[I. Call to order]
[00:00:05]
EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO THE AUGUST 26TH NEW ALBANY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING. I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS EVENING'S MEETING TO ORDER. CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL. MR. LAJEUNESSE. MR. SHELL.
YES. MR. JACOB. PRESENT. MISS SAMUELS. PRESENT. MR. SMITH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SHAW. HERE
[III. Action on minutes]
THERE ARE FOUR VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT. WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU. IF MEMBERS OF THE BOARD COULD TAKE A LOOK AT THE MINUTES FROM THE JUNE 24TH BOARD MEETIN. IF THERE ARE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THOSE MINUTES. OTHERWISE, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. NO CORRECTIONS HERE.OKAY. THEN I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 24TH, 2024 BOARD MEETING. I'LL SECOND THAT. I'LL JUST REMIND THE BOARD THAT YOU'RE QUALIFIED TO VOTE ON THE MINUTES. EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T ATTEND THE MEETING, SO LONG AS YOU FEEL LIKE THEY'RE AN ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF WHAT HAPPENED. MR. JACOB? YES. MR. SHELL. YES. MISS SAMUELS? YES. MR. SMITH? YES. THE MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE FOUR VOTES TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED. THANK YOU, ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING? NONE FROM STAFF. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE FIRST BUSINESS, IF WE'D LIKE TO ADMINISTER THE OATH TO ANY WITNESSES OR APPLICANTS, OR THAT MAY BE SPEAKING THIS EVENING, GENTLEMEN, WOULD EITHER OF YOU BE LIKELY SPEAKING THIS EVENING? OTHERWISE, PLEASE STAND UP AND WE'LL GIVE A QUICK OATH OF OUR OATH OF TO SPEAK. SO, DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DO.
THANK YOU. HAVE A SEAT. AND BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO OUR CASE, WE'LL HEAR OF ANY VISITORS FOR
[VI. Cases]
ITEMS ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. SEEING NONE, WE'LL HEAD TO OUR FIRST CASE. FIRST CASE IS VARIANCE VR56 2024. STAFF. THANK YOU. ALRIGHTY. THE 75 ACRE SITE FRONTS HARRISON ROAD, BRISCOE PARKWAY AND CLOVER VALLEY ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO ALLOW TWO WALL SIGNS, ONE ON THE EAST ELEVATION AND ONE ON THE NORTH ELEVATION. BOTH WOULD BE 166.25FT■!S IN LIEU OF THE PERMITTED 75FT■!S. SHOWN HERE IA SIGN DESIGN, WHICH WILL BE THE SAME ON BOTH ELEVATIONS AND INCLUDES THE DSB'S LOGO AS AND ALSO SHOWN ARE THE ELEVATIONS. A PORTION OF THE EAST ELEVATION AS WELL AS A PORTION OF THE NORTH ELEVATION. ONE OF THE WALL SIGNS WILL FACE CLOVER VALLEY ROAD AND ONE WILL FACE BRISCOE PARKWAY. IN REGARDS TO THE REQUESTED VARIANCE, THE BUILDING ITSELF IS APPROXIMATELY ONE POINT 2,000,000FT■!S. EACH OF THE PROPOSED SIGNS ARE LESS THAN 1% OF THE APPLICABLE BUILDING FACADE THAT THEY WILL BE INSTALLED ON. DUE TO THE LARGE SIZE OF THE BUILDING, HAVING LARGER SIGNS WOULD NOT BE SUBSTANTIAL. THE PROPOSED SIGNS SEEM TO BE APPROPRIATE IN TERMS OF SCALE, DESIGN AND INTENSITY FOR THE BUILDING. ADDITIONALLY, THE BZA HAS APPROVED OTHER SIMILAR VARIANCES AND ALSO WILL BE DISCUSSING A CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING THIS LATER. AND I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. I'M WITH, STAFF SUPPORT REGARDING VARIANCE. 562024 SECOND. MISS SAMUELS. YES. MR. SMITH? YES. MR. JACOB.YES. MR. SHELL. YES. MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE FOUR VOTES TO ADMIT THE DOCUMENTS. OKAY ARE THERE ANY? GO AHEAD. SORRY, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY I HAVE A QUICK. OH, NO. OKAY NO PROBLEM, IS THERE ANYONE HERE? THIS EVENING THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS? SIR, COULD YOU PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF, PLEASE? BRUCE SUMMERFIELD, ON BEHALF OF THE ON BEHALF OF DSP. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. STAFF. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER. BUT NOT UNLIKE WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR. LAST MONTH IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS FOR, FOR THE NEIGHBOR, IT'S THAT FUNCTIONAL SIGNAGE. I THINK THEY FIT WITH THE SCALE, AND THEY REVERSE HALO ILLUMINATED. SO THEY'RE NOT BEAMING LIGHT DURING DURING THE EVENING AND SO FORTH. IT'S KIND OF UNDERSTATED, BUT THEY DO HAVE SOME ILLUMINATION THAT IS JUST THE HALO LIGHTING OUT OF THE BACK RATHER THAN THE FACE LIGHTING. AND THEY WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO UTILIZE THEIR LOGO IN THAT SIZE. AND ESTHETIC WITH WITH THE SIZE OF THAT BUILDING. ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? WELL, I THINK WHAT WHAT TRUCKS DOES THE SIGNAGE NEED TO BE USED FOR SHIPMENTS THAT WOULD BE DELIVERED INTO SO THAT A TRUCK DRIVER CAN SEE THE ACTUAL, YOU KNOW, LOCATION IF
[00:05:04]
THEY'RE OBVIOUSLY THERE'S TECHNOLOGY IN PLACE THESE DAYS, BUT THAT WOULD ALMOST VERIFY THAT THEIR IDENTIFICATION AND MOSTLY IT'S STRAIGHT IN AND OUT AND EMPLOYMENT AND RECOGNIZED RECOGNITION FROM, FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY, IT'S NOT THERE'S A MULTITUDE OF FREIGHT CARRIERS FOR ALL THESE BUILDINGS. SO IT'S NOT ALWAYS THE SAME TYPE IN THE SAME FACILITY, IF YOU WILL.QUESTION FOR STAFF. I RECALL A SIMILAR CONVERSATION EARLIER THIS YEAR. AND, GIVEN THE FEEDBACK AND THE STAFF REPORT SAYING THAT THIS ALIGNS WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE CODE, IS THERE AN EXPECTATION WITH THE GROWTH FOR THERE TO BE A TRANSITION OR UPDATE TO THE CODE? YES, AND WE'LL BE DISCUSSING THAT LATER TODAY. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A WORKSHOP AND DISCUSSION. YEAH. BECAUSE I KNOW YOU GUYS HEAR SEVERAL OF THESE. SO WE ARE STARTING TO RESEARCH AND WORK ON SOME CODE UPDATES FOR THAT. FABULOUS. THANK YOU. YEP ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS VARIANCE. SO MOVED. AND I WILL SECOND THAT. MISS SAMUELS. YES, MR. SMITH? YES, MR. JACOBS. YES. MR. SHELL? YES THE MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE FOUR VOTES IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION. THANK YOU.
CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. OUR SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS WILL BE VARIANCE VAR 58 2024. STAFF THANK YOU. THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE NEW ALBANY FARMS SUBDIVISION. AND IT IS EAST OF REYNOLDSBURG NEW ALBANY ROAD. US ROUTE 605 AND WEST OF NEW ALBANY FARMS ROAD. THE REQUESTS ARE RELATED TO THE SIZE AND LOCATION OF THE GARAGE AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THE NEW PROPOSED GARAGE IS SITUATED BETWEEN THE EXISTING DRIVEWAYS RIGHT HERE, HIGHLIGHTED IN THE CIRCLE.
VARIANCE A IS TO THE SIZE REQUIREMENT AND THE CODE CONTEMPLATES RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES UNDER TWO ACRES. HOWEVER, THE PROPERTY IS ALMOST FIVE ACRES IN SIZE. THE NEW ALBANY FARM SUBDIVISION HAS SOME OF THE LARGEST ESTATE PROPERTIES IN THE CITY, AND THE NEW GARAGE WOULD ONLY MAKE UP 1% OF THE LOT. THEREFORE THE INCREASED SIZE OF THE GARAGE APPEARS TO BE APPROPRIATELY SCALED FOR THE LOT. AS A RESULT OF THE LARGE ESTATE PROPERTIES, THIS LOT IS NOT THE FIRST VARIANCE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE BOARD. IN 2015, THE BOARD APPROVED A DETACHED GARAGE VARIANCE FOR A GARAGE TO BE 2560FT■!S, AND IN 2021, THE BOAD APPROVED A DETACHED GARAGE VARIANCE TO BE 2040FT■!S. THE PROPOSED GARAGE IS TO BE LOCATED IN FRONT OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE BY 16FT, AND THIS LOCATION IS INTENTIONAL DUE TO THE EXISTING BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS ON THE PROPERTY. FIRST, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON A FLAG LOT, RESTRAINING IT FROM THE PUBLIC ROAD AND THERE IS A 30. THERE'S A 30 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND CREEK RUNNING ALONG THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. SO WE'VE KIND OF HIGHLIGHTED THE LOCATION HERE. IT'S NOT ENTIRELY VISIBLE HERE, BUT YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE TREE LINE GOING DOWN THAT MATCHES THE PLAT. THE APPLICANT STATES THE LOCATION OF THE GARAGE FOLLOWS THE FUNCTION OF THE LOT. THE NEW GARAGE IS ADJACENT TO THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY AND GARAGE TO ALLOW DIRECT ACCESS TO THE PARKING AREA, INSTEAD OF CREATING A NEW DRIVEWAY. THE DESIGN OF THE GARAGE IS INTENDED TO MATCH THE EXISTING HOME AND GARAGE, USING THE SAME MATERIALS AND FACING THE SAME DIRECTION AS THE GARAGE. THESE MATERIALS INCLUDE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING ON THE GABLE AND RED BRICK ON THE EXTERIOR. THE CITY ARCHITECT HAS REVIEWED THE DESIGNS AND HAS SEVERAL COMMENTS TO ENSURE THAT THE GARAGES APPEARANCE WILL MATCH THE HOME. THESE COMMENTS ARE RECOMMENDED AS STAFF'S CONDITION OF APPROVAL. THE DESIGN AND PLACEMENT OF THE NEW GARAGE ARE INTENDED TO MAXIMIZE THE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF THE LAND. WHILE ADDRESSING THE EXISTING BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS WITH THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. THE DETACHED GARAGE WILL APPEAR TO BE AN EXTENSION OF THE PRIMARY HOME, AND AT THIS TIME STAFF WILL TAKE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WILL MOVE TO ACCEPT STAFF REPORT AND RELATED DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD FOR VARIANTS FIVE, EIGHT, 20, 24. SECOND MR. JACOB. YES. MR.
[00:10:10]
SHELL. YES. MR. SMITH? YES, MISS. SAMUELS? YES. MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE FOUR VOTES TO ADMIT THE DOCUMENTS. THANK YOU. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING, SIR? YES, MY NAME IS DEAN DETWEILER, I'M A CONTRACTOR OUT OF DOVER, OHIO, AND WE DO ALL OF RYAN'S CONTRACTING WORK. RYAN MASON, WHICH, FORTUNATELY, HE'S IN FLORIDA. AND DOESN'T HAVE TO BE HERE, SO. BUT WE HAD WANTED TO WE HAD TALKED ABOUT PUTTING THE GARAGE IN DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, BUT BECAUSE OF THE RESTRICTIONS, THERE'S SOME WETLANDS AROUND THERE THEY WOULD LIKE TO PUT IT WHERE WE REQUESTED BECAUSE ALL THE GARAGE DOORS WOULD THEN MATCH WHAT'S ALREADY THERE. AND, WE WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM DOING ALL BRICK TO MATCH UP THE GABLE OF THE HOUSE, WHEN YOU DRIVE THE ROAD, WHAT I NOTICED IS, WITH THE SIZE OF THE OF THE LOT THERE, YOU'RE REALLY NOT BLOCKING THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, I, I DO BELIEVE IT WOULD BE A NICER APPEARANCE THAN IT WOULD EVEN IF YOU PUT IT ON THE OTHER SIDE, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN THEN? YOUR GARAGE DOORS WOULD BE EXPOSED TO THE ROAD, TO WHERE THEY'RE ACTUALLY TREE LINED. NOW, IF WE PUT IT ON THE LOCATION, THAT WE HAD REQUESTED.THANK YOU, CITY STAFF HAS, THE SUGGESTED CONDITIONS THAT BOTH OF THEM BEEN SHARED WITH THE APPLICANT. OKAY. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY'S. YES. COMMUNICATIONS GOING ON LIKE THAT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY FEEDBACK FROM ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS? WE HAVE NOT. IT LOOKS LIKE IN THE REPORT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME PRECEDENTS SET. CORRECT. A COUPLE OTHER FOR THE ACTUAL ZONING COMMITTEE. THERE WERE TWO IN THERE. I'M NOT MISTAKEN. I BELIEVE SO. THAT'S CORRECT. ONE FROM 2015. AND IS THERE A MORE RECENT ONE? I THINK IT'S 2021. YEAH. 2021. AND LAST THING, THE CITY. I KNOW IT WASN'T TOO LONG AGO WHEN WE UPDATED THESE NUMBERS WITH ACREAGE AND SIZE OF DETACHED STRUCTURE. IS THERE ANYTHING ON THE TABLE FOR THESE LARGER PLOTS TO JUST CONSIDER THIS WITHOUT ANY TYPE OF VARIANCE OR. YEAH. I REMEMBER WHEN WE DID THE CODE UPDATES, WE KIND OF KNEW THAT THERE'D BE A FEW OF THESE SORT OF LIKE OUTLIERS, SO TO SPEAK, WITH THESE LARGE LOTS WHEN WE DID, A LOT OF RESEARCH WITH THIS CODE UPDATE, WE FOUND OUT THAT THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE IN NEW ALBANY, RESIDENTIAL LOT SIZE, I BELIEVE, IS ABOUT 0.65 ACRES.
AND SO LOOKING AT THE PAST VARIANCES, TWO AT THE TIME OF THE CODE UPDATES, WE KNEW THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WE WERE NOT CONTEMPLATING THESE LARGE LOTS. SO LOTS GREATER THAN THE TWO ACRES IN SIZE. THERE ARE VERY FEW AND FAR IN BETWEEN. SO WE THINK JUST THE LOT SIZE IN AND OF ITSELF. PLUS IT'S IN A PRIVATE SUBDIVISION, CREATE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES. THANK YOU.
SO YOU MENTIONED AT THE BEGINNING YOU HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE MATCHING. THE BRICK.
HOWEVER, IS THERE AGREEMENT THAT THE PROPORTIONS OF THE WINDOWS WILL MATCH THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AS WELL? OKAY, CORRECT. THANK YOU. WE'LL CHANGE WHATEVER WE NEED TO MAKE IT WORK. WHAT I DID IS I, I STARTED OUT HAVING MY GUY DO THE PRINT JUST TO GET A LAYOUT AND GET AN APPROVAL, AND THEN WE'LL WE'LL FINISH THE DETAILS AND CHANGE ALL THAT. IS THERE GOING TO BE RESIDENTS IN THIS GARAGE? THERE'S A IT LOOKS LIKE A SECOND STORY WITH SOME SPACE. AND IS THE INTENT THERE WOULD BE. NO NOBODY WOULD BE LIVING IN IT, YEAH. IT'S JUST LIKE STORAGE, WE WITH, ATTIC TRUSSES, WHICH WILL GIVE US AT 32FT. YOU WOULD HAVE APPROXIMATELY 16FT. OF SPACE BY BY THE LENGTH. 16 BY 16, WHICH, WHAT DID WE SAY? 920 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT WOULD BE SQUARE FOOTAGE. AND IS THERE ANY CONNECTION BETWEEN THE EXISTING GARAGE AND THE NEW GARAGE? IS THERE GOING TO BE A BREEZEWAY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? THERE'S GOING TO BE. WELL, WE'RE NOT WE WERE HOPING TO JUST SEPARATE IT BECAUSE OF THE DETAIL ON THE HOUSE FOR US TO TIE IT INTO THE HOUSE, WOULD TAKE SIGNIFICANT WORK AND WE YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO A REAL
[00:15:10]
NICE JOB AND COVER IT LIKE WE SHOULD. IF WE DO THAT, AND I DIDN'T REALLY WANT TO START BUILDING BRICK COLUMNS NEXT TO A BEAUTIFUL HOME. I WAS AFRAID IT WOULD TAKE AWAY FROM THE LOOK OF IT. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SO I'M ON BOARD WITH, I MEAN, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, APPROVING WITH THE TWO CONDITIONS. MAKE A MOTION. OKAY MOVE TO APPROVE APPLICATION B A R 58 2024. BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT, WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. SECOND, MR. SHELL. YES. MR. JACOB? YES. MR. SMITH. YES. MISS SAMUELS? YES. MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE FOUR VOTES IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION. THANK YOU.[VII. Other business]
CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO OTHER BUSINESS, AND I ASSUME WE'LL TURN IT OVER TO CITY. THE CITY TEAM. THANK YOU. FOR REQUESTING STAFF COMMERCIAL WALL REGULATIONS. DUE TO THE NUMBER OF APPEARANCES THAT HAVE OCCURRED. CURRENTLY, THE EXISTING CODE AND THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL WALL SIGNS, INCLUDING ONE SIGN PER BUILDING FROM. ONE SIGN PER BUILDING. FRONTAGE SIGN. I'M ALREADY LOUD, SO I WAS LIKE, I DIDN'T EVEN THINK ABOUT IT. ALL RIGHT, THE EXISTING CODE HAS THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING ONE SIGN PER BUILDING. FRONTAGE SIGNS NOT TO EXCEED 75FT■!S, AND A LETTERING HEIGHTP TO A MAXIMUM OF 36IN. THESE REQUIREMENTS ARE A ONE SIZE FITS ALL. IN OTHER WORDS, A SMALL OFFICE BUILDING AND A LARGE COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSE WOULD HAVE THE SAME WALL SIGN REGULATIONS.STAFF REVIEWED RECENTLY APPROVED VARIANCES SHOWN HERE AND DID SOME CALCULATIONS TO UNDERSTAND THE PERCENTAGE OF THE PROPOSED WALL SIGNS USING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE FACADE IN WHICH THE WALL IN WHICH THE SIGN WOULD BE INSTALLED AS YOU CAN SEE, THE MAJORITY OF WALL SIGNS THAT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM 75FT■!S TAKEP LESS THAN 1% OF THE BUILDING FACADE. ADDITIONALLY, WE EXAMINED VARIANCES FOR ONE SIDE PER BUILDING, FRONTAGE AND LETTERING HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS.
SOME SITES ARE LIMITED IN TERMS OF BUILDING FRONTAGE, AS THEY MAY ONLY FRONT ONE STREET, BUT HAVE MULTIPLE ENTRANCES THAT MAY NOT FRONT THAT STREET. THIS CAN BE A COMMON VARIANCE REQUEST ALONG WITH WALL SIZE VARIANCE REQUEST. ADDITIONALLY STAFF SELECTED A VARIETY OF BUILDINGS WITHIN THE BUSINESS PARK TO EVALUATE SQUARE FOOTAGE. HERE IS A TABLE IDENTIFYING WHICH BUILDINGS WERE EVALUATED, WHICH INCLUDE A MIX OF SMALLER OFFICE BUILDINGS AND LARGER COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. THE AVERAGE SIZE OF THE SAMPLE CAME OUT TO BE 238,737FT■!S. STAFF PROPOSES THE FOLLOWING CHANGES TO THE WALL SIGN CODE REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING CHANGING ONE SIDE SIGN PER BUILDING FRONTAGE TO ONE SIGN PER BUILDING. ENTRANCE THIS ENSURES IF A BUILDING IS MULTI-TENANT, THAT MORE THAN ONE SIGN CAN BE PERMITTED, AND IT ALSO IS A MEANS OF WAYFINDING FOR VISITORS TO THE SITE. SIMILARLY TODAY RETAIL BUILDINGS ARE ALLOWED ONE SIGN PER TENANT, ALTHOUGH THAT WOULD FUNCTION DIFFERENTLY THAN A LARGE COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSE. THE SECOND CHANGE IS TO ALLOW WALL SIGN ON A BUILDING OVER 150,000FT■!S TOE UP TO BE UP TO 1% OF THE BUILDING FACADE. THIS NUMBER WAS CHOSEN BASED ON STAFF RESEARCH, WITH THE REASONING THAT LARGER COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS SHOULD HAVE LARGER SIGN REQUIREMENTS TO MATCH THE BUILDING SCALE AND INTENSITY. SMALLER OFFICE BUILDINGS TYPICALLY DO NOT REQUEST THESE TYPES OF VARIANCES ASSOCIATED WITH WALL SIGN. WALL SIGN SIZE. THEREFORE, STAFF FEELS IT'S APPROPRIATE TO KEEP ANY BUILDING UNDER 150,000FT■!ST THE EXISTING 75 SQUARE FOOT MAXIMUM. LOOKING AT THE OVERALL AVERAGE, MAJORITY OF THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ARE OVER 150,000FT■!S. LAST BUT NOT LEAS, STAFF HAS HISTORICALLY INTERPRETED LOGOS TO NOT BE APPLICABLE IN TERMS OF THE LETTERING HEIGHT. THEREFORE, THIS IS SIMPLY ADDING THAT FLEXIBILITY INTO THE ZONING CODE. AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A WORKSHOP AND DISCUSSION. THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE FOR STAFF TO FINALIZE CODE AMENDMENTS AND TAKE THIS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. YOU TOOK CARE OF AT THE VERY END, TOOK CARE OF MY FIRST QUESTION. SECOND QUESTION. I KNOW WE DON'T. NEW ALBANY DOES. WE DON'T COMPARE OURSELVES TO OTHER COMMUNITIES. WE LIKE TO STAY ON OUR OWN. HOWEVER, WHEN YOU SAID RESEARCH, WHEN IT CAME TO THE COMPARISONS, WERE YOU LOOKING NATIONALLY, STATEWIDE? OTHER COMPARABLE TO NEW ALBANY SIZE. WHAT WAS THE METRIC? YEAH, I DID LOOK AROUND THE AREA. AND
[00:20:03]
HONESTLY, A LOT OF THEM ARE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN OURS. A LOT OF THEM HAD A MAX OF 50FT■!S FOR THEIR SIGN. I DID START TO LOOK AT OTHER AREAS. I KNOW THE TOWN THAT I PREVIOUSLY WORKED IN IN NORTH CAROLINA. WE DID DO A PERCENTAGE AND WE CHANGED OUR CODE WHILE I WAS THERE, AND IT DID SEEM TO BE VERY HELPFUL, FOR THESE LARGER COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. AND ARE WE AN OUTLIER? BY GOING PERCENTAGE VERSUS THE OUTRIGHT NUMBER, WELL, I'LL SAY IN THE AREA I DIDN'T SEE ANYONE THAT WAS DOING A PERCENTAGE. YEAH. I THINK THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST TIME WE'RE DOING A PERCENTAGE JUST FROM OUR FROM THE OVERALL CODE STANDPOINT AS WELL. BUT WE THINK IT MAKES SENSE BASED ON THE LARGE SCALE OF THESE BUILDINGS. SO JUST AS A WAY OF HISTORY, WE LAST DID THIS CODE UPDATE AND ESTABLISHED THESE, YOU KNOW, EXISTING CODE REQUIREMENTS IN 2010. AND THAT WAS BEFORE ANY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OCCURRED IN THE LICKING COUNTY PORTION OF THE BUSINESS PARK. SO IT WASN'T EVEN CONTEMPLATED AT THAT TIME THAT WE COULD HAVE THESE, YOU KNOW, 500 MILLION PLUS SQUARE FOOT FACILITIES. SO WE THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE LARGE FOOTPRINT YOU KNOW, AND EVEN THOUGH WE WERE TALKING EARLIER, THE DS, DSP ONE, THE BUILDING ITSELF IS LITERALLY A HALF MILE LONG. SO IT CREATES A LOT OF BUILDING SPACE, SO THIS IS SOMETHING. YEAH. WE AND THIS IS WHY WE WANTED TO WORKSHOP IT WITH YOU JUST TO KIND OF GET YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT IT AS WELL. SOMETHING NEW. WE WOULD BE TRYING AGAIN AS MR. SHELL MENTIONED EARLIER, THIS MAY NOT COVER ALL OF OUR BASES, BUT WE'RE NOT AFRAID TO, LIKE, COME BACK AND DO A TWEAK AGAIN TO SEE HOW THIS FITS, YOU KNOW, SAME WITH THE GARAGES TOO. WE WE'RE NOT GETTING TOO MANY GARAGE VARIANCES OVER 1600 SQUARE FEET. SO IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S WORKING.WELL, BUT WE THINK THIS IS A GOOD STARTING POINT. BUT IF WE NEED TO SORT OF, YOU KNOW, QUICKLY TWEAK AND MAKE ANOTHER CODE UPDATE IN THE FUTURE IF THIS IS ADOPTED. WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT AFRAID TO DO THAT AS WELL. OKAY. WHAT, WHAT'S CONSIDERED A BUILDING ENTRANCE, LIKE THE BUILDING WE JUST LOOKED AT, WOULD GARAGE DOORS BE AN ENTRANCE? WOULD EMPLOYEE ENTRANCES COUNT? SO WE GO. SO WE ALWAYS VIEW IT AS LIKE WHERE VISITORS WOULD GO. SO IT WOULDN'T BE LIKE, FOR, LIKE, TRUCK BAYS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT WOULD JUST BE LIKE MAIN FACADE. SO THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE WE COULD TWEAK TO. BUT RIGHT NOW THE INTENT IS, LIKE PRIMARY DOORWAYS INTO THE BUILDING. SO WHAT'S INTERESTING TOO, IS A LOT OF THE BUILDINGS IN THE LICKING COUNTY PORTION OF THE BUSINESS PARK, THEY'RE DESIGNED WITH MULTIPLE DOORWAYS, BUT ONE USERS, YOU KNOW, TAKING DOWN THE WHOLE BUILDING, SO TO SPEAK. AND SO THERE'S NOT MULTIPLE TENANTS, BUT THERE COULD BE AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE. SO OUR THOUGHT IS LIKE THIS WOULD ALLOW FOR IF THERE'S LIKE THREE TENANTS IN THERE, IT WOULD ALLOW FOR EACH OF THOSE TENANTS TO HAVE ONE WALL SIGN ON A FACADE. LIKE IT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DO FOR RETAIL. AND I THINK JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, BACK IN JUNE, WE HEARD, AMPLIFY BIAS VARIANCE REQUESTS. AND THAT WAS THREE SIGNS ON ONE SIDE BECAUSE THEY HAD THOSE THREE ENTRANCES. SO OKAY, SORRY, I THOUGHT I WAS JUST CHECKING.
SORRY. GO AHEAD. SO FOR THAT SCENARIO, THIS IS WHAT I'VE BEEN THINKING OF IN THE EVENT THAT THERE'S THREE COMPANIES, LET'S SAY THAT OCCUPY ONE BUILDING SPACE WITH THEIR COMBINED SIGNAGE HAVE TO BE 1% OF THE BUILDING. OR IS THAT EACH COMPANY GET 1%? SO YEAH, WE'RE SMILING RIGHT HERE BECAUSE THIS IS THE EXACT SAME CONVERSATION WE WERE HAVING AND DEBATING INTERNALLY. SO RIGHT NOW IT'S WRITTEN THAT EACH SIGN COULD BE 1% OF THE ENTIRE BUILDING FACAD.
SO EACH. YEAH. SO EACH SIGN GETS 1%. SO IF YOU HAVE THREE ENTRANCES THAT WOULD. AND SO IF YOU HAVE THREE ENTRANCES WHICH EQUALS THREE SIGNS WHICH WOULD EQUAL A TOTAL OF 3% OF THE BUILDING FACADE. AND YOU KNOW, IF IT'S THIS HUGE BUILDING FACADE, MAYBE THAT'S OKAY. LIKE WE'RE NOT AFRAID OF SIGNAGE. AND THERE'S OTHER, REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IN PLACE THAT WE THINK WOULD GIVE US A STAFF, SOME PARAMETERS. SO THERE ARE SOME JUST GENERAL SIGN CRITERIA THAT EXIST TODAY THAT BASICALLY SAY, LIKE, YOU CAN'T OVERSIZE THE SIGN, YOU CAN'T PLACE SIGNS WHERE THEY'RE CREATING COMPETITION TO EACH OTHER OR WHERE THEY'RE REPETITIVE. SO WE FEEL WITH THOSE EXISTING CONSTRAINTS AND PARAMETERS IN PLACE THAT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK WE'RE WE'RE TOO WORRIED ABOUT HAVING, YOU KNOW, THREE SIGNS OR EVEN, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S FOUR ENTRANCES, THAT COULD BE 4%. RIGHT? I GUESS THIS IS THE THING THAT WE'VE DEBATED AND WE WELCOME YOUR INPUT ON. YEAH, IT CONCERNS ME A LITTLE. ONLY BECAUSE TO NOT HAVE A MAXIMUM, ONLY BECAUSE WE SEE, YOU KNOW, BUSINESS MOVE IN BUSINESS MOVE OUT. AND AS WHOEVER OWNS THE BUILDING IS GOING TO DO THEIR BEST TO GET OCCUPANCY. AND IF THAT MEANS SPLITTING THREE BUSINESSES BUSINESS SPACES INTO SIX, THEN THAT PUTS US IN A POSITION WHERE THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME TO US FOR A VARIANCE FOR SIX 1% SIGN. THAT'S RIGHT AS IT IS RIGHT NOW.
[00:25:06]
THAT'S YEAH. THAT'S RIGHT, THE OTHER QUESTION THAT I HAD IS AROUND JUST HELPING ME UNDERSTAND BECAUSE FOR CLARITY, THE WALL SIGN, THE MEASUREMENTS, ADJUSTMENT THAT'S PROPOSED. THE WALL SIGN IS THE COMPANY'S LOGO. OR IF THE WALL SIGN IS THE COMPANY'S LOGO, THE LETTERING HEIGHT DOES NOT APPLY. SO DOES THAT MEAN AS LONG AS THE SPACE IS STILL 1% OF THE BUILDING FACADE, HOWEVER, THAT LENGTH WIDTH PILES UP THAT IT CAN BE EXEMPT FROM THAT 36 MAXIMUM? YEAH, I BELIEVE SO. YEAH. AS I SAY, IF WE'RE FOLLOWING. YEAH THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH. AND PREVIOUSLY DSV CAME IN WITH A LETTERING HEIGHT BUT THAT IS THEIR LOGO. SO THAT'S WHY YOU KNOW THEY DIDN'T NEED A VARIANCE FOR THE LETTERING HEIGHT, EVEN IF THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT OVER THE 36IN. THAT'S TO APPLY FAIRNESS BECAUSE SOMETIMES LOGOS DO NOT CONSIST OF LETTERING. IT COULD BE LIKE AN IMAGE. AND SO WE'VE HISTORICALLY IN FAIRNESS APPLIED BOTH LIKE SO THERE'S THE MAXIMUM SIGN SIZE STANDARD. AND THEN WE WOULD SAY LIKE A LETTERING HEIGHT. IF IT'S NOT LETTERING WOULDN'T APPLY. SO WHAT WE SEE A LOT TOO IN THE WAY WE APPLIED. IF IT'S LIKE IN A SIGN BOARD. SO WE'LL LET THE SIGN BOARD BE TALLER THAN 36IN. BUT THE LETTERING INSIDE THAT SIGN BOARD HAS TO BE 36IN, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. YEAH, THAT DOES. SO I MEAN, I KNOW WHEN YOU EXPAND LOGOS, SOMETIMES THE DIMENSIONS CAN'T FIT SOMETHING. BUT ALTOGETHER THE SQUARE FOOTAGE WOULD NEED TO STILL MAINTAIN THAT 1%. OKAY LAST QUESTION, I PROMISE I'M SORRY.YEAH. OKAY. THESE ARE GOOD QUESTIONS FOR OUR BUSINESS PARK. THE ZONING DOES NOT FACE ANY RESIDENTIAL, DOES IT? IT COULD. YEAH. THERE ARE SOME AREAS. YEAH. WHERE IT COULD BE AT THE BOUNDARY OF THE OF THE CITY, CORPORATE LIMITS. OR IT COULD BE UNINCORPORATED AREAS THAT MAY FACE RESIDENTS TODAY. BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A QUESTION OF IF AND WHEN THOSE WOULD GET SOLD AND THEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY AT SOME POINT. SO I THINK, YEAH, THERE WILL CERTAINLY BE INSTANCES WHERE THESE COULD FACE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. OKAY. WITH THAT CONSIDERED, I KNOW YOU ALL ARE THE EXPERTS ON THIS, AND I SEE THE DEFINED ILLUMINATION TYPES. DOES THAT PROTECT POTENTIAL RESIDENTS THAT MAY BE FACING THOSE THAT SIGNAGE? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. SO THOSE ARE THE EXISTING, ILLUMINATION. REQUIREMENTS TODAY. SO I THAT'S THAT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION. I DO THINK THE WAY IT PROTECTS IT IS I MEAN, WE DON'T HAVE A PHOTOMETRIC OR A FOOT CANDLES IN PLACE. SO I GUESS CANDIDLY, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S LIKE TOO MUCH IN PLACE. I, YOU KNOW, I THINK IN GENERAL WE'RE, YOU KNO, NOT SUPPORTIVE OF SIGNS THAT ARE OVERLY BRIGHT. SO I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A CODE REQUIREMENT IN THE SIGN CODE THAT EXISTS TODAY.
BUT BESIDES THAT, I, YOU KNOW, LUCKILY WE HAVE NOT SEEN THAT TAKE PLACE. I THINK WE'RE MORE CONSCIOUS OF LIKE PARKING LOT LIGHTING THAT GOES I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE APPLIED, LIKE ZERO FOOT CANDLES, BUT LUCKILY TOO, IT'S SORT OF THE SORT OF CITY POLICY AND SORT OF THE ESTHETIC OUT IN THE BUSINESS PARK THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK WHERE THERE IS EXTERIOR LIGHTING FOR SIGNS, IT'S TYPICALLY DOWNCAST GOOSENECK. SO IT'S SHIELDED. SO I WOULD SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE SEEN SUCCESS WITH THAT SO FAR. OKAY. JUST WANTED TO THROW IT OUT THERE FOR CONTEMPLATION I THINK THAT'S A GREAT COMMENT. YEAH. SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. TO FOLLOW UP ON HANS'S QUESTION AS IT RELATES TO THE ENTRANCE QUESTION VERSUS FRONTAGE. AND I'M JUST SPITBALLING BECAUSE I KNOW YOU DID EXPLAIN IT AND YOU OBVIOUSLY ANSWERED HANS'S QUESTION.
HOWEVER, LIKE WHEN I, I'VE DONE A FEW MEETINGS OUT IN THE BUSINESS PARK WITH ELECTED OFFICIALS AND FOR CLIENTS THAT ARE OUT THERE AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN EASIER, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU HAVE FOLKS WHO ARE NOT, FROM NEW ALBANY. THEY'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH NEW ALBANY, AND THEY'RE LOOKING FOR WHERE'S THE SIGN? BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW OUR BUILDINGS. THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT TO LOOK FOR. SO TO THAT POINT WHERE YOU'RE SAYING THE ENTRANCE IS THEY'RE STILL GOING TO BE A WAY WHERE IT'S JUST USER FRIENDLY, SO TO SPEAK, WHEN WE HAVE VISITORS COMING DOWN, OR JUST PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT FAMILIAR WHERE THEY'LL SEE AND THEY'LL KNOW THAT THAT'S THE BUSINESS THEY'RE PULLING INTO. AND THAT'S WHY IT WAS THE CONCERN VERSUS FRONTAGE VERSUS ENTRANCE, I GUESS, IS MY ONLY CONCERN. SO I'D SAY THE SIGN CODE TODAY ALLOWS FOR FLEXIBILITY FOR BUSINESSES TO LOCATE THESE SIGNS WHERE THEY THINK IT MAKES THE MOST SENSE FOR THEIR BUSINESS NEEDS. EVEN SO, THE DSV ONE. SO JUST TO GO BACK TO THIS. SO THIS IS, YOU
[00:30:01]
KNOW, THE FRONT DOOR. SO THIS WOULD BE THE ONE OF THE ENTRANCES. BUT YOU KNOW, THEY'RE PUTTING THE SIGN KIND OF NEXT TO IT. RIGHT? SO WE THINK IT'S STILL SORT OF LEADING TO THE GENERAL ENTRYWAY. SO THE CODE ALLOWS FOR THIS TYPE OF FLEXIBILITY. THEY COULD HAVE PUT THIS SIGN, YOU KNOW HERE OR YOU KNOW LIKE HERE ALONG THIS LITTLE FACADE. SO WE LIKE KIND OF LEAVING THAT OPEN LANGUAGE BECAUSE HOPEFULLY YOU KNOW BUSINESSES ARE DOING WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THEIR CUSTOMERS AND USING IT FOR WAYFINDING. LIKE IT SHOULD BE. BUT WE DON'T. AND CODE THAT IS SORT OF PUT MANY PARAMETERS AROUND THAT IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY. GOTCHA. AND THE REASON I THINK I ASKED, I'M THINKING THIS OF THE BUSINESS OUTRIGHT. IT WAS ALIEN CANDLES PULLING IN. THEY HAD THEY DO HAVE THEIR SIGN RIGHT THERE. BUT THE ENTRANCE WE WENT INTO WAS ON THE WEST OF IT. AND SO THEREFORE I REMEMBER FACING IT. I WOULDN'T HAVE SEEN THAT THAT WAS ALIEN IF THEY WOULD GO IN THE ENTRANCE DIRECTION VERSUS THE FRONTAGE.AND I GUESS THAT'S, THAT'S THE REASON I ASKED THE QUESTION WAS ALL, YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S A GREAT COMMENT. I THINK WHEN WE SAW THE WAS IT CROWN, I THINK THEY HAD A SIGN VARIANCE, NOT TOO LONG AGO AND THEY HAD LIKE A PARTS AND SERVICE STATION WALL SIGN THAT I THINK THEY NEEDED A. THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH. A VARIANCE FOR. AND SO WE'RE HOPING THAT THIS WILL ALSO ALLOW FOR THEM TO DO THAT.
SO THEY SO IF COMPANIES DO WANT TO PROVIDE MORE WAYFINDING THEY CAN I DON'T KNOW. YEAH. IF THEY JUST YOU KNOW BECAUSE OF THE CODE, THEY JUST DIDN'T WANT TO REQUEST A VARIANCE. THERE COULD BE MANY REASONS. BUT HOPEFULLY IF THEY WANTED THAT THIS CODE I THINK WOULD ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE ALONG THAT DOORWAY. OKAY WHAT'S INTERESTING TOO JUST ANOTHER WAY OF HISTORY IS THAT WE JUST HAVEN'T SEEN MANY WALL SIGNS OUT IN THE BUSINESS PARK. SO I THINK SOME OF THESE NEWER COMPANIES ARE MORE INTERESTED IN THIS. SO I THINK THAT'S ALSO WHY WE JUST HAVEN'T SEEN MANY WAIVERS UNTIL TODAY. IT'S MOSTLY BEEN THROUGH GROUND SIGNAGE THAT THEY'VE BEEN IDENTIFYING THEIR SITES. SO WE DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT. IT'S JUST SORT OF I DON'T KNOW. IT'S JUST KIND OF THE BUSINESS PARK AS IT'S GROWN. AND I THINK ALSO THE BUILDINGS HAVE GROWN TOO, THAT THIS IS WHAT BUSINESS THE NEW BUSINESSES ARE DESIRING. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I GOT ONE FOR YOU. IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE SLIDE, YOU JUST HAD. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND IT. SO FIRST, IT'S JUST A GENERAL QUESTION. HOW DID YOU LAND ON THE 150 ZERO ZERO ZERO SQUARE FOOT WHEN YOUR AVERAGE WAS, I THINK, 253, I THINK, YEAH. SO HERE'S KIND OF THE RANDOM SELECTION THAT WE MADE. AND SO THE TOP FIVE ARE TRADITIONAL OFFICE WHICH ARE UNDER THE 150, AND THEN WE KIND OF LOOKED AT THE OTHER ONES AND THEY ALL ARE OVER 150. SO WE OUR THOUGHT AS STAFF IS THAT THE CURRENT SIGN REGULATIONS SEEM TO BE WORKING WELL FOR OUR TRADITIONAL OFFICE BUILDINGS, LIKE OUR MEDICAL OFFICE AND SO WHEN WE LOOKED AND WE PULLED THOSE OUT OF THIS RANDOM SAMPLING OF BUILDINGS, WE SAW THAT ALL OF THOSE OFFICE BUILDINGS ARE YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE REALLY NOT MUCH BIGGER THAN 106,000FT■!S, FOR THE MOST PART. AND WE DIDN'T DO EVERY OFFICE BUILDING. SO THIS IS JUST SORT OF A RANDOM SAMPLING OF BUSINESSES, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT EVERYTHING LIKE OTHER THAN OFFICE, THOSE ALL SEEM TO BE BIGGER THAN 150,000 FOR THE MOST PART. SO, CANDIDLY, WE JUST KIND OF PICKED A NUMBER IN THE MIDDLE WHERE WE THOUGHT WOULD BE A GOOD DIVIDING LINE. SO WE WOULD CAPTURE, YOU KNOW, MOST OF THE OFFICE BUILDINGS, AND KEEP THAT IN THAT MAXIMUM 75FT■!S. BUT WED BE TREATING SORT OF THE TRADITIONAL DATA CENTERS, WAREHOUSE, MANUFACTURING FACILITIES THAT THEY WOULD GET THAT 1%. SO THOSE ARE TYPICALLY LARGER BUILDINGS. OKAY. AND THEN AS A FOLLOW UP QUESTION, SO BASED ON THE DISCUSSION, CUPERTINO AT 446 VERSUS, JUST I GUESS CROWN AT 179, IF THEY, THEY'RE BOTH OVER 150 AND THEY STILL COULD HAVE THE SAME HEIGHT IN THE BUILDING, RIGHT? JUST ONES LONGER THAN THE OTHER IF THEY WERE SITTING NEXT TO EACH OTHER, THAT CUPERTINO SIGN REALLY COULD BE OVER 400 FOOT AT AN ENTRANCE. GIVEN THIS NEW VERSUS 180 FOOT. SO ARE THERE ANY THOUGHTS TO THE DIFFERENT SIZES OF ALL THESE SIGNS, GIVEN THE FACT THAT MAYBE THESE WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS WILL BE THE SAME HEIGHT? YEAH, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. I NOT NECESSARILY WE'VE ALLOWED THAT JUST FOR THAT FLEXIBILITY STILL IN CODE. SO IF USERS WANT TO DO SORT OF A MORE VERTICAL SIGN VERSUS HORIZONTAL, RIGHT, THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO SO AGAIN, KNOWING WE HAVE THOSE OTHER CONSTRAINTS, MAKING SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, SIGNS DON'T COVER ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES OF BUILDINGS AND, AND THAT THEY DON'T COMPETE WITH EACH OTHER. SO THAT'S HOW WE AS STAFF WOULD BE ABLE TO PUT SOME CONSTRAINTS AND CONTROLS AROUND, YOU KNOW, A SIGN THAT MAY NOT FIT QUITE
[00:35:06]
RIGHT ON THE BUILDING, I GUESS, BUT I THINK IT'S A VERY VALID QUESTION. JUST I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD THINK ABOUT THAT WITHOUT GETTING TOO INTO THE WEEDS ON THIS, BUT SINCE IT'S A WORKSHOP, IS THERE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD THINK ABOUT WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT WOULD BE, A LITTLE BIT RESTRICTIVE TO THE SIZE VERSUS THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, AS OPPOSED TO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING.IF THERE'S SOMETHING IN THERE THAT WOULD KIND OF KEEP IT TO SCALE, BUT STILL HIT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW. YEAH, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY LANGUAGE YOU COULD ADD THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I'M SURE WE HAVE THE AVERAGE HEIGHT OF OUR WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS. THEY'RE ALL, AS YOU SAID, WITH THE WATER'S EDGE, YOU KNOW, IN THAT AREA, THEY'RE ALL KIND OF THE SAME HEIGHT. BUT WE HAVE A LOT OF WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS THAT ARE THE SAME HEIGHT DUE TO OUR CODES AND EVERYTHING OUT THERE. ANYWAYS, I DON'T KNOW, IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. SURE.
YEAH. WE CAN CONTINUE TO RESEARCH THAT. YEAH. AND THEN SO HOW DOES EVERYBODY FEEL ABOUT THE 1%? I KNOW THAT MAYBE IT SHOULD BE A MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE. AND WE'RE PERFECTLY OKAY WITH THAT TOO. THIS IS JUST SOMETHING WE WANT TO THROW OUT FOR DISCUSSION AND WORKSHOP WITH YOU ALL. SINCE YOU GUYS SEE THESE VARIANCES BEFORE WE TAKE IT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WE CAN CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, TAKE AWAY THAT 1% AND JUST PUT, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THIS DATA HERE, YOU CAN SEE THAT, YOU KNOW, GENERALLY PROBABLY AROUND LIKE 200FT■!S. AGAIN, WE KNOW WE'RE T GOING TO LIKE SOLVE EVERY VARIANCE. THERE WILL STILL BE SOME. BUT JUST KIND OF LOOKING AT GENERAL, YOU KNOW, KIND OF LIKE RULES OF THUMBS ABOUT WHERE THESE THINGS ARE LANDING. THEY SEEM TO BE ABOUT 200 TO MAYBE 225FT■!S WOULD PROBABLY ENCAPSULATE MOST OF THESE. AND AGAIN, THAT WOULD STILL GET YOU ABOUT 1%, BUT THEN THAT WOULD PUT SOME MAXIMUM, YOU KNOW, AREA CONTROLS OVER THESE. AND AGAIN, WE AS STAFF ARE ALSO NOT AFRAID OF VARIANCES. WE'RE TRYING TO ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, MAKE LESS WORK FOR EVERYBODY. AND YOU KNOW WE DON'T WANT A VARIANCE JUST FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING A VARIANCE. BUT YOU KNOW WE ALWAYS SUPPORT GOOD DESIGN. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IF WE DO STILL GET THIS OUTLIER, JUST LIKE WE DID AT THE FARMS TODAY, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THOSE WILL CERTAINLY HAPPEN TO I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF THE SOLUTION I KNOW THAT IN THE PAST WHEN WE'VE REVIEWED THEM FOR VARIANCE, WE'VE KIND OF LOOKED AT THE PERCENTAGE OF THE BUILDING FACADE, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE TOO NUANCED TO DO A TIERED APPROACH FROM A SQUARE FOOTAGE POSITION, SIMILAR TO HOW THE GARAGE, CODE IS WRITTEN. YEAH, JUST A THOUGHT. I MEAN, IT MAY BE REALLY HARD. I DON'T LOOKING AT THE VARIATION IN BUILDINGS, BUT I ALSO AGREE WITH MATT'S POSITION ABOUT THE BUILDING HEIGHT. SO WE MAY HAVE A REALLY TALL, WIDE BUILDING THAT SITS NEXT TO A SLIMMER SAME HEIGHT BUILDING, AND THAT'S GOING TO CREATE SOME KIND OF, AND YET INCONSISTENCY. AND FROM A VISIBILITY PERSPECTIVE, I THINK WE ALL APPRECIATE THE CLEAN LOOK THAT WE HAVE, ESPECIALLY LIKE IN THAT AS WE BRING THE BUSINESS PARK AREA, GETS MORE POPULATED.
SO WHATEVER WE CAN DO TO MAINTAIN THAT, I THINK THAT IS THE SPIRIT BEHIND WHAT I'M SEEING HERE. SO THAT'S JUST MY FEEDBACK. YEAH, I THINK 1% SEEMS HEAVY, I MEAN, THAT BUILDING WAS A MILLION SQUARE FEET, SO YOU COULD HAVE 1000 SQUARE FOOT SIGN. AND THAT TO ME IS A BIT OBNOXIOUS IN THE BUILDING'S OBNOXIOUS. BUT THEN YOU ADDED THAT 1000 SQUARE FOOT SIGN. SO I WOULD PROBABLY LIKE TO SEE A MAXIMUM. AND I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT A COMPANY WOULD LIKE. I'M ALL ABOUT LIKE, CREATING ENVIRONMENT TO BRING IN COMPANIES AND BRING IN BUSINESS.
BUT I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT NOT ALLOWING A 1000 SQUARE FOOT SIGN WOULD BE A BIG DETERRENT FOR SOMEBODY. SO. SO IF WE'RE IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SCALE, RIGHT, THAT'S THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS TALK ABOUT THE SCALE OF THIS SIGN. SO IF YOU WERE TO ADD SOMETHING TO THAT PERMITTED AREA WHERE IT SAYS OVER 150,000FT■!S MAY HAVEA WALL, SIGN UP TO 1% OF THE APPLICABLE BUILDING FACADE NOT TO EXCEED 10% IN HEIGHT OF THE TOTAL BUILDING HEIGHT. YOU KNOW WHETHER IT'S 10%, WHETHER IT'S 8%, WHETHER IT'S 5%, THEN I THINK YOU GET SOME SORT OF UNIFORMITY WITH WITHOUT BLOWING IT UP. SO IF YOU JUST ADD LIKE MAYBE NOT TO EXCEED A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, THEN I THINK YOU MIGHT CAPTURE THAT. SO THE 1% MIGHT NOT BE AS BIG A DEAL. YEAH. IF THEY CAN'T BLOW IT UP. YEAH. YOU KNOW IT MAY NOT HIT THAT 1%, BUT
[00:40:06]
IT WILL STILL BE TO SCALE FOR I THINK FOR EVERYBODY. THEN IF THEY NEED A VARIANCE OFF OF THAT THEN THEY CAN COME IN AND SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT, IT'S A TWO STORY BUILDING. THIS IS WHY WE THINK WE SHOULD GO A COUPLE MORE INCHES HIGHER OR WHATEVER. I DON'T KNOW, BUT JUST A THOUGHT.AND THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WAS LOOKING AT IT A HECK OF A LOT BETTER THAN I WAS GOING TO. BUT I'M MORE VISUAL. SO THAT'S WHY I ALWAYS LOVE WHEN YOU PUT RENDERINGS IN THE PACKET. SO IF YOU GO IN THE DIRECTION OF MATT WAS JUST SUGGESTING, I WOULD BE ABLE TO VISUALLY SAY, OKAY, THAT'S HOW BIG THAT WOULD BE VERSUS IF YOU GO THE PERCENTAGE ROUND. I'M STILL I'M PRAYING THAT YOU PUT A RENDERING IN THERE. SO I HAVE MORE OF AN IDEA OF HOW MUCH IT WOULD REALLY TAKE SHAPE OF THAT BUILDING. BUT IF YOU GO IN THE DIRECTION OF WHAT MATT'S SUGGESTING, THAT WOULD HELP THAT VISUALIZATION A LITTLE BIT. IF WE IF IT'S BROUGHT BEFORE US TO MAKE A DECISION.
OKAY. LIKE, WHAT DO WE KNOW THAT THE HEIGHT IS OF THAT DSV BUILDING JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, ARE WE AT, I DON'T KNOW, PROBABLY 50 OR 50. YEAH. OKAY. I GUESS SO. YOU'RE LOOKING I MEAN, ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT, 166 SEEMS LIKE REASONABLE TO THEM BASED ON A 50 FOOT. YOU KNOW, SOMEHOW WE CAN WORK THAT PERCENTAGE INTO TO SEE IF THAT'S IF WE GO OUT THERE AND DO A LITTLE RESEARCH ON JUST HINDSIGHT, YOU KNOW, HEIGHT OF SIGNS VERSUS, YOU KNOW, THAT 50 FOOT OR 60 FOOT. IF WE DID, I THINK THAT WOULD YOU COULD MAYBE GET TO THAT POINT ANYWAY. SO THAT REDUCES THE THIS WITHOUT REDUCING THE NUMBER THAT THEY COULD DO. I APPRECIATE THE STAFF'S EFFORT AT TRYING TO BRING THIS TOGETHER, BUT THE VARIANCE PROCESS IS OKAY TOO.
NOW WHAT I'LL SAY ABOUT THE VARIANCE PROCESS IS I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD SINCE 2021. WE'VE MET WITH FIVE OF THESE INDIVIDUALLY AND AT NO POINT DID WE SIT HERE AND SAY, WELL, HOW DOES THAT COMPARE WITH THE PREVIOUS ONE? LIKE WE ALWAYS SILO THEM INTO AN INDIVIDUAL JUST THAT BUILDING.
AND WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE PREVIOUS 4 OR 5 TO SAY WE DON'T WANT MATT'S BUILDING ACROSS THE STREET TO BE AT X AMOUNT OF SQUARE FEET COMPARED TO MINE, AND JUST BECAUSE I WAS HERE EARLIER, MAYBE MINE WAS SMALLER AND NOW WE HAVE SIGN CREEP, RIGHT? ALL OF A SUDDEN THE SIGNS ARE GETTING LARGER AND LARGER. SO I, I WOULD TEND TO AGREE IF WE BECOME MAYBE A LITTLE MORE RESTRICTIVE IN OUR LANGUAGE AND THEN ALLOW THE VARIANCE PROCESS TO COME THROUGH, BUT THEN IT'S INCUMBENT ON US TO START TO TIE BACK TOGETHER THAT THE PREVIOUS FIVE THAT DATE BACK TO 2021 WOULD BE VERY INTERESTING TO USE AS A GUIDE, BECAUSE DO WE TRULY IF WE LOOK BACK AND WE SAY WE HAVE JUST GONE FROM THIS TO THIS OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS, THAT'S ON US TO MAYBE REIN THAT IN TOO.
SO I DON'T THINK I SAID ANYTHING RIGHT THERE, BUT I DO APPRECIATE WHAT YOU. YEAH, THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. WELL, THANK YOU. THAT'S GREAT FEEDBACK. YEAH. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YEAH WE'LL RETHINK THIS 1%. LOOK AT A TIER SYSTEM THAT HAS MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGES. WE'LL LOOK AT THE BUILDING HEIGHTS AND MAKE MAYBE MAKE THAT MAYBE THAT'S WHERE IT SCALES AS A PERCENTAGE. SO INSTEAD OF THE SIZE BEING PERCENTAGE MAYBE IT'S THE HEIGHTS. AND THAT WAY WE MAKE SURE THAT IT CAN. YEAH. BECAUSE A FOUR STORY, THREE STORY OFFICE BUILDING IS ONE THING. AND THEN KIND OF A LOW WAREHOUSE COULD BE ANOTHER. I FEEL LIKE THAT MATT'S SUGGESTION ABOUT A HEIGHT PERCENTAGE ELIMINATES THE NEED FOR A TIERED SYSTEM, BECAUSE IF THERE'S VARIATION AROUND THAT, THEY'LL HAVE TO COME TO US ANYWAY, AND THEN WE CAN IMPROVE OUR EVALUATION PROCESS OF SAYING, YOU KNOW, IT LOOKS OFF. SO ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. WELL, WE CAN DO THIS, WE'LL DO SOME MORE RESEARCH, AND THEN I GUESS WE CAN WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK AND JUST WORKSHOP THIS AGAIN SO YOU GUYS CAN SEE, WHAT WE THINK BECAUSE THIS IS GREAT FEEDBACK. SO. YEAH. GIVE US WE'LL TRY TO GET THIS DONE IN A MONTH, BUT WE'LL IF NOT WE'LL BRING THIS BACK TO YOU IN. WOULD THAT BE.
OCTOBER. OCTOBER OCTOBER. ARE YOU TRYING TO GET THIS WRAPPED UP BEFORE THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR, OR WHAT'S IDEALLY, I THINK IDEALLY, BY THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR, BUT WE DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY REAL RUSH FOR THIS. I MEAN, I KNOW WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF THESE VARIANCES, BUT I DON'T THINK WE'RE AWARE OF ANY MORE, I JUST GOT ONE. SO NEXT MONTH. BUT BUT I HAVE NOT REVIEWED THE APP. I HAVE NOT REVIEWED THE APPLICATION. SO DON'T HOLD ME TO EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE ASKING. WELL, MAYBE WE'LL HAVE MORE DATA TO COMPARE. IF NOTHING ELSE. SO THERE WILL BE A SEPTEMBER MEETING. THERE WILL BE A SEPTEMBER. WELL, YEAH. IF THEY HAVE ALL OF THEIR IF THEIR APPLICATION IS COMPLETE, I WOULD HATE TO DO A MEETING JUST FOR THAT. YEAH, YEAH. THANK YOU STAFF. APPRECIATE IT. YEAH YEAH. THANK YOU GUYS. I WILL PULL FOR
[00:45:03]
PULL MEMBERS FOR AND ANY FINAL COMMENTS BEFORE WE CALL IT A DA. ALL RIGHT. I MOVE TO ADJOURN THIS EVENING'S MEETING. SECOND, MR. JACOB. YES, MISS SAMUELS? YES, MR. SHELL? YES MR. SMITH? YES. THERE ARE FOUR VOTES TO ADJOURN. GOOD NIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.