. THEY HAVE BEEN OPEN FOR DAYS. WE THEN SIFTED THROUGH THOSE 338 GOLF BALLS TO COME UP WITH WHAT THEY JUST CONFIRMED. ARE THERE NEW GOLF BALLS WHICH SIT IN FRONT OF ME? AND SO JUST THIS YEAR ON JUST THE FOUR DAYS THEY WERE OPEN ON JUST GOLF BALLS THAT COME OUT OF THEIR SYSTEM, WE HAVE RECEIVED 34. IF YOU'RE ASKING FOR AN EXPERIMENT, WE HAVE IT. IF YOU DO THE MATH, THAT IS OVER EIGHT PER DAY, THEY ARE OPEN ONTO OUR PROPERTY. IF YOU'RE ASKING HOW MANY DOES IT TAKE? IT'S JUST GOING TO TAKE ONE. AS WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY STATED, WE HAVE ALWAYS, SINCE THE INCEPTION, RECEIVED GOLF BALLS ONTO OUR PROPERTY. THE TREES THAT WERE MUCH HIGHER THAN THE NETS THEY HAVE NOW DID NOT STOP EVERY GOLF BALL COMING ONTO OUR PROPERTY. WE DID NOT AT THAT POINT GO AFTER THEM, BUT THAT ISSUE STILL REMAINED THERE, HERE, TELLING US THAT A 15% REDUCTION IN THEIR GOLF BALL IS GOING TO FIX THIS ISSUE. THEY'RE HERE TELLING US THAT WE RECEIVED TWO GOLF BALLS OUT OF EVERY 1 MILLION. WHEN WE HAVE THESE 34 THAT WE HAVE OF THESE CALLOWAYS THAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY HITTING ARE NOT WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR POSSESSION. THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE PICKED UP THIS YEAR. AND AGAIN, WE KEEP RECORDS. WE CALL IN, WE DO ALL OF THESE THINGS. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY AN ISSUE. WE HAVE RECEIVED THOUSANDS OF GOLF BALLS IN THE ONE YEAR. AND AS YOU HEARD, THEY STARTED IN LATE IN THE SEASON. SO WE'VE ONLY RECEIVED ONE SEASON OF GOLF BALLS, AND WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF THEM. I WOULD ALSO LIKE THE RECORD TO SHOW THAT THEY HAVE TOLD US SINCE THEIR CEASE AND DESIST THAT THEY'RE ONLY HITTING IRONS, AND THAT HAS DRAWN BACK THE AMOUNT OF GOLF BALLS WE GET. BUT IF YOU'RE COUNTING THIS YEAR'S GOLF BALLS, THAT'S ALLEGEDLY WITH IRONS ONLY, AND YOU ALSO HAVE TO THINK THOSE NUMBERS TOOK PLACE IN MARCH, WHEN THERE WAS PROBABLY VERY, VERY FEW GOLFERS ON THE RANGE. SO JUST THINK ABOUT THE NUMBERS. 
          ONCE THEY START FIRING ON US. AND SO EVEN WITH THESE CONCESSIONS, WE CANNOT SAFELY USE THE BACK 50% OF OUR PROPERTY. AND OVER JUST THE LAST YEAR, THIS ISSUE HAS COST OUR 
          [01:25:02]
CHURCH OVER $11,000 IN LOST RENT REVENUE, NOT TO MENTION OUR LEGAL FEES, AND NOT TO MENTION THE TIME THAT OUR STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS WASTE. WITH THIS, THEIR ACTIONS HAVE DEVALUED OUR PROPERTY AND A PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. WE LIKE TO BE A CHURCH USED BY OUR COMMUNITY. WE LIKE HELPING OTHERS, BUT THE ACTIONS OF THE LINKS RESTRICT US FROM DOING BOTH. I DO NOT WANT TO RECRUIT VOLUNTEERS TO CALL RANGES AND PICK UP GOLF BALLS. I WANT TO RECRUIT VOLUNTEERS TO VISIT THE SICK AND PACK MEALS FOR THE NEEDY. IF THE LINK IS IF THE LINKS IS ALLOWED TO RUN IN THE WAY THEY ARE REQUESTING OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS, THIS WILL COST US WELL INTO THE SIX FIGURES, AND IT WILL LIMIT US FROM EXPANDING OUR CHURCH ONTO THE PROPERTY THAT WE HAVE OWNED FOR 50 YEARS. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY TREES AND GRASS, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT IS GOING TO BE FOREVER. WE HAVE TO BE ALLOWED TO USE OUR PROPERTY. THE PROPOSAL THAT WE NEED TO SUBMIT, THE TIMES THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE USING OUR PROPERTY TO THEM, IS IN SAYING WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO TELL THEM WHEN WE'RE DOING WHAT WE'RE DOING, IN THE SAME WAY THAT YOU DON'T TELL YOUR NEIGHBORS WHAT YOU'RE DOING BECAUSE YOU OWN YOUR LAND. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SAY THAT WE UNDERSTAND KEMPER IS IN A DIFFICULT SITUATION. WHEN WE BEGAN TO CALL OTHER DRIVING RANGES, WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT WHEN WE CALLED DRIVING RANGES, THEY DID EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER TO PLAN IN PLACE. THEIR DRIVING RANGE IN A SITUATION VERY, VERY DIFFERENT IN WHICH THIS ONE WAS PLANNED AND PLACED MOST DRIVING RANGES WE CALL DID NOT HAVE A NET BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T NEED A NET, BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T NEXT TO A PLACE WHERE KIDS PLAY AND PEOPLE LIVE TWICE OVER THE HISTORY OF THE LINKS THEY HAVE BEEN FORCED TO SHIP BACK TO IRONS ONLY, AND THEY HAVE BEEN A CONSTANT NUISANCE TO THEIR NEIGHBORS ON BOTH SIDES. AND THIS IS WELL DOCUMENTED WHEN DRIVING RANGES ARE IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS, THEY NEED TO TAKE EXTRAORDINARY MEASURES TO KEEP THE PEOPLE AROUND THEM SAFE. WE ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT KEMPER BOUGHT THE PROPERTY AFTER IT WAS DEFORESTED, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS PICTURE, YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S WELL OVER 50 TREES. THIS LACK OF A NATURAL BARRIER MAKES IT EVEN DIFFICULT TO SAFELY RUN A DRIVING RANGE, AND WOULD TAKE DECADES TO RESTORE. IN FACT, MOST OF THE PEOPLE AT OUR CHURCH DID NOT EVEN KNOW WE WERE NEXT DOOR TO A DRIVING RANGE UNTIL THE PREVIOUS OWNER REMOVED THE ONLY BARRIER BETWEEN US. THE FOOLISHNESS OF THE PREVIOUS OWNER MAKES THIS AN EVEN MORE DIFFICULT AND COSTLY PLACE TO RUN A DRIVING RANGE. IT IS EVEN MORE FURTHER COMPLICATED BY THEIR CURRENT ZONING, AND THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN GET BACK INTO THAT ZONING. I'M NOT A LAWYER, BUT IS TO HAVE THE TREES THEY HAD BEFORE. IF YOU WALK OUT INTO OUR BACK FIELD AND YOU LOOK AT THE TREES THAT ARE THERE, THEY WERE 65 TO 75FT TALL. THEY ARE MUCH TALLER THAN THE FENCE THAT IS CURRENTLY THERE. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, THE LYNX HAS PURCHASED A PROPERTY WERE TO BE VERY DIFFICULT TO SAFELY RUN A DRIVING RANGE. THIS MEANS THAT IF THEY CHOOSE TO RUN A DRIVING RANGE IN THIS DIFFICULT LOCATION, WE ARE ASKING THAT THEY WORK WITH A PLANNING COMMISSION AND WITH EXPERTS TO BRING A SAFE, ESTHETICALLY PLEASING PLAN TO RUN AND DRIVING RANGE IN A VERY, VERY COMPLEX LOCATION. AND TO DATE, THEY SEEM TO HAVE NO INTEREST IN DOING THIS. WE ARE NOT PLEASED BY A SIGN THAT SAYS IT IS THE GOLFER'S RESPONSIBILITY. WHEN THEY AIM THEM AT US AND PUT A GOLF BALL IN THEIR HAND, WE ARE SUPPOSED TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS, THEN WAIT ACROSS A NO MOW ZONE AND THEN FIND 14 GOLFERS AND FIGURE OUT WHICH ONE HITTED US WHEN THEY'RE ALL HITTING THE EXACT SAME GOLF BALL. TO BE CLEAR, WE DO NOT WANT TO BE IN A BATTLE WITH OUR NEIGHBORS, AND WE DO NOT WANT TO TAKE THE TIME OF THIS COMMISSION. I HAVE BEEN IN OUR CHURCH FOR THE LAST TEN YEARS, AND WE HAVE NEVER PAID AN ATTORNEY'S RETAINER UNTIL KEMPER BOUGHT THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR. 
          THEY TELL US THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY. THEY TELL US THEY WANT TO FIND A RESOLUTION, BUT THEY HAVE NOT PROPOSED A REASONABLE SOLUTION, AND THEY SEEM UNWILLING OR UNABLE TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF ANYONE WALKING INTO OUR BACK FIELD AGAIN, WE DID PROPOSE A SOLUTION . WE HAVE BEEN REASONABLE. WHAT WE ARE ASKING IS THAT THEY PUT BACK THE BARRIER THAT WAS REMOVED BY THE PREVIOUS OWNERS, MADE EXTRAORDINARY CHANGES TO THIS PROPERTY. THE CURRENT OWNERS CLEARLY KNEW OF THESE CHANGES AND TOOK ON THE LIABILITY OF THIS RANGE AND THEY NEED TO MAKE EXTRAORDINARY CHANGES IF THEY WANT TO PUT A DRIVING RANGE IN THIS COMMUNITY. 
          SO TODAY WE ARE VERY CLEARLY ASKING THE COMMISSION TO DENY THIS PROPOSAL, AND WE WOULD ALSO 
          [01:30:02]
ASK THE LYNX TO PUT A BARRIER IN PLACE SO THAT AS THEIR RANGE IS CLOSED, THERE ARE NOT PEOPLE ACTIVELY WALKING ONTO IT AND DRIVING AT US. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. WELCOME THANK YOU. 
          CAN I, THE APPLICANT OR QUESTIONS FOR I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. ARE THERE ANY ARE THERE ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE TREES THAT WERE ON THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO THEM BEING CUT DOWN? THAT WOULD GIVE US A PERSPECTIVE OF HOW TALL THEY WERE IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE 50 FOOT FENCE THAT'S WERE NETTING, THAT'S IN THERE. IS THERE ANY ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY OF THAT? I'M ALSO GOING TO CHURCHES ARCHIVES. DO YOU HAVE OUTDOOR PICTURES? WE COULD PROBABLY COME UP WITH THOSE. I DO NOT HAVE THEM WITH ME, BUT WE CAN. NO, I GET THAT. I JUST I'M WONDERING BECAUSE I DON'T THINK I'VE SEEN ONE. YEAH, BUT YEAH, I THINK WHAT, WHAT THE PLACE WAS I THINK WE CAN COME UP WITH A BALLPARK OF THAT. YEAH BECAUSE WHAT I'M, I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT PRIOR TO THE TIME THAT THE REALLY TALL TREES THAT WERE HELPING TO BLOCK WERE CUT DOWN, THE PROBLEM WAS WHAT WAS LESS? IS THAT FAIR? YES. WHEN WE HAD A BARRIER BETWEEN THEM AND US, THERE WAS MUCH LESS. NEIL, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. IT'S A VERY DANGEROUS SLASH. NOT, PROBABLY POPULAR QUESTION, BUT STEVE, CAN YOU OR BEN WALK US THROUGH? WALK ME THROUGH AT LEAST. WHAT HAPPENS IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTES THIS PROPOSAL DOWN THIS EVENING? SO IT'S THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTES THIS DOWN. AND, BEN, TELL ME IF I'M WRONG, THEN WE. THEN THE APPLICANT COULD EITHER, I GUESS, RESUBMIT OR APPEAL THE DECISION, BUT IF NO CHANGES MADE TO THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THEN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE WOULD CONTINUE AND COULD BE FINED RIGHT? SO THE EXPECTATION WOULD BE THAT THEY COMPLY WITH THE PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED, WHAT, 2009, AND IF THEY DON'T AND THEY OPERATE THE DRIVING RANGE AND THEY'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE, THEN THE THERE'D BE COMPLIANCE ISSUES THEY'D BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AT THAT POINT. AND GO DOWN THAT ROAD OR ELSE APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSION. THEN WITH THE CURRENT SITUATION. SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE CURRENTLY CLOSED, IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE STILL GOLFERS GOING OUT AND HITTING BALLS. SO THEY TECHNICALLY THEY'VE THEY'VE SHUT IT DOWN. SO THEY ABIDED BY, I GUESS THE LAW. BUT IF THERE'S HOW DO YOU STOP GOLFERS WHO ARE GOING ON ILLEGALLY? WELL, I MEAN, IF PEOPLE ARE USING THEIR PROPERTY, IN A MANNER THAT THEY DON'T HAVE A LICENSE OR THE ABILITY TO DO, I THINK THAT'S A THEM ISSUE. BUT I THINK IF, THERE ARE GOLF BALLS AND PEOPLE ARE TRESPASSING INTO THE CHURCH'S PROPERTY, THEN THAT'S A CHURCH ISSUE AT THAT POINT WHERE THEY COULD CALL FOR SOME TYPE OF ENFORCEMENT IN THAT SITUATION. AND WITH APPEALED BE TO FRANKLIN COUNTY, OR WOULD IT BE TO THE CITY COUNCIL? I DON'T THINK IT GETS CANCELED, OR WE CAN DOUBLE CHECK THAT REAL QUICK. OKAY. THANK YOU. WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? WHO IS THE PEOPLE? GO TO MUNICIPAL COURT, RIGHT? NO, IT GOES TO COMMON PLEAS COURT, I THINK. AND THEN. SORRY. AND THEN . WHAT'S THAT? CAN THEY GO DIRECTLY TO THE COURT OF APPEALS? NO, IT COULD GO TO COUNCIL. OKAY CAN I CAN I PRESENT A PICTURE THIS IS ON, PLEASE? YEAH IF YOU'D BE SO KIND JUST TO EMAIL THAT TO STAFF. ABSOLUTELY. WE CAN WE CAN SEND THAT PICTURE, THOSE ARE THE CURRENT TREES THAT ARE ON OUR PROPERTY THAT WERE NOT DEFORESTED AND BUT THEY WERE ON POINT. CAN YOU CAN WE GO BACK, A COUPLE OF SLIDES SO WE CAN MAYBE GET ORIENTED? I KNOW YOU GUYS HAVEN'T SEEN THIS YET, BUT. YEAH. SO CAN YOU, LIKE, NARRATE? OKAY. I SEE, YES. SO YOU CAN SEE THE TREES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN CUT DOWN. AND I WOULD SAY WHAT WE HAD WAS VERY MUCH ON PAR WITH THOSE. AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IT IS TALLER THAN THEIR 50 FOOT NET. I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT DOESN'T LOOK TO ME LIKE THE RIGHT VANTAGE POINT, IS IT. WELL THIS IS THE THIS IS A LONG THIS IS THIS IS ALONG THE STREET AND THIS IS THE EASTERN COMMON. NO, NO, NO, THAT WOULD BE THE BACK POINT OF OUR PROPERTY. SO WHAT'S IN THE LEFT? TOP LEFT OF THAT PICTURE. RIGHT THERE IS WHAT YOU'RE SEEING ON YOUR SCREEN. ALL RIGHT. SO IT'S REALLY KIND OF IT'S LOOKING WEST. YEAH SO AGAIN WHAT YOU CAN SEE VERY CLEARLY. SORRY ABOUT THAT. WHAT YOU CAN SEE VERY CLEARLY. IS IT IS TALLER THAN THEIR 50 FOOT NET. I MEAN WE WEREN'T OUT MEASURING THEM. YEAH. WE DID NOT 
          [01:35:01]
KNOW THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE IN THIS SITUATION BECAUSE OF OUR NEIGHBORS. BUT YEAH, I WILL POINT OUT FOR THE RECORD, FOR THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, THAT THE TREES APPEAR A DIFFERENT THEY APPEAR TOO SHORT BECAUSE OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC QUALITIES AND THE FACT THAT THAT FENCE STARTS HALF THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE CAMERA AND THE TREE. YEAH, THERE'S A LOT OF FORESHORTENING GOING ON WITH THE SHORT LENS IN THAT PHOTO RIGHT HERE. GOT IT. YEAH. 
          SO THAT IT LOOKS LIKE THE FENCE. AND YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT THE FENCE, THE CLOSEST FENCE POST TO YOU AND THE TREES FURTHER BACK LOOK ALMOST THE SAME SIZE. THAT'S A PHOTOGRAPHIC ISSUE. 
          CORRECT. THAT ISSUE SHOT FROM A DIFFERENT VANTAGE POINT, CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE TREES ARE MUCH TALLER. YEAH, THAN THE 50 FOOT FENCE. AND AGAIN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE BLOCKING TREES OR THE BLOCKING TREES, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE AMOUNT OF TREES REMOVED, IT'S NOT ONE LAYER. SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. OH 165 75FT TALL TREE. I MEAN, WHEN YOU SAY HOW MANY TREES WERE REMOVED, I'M GOING TO GUESSTIMATE THAT THAT'S AN ACRE AND A HALF OF TREES. I MEAN, EVERYTHING THAT YOU SEE ALONG OUR PROPERTY LINE IN THE BACK, WHEN THEY WHEN THEY TREED THAT OUT, THERE WAS LOG TRUCKS THERE AND THEY WERE HAULING LOGS OFF TO BE MILLED. I MEAN, THIS WAS NOT LIKE A GUY WITH A CHAINSAW. ALL THEY HAD SKIDDERS THERE AND FELL A BUNCHERS AND IT WAS AN ENORMOUS OPERATION TO REMOVE WHAT THEY REMOVED. AND IT WOULD TAKE AN ENORMOUS OPERATION TO PUT BACK ANY SEMBLANCE OF WHAT THEY HAD. OKAY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR NO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. AND BEFORE MOVING ALONG. SO THERE'S A COUPLE OF OPTIONS. IF YOU VOTE IT DOWN THERE'S ALWAYS THE OPTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. IF THEY MEET THOSE CRITERIA THEY CAN COME BACK AND SEEK RECONSIDERATION BY THIS COMMISSION. AND IF NOT UNDER 1159 12, THE APPEAL GOES TO COUNCIL FIRST. SO GOT IT. PARDON ME. THERE ARE BUT I HAD A QUESTION FOR THEIR, SO THE T THE OR THE T'S ARE HAS SHIFTED. IT WAS ORIGINALLY STRAIGHT AND NOW IT'S SHIFTED. IF LET'S SEE IF I CAN. WE'VE SEEN A DIAGRAM. THAT DIAGRAM IS THE ORIGINAL AND IT SHOWS THAT THE T'S ARE PERPENDICULAR TO YOUR NORTH SOUTH LOT LINES. SO IF I COULD DIRECT THE MEMBERS ATTENTION TO THIS CIRCLE RIGHT HERE, WHERE WHICH IS ALIGNED WITH THE T AREA THAT WAS IN THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED, THAT TEEING AREA WAS MUCH CLOSER TO THE CHURCH. AND THE TEEING AREA BY THE PRIOR OWNER WAS PUSHED BACK AS FAR AWAY AS POSSIBLE TO ITS PRESENT WHERE IT IS TODAY. SO IF YOU COMPARE THAT TO THE AERIAL, IF I COULD HAVE, OUR SLIDE PRESENTED IS THAT PUSHED BACK WEST? YEAH. CORRECT SO BY COMPARISON OFTEN YOU CAN SEE THIS CONCRETE AREA WHICH IS THE GOLF CART TURNAROUND. SO AS ORIGINALLY LAID OUT IN THE APPROVED FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE TEEING AREA WOULD BE RIGHT HERE WHERE THIS FIRST TARGET. BUT IT WAS PERPENDICULAR. CORRECT OKAY. AND SO IT WAS MOVED BACK AND ANGLED. 
          CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT. WOULD IT BE A HARDSHIP TO TAKE THE ANGLE OUT OF IT? WE'VE WE'VE ANALYZED THAT WE COULD DO THAT. IT'S JUST AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE WE PROPOSE TO THE, THE EXPERT. AND HE SAID WE DIDN'T. THERE'S REALLY NO NEED TO DO THAT. IT'S REALLY DRIVEN OFF OF THE, THE. SEE THE WHITE LINES AND THE MATS. SO OPERATIONS WE COULD RESTRICT THE USE OF, OF, YOU KNOW, LONG CLUBS LIKE A DRIVER, WHICH IS REALLY, I THINK WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE TO THE MAD AREA. AND THEN YOU CAN PUT A LITTLE BOARDS, YOU CAN SEE THEM LAYING DOWN THERE BECAUSE THE DRIVING RANGE IS CLOSED. BUT THAT IS DIRECTING THE GOLFERS TO HIT THE BALL DOWN THE CENTER OF THE RANGE. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN THOSE ENHANCEMENTS THAT THAT ARE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT, QUICK QUESTION. QUICK QUESTION, I CAN'T REALLY TELL. ARE THE TEEING, GROUNDS, ARE THEY MATS OR ARE THEY GRASS. THEY'RE THERE ARE MATS AND THEN THERE IS A GRASS AREA IN FRONT OF THAT. OKAY AND THAT, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION AND MEMBER WALLACE 
          [01:40:07]
THAT ARE THE OPERATIONAL THINGS THAT THE CLUB CAN MANAGE AFTER ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT IMPROVEMENTS ARE PUT IN PLACE AND YOU HAVE GOLFERS OUT THERE, WE CAN TAKE ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT STEPS TO MITIGATE THE ISSUE. AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS ALLUDING TO EARLIER. YOU COULD ALSO PUT, NOT SURE WHAT THE WORD IS, BUT I'VE SEEN THEM IN RANGES . THEY'RE, THEY'RE WOODEN STRUCTURES OR SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, DIVIDERS. YEAH. DIVIDERS. THANK YOU, THAT WOULD ALSO HELP TO ASSIST IN DIRECTING THE GOLFER TO GO TOWARD THE CENTER OF THE FAIRWAY, INSTEAD OF WHAT WE'RE HEARING ANECDOTALLY FROM MEMBERS OF THE CHURCH IS THAT SOME OF YOUR GOLFERS, WHAT WE'RE HEARING ANECDOTALLY IS THEY LIKE TO SET UP AND SEE IF ANYBODY CAN HIT IT IN THE CHURCHYARD. SO POINTING TOWARD THE 150 YARD. YEAH RIGHT. RIGHT. OKAY. IS THAT IN IS THAT BAKED INTO YOUR DEVELOPMENT PLAN THEN, MEMBER WALLACE THAT IS ONE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WE AGREED TO, OR ARE PROPOSING, I SHOULD SAY. BUT AS FAR AS DEPICTING THAT MINUTE DETAIL ON THE SITE PLAN I, THERE ARE LINES DRAWN THERE, AND WE CAN AGREE TO CONSTRUE THAT THOSE WILL BE THE, THE WOOD BOARDS. THAT'S NUMBER FOUR OF THE CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL. COULD YOU RUN IT BACKWARDS. NUMBER FOUR OF THE CONDITIONS. SORRY. NUMBER THREE HERE THE BLOCKS. IT'S THAT THAT IS BASED ON THEIR PLAN. COULD YOU RUN THIS BACKWARDS OKAY. CAN YOU RUN IT SO THAT YOU'RE GOLFING BASICALLY FROM 62 TOWARDS THE GOLF COURSE. SO WE'VE CONSIDERED THAT. AND THE ISSUE REALLY BECOMES, HOW TO SAFELY GET THE GOLFERS ACROSS THE RANGE EDGE TO THE TEE TO THAT TEEING AREA. WHEN THE GOLFERS, WHEN THE FOLKS AREN'T USING IT, UTILIZING THE RANGE WOULD BE DRIVING GOLF BALLS VIRTUALLY AT THEM. AND SO WE CONSIDERED IT, BUT IT WOULD BE VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO DO SAFELY. BUT THEY DON'T HIT GOLF BALLS OFF THE SIDE. IT'S I, I, I . I SUPPOSE YOU COULD HAVE A NETTED TUNNEL. I SUSPECT ACTUALLY THAT A 12 FOOT BY 12 FOOT NETTED TUNNEL MIGHT BE CHEAPER THAN A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT ARE BEING TOSSED AT YOU. 
          BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT TO BE TRUE. SO, A COUPLE OF THINGS, THAT I WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO, FIRST OF ALL, YOU ALL WERE DIRECTED TO THE EXPERT REPORT BY , COUNSEL BY THE CHURCH'S COUNSEL, AND I WOULD, DRAW TO THE MEMBER'S ATTENTION, DIAGRAM FOUR AND THE POSSIBLE TREE DIRECTORIES. JUST TO SHOW YOU IN WHAT OUR INTENTIONS WERE, WE DIDN'T ASK FOR THE EXPERT TO ASSUME EVERYTHING, YOU KNOW, SLANTED IN OUR FAVOR OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. NO, WE ASKED THE EXPERT TO CONSERVATIVELY ANALYZE US. WORST CASE SCENARIO. AND WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS DIAGRAM FOUR. THESE ILLUSTRATIONS ARE BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT STANDARD RANGE BALLS BE USED, NOT THE LIMITED FLIGHT. IT ALSO ASSUMES THAT EACH GOLF SWING WOULD BE A 100MPH SWING SPEED. 
          AS FAR AS THE MATH AND PHYSICS ASSUMPTIONS BAKED IN. NOW, THE EXPERT SHOWS IN IN PARAGRAPH 12 OF HIS REPORT THAT ONLY ABOUT 20% OF MALE GOLFERS HAVE SWING SPEEDS GREATER THAN 100MPH. 
          FEMALE GOLFERS HAVE SLOWER SWING SPEEDS THAN MALE GOLFERS, AND THE POINT OF THAT IS, ONCE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 100 MILE AN HOUR SWINGS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT EXPERTS AND EXPERTS DON'T HIT THOSE KINDS OF SHOTS. THEY'RE GOING DOWN THE RANGE. AND HE HE TALKS ABOUT THIS, BUT THEIR THEIR DISPERSION IS QUITE NARROW. WHAT WE'RE REALLY CONCERNED WITH ARE AMATEUR GOLFERS. AND THAT'S WHY, YOU SEE THE DISPERSIONS WE'RE ONLY HAVE DATA THAT SHOWS THAT AMATEUR GOLFERS HAVE A WEAKER SWING THAN PROFESSIONAL GOLFERS, THAT IS PARAGRAPH 12 OF THE EXPERT REPORT. CHAIRPERSON KIRBY. AND HANG ON AND GO AHEAD. AND WITH RESPECT TO, YOU KNOW, 
          [01:45:02]
SPECULATION ON WHERE THE GOLFERS WILL AIM AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. THAT IS WHY WE ARE PROPOSING TO PUT THE TREES WHERE WE ARE IS TO TAKE AND ADJUST THE SIGHTLINES SO THAT YOU'RE NOT REALLY GOING. THAT'S NOT REALLY GOING TO BE YOUR FOCUS, AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE WOODEN DIVIDERS AGAIN WHEN DICTATING, THE, THE OVERALL DIRECTION AND AIMING POINT TO BE THE CENTER OF THE RANGE, THE OTHER THING I WOULD MENTION IS, WE CERTAINLY WANT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS. WE CERTAINLY WANT TO WORK WITH THE CHURCH, BUT THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF FRUSTRATION BECAUSE IT'S A MOVING TARGET. SO I HAVE AND IN IN YOUR PACKETS, FROM THE LAST MEETING IS THE QUOTE THAT WAS REFERENCED. AND AT THE LAST MEETING WE WERE TOLD THAT THE CHURCH WANTED TO SEE A 65 FOOT NET, NOT A 75 FOOT NET. AND THE COST, THEY WERE CORRECT. THE COST FOR A 65 FOOT NET IS $507,100, ACCORDING TO THEIR QUOTE. WELL, THE RANGE BALLS ARE $10 A BUCKET. THAT'S A LOT OF BUCKETS OF BALLS. AND THAT'S JUST NOT ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE. AND OUR FRUSTRATION AND ISSUE IS WE'VE UTILIZED A PREEMINENT INTERNATIONAL EXPERT WHO SPECIALIZES IN DETERMINING WHAT RANGE, WHAT SAFETY NET SIZES SHOULD BE USED. AND HE'S TELLING US IT'S OKAY, BUT THE CHURCH IS PROVIDING US WITH QUOTES THAT ARE NOT BASED ON ANY ACTUAL ANALYSIS. AND THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, THE ONLY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE BOARD IS, YES, WE WE'RE PROPOSING A SAFE SOLUTION. 
          THAT'S THE ONLY EVIDENCE. IF IT TURNS OUT THAT WE'RE WRONG, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIX IT. 
          AND WITH RESPECT TO TRESPASSERS, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT PLEASED TO HEAR, ABOUT ANY TRESPASSERS. AND CERTAINLY IF WE CAN CATCH THEM AND I BELIEVE THE CLUB MAY BE IMPLEMENTING, PERHAPS TOOLS TO, TO MONITOR AND SEE WHAT'S GOING ON, BUT BUT ONE THING AND THAT I MENTIONED TO EARLIER IS THAT WE DON'T KNOW THE CIRCUMSTANCES WITH THE HOW OR WHEN THE BALLS THAT HAVE BEEN FOUND OCCURRED. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE, WELL, WE KNOW WE KNOW AT LEAST ONE THING, DON'T WE, THAT IF IT'S A LIMITED FLIGHT BALL, THEN IT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN STRUCK FROM THE DRIVING RANGE PRIOR TO LAST AUGUST WHEN THEY WERE IMPLEMENTED. CORRECT. WE KNOW THAT IF IT WAS A LIMITED FLIGHT BALL, IT WAS STRUCK AFTER AUGUST. WHAT WE DON'T KNOW IS WHETHER SOMEBODY FOUND SOME BALL, SOME LIMITED FLIGHT BALLS, WALKED OUT ON THE RANGE ON A LATE SATURDAY AFTERNOON AND WAS AIMED AT THE CHURCH. WE'RE HALFWAY DOWN THE RANGE. WE DON'T KNOW IF THEY WERE HITTING FROM THE APPROPRIATE AREA OR NOT. AND LET ME JUST CUT YOU OFF BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT MAKES ANY DIFFERENCE. THE BALL STILL ENDED UP IN THE CHURCH'S PARKING LOT, WHETHER IT WAS DONE BY A GOLFER WHO JUST ISN'T VERY GOOD, FROM THE TEEING RANGE, OR IF IT'S BY A GOLFER WHO WAS TRYING TO COMMIT VANDALISM, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, I, I AM VERY CURIOUS, AND I GUESS I'M FIXATED ON THE BALLS. AND THERE'S ANOTHER BUCKET THAT SHOWED UP TONIGHT. HOW MANY OF THOSE ARE THE LIMITED FLIGHT BALLS? CAN YOU GUYS TELL THE. DO YOU MIND GIVING THEM THE BALL? GIVE THEM THE BUCKET. ALL OF THESE ARE LIMITED BY GOLF BALLS. TO THE MIC, TO THE MIC, TO THE MIC. YEAH. ALL OF THESE ARE LIMITED FLIGHT GOLF BALLS. THEY CAN INSPECT THEM AND THESE ARE JUST WHAT WE HAVE PICKED UP THIS YEAR. IN THE FOUR DAYS. HOW MANY? THIS IS 34, 34. YEAH. AND WE HAVE MANY MORE OF THEM IF WE NEED TO PRODUCE THEM. YEAH. 34. 
          DO YOU KNOW WHO COLLECTED THEM. THE, THE BALLS THAT ARE IN THE BUCKET. YES, WE HAVE VOLUNTEERS THAT COLLECT THEM. AND WERE THEY IN OBVIOUSLY I'M HEARING FROM YOU AND YOU'RE REPORTING TO ME WHAT SOMEBODY TOLD YOU, WHICH IS CALLED HEARSAY. BUT BUT THE POINT IS, IT'S YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THESE GOLF BALLS WERE COLLECTED FROM THE CHURCH'S PROPERTY. IS THAT RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY. MEMBERS OF OUR CHURCH WHO KNOW EXACTLY WHERE OUR PROPERTY LINE IS. AND AGAIN, IT'S NOT HARD TO TELL. THEY HAVE A NO MOW ZONE NEXT TO US. THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE WADING IN SIX FEET GRASS TO GET IT FROM THEIR PROPERTY. THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THEY'RE GETTING IT FROM, AND WE HAVE VOLUNTEERS PICK THEM UP EVERY WEEK. AND THIS IS WHAT WE'VE COLLECTED AND YOU VERY CANDIDLY SAID YOU'RE NOT CERTAIN THEY COULD HAVE COME FROM, SOME TIME OUT OF A PLANE. 
          [01:50:01]
BUT I'M JUST GUESSING THAT THEY CAME FROM THE DRIVING. YOU READ MY MIND. I WAS GOING TO SAY. I THINK THEY DROPPED OUT OF THE SKY. YEAH. SO MAYBE THE GOLF BALLS THEY'RE HITTING CAME ONTO OUR PROPERTY. IT'S ONLY A 2 IN 1,000,000 CHANCE. BUT MAYBE. MAYBE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. OKAY THANK YOU, THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME. I'D LIKE TO JUST GO AHEAD. 
          ONE ONE QUICK POINT. SO I JUST GRABBED TWO BALLS OFF THE TOP AND YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE COVERED IN MUD. AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS WITH DRIVING RANGES AND, WITH, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE HITTING HIGH BALLS AND THEY COME DOWN AND THEY LAND, IF THE SOD IF THE AREA IS WET AND YOU HAVE WET CONDITIONS, BALLS CAN DO WHAT WE CALL PLUGGING. IN OTHER WORDS, I'VE LOST A BALL ON A FAIRWAY BEFORE. IT'S COME DOWN AND IT ACTUALLY GOES, SINKS INTO THE MUD AND DISAPPEARS, AND THEN WITH THE NATURAL HEAVING, THE FREEZING AND THAWING OF THE TURF, THE BALLS KIND OF SQUEEZE UP. AND SO MR. BOWERSOCK CAN TELL YOU MAGICALLY AROUND THIS TIME OF THE YEAR, YOU START SEEING A LOT MORE BALLS THAT WEREN'T THERE A MONTH OR TWO AGO AT THE WINTER. AND SO THAT WHEN I TALK ABOUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF WHEN OR HOW THESE WERE HIT, THAT'S WHAT I'M REFERRING TO. 
          AND, AND PART OF THE ISSUE, TOO, IS WE'RE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT THE EXISTING NET. WE'RE IMPLEMENTING ALL THESE OTHER CHANGES IN ADDITION TO THE NET THAT'S OUT THERE. OKAY. THOSE PARTICULAR BALLS WERE NOT IN EXISTENCE PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR. CORRECT AUGUST. YEAH. 
          CORRECT. CORRECT. SO THOSE COULD NOT HAVE COME FROM THE EARTH PRIOR TO THOSE PRIOR TO THAT. 
          THOSE MUST HAVE THOSE MUST HAVE BEEN HIT FROM YOUR CLIENT'S DRIVING RANGE PRIOR TO AUGUST OF LAST YEAR. AFTER AUGUST, AFTER AFTER. THANK YOU SO MUCH. AFTER COUNCIL MEMBER WILTROUT. 
          CORRECT. THEY WOULD HAVE THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN STRUCK BY SOME SOME POINT AFTER AUGUST. BUT WHAT WE DON'T KNOW IS WHERE THEY WERE STRUCK FROM. WHERE ELSE COULD THEY HAVE BEEN STRUCK FROM LIKE WHAT ARE YOU INSINUATING? LIKE SOMEBODY'S GOING PICKED UP A RANGE BALL, WALKED 50 YARDS AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AND TRIED TO CHIP IT OVER THE NET. WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT? GOOD QUESTION. THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO. WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT? 36 TIMES? I MEAN, BUT. THE ONE THING I DO AGREE WITH YOU, THE MOVING TARGET ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE NET THAT THEY'RE PRESENTING ON THE OTHER SIDE, I MEAN, THERE HAS TO BE AT SOME POINT IF THERE'S SOME TYPE OF AGREEMENT, THERE HAS TO BE AN A SOLID AGREEMENT ON A FIX. AND IF THEY WERE 65, NOW THEY'RE 75. AND IT'S 65 IS A HALF MILLION, 75 IS PROBABLY 750,000 OR SOMETHING, I'M IN AGREEMENT. THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY TYPE OF GREAT SOLUTION TONIGHT. OKAY, AT THIS POINT, I'D LIKE TO CALL A TEN MINUTE RECESS. WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR TWO HOURS, AND SOME OF US HAD SUPPER BEFOREHAND AND WOULD LIKE TO GET A DRINK AS WELL.. IS ALL SET, COMMISSIONER. READY ALL RIGHT, LET'S GET BACK TO IT. WE WERE HEARING FROM, OTHER SPEAKERS, SO LET US CONTINUE WITH THE SPEAKER LIST, MR. CHAIR, THOSE THOSE THE ONLY SPEAKER CARDS I HAVE FOR THIS APPLICATION. IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION, PLEASE COME TO THE. 
          GEORGE, DO YOU WANT TO TALK? PLEASE COME TO THE MICROPHONE AND GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. 
          YES. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU AGAIN. BRANDON. PAULIE, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY ONE THING. THE LAST POINT, MR. SHELL, THAT YOU MADE ABOUT THE MOVING TARGET, AS I PUT IN MY, AS I SAID IN MY LITTLE SPIEL, WE DIDN'T GO OUT AND GET EXPERTS TO DO THIS WORK. YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD COME IF THERE WAS CIVIL LITIGATION, WHICH HOPEFULLY WE NEVER GET TO, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, HEIGHT HAS BEEN A NONSTARTER AS IT RELATES TO NEIGHBORLY NEGOTIATIONS, IF THERE WAS AN APPETITE FOR THAT, WHAT I WOULD HOPE IS THAT THE PARTIES COULD COME TOGETHER AND LOOK AT THE ACTUAL REALITIES AND THEN FIGURE OUT WHAT THE APPROPRIATE HEIGHT WOULD BE. WHAT I DO KNOW WITH MY , YOU KNOW, ALL YOU HAVE TO HAVE IS TWO EYES. YOU SEE THE GOLF BALLS HERE, YOU SEE 50FT DOES NOT CUT IT. TWO IS OUT OF 1 MILLION IS JUST AN OUTRAGEOUS OPINION. AND THERE WAS THIS QUOTE, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU HAVE, ANECDOTE'S VERSUS DATA, YOU LOOK AT ANECDOTE'S BECAUSE USUALLY THAT TELLS MORE OF THE STORY, BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY LIVING IT. SO THOSE ANECDOTES OF THE 34 BALLS THAT ARE COMING ONTO OUR PROPERTY, I THINK OUTWEIGHS WHAT, YOU KNOW, SOME GUY WHO'S CURRENTLY IN CANADA AND CAN'T SHOW UP WHAT HIS OPINION IS ON THIS MATTER. SO 
          [01:55:02]
THE MOVING TARGET, LOOK, WE'RE WE'RE NOT VIEWING THIS AS LITIGATION. WE'RE VIEWING THIS AS THE ONLY MOVING TARGET HAS BEEN THE DRIVING RANGE. NEW ALBANY LINKS AS IT RELATES TO WHAT THEIR PLAN WAS. AND HOW THEY'VE BEEN CONTINUALLY WITH THE LOCATION OF THE DRIVING RANGE TEE BOX WITH THE REMOVAL OF TREES, THAT'S WHERE THE MOVING TARGET LIES. SO THANK YOU. OKAY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? COMMISSION MEMBERS, QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. THE ONLY THING I WANT TO CONFIRM IS THAT THE SEVEN, ENHANCEMENTS THAT ARE INCLUDED AT THE END OF THE STAFF REPORT, THEY DO APPEAR TO BE NOTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AT PAGES THREE AND FOUR. AND I WANT TO CONFIRM WITH THE APPLICANT THAT AS PART OF THEIR APPLICATION, THEY HAVE COMMITTED TO IMPLEMENT THOSE ENHANCEMENTS, WHICH ARE ONE THROUGH SEVEN ON THE LAST PAGE, WHICH START WITH LIMITING GOLF BALL USE ON THE DRIVING RANGE, LIMITED FLIGHT BALLS, AND THEN PROCEEDING DOWN TO, ESTABLISH THE COMMUNICATION PROTOCOL. CHURCH BECAUSE I DID NOTE THAT THE STAFF REPORT HAS THIS CONDITION ONE USES LIMITED FLIGHT GOLF BALLS, WHICH IS ONE OF THE SEVEN ENHANCEMENTS, BUT THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT'S LISTED AS A CONDITION. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT, THAT THAT THE AND YOU HAVEN'T SEEN OUR STAFF REPORT. HAVE YOU SEEN OUR STAFF REPORT? I HAVE IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAST PAGE OF THE STAFF REPORT, IT'S AFTER THE CONDITIONS. IT'S ON PAGE. IT'S ON THE BACK OF MY PAGE SEVEN OF SEVEN. IT'S MAYBE THE NEXT PAGE. 
          IT'S ON. IT'S ON THE BACK OF PAGE. YEAH. IT'S JUST IT'S JUST IT'S APPENDED TO THE BACK. I DON'T HAVE THAT PAGE, BUT THAT THAT MAY BE FOR ME. SO THAT IS ACTUALLY PART OF THE SORRY. I THINK THAT JUST INADVERTENTLY GOT ATTACHED TO THE BACK OF THE STAFF REPORT. BUT THIS LAST PAGE HERE, THIS IS A SUBMITTAL WE GOT FROM THE APPLICANT. THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS. THE STAFF REPORT ITSELF OKAY OKAY. SO THE ARE YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THOSE SEVEN ENHANCEMENTS. I PROPOSE THOSE TO STAFF. YES. WOULD YOU DO YOU AS THE APPLICANT AGREE THAT YOU WOULD INCLUDE, ADHERING TO THOSE SEVEN ADDITIONAL ENHANCEMENTS AS, AS A FURTHER CONDITION AFTER THE APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION? YES. OKAY MR. WALLACE, BUT THE FOUR ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS, ADDITIONAL. THERE ARE FOUR CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT. YEAH FOUR CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT. ARE I BELIEVE WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING IS WHAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSED. I JUST WANT TO BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO WHAT STAFF IS PROPOSING, WHICH ARE THESE FOUR CONDITIONS? YES, I KNOW THAT. OKAY AND WE HAVE A FIFTH CONDITION THAT IS THAT THE LOCATION OF THE TREES IS GOING TO BE DETERMINED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY FORESTER. AND SO I WANT TO SIXTH THE SIXTH, CONDITION ON THE APPLICANT'S COMMITMENT TO, TO ENHANCE THIS ONE THROUGH SEVEN, AS LISTED ON THAT LAST PAGE OF THE STAFF REPORT, WHICH WHICH I DO BELIEVE WERE REFERENCED IN THE STAFF REPORT AS WHAT I UNDERSTOOD TO BE PART OF THE APPLICATION. BUT SINCE THE STAFF REPORT WAS MAKING ONE OF THOSE ENHANCEMENTS TO BE A CONDITION, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL SIX ARE GOING TO BE A CONDITION. SO ALL RIGHT, DOES THAT MAKE DOES THAT MAKE ANY SENSE TO EVERYONE? DOES TO ME BECAUSE IT MATCHES MY NOTES. 
          PERFECT. ALL RIGHT OKAY. SO THAT WAS MY QUESTION. SOMEWHERE HERE I DON'T KNOW. 
          I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD FOR FINAL DEVELOPMENT MODIFICATION TO OH EIGHT OF 2024. DO I HEAR A SECOND ON THE DOCUMENTS MOTION? SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION ON THE DOCUMENTS MOTION? I'LL START WITH. THERE WAS A NUMBER OF ITEMS PASSED OUT TO US AND THOSE ARE TO BE INCLUDED. THERE WAS SOME COMMENTARY ON THEM DURING THE HEARING. OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. ANY OTHER ROLE FOR THE DOCUMENTS, MR. KIRBY? YES, MISS BRIGGS? YES. MR. SHELL? YES. MR. LARSON YES. MR. WALLACE YES. MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE FIVE VOTES TO ADMIT THE DOCUMENTS. I MEAN, IF I CAN JUST INTERJECT. SO THE NEXT STEP HERE WOULD BE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION. SO ARE WE DOES THE APPLICANT WANT US TO MOVE TONIGHT? IS THERE FURTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR THERE TO BE SOME DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE 
          [02:00:02]
NEIGHBORING CHURCH AND THE APPLICANT REGARDING THE HEIGHT OF THE TREES, OR THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE, OR THE SIZE OF THE NET OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? AND AND AS YOU GUYS GO AHEAD AND DISCUSS IT FOR A SECOND, AND I HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT TO MAKE. AND I ONLY SPEAK FOR MYSELF. I DON'T SPEAK FOR THE COMMISSION. IT WAS A QUESTION I WAS GOING TO ASK. IT WAS ON MY LIST. WHAT WAS AFTER? WHAT I JUST ASKED? GOOD SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR. AS A, YOU KNOW, A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER, I THINK I'VE SAID AD NAUSEAM, WE DO CARE ABOUT THE SAFETY AND THE OVERALL SOLUTION HERE, WE WOULD CERTAINLY BE AMENABLE TO FURTHER NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE CHURCH. I'M JUST NOT SURE WE BOIL THIS DOWN. DO YOU WANT A VOTE TONIGHT ON WHAT YOU PRESENTED TO US? DO YOU WANT US TO TABLE IT TO A DIFFERENT TIME SO THAT YOU MIGHT CHANGE IT? YOUR CALL. WE WOULD NOT OPPOSE A TABLING TO HOW LONG TO GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH THE CHURCH. ONE, TWO MONTHS WOULD BE TYPICAL. YEAH. HOW MUCH. WELL, CAN JUST CLARIFICATION AS IT STANDS, THE RANGE WOULD REMAIN CLOSED DURING THE PENDENCY OF OUR BELONGINGS. THEY ARE CURRENTLY NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THEIR ZONING. THEY CANNOT OPERATE THE RANGE WHILE THEY'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THEIR ZONING. AND JUST A CLARIFICATION IS THAT, DUE TO CITY ENFORCEMENT OR IS THAT VOLUNTARY, BY THE WAY, WOULD IT BE ENFORCED BY THE CITY? IT'S COMPLAINT DRIVEN. I MEAN, THE CITY WON'T DRIVE BY AND CHECK, BUT, TYPICALLY I'LL LET STAFF CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT TYPICALLY ZONING, COMPLAINTS ARE ZONING ISSUES ARE COMPLAINT DRIVEN. SOMEONE SEES SOMETHING OUT OF COMPLIANCE AND THEY TELL THE CITY, AND THE CITY TELLS THE APPLICANT TO THE HOMEOWNER, THE PROPERTY OWNER TO CEASE AND DESIST, COME IN COMPLIANCE, WHATEVER THE THING MAY BE. AND IF NOT, THEY ARE FINED, I'LL LET STAFF SAY IF THAT'S A REASONABLE YES, I THINK THAT'S RIGHT. I DON'T THINK I THINK RIGHT NOW THEY'RE CLOSED VOLUNTARILY. IF THEY WOULD OPEN AND BE IN VIOLATION OF THEIR REQUIREMENTS CODE REQUIREMENTS, AND IT BECOMES A ZONING ISSUE WHERE THEY END UP IN, FINES COURT AND ALL THAT FUN STUFF IF THEY CHOOSE NOT TO COMPLY. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NECESSARILY HAVE THE ABILITY TO SET SHUT THEM DOWN, BUT THEY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO FINES IF THE PROCESS WENT THROUGH AND THROUGH THE TYPICAL ZONING ENFORCEMENT ON A PER DAY BASIS. SO I GUESS WHAT WE'RE OBJECTING PARTY. WE'RE ALWAYS HAPPY TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE APPLICANT. WE WOULD HOPE BASED ON THE TESTIMONY AND SPEAKERS AND WHAT THEY PROVIDED, THAT MAYBE THE APPLICANT CAN COMMIT TO HAVING THE DRIVE RANGE CLOSED. AND SO THERE IS A VOTE, WE CAN'T ASK THAT, I DON'T THINK I DON'T THINK THIS BOARD CAN ASK THAT. WE ASK THAT. WELL, JUST KEEP AN EYE ON THEM. AND IT'S A CASE OF, YEAH, I CALL IT WHEN YOU SEE IT, YOU KNOW, TAKE A PICTURE AND YOU KNOW, I MEAN, TO EASE THEIR SUSPICIONS. WE'RE TRYING TO WORK IN GOOD FAITH HERE. WE VOLUNTARILY CLOSED IN MARCH, APRIL AND MAY. I DON'T EVEN SEE WHY THIS IS A CONCERN. YEAH LET ME I'M NOT GOING TO RESPOND DIRECTLY TO THE COMMENT YOU JUST MADE, BUT I JUST WANTED HERE'S WHERE I'M COMING FROM. 
          OKAY. SO I SEE AN APPLICATION WHICH YOU BROUGHT BACK A SECOND TIME, AND THERE WERE ENHANCEMENTS TO THAT APPLICATION. THERE WERE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE TO, TO, TO MAKE IT LESS LIKELY THAT THAT GOLF BALLS ARE GOING TO GO ON TO YOUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. AND I APPRECIATE THAT. WE ALSO HEARD TESTIMONY FROM THE CHURCH EARLIER THAT AT SOME POINT IN THE PAST, WHEN BIG TALL TREES WERE THERE, THEY DIDN'T REALLY HAVE AS BIG OF A PROBLEM. IT'S ONLY BECAUSE THERE'S NO TREES THERE NOW. AND SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, AND WHAT THE CHURCH IS TRYING TO DO IS FIGURE OUT, OKAY, WHAT WHAT HAS TO BE ERECTED OR PLANTED IN THAT AREA BETWEEN THE DRIVING RANGE AND THE CHURCH'S PROPERTY. THAT IS GOING TO MOST EFFECTIVELY PUT THE DRIVING RANGE SITUATION BACK WHERE IT WAS WHEN THE BIG TREES 
          [02:05:02]
WERE THERE, WHEN IT REALLY WASN'T A PROBLEM, AND THE PROBLEM I HAVE IS WE HAVE THIS EXPERT REPORT, WHICH IS FINE, BUT WE'RE I DON'T KNOW I DON'T KNOW WHETHER A 75 FOOT FENCE OR A 65 FOOT FENCE MIGHT HELP IN TERMS OF YOUR EXPERTS PREDICTIONS OF WHEN THESE BALLS ARE GOING TO COME, YOU KNOW, OVER INTO THE CHURCH'S AREA. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M, I DON'T I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW, I FEEL LIKE I'M, I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH FACTS HERE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT, WHAT THE RIGHT ANSWER IS. SO THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE CHURCH IF THEY HAD ANY, YOU KNOW, IF THEY HAD ANY EVIDENCE AS TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE HEIGHTS THAT WOULD WORK. AND TOWARDS THE CHURCH CHURCH'S POSITION WAS, WE DON'T HAVE TO PRESENT THAT HERE AND THAT'S FINE. BUT WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION AS A BOARD, BASED ON THE EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF US AND SOME OF THE EVIDENCE THAT WE LISTENED TO IS THE COMMENTARY FROM THE NEIGHBORS, BOTH GOOD AND BAD. AND SO, IT IS TO YOUR ADVANTAGE TO COME IN WITH NEIGHBORS THAT ARE HAPPY WITH WHAT YOU'RE DOING. SO FROM MAYBE I'VE SAID TOO MUCH, BUT THAT'S WHY I THINK IT MAKE WOULD MAKE SENSE TO SEE JUST TAKE ANOTHER SHOT AT IT AND SEE IF THERE'S SOME WAY FOR YOU TO, TO TWO SIDES TO AGREE THAT IF WE DO THIS, THAT'S GOING TO LOOK A LOT LIKE IT LOOKED LIKE, YEAH, TEN OR SO YEARS AGO WHEN THINGS WERE WORKING PRETTY WELL. SO IF I MAY, THE QUESTION WAS, YOU SUGGESTED THE TABLING WOULD BE TO YOUR, PREFERENCE AND I ASK HOW MANY MONTHS, ONE MONTH WOULD BE OUR PREFERENCE SINCE THIS IS OUR. AND I GET THAT BECAUSE IF YOU'RE GOING TO GET YOUR DRIVING RANGE BACK, YOU WANT TO HAVE IT BACK DURING THE GOLF SEASON. AND I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE. SO 30 DAYS WOULD BE WILL BE FINE. SO OKAY WE APPRECIATE YOUR INDULGENCE AND YOUR AND YOUR, WORKING THROUGH THIS ISSUE WITH US ALL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM US? OKAY I MOVE TO TABLE FINAL DEVELOPMENT MODIFICATION OH 8 TO 2024 UNTIL OUR REGULAR SCHEDULED GET MY MONTHS STRAIGHT JUNE MEETING. SECOND. REGULAR JUNE. DO YOU KNOW THE DATE OF THE REGULAR JUNE 3RD, NO. NO. 
          REGULAR SCHEDULED IS, OH 17 THIRD MONDAY 17TH. THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. YEAH, THAT'S WHY I SAID REGULARLY SCHEDULED. IT'S A MONDAY. SO THE 5TH JUNE, JUNE 17TH. 17TH. OKAY SO IT'S BEEN MOVED BY ME AND SECONDED BY DAVE THAT WE TABLE TO OUR REGULAR JUNE MEETING. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. NO. CAN I HEAR THE ROLL, PLEASE? MR. KIRBY? YES, MR. WALLACE? YES, MISS BRIGGS? YES MR. LARSON. YES, MR. SHELL. YES. THE MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE FIVE VOTES IN FAVOR OF TABLING THE APPLICATION UNTIL THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED JUNE MEETING. GOOD LUCK TO YOU ALL. THANKS. TAKES US TO VARIANCE 19 OF 2024. POOL IN THE SIDE YARD. CAN WE HEAR FROM STAFF ? I KNOW WE'RE ALL THE TREES THAT THEY'VE LONG WENT TO. YEAH. 
          THAT'S GOOD. OKAY, SO THIS PROPERTY IS ABOUT A LITTLE OVER A HALF ACRE IN SIZE AND CONTAINS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. AND IT IS LOCATED IN THE TIDEWATER SUBDIVISION. THERE ARE SPECIAL CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPERTY AS IT IS AN OBLONG SHAPED LOT DUE TO THE CUL DE SAC STREET AND THE AVERAGE LOT, IN TIDEWATER HAS A DEPTH OF 140FT. HOWEVER THIS LOT HAS A DEPTH OF 120FT, AND AS A RESULT, THE BILL, THE REAR OF THE BUILDING HAS LESS BUILDABLE SPACE THAN THE AVERAGE LOT IN TIDEWATER. THE VARIANCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE SUBSTANTIAL BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE POOL. THIS POOL MEASURES AT ABOUT 100 AND 44.5FT■!S, WHILE THE PROPERTY IS 
          [02:10:01]
OVER 20,000FT■!S. THEREFORE, THE POOL ONLY MAKES UP LESS THAN 1% OF THE LOT. IN ADDITION, THE VARIANCE PRESERVES THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE ZONING REQUIREMENT BECAUSE IT MEETS ALL CITY CODIFIED ORDINANCE STANDARDS, ALL OTHER CODE REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING SETBACKS FROM ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND POOL FENCES, FENCING IS BEING MET, AND IT APPEARS THAT APPROVING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE DELIVERY OF GOVERNMENT SERVICES, NOR WILL THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE ADVERSELY AFFECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF PERSONS RESIDING OR WORKING WITHIN THE VICINITY, AND THIS VARIANCE IS NOT SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE THE POOL IS NOT VISIBLE TO THE PUBLIC STREET AND HAS LIMITED VISIBILITY FROM NEIGHBORS DUE TO THE LANDSCAPING. THE POOL IS LOCATED IN THE SIDE YARD DUE TO ITS UNIQUE SHAPE CAUSED BY THE BEND IN THE CUL DE SAC STREET, AND THE PROPOSED POOL IS ENCLOSED BY A COMPLIANT FENCE AND MEETING ALL OTHER STANDARDS. AT THIS TIME, CITY STAFF WILL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. I TAKE IT THERE'S NO ENGINEERING. I HAVE A QUESTION. GO AHEAD. COULD YOU PUT THAT ONE UP, PLEASE? SO I HAD A QUICK QUESTION. SO WHAT ARE THE DIMENSIONS OF THE BACKYARD AND THE SIDE YARD FOR THIS LOT AS A IS THIS DOES THE BACKYARD SORT OF START AT THE, THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY AND SORT OF GO, YOU KNOW, PERPENDICULAR FOR PERPENDICULAR TO THAT, NOT PERPENDICULAR, PARALLEL TO THAT. 
          SO WOULD THIS BE CONSIDERED BACKYARD ALL THE WAY DOWN HERE? SHE SAID, I'M GETTING AT. YEAH. 
          SO IN THIS CASE THE TIDEWATER ZONING TEXT HAS A VERY SOMEWHAT SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT SAYING IT HAS TO BE IN THE REAR YARD BEHIND THE LINE OF THE, OF THE HOUSE. SO IN THIS CASE, FOR THE HOUSE. YEAH SO IN THIS CASE FOR A POOL, IT DEFINES THE BACKYARD AS IMMEDIATELY BEHIND THE HOUSE. 
          BUT YEAH PURELY FROM A ZONING CODE STANDPOINT IT WOULD BE A BACKYARD WOULD ENCOMPASS THE AREA BETWEEN THE TWO SIDE YARDS. SO IT WOULD RUN THE WHOLE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AGAIN. THAT'S FROM A GENERAL REAR YARD DEFINITION. BUT IN THIS CASE FOR THE POOL, IT IS JUST IMMEDIATELY BEHIND THE HOUSE. OKAY. SO IS THIS POOL LOCATED IN THE BACKYARD OR SIDE YARD BASED ON THE TIDEWATER DEFINITION, IT DOESN'T MEET THE TIDEWATER DEFINITION OF WHERE A POOL CAN GO RIGHT? I'M JUST CURIOUS, IS IT IN THE SIDE YARD OR IN THE BACKYARD? YEAH SO AS LONG AS I CAN'T QUITE TELL, LIKE WHERE THE HOUSE ENDS AND WHERE THE POOL BEGINS. BUT AS LONG AS THE POOL ITSELF AND I DON'T THINK IT COUNTS TOWARDS THE CURTAINS AS PER SE, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THE POOL ITSELF IN THAT CASE, MIGHT BE DIRECTLY STILL BEHIND THE LINE OF SIGHT OF THE HOUSE, BUT MAYBE IT'S CLOSE. LOOK TO ME LIKE IT'S BEHIND THE DRIVEWAY. THAT'S WHY I WONDER. AND FOR THIS HOUSE, THIS IS THIS WOULD BE THE BACKYARD AREA. AND THIS WOULD BE A SIDE YARD AREA, FOR YOUR SECOND QUESTION, YES, THAT'S CORRECT. SO THE BACKYARD IS EVERYTHING BACK OF THE REAR FACE OF THE HOUSE, REGARDLESS OF HOW FAR OUT IT GOES, CORRECT? YES OKAY. CAN THEY BUILD ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK PROPERTY LINE, OR IS THERE A SETBACK AREA THAT THEY CAN'T DRAINAGE EASEMENT? AN EASEMENT BASICALLY. YEAH. SO THERE'S AN EASEMENT AND THEN POOLS AND THEIR APPURTENANCES HAVE TO BE AT LEAST 15FT FROM ALL PROPERTY LINES. 15 OKAY. AND THE DIMENSION FROM THE BACK OF THE HOUSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE, THE REAR PROPERTY LINE IS DO WE HAVE THAT? DON'T WE HAVE IT AS 32FT OR IS THAT. YEAH. SO FROM THE TOP OF THIS BUILDING RIGHT HERE, IT SHOULD BE OVER 30FT. 
          AND THEN TO THE END THEY DID NOT MEASURE THE EDGE OF THIS HOME HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE MAYBE THAT ANSWER. BUT YEAH. SO THERE ARE LOT LINE INCLUDE. THEIR LOT INCLUDES THE 15 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT. OKAY YES THAT'S CORRECT. AND THE POOL HAS TO BE A CERTAIN DISTANCE FROM THE LOT LINE OR FROM THE EASEMENT LINE FROM THE LOT LINE. IT JUST CAN'T BE IN THE EASEMENT . THAT'S OVER 30FT. AND THERE'S 15FT OF EASEMENT. THERE'S 15FT OF BUILDABLE SPACE. AND THE POOL IS EIGHT FOOT SIX ON IT'S NARROW. SO PORTION OF IT COULD BE BEHIND THE HOUSE. IT COULD BE 
          [02:15:05]
I KNOW THERE'S ALSO SIDEWALK AREAS IN THE DESIGN WITH THIS POOL AS WELL. SO I THINK THOSE ARE ALSO CONSIDERATIONS, THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS TOOK, WHEN DESIGNING THE POOL FOR THE LAYOUT AS WELL. BUT I'LL LET THEM ANSWER THAT MORE. CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? GOOD EVENING. JONATHAN. 5370 PAMPLIN COURT IN ALBANY, OHIO, 43054. YOUR SO COULD THE PLACEMENT OF THE POOL. SO IT'S AT EIGHT FOOT SIX BY 17FT. WHAT'S THE INTENT ABOUT, LIKE, AREA AROUND THE POOL AND TO MAKE IT USABLE, AND COULD IT GO BEHIND. COULD A PORTION OF IT SLIDE BEHIND THE HOUSE? RIGHT. THERE'S, THE CONCRETE BORDER AROUND THE POOL ITSELF. THAT'S GOING TO BE OUTSIDE THE EAST AREA IS THERE A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT ON THAT CONCRETE AREA? THREE FOOT IN TERMS OF MOTION. COULD YOU COME TO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE? YEAH. THANKS THANK YOU, MATTHEW RAY, 1605 SHAWNEE AVENUE, IN TERMS OF STRUCTURAL THREE FEET, BUT IN TERMS OF PRACTICAL USE, 6 TO 8FT IS NEEDED TO, TO SAFELY. SO BASICALLY YOU'VE GOT AN 8.5FT POOL AND YOU NEED SIX MORE FEET TO FIT THE CONCRETE ON AND THRE, I THINK YOU'RE TALKING SIX, SIX AND SIX OUTSIDE THE POOL, SIX FEET PER SIDE TO OH PER SIDE TO USE IT. YES SO I ASSUME YOU LOOKED AT EVERY OPTION TO TRY AND NOT HAVE A VARIANCE AND GET IT BEHIND THE HOUSE? DEFINITELY, AND THIS SITE PLAN DOESN'T REALLY COMMUNICATE THAT THE LANDSCAPING, BOTH THE PROPERTY OWNERS AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORS, IN TERMS OF THE DISRUPTION THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, NEEDED TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN, THE, THERE'S A AN ESCAPE. WELL, THERE. AND THE MECHANICALS HAVE BEEN POSITIONED FOR THE VERY SAME REASON. IT'S JUST TIGHT BACK THERE. THERE ISN'T REALLY ROOM FOR A POOL, EVEN WITHOUT THE SETBACKS, THE TOPOGRAPHY AND THE NEIGHBORS PROPERTY, IT WOULDN'T BE PRACTICAL. EVEN IF THAT SETBACK IN THAT EASEMENT WASN'T THERE, DID YOU HAVE THE HOUSE BUILT OR DID YOU BUY THE HOUSE ALREADY BUILT? I ALREADY BOUGHT THE HOUSE. OKAY HAS THIS GONE PAST THE HOA? AND DO THEY HAVE APPROVAL? YES SIR. ALREADY APPROVED. OKAY I APPRECIATE YOU REACHING OUT TO THE NEIGHBORS, TOO. AND IT SEEMS LIKE THOSE ARE 3 OR 4 TEXTS IN THERE FROM THE NEIGHBORS. YEAH. AS FAR AS DOTTING YOUR I'S AND CROSSING YOUR T'S, THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE TYPICALLY ASK IS DO ALL THE NEIGHBORS, YOU KNOW, HOA AND ALL YOUR NEIGHBORS, IS A BIG DEAL ON A VARIANCE LIKE THIS, CORRECT? YES. THEY HAVE. THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS IN THE RENDERING, THE SCREENING WAS SOME TREES THAT HAD SPACE BETWEEN IT. WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO HAVING THAT BEING LIKE MORE OF AN OPAQUE LIKE IF IT WAS BEHIND A HOUSE, LIKE A ROW OF ARBORITES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, COMPLETELY CONCEALED IT VERSUS PARTIALLY CONCEALED IT? YES. IN THE FRONT AREA WHERE YOU'RE IN THE FRONT AREA. YEAH. ALONG THE FRONT PART. ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. YEAH. I THINK I'D WANT TO SEE THAT SINCE IF IT WAS THAT SAME SITUATION. RIGHT, RIGHT. BRUCE, IS THIS WITH BRUCE? IS THIS THE YOU'RE SAYING. YEAH. TIGHTEN THAT UP. YEAH. INSTEAD OF HAVING SPLAY TREES I THINK BRUCE THAT'S PRETTY OPEN. IS THAT YOUR CONCERN. YEAH. JUST TO HIDE THAT OPENINGS BETWEEN THERE. SO THAT IT'S NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET. MAYBE SOME MORE TREES AND CLOSER TOGETHER. OKAY. YEAH AND THEN IN THE REPORT, IS IT FOR STAFF IN THE REPORT, IT TALKS ABOUT THE GATE AND HAVING A LATCH, BUT NOT A LOCKABLE ONE. I DON'T THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO BECAUSE IDEALLY IN A POOL SITUATION, YOU'D HAVE IT LOCKABLE. SO NEIGHBORHOOD KIDS WOULDN'T GET INTO IT. RIGHT? WE DON'T HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT HERE . OR DO WE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT HERE. BUT WE WILL CONSIDER THAT AS PART OF THE POOL PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION TO MAKE SURE IT'S MEETING ALL THE GATE AND FENCING REQUIREMENTS. SO IT I THINK OUR CODE SAYS A LATCH BOLT GATE IS WHAT IT REQUIRES TO MAKE SURE IT CLOSES. SO WE'LL CHECK FOR THAT SPECIFIC ITEM, DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REVIEW. OKAY. I'M ONLY ASKING BECAUSE IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE TEXT, BUT IT WASN'T CALLED OUT AS A LOCKABLE. SO THAT'S WHAT I JUST WANT TO GET. CLARITY. OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS COMMENTS. ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER? HEARING NONE. I MOVE FOR 
          [02:20:11]
ACCEPTANCE OF STAFF REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD FOR VARIANCE 19 2024. DO I HEAR A SECOND ON THE DOCUMENTS MOTION? I'LL SECOND THAT AND DISCUSSION HERE. THE ROLE OF THE DOCUMENTS, MR. KIRBY? YES, MR. LARSON? YES. MR. WALLACE YES. MR. SHELBY. YES, MISS BRIGGS? YES THE MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE FIVE VOTES TO ADMIT THE DOCUMENTS. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE VARIANCE ITSELF? NO, NO. YOUR MOTION ON VARIANCE, 19. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE TO APPROVE APPLICATION VARIANCE 19. DASH 2024. BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF THE STAFF REPORT, AND WITH THE CONDITION THAT YOU WOULD HAVE A FULL SCREENING AT THE STREET SIDE TO SHOW THE POOL, I'LL SECOND THAT CONDITION. FULL SCREEN. PLANTS. AND DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION CAN HEAR THE ROLL. 
          MR. LARSON. YES, MR. SHELL? YES. MR. KIRBY. NO MR. WALLACE, NO. MISS BRIGGS. YES THE MOTION PASSES WITH THREE VOTES, TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE. WELL, WITH THE CONDITION. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. EXCUSE ME. ON WITH AN ADDITIONAL CONDITION OF FULL SCREENING ON THE STREET SIDE TO SHIELD THE POOL. THANK YOU, I VOTED NO BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT MEETS THE DUNCAN CRITERIA. 
          THE APPLICATION IS PERFECT, IF I HAD TO VOTE YES ON A VARIANCE, THIS WOULD. THIS IS HOW IT'S DONE. THIS IS TIDE WATERS ZONING AND IT'S BEEN HERE. AND WHOEVER PUT THE HOUSE THERE DIDN'T WANT. 
          EXCUSE ME. SO I WROTE A NOTE FOR THE SAME REASONS. OKAY. GOOD LUCK. THANK YOU. BUT YOU'VE GOT YOUR POOL. THANK YOU. TAKES US TO F FIVE DESIGN, CASE NUMBER ON THIS FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 20 2024. CAN WE HEAR FROM STAFF? IF IT'S ALL RIGHT WITH THE BOARD, IN ADDITION TO THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THERE ARE A FEW VARIANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. AND I COULD READ IT AT BOTH AT THE SAME TIME. PLEASE DO . OKAY DUE TO THE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND THE PUD ZONING TEXT, THE PLANNING COMMISSION MUST REVIEW AND APPROVE A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR ALL RESIDENTIAL HOMES AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON THIS PROPERTY. IN ADDITION TO THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED VARIANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THIS PROPERTY IS 1.6 ACRES LARGE AND IS LOCATED WEST OF REYNOLDSBURG. 
          NEW ALBANY ROAD. IT IS NORTH OF THE HAWKSMOOR SUBDIVISION AND SOUTH OF BELMONT PLACE. THE LOT IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED AT. THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN AND IT APPEARS THE APPLICANT HAS STRATEGICALLY PLANTED SCREENING AROUND THE NORTH AND WESTERN PROPERTY LINES . YOU CAN SEE IT IN THE NORTH. THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL TREES HERE TO THE WEST AS WELL. ALSO, THE PUD TEXT REQUIRES ALL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT BE SCREENED OR ENCLOSED BY LANDSCAPING FENCE OR WALLS AT A MINIMUM OF FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT, AND THE CITY STAFF RECOMMENDS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL REQUIRING THAT THESE BE SCREENED PER CODE REQUIREMENTS AND SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. 
          THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CREATE A NEW TWO STORY, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME ON THE PROPERTY, AND THE PROPOSED HOME IS OVER 3600FT■!S. THE PROPERTYS MEETING ALL SETBACKS AND MAKES UP LESS THAN 4% OF THE LOT. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO INSTALL TWO GARAGES ON THE FRONT OF THE HOME. THAT WOULD BE THESE TWO RIGHT HERE. THERE WILL BE TWO AND FOUR ON THE REAR TO JUST ABOVE RIGHT HERE, AND TWO MORE ON THE SIDE RIGHT HERE. AND ONE, ONE LARGE GARAGE RIGHT HERE. 
          DOOR. THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS OF. I'M SORRY. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO INSTALL 
          [02:25:04]
TWO GARAGE DOORS IN THE FRONT OF THE HOME. THAT PROJECT 24FT IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING'S PRINCIPAL FACADE. THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS REQUIRE ALL GARAGE DOORS THAT FACE THE PRIMARY STREET TO BE SET BACK A MINIMUM OF TEN FEET FROM THE PRINCIPAL FACADE. THIS DOES NOT MEET THE CODE, HOWEVER. THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE GARAGE TO PROJECT 24FT IN FRONT OF THE PRIMARY FACADE. ACCORDING TO STAFF REVIEW, THE VARIANCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE SUBSTANTIAL BECAUSE THE THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT LAYER OF BUFFERING. 
          THE FIRST IS A LAYER OF SIGNIFICANT SETBACK FROM THE PRIMARY STREET. THE HOME IS ABOUT 251FT FROM THE PUBLIC STREET RIGHT OF WAY. IN ADDITION , THE SECOND LAYER IS THE EXISTING MATURE LANDSCAPE ALONG STATE ROUTE 605. THE VISIBILITY OF THE GARAGE IS REDUCED DUE TO THIS NATURAL BUFFER ALONG THE STREET. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES THE DESIGN OF THE NEW RESIDENTIAL HOME IN A BARN STYLE. THE APPLICANT STATES. THE DESIGN INTENT IS THAT THE BUILDING APPEARS TO BE A BARN WITH A MODEST LIVING QUARTER ATTACHED. THE APPLICANT PROPOSED THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO INSTALL A 22 FOOT SINGLE SWING HYDRAULIC DOOR ON THE SOUTHERN FACADE. THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS REQUIRE ALL GARAGE DOORS TO BE SINGLE BAY THAT ARE NO LARGER THAN TEN FEET IN WIDTH. THIS DOES NOT MEET CODE, HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE GARAGE TO BE 22FT INSTEAD OF TEN. ACCORDING TO THE STAFF REVIEW, THE VARIANCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE SUBSTANTIAL BECAUSE THERE IS LIMITED VISIBILITY. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A MIX OF TREES AND SHRUBS ON BOTH ENDS OF THE FACADE, PREVENTING THE HYDRAULIC GARAGE DOOR FROM BEING SEEN FROM REYNOLDSBURG NEW ALBANY ROAD. IN ADDITION, THE VARIANCE PRESERVES THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE ZONING REQUIREMENT. BECAUSE OF ITS DESIGN, THE APPLICANT STATES THAT THE DESIGN OF THE HOME IS OF A RURAL BARN DESIGN. THE ADDITION OF A WIDE GARAGE IS SIMILAR TO A CARRIAGE DOOR, OFTEN SEEN ON BARNS, SO THE DOOR IS COHESIVE WITH THE OVERALL ARCHITECTURE, AND IT IS ALSO HIGHLIGHTED RIGHT HERE FOR YOU, AS WELL AS THE ON THE ELEVATIONS . SINCE THE ARCHITECTURE IS DESIGNED TO BE INSTALLED WITH THE RURAL BARN STANDARD, IT APPEARS THAT THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS PROPOSED ARE COHESIVE. 
          THE NEW HOME IS CURRENTLY SHOWN TO HAVE WOOD SIDING AND A DARK BROWN COLOR, WITH A STONE WATER TABLE SURROUNDING ALL THE FACADES. THE PROPOSED WINDOWS ARE AN ALUMINUM CLAD TO MATCH, HOWEVER, THE USE OF NATURAL STONE ON THE EXTERIOR IS PROHIBITED. THE PUD TEXT REQUIRES THAT WHEN USING WOOD SIDING, THE WATER TABLE IS REQUIRED TO BE OF BRICK MATERIAL . ACCORDING TO STAFF REVIEW, THE VARIANCE IS NOT SUBSTANTIAL CONSIDERING THE WATER TABLE IS LESS THAN TWO FEET TALL, WHILE THE BUILDING WALL HEIGHT IS 25.5FT TALL. ALSO, THE VARIANCE PRESERVES THE SPIRITED INTENT OF THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE THE OVERALL APPEARANCE IS MORE NATURAL, THE APPLICANT STATES, THE NATURAL STONE MATERIAL USED IS THE SAME FOUND ON OTHER HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AFTER ALL, THE BUILDING THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HAVE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED THE USE OF STONE AS A PRIMARY EXTERIOR MATERIAL FOR OTHER HOMES IN THE HAWKSMOOR SUBDIVISION, SUCH AS ONE HAWKSMOOR. IN OCTOBER OF 2013 AND 15 KENSINGTON COURT IN AUGUST OF 2014. IN REFERENCE OF THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR THE DESIGNS IN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS AS NEW ALBANY DEVELOPMENT WILL USE AUTHENTIC AND HIGH QUALITY BUILDING MATERIALS. ALTHOUGH WOOD AND BRICK ARE PREFERRED, THE USE OF NATURAL STONE FOR THIS RESIDENCE APPEARS TO BE APPROPRIATE BASED ON ITS DESIGN INTENT AND THE LOCATION WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. 
          SHOULD THE PLANNING COMMISSION FIND THE APPLICATION SUFFICIENT, HAS SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR APPROVAL, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THIS STAFF REPORT AND AT THIS TIME WE WILL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. COUPLE QUICK ONES, YOU SAID THAT CODE SAID TEN FEET WIDE ON GARAGE DOORS AND THE VARIANCE, A SAYS THAT HAWKSMOOR HAS A MAXIMUM OF NINE. SO THE PUD TEXT USUALLY SUPERSEDES. YES STANDARD ZONING REQUIREMENTS. SO THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED PERHAPS A TYPE OF. SO THEY NEED A ZONING. THEY NEED A VARIANCE FOR EVERY SINGLE GARAGE DOOR HERE. ALL SIX, ALL SEVEN OF THEM. THEY'RE TEN FOOT WIDE GARAGE DOORS AS SHOWN ON THE DIAGRAM. THEY DON'T MEET THE 
          [02:30:05]
NINE FOOT LIMIT. STAFF AGREES. YES, THAT THEY WOULD NEED A VARIANCE FOR ALL. I NEED SIX MORE DOORS. TO DO THE TEN FEET. THE 22 FOOT VARIANCE IS THAT APPLIES TO JUST THE ONES 22 FOOT DOOR SHOWN. CORRECT. OKAY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE PLANNING SIDE, BEFORE WE GO TO ENGINEERING, DO THEY DO WE HAVE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE BREAK OUT BETWEEN THE FIRST FLOOR AND THE SECOND FLOOR? SECOND FLOOR TO THE MIKE, PLEASE. NAME AND ADDRESS FIRST TODD PARKER, P.O. BOX 86, NEW ALBANY, OHIO. I'M REPRESENTING THE OWNERSHIP GROUP HERE, THE FIRST OF ALL, THE 22 FOOT DOOR. 
          SIERRA AND I HAVE COMMUNICATED. WE'RE GOING TO GET RID OF THAT IN LIEU OF A TEN FOOT GARAGE DOOR. SO THAT VARIANCE WE CAN REMOVE, DUE TO COST. AND, YES, THE REST OF THE DOORS WE ARE LOOKING FOR. SO VARIANCE A IS BEING VERY VARIANCE A WELL IT'S BEING TRANSFORMED INTO SIX TEN FOOT DOORS. OH CORRECT. OKAY. I GUESS THAT'S THE WAY TO PUT IT. I DON'T I'M NOT A CAR GUY. IS THERE A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NINE FOOT AND A TEN FOOT, JUST FROM THE EASE OF ENTRY? YEAH, YEAH. SCRATCHING THE LAMBORGHINI. YES, EXACTLY. IT LOOKS LIKE A LOTUS, BUT I'M NOT SURE THOSE ARE FERRARIS. BUT A MINIVAN IN THERE? YEAH, YEAH. OR A FULL SIZE VAN. EXACTLY OR A BEER DRIVE THROUGH. I'M SORRY. WE WON'T DO THAT, PROMISE. SO, BACK ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. 
          FIRST FLOOR AND SECOND FLOOR. FIRST FLOOR IS JUST THE, I'M SORRY. THE SECOND FLOOR IS JUST THAT NORTHERN PART OF THE T, AND IT'S ABOUT JUST UNDER A THOUSAND. AND SO THE FIRST FLOOR IS ABOUT 2300. AND STAFF, IF MOST OF THIS IS STORAGE FOR CARS, DOES THAT BECOME A STORAGE FACILITY OR A RESIDENCE. SO IT'S STILL CONSIDERED A RESIDENCE. IT HAS, YOU KNOW, FULL LIVING AREA, KITCHEN AND BEDROOMS. SO OUR CODE DOESN'T HAVE ANY LIKE, SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENTS. SO IN OUR BY, BY CODE AND OUR INTERPRETATION, THIS IS STILL CONSIDERED A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH JUST A LARGE GARAGE ATTACHED TO IT. OKAY I FEEL LIKE MAYBE IT WAS A COUPLE MONTHS AGO. WE SAW A SIMILAR VARIANCE WHERE THEY WANTED A LITTLE BIT WIDER GARAGE. IS THAT ACCURATE? YES. THAT WAS FOR, THE SUBDIVISION UP NEAR WALNUT AND BEAVER ROAD, WOODHAVEN. 
          WOODHAVEN. THANK YOU. SO AS A CITY, ARE WE CONSIDERING A NEW TAX TO ALLOW FOR TEN FOOT BEING THE, THE NORM? SO THE OUR DESIGN GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS THAT THE CITY DEFAULT IS A TEN FOOT WIDE GARAGE DOOR, SO THE APPLICANT AT THE TIME OF REZONING HAS, PROPOSED THESE MORE RESTRICTIVE WIDTHS FOR GARAGES? I THINK SOME OF THAT PROBABLY HAS TO DO PARTIALLY WITH DESIGN. IN THIS CASE, IT'S A BARN FORM. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS ORIGINALLY ENVISIONED HERE. SO I THINK A IT'S, YOU KNOW, STILL IN LINE WITH THE OUR CODE REQUIREMENTS, OUR DEFAULT CODE. AND THEN TWO, YOU KNOW, SINCE IT'S A BARN FORM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THE WIDER DOORS SEEM MORE APPROPRIATE IN THAT CASE AS WELL. WHY IS THIS STILL HAWKSMOOR? SO THIS IS TECHNICALLY A DIFFERENT ZONING TEXT CALLED HAWKSMOOR NORTH, BUT IT IS, PART OF THE HAWKSMOOR HOA, I BELIEVE, SO OWNERS OF HAWKSMOOR HAVE PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY AND REZONED IT TO ALLOW FOR ITS DEVELOPMENT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY RECALL, BUT THIS WAS SOME YEARS AGO. SO THE ZONING ALLOWS FOR TWO HOUSES, SO ONE HAS ACCESS OFF OF 605, THE OTHER ONE WILL HAVE, ACCESS VIA HAWKSMOOR LOT SIX, THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST OF THIS. EXACTLY. THIS WAS THE FRONTAGE FOR THAT ORIGINAL PIECE BECAUSE IT WAS A DEEP, R1 LARGE LOT. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. 
          TOWNSHIP ZONING BACK IN THE DAY. AND WHEN THEY SPLIT IT, THEY PUT THEM BOTH IN HAWKSMOOR. THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH. SO IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO HAWKSMOOR. A LOT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS, SO I THINK THAT'S WHY YEAH, WE STILL THINK OF IT AS SORT OF AN EXTENSION OR TRANSITION FROM HAWKSMOOR. AND THAT'S WHY WE TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION TO THE STONE. SO THERE ARE, I THINK, THREE HOMES WITHIN THE HAWKSMOOR SUBDIVISION THAT ARE COMPLETELY MADE OF STONE. SO WE STILL FEEL 
          [02:35:03]
IT IS, YOU KNOW, MEETING THE CHARACTER AND GENERAL DESIGN OF THE OVERALL HAWKSMOOR SUBDIVISION. YEAH BECAUSE I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THIS AS A VARIANCE, AND I'M NOT NEARLY AS UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THIS AS A REZONING BECAUSE THIS DOESN'T WANT TO BE HAWKSMOOR LIKE, YOU DRIVE DOWN ONE HAWKSMOOR AND GO PAST ALL THE HOUSES IN HAWKSMOOR, AND THEY ALL HAVE A VERY COHERENT FEEL. AND THERE WAS A CLEAR, THIS IS HOW IT WILL BE. AND THOSE DOORS ARE NINE FEET FOR A REASON. AND AT THE PRICE POINT HAWKSMOOR IS AT ESPECIALLY, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT IT, MAKING SURE THAT IT'S ALL REALLY NICE STUFF OF A SPECIFIC FIELD AND I'D AS A, YOU KNOW, R-1 STYLE PROPERTY, THIS, THIS, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A LOT MORE PALATABLE THAN THREE VARIANCES AND A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE HAWKSMOOR AT ALL. BUT THAT'S THAT'S ONE OPINION HERE. I MEAN, THE ONLY THE ONLY ADJUNCT TO THAT IS THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T EVEN LOOK LIKE IT'S IN HAWKSMOOR, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE IT, WHEN YOU DRIVE INTO HAWKSMOOR, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT. IF YOU STUCK THIS HOUSE RIGHT BETWEEN TWO OF THE OTHER HAWKSMOOR HOUSES AND STICK OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB, THAT'S ME. WELL, AND IF I COULD ADD, DAVID BULLOCK AND I COLLABORATED ON THIS DESIGN, AND IT IS FOR THE DZENIS FAMILY THAT, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPED HAWKSMOOR. SO, YOU KNOW, IT IS PART OF THEIR FAMILY ESTATES. I GUESS, IF YOU WILL, SO THE THOUGHT BEING, IT'S IT IS A BARN STYLE STRUCTURE TO MIMIC, YOU KNOW, THE SEVERAL OTHER BARN STRUCTURES THAT ARE WITHIN THAT CORRIDOR, YOU KNOW, BEING IN THE FARMS AND FURTHER TO THE SOUTH OPPOSITE THE FARMS. WHY THE DARK ROOF? IT'S DARK METAL OR DARK SLATE. THEY HAVEN'T TOTALLY DECIDED YET. OKAY. BECAUSE I OWN A BARN AND I'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, IT. DARK ROOFS. YEAH. AREN'T TERRIBLE LIKE THAT. YEAH, YEAH. YEAH. THERE'S A VERY SPECIFIC DESIGN IMAGE WE WERE GIVEN BY THE OWNERS THAT SAID THIS IS WHAT WE WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE. IT'S BASED ON A BARN IN TENNESSEE. OKAY, SO. OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS, ENGINEERING. ACTUALLY, I WOULD SAY THERE'S LOTS OF ROOM ON THIS SITE WHERE YOU WOULDN'T NEED TO HAVE A VARIANCE FOR THE DOORS TO BE IN FRONT, 24FT IN FRONT. YOU COULD PUT THEM FURTHER BACK. WHY? WHAT'S THE JUSTIFICATION, THE IDEA OF BEING ABLE TO DRIVE THROUGH IT. YOU CAN PUSH THAT BACK AND DRIVE THROUGH IT. STILL CORRECT. IT WAS JUST PART OF THAT EXISTING IMAGE WE WERE GIVEN TO IS THE BARN SHAPE WAS A T FORM, AND THEN AGAIN, I MEAN, THERE ARE OTHER BARN STRUCTURES ALONG THAT CORRIDOR THAT HAVE LARGE OVERHEAD OR LARGE SLIDING DOORS OR OVERHEAD DOORS THAT LOOK LIKE SLIDING DOORS THAT FACE THE ROAD, BUT NOT 24FT IN FRONT OF THE FACADE, THOUGH, RIGHT? CORRECT BUT THEY'RE ON A MAIN FACADE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE, YOU KNOW, THE BARN OR THE I THINK IT'S THE BENSONS BARN THAT'S IN THE FARMS. THERE'S A LARGE DOOR THAT FACES 605. YEAH, THAT IS ON A MAIN FACADE. ZONING ALLOWS IT ON THE FACADE, JUST NOT SET IN FRONT OF THE FACADE. WELL THIS IS KIND OF A MAIN FACADE AS WELL. BEING THAT T FORM. WITH THE GARAGE, YOU KNOW, I DON'T SEE IT THAT WAY. I SEE THE GARAGE DOORS BEING IN FRONT OF THE MAIN OF THE HOUSE FACADE. AND THAT'S WHY YOU'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE, IS BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MEET THE ZONING CODE. IF SOMEBODY'S ACTUALLY GOING TO LIVE THERE, PARDON ME IF SOMEBODY'S ACTUALLY GOING TO LIVE THERE. YES I MEAN, BESIDES THE TIMES THEY'RE GOING TO DRIVE THEIR CAR. YEAH. THE THOUGHT IS ONE OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS WILL BE LIVING THERE SOON AND POSSIBLY RELOCATING FROM THEIR CURRENT HOME. SO OKAY, IT'S CONSTANTLY EVOLVING, BUT THAT IS THE CURRENT PLAN. AND REVOLVING. IT LOOKS LIKE. YES, YES, ENGINEERING. YES, PLEASE REVISE THE REFERENCE PLAN TO INCLUDE SIGNATURE BLOCK AND ADD MONUMENTAL ON NOTE BLOCK. REVISE THE SHEET C 100 TO SHOW PUBLIC WATER MAINS AND PUBLIC SANITARY SEWERS DESIGNED TO SERVE THIS PARCEL. VERIFY THAT A 40 FOOT OF PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, AS MEASURED FROM THE ROAD CENTERLINE, IS PROVIDED ALONG THE PARCELS FRONTAGE AND, MODIFY THE LANDSCAPE PLAN TO SHOW SITE DISTANCE TRIANGLES. LET'S DO THE EASY STUFF. ANY CONFLICT WITH 
          [02:40:02]
THE, TWO CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT, WHICH INCLUDE THE ENGINEER'S COMMENTS? NO OKAY. 
          AND A COMMENT TO US, DO WE WANT THE VARIANCES TO BE INCLUDED AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN? BECAUSE AS AS LISTED THAT FDP IS GOT SERIOUS TROUBLE WITH THE VARIANCES. DON'T HAPPEN. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S A FAIR CONDITION. YES. THAT'S CONDITION THREES. 
          WOULD YOU REPEAT THAT ONE, PLEASE, SUBJECT TO PASSING OF THE VARIANCES IN AS IT WILL BE REVISED VARIANCE 31 2020 FOR THE ATTENDANT VARIANCES FOR 1493. REYNOLDSBURG MALONEY OKAY. AT THIS POINT IS IT JUST THE GARAGE DOORS. IS THAT WHAT. NO THE FIRST ONE WAS ELIMINATED. THE LARGE GARAGE LARGE DOORWAY. SO TEN FOOT INSTEAD OF NINES. AND THE 24 FOOT PROJECTION, THE STONE WATER TABLE IS THE OTHER VARIANCE. I FORGOT THE 20 HAS. YEAH, GRANTED THAT ONE, ELSEWHERE, INCLUDING IN HAWKSMOOR, SO WE DON'T HEAR HAWKSMOOR VARIANCES, I TAKE IT. 
          OKAY. OKAY. AND THIS WOULD PROBABLY. BE A LOT MORE PALATABLE IF IT WASN'T FOR THE TWO HOUSES, JUST A LITTLE BIT NORTH OF HERE, WHERE THE GARAGES FACE BROWNSBURG, NEW ALBANY, AND THE HOUSES FACE EACH OTHER. AND I REMEMBER ARGUING WITH TOM RUBY ON THAT ONE. AND BEING GIVEN GREAT ASSURANCES. AND I BICYCLE BY THERE EVERY DAY, EVERY SUMMER. AND I AND I SHOULD HAVE VOTED NO. YOU KNOW THAT THE, IT'S IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN, I BELIEVE THAT WE WILL NOT HAVE EMPHASIS ON THE GARAGE DOORS AND GARAGE DOORS WILL ALWAYS BE SET BACK BEHIND A FACADE, AS WELL AS OTHER DOCUMENTS. I BELIEVE THAT IS, RECOMMENDATION IN OUR STRATEGIC PLAN. YEAH, THAT GARAGES BE SECONDARY TO THE HOME. YEAH AND THOSE ONES YOU'RE REFERENCING, THE GARAGE DOORS. 
          PHASE 605, RIGHT? YEAH. YEAH, YEAH, THE TWIN, THEY'RE TWINS. YEAH. AND THEY'RE LOVELY HOUSES, BUT BUT THEY SORT OF GIVE THE REYNOLDSBURG WALNUT THE COLD SHOULDER WITH. SEE MY GARAGE. 
          YEAH. CAN'T SEE THE NICE PART OF THE HOUSE. YEAH, YEAH. ALL RIGHT. AND AS A COMMUNITY, WE'RE PRETTY CONSISTENT IN MAINTAINING THAT STANDARD TOO. YEAH. WHAT WAS THAT WITH HAVING THE GARAGES SETBACK AND NOT HAVING THEM FORWARD. SO IF YOU LOOK THROUGHOUT NEW ALBANY AS A WHOLE, IT'S THAT WAY. THIS THIS KIND OF STRIKES ME AS A GARAGE WITH A DETACHED HOUSE. YEAH. 
          THAT'S HOW I CHARACTERIZE IT. WHEN I DESCRIBE THAT TO OTHER PEOPLE. OKAY HOUSE IN QUOTES TO 2000FT■!S. IF I DID THE MATH RIT OF RESIDENTS, IT'S BIGGER THAN MY HOUSE. SO YEAH, IT'S ACTUALLY SAID A THOUSAND UNDER 1000FT■!S. WELL, IF THE UPSTAIRS IS A THOUSAND, THE DOWNSTAIRS HABITABLE PARTS A THOUSAND. YEAH OKAY. AND THEN YOU GOT GARAGE. IF YOU CONSIDER THAT RESIDENCE. 
          BUT YEAH, THERE WAS MUCH IN THERE ANYWAY. ANYWAY. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. ANYWAY, SO, I THINK THAT THE AVERAGE SQUARE FOOTAGE IN, HAWKSMOOR IS PROBABLY CLOSER TO 6 OR 7000. I I DON'T HAVE THAT ONE COMMITTED TO MEMORY. I KNOW THAT NORMALLY YOU JUST NODDED. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. LET'S WE'RE PROBABLY READY TO. SO, ALL RIGHT, I'M, I'M NOT THRILLED WITH, TO THE ZONING CATEGORY, BUT THAT'S JUST ME. SO ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT, LET ME SEE WHERE. I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS FOR FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 20 OF 2024 INTO THE RECORD. DO I HEAR A SECOND ON THE DOCUMENTS MOTION? SECOND, AND DISCUSSION ON THE DOCUMENTS. OKAY. THE ROLL PLEASE, MR. KIRBY. YES MISS BRIGGS? YES, MR. WALLACE? YES, MR. SHELL. YES. MR. LARSON. NO. SORRY. YES THE MOTION PASSES. 
          THERE ARE FIVE VOTES TO ADMIT THE DOCUMENTS. OKAY. AND SINCE WE'RE DOING THESE TOGETHER, I'M GOING TO MOVE TO ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS FOR VARIANCE 31, 2024 INTO THE RECORD. DO WE ARE SECOND ON THE DOCUMENTS? SECOND, AND DISCUSSION ON THE DOCUMENTS MOTIONS FOR THE VARIANCES? CAN I HAVE THE ROLL, PLEASE, MR. KIRBY? YES. MR. SHELL YES. MR. WALLACE YES, MISS BRIGGS YES. MR. LARSON NO, THIS IS DOCUMENTS . THESE ARE DOCUMENTS? YEAH. 
          [02:45:01]
SORRY. OKAY. I DIDN'T I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. THE MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE FIVE VOTES TO ADMIT THE DOCUMENTS FOR THE VARIANCES. YEAH, I WAS DOING THE DOCUMENTS FIRST, FOR ALL OF IT. OKAY. OH, I SHOULD HAVE SAID. AND NOTING THAT VERY SINCE A IS SIX DOORS, TEN FEET AND THAT THE 22 FOOT HAS BEEN DROPPED, ACTUALLY THAT WOULD BE SEVEN DOORS. TEN FEET BECAUSE THAT SOUTHERN 22 FOOT, WE'VE CHANGED TO A TEN FOOT TO A SINGLE TEN FOOT. YES. RIGHT. SEVEN TEN FOOT. SEVEN TEN FOOT DOORS. TAKES US TO THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ITSELF. DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN? 20 OF 24. ALL RIGHT. I PRESUME YOU WANT TO VOTE ON THIS TONIGHT? SURE. OKAY DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN? THAT'S ALL I MOVE FOR APPROVAL. FDP 20 2022. 
          MANY 20S IN A ROW. FDP 20 OF 2024. SUBJECT TO THE TWO CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT. 
          AND A THIRD CONDITION THAT IT IS CONTINGENT ON THE VARIANCES IN THE MODIFIED VARIANCE. 31 IS THE CASE NUMBER 31 2024 ARE THE CONDITIONS CLEAR, CONTINGENT TO PASSAGE OF THE ATTENDANT VARIANCES? YES, THE VARIANCES ARE INCLUDED, THIS AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE VARIANCES MUST ALSO PASS. YES IT'S ME. DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND AND DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION ON THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. CAN I HAVE A ROLL, PLEASE, MR. KIRBY? NO MR. WALLACE, NO. MR. SHELL, NO. MISS BRIGGS. YES, MR. LARSON? NO THE MOTION FAILS WITH FOUR VOTES AGAINST AND ONE VOTE IN FAVOR, I VOTED NO BECAUSE I FIND THAT THIS, IS IN DISAGREEMENT WITH THE HAWKSMOOR ZONING ITSELF AND THE, STRATEGIC PLAN, AND OTHER DOCUMENTS, NOTABLY THE THAT THE HOUSE IS THE PRIMARY AND THE GARAGE IS THE SECONDARY TO THE TO IT, AND THAT THE GARAGE BEING FORWARD OF THE OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THIS BE BETTER HEARD AS REZONING OTHER NO VOTES. WHAT DID YOU SAY? NO I CONCUR WITH MR, KIRBY'S REASONS FOR, VOTING NO ON THIS APPLICATION. I ALSO CONCUR WITH MR. KIRBY'S REASONING, AND I CONCUR WITH THE SAME AS WELL. ALL RIGHT. TAKES US TO VARIANCE 31, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF VARIANCE 31 2024, NOTING THAT THE DOORS THAT THERE WOULD BE SEVEN TEN FOOT DOORS IN VARIANCE A. AND A DO I HEAR A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. AND DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION ON THE VARIANCES. DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THESE SEPARATELY? ONLY IF WE WANT TO, THE MOTION WAS FOR ALL OF THEM. 
          DO WE WANT SEPARATE? ACTUALLY, I MEAN, DO WE EVEN NEED TO VOTE ON IT SINCE THE APPLICATION WAS DENIED? I THINK TO CLEAR IT OFF THE AGENDA, IT NEEDS A VOTE. YES JUST FOR CLEAN RECORD. VOTE ON THEN. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO SPLIT THEM UP. I WOULD I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. ALL RIGHT. 
          ALTHOUGH I WILL SAY THAT IF WE ARE VOTING ON THE APPLICATION, IF THE APPLICATION HAD PASSED, FIRST CASE HAD PASSED, I MUCH SEPARATE VOTES WOULD HAVE BEEN NECESSARY. BUT YES, HAVING SAID THAT, I WOULD IMMEDIATELY TURN TO YOU AS A PERSON WHO SECOND AND SAID, DO YOU AGREE TO HAVE IT SPLIT BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED, BUT SO WE'RE STILL GOOD WITH THAT MOTION. FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION FOR THE VARIANCES. CAN YOU THE ROLL PLEASE? MR. KIRBY? NO, MR. WALLACE, NO. MR. SHELL, NO. MISS BRIGGS. NO. MR. LARSON. NO. THE MOTION FAILS WITH ALL VOTES AGAINST. AND FOR MUCH THE SAME REASONS AS BEFORE. UNDERSTOOD OKAY. SAME. THANK YOU 
          [VII. Other business ]
. SAME THING. THANK YOU. BRINGS US TO OTHER BUSINESS. WELL, WE BEAT. NO, WE DIDN'T BEAT. I WAS 
          [02:50:02]
ACTUALLY, WE'RE DOING A LOT BETTER THAN I THOUGHT WE WOULD, IT'S 10:00. ARE WE STILL GOOD TO HEAR THE OTHER BUSINESS? SURE. I THOUGHT WE WERE MOVING IT TO THE NEXT MEETING. I I WANTED TO ASK THAT I DIDN'T HAVE. TIME TO SAY. LET'S GET OUT OF HERE OR NOT. WE'LL CRANK IT OUT. SO UP TO YOU GUYS, WE CAN. WE WEREN'T GOING TO GIVE A FULL PRESENTATION SINCE WE WORKSHOPPED IT AT THE LAST MEETING. LET'S TABLE THIS THEN. IF THERE'S A REQUEST TO TABLE. IT BECAUSE OF THE HOUR THEY CAN TALK ABOUT THIS TABLE I MEAN I WOULD I WOULD I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF TABLING UNLESS THERE'S SOME URGENT REASON THAT STAFF WOULD LIKE US TO VOTE ON IT TONIGHT, IN WHICH CASE, I'D BE HAPPY TO STAY LATER TO DO THAT. BUT IF THERE'S NO REASON, THEN I WOULD VOTE TO TABLE IT. 
          ALTHOUGH DO WE HAVE A JUNE 3RD MEETING COMING? RIGHT. YEAH I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING URGENT THAT, SAYS IT COULDN'T BE DONE AT THE JUNE 3RD MEETING. OKAY, THAT SOUNDS GOOD, THROW YOUR MOTION TO TABLE THESE. MOVE TO TABLE THE OTHER BUSINESS. WHICH INCLUDES THE CITY CODE AMENDMENT. 1187 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND THE URBAN CENTER CODE AMENDMENT, RELATING TO PARKLAND AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS UNTIL THE JUNE THIRD, 2024 MEETING DELAY OR SECOND? SECOND AND DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO TABLE. GO TO THE ROLL, PLEASE, MR. WALLACE. YES, MR. SHELL? YES, MISS BRIGGS? YES, MR. LARSON? YES, MR. KIRBY? YES. MOTION PASSES WITH FIVE 
          [VIII. Poll members for comment]
VOTES TO TABLE THE OTHER BUSINESS UNTIL THE JUNE 3RD MEETING. ALL MEMBERS ARE COMMENTS. SARAH NOTHING. THANK YOU. NO COMMENT. THANK YOU. DAVE, HAD A QUICK QUESTION FOR BEN. SINCE YOU'VE BEEN ANSWERING ALL THE QUESTIONS TONIGHT. SO NO GOING BACK TO THE, DRIVING RANGE. SO THE ATTORNEY FOR THE CHURCH SORT OF SAID, YOU KNOW, WE'LL PRESENT OUR EVIDENCE, YOU KNOW, DOWN THE ROAD, WHICH STRUCK ME AS INCORRECT BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME THE EVIDENCE HAS TO COME IN NOW AT THIS HEARING. AND THE ABILITY OF I ALTHOUGH I GUESS THEY COULD PRESENT IT AT COUNCIL, I SUPPOSE. I KNOW WHEN YOU GET TO CALL THE POLICE COURT, THE ABILITY TO ADD EVIDENCE IS LIMITED AND IN THE JUDGE'S DISCRETION. BUT DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT? YEAH. 
          SO YOU'RE YOUR RESPONSIBILITY AND OBLIGATION IS TO MAKE A DECISION BASED UPON THE SUBSTANTIAL, RELIABLE PROBATIVE EVIDENCE THAT'S IN THE RECORD BEFORE YOU, EVERYBODY HAS AN OBLIGATION. RESPONSIBILITY TO PRESENT IT FOR YOU AT YOUR CONSIDERATION. IF THERE IS AN APPEAL DOWN THE ROAD, I SUPPOSE THEY COULD TRY TO GET IT IN. BUT I THINK IF WE'VE DONE EVERYTHING THAT WE NEED TO DO, IT'S GOING TO BE TOUGH ROW TO HOE FOR THEM. THANK YOU. JUST. AND YOU'RE RIGHT, I THINK ABOUT THE, DECLARATION. SHOULD HAVE BEEN AN AFFIDAVIT, AND IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN WITH A NOTARY SWORN AND ATTESTED TO. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT BOARD MEMBERS SHOULD COMMENT. BRUCE YEP. FOR ME, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU GOT ALL THE HARD ONES TODAY. WHICH ONE DO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE IMPROPER FOR THE COMMISSION TO CREDIT THE DECLARATION, THE UNSWORN DECLARATION, OVER SINCE IT WASN'T AN AFFIDAVIT FORM OR. YEAH. SO THAT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION, I THINK, ABSENT A FORMAL OBJECTION, YOU CAN GIVE IT CONSIDERATION AND DO BUT I DO THINK IN KIND OF A BACKHANDED WAY, I HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE RECORD. I THINK THEIR COUNSEL DID BORDERLINE OBJECTED AS BEING HEARSAY OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES. SO I THINK THAT THAT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT, YOU'D BE RIGHT TO GIVE IT THE WEIGHT THAT YOU THINK IT'S WORTH, SIMILAR TO ME IMPEACHING THE PHOTOGRAPHS, YOU KNOW, SAYING, OKAY, THIS THIS CLEARLY ISN'T HOW THE EYE SEES IT AND STUFF LIKE THAT. YEAH. AND I LEARNED THAT BEFORE I GO ON VACATION NEXT, I'M GOING TO TALK WITH YOU ABOUT HOW TO USE MY IPHONE MORE EFFECTIVELY. GET A REGULAR CAMERA WITH A REGULAR LENS. AND THEN IT LOOKS THE WAY PEOPLE LOOK. YOU GET QUOTE SNAPSHOTS OUT OF IT INSTEAD OF THE WIDE ANGLE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER GUYS? ALL MY COMMENTS. SO WITH THAT WE'RE ADJ
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.