[I. Call to order]
[00:00:05]
COMPLETELY. GOOD EVENING. AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE NEW ALBANY ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD MEETING, MONDAY, JULY 8TH, 2024. COULD I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? MR. HINKSON HERE. MR. EITAN HERE. MISS MOORE HERE. MR. DAVEY HERE. MR. MALIK'S HERE.
MR. BROWN HERE. MR. STRAHLER HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER BRISK HERE. ALL VOTING MEMBERS ARE PRESENT.
[III. Action on minutes: June 10, 2024 ]
WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY ACTION PROPOSED ON THE MINUTES OF JUNE TEN, 2024, MEETING? I HAD NO REVISIONS. SAME. AND HEARING NO OTHER COMMENTS, I WOULD MOVE APPROVAL OF THOSE MINUTES. SECOND. WAS THAT. ALLEN? YES, SECOND. THANK YOU. MR. ITEM. YES. MR. HENSON? YES, MISS. MOORE. YES, MR. DAVEY? YES, MR. MORLEY. YES, MR. BROWN? YES MR. STRAHLER. ABSTAIN THE MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE SIX VOTES TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED. THANK YOU, STAFF, IS[IV. Additions or corrections to the agenda]
THERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT'S FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING? NONE FROM STAFF. THANK YOU. THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO ADMINISTER THE OATH. ALL WITNESSES AND APPLICANTS WHO PLAN TO ADDRESS THE BOARD SHOULD RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ARE THERE ANY VISITORS FOR ITEMS NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA? HERE SEEING NONE, I'M GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, CASE A OR B 21 2024 FOR[VI. Cases]
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR A NEW SIGN ON THE REAR ELEVATION AT 200 MARKET STREET.THE APPLICANT IS MORRISON SIGN COMPANY. AND CAN I HAVE A STAFF REPORT, PLEASE? THANK YOU. SO THIS APPLICATION WAS ORIGINALLY HEARD ON MAY 13TH AND DURING THE MAY MEETING, THE BOARD EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT THE TITLE, DESIGN AND LOCATION OF THE SIGN. THESE COMMENTS INCLUDED THE SIGN BEING OFF CENTER ON THE BUILDING AND LOCATED ABOVE A LOADING DOCK. THE SIGN THE SIZE OF THE SIGN DUE TO THE LENGTH OF THE TITLE, AND THE ORDER OF THE WORDING WHICH DID NOT MATCH THE TEXT ON THE FRONT FACADE. THE APPLICANT REQUESTED TO TABLE THE APPLICATION TO ADDRESS THE BOARD'S CONCERNS, AND SINCE THEN HAS SUBMITTED A NEW APPLICATION WITH FOUR OPTIONS AND A NARRATIVE FOR REVIEW. THE NEW ALBANY BRANCH OF THE COLUMBUS METROPOLITAN LIBRARY IS LOCATED IN RED HERE, AND SEEN ON THE SIDE. AND AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE SITE, PLAN, THE APPLICANT HAS NOT CHANGED THE PROPOSED LOCATION FROM THE LAST MEETING. HERE ARE THE FOUR OPTIONS. THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED. OPTION ONE SHOWS AN 11 SQUARE FOOT HALO ILLUMINATED SIGN, AND OPTION TWO SHOWS A 20 SQUARE FOOT HALO ILLUMINATED SIGN. THE PROPOSED NEW SIGNS ARE SIMILAR TO THE ELEVATION ON THE FRONT FACADE, WITH THE SAME FONT COLOR AND DESIGN. OPTION THREE SHOWS A NEW DESIGN AT ABOUT 33FT■!S, AND IS MADE UP OF A WOOD BOARD OVERLAY, AND OPTION FOUR SHOWS A NEW SIGN AT ABOUT 37FT■!S AND IS MADE OF THE SAME MATERIAL. THE PROPOSED NEW SIGNS ARE NOT SIMILAR TO THE DESIGN OF THE LIBRARY, BUT ARE SIMILAR TO THE CHARACTER OF MARKET SQUARE. ALL PROPOSED SIGN OPTIONS MEET THE CODE REQUIREMENTS AND REMAIN IN THE SAME LOCATION. THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED THESE FOUR OPTIONS TO ALLOW THE BOARD TO DECIDE, AND AT THIS TIME, STAFF WILL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. BEFORE WE HAVE THE APPLICANT UP TO SPEAK. MR. WRIGHT. YES. I'LL MAKE SOME COMMENTS. PLEASE MAKE SOME COMMENTS THAT I THOUGHT MIGHT ADDRESS THIS KIND OF COMPREHENSIVELY, AT LEAST MY STANDPOINT, I WAS DISHEARTENED TO SEE MORE SIGNS ON THIS LOCATION BECAUSE I HAD THOUGHT THAT THE BOARD HAD COMMUNICATED THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO ACCEPT A SIGN AT THIS LOCATION THAT SAID, I THINK WE FAILED IN THAT COMMUNICATION BECAUSE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE MESSAGE DIDN'T GET THROUGH AND WE HAVE MORE SIGNS, SO I WANTED TO SINCE THE LAST TIME, I THINK THERE WAS A SENSE OF THE BOARD AND WE AND, AND WE, I THINK GENERALLY HAD A CONSENSUS THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS, THIS SIGN IN THIS LOCATION BECAUSE IT NEEDED TO BE CENTERED. AND I WANTED TO GO BACK AND CONSIDER THE ISSUE OF HOW WHAT IS WHAT ARE THE
[00:05:07]
PRINCIPLES, A PRINCIPLE BASIS FOR REACHING THAT DECISION? SO SINCE WE FAILED TO COMMUNICATE, I THOUGHT IT WOULD IT MADE SENSE FOR ME TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS. AND SO I DID, I SPENT A LOT OF TIME THIS WEEKEND DRIVING AROUND LOOKING AT. GEORGIAN ARCHITECTURE, THE CIVIC BUILDINGS OF GEORGIAN ARCHITECTURE AROUND THE CENTER OF NEW ALBANY, TAKING A LOT OF PICTURES. STAFF IS SEEING A WHOLE BUNCH OF THEM, AND, MY WIFE SAID I HAD KIND OF OBSESSED ON THIS. PERHAPS SHE'S RIGHT, I WAS MORE WORRIED, HOWEVER, THAT BEING THAT I WAS WALKING AROUND THESE BUILDINGS ON SUNDAY, THAT, THAT THAT THAT PEOPLE MIGHT REPORT TO THE POLICE. A DISTURBING OLD MAN LURKING, THAT SAID, HAVING COMPLETED THAT, I WENT BACK TO GO TO THE BASIS ON WHICH WE MAKE OUR, OUR DECISIONS AND, AND THE PROCESS BY WHICH WE FOLLOW. AND THAT'S THE REVISED, THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES, I FOCUSED ON THREE SECTIONS OR TWO, FOUR, FIVE SECTIONS OF THE OR SUBSECTIONS OF, OF THE CODIFIED ORDINANCE HERE. THE FIRST ONE GOES BACK TO THE WHOLE THE GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMANENT SIGNS, 1169 12 A ONE FIRST SIGNS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN STYLE OF THE BUILDING ON WHICH THEY ARE LOCATED. SIGNS INTEGRATE WITH THE BUILDING ON WHICH THEY ARE LOCATED. SO THAT'S NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO IS IN SUBSECTION FIVE. SIGNS ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THEIR SETTINGS. SO LET'S HOLD THAT FOR A SECOND. I ALSO THEN LOOKED AT THE CRITERIA THAT WE WERE TO USE FOR CONSIDERING WHETHER TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF DESIGN APPROPRIATENESS OR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, AS WE REFER TO IT HERE. THAT'S. 1150 709 AND I THOUGHT THE FIRST THREE SUBSECTIONS WERE THE ONES THAT REALLY WERE RELEVANT TO THIS, A, A COMPLIANCE OF THE APPLICATION WITH THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS. B THE VISUAL AND FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTS OF THE BUILDING, SO WE LOOK AT THAT AND SEE THE DISTINGUISHING ORIGINAL CHARACTER QUALITIES OR CHARACTER OF THE BUILDING SHALL NOT BE DESTROYED. AND I THINK IN MY ASSESSMENT AND MY INTERPRETATION OF THAT, I'VE ALWAYS INTERPRETED THAT AS ESSENTIALLY MEANING THAT NOTHING WE WILL DO, NOTHING INJURIOUS TO THOSE THINGS. SO HAVING GONE THROUGH THAT PROCES, I THEN WENT OUT AND LOOKED AT THIS BUILDING. WHAT IS THIS BUILDING, BECAUSE I THINK WHAT COUNCIL HAS BEEN TELLING US THERE IS THAT OUR DECISIONS ON SIGN PLACEMENT ARE CONTEXTUAL.IT DEPENDS ON THE BUILDING ON WHICH THEY'RE ON, A DECISION THAT WE WOULD MAKE IN A MODERN ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING IS PROBABLY DIFFERENT THAN A GEORGIAN BUILDING, IN THAT CONTEXT, THIS SUBJECT TO THE OBJECTIONS OF MY ARCHITECT COLLEAGUES ON THE BOARD, THIS IS A GEORGIAN BUILDING. THIS IS, I THINK, AN ICONIC GEORGIAN BUILDING. IT HAS A CENTRAL MASSING. IT HAS HYPHENS. IT HAS APPENDAGES THAT'S MIRRORED IN THE BACK. IF YOU LOOK AT THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, WHERE IT DESCRIBES THE VARIOUS FORMS OF TRADITIONAL ARCHITECTURE AMONG THE FORMS OF ARCHITECTURE THAT ARE MENTIONED BACK, THERE IS GEORGIAN. THE FIRST ATTRIBUTE LISTED. AND THIS IS SIMILAR WHEN I WENT OUT AND LOOKED AT OTHER SOURCES, IS THAT GEORGIAN BUILDINGS ARE SYMMETRICAL, AND THE SYMMETRY THAT EITHER SIDE OF THE DOOR, YOU HAVE THE SAME NUMBER OF WINDOWS, IT ALL MATCHES. AND YOU LOOK AT THE FRONT OF THIS BUILDING, THERE IT IS. YOU'VE GOT THE CENTER, THE CENTRAL MASSING. YOU HAVE, HYPHENS. YOU HAVE APPENDAGES.
YOU'RE OUT OF THE BACK. BUT IN THE MIDDLE, ON THE CENTER IS THE SIGN. THERE'S NOTHING THERE THAT'S ASYMMETRICAL. IT'S RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE. I GO TO THE BACK AND IN THE BACK WE HAVE A REQUEST FOR A SIGN ON THE LEFT APPENDAGE. THAT TO ME THEN IS RIGHT AWAY ASYMMETRICAL. HOW DO YOU FIX THAT? BECAUSE GEORGIAN ARCHITECTURE IS SYMMETRICAL. YOU COULD FIX IT BY HAVING A SIGN ON THE RIGHT APPENDAGE. I THINK THAT'S I THINK THAT'S POOR, VISUAL DOESN'T REALLY WORK FOR ME, BUT IN ANY EVENT, THAT'S NOT RELEVANT HERE BECAUSE THE LIBRARY GETS TWO WALL SIGNS. ONE OF THEM IS USED UP FRONT, AND YOU ONLY HAVE ONE USE IN THE BACK. GIVEN THAT, THEN THERE'S ONLY ONE PLACE GIVEN THE DICTATES OF GEORGIAN ARCHITECTURE AND THE ONE PLACE WHERE IT IS IN THE SOUTH, SO AS I WENT THROUGH ALL THAT, I CONCLUDED THAT I DIDN'T SEE A BASIS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE DICTATES OF THIS ARCHITECTURE IS. FOR ME TO, TO, FOR ME TO BE
[00:10:08]
ABLE TO APPROVE A SIGN ON THE LEFT APPENDAGE THAT'S ASYMMETRICAL BECAUSE I THINK IT FIGHTS WITH THE ARCHITECTURE, SO LET ME GIVE A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES, AND I GUESS, LET'S SEE. CAN YOU GO TO THE CITY HALL EXAMPLE? THERE WE GO. SO A LITTLE HARD TO SEE. OBVIOUSLY, I SHOULD HAVE MAYBE MADE THESE BIGGER. SO LET'S SAY FOR EXAMPLE, CITY HALL, VILLAGE COUNCIL OR CITY COUNCIL DECIDES THAT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE YOUTH OF, OF NEW ALBANY TO HAVE CIVIC LEADERS TO LOOK UP TO, AND THEY DECIDE WE'RE GOING TO PUT STATUES, WE CAN PUT STATUES IN FRONT OF, SAY, MAYOR SPALDING, COUNCIL MEMBER BRISK COUNCIL MEMBER DEREK. AND THEY'RE LIKE 20 FOOT STATUES THERE. AND SO BECAUSE YOU WANT TO LOOK UP TO THESE FOLKS AND THEY'RE GONNA, THEY'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, IT ISN'T GOING TO WORK, IS IT? MR. HANSON? YOU HAVE IT ON READ.THEY'RE GOING TO THEN OBSCURE THIS SIGN. COUNCIL, THINKING ABOUT IT, SAYS, BOY, WOULDN'T IT BE COOL FOR US TO PUT A SIGN OVER HERE BECAUSE THAT WAY PEOPLE BACK IN THE NEW VETERANS MEMORIAL SECTION, THEY WANT TO THEY WANT TO KNOW WHERE CITY HALL IS. THEY CAN SEE IT. DID A DITTO WITH THE NEW GARAGE THAT WE HAVE AT LEAST APPROVED HERE AT THE ARB. IF YOU'RE ON THE ROOF LOOKING AT THE FIREWORKS, BOY, YOU RIGHT OVER THERE. YOU'D SEE THAT SIGN. I THINK IF THAT SIGN COMES TO US, WE DECLINE IT BECAUSE IT'S ASYMMETRICAL A SIGN. IF THEY'RE GOING TO DO ANOTHER SIGN, IT HAS TO BE IN THE MIDDLE. IF IT CAN'T BE THERE, THEN I WOULD APPROVE ONE UP THERE, SAME THING ON LEARNING CENTER. AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE LEARNING CENTER, THE LIBRARY, LET'S SAY THE SCHOOLS COME TO US AND THEY SAY, WELL, WE WANT A SIGN. AND IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO HAVE A SIGN THAT PEOPLE LEAVING POOL CAN SEE BECAUSE WE WANT KIDS AND PARENTS TO BE ABLE TO SHOW THEIR YOUNG KIDS, YOU KNOW, HEY, JASPER, THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO GO THIS FALL.
AGAIN, THAT SIGN COMES TO US. I THINK THE I THINK WE REFUSE IT BECAUSE, AGAIN, THIS IS A GEORGIAN ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING AND THE SIGN GOES THERE IN THE CENTER. SO BECAUSE OF THAT, AGAIN, I DON'T THINK I'VE GOT DISCRETION TO APPROVE A SIGN ON THE LEFT BECAUSE I THINK THE ENTIRE BASIS THAT, THAT THAT CITY COUNCIL HAS SET FORWARD ISN'T MET BY HAVING AN ASYMMETRICAL SIGN ON A GEORGIAN BUILDING. IF THIS WERE IF THIS LIBRARY WAS, FOR EXAMPLE, THE GAHANNA BRANCH, WHICH IS A VERY MODERN BUILDING, THERE'S LOTS OF PLACES YOU CAN PUT THAT THAT SIGN ON ON THAT BUILDING, BECAUSE THE ARCHITECTURE DOESN'T DICTATE WHERE THAT SIGN GOES.
SO, AS A RESULT OF ALL THAT, I JUST WANTED TO SPELL OUT WHY I WON'T. I DON'T BELIEVE I CAN APPROVE A SIGN IN THAT LOCATION. THANK YOU, MR. EVANSON, FOR YOUR INDULGENCE. THANK YOU, MR. REAGAN. THE APPLICANT, MORRISON SIGN COMPANY BACK THERE. PLEASE COME FORWARD. JUST PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD. HELLO. I'M KRISTIN SUTTON, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS MANAGER WITH THE COLUMBUS METROPOLITAN LIBRARY. THANK YOU. AND I'M SEAN WHITE WITH MORRISON. SIGN COMPANY. THANK YOU, DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON THE, MAYBE IT WAS OUR LACK OF CLEAR INSTRUCTION ON THE LOCATION OF THAT SIGNAGE. THERE WAS NOT. NO. WE TOOK BACK THE, BOARD'S CONCERNS ON THE SIGN BEING OFF CENTER, AND STAFF WENT OUT AND DID A SURVEY OF THE SITE TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE SIGN COULD BE CENTERED. THE LOCATION OF THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE AS SHAGBARK MAPLE THAT CENTERED ON THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. WOULD OBSTRUCT THE SIGN'S VIEW FROM ROSE RUN PARK AND THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, WHICH WOULD RENDER THE SIGN USELESS IF IT WAS CENTERED, WE DISCUSSED WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS POSSIBLE TO, REMOVE THAT TREE AND HEARD FROM SOME CITY OFFICIALS THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE RECEIVED WELL BY THE COMMUNITY. SO THE LIBRARY LEADERSHIP DETERMINED THAT THE LOCATION OF THE SIGN ON THAT NORTHEAST CORNER WAS THE ONLY LOCATION THAT WOULD WORK FOR A WAIVER SIGN. OH, I'M SORRY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES. AND I'LL JUST SAY THAT. OOPS, SORRY, AFTER THE LAST HEARING, I DID HAVE, A MORE ROBUST CONVERSATION WITH OUR LEADERSHIP TEAM TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE WERE BRINGING THIS PROPOSAL FORWARD, AND AS YOU KNOW, OUR CEO IS A RESIDENT OF NEW ALBANY. AND AS HE'S OUT AND ABOUT IN COMMUNITY, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HE HAD BEEN ASKED ABOUT, SO SOMETHING THAT HE WAS TRYING TO DO IN RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS THAT HE HAD GOTTEN SO GOOD TO KNOW. COMMENTS FROM, THE REST OF
[00:15:04]
THE BOARD. ANY THOUGHTS? I HAVE A AN IDEA, BUT I WILL PROCEED. THE IDEA BY BY STATING THAT I VERY MUCH SHARE MR. AIDEN'S SENTIMENTS. AND I THINK, THE POINT WAS WELL MADE. TOP TO BOTTOM, WHEN YOU LAST MET, THERE WAS SOME CONCERN ABOUT THE VISIBILITY OF THE SIGN, AS WELL AS REALLY ANNOUNCING ITS PRESENCE FROM THE OPPOSITE SIDE. I'M LOOKING AT THE PLAN AS I'M TALKING HERE. REALLY FROM FROM REALLY SIDE FRONT. WHEN YOU'RE APPROACHING FROM THE BRIDGE OVER, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, COMING OVER THE BRIDGE FROM FROM THE PARK, FROM ROSELAND PARK, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE? AND I GUESS THIS IS MUCH A QUESTION FOR ADMINISTRATION AS WELL AS THOSE THOSE IN ATTENDANCE THIS EVENING. COULD COULD I ASK THAT WE GO BACK TO THE THERE'S A PHOTO THAT SHOWED THE BOOK DROP. THERE WE GO. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WOULD SATISFY ANYONE'S CONCERNS OR NOT, BUT CONSIDERING THAT I DO SHARE THE SAME, THIS IS NOT GOING TO WORK. THANK YOU, I DO HAVE ALL THE SAME OBJECTIONS ABOUT THIS. IT'S JUST IF OUR CHARGE IS TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE IN MY IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, HOWEVER, I DO SEE AN OPPORTUNITY RIGHT HERE. AND I THINK THAT THAT CANOPY, FROM A WAYFINDING STANDPOINT, DOESN'T DO A PARTICULARLY GOOD JOB OF ANNOUNCING WHAT IT'S THERE FOR, COULD BE A DRIVE THROUGH, BUT WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A BOOK DROP OR WAS A BOOK DROP. IS IT STILL USELESS BOOK DROP. OH, YEAH. YEAH, I IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I GOT MY BOOKS. FORGIVE ME FOR ASKING. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I. I WOULD, I WOULD BE AT LEAST IN FAVOR OF CONSIDERING SUBJECT TO EVERYONE ELSE'S, YOU KNOW, COMMENTARY, SOME SORT OF SIGNAGE THAT EITHER STANDS ATOP THE CANOPY OR IS EQUIVALENT TO A BLADE SIGN, THAT IS NECESSARILY ATTACHED TO THIS ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENT, THAT COULD BE BACKLIT, THAT COULD BE FREESTANDING LETTERS. IT COULD SAY, YOU KNOW, THE WORDS LIBRARY ACROSS THE TOP, AND IT COULD SAY BOOK DROP ON THE FASCIA OF THE OF THE METAL PANEL, IT WOULD ACHIEVE, ALBEIT PERHAPS NOT WHAT YOU CAME FORWARD WITH AS A RECOMMENDATION, BUT IT WOULD CERTAINLY ACHIEVE THE WAYFINDING, ANSWER AND MIGHT CREATE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BREAK AN IMPASSE BECAUSE I AGAIN, I KNOW I'VE SAID IT TWICE NOW. I GUESS I'LL SAY IT A THIRD TIME. I JUST DON'T SEE A SCENARIO WHERE I COULD SUPPORT A SIGN ON THAT WALL, CONSIDERING ALL THE OTHER ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS. SO I JUST WANTED TO ASK THAT AS A CONSIDERATION. I HAD A PICTURE THERE THAT WAS MY THAT WAS MY, YOU KNOW, YOUR SIGN WOULD LOOK BETTER. SO THIS ISN'T WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING? NO, I'M JUST SAYING I'M SAYING THAT THAT YOU ARE ENTITLED TO WRITE AS AN, TO AN AWNING SIGN BECAUSE YOU HAVE AN AWNING. YOU GET ONE FOR AWNING. AND WE'RE CERTAINLY RECEPTIVE. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD TRY TO DESIGN THAT SIGN TONIGHT. UNLESS YOU WANT TO. BUT YOU DON'T WANT ME DESIGNING ANYTHING BECAUSE YOU. YOU SAW MY WORK. BUT YOU'RE ENTITLED TO AN AWNING SIGN, AND CERTAINLY THAT'S CERTAINLY PEOPLE DRIVING INTO THE PARKING LOT FROM THE POST OFFICE DIRECTION. BOY, THERE'S THE LIBRARY, BUT YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THE SIGN IN THE BACK GOES, I GUESS WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IS EITHER CENTER AND A CHAIN OR NO SIGN OF THE BACK IN THE LAST WHERE I AM, I CAN CERTAINLY TAKE THIS PROPOSAL BACK. I THINK THEY WOULD NEED TO DO A STUDY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THIS SIGN IN PARTICULAR WOULD ACHIEVE THAT VISIBILITY, THAT THEY WERE GOING FOR WITH THE SIGN ON THE REAR FACADE. NO I HAVE A QUESTION. I SAW THE AND ONE OF THE PHOTOS. EXCUSE ME.THERE WAS A YARD SIGN OR A MONUMENT SIGN. IT WAS. OH, WAS THAT THAT WAS I WAS AN IDEA THAT SINCE I SENT IT, I REALIZED THAT THAT A DOUBLE POST SIGN ISN'T PERMITTED HERE IN THIS. AND SO.
OKAY, I THOUGHT THESE WERE GOING TO BE BROUGHT UP ON DEMAND AS OPPOSED TO A SLIDE. SO AGAIN, YOUR SIGN WOULD WORK BETTER IF IT WAS PERMITTED. BUT BUT WE CAN'T DO A DOUBLE POST SIGN HERE. OKAY. WE I MEAN I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. I HAD SOME OTHER EXAMPLES WHICH INCLUDED THE EAGLE STADIUM THAT I AND THE CITY AND, BUT I DECIDED I WAS BEATING A DEAD HORSE AT THAT POINT. ISN'T THERE A DOUBLE POST SIGN IN THE FRONT FOR THE. IT'S ON THIS PLAN HERE. THERE'S A DOUBLE POST LINE. THIS IS THIS NOT. NO, IT MIGHT BE ONE IN THE PARK. I DON'T THINK IT'S OUT HERE, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S A BUILDING SIGN. IT'S. YOU'RE RIGHT. THERE'S A DOUBLE POST SIGN AT MARKET STREET IN THE MIDDLE OF THE MEET. THE STAFF HAVE AN EXPLANATION OF THAT. THERE SO THE LIBRARY PREDATES OUR CURRENT SIGN CODE. OUR SIGN CODE WAS UPDATED, I
[00:20:05]
THINK IN 2012 OR 14. SO I THINK IT'S AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING SIGN. OKAY. SO THANK YOU. GOT IT. THANK YOU. EXCELLENT OBSERVATION. SO I'M HAPPY TO TABLE IT ONCE MORE. BUT BUT PLEASE DON'T COME BACK WITH ANOTHER SIGN ON THAT WALL. JUST WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO GET IT, YES. IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND TABLING IT, I CAN TAKE THESE COMMENTS BACK TO OUR LEADERSHIP TEAM TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY WOULD BE INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPLICATION. ANY FURTHER.OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH I APPRECIATE IT. GREAT. THANK YOU. I'M SORRY. IS THERE DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION? YEAH. I'M GONNA. OKAY. I WILL DO THAT RIGHT NOW. YEAH. PERFECT. THANK YOU. I MOVED TO TABLE, APPLICATION 21, 2024. I'LL SECOND. GREAT. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, MR. ITEM. YES, MR. BROWN? YES, MISS MOORE. YES, MR. DAVEY? YES, MR. STROLLER? YES, MR. HENSON. YES, MR. MALITZ. YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES TO APPROVE THE TABLING OF THE APPLICATION. THANK YOU. ON TO A OR B 35 2024 FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ALLOW A BUILDING ADDITION, TWO NEW BUILDINGS AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS AT 6300 EAST DUBLIN-GRANVILLE ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS SCOTT R HARPER.
COULD WE PLEASE HAVE A STAFF REPORT? YES THANK YOU, THIS APPLICATION WAS FIRST HEARD AT THE JUNE ARB MEETING AND WAS TABLED TO TODAY'S MEETING TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TIME TO MAKE CHANGES TO LANDSCAPING. HERE'S A REVISED SITE PLAN WHICH SHOWS THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN COLOR, WHICH INCLUDE THE ONE ADDITION, TWO PROPOSED BUILDINGS, LANDSCAPING AND PARKING. THE SITE CURRENTLY HAS AN EXISTING CHURCH AND MINISTRY CENTER. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES ONE ADDITION AND TWO NEW BUILDINGS, INCLUDING THE PARISH COMMUNITY CENTER LABELED AS A. THE PARISH LIFE CENTER LABELED AS B, AND THE MAINTENANCE, STORAGE BUILDING LABELED AS C. THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED NO CHANGES IN REGARDS TO THE ARCHITECTURE OR THE PROPOSED BUILDINGS FROM THE LAST MEETING. AS A RECAP FOR THE PROPOSED BUILDINGS, THE PARISH COMMUNITY CENTER IS EIGHT 18,000FT■!S AND PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH BRICK, GRAY ASPHALT ROOF SHINGLES, HARDY BOARD LAP SIDING AND ARCHED WINDOWS. THE PARISH LIFE CENTER IS 29,200FT■!S, AND IS PROPOSEDO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH THE SAME MATERIALS AS THE PROPOSED PARISH COMMUNITY CENTER. STAFF RECOMMENDS THE SAME CONDITION THAT THE PARISH PARISH LIFE CENTER AND THE PARISH COMMUNITY CENTER USE THE SAME BRICK, MORTAR AND TOOLING AS WHAT IS EXISTING AND THE PROPOSED BRICK AND ROOF COLOR SHOULD BE WITHIN THE SAME COLOR FAMILY AS THE EXISTING CHURCH. ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPOSED WINDOWS SHOULD BE THE SAME YELLOW LINE OR AN IDENTICAL DESIGN AS TO WHAT IS EXISTING. THE MAINTENANCE BUILDING WILL BE 8000FT■!S AND PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH VERTICAL METAL SIDING AND A LIGHT GRAY STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF. NO CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE SINCE THE LAST MEETING IN REGARDS TO VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS. THERE WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL 77 SPACES FOR A TOTAL OF 545 PARKING SPACES. TWO ADDITIONAL BIKE RACKS WILL BE ADDED AND WHILE NO SIDEWALK IS REQUIRED ON MORGAN ROAD, THE CITY RECOMMENDS A TEN FOOT PUBLIC ACCESS AND STREETSCAPE EASEMENT TO BE PROVIDED FOR FUTURE CONNECTION.
SINCE THE JUNE MEETING, THE APPLICANT HAS MADE LANDSCAPING UPDATES WHICH ARE SHOWN HERE.
THE APPLICANT HAS ELIMINATED THE PROPOSED TREE SCREENING ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPOSED ASPHALT DRIVE FIRE ACCESS LANE AND NOW PROPOSES A ONE TO 1.5FT MEANDERING MOUND WITH SHRUBS.
THIS WILL ENSURE THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE EXISTING CHURCH IS NOT BLOCKED, BUT STILL PROVIDES SCREENING OF THE PROPOSED DRIVE. TWO ADDITIONAL STREET TREES HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE CORNER OF THE SITE, AND THE EXISTING DRY BASIN IS NOW SHOWN TO BE CONVERTED TO A WET BASIN.
ADDITIONALLY, THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WALKED THE SITE AFTER THE JUNE MEETING AND UPDATED THE COUNT ON THE SITE PLAN TO ACCURATELY DEPICT HOW MANY TREES ARE EXISTING. WHILE THE PLANS ARE INDICATING WHERE THE PROPOSED GATES WILL BE, NO INFORMATION REGARDING THE DESIGN WAS SUBMITTED. HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT HAS INFORMED STAFF THAT DUE TO THE PROJECT'S LARGE SCALE, THEY EXPECT TO RETURN TO THE ARB FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS SUCH AS SIGNAGE AND GATES. THE DESIGNS OF THE BUILDING ARE HIGH QUALITY AND THE SELECTION OF ARCHITECTURAL STYLE IS APPROPRIATE WITH THE CONTEXT, LOCATION AND FUNCTION OF THE SITE, WITH THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FROM THE CITY ARCHITECT AND STAFF. IT DOES APPEAR THAT THE QUALITY OR DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THE QUALITY OR CHARACTER OF THE SITE WILL BE DESTROYED OR COMPROMISED. THE ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN SHOWS HOW THE NEW IMPROVEMENTS INTEGRATE WITH WHAT IS EXISTING ON SITE.
THE PROPOSED MOUND EMPHASIZES THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE EXISTING CHURCH, WHILE CONCEALING THE PROPOSED ASPHALT DRIVE, AND THE SITE PLAN NOW ACCURATELY DEPICTS THE EXISTING TREE COUNT. AT THE LAST MEETING, A REQUEST TO SEE THE CHURCH'S FUTURE PLANS WAS MENTIONED, AND HERE'S A SITE
[00:25:01]
PLAN SHOWING THE 12 TO 15 YEAR PHASE TWO PLANS HIGHLIGHTED IN GRAY. AND AS MENTIONED IN THE MEETING IN JUNE, THE INTENT IS TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING MINISTRY CENTER. STAFF IS HERE.IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, WOULD THEY LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK TO THE BOARD, PLEASE? YES. HELLO. MY NAME IS SCOTT HARPER WITH HARPER ARCHITECTURE STUDIO IN GAHANNA, AND WE WERE HERE LAST MONTH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR COMMENTS. AND WENT BACK AND REALLY DID A BETTER EVALUATION ON THE EXISTING TREE COUNT ON THE SITE, AND TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THE COMMENTS, INCLUDING THE REMOVAL OF THE TREES ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE NEW DRIVE, AND DID ADD THE MOUNTING. THE MOUNTING WAS REVIEWED BY THE CITY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. THERE WERE A COUPLE OF TWEAKS MADE TO THAT, SO WE DID MODIFY IT FOR THEIR REQUIREMENTS. WITH ME TODAY ACTUALLY IS JEFF SAMPSON, WHO IS THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. SO WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO HAVE HIM COME UP AND TALK ABOUT THE CHANGES HE MADE TO THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. FROM THE COMMENTS FROM THE LAST MEETING, MAY I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION, IN THE STAFF REPORT, IT STATED THAT THE DRIVE BASIN WAS CONSERVED OR CONVERTED TO A WET POND, BUT THAT WAS ALREADY PRESENTED LAST MONTH. CORRECT, ON THE PLANS, IT JUST SHOWED IT AS A PROPOSED. BUT I REMEMBER IN THE JUNE MEETING THEY SAID THAT THE DRY BASIN WOULD BE CONVERTED TO A WET BASIN. SO I ASKED THEM TO SHOW THAT ON THE PLAN. OKAY. SO THEN MY FOLLOW UP, THANK YOU. AND MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION IS, HAS THE OVERALL SURFACE AREA OF THAT CHANGED OR GEOMETRICALLY? IT LOOKS LIKE IT HAS CHANGED SLIGHTLY. CAN YOU JUST PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT WHILE YOU'RE PRESENTING? THANK YOU.
TOM STAND UP. TOM IS A CIVIL ENGINEER WITH THE PRIME. YES. THE POND WILL CHANGE. OUR OBJECTIVE IS TO CREATE SOME DEPTH TO THE POND, TO, YOU KNOW, CLEAN UP SOME OF THE NATURAL VEGETATION THAT GROWS THERE. AND THEN, WE EXPECT WE HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH THE DETAILED ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS, BUT OUR PRELIMINARY REVIEW, IS THAT IT WILL INCREASE IN SIZE, BUT MAYBE 10% IN SURFACE AREA, POSSIBLY EVEN BY INCREASING THE DEPTH. WELL, WE'RE OUR OBJECTIVE IS TO GET TO LEAVE IT AS IT IS AT THE DEPTH. WE HAVE A CONTROLLING FACTOR ON THE DISCHARGE ACROSS THE STREET. THERE DOWN GRANVILLE ROAD TO GET THE CREEK. AND THAT'LL THAT'LL INFLUENCE HOW MUCH DEPTH WE CAN GET OUT OF THE POND. THANK YOU. BUT OUR INTENT IS NOT TO MAKE IT LARGER AND MAKE IT DEEPER, THOUGH. AND THEN MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION, WHICH IS UNCLEAR IN THE, IN THE COLOR DRAWING RIGHT ON SCREEN HERE, MAKING SURE I'M FOLLOWING ALONG. WELL, ANY OF THOSE EXISTING TREES NOTED AS EXISTING DECIDUOUS OR EVERGREEN ALONG THE SOUTH? I GUESS WOULD BE THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. WOULD THOSE BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THE CONVERSION OF THAT WET POND? AND IF SO, ALL SOME, NONE. I JUST WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND IF THOSE ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OUR, PLAN IS NOT TO IMPACTED FIXTURES. I GUESS IT WAS MORE OF A QUESTION OF IS IT IS THAT POSSIBLE WITH RESPECT TO THE ENGINEERING AND THE LAY BACK AREA OF THE POND? YES THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE POND AS WELL. WHAT FENCING IS GOING TO BE REQUIRED? I'M SORRY, WHAT FENCING WILL BE REQUIRED TO AROUND THAT POND AS AN WE ARE PROPOSING THE FENCING. OKAY. NOW NOW TYPICALLY THE DESIGN, THE SIDE SLOPES SUCH THAT YOU KNOW, A DROP OFF PER SE. AND SO IF SOMEONE WANDERED INTO THE WATER, THEY'RE ABLE TO STAND AND THEN REALIZE THEY NEED TO GET OUT. YEAH WITHOUT FALLING. SO ON THE, IT APPEARS THE ENTRANCE OFF OF DUBLIN-GRANVILLE ROAD IS GOING TO BE EXPANDED AND A TURN LANES ADDED WHERE EXISTING, BUT IT ALSO SHOWS ON YOUR FUTURE MASTER PLAN, WHICH I REALIZE IS NOT FOR CONSIDERATION, BUT YOU'RE THE PLAN IS TO MOVE THAT ROAD TO LINE UP WITH WITH, THE DRIVE CLOSEST TO THE EXISTING, MINISTRY CENTER AND THEN YOU ALSO SHOW IN THIS LANDSCAPE PLAN, YOU'RE GOING TO PLANT A BUNCH OF TREES WHERE YOU PLAN TO PUT THE FUTURE DRIVE. SO MY QUESTION IS, WHY DON'T WE WHY DON'T YOU JUST MOVE THE ENTRANCE OFF DUBLIN-GRANVILLE TO LINE UP WITH THE FUTURE PLAN AND NOT HAVE TO CUT DOWN A BUNCH OF TREES IN THE FUTURE AND REPLANT THEM WHERE THE TAKE OUT THE EXISTING DRIVE. I UNDERSTAND THAT POINT COMPLETELY, AND CERTAINLY ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. IF
[00:30:10]
WE LEAVE THE DRIVE WHERE IT'S AT NOW, IT WOULD REQUIRE US TO PUT THOSE TREES IN A LOCATION. IT WOULD NOT IMPACT THE DRIVEWAY, IF WE FOR THE FUTURE IS WHAT I MEAN. IF WE LEAVE THE DRIVEWAY THERE NOW, WE WOULD WANT THOSE TREES TO BE MOVED SO THEY WOULD NOT IMPACT THE SECOND PHASE OF THE PROJECT. AND THE INTENT REALLY IS TO MOVE THAT DRIVE. LONG TERM IF THERE IS ANOTHER BUILDING THERE, IF THERE IS AN EDUCATIONAL BUILDING THERE, THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER SERVED TO MOVE FURTHER TO THE WEST. IS THERE ANY WAY YOU CAN DO THAT NOW? IT JUST SEEMS TO MAKE MORE SENSE TO LINE IT UP NOW AND PLANT THE TREES CONSISTENTLY. LINE THE DRIVE UP NOW. YEAH I'D ASK THE PASTOR, SUE AND FATHER, HOW ABOUT THAT, ALL ALONG, ACTUALLY, OUR INTENT WAS TO LEAVE THE DRIVE WHERE IT IS FOR THIS FIRST PHASE, AND THEY WOULD GO THROUGH QUITE A BIT OF EXPENSE IN DOING THAT AT THIS TIME. WHAT I WOULD ASK AND SAY IS PROBABLY AN EASIER THING TO DO IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE TREES DO NOT INTERFERE WITH ANY FUTURE DRIVE, OR WAS PROPOSED IN THE IN THE PHASE TWO PLAN ONE, ONE CAN PRESUMABLY PLANT IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE DRIVE TO GO THROUGH WITH. IF YOU ARE CAREFUL ON THOSE THAT THE CAREFUL CARE IS AN IMPORTANT THING, AND SHRUBBERY OR OTHER THINGS SMALLER CAN BE PLANTED WHERE THAT DRIVE IS GOING TO GO. JUST TYPEKIT. OBVIOUSLY WE KNOW WE ASKED FOR WHAT IS NOW SB THREE JUST TO KIND OF SEE, AND WE KNOW YOU'RE NOT COMMITTING TO IT, AND YOU MAY DECIDE LATER ON TO HAVE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. BUT GIVEN THE CURRENT CONCEPT, IT MIGHT MAKE SOME SENSE TO AT LEAST ANTICIPATE THAT BY PLANTING THE TREE SUCH AND HAVING LOWER THINGS LIKE SHRUBS, WHICH PRESUMABLY WHICH WE WOULD TO SHED LAST YEAR. YEAH, JUST DON'T PLANT A TREE OF LIFE, WHICH APPARENTLY CAN'T BE MOVED.I AGREE WITH THAT. ALL THE WAY BACK AROUND. ALL THE WAY BACK, I HAD NO IDEA OF READING. ONE OTHER COMMENT I WOULD MAKE ABOUT THAT IS THAT, AND YOU MENTIONED THIS. THE PLAN COULD BE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT IN THE FUTURE. YEAH. THAT'S RIGHT. SO WE'RE NOT APPROVING. THE SB THREE IS NOT BEING APPROVED. WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING IT. RIGHT. SO LEAVING IT WHERE IT IS NOW, IT'S GOING TO GIVE A FUTURE DESIGNER FLEXIBILITY IF, SAY, THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT ACTUALLY HAS TO GET BIGGER. YEAH. IF IT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FOOTPRINT AND A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PARKING. SO I, I'M NOT I'M NOT. I'M GIVEN THAT WE'RE NOT HOLDING YOU TO SB THREE AND YOU'RE NOT COMMITTING TO SB THREE. I'M I WOULDN'T SAY MOVE THE DRIVE, BUT IF YOU KNOW, IT WOULDN'T BE THAT MUCH TO PLANT THE TREES SUCH THAT MAYBE IT'S MAYBE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED. I THINK IT WOULD BE WISE TO MOVE THEM OUT OF OUT OF THE DRIVE. THE FUTURE DRIVE.
YEAH. BUT AGAIN, I DO THINK THAT ANY DESIGNER IN THE FUTURE MAY DECIDE TO TAKE OUT OTHER TREES.
MAYBE A VERY DIFFERENT. WELL YEAH. NO. ONE MORE NUMBER AND HOPEFULLY I'LL BE RETIRED. YEAH WHILE YOU'RE SO. I HAD A FEW QUESTIONS, SO, SO ARE WE NOW BEING GIVEN? I SEE NOW WE HAVE PLANTINGS HERE IN THIS KIND OF FUTURE SPACE. SO ARE WE APPROVING TODAY THE AT LEAST THE PLANTINGS FOR THAT. THE LAST TIME I THINK THERE WAS A QUESTION THAT, THAT WAS UNDETERMINED. BUT I NOW THINK I SEE TREES THERE. IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE THOSE. IS THAT CORRECT. YES. THAT'S THE INTENT OKAY. WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT BEING ASKED TO APPROVE THE HARDSCAPE BECAUSE NO HAVE BEEN MADE. BRING THAT BACK WITH MORE DETAIL, INCLUDING THE STATUTE. AND THEN ALSO HERE THESE FOUR HARDSCAPE OR THESE THREE AROUND BUILDING A WE'RE NOT BEING ASKED TO APPROVE THAT HARDSCAPE, BUT WE ARE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE PLANTINGS AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. YES. OKAY. YES. THAT'S FINE, LET ME LET ME JUST GO THROUGH MY LIST OF THINGS. OKAY SO WE HEADED THAT WORK. SO AGAIN, I SAY WE'RE NOT WE ARE NOT APPROVING AND YOU'RE NOT COMMITTING TO SB THREE ON 89. IF STAFF CAN BRING UP 89. AND OR, THERE'S A VISUAL REPRESENTATION. I'M SORRY. WHICH SHEET? 89 IS THE ONE IN THE ON MY ROOM, I'M NOT SURE. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE MAINTENANCE BUILDING? YEAH, YEAH. OKAY. YEAH, YEAH, THIS IS WHAT I HAVE.
SO I DON'T, I, YOU KNOW, I KNOW WE HAVE THE FORMER BRICK WAINSCOTING REMOVED, BUT NEITHER ON. MAYBE IT'S JUST ME, NEITHER ON THIS NOR ON THE PICTURE EQUIVALENT OF IT. WHICHEVER
[00:35:08]
VERSION THAT IS BACK HERE FURTHER, I JUST, I COULDN'T I GOT TO FAST TO FIND IT. BUT THERE'S A PICTURE VERSION OF THAT BUILDING. DO I SEE EVIDENCE OF THAT? STONE BASE? AND COULD WE GET, YOU KNOW, AND I MEAN, THAT WAS TAKEN OFF. YEAH. THEY SAY, OUR CITY ARCHITECT ASKED FOR THAT BRICK. I KNOW THE BRICKS GUY. YES BUT IN IN IN IN REPLACEMENT OF THE BRICK, THERE'S A THERE'S LIKE A STONE BASE. CORRECT THAT WOULD SHOW THERE WAS NOT ACTUALLY THAT WAS.SO NOW IT JUST GOES DOWN. JUST GOES DOWN TO TERMINATES ON THE GROUND. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S I THINK IT WAS A CONCRETE SLAB. IT'S NOW A STONE. THERE'S NO STONE TERMINATION. SO THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S GONE ORIGINALLY THERE WAS STONE THAT ACTUALLY RAN AS A WATER TABLE ON ABOVE THE BRICK. OKAY. SO OH THAT'S FINE. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S OKAY. THANK YOU. CLARIFYING THAT. AND I THINK THAT IS ALL I HAD I WANTED TO CLARIFY. THANK YOU. SO I'M SORRY I'D LIKE TO GO BACK ONE MORE TIME TO THE WET POND. I'M JUST TRYING TO RECONCILE THE CHANGES FROM THE LAST PRESENTATION, I'M LOOKING AT SHEET, SO I'M LOOKING AT A PAGE NUMBER HERE. EXCUSE ME. L ONE, AND WHERE IT REFERS TO THE PROPOSED WET POND IT APPEARS TO HAVE. I'M JUST COMPARING IT TO THE EXISTING CURRENT SATELLITE PHOTOGRAPHY, WHICH I KNOW IS NOT PART OF THE PRESENTATION, BUT I GUESS. COULD YOU PLEASE CONFIRM THAT THE BOUNDARY OF THE AREA HATCHED IN GRAY ON LABELED C? IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO READ ON THE SCREEN, I UNDERSTAND, BUT ON THE ATTACHMENTS, IT'S EASIER APPEARS TO MERELY MATCH OR IDENTICALLY MATCH THE BASIN AS IT EXISTS TODAY. BUT I'M UNCERTAIN ABOUT THAT. BOTH JUST TRYING TO COMPARE IT VISUALLY, BUT SECOND IS BACK TO MY QUESTION ABOUT SURFACE AREA OF THAT POND. GIVEN IT FROM WHAT I SEE, AN UNCHANGED CONDITION, I'M JUST I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WILL ULTIMATELY NEED TO CHANGE TO MAKE THE WET POND FEASIBLE, SO THAT WE CAN PROVIDE A BETTER RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION. OH, ABSOLUTELY. TOM BRADY WITH NEW ALBANY COMPANY, I THOUGHT, I'M JUST LISTING, IN THE BACK, THOUGHT I MAY BE ABLE TO SHED SOME LIGHT ON THIS, WHE, WHEN, THE CHURCH HAS GONE THROUGH OUR ARC PROCESS. SOME OF OUR DESIGNERS AND OUR CRITIQUE WERE HYPERCRITICAL ABOUT THE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE DRY BASIN. THERE'S A CONCRETE CHANNEL, THERE'S ROCKS AROUND IT, HEAVILY PLANTED. BUT BUT THE ESTHETIC OF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE FOCUSED ON FAIRLY IN INTENSELY, AS A RESULT OF THAT, I SUSPECT, IS WHY WE'RE NOW SEEING A WET BASIN, THE DESIGN OF THAT, THE, THE, WHAT DO YOU CALL IT? THE VARIATION IN THE, IN THE HEIGHT OF THE STORAGE CAPACITY OF THE POND IS SOMETHING THAT WE WILL BE LOOKING AT AS WELL AS THEY FINISH OUR ARC REVIEW AND APPROVAL. MAINTAINING IT IN THAT LOCATION WAS SOMETHING WE WERE SUPPORTIVE OF AND THOUGHT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. AND I'M THRILLED TO SEE THAT THEY'RE NOW RESPONDING TO THE CRITIQUE OR THE CRITICISM OF THE EXISTING CONDITION. BUT MAINTAIN DESIGNING THAT AND RATING THAT PROPERLY SO THAT IT NOT ONLY FUNCTIONS PROPERLY, BUT IS LANDSCAPED APPROPRIATELY, WAS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE BEEN, CONCERNED WITH. AND WILL CERTAINLY BE CONTINUING TO WORK WITH. THANK YOU, THAT'S HELPFUL CONTEXT. THANK YOU. AND, AND I GUESS JUST TO TIDY UP MY RELENTLESS COMMENTARY ON THE WEB BASED, IS MY CONCERN IS SIMPLY THIS THAT ENGINEERING PROVES THAT A GREATER PART OF THAT CORNER OF THE SITE NEEDS TO BE DISRUPTED, AND THE 33 TREES THAT ARE EXISTING WILL HAVE TO BE REMOVED IN PART OR IN WHOLE. AND THEN WE'RE LOSING THE VERY ISSUE THAT WE RAISED AT OUR LAST MEETING IN TERMS OF THE CONCERN OF THE STREETSCAPE ALONG DUBLIN-GRANVILLE ROAD. SO MY OBJECTION ISN'T SO MUCH WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS THAT IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN FULLY ENGINEERED AT THIS POINT.
AND SO IT'S DIFFICULT FOR US TO WITHOUT CONDITIONS, RESPOND TO THAT. SO THAT'S MY QUESTION, BOTH AS A CLARIFICATION, BUT ALSO TO MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS OF, YOU KNOW, SHOULD WE MOVE TOWARD APPROVAL? I BELIEVE SOME QUALIFICATION NEEDS TO BE PLACED ON THAT CORNER SO THAT WE CAN ALL ACHIEVE THE SAME DESIRED OUTCOME. I'VE GOT A LIST OF ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS. SO IF A
[00:40:01]
MOTION YOU WANT TO HAVE ONE READY I CAN CERTAINLY. OH, IT'S MY WEAK LINK. THANK YOU, MR. ADEN. IF I COULD MENTION, AFTER THE LAST MEETING, WE ALL TALKED ABOUT THE SAME CONCERN ABOUT THE TREES AND THE WET BASIN. AND IN DISCUSSION WITH PRIME, THEY REALLY FELT THAT THEY COULD KEEP THE TREES AND STILL ACCOMPLISH THE WET BASIN. NOW, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. THE FULL ENGINEERING HAS NOT BEEN DONE ON THAT. SO WE'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO BRING THAT BACK TO YOU AND, AND VET THAT OUT AS THE ENGINEERING IS COMPLETED. THANK YOU. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR CONFIDENCE IN THAT. AND THAT WOULD FRANKLY, BE MY RECOMMENDATION OF A CONDITION.IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROPOSAL, SO LONG AS IT DOESN'T COMPROMISE ANY OF THE EXISTING TREES. AND IF IT DOES, THEY'LL HAVE TO BE RECONSIDERED. I IMAGINE THAT'S AS GOOD AS I CAN DO. MR. WRITING THAT'S VERY HELPFUL, ALEX. THANK YOU. MY PLEASURE, SOME OF THAT DASHED IS, IT SHOWS THE FOREBAY AND THE WATER LEVEL, I BELIEVE WHEN IT'S NOT FULL, THOSE TREES AND PLANNING WAS DONE BACK WHEN THE, IMPROVEMENTS WERE DONE WITH PARKING AND 2016, 2016. YEAH AND, THE TREES WERE SET BACK AWAY FROM THAT IMPOUNDMENT SO THEY WOULDN'T BE IMPACTED. AND AS SCOTT SAID, WE BELIEVE THERE WILL BE NO IMPACT AND CAN AGREED TO THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO OUR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT? NOT FOR ME. I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. PLEASE EVENING. GOOD EVENING, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ON THIS PROJECT, SO THERE WERE THREE, CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED LAST TIME ABOUT THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, FIRST OFF, ALONG MORGAN ROAD, WHERE WE WERE ADDING STREET TREES. THEY WERE INITIALLY ADDED IN KIND OF A LINEAR FASHION, YOU HAVE ONE. THIS ONE. OKAY SO ADDING THESE STREET TREES ALONG HERE, INITIALLY THEY WERE IN JUST A STRAIGHT LINE, KIND OF SIMILAR TO THAT. THOSE WERE DESIGNED OVER HERE, AND THE REQUEST WAS MADE TO KIND OF NATURALIZE THOSE A LITTLE BIT.
SO WE'VE, WE'VE DONE THAT, KEEPING DIFFERENT, MASSING AND NOT JUST A STRAIGHT LINE. THE ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WAS NOTED WAS THAT ALONG THIS, FIRE ACCESS LANE THAT WILL NEED TO BE INSTALLED, THE FORMER DESIGN INCLUDED SOME, SOME LARGE TREES ALONGSIDE IT TO HELP WITH, GO TOWARDS SCREENING, AND INSTEAD OF THAT, IN ORDER TO NOT INTERFERE WITH THE VIEW OF THE EXISTING BUILDING HERE, SOME MOUND MOUNDING AND SHRUBS HAVE BEEN REPLACED, HAVE BEEN PROPOSED, AGAIN WITH SOME, INPUT FROM, STAFF FROM MCCSC AND THEN THE OTHER THE OTHER CONCERN THAT WAS BROUGHT UP WAS, I THINK JUST THE, THE CONTINUITY ALONG DUBLIN-GRANVILLE ROAD, AND, OUR CHANGES THERE PRIMARILY HAVE BEEN HAVE BEEN GRAPHIC. I THINK WE JUST WE WEREN'T SHOWING EVERYTHING THAT WAS EXISTING, ON THE LAST, THE LAST TIME THIS WAS IN FRONT OF YOU, SO, VISITED THE SITE AND ACTUALLY COUNTED THE TREES, MADE SURE ALL THE TREES THAT WERE, YOU KNOW, ALL THESE TREES ARE ALIVE, A LOT IN THIS AREA ARE, THEY'RE SMALLER. THEY'RE YOUNGER AT THIS STAGE.
BUT, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF TREES HERE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, A NUMBER OF TREES HERE ALL AROUND THE POND, AND IN ADDITION, THERE WAS A LITTLE BREAK HERE, SO WE'RE ADDING TO STREET TREES IN THAT AREA CLOSER TO THE INTERSECTION WITH BOULDE. ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, I DO HAVE ONE. ONE MINOR QUESTION, I KNOW THAT THIS IS YOU OR SOMEBODY ELSE, BUT SINCE IT'S ON L4, I NOTICED THAT WE'VE GOT THE FIRE LANE GRASS PAVER, DO WE KNOW WHAT THE PAVER LOOKS LIKE? HAVE WE SPECIFIED THAT? NOT A LANDSCAPE MATTER. IT'S AN ARCHITECT. OKAY.
YEAH, YEAH, ACTUALLY, THERE IS A CURRENT FIRE LANE COMES OFF OF PHOTO ROAD. WE'RE SHIFTING IT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER TO THE SOUTH. OKAY, SO THAT WE GET FULL COVERAGE FOR THE SAME PAVER AS IT GOES. SO IT WILL ACTUALLY LOOK LIKE GRASS IF YOU GO ACTUALLY TO AN AERIAL MAP OF THE SITE, YOU'LL SEE WHERE THAT LANE EXISTS. RIGHT NOW IT'S ROUGHLY ABOUT RIGHT WHERE THE GATHERING
[00:45:01]
SPACE IS. YEAH. OKAY. THERE IT IS. YEP OKAY. GOT IT. PERFECT. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I NEED. THANK YOU. AND IF I COULD ADD A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS, JUST AS COMMENTARY TO THE LANDSCAPE, A LOT OF THE WORK THAT WAS DONE, ACTUALLY IN 2016, WHICH IS ALONG THE BASIN AND WEST OF THE DRIVE AND THE RIGHT OF WAY, THAT WAS ACTUALLY AN ORIGINAL DESIGN BY MCCSC. SO THE CHURCH HAD WORKED WITH THE CITY ON THAT, AND THOSE TREES AND THE LANDSCAPE SELECTIONS WERE ALL, COORDINATED WITH THE CITY. AND THEN SECONDLY, TO MAYBE USE A MUSICAL TERM, THE TREES THAT ARE ACTUALLY TO THE EAST SIDE OF THE EXISTING DRIVE, THEY REALLY FORM A BIT OF A CADENCE WITH WHAT'S GOING ON FURTHER DOWN IN EAST DUBLIN-GRANVILLE ROAD, BECAUSE RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE HIGH SCHOOL THERE ARE TWO ROWS OF TREES, AND THAT CONTINUES ACTUALLY TO OUR DRIVEWAY FROM FOSTER ROAD. SO THERE IS A REALLY NICE CADENCE THERE ALREADY. WE ARE PROPOSING TO PUT IN TWO NEW TREES TO COMPLETE WHERE THERE'S A BARE SPOT THERE. WE DO HAVE A MANHOLE THERE, SO WE WILL HAVE TO COORDINATE WITH THE MANHOLE, BUT THAT'S THE INTENT OF TRYING TO KEEP THAT LINEAR LOOK ALL THE WAY ACROSS. OKAY THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER LANDSCAPE QUESTIONS? I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER THE CHAIR. NOT FOR ME. ANY OTHERS FROM THE BOARD? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.THANK YOU. WE PREPARED. FOR MOTION. ANY OTHER COMMENTS YOU WANT ME TO TRY IT? MR. AITKEN, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND. ALL RIGHT. I WILL DO THE BEST THAT I CAN. I'M ALREADY SICK OF HEARING FROM ME, I WOULD MOVE APPROVAL OF ARB 35 2024 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. ONE. THE APPLICANT MUST REVISE THE DESIGN AND DRAWINGS FOR THE CITY OUT PARTICIPANTS COMMENTS AND RENDERING PROVIDED SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. A UNDER THAT THE BRICK ROOF AND BRICK MORTAR COLORS BE WITHIN THE SAME COLOR FAMILY AS THE EXISTING CHURCH, AND THE PROPOSED WINDOWS ARE THE SAME COLOR LINE AS THE EXISTING CHURCH OR AN IDENTICAL DESIGN ON THE PARISH. BOTH THE PARISH COMMUNITY CENTER AND THE LIFE PARISH CENTER BUILDING NUMBER TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD UPDATE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN TO INCLUDE THE STREET VIEW QUANTITIES ON MORGAN ROAD IN THEIR LANDSCAPE DATA TABLE, WHICH I THINK HAS ALREADY BEEN SATISFIED. THREE THE PROPOSED MOUNDING IS SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL FOR THAT. THE DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED WET BASIN IS SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. AND LET ME LEAVE. WELL I'LL LEAVE THAT ONE THERE FOR NOW AND WE'LL MOVE ON TO FIVE. THE LIGHTING USES CUT OFF FIXTURES AND DOWNCAST DESIGNS, PREVENTING SPILLAGE BEYOND THE SITE'S BOUNDARIES AND MATCHING THE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURES CURRENTLY ON THE SITE. SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. SIX A TEN FOOT PUBLIC ACCESS AND STREETSCAPE EASEMENT BE PROVIDED, EXTENDING FROM THE EDGE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF MORGAN ROAD THAT EXTENDS THE LENGTH OF THE PROPERTY, SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. SEVEN, THAT THE HARDSCAPE AREAS REFLECTED IN NOTE 21 ON S ON A1. I GUESS IT IS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE APPROVAL TODAY OR IN ANY ANY NOTATIONS ELSEWHERE IN THE PLAN, AND THAT THOSE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW BY THE APPROVAL BY THE IRB. NOTE NUMBER EIGHT. NO, NO APPROVAL OR CONSIDERATION IS BEING MADE OF SP THREE. THAT'S PROVIDED FOR INFORMATION ONLY. NINE, NO, I DON'T I DON'T NEED THAT. AND I GUESS 10 OR 9 I GUESS WE'RE ON NINE THAT IN THE ENGINEERING OF THE WET BASIN THAT THERE BE NO NET LOSS OF TREES AND THAT SHOULD THERE BE A NECESSITY? IF THERE, IF THERE THAT ANY ENGINEERING THAT WOULD REQUIRE A LOSS OF TREES THAT NEEDS TO COME BACK TO THE IRB. OKAY SURE. AND WHETHER THAT COMES BACK TO THE IRB OR IS JUST WORKED WITH STAFF, I GUESS I'M I'M OPEN TO EITHER SCENARIO. BASED ON YOUR COMMENT REGARDING THE STAFF APPROVAL IN NOTE, I'M HAPPY TO HAVE IT GO TO STAFF IF YOU CAN REVISE NOT TO BURDEN STAFF. STAFF IS PAID. YOU DON'T. NEED DO WE HAVE A SECOND? AWESOME.
I'LL SECOND. MR. EITAN. YES. MR. DAVEY? YES, MR. MULLINS? YES MR. BROWN? YES. MR. STRAHLER. YES,
[00:50:05]
MR. HENSON. YES MISS MOORE. YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND CONDITION SEVEN HARDSCAPE AREAS ON A1 ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE APPROVAL. THOSE ARE SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVIEW OF THE ARB CONDITION NUMBER EIGHT. THIS IS NOT SUBJECT TO SB THREE OR WE'RE NOT APPROVING AS WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING OR APPROVING SB THREE. NOT CONSIDERING OR IT'S THERE FOR INFORMATION ONLY.THANK YOU. AND NUMBER NINE, ENGINEERING OF THE WET BASIN THAT THERE BE NO NET LOSS OF TREES. AND THAT IS SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. CONGRATULATIONS THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
LOOK FORWARD TO. OUR NEXT CASE IS ZC. 48 2024 FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OF REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 108.1 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST OF STATE ROUTE 161, NORTH OF EAST DUBLIN.
GRANVILLE ROAD, EAST OF JONESTOWN ROAD, US ROUTE 62 AND WEST OF KITZMILLER ROAD. FOR A FROM COMPREHENSIVE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CPWD TO COMPREHENSIVE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. APPLICANT IS THE NEW ALBANY COMPANY AND CARE OF AARON UNDERHILL. OKAY. STAFF REPORT, PLEASE. SURE. THANK YOU. WERE YOU GUYS ABLE TO SEE IF I, IF I AM POINTING TOWARDS THE SCREEN OR SHOULD I ORIENT MYSELF MORE TOWARDS THIS ONE OVER HERE? YOU GUYS. EITHER WAY, WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT. OKAY. GOTCHA ALL RIGHT. SO AS YOU MENTIONED, THIS IS A REZONING APPLICATION, I KNOW THAT REZONINGS ARE NOT SOMETHING THAT TYPICALLY COME BEFORE THE ARB, SO I JUST WANTED TO, SLOW DOWN AND EXPLAIN THAT TO YOU GUYS A LITTLE BIT. SO OUR CODE REQUIRES, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING IN THE VILLAGE CENTER THAT'S CONSIDERED A MAJOR, ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD, ONE OF THOSE CHANGES IS A REZONING. SO YOU GUYS ARE CHARGED WITH REVIEWING YOUR REZONING APPLICATION AND MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AS YOU PROBABLY NOTICED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT, THE TYPICAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS EVALUATION CRITERIA WAS INCLUDED. AND BECAUSE THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED AT THIS TIME, A LOT OF THAT, CRITERIA, COULDN'T BE EVALUATED. BUT WE THREW IN THE TYPICAL, CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE PROVIDE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEIR STAFF REPORTS SO THAT YOU GUYS CAN HAVE THEM SO THIS IS THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE VILLAGE CENTER. THIS IS COMMONLY THIS AREA IS COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE GANTMAN. TRACK OR THE GANTON AREA. AND BOTH OUR STRATEGIC PLAN AND THEN FOR A LONG, LONG TIME BEFORE THAT, SO AGAIN AS PART OF THIS, REZONING, THERE IS NO DEVELOPMENT THAT'S PROPOSED AT THIS TIME. THIS IS JUST SETTING STANDARDS, THAT WE WOULD USE TO EVALUATE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS BECAUSE OF THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION, KPD, THE APPLICANT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO RETURN TO THE, TO THE ARB AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW OF A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WHICH IS KIND OF THE NEXT STEP. IT SHOWS A LITTLE BIT OF DEVELOPMENT SITE WHERE BUILDINGS COULD BE LOCATED ON SITES, MAYBE SOME PRELIMINARY ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. AND THEN ALSO YOU HAVE TO COME BACK FOR A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION, FOR MORE FINAL DESIGN DRAWINGS, JUST IN CASE YOU ANYONE DOESN'T KNOW, THIS IS, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IS LOCATED HERE. THIS IS DUKE AND DUCHESS HERE. SO THIS IS, THIS IS STATE ROUTE 161. SO THIS IS REALLY EVERYTHING BEHIND. IT'S PROBABLY THE CLOSEST LANDMARK I CAN REFER TO. AND NORTH OF, DUBLIN-GRANVILLE ROAD. RIGHT HERE. SO AS I MENTIONED, THIS SITE IS ALREADY ZONED UNDER THE 1998 NACO KPD GO THROUGH SOME OF THE EXISTING PERMITTED USES OF THAT ZONING DISTRICT THAT INCLUDES 294 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A SMALL AMOUNT OF COMMERCIAL USES, KIND OF IN THE SAME AREA THAT DUKE AND DUCHESS IS NOW, AND LAND A LITTLE BIT BEHIND IT. AS WELL. AND THEN THE ZONING, EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT ALSO ALLOWS FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES TO BE DEVELOPED, ON THIS AREA THAT INCLUDES HOSPITALS, GOVERNMENT FACILITIES AND EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES. SO THE PROPOSED REZONING REALLY ISN'T MUCH DIFFERENT, THERE ARE SOME MINOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE EXISTING ZONING AND WHAT'S PROPOSED, BUT BY AND LARGE, THE APPLICANT REALLY IS, RETAINING ALL OF THOSE USES AND, JUST PROVIDING SOME ADDITIONAL
[00:55:03]
STANDARDS, SOME MORE REFINED STANDARDS FOR HOW TO EVALUATE THOSE USES ON THE SITE. SO THE PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT IS MADE UP OF THREE DIFFERENT SUBAREAS, WHICH ARE SHOWN HERE IN THE COLORS SUBAREA. ONE IS WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO SEE, THOSE SIMILAR TO CF USES, AGAIN, THAT ARE ALREADY EXISTING OR THAT ARE ALREADY ALLOWED INTO THE EXISTING ZONING TEXT. THOSE ARE RETAINED HERE IN SUBAREA, ONE THAT WILL ALLOW THINGS LIKE HOSPITALS, SURGERY CENTERS, SUPPORTIVE OFFICE USES, AND THEN SOME ACCESSORY, USES THAT YOU WOULD TYPICALLY FIND IN A HOSPITAL SETTING, LIKE A PHARMACY OR MAYBE A CAFETERIA. THINGS LIKE THAT ARE PERMITTED AND SUBAREA ONE, SIDEBAR TWO IS THE INTRODUCTION OF SOME NEW USES, BUT COMPLEMENTARY TO WHAT'S PERMITTED IN SUBAREA ONE, OFFICE USES ARE PERMITTED TO BE DEVELOPED THAT COULD BE GENERAL OFFICES, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES, MEDICAL OFFICES COULD ALL BE DEVELOPED IN SUBAREA TWO.THEY'RE IN THE ORANGE AND THEN IN SUBAREA THREE, THE APPLICANT IS NOT INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF RESIDENTIAL THAT CAN BE DEVELOPED IN THE SITE THAT IS RETAINING THOSE, 294 UNITS, WHICH AGAIN, THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP THOSE EXIST TODAY UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING, THOSE WOULD BE DEVELOPED IN SUBAREA THREE, WHICH IS SHOWN IN THE LIGHT GREEN THERE ON YOUR SCREEN, THE ONE, WHAT WE WOULD CALL AN IMPROVEMENT, WITH THIS, WITH THIS NEW TEXT IS THAT THOSE, RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE REQUIRED TO BE DEVELOPED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE URBAN CENTER CODE, WHICH IS SOMETHING YOU GUYS ARE VERY, VERY FAMILIAR WITH. IT'S A FORM BASED CODE. MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING THE RIGHT ARCHITECTURE, AND CREATING, YOU KNOW, A NODE OF DENSITY THAT KIND OF HELPS SUPPORT THE REST OF THE TRADITIONAL TOWN CENTER THAT'S BEING DEVELOPED, AND THE REST OF THE VILLAGE CENTER THAT SURROUNDS THE SITE. SO THAT'S ONE, MAJOR PLUS WITH THIS APPLICATION FROM A USE PERSPECTIVE, WE DID INCLUDE, AS YOU NOTICE IN YOUR STAFF REPORT, THERE'S AN EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF USES AND SUBAREA THREE, BECAUSE IT DOES REVERT BACK TO THE URBAN CENTER CODE. SO THERE'S MULTIPLE DIFFERENT USES THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED IN THAT SUB AREA. AND THEN DIFFERENT TYPES OF HOUSING, DIFFERENT HOUSING TYPOLOGIES. SO HOPEFULLY YOU CAN SEE THIS ON THE SCREEN. BUT ON YOUR LEFT HAND SIDE OF YOUR SCREEN IS THE PROPOSED OR THE ALLOWED BUILDING TYPOLOGIES. THAT INCLUDES COTTAGE HOMES, BUNGALOW HOMES, TRADITIONAL HOMES, ATTACHED HOMES AND TOWNHOMES, AS WELL AS MULTI-UNIT BUILDINGS. AND THEN ALL THE LIST OF PERMITTED USES ARE THERE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF YOUR SCREEN AND AGAIN, ALL OF THOSE PERMITTED USES AND ALL THESE PERMITTED BUILDING TYPOLOGIES ARE ACTUALLY COMING FROM THE URBAN CENTER CODE, WHICH THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO ADHERE TO. IT'S NOTHING KIND OF NEW. IT'S OUT OF THE NORM WITH THAT. SO IF, I THINK WE MADE A POINT OF THIS IN OUR IN OUR STAFF REPORT, BUT I'LL REITERATE IT HERE. SO AGAIN, THIS ZONING DISTRICT ACTUALLY BRING THE PROPOSED ZONING ACTUALLY BRINGS THIS, THE SITE MORE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THEIR STRATEGIC PLAN AND THE VILLAGE CENTER STRATEGIC PLAN. OUTLINE THE SITE HERE IN RED, AND IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE RIGHT THERE.
SO THE, STRATEGIC PLAN ALWAYS IDENTIFIED, YOU KNOW, A ROAD CONNECTION GOING THROUGH THIS, THIS ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH IS, CONTEMPLATED IN THE ZONING TEXT, CANTON PARKWAY NORTH OF THAT ROAD, CREATING A REALLY COMPELLING HIGH QUALITY OFFICE ENVIRONMENT ALONG STATE ROUTE 161. THE APPLICANT IS, YOU KNOW, SETTING UP THE STAGE TO BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE THAT, THAT VISION.
AND THEN SOUTH OF CANTON PARKWAY, WE REALLY HAVE ALWAYS ENVISIONED THAT AREA BEING KIND OF TIED BACK INTO THE VILLAGE. THE REST OF THE VILLAGE CENTER, IN TERMS OF WHAT BUILDINGS LOOK LIKE, YOU KNOW, THEIR INTENSITY, AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO, TO, YOU KNOW, MEET ALL OF THESE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES THAT ARE IN OUR STRATEGIC PLAN, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS STAFF. I HAD A NUMBER OF I MEAN, AGAIN, THIS IS SINCE WE'RE NOT TYPICALLY, WE'RE NOT TYPICALLY VIEWING THESE THAT WAS WHAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD A FEW THINGS ABOUT THIS. SO IT'S CURRENTLY IN A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, AND NOW IT'S IN A NEW PLAN UNIT. THAT'S RIGHT. IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY, SO AS I SEE YOUR INTERPRETATION OF 1150 708 B2, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THIS NOW, AND THEN WE'LL LOOK AT IT AGAIN WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THE PRELIMINARY, DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND THEN AGAIN FOR A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. AND THEN WE'LL SEE IT TWICE MORE. CORRECT. SO IT IS REALLY ARCHITECTURE WILL SHOW UP LATER. CORRECT. SO THINGS THAT WE KNOW ABOUT MR. MALLETT'S AND MR. DAVEY KNOW A LOT ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS. BUT AS FAR AS WHAT I KNOW ABOUT IT'S, IT'S YES, IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S AS MUCH ARCHITECTURE YOU HEARD AS MUCH ARCHITECTURE AS I KNOW TONIGHT WHEN I DISCUSSED THIS GEORGIAN BUILDING, BUT AT LEAST I KNOW THAT MUCH. YEAH, BUT WE'LL SEE THAT LATER. CORRECT. OKAY. YEP. AND AM I CORRECT, IF I UNDERSTAND THIS PROPERLY, THAT WHEN IT COMES TO. WE'LL SEE IT DURING THE WE'LL SEE ARCHITECTURE DURING THESE PLANS. BUT AFTER THE PLAN GETS APPROVED, WE WON'T SEE THE ARCHITECTURE FOR INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS. IS THAT CORRECT. SO IN THE VILLAGE CENTER IT IS A
[01:00:01]
LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. SO BECAUSE EVERYTHING IN SUBAREA THREE IS IN THE VILLAGE CENTER OKAY. THEY WILL HAVE TO COME BACK WITH VERY DETAILED SORT OF SPECIFIC HOMES SO THAT THAT OKAY. SO I KNOW SOMETIMES WE JUST APPROVE A MODEL AND THEN WE NEVER SEE IT AGAIN. IN THIS CASE WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY AND THE FINAL PLAN. AND THEN WHEN THEY DECIDE TO BUILD 43 DETACHED HOMES OVER HERE, THOSE ARE GOING TO COME TO US. YEAH, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE LARGELY DEPENDENT ON WHAT'S PROPOSED. AT THAT TIME. THE APPLICANT ASKED FOR IT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S A I'LL LET THEM SPEAK TO THAT, BUT IT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S MORE OF A MODEL. OR IT COULD BE INDIVIDUAL CUSTOM HOMES. IT KIND OF JUST DEPENDS. AND WE'RE NOT THERE YET. BUT OKAY. BUT WE KNOW MORE ABOUT THAT WHEN WE SEE THE PRELIMINARY PLAN. AND THE FIVE PLAN. OKAY, THAT THAT'S HELPFUL BECAUSE AGAIN, I'M JUST NOT SURE. YEP, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY ZC CASES WE'VE HA.THIS WAS KIND OF EXCITING JUST TO SEE A ZC CASE. AND OKAY, LET ME LET ME STOP THERE AND LET OTHER PEOPLE POST QUESTIONS. IS THAT THAT'S REALLY THE FIRST QUESTIONS I HAD. I DO HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION, REGARDING THE PROPOSED SUB AREAS, WILL THEY CARRY THIS IS AS MUCH A CURIOSITY AS A CLARIFICATION. WILL THERE BE REQUIRED TO HAVE ANY SORT OF BUFFER OR SETBACK O.
ANY KIND OF SEPARATION BETWEEN THE SUB AREAS, DO YOU MEAN? SURE SO THE SUB AREA PLAN THAT YOU SEE ON THE MAP RIGHT NOW IS, IS BASED ON A CONCEPTUAL ALIGNMENT OF THE EXTENSION OF GAYTON PARKWAY. SO THE ACREAGES I SUSPECT, AND THOSE BLOBS WILL EXPAND AND CONTRACT OVER TIME AS THE CITY IS FINALIZING THE ALIGNMENT OF GANTON PARKWAY AND KITZMILLER ROAD, FOR THAT MATTE, THERE ARE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, ALONG 161, THERE WILL ALSO BE A SIGNIFICANT 300FT, POTENTIALLY EVEN 400FT SETBACK ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF DUBLIN-GRANVILLE ROAD. THERE'S LANGUAGE IN THE ZONING TEXT AND COMMITMENTS IN THE URBAN CENTER CODE THAT TALK ABOUT HOMES NOT BACKING UP TO PARKS AND OPEN SPACES THAT WILL BE EXCEEDINGLY DIFFICULT, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE TO ACHIEVE IN SUBAREA THREE, IF IN FACT, WE COME BACK WITH THIS SIGNIFICANT SETBACK ALONG DUBLIN-GRANVILLE ROAD, MR. AITKEN, WHETHER WE COME BACK WITH, A MENU OF ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS FOR HOMES OR THEIR INDIVIDUAL HOMES IS ALL YET TO BE DETERMINED. ONE OF THE OTHER, SIGNIFICANT COMPONENTS IN SUBAREA THREE IS A COMMITMENT FOR A LARGE PARK ADJACENT TO ROSE RUN. THAT'S THE HEADWATERS OF ROSE RUN CREEK. IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER OUR DEAR FRIEND BILL RAUSCH, THIS ALL STARTED WITH HIM MANY YEARS AGO WHERE THERE WAS A REQUEST TO ADD A CONSERVATION EASEMENT ALONG THAT VERY IMPORTANT SECTION OF THE HEADWATERS OF THE ROSE CREEK THAT, IN FACT, IS IN PLACE TODAY. WE WILL BE MODIFYING THAT AS THE AS THIS PLAN CONTINUES TO EVOLVE, MODIFY IT, BUT MODIFY IT IN A WAY THAT TURNS THAT PARK LAND INTO AN AMENITY THAT'S REALLY PART OF THE CITY'S VISION FOR ROSE RUN PARK. OKAY. THAT WILL BE SUCH AN AMENITY THAT I CAN'T IMAGINE A SCENARIO WHERE WE WOULD NOT FRONT HOMES ON TO A PARK IN THAT AREA. DIFFICULT TO DO THAT ALONG ALONG, DUBLIN-GRANVILLE ROAD. I'LL PROBABLY GONE ON TOO LONG. NO, THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL. SO I GUESS WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING IS THE DELINEATION BETWEEN THE SUB AREAS IS INTENDED TO BE A ROADWAY. YES BUT NOT FINAL. AND I GUESS THE, ACREAGE MAY CHANGE OF THE SUB AREAS WILL CHANGES RESULT. OKAY. IT CURRENTLY THE COMMITMENT IN THE ZONING TEXT IS THAT THAT WILL BE A MINIMUM OF 100FT OF RIGHT OF WAY PUBLICLY DEDICATED RIGHT OF WAY, OKAY. TO ALLOW FOR THE EXTENSION OF THE ROAD WITHIN SUBAREAS ONE AND TWO. THERE IS A USER THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH RIGHT NOW, NOTHING WE CAN ANNOUNCE PUBLICLY, SPECIFICALLY FOR SUB AREA ONE. WILL THAT WILL THAT USER GROW INTO SUB AREA TWO OR WILL SUB AREA TWO BE A COMPLEMENTARY USE TO SUB AREA ONE IS THE QUESTION MARK. SO THERE ARE MINIMUM SETBACKS WITHIN THOSE TWO G'S. IT WOULD BE REALLY GREAT IF SUB AREA ONE AND SUB AREA TWO WERE CONNECTED. THAT WAS ONE LARGE USER. THAT'S THE WAY WE DRAFTED
[01:05:02]
THE COMMITMENTS TEXT. THANKS. THANK YOU. I'M SORRY, I WAS GOING TO ASK ABOUT THE HOW THE AGAIN PARKWAY ROAD WAS GENERATED IF AND IF THAT IS THAT SOMETHING WE'RE REVIEWING OR IS THAT JUST SO GANTON PARKWAY IS A COLLECTOR ROAD ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 161. THAT IS IDENTICAL IN DESIGN AND CHARACTER TO WALTON PARKWAY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROAD. SO IT'S ALREADY STARTED FOR THE EAST OVER BEACH ROAD. TO ACCESS PARKWAY TO GET TO ENGINE, IT'S CONNECTING THE DOTS RIGHT FROM, FROM 62 TO OVER TO, TO ENGINE THE ENGINE SITE THAT ALIGNMENT, I DON'T BELIEVE, COMES BACK TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD. THE PROFILE IS BEING DETERMINED BY THE CITY AND THE CITY ENGINEER. EVEN AS WE SPEAK. NUMBER OF LANES. IT WILL BE A BOULEVARD, LANDSCAPE BOULEVARD.IT WILL HAVE LEISURE TRAIL ON BOTH SIDES. IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, WILL INCLUDE AN EXTENSION OF THE. WHAT'S THE NAME OF THE PEDESTRIAN PATH? SO THAT THERE ARE THINGS LIKE THAT THE CITY IS WORKING THROUGH. THEY THEY WILL DETERMINE WHAT THAT ULTIMATE ALIGNMENT IS, BUT ISN'T PART OF.
I DON'T BELIEVE PART OF THE ARAB. IT'S ALL JUST ADD REAL QUICK. SO THE ROAD WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL. OKAY. IS THE APPROVAL TRACK FOR THAT ON THE HILL? PARKWAY HERE IN THE WORLD. AND HE JUST WANTED TO ADD PROCEDURALLY AS AS CHRIS MENTIONED, WHAT THE PLANNING PROCESS AND THAT WILL GO THROUGH, I THINK, AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, ALTHOUGH YOU PROBABLY WON'T YOU WON'T BE APPROVING NECESSARILY DESIGN AND GEOMETRY OF THE ROAD AS WE COME BACK WITH A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, YOU WILL SEE IT AND HOW THE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE, THE CPWD WILL ADDRESS THAT, THAT RIGHT OF WAY, EVEN THOUGH YOU WON'T APPROVE THE DESIGN PER SE, OF THAT ROAD, YOU GET TO SEE THE LOCATION AND HOW WE'RE IMPACTING IT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. THE REASON I ASKED IS JUST FELT LIKE A WEIRD CONNECTION HERE WITH KITZMILLER. AND, YEAH. SO THERE ARE A SERIES OF, SUGGESTIONS THAT ARE BEING THAT HAVE BEEN THROWN OUT THERE THAT INCLUDE ROUNDABOUTS, TO SOLVE THAT RIDDLE BECAUSE YOU CAN'T OBVIOUSLY CONNECT THE PARKWAY INTO THAT FOUR WAY INTERSECTION.
SO HOW DO YOU SOLVE THAT? THAT'S BEING WORKED ON NOW BY THE CITY ENGINEERS HERE, THE CITY, AS WELL AS SOME SUGGESTIONS FROM US, CORRECT? YEAH. THE CITY HAS HIRED THE, TRAFFIC CONSULTANT AND ENGINEERING FIRM CARPENTER MARTIS. WE'VE DONE A TRAFFIC STUDY, AND WE'RE WORKING WITH THEM ON DIFFERENT ALIGNMENTS. TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO REALIGN AND INTERSECT WITH, KITZMILLER ROAD. AND IN CASE ANYONE'S NOT FAMILIAR, THE ROAD STARTS TO RAISE UP ABOUT HERE.
SO IT'S ELEVATED TO GET OVER 161 HERE. SO THAT'S WHY LOTS OF TREES. YEAH. HUGE TOP I'M GOING TO SAY 15 18FT. WOW IN ELEVATION. SO IT'S A REAL GEOMETRY QUESTION. FLYOVERS.
THAT WAS JUST MY CURIOSITY. YEAH THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ON THE, ON PAGE SEVEN OF THE TEXT IN SECTION THREE A, THE LAST SENTENCE READS ALTERNATIVE BUILDING MATERIALS MAY MAY BE USED SUBJECT TO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DISTRICT APPROVAL. SO THAT'S IT IS THAT US OR A REVIEW BOARD OR SOME OTHER DISTRICT THAT APPROVE THAT. BUT THAT'S THE ARB. YEAH. OKAY. SO WE JUST NEED THE WORD DISTRICT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED OVER BOARD. YES. OKAY THE FENCING, IT JUST MENTIONS PUTTING THE, THE, HORSE FENCING ALONG 161 AND 62 AND THEN THEN SUBAREA THREE. IT MENTIONS DOUBLE DOUBLE GRAVEL ROAD WITH THE NEW PARKWAY, NOT HAVE THE FENCING. I SUSPECT IT WILL HAVE FENCING. YES OKAY. AGAIN YEAH. SO OUR FENCING WOULD BE PERMITTED WITHIN THE WAY THAT THE TEXT IS DRAFTED. NOW EXCUSE ME. WHERE THAT FENCING OCCURS, TYPICALLY A HORSE FENCE GOES ONE FOOT OFF THE RIGHT OF WAY. AS I MENTIONED, WE THINK THE RIGHT OF WAY WILL BE ABOUT 100FT. IT STILL BEING DESIGNED. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN SAY HORSE FENCING WILL BE ONE FOOT OFF THE RIGHT OF WAY. IT COULD BE GREATER. IT COULD BE LESS. WE NEED THIS KIND OF A MOVING TARGET. THERE WILL BE HORSE FENCE ON BOTH SIDES OF THAT. OKAY. I MEAN, THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING. AND THEN ALL THE SECTIONS ON LIGHTING IN THE TEXT, IT REFERS TO, ALL PARKING LOT LIGHTING SHALL BE THE SAME, LIGHT SOURCE TYPE AND STYLE. AND THE SECOND SENTENCE, BUILDING
[01:10:01]
PEDESTRIAN LANDSCAPE MAY BE INCANDESCENT OR METAL HALIDE IS THAT IS THAT LIMITING IT TO THIS THAT OR IS IT SAYING IT CAN BE THAT. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT LED WOULD BE SOMETHING WE. YEAH, I THINK WE COULD ADD IN LED JUST TO CLARIFY THAT THAT ALSO MAY BE ALLOWED. OKAY. SO THAT'S IN ALL THREE SUB AREA SECTIONS FOR THE LIGHTING. OKAY. YEP. I THINK THAT WAS ALL MY COMMENTS.LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE ARB, OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS AND YEARS AS THIS PROJECT COMES TO COME TO FRUITION. OKAY. THANK YOU. BACK HERE BEFORE YOU ALL NOT NOT NOT SO MUCH A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT MAYBE FOR THE CITY IS, YOU KNOW, GIVEN WHAT WE HAVE IN HERE AND OVER THERE, IT'S CALLED SOMETHING ELSE. IS IT GOING TO BE IS THE NAME GOING TO BE ALIGNED AND. SO IT DOESN'T START AS THIESSEN AND CONTINUE AGAIN. YEAH. SO IT DEPENDS ON THE INTERNAL ROADWAYS. SO GATING IS THE MAIN AS MR. SAID THE COLLECTOR ROAD, WE KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE FUTURE ADDITIONAL INTERIOR ROADS THAT SERVICE THAT DOES THIS HAVE A NAME RIGHT NOW.
YEAH. SO THAT IS, THAT'S RIGHT. AND SO I THINK THERE'S OPTIONS. AND SO THE NAMING ULTIMATELY COMES TO CITY COUNCIL TO DETERMINE THE ROAD NAMES. AND SO RIGHT NOW I GUESS IT'S THE ANSWER IS TO BE DETERMINED IF THERE ARE MORE IT'S NOT WORKING. IF THERE ARE MORE INTERNAL RAILWAYS IN THE FUTURE THAT RUN SORT OF NORTH SOUTH, MAYBE THAT WOULD BE A TRANSITION POINT AT AN INTERSECTION. OKAY. OTHERWISE, YEAH, I THINK MAYBE IT DOES GET CHANGED. NOT A GOOD THING. I JUST IT'S YEAH IT IS SOMETHING THAT. YEAH, WE ARE CONSIDERING AND THINKING ABOUT OPTIONS ON. SORRY. ONE MORE QUESTION. SO DOES THE ARB HAVE REVIEW OF ALL THREE SUB AREAS OR JUST SUB AREA THREE. ALL THREE. ALL THREE OKAY. THANK YOU. I GUESS I DO HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION WHERE IT IS CURRENTLY THE SUB THAT'S CURRENTLY BUILT BETWEEN THE, THE FIRE STATION AND THE BP. WILL THAT BE PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT, THAT THAT AREA? I MEAN, THAT REALLY IS SERVING AS THE ENTRANCE FROM THE NORTH WEST. WELL I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THERE ARE ANY, WILL THERE BE ANY PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS TO THAT EXISTING? WHAT PROBABLY IS, IS WHAT, 1000 FOOT OF ROADWAY? OR IS THAT GOING TO BE COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT OF WHAT THIS PROJECT WILL ENTAIL? SO THE CITY DID DO SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO THAT SECTION AS PART OF OUR SORRY WORKING AS PART OF OUR WHAT WE CALL THE WALTON TO WINDSOR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS, THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL WIDENINGS NEEDED AND TO BRING THIS INTO ALIGNMENT ONCE THE REST OF GARLAND PARKWAY, IS INSTALLED. SO I GUESS MY ANSWER TO THAT IS IT'S BEING CONSIDERED AND BEING THOUGHT OF AS THAT ANSWERING MY QUESTION. THANK YOU. YEAH. THANK YOU. AND WE'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ASK IF THERE'S ANY OTHER COMMENTS WITHOUT ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD, WOULD ONE OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? SO I MOVED, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF, ZONING CHANGE APPLICATION. ZC 48 2024, SUBJECT TO FIXING THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD ON PAGE SEVEN OF THE TEXT AND ADDING SECOND ITEM IS ADDING PERMIT LEDS, PERMITTED LIGHTING AND ALL THREE SUB AREAS. I'LL SECOND. MR. SCHOLAR? YES, MR. MULLINS? YES MR. BROWN. YES. MR. HANSON. YES. MR. ITEM. YES MISS. MOORE. YES, MR. DAVEY? YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE ADDITIONAL CONDITION THAT LED IS PERMITTED. LIGHTING AND ALL SUB AREAS.
CONGRATULATIONS THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALWAYS A PLEASURE. UNDER OTHER
[VII. Other business]
BUSINESS WE HAVE A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW TRAINING. SORRY I PROBABLY WILL COME UP THERE FOR THIS ONE SO I CAN LOOK AT THE SCREEN LIKE WHAT WE TALKED.[01:15:07]
ALL RIGHT. WELL, IN THE SAME VEIN OF APPLICATIONS THAT WE DON'T TYPICALLY SEE AT THE AARP, WE WANTED TO GIVE YOU GUYS A HEADS UP THAT WE HAVE A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION COMING BEFORE YOU WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH OR TWO. FOR THE HAMLET PROJECT. WE NEED TO KIND OF WALK YOU GUYS THROUGH, IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, BUT WE WANTED TO WALK YOU THROUGH SOME OF THE, GET YOU UP TO SPEED ON THE PROJECT. AND THEN WHAT? THAT REVIEW CRITERIA WOULD BE AT THAT TIME. I'M SORRY. WHAT PROJECT IS THIS? THE HAMLET PROJECT AT 605 AND CENTRAL COLLEGE. YEAH. SO AGAIN, EVERYONE KIND OF UP TO SPEED. YEAH. THE HAMLET. OKAY.YEAH, YEAH. SHAKESPEARE. YEAH SHAKESPEARE REFERENCE THAT FAILED MISERABLY AT THAT. THE ZONING HEARING. SO WE'RE GONNA WATCH THAT, SO THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST CORNERS OF THE CENTRAL COLLEGE AND 605 INTERSECTIONS. THE AREA IDENTIFIED IN RED TO HELP ORIENT YOU, DISCOVER IS RIGHT HERE ACROSS THE STREET, ALDEN WOODS SUBDIVISION. I DON'T THINK YOU GUYS LOOKED AT THAT. IS LOCATED OVER HERE, FURTHER TO THE EAST ON CENTRAL COLLEGE, THAT SHOULD GET YOU GUYS PRETTY WELL. ORIENT THE, THE OLD STATE FARM OFFICE BUILDING IS HERE.
THE MARGARITA GLASS IS HERE. SO BACK IN 2022. SO THIS FEELS LIKE YESTERDAY, BUT IT WAS ALMOST TWO YEARS AGO AT THIS POINT. CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A ZONING DISTRICT AND ZONING TAX TO ALLOW A HAMLET TO BE DEVELOPED ON THIS SITE AS ENVISIONED IN THE ENGAGEMENT ARMY STRATEGIC PLAN.
SO, AS I MENTIONED, THE ZONING TEXT WAS APPROVED, PART OF THAT ZONING TEXT APPROVAL WAS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS TO COME BACK BEFORE THREE BOARDS. BEFORE CONSTRUCTION STARTS FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION. IF SOME OF YOU I KNOW A FEW OF YOU WERE ON THE BOARD WHEN INGLEFIELD ROYAL OR DUKE AND DUCHESS, CAME BEFORE YOU, I THINK THAT WAS BACK IN LIKE 2019. THAT WAS ALSO A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION, SO THAT'S SMALL, SMALL ONE. OBVIOUSLY THIS IS MUCH THIS IS MUCH MORE SIGNIFICANT, SO TO KIND OF GET YOU ORIENTED A LITTLE BIT, THIS IS CENTRAL COLLEGE ROAD. THIS APPLICATION WAS JUST SUBMITTED, ON FRIDAY. JUST SO THAT YOU'RE AWARE THIS IS 605 HERE. SO AROUND, IT'S BROKEN UP INTO DIFFERENT SUB AREAS. AND I'LL KIND OF GENERALLY OUTLINE THOSE FOR YOU.
IF I'M BORING YOU, TELL ME TO MOVE ON, PLEASE, I'VE BEEN LIVING IN THIS FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS, I CAN TALK ABOUT IT FOR A LONG TIME, BUT SUBAREA ONE IS HERE GENERALLY, THIS IS REALLY. IT'S THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT, BUT SPECIFICALLY IN SUBAREA ONE, IT'S REALLY CENTRALIZED AROUND A COMMERCIAL OR CIVIC GREEN, THIS IS WHERE THE MOST, YOU KNOW, KIND OF INTENSE BUILT FORM IS BEING ACHIEVED THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE ZONING DISTRICT, THIS IS WHERE A LOT OF THE COMMERCIAL USERS WILL BE LOCATED IN THIS AREA AND KIND OF BLEEDING OVER INTO THIS AREA HERE, SUBAREA TWO IS GENERALLY THIS AREA HERE. THIS WILL MOSTLY BE MADE UP OF PREDOMINANTLY TOWNHOMES, TOWNHOME UNITS, SUBAREA THREE IS, ACROSS THE STREET ON 605. THIS IS A DUPLEXES, 1 OR 2 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, BUT MOSTLY AGAIN MOSTLY DUPLEX UNITS. SO JUMPING AHEAD A LITTLE BIT. SO FOR SUBAREA THREE OOPS. AND SUBAREA FIVE JOHN ALLUDED TO THIS FOR OUR PREVIOUS APPLICATION. BUT THESE TWO SUB AREAS WILL DEVELOP SIMILARLY. SIMILARLY TO HOW ELY CROSSING STRAITS FARMS AND PARTS OF ACKERLY FARMS WERE DEVELOPED IN TERMS OF YOU GUYS WILL SEE THE LOTS, YOU'LL SEE GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS WITH THE FINAL DESIGNS OF THOSE HOMES WILL NOT COME BACK THROUGH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. THEY WILL BE BUILT. SUPPORT IT AS LONG AS THEY MEET ALL OF THE GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS. AGAIN, VERY SIMILAR TO ELY STRAITS FARMS, FACULTY FARMS, WHERE WE DID GOOD WORK. YES. YEAH. AND TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF A PEEK, I DON'T WANT TO STEAL TOO MUCH OF THE APPLICANT'S THUNDER, WHEN THEY COME BACK BEFORE YOU, BUT, SUBAREAS FIVE AND SUBAREAS THREE. THE DESIGN OF THOSE, HAS BEEN VERY INTENTIONAL ON THEIR PART. THEY ARE REALLY HOPING TO ACHIEVE A SIMILAR FEEL AS. OH, MY GOSH, I JUST FORGOT WHAT THAT WAS AS WELL. THE CUTE ONE OFF OF 62 ASHTON GROVE, ASHTON GROVE.
SO THE DESIGN OF THOSE IS SUPPOSED TO BE VERY EASY. AND ASHTON GROVE LIKE VERY, VERY DENSE, QUAINT, TYPE SUBDIVISIONS. THAT'S KIND OF THE OVERALL DESIGN FOR AGAIN, SUBAREAS THREE AND SUBAREAS FIVE. SO AGAIN, WHEN THEY COME BEFORE YOU YOU'LL SEE VERY, VERY
[01:20:01]
HIGH LEVEL ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS WILL WALK YOU THROUGH ALL THE DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS. BUT AGAIN, THOSE, THOSE HOMES WILL NOT COME BACK. BEFORE THIS BOARD OR THE INDIVIDUAL HOMES, SO THAT'S A SIMILAR CASE FOR SO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS IS FOR ANYTHING THAT'S CONSIDERED, REALLY SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED OR DETACHED, YOU KNOW, NOT COMMERCIAL, NOT APARTMENT BUILDINGS. YOU SEE GENERAL ILLUSTRATIONS OF THOSE ELEVATIONS. YOU DO NOT SEE, YOU KNOW, VERY, VERY DETAILED ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS OF THOSE UNITS. SO THAT'S WHAT I JUST SAID ABOUT, SUBAREAS THREE AND FIVE. YOU PROBABLY SEE A LOT MORE DETAIL ON IN SUBAREA THREE FOR THESE TOWNHOMES. THIS CLICKER IS NOT WORKING. BUT ALL OF THESE THOSE SAME RULES WILL APPLY WHERE YOU'LL SEE GENERAL ILLUSTRATIONS OF WHAT THOSE WILL LOOK LIKE, BUT NOT BY GRADING DETAILED ELEVATIONS, THE FLAT BUILDING HERE, THERE WILL BE 40 VERY, VERY HIGH END FLATS ALL CONCENTRATED IN THIS BUILDING, HERE YOU'LL SEE, VERY, VERY DETAILED ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS FOR THAT, SINCE IT IS NOT A SINGLE FAMILY, BUILDING TYPOLOGY. AND THEN AGAIN, SOME A MIXTURE OF USES IN THESE BUILDINGS HERE, MOSTLY COMMERCIAL. YOU'LL SEE VERY, VERY DETAILED ELEVATIONS OF THOSE BUILDINGS, PROBABLY THE BEST PART OF THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT IS THE PARK SPACE THAT'S BEING DEVELOPED THROUGH THE CENTER OF THE PROJECT, AROUND THE SUGAR CREEK, CORRIDOR THERE. SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO ACTIVATE, AS YOU'LL SEE AGAIN, NOT TO STEAL THE THUNDER, BUT A BIG PARK SPACE THAT CONNECTS INTO THIS CENTRALIZED GREEN DOWN AND AROUND THE CREEK WITH SOME BRIDGES THAT ACTUALLY EXIST ON THE SITE TODAY, THERE'S SOME PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT, THAT WILL BE, INSTALLED IN THOSE AREAS TO REALLY ENFORCING THE, THE, THE NATURE PLAY ASPECT OF THAT SUBAREA. AND I CAN BREEZE THROUGH THE PARKS AND I'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS PAINSTAKING DETAIL PROBABLY AT THIS POINT.BUT, SO FOR THIS, THIS SITE. SO FINAL PLANS IN THE HAMLET AREA REQUIRE REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PARKS AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD. SO THAT'S THE FIRST STEP. THEN THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHO TAKES FINAL ACTION. SO YOU GUYS WILL REVIEW THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN THROUGH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN LENS OR APPLICATION TYPE, AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THEN WE THIS IS ON OUR WEBSITE. WE'VE UPDATED OUR WEBSITE TO INCLUDE MOST OF THIS INFORMATION. SO IF YOU WANT TO COME BACK TO IT, WE DO HAVE A HAMLET SUB PAGE ON OUR CITY WEBSITE, JUST INCLUDED SOME GENERAL TOPICS AND WHAT BOARD HAS REVIEWED PURVIEW OVER EACH OF THOSE AREAS. SO SOME THINGS JUST TO NOTE SO YOU GUYS ARE AWARE OF. BUT FOR LAND USE AND DENSITY, YOU KNOW, WE WILL INCLUDE THAT EVALUATION IN YOUR STAFF REPORT HERE. BUT JUST SO YOU GUYS KNOW, THE ZONING TEXT ALLOWS SIX UNITS PER ACRE TO BE DEVELOPED THERE. SO THAT'S KIND OF ALREADY THERE'S THOSE RULES HAVE ALREADY BEEN ESTABLISHED WITH THE ZONING, THE ZONING TEXT COUNCIL APPROVED. COUNCIL APPROVED THAT. CORRECT. BUT WE GET ANGRY NEIGHBORS OR WE SIMPLY SAY, GO SEE COUNCIL. THANK YOU. THAT'S WHY YOU GET YOU'RE ALREADY SEEING ME, AND THEN SOMETHING THAT IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAT YOU'LL SEE US TALK ABOUT IS THERE'S ACTUALLY A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF COMMERCIAL SPACE THAT HAS TO BE DEVELOPED ON THE PROPERTY, HAS TO BE A MINIMUM OF 200FT■!S OF COMMERCIL SPACE FOR EVERY RESIDENTIAL UNIT THAT'S DEVELOPED. IT'S ABOUT 196 UNITS, 42,000FT■!S OF COMMERCIAL SPACE. ROUGHLY, TRAFFIC, WE'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, TRAFFIC IS SOMETHING THAT'S, EVALUATED AT THE TIME OF A REZONING APPLICATION, A TRAFFIC STUDY WAS ALREADY APPROVED AS PART OF THE REZONING APPLICATION. AGAIN, JUST SOME SOME BACKGROUND FOR YOU GUYS. AND THEN THE CITY DID DO AN INDEPENDENT, TRAFFIC EVALUATION, TO VERIFY. AND WE DID VERIFY THE RESULTS OF THE PRIVATE DEVELOPER STUDY. YOU PROBABLY HEAR A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT, POTENTIALLY, SO I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF GIVE YOU GUYS A HEADS UP ON THAT ARCHITECTURE WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT. AND THEN PARKLAND AND OPEN SPACE, THIS ISN'T SUPER PERTINENT TO YOU GUYS, BUT OUR CODE ACTUALLY ONLY REQUIRES OR REQUIRES 25% OF THE TOTAL AREA TO BE DEDICATED AS, PARKLAND AND OPEN SPACE. YOU'LL SEE THAT EVALUATION OR STAFF REPORT. I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU GUYS A HEADS UP. ONE THING THAT YOU WILL BE VERY FAMILIAR WITH IS DEVIATIONS FROM THE ZONING TEXT AND CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS ARE ACTUALLY NOT HEARD AS VARIANCES. THE HEARD AS WAIVERS, WHICH YOU GUYS ARE VERY, VERY FAMILIAR WITH, LUCKILY, AT THE SAME TIME, WE WERE, FINISHING UP THIS, THIS CODE, I THINK MAYBE SOME OF YOU REMEMBER WE DID A, WE KIND OF NOT REINVENTED BUT CLARIFIED SOME OF THE LANGUAGE IN OUR WAIVER. CITY CODE SECTION. SO YOU'LL SEE THAT'S ACTUALLY REFLECTED IN HERE WITH THIS AND, AND SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS I THINK BUILDING WAS ADDED MAYBE,
[01:25:03]
BUT, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S CAPTURED HERE AS WELL, YOU GUYS, I KNOW THAT THERE'S, WE KNOW NOW THERE'S, I THINK FOUR, RELATIVELY MINOR WAIVERS THAT WILL BE REQUESTED, AND THEY'LL BE EVALUATED THROUGH THIS LENS. YOU GUYS WILL. SO WE'LL TAKE THE HEAT FOR THAT AS OPPOSED TO. NO, IT'LL BE THE SAME. IT'LL BE IF WE IF WE'RE WAIVING COUNCIL STANDARDS, WE'LL TAKE THE HEAT FOR THAT BECAUSE COUNCIL SET THE STANDARDS AND WE'RE WAITING FOR, WELL I THINK WELL I DON'T THINK IT'S ANY I ACTUALLY DROVE A LOT OF IT. SO YOU JUST JUST SO EVERYBODY KNOWS IT'S NOT TO THE STANDARDS OF THE TEXT. IT'S ACTUALLY STANDARDS TO CODE THAT WERE KIND OF FOUND THROUGHOUT THE FINAL DESIGN PROCESS. SO BUT GENERALLY NO ONE'S GOING TO GET EXCITED ABOUT IT. OKAY. MAYBE WE'LL SEE. YEAH, SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE. I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU GUYS A HEADS UP AGAIN. THIS IS GOING TO START MOVING PRETTY QUICKLY. THEY'LL EITHER BE IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS, POTENTIALLY EVEN INFORMALLY IN AUGUST, BUT DEFINITELY FOR A FORMAL VOTE IN SEPTEMBER AT THE LEAST, WE DO HAVE, LIKE I SAI THE AD, SUB PA ON OUGER WEBSI FOR TTE HEMLETHA PROCT, IFJEOU EVE YR WT TOIND OF K CHE IT OUCK ITT, H ASLOT OFA T SAME HEFORMATINN. JUSWANT TT GIVEO OU GUY Y SHEADSA U THANKP.OU. YHANK Y T OURY MUCVE YEAHH. IO D HE ONEAV QUTION FESOR STA. IS TFFREHE ANY PLE WE CACANEE THE S PPOSEDRO ABOU WHANTTHEY'RT E THIINGNK WITH TT CITY,HE OCAN WER GETHAT TNFORMA ION? SOTIE W VEN'T HALEASEDRENYTHIN AG PUICLY YBL, IT'SETLL A THINT TUISTH POI. INT WEK O HOPE DO HAVE T METHINSO TOG SHAREITH OU W RARDSBO A THE PNDLIC, IUBN THE NEAR FUTE, AGAUR, WE'RIN DESIATIEVNG REALLY LIKE REETH S, ANDGN I TNK WE'HI REAPPINGWR IUP. SOT I, I ANCIPATETIE'LL W HAVE METHINSO[VIII. Poll members for comment]
G CANWE SHAREITH YO WVERYU SHTLY. OORY. IKA IAD ONE H MAERTT TT I WAHAEDNTO T JUS TISE TORAHE TOARD B BORE WEEF ADURN,JOF THAT I OKAY.'SR. M TOO COUE. CANRS WE GOACK B MY CTURESPI? WHI PICTUCHSRE? IS THISE O OF THNE YEAHNGLO DOCK. KEEPOING GOH,.I'LL C. EOM BK TO YACOU TAKIE. AY. SOOKN ASSE IINGSS IN MY DENGEP DEIV FOR AS PA RT MYOF SECH TOPEGHT, INIENT W N A LOOOKK AT THQUESTIE ENTI HOWANY WA M SIGNSLLRE AHEYT ED TO.TLND A MINITIAY KNOWIONRE IS RIS ANCHSTEVED WHAT WS THEYAS WERE TITLEDEN TO E BECAONE THEYUS VE ONEHAMAGE I I TOO I WALK.D T BUILDHEG AS PINTAR O F WORKIMY, ANDNG IEALIZE RD, , T BEUSECAUSE BTAFF H S ASIDSAHEY HA TVEWO ENT TNCES ARA NDISTH HAS TBEO THE OER . I'MCE ASSING THUM ATAT'S CTHRECT,OR BECAU EQUIYTHIEVNG ELSE EMS TOSEO GNTI ENT, OPMIT'SR ONLY AN IT I GUESRE. SO THE QUEION,ST S, ANDESHIS IS TN PART I BRISEDDI TO, CNCIL MOUBEREM K A BUTNDLSO TO A STAFF IN QUALIFYING FOR A WALL SIGN GIVEN GIVEN THAT THE CODE SAYS ONE PER ENTRANCE IS THIS REALLY WHAT WE HAVE IN MIND? SHOULD THERE BE WORDING AROUND THE CONCEPT OF AN ENTRANCE SUCH THAT IT REALLY SHOULD MEAN SOMETHING THAT IS MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN THIS LOADING DOCK DOOR? AND AGAIN, THAT WASN'T ANYTHING TO BRING UP FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT IT JUST STRUCK ME. BOY, THAT'S DRIVING A LOT OF BOTHER BECAUSE THEY ONLY HAD ONE ENTRANCE. WE WOULD HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS. BUT I THINK WE'VE TALKED ABOUT I THINK THIS CAME UP WHEN WE WERE REVIEWING RELATED WHEN WE WERE REVIEWING THE, THE JEWELRY STORE. I'M SORRY. I'M DRAWING A BLANK. YEAH. THANK YOU. AND THE WHOLE QUESTION OF WHAT? I DON'T KNOW THAT WE EVER CONCLUDED WITH ENTRANCE BEING A DEFINED TERM IN THE IN THE WAY THAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING. I MEAN, THAT'S PROBABLY THE QUESTION IN OTHER IN OTHER, SIGN CODES THAT I NOTED. NOT NOT OURS, BUT THEY HAVE CONCEPTS OF, OF SECONDARY WALL SIGNS VERSUS A PRIMARY WALL SIGNS. AND I COULD SEE A WORLD WHERE A SECONDARY WALL SIGN, AS IN LOADING DOCK OR CHARLOTTE KESSLER LOADING DOCK OR WHATEVE. BUT BUT THERE BUT TO DRIVE THISR AND THAT I OBSESSED OVER THROUGH THIS JUST STRIKES ME AS THIS LITTLE TINY TAIL WAGGING LISTING OVERSTOCK. YEAH. SO THAT'S A THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER I GUESS STAFF MAY WANT TO THINK ABOUT THAT OVER TIME. I MEAN, IT ISN'T AS BIG A PROBLEM AS WAIVERS. YEAH. THE SIGN CODE ALLOWS FOR DIFFERENT AMOUNTS OF SIGNS BASED ON THE BUILDING'S LOCATION. SO IN THE TYPE OF SIGN. SO OUTSIDE OF THE VILLAGE CENTER, I, I THINK YOU SEE MORE OF ONE SIGN OR ONE WALL SIGN PER STREET
[01:30:04]
FRONTAGE. AND THE VILLAGE CENTER SIGN CODE ACTUALLY DOES ENCOURAGE MORE SIGNAGE AND MORE VIBRANCY, WHEN WE DID THAT CODE UPDATE IN 2014, I THINK, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE OTHER, DESIGN REGULATIONS YOU FOUND IN PLACE, RIGHT? SO THAT SIGNS LIKE A REGULATION SIGNS DON'T COMPETE WITH EACH OTHER. SO I STILL THINK THERE ARE OTHER TOOLS SORT OF IN YOUR TOOL CHEST, SO TO SPEAK, THAT ALLOWS FOR THE BOARD, EVEN EVEN THOUGH WE, WE DON'T DEFINE WHAT AN ENTRANCE IS. THE STAFF HAS TAKEN A BROAD INTERPRETATION OF THAT IN THE PAST TO BE FAIR, AND I THINK IT'S LED TO SOME SUCCESS. I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE FIRST INSTANCES WHERE UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW, JUST BASED ON THE LOCATION OF THE SIGN, I THINK THE SYSTEM IS SORT OF WORKING, THOUGH, BASED ON MR. RYAN'S REVIEW OF THE SIGN CRITERIA, THAT THERE ARE OTHER PIECES AND JUST GENERAL DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT ARE IN PLAY ABOVE AND BEYOND JUST THE NUMBER OF SIGNS.BUT IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT AND WE'LL DEFINITELY MAKE A NOTE OF AND WE'LL PASS THE COMMENTS. CERTAINLY JUST FOR THE SYMMETRY, THAT WE'RE HEARING FROM THE ARB AS WELL, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S ALSO SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE HEARD, SO MAYBE NOT SO MUCH THE NUMBER OF SIGNS, BUT I WAS THINKING ABOUT THINKING ABOUT SYMMETRY AND HOW MAYBE THAT COULD BE INCORPORATED AS WELL. AND AGAIN, I THINK SYMMETRY IS PECULIARLY IMPORTANT IN GEORGIAN ARCHITECTURE. AND AGAIN, IN THE MODERN BUILDING, I CARE. BUT YEAH, I THINK IN THOSE CASES WHERE IT SAYS BUSINESS ENTRANCE IS MORE OF A, YOU KNOW, LIKE THE RETAIL LIKE YOU SEE IN MARKET SQUARE. RIGHT. AND SO I THINK THE UNIQUE ARCHITECTURE OF THIS BUILDING AND THE DOORWAY IS THIS KIND OF CREATED THAT, YOU KNOW, SORT OF CONFLICT BETWEEN CODE AND, AND THE NUMBER OF SIGNS ALLOWED. NO, BUT I JUST WANTED TO RAISE THAT NOTHING. IT'S NOT IT'S NOT THE WAIVER PROBLEM THAT WE REALLY NEED TO DEAL WITH. THANK YOU, MR. HINTON. THANK YOU, MR. EATON. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM OUR BOARD? DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. NEXT MEETING. I'LL SECOND MR. BROWN. YES, MR. HINSON? YES, MR. EATON? YES MR. DAVEY? YES, MR. MULLINS.
YES MR. MISS MOORE. YES, MR. STROLLER? YES. MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.