Sep 09, 2024 Architectural Review Board Meeting

[I. Call to order]

[00:00:08]

YEAH AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD MEETING FROM MONDA, SEPTEMBER 9TH, 2024. COULD WE PLEASE HAVE A ROLL CALL? MR. HENSON? HERE. MR. AITKEN. HERE.

MR. OH, SORRY. MR. STROLLER. HERE. MR. DAVEY. HERE. MISS MOORE. HERE. MR. MALLETT'S HERE.

MR. BROWN. HERE COUNCIL MEMBER. BRISK HERE. ALL VOTING MEMBERS ARE PRESENT. WE HAVE A QUORUM.

[III. Action on minutes]

AND FINALLY, AT THE END OF THE FOUR PARAGRAPH, FOUR NUMBERED PARAGRAPHS, ADD THE FOLLOWING.

THEREFORE MR. AITKEN FELT THE GROUNDS WERE NOT PRESENT TO GRANT A WAIVER. FURTHER DOWN ON THIS PARAGRAPH ON PAGE THREE, ON THE PARAGRAPH THAT BEGINS, MR. BAILEY, AND RIGHT NOW IT SAYS MR. BAILEY PAVERS. WE PROBABLY SHOULD SAY MR. BAILEY SAID THE PAVERS AND IN THE PARAGRAPH IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT STARTS, MR. AITKEN ASKED MR. BAILEY WHETHER HE WOULD LIKE THE BOARD TO WAIT TO VOTE TO REMARK THAT ALTHOUGH HE IS SYMPATHETIC, THE BOARD IS CONSTRAINED BY THE DEGARS AT AN S AND THE ORDINANCE PERIOD. AND THAT IS WHAT I HAD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY OTHER, ACTION ON THE MINUTES OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES FROM THE BOARD? I'M WITH THAT REVISION. I WOULD MOVE APPROVAL. SECOND. MR. ITEM. YES MR. STROLLER? YES. MR. BROWN? YES MISS. MOORE. ABSTAIN. I WAS ABSENT, MR. HENSON. YES. MR. MR. MALLET, ABSTAIN. MR. DAVID ABSTAIN. MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE FOUR VOTES TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS REVISED. THANK YOU

[IV. Additions or corrections to the agenda]

[VI. Cases]

[00:05:05]

THERE'S STONE, THERE'S PAVERS, THERE'S GRAVEL, AND ET CETERA. AND SO I FELT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT COUNCIL KNEW ABOUT CONCRETE DID NOT SPECIFY IT TO ME, MEANT THAT THAT REQUIREMENT TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY MEET THE INTENT OF THE STANDARD THAT THE APPLICANT IS ATTEMPTING TO SEEK A WAIVER FROM, THAT WASN'T MET HERE, AND THEN I GIVEN THAT I FOUND THAT THAT WASN'T MET, I DIDN'T GO AHEAD TO THEN ASSESS THE OTHER TWO. THAT WAS MY MR. HINSON CAN SPEAK FOR HIMSELF. I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THIS. RIGHT. AND I'M ON THE FENCE ON THIS AS WELL. UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAVE, DENIED CONCRETE ON OTHER PROPERTIES, KITZMILLER ROAD AND, ONE OTHER ADDRESS I CAN'T RECAL, JERSEY DRIVE. AND THIS IS ALMOST IDENTICAL. OTHER THAN THAT, THERE'S A CONCRETE DRIVE NEXT DOOR TO THE KITZMILLER ROAD. I SEE NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS AND THE KITZMILLER ROAD PROPERTIES. I SEE. NO, THE FACT THAT THEY THEY TOUCH, IF THEY OWN BOTH PROPERTIES, THAT I MIGHT LOOK AT IT DIFFERENTLY, BUT THEY DON'T. I THINK IT'S ODD AND COULD CREATE FUTURE ISSUES TO HAVE CONNECTING DRIVEWAYS FOR ADJOINING PROPERTIES. AND THERE'S A LOT OF CONCRETE IN THIS PROPOSAL. A LOT OF DRIVEWAY SURFACE. SO IT'S MY CONCERN AND THOUGHT. MR. MANAGER. THAT I

[00:10:05]

MR. BROWN, ARE YOU GOING TO GO AHEAD? SO MY, MY, MY TAKE ON IT WAS THAT MAINLY BECAUSE OF THE SITE SPECIFIC, THAT IT CONNECTS. IT'S ACTUALLY CONNECTING. IT'S NOT JUST AN ADJACENT DRIVEWAY.

IT IS IT IS CONNECTING THAT THE CONCRETE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION. YEAH.

AND I FELT THE SAME WAY, IF IT WAS A, IT IS A STANDALONE SITUATION. IF THE DRIVER IS INDEPENDENT, COMPLETELY AGREE. I COULD GO BOTH WAYS. I SEE IT BOTH WAYS, BUT I THOUGHT THE SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS HERE, NEW CONCRETE ISN'T GOING TO MATCH OLD CONCRETE, BUT ASPHALT IS NOT GOING TO MATCH OLD CONCRETE AT ALL. SO I FELT IT WAS, APPROPRIATE TO GRANT THE WAIVER. THANK YOU. I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS OR REMARKS ABOUT THIS. I THINK THE REASONING BEHIND THE SELECTION OF ASPHALT VERSUS CONCRETE BACK IN 2007 OR 2008, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE UNDERLYING REASON WAS UNLESS IT WAS WHAT YOU SAID, BUT I IT COULD HAVE BEEN AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATE IN MY MIND IF IT WERE TO HAVE BEEN FOR THE SAKE OF CONSISTENCY, BECAUSE HAVING NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE IT WOULD BE ELECTIVE TO CHOOSE EITHER CONCRETE OR ASPHALT ADJACENT TO EACH OTHER WOULD REALLY NOT BE A STRONG ESTHETIC CHOICE. NOW, ONCE AGAIN, NOW I'M SPECULATING ABOUT WHAT THE UNDERLYING CAUSE WAS, BUT TO ME, CONSISTENCY DOES CARRY MERIT. IN THIS DISCUSSION, I WOULD SAY, HAVING INSTALLED BOTH MANY TIMES THAT AN ARGUMENT REALLY CAN'T BE MADE ABOUT THE DURABILITY OR FUNCTION OR UTILITY OF ONE VERSUS THE OTHER.

THEY BOTH REQUIRE THEIR OWN UNIQUE MAINTENANCE. THEY BOTH REQUIRE THEIR OWN UNIQUE CARE.

SO I DON'T THINK THAT THE DECISION SHOULD BE BASED ON THE MERITS OF SOME KIND OF DURABILITY ISSUE, BECAUSE I THINK THAT CAN BE HANDLED INDEPENDENTLY OF OUR CHARGE, I DO THINK IT DOES MATTER, FOR THE SAKE OF CONSISTENCY, THAT THE ADJACENT HOME DOES HAVE CONCRET, THAT THAT'S MEANINGFUL IN THE IN THE DEBATE. TO ME, AND I DO AGREE THAT MR. BROWN'S COMMENT THAT THAT HAVING THE TWO SIDE BY SIDE MAY NOT REALLY ACHIEVE AN OUTCOME THAT ANY OF US ARE HAPPY WITH. MY LAST REMARK IS, I'M VERY CAUTIOUS ABOUT SETTING A PRECEDENT THAT WOULD, IN THE LACK OF A UNIQUE SITE CONDITION, WOULD OPEN THE DOOR TO RECONSIDERATION OF THIS GOING FORWARD. SO I THINK WHILE I SEE MERIT FOR THE CAUSE GIVEN THE STANDARD THAT WE HAVE TO MEASURE OUR DECISION ON, I WOULD BE RELUCTANT TO AGREE TO THE APPROVAL. THAT'S MY I GUESS THAT DIDN'T REALLY INVOLVE A QUESTION, BY THE WAY, BUT I'LL AT LEAST, ACKNOWLEDGE THE COMMENTS. SO, MR. STONE, YEARS FROM VIEWING THIS FROM THE OUTSIDE, LOOKING IN, BEFORE HEARING ANY COMMENTS AND, AND TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION ANY FEEDBACK, I, I LOOKED AT IT AND THOUGHT ABOUT HOW I WOULD HANDLE IT AND, IS MY CONSIDERATION THAT UNDERSTANDING THE IDEA OF PASSING THE WAIVER HAS SOME SORT OF IMPACT ON SETTING A PRECEDENT. I DO BELIEVE THAT WITH THE STANDALONE CONDITION, IT'S NOT A NEIGHBORHOOD CONDITION AND IT HAS A CONNECTION THAT THERE'S ROOM FOR ACCEPTANCE IN THIS CASE. SO I WOULD I WOULD FIND IT TO BE APPROPRIATE. SO WE KNOW WE HAVE NOT ADVANCED OUR OUR. IT'S ALL DOWN TO ONE. WELL AND SHE CAN'T VOTE. YES. SHE'S RECUSED I'M RECUSING MYSELF. SO OKAY. ABSOLUTELY. NO OKAY. SO DO WE NEED TO DISPOSE IT. DISPOSE OF IT, DOES THE APPLICANT WANT TO. IF THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, WE'LL SWEAR YOU IN NOW. AND WOULD NOT LIKE TO HAVE. SO SINCE WE HAVE TO DO THIS IN THE NEGATIVE WAY, OR IN THE POSITIVE WAY, I WOULD MOVE APPROVAL OF APPLICATION ARB 54 2024 TO GRANT THE WAIVER IS MY MOTION, AND I WOULD SECOND THAT. MR. ITEM NO. MR. BROWN. YES. MR. HENSON? YES

[00:15:16]

CARE OF MR. AARON UNDERHILL. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A STAFF REPORT? YES. THANK YOU. SURE WE DO. SO AS YOU MENTIONED, THIS APPLICATION IS FOR FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE HAMLET PROJECT, THE HAMLET SITE IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST, SOUTHWEST WHILE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE 605 AND CENTRAL COLLEGE INTERSECTION. I'LL SHOW YOU A MAP HERE IN A SECOND, BUT I'M SURE EVERYONE HERE KNOWS EXACTLY WHERE THIS SITE IS AT. SO JUST SO EVERYONE, EITHER FOLKS AT HOME OR FOLKS IN THE ROOM, I'M SURE YOU ALL NOTICED THAT WE ORGANIZED JUST KIND OF DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE APPLICATION, WE ORGANIZED EVERYTHING INTO BINDERS FOR YOU GUYS TO HELP NAVIGATE STAFF MATERIALS AND THE, THE MATERIALS THAT WERE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, SO FOLKS AT HOME OR ANYONE HERE IN ATTENDANCE CAN ACCESS THESE MATERIALS. WE HAVE EXTRA BINDERS AT THE BACK OF THE ROOM, AND WE ALSO, IF YOU USE THE QR CODES, YOU CAN ACCESS THE MATERIALS DIGITALLY. SO I KNOW WE WENT OVER THIS A LITTLE BIT, LAST, LAST MONTH, BUT I JUST WANTED TO TOUCH ON IT AGAIN, AGAIN FOR FOLKS AT HOME. I KNOW THAT WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE WATCHING TONIGHT. SO A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ON THE HAMLET SITE, AND THE APPLICATION, FROM WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY, ENVISIONED TO NOW. SO BACK IN 2022, THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED A AMENDMENTS OR A FOCUS AREA. THE HAMLET FOCUS AREA, INTO THE ENGAGE STRATEGIC PLAN. THIS DOCUMENT, REALLY LAID OUT THE VISION FOR WHAT A HAMLET SHOULD BE AND ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WERE INCLUDED IN THAT DOCUMENT. LATER IN 2022, THE APPLICANT REZONE THE PROPERTY.

CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE REZONING, TO ALLOW A HAMLET TO BE DEVELOPED ON THE SITE, THE THERE'S A ZONING TEXT IN PLACE THAT CONTEMPLATES AND PROVIDES DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THIS PROJECT. SO THE THIRD BOX HERE, AND THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT TONIGHT, THE NEXT STEP IN THE PROCESS IS THE APPLICANT HAS TO RECEIVE APPROVAL FOR A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND FINAL PLAT APPLICATION. ONCE THEY GET THOSE APPROVALS, THEY CAN MOVE INTO THEIR ENGINEERING AND BUILDING PERMITS AND THEN START CONSTRUCTION. SO FOR A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION, THIS IS REALLY A, A FINAL CHECK IS A GOOD WAY TO LOOK AT IT TO MAKE SURE THAT, WHAT THE DEVELOPER IS PROPOSING MATCHES THE STANDARDS OF THE ZONING TEXT. SO WE, WE WILL SEE A DETAILED SITE PLAN, ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS, YOU KNOW, SIZES OF UNITS AND DIFFERENT ENGINEERING PLANS AS THEY EXIST TODAY. SO HAMLET, FINAL DEVELOPMENT, DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATIONS HAVE TO BE REVIEWED BY THREE BOARDS. THE FIRST BOARD IS THE PARKS AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD. THIS IS AN ADVISORY BOARD THAT REVIEWS ALL OF THE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE DESIGNATIONS, AND MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION, SO THE APPLICANT VISITED. GOSH, LET ME GET MY DATES WRONG EARLY AUGUST. I THINK IT WAS THE PARKS AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD AND RECEIVED UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. WITH SOME CONDITIONS, THOSE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, THOSE CONDITIONS HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN FULLY INTEGRATED INTO WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. WITH THE CURRENT SUBMITTAL, THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD, WHICH IS THIS BOARD HERE, AS YOU ALL KNOW, IS ANOTHER ADVISORY BOARD THAT REVIEWS THE FULL FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION AND MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AND THE NEW ALBANY PLANNING COMMISSION TAKES FINAL ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. SO GETTING INTO THE SITE A LITTLE BIT TO HELP ORIENT EVERYONE. SO THIS IS THE THIS IS CENTRAL COLLEGE ROAD. THIS IS 605, EVERYTHING THAT'S IN COLOR HERE IS WHAT IS PROPOSED AS PROPOSED AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. SO THE THIS THE SITE IS A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT THAT IS REALLY ORGANIZED AROUND

[00:20:04]

AND THE SUB AREA AGAIN, I'LL WALK YOU THROUGH THIS HERE IN A SECOND. BUT THIS REALLY, ALL OF THESE ELEMENTS, BUT SPECIFICALLY THE PARK AND THIS COMMERCIAL NODE REALLY HELPS FULFILL THE VISION OF WHAT WAS LAID OUT IN OUR STRATEGIC PLAN FOR WHAT A HAMLET SHOULD BE. AND THEY DON'T HAVE ANY COMMUNITY. SO THE SITE IS BROKEN UP INTO FIVE DIFFERENT SUB AREAS AS ENVISIONED IN THE ZONING TEXT. AND WE'VE OUTLINED THOSE HERE ON THE SCREEN. AND WE'LL TAKE A MINUTE TO WALK. YOU THROUGH WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IN EACH OF THOSE AREAS. AGAIN, GENERALLY IN SUB AREA ONE, WE HAVE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS A HIGH END LUXURY FLATS BUILDING HERE. SUB AREA TWO.

IT'S ALL TOWNHOMES. SUB AREA THREE. IT'S A MIXTURE OF DUPLEXES AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. SUB AREA FOUR MAKES UP THE SUGAR RUN PARK THAT IS PROPOSED AND THEN SUB AREA FIVE IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THESE WILL BE DEVELOPED VERY SIMILARLY TO LIKE ELY CROSSING. THE ELY CROSSING NEIGHBORHOOD, ASHTON GROVE AND THE NEW ALBANY COUNTRY CLUB. ALL CUSTOM HOMES WILL BE LOCATED INSIDE AREA FIVE. SO THIS IS A LITTLE I KNOW THIS IS HARD TO SEE, BUT AGAIN, ALL THIS MATERIAL IS IN YOUR BINDERS SO YOU CAN GET A BETTER LOOK AT THE GRAPHICS. BUT THESE ARE ALL THE PARK, LAND AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENTS THAT ARE BEING DEDICATED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. SO AGAIN, WE HAVE THE SUGAR RUN PARK AS THE ORGANIZING ELEMENT. AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE ADJACENT, GREEN NODES OR GREEN PARKLETS THAT ARE PROVIDED THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE ZONING DISTRICT TO KIND OF TIE, ALL THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE SITE, BACK TO GREEN SPACE AND THEN BACK DOWN INTO, THE, THE SUGAR RUN PARK THERE, IN TOTAL. SO THE CITY CODE DOES REQUIRE 25% OF THE TOTAL DEVELOPABLE AREA TO BE DEVELOPED OR TO BE DEDICATED OR MADE UP OF PARKLAND AND OPEN SPACE. AGAIN, 25%. THE APPLICANT IS FAR EXCEEDING THIS REQUIREMENT BY PROVIDING 33% OF THE ENTIRE AREA AS PARKLAND AND OPEN SPACE. SO TAKING A LITTLE BIT OF A CLOSER LOOK AT THAT, THE APPLICANT ON THE, THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE SITE, WHICH IS WHAT WHAT'S SHOWN HERE ON THE SCREEN, THEY WILL HAVE A NATURE PLAY ELEMENT KIND OF TUCKED BACK IN HERE INTO THE WOODS, AND THEN THERE'S A PLAYGROUND WHICH IS SHOWN UP HERE. THAT IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT HERE, BOTH OF THESE SERVICES, YOU KNOW, AS MOST OF YOU PROBABLY KNOW, THE CITY HAS GONE, UNDERTAKEN SIGNIFICANT, RESPONSIBILITY TO UPGRADE ALL OF THE EXISTING PARKLAND OR PUBLICLY OWNED PARKLAND AND OPEN SPACE AREAS IN THE COMMUNITY, THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPORTANT TO ALL NEW ALBANY RESIDENTS AS PART OF THAT PROCESS. THAT INCLUDES MAKING SURE THAT ALL THE MATERIALS ARE ACCESSIBLE TO PEOPLE OF ALL ABILITIES. THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING A ACCESSIBLE, MATERIAL, AND AS PART OF THAT, BOTH THE NATURE PLAY AND THE PLAYGROUND. AND THEN WE'VE ALSO THIS WAS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL AS PART OF THE, PARKS AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD, WE MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SUFFICIENT TRASH, RECYCLING AND DOG WASTE STATIONS SPREAD OUT THROUGHOUT THE PARK AREA, AND THAT IS BEING PROVIDED, BY THE APPLICANT, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAN. SO A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS, JUST TO HIGHLIGHT IN THIS SECTION, THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO THE COMMUNITY, IS MAKING SURE THERE'S PROPER SHADE FOR ALL THE PARK ELEMENTS. SO INITIALLY THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY HAD, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THESE PLAYGROUND ELEMENTS KIND OF TUCKED UP INTO MORE OF THE OPEN SPACE AREA.

AND, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE LISTENED TO THE COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, AS WE'VE CONTINUED TO DEVELOP LIKE ROSELAND PARK AND OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, AND FOLKS HAVE SOME DESIRE TO HAVE MORE SHADE. SO THEY'VE ACTUALLY TUCKED THESE BACK INTO MORE OF THE TREE LINE TO HELP PROVIDE SOME OF THAT NATURAL SHADING. FOR THOSE, FOR THOSE, THOSE EQUIPMENT PIECES, AND THEN BENCHES ALSO ARE SOMETHING THAT COMES UP A LOT IN OUR PARKS AND OPEN SPACE. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO INSTALL THOSE HERE AS WELL. SO TAKING A LOOK AT THE STREETS HERE, THIS IMAGE REALLY KIND OF TRIES TO HIGHLIGHT IN BLUE DIFFERENT SHADES OF BLUE, ALL OF THE NEW RIGHT OF WAY THAT'S BEING DEDICATED TO THE CITY FOR STREETS. EACH OF THESE STREET SECTIONS, MEET OUR CITY CODE STANDARDS IN TERMS OF HAVING A TREE LAWN, A, A PUBLIC SIDEWALK AND STREET TREES

[00:25:08]

WE'VE HEARD FROM PEOPLE, FOLKS IN THIS AREA IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT INTERSECTION IS WAY TOO FAST, WAY TOO BIG. AND ONE WAY THAT WE CAN HELP START SLOWING TRAFFIC DOWN SO WE CAN JUSTIFY REDUCING THE SPEED LIMIT IS ADDING MORE URBAN ELEMENTS, LIKE ON STREET PARKING AND ENHANCED STREETSCAPE SECTION. SO THE CITY IS HOPING TO WORK ON GETTING THOSE IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED, BUT WE JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT TO YOU GUYS THAT THOSE HAVE NOT BEEN FUNDED AS OF TODAY. CAN WE CAN I ASK A QUESTION OR DO YOU PREFER WE WAIT TILL THE END? YEAH. IS THERE A PROFILE FOR THE PUBLIC ALLEY? I DIDN'T SEE IT ON THE LIST. AND I SEE THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE PUBLICLY DEDICATED ALLEYS. AND I WAS WONDERING IF THERE'S A CROSS SECTION THAT THAT WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THOSE.

I BELIEVE THAT THERE'S A CROSS SECTION OF DEVELOPERS MATERIAL. IT'S A PRETTY STANDARD, TYPICAL ALLEY THAT WE'D SEE THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY. MCDONALD LANE, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT ALLEYS IN THE WINDSOR SUBDIVISION. I DIDN'T PULL IT OUT ON OUR STAFF MATERIALS HERE, BUT I DO KNOW THAT IT'S IN THE APPLICANT'S MATERIALS. MAYBE JUSTIN CAN TRY TO FIND WHICH PAGE THAT'S ON BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN WE KEEP WALKING. SORRY, JUSTIN 19. BRIAN'S ON IT. THANK YOU. CHRIS, CAN I ASK A QUESTION, FOR 605, THE STREET PARKING. I UNDERSTAND THAT'S A CITY PROJECT, BUT IF THEY'RE IF THERE WERE NO STREET PARKING SPACES, SUB AREA FOR THE PLAYGROUND, THERE WOULD BE NO PLACE TO PARK. CORRECT. SO PARKING. ACTUALLY, I SHOULD HAVE WENT THROUGH THAT. AND I CAN GO BACK TO THE PARKING REALLY QUICK. I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP. SO PARKING, THE DEVELOPER WAS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A MASTER PARKING MODEL FOR THIS ENTIRE SUB AREA, AN INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS WAS SUBMITTED, GOSH, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE COMPANY'S NAME, WELLS AND ASSOCIATES OUT OF WASHINGTON, DC, WORKED AND PREPARED A PARKING MODEL, WHICH WAS INCLUDED IN THEIR SUBMITTAL THAT SHOWS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT PARKS ITSELF ALL THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. THIS PARKING LOT ON THE FAR WEST SIDE OF THE SITE IS GOING TO BE A PUBLIC PARKING LOT, AT LEAST THAT'S HOW IT'S ENVISIONED IN THIS, THIS FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. AND THIS PARKING LOT WOULD PROVIDE THE PARKING NECESSARY FOR THE ENTIRE PARK AND AN OPEN SPACE. I AGREE, WE AGREE WITH YOU THAT YOU KNOW THESE. THERE'S AN ADDED BENEFIT TO HAVING THESE ON STREET PARKING SPACES ON 605, SO THAT FOLKS CAN QUICKLY GET IN AND OUT OF THE PARKING AND OPEN SPACE.

THERE WILL BE PARKING AVAILABLE ON THIS STREET AS WELL. STREET C, SO THAT FOLKS CAN STILL, ACCESS THIS THIS AREA THERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEP ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH ARCHITECTURE NOW, I'M GOING TO GIVE A VERY HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW, AS I'M SURE YOU SAW, THIS IS A VERY THICK BINDER. AND WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE TO WALK THROUGH, YOU KNOW, ALL THE DESIGN INSPIRATION AND JUSTIFICATION FOR ALL THE ARCHITECTURE THROUGHOUT THE ZONING DISTRICT. BUT I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU A HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW FOR EACH SUB AREA. SO THIS IS SUB AREA ONE THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED. AGAIN THIS IS THE COMMERCIAL AREA AND THE MIXED USE AREA HERE. AND THE FLATS BUILDING. SO THIS IS A GOOD, SHEET HERE SHOWING YOU DIFFERENT, VIEWPOINTS OR VANTAGE POIN FOR THE COMMERCIAL SPACE THAT'S PLANNED IN SUB AREA ONE.

I DO, AND I'LL PROBABLY DO THIS AGAIN, BUT I DO WANT TO CREDIT THE APPLICANT, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THIS BOARD IS FAMILIAR WITH, BUT WE OFTEN HAVE A LOT OF COMMENTS BACK AND FORTH FROM OUR CITY ARCHITECT, ON PROJECTS SUCH AS THESE. AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET WITH THE CITY ARCHITECT AT LEAST THREE TIMES, KIND OF LEADING UP TO THIS PROJECT OR THIS THIS HEARING DATE TODAY.

AND WE CAN REPORT THAT THEY HAVE ADDRESSED, MET AND ADDRESSED ALL OF THE CITY ARCHITECT'S COMMENTS FOR THE ENTIRE ZONING DISTRICT, NOT JUST THE SUB AREA, BUT FOR THE ENTIRE DISTRICT AS A WHOLE.

SO THESE ARE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. THIS IS THE HIGH END FLATS BUILDING THAT WILL FRONT ONTO, REALLY TWO FRONTS, ONE ONTO THE CENTER SPINE STREET AND ALSO ONTO THE SUGAR RUN PARK AREA. THIS IS A VERY, YOU KNOW, ALL THE BUILDINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT ACHIEVE A REALLY, REALLY STRONG, BUILDING DESIGN. AND THE SAME BUILDING MATERIALS ARE USED ON

[00:30:03]

AND THE APPLICANT, WORK WITH THE CITY ARCHITECT TO MAKE SOME MINOR REVISIONS TO THAT TO HELP ACHIEVE THAT DESIRE. SO, AGAIN, THIS IS 605. THIS IS WHAT YOU WOULD SEE FROM CENTRAL COLLEGE, INSIDE THE DEVELOPMENT, THESE ARE SOME OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME MODELS. AND THEN THESE, THESE HOMES HERE WILL BE COMPLETELY INTERNAL TO THE DEVELOPMENT FACING EAST. SO SUBAREA FIVE, AS I MENTIONED, THIS IS REALLY, REALLY SIMILAR TO EVEN KIND OF LOOKS LIKE IT A LITTLE BIT, ELY CROSSING, ASHTON GROVE NEIGHBORHOODS. THESE WILL BE COMPLETELY CUSTOM HOMES, THE APPLICANT WAS NOT REQUIRED TO SUBMIT DETAILED ELEVATIONS FOR THESE AREAS, AS THEY WILL BE COMPLETELY CUSTOM HOMES, BUT THEY WERE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT, YOU KNOW, A NARRATIVE STATEMENT AND IMAGES THAT GENERALLY DESCRIBE WHAT THEIR INTENT IS FOR THE SUB AREA. THESE I BELIEVE ALL OF THESE IMAGES ARE FROM NEW ALBANY, MAYBE ONE IS NOT, BUT, THAT IS WHAT THE ARCHITECTURAL INTENT IS FOR THAT SUBAREA. FIVE SO LASTLY, I WILL TALK ABOUT WAIVERS. FIVE WAIVERS WERE REQUESTED AS PART OF THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION. AGAIN, THE ARB IS AN ADVISORY BOARD. SO AS PART IN ADDITION TO MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, YOU WOULD ALSO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ABOUT THE WAIVERS THAT WERE REQUESTED, I CAN WALK THROUGH THOSE HERE. THE DETAILS ARE ALL IN YOUR STAFF REPORT, BUT I WILL WALK YOU THROUGH WHERE THOSE ARE LOCATED ON THE SITE. SO WAIVER A CHECK MYSELF AS I'M SITTING HERE TALKING. YEP. SO WAIVER A WOULD BE TO ALLOW A FOUR FOOT PUBLIC SIDEWALK ON, IN LIMITED LOCATIONS, IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND THOSE ARE REPRESENTED BY THIS, THIS HATCH OR THIS DASHED LINE HERE. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT'S PARTIALLY IN SUB AREA, CERTAIN PORTIONS OF SUBAREA FIVE HERE ALONG THESE INTERNAL STREETS AND THEN PORTION IN SUB AREA THREE AS WELL, THE APPLICANT'S INTENT IS TO REALLY DESIGN THESE AREAS TO RESEMBLE NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE ELY CROSSING. AND, ASHTON GROVE AND DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF THE NEW ALBANY COUNTRY CLUB, WHERE THERE'S, YOU KNOW, TIGHTER STREETSCAPE BECAUSE HOMES ARE LOCATED CLOSER TO THE CLOSER TO THE STREET. AND BASED ON ALL THE WAIVER CRITERIA THAT ARE EVALUATED IN THE STAFF REPORT, STAFF BELIEVES THAT, THEY ARE MET FOR THAT WAIVER REQUEST. CAN I ASK A QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THAT? SO IN THE CROSS SECTION FOR THE PUBLIC STREET E, IT DOESN'T SHOW A SIDEWALK ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF, THERE'S NO SIDEWALKS SHOWN

[00:35:01]

REQUESTED TO BE FOUR FOOT. YES. THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. SORRY ABOUT THAT. GOOD CATCH. YOU'RE ON IT. GOOD. LET ME SCROLL BACK ALL THE WAY THROUGH HERE. SORRY. GIVING ME MOTION SICKNESS. I ALSO HAVE A QUESTION. WHAT IS THE SETBACK OF THE HOMES, I BELIEVE IT'S, WE CAN CHECK THE ZONING TEXT, BUT IT'S MAYBE FIVE. I CAN CUT THE SIDE YARD. THE SETBACK FROM THE STREET.

VERY, VERY MINIMAL, WE CAN CHECK REAL QUICK ON THE IN THE ZONING TEXT, BUT IT IS VERY, VERY, VERY SMALL. OUR INTERNET IS ALSO DOWN, SO WE MIGHT HAVE TROUBLE PULLING IT UP, BUT IT'S VERY, VERY MINIMAL. I BELIEVE IT'S FIVE FEET FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY. YEAH. VERY VERY SMALL. VERY SIMILAR TO THE CROSSING I BELIEVE ELY IS ZERO LOT LINE. ELY IS ZERO LOT LINE. YEAH. SO THIS WOULD BE A LITTLE MORE SPACIOUS THAN ELY IS 15 FOOT SETBACKS. NO ZERO. NO. FROM THE CURB. YEAH WELL THAT'S THE RIGHT OF WAY. YES. YEAH. SO THIS WOULD NET OUT VERY CLOSE TO THE SAME WITH THE REDUCTION. BUT YEAH, WITH THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK WOULD PROBABLY, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, WOULD COME OUT PRETTY CLOSE WOULDN'T IT. PRETTY CLOSE TO THE EXISTING ELY. YEAH OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YEP. NO PROBLEM, SO WAIVER. BE SURE TO MAKE SURE I'M FOLLOWING MY STAFF REPORT HERE. SO WAIVER B APPLIES TO THE TWO LOTS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED HERE ON THE SCREEN IN SUBAREA THREE. SO THE ZONING TEXT STATES THAT ONLY TOWNHOMES ARE ALLOWED TO FRONT ONTO 605. AND THE APPLICANT REQUEST A WAIVER TO ALLOW TWO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO FRONT ON 605 AND THE LOCATIONS IDENTIFIED, ON THE MAP THERE, AGAIN, WE'VE PROVIDED A FULL ANALYSIS IN OUR IN OUR STAFF REPORT, BUT MAYBE JUST A HIGH LEVEL, QUICK SNAPSHOT FOR THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY. WE BELIEVE THAT THE, THE DESIGN IS APPROPRIATE IN THIS INSTANCE. CANDIDLY, WE'RE NOT REALLY SURE WHY THE REQUIREMENT WAS ADDED IN THERE FOR JUST, HAVING TOWNHOMES ON 605. WE, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS A APPROPRIATE ARCHITECTURE IS ACHIEVED ALONG THAT ROADWAY, THAT'S WHAT WE BELIEVE IS MOST IMPORTANT. THE SITE IS ALSO CONSTRAINED. YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS INTO THE SUB AREA, BUT THEY ALSO HAVE TO RESPOND TO RESPOND AND RESPECT THE GREEN SPACE AND SUBAREA FOUR AS WELL, SO ADDING A, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER ROW OF A DUPLEX OR TOWNHOMES WOULD, CAUSE AN EVEN GREATER IMPACT, ESPECIALLY ON THE SOUTHERN LOT HERE IN THE SUB AREA, SO THOSE ARE JUST WE PROVIDED MORE ANALYSIS WITH OUR STAFF REPORT, BUT THAT'S SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS THERE. THE APPLICANT ALSO WANTS TO, REALLY HAVE THESE HOMES BE THE CENTER LIKE FOCAL PIECE OF THE DEVELOPMENT, THE ENTRANCE INTO THE DEVELOPMENT AND IF YOU SCROLL THROUGH SOME OF THE PAGES, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE IS A REALLY STRONG, DESIGN FOR THOSE HOMES. OOPS, SORRY, LET'S SEE. SO WAIVER FOR SUB. YES. WAIVER. SEE. SO THIS IS RELATED TO CERTAIN PORTIONS OF, SUB AREA TWO AS OUTLINED HERE ON THE SCREEN. SO THE ZONING TEXT STATES THAT THERE'S A MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMITATION OF 40FT WITHIN THE SUB AREA. AND OUR CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE SUB AREA RATHER, AND THE STATE THAT THERE'S A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OR NUMBER OF STORIES, NUMBER OF THERE'S A MAXIMUM OF THREE STORIES ALLOWED, FOR HOMES OR TOWNHOMES IN IN THAT SUB AREA AS WELL. SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER TO ALLOW THE HEIGHT OF THOSE TO BE 44FT AND HAVE AN ARCHITECTURAL EXPRESSION OF THREE AND A HALF STORIES, RATHER THAN THE THREE STORIES. AND AGAIN, HIGHLIGHT REALLY QUICK. SO PROBABLY THE MOST UNIQUE THING ABOUT THE SITE THAT'S KIND OF DRIVING THIS WAIVER REQUEST IS THAT THE SITE ACTUALLY GRADES DOWN, PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY FROM CENTRAL COLLEGE AND 605 DOWN TOWARDS THE CREEK AREA. SO ALONG STATE ROUTE 605 OR 6, SORRY, CENTRAL COLLEGE AND 605 DUE TO THE GRADE CHANGE, THEY'RE ABLE TO BUILD A TOWNHOME THAT HAS THE THIRD OR BOTTOM STORY PARTIALLY BURIED, KIND OF LIKE WHAT'S DONE AT RICHMOND SQUARE TO WHERE ALONG CENTRAL COLLEGE AND 605, IT'S JUST TWO AND A HALF, TWO, TWO AND A HALF STORIES. BUT AT THE BACK THERE'S THREE STORIES. SO TO KIND OF CARRY THAT SAME TOWNHOME MODEL THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE ENTIRE SUB AREA, THE GRADE IS ACTUALLY WORKING AGAINST THEM. SO ALL THREE LEVELS ARE EXPOSED DUE TO THE GRADE CHANGE, WE TOOK A REALLY CLOSE LOOK AT THIS WITH OUR CITY ARCHITECT, AND WE BELIEVE THAT THE WAIVER IS APPROPRIATE, THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN IS STRONG

[00:40:04]

SO DOES WHAT MAKES IT A HALF STORY IS THE IS THE ARCHITECTURAL EXPRESSION OF THE DORMERS? THAT'S CORRECT. YEP AND DOES THE DGRS DO THE DGRS SPEAK IN TERMS OF FULL STORIES OR HALF STORIES? IT DOES NOT SPEAK IN TERMS OF HALF STORIES OR FULL STORIES. IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THE INTERPRETATION OF STAFF THAT THAT IT. BUT IT TALKS ABOUT THE TWO STORIES OR THREE STORIES OR WHATEVER. YES. THAT'S RIGHT. YEP. AND THE STAFF'S INTERPRETATION HAS BEEN THAT IF THERE'S AN ARCHITECTURAL EXPRESSION OF TWO AND A HALF, THAT'S MORE THAN TWO, CORRECT? OKAY. DUE TO THOSE. YEAH. THE DORMERS WOULD WOULD TRIGGER THAT BACK STORY. BUT IN IN THEORY, YOU KNOW, IT IT IF YOU HAVE A HIPPED OR A GABLED ROOF, IT ISN'T ANY HIGHER. RIGHT. IT'S JUST IT'S JUST THE EXPRESSION. CORRECT. YEAH, YEAH. AND ORIGINALLY MAYBE JUST REAL QUICK, NOT TO GET TOO DETAILED, BUT, YOU KNOW, UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING RIGHTS AND I WON'T SEE ALL THE APPLICANTS THUNDER HERE. SORRY, BUT, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT COULD COME IN AND HAVE FLAT ROOF TOWNHOMES. DO THEM PHILADELPHIA STYLE, DO THEM REALLY, REALLY WELL, AND NO WAIVERS WOULD BE NEEDED, YOU KNOW, THE SAME THE SAME HEIGHT LEVEL, BUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WORKING WITH THE DEVELOPER AND THE CITY ARCHITECT, WE REALLY THOUGHT THAT THE TRADITIONAL, YOU KNOW, PITCHED ROOF, RICHMOND SQUARE, KESWICK STYLE TOWNHOME WAS MOST APPROPRIATE IN THE SUB AREA. WHICH REALLY KIND OF DROVE THE DESIGN AND THE NEED FOR A WAIVER HERE. SO, WAIT, YOU'RE SO THE ONES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, ONES THAT ARE THREE AND A HALF CORRECT? YEP. BUT IF THEY MADE A FLAT ROOF THEN IT WOULD BE FOUR IN THAT CASE. RIGHT NO. BECAUSE THEY COULD DO THREE AND THEN THE ROOF WOULD BE FLAT. SO THE HEIGHT AT LEAST WOULD GO AWAY THE RIGHT. OKAY. AND THEN BUT BUT WE OKAY. SO AGAIN IT'S THE EXPRESSION HERE. CORRECT. YEP. THAT THAT IS CAUSING THE PROBLEM. NOT IN FACT THAT THESE ARE OCCUPIED. CORRECT. YEP. THAT'S RIGHT OKAY. SO LET'S SEE.

SO WAIVER REQUEST D SO THIS IS ONE THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY FOUND THAT STAFF DIDN'T CATCH IN OUR JAEGERS. SO IN OUR JAEGERS EACH HOME IS REQUIRED TO HAVE AT LEAST A TWO FOOT HIGH ENTRY INTO HOMES LIKE, STEPS UP INTO HOUSES TWO FEET OFF OF, OFF OF GRADE, AND THEY'RE REQUESTING A WAIVER TO ELIMINATE THAT REQUIREMENT FOR THE SUB AREAS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF LOOKING AROUND THE COMMUNITY, AND THEN EVEN OUR NEIGHBORS THEMSELVES, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NUMEROUS EXAMPLES OF WHERE, THAT TWO FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT HAS NOT BEEN MET. THE APARTMENT BUILDING, THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, RISERS INTO SOME OF THOSE UNITS. BUT THE MAIN ENTRANCE THAT'S ALONG THE ROUNDABOUT IS COMPLETELY AT GRADE. AND WE GRANTED A WAIVER FOR THAT, I BELIEVE SO, AT LEAST APPROVED AS PART OF, I WASN'T HERE THEN, SO YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT, BUT I WOULD ASSUME SO. YEAH. WE'RE GOING TO ASSUME. YEAH, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NUMEROUS OTHER EXAMPLES PROBABLY MOST NOTABLY, WHERE DEVIATIONS FROM THIS HAVE BEEN APPROVED ARE IN OUR 55 AND OLDER COMMUNITIES, NOTTINGHAM, TRACE AND EPCON, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT AGAIN I WON'T STEAL THE THUNDER, BUT THEY BELIEVE THAT THESE TOWNHOMES AND REALLY, YOU KNOW, ALL RESIDENTIAL PRODUCTS IN THIS, IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT WILL BE MARKETABLE TO, THE AGING COMMUNITY WHERE ADA ACCESSIBILITY IS, A PRIORITY, DRIVING DESIGN FACTOR FOR THEM. SO, GRANTING THE WAIVER FOR THAT REASON APPEARS TO BE APPROPRIATE IN THIS CASE. THEY DO COMMIT TO PROVIDING AT LEAST TWO RISERS

[00:45:04]

YEAH. AND SO FORTH IN TERMS OF, OF ATTRACTIVENESS. AND IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THE ZONING CODE FOR THOSE THAT SAID IT WAS 55 OR OLDER, OR IS IT SIMPLY IT WAS THERE WAS NOTHING MORE THAN THE APPLICANT. YEAH. IN BOTH OF THOSE THERE IS A CLAUSE ABOUT BEING AN AGE RESTRICTED COMMUNITY TO VARYING DEGREES, DEPENDING ON WHICH SUBDIVISION YOU'RE IN. AND THAT IS NOT PRESENT HERE. THAT IS CORRECT. YEAH. IS THIS REQUEST FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO OR IS IT APPLIED JUST TO TOWNHOMES, I WILL LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER THAT WHEN THEY GET UP AND DO THEIR PRESENTATION. I BELIEVE I THINK IT READS ON THE ENTIRE YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING.

BUT YEAH, BECAUSE I'M. KEEP CHUGGING ALONG HERE. THAT'S GOOD FOR EVERYBODY. SO WAIVER. SO WE DID D SO, WAIVER E ANOTHER ONE THAT WAS FOUND BY THE APPLICANT. SO THERE'S A DEVELOPMENT STANDARD AND THE TEXT THAT STATES THAT NO USER WITHIN SUBAREA ONE. SO THE COMMERCIAL AREA HERE, NO SINGLE TENANT CAN HAVE A GROSS FLOOR SQUARE FOOTAGE OF MORE THAN 10,000FT■!S IN SIZE, THEY'RE REQUESTING A WAIVER TO THAT REQUIREMENT FOR ALL NON RETAIL TENANTS. SO OFFICE USES WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT OR WOULD BE EXEMPT FROM THAT REQUIREMENT. BUT INDIVIDUAL RESTAURANTS AND COFFEE SHOPS WOULD STILL BE SUBJECT TO THAT MAXIMUM. SQUARE FOOTAGE. AND, YOU KNOW, REALLY LOOKING AT IT, YOU KNOW, WITH YOU GUYS, AND WE DID NOTE THIS IN OUR STAFF REPORT THAT WAS REALLY THE INTENT OF THAT REQUIREMENT IS REALLY TO APPLY TO KIND OF PREVENT, YOU KNOW, MEDIUM TO BIG BOX STYLE RETAILERS THAT ARE COMING IN AND, YOU KNOW, EATING UP ALL THE SPACE THIS IS, YOU KNOW, SUBAREA ONE, THIS IS REALLY SUPPOSED TO BE A MIXED USE WITH, DIFFERENT RETAIL OFFERINGS, FOR THE COMMUNITY. THAT'S REALLY WHAT WAS ENVISIONED IN THE HAMLET. SO WE PUT THIS RESTRICTION IN THERE, NOT REALLY THINKING THAT IT WOULD NECESSARILY APPLY TO OFFICE, BUT AS THE CODE IS WRITTEN, IT DOES APPLY TO OFFICE. WE ALSO DID DO A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF RESEARCH IN THE REGION, FOR THIS WAIVER REQUEST TO REACH OUT TO ONE COLUMBUS, WHICH IS THE REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ARM THAT WORKS WITH THE STATE OF OHIO TO HELP ATTRACT COMPANIES, INTO OUR REGION, AND JUST KIND OF ASK THEM ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THEIR THOUGHTS ON THIS REQUIREMENT IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, THE OFFICE MARKET IS REALLY VOLATILE. I GUESS STILL, AT LEAST IN THE VOLATILE FOR THE TRADITIONAL, YOU KNOW, SUBURBAN OFFICE MARKET, THAT'S NOT REALLY A DESIRABLE, FOR THE USERS THAT THEY'RE INTERACTING WITH. THERE'S STILL A VERY LOW DESIRE, REGIONALLY FOR NEW OFFICE SPACE.

BUT WHAT WE'VE LEARNED IS THAT WHEN THERE IS A DESIRE FOR OFFICE SPACE, IT IS USUALLY FOR BRAND NEW OFFICE SPACE. IT'S USUALLY IN A MORE OF A MIXED USE ENVIRONMENT WHERE THEY CAN PROVIDE A LIVE WORK, PLAY EXPERIENCE FOR, FOR THEIR RESIDENTS. SO THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, BRIDGE PARK, THE SHORT NORTH, YOU KNOW, THE EAST FRANKLINTON, THOSE TYPES OF ENVIRONMENTS ARE REALLY WHERE THEY'RE SEEING A LOT OF REQUESTS FOR NEW COMMERCIAL OFFICE SPACE.

AND, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN SO LITTLE, SO LITTLE OF THEM, THEY HAVEN'T THEY WEREN'T REALLY ABLE TO PROVIDE AN IDEAL SQUARE FOOTAGE NUMBER, BUT THEY BELIEVE THAT THIS IS THIS LIMITATION, AT LEAST IN THE RESPECT FOR OFFICE, IS REALLY JUST KIND OF LIMIT THE CITY'S ABILITY TO MEET, MAY BE COMPETITIVE AND THAT VERY LIMITED OFFICE MARKET, WHICH PLAYS A HUGE FACTOR INTO THE CITY'S TAX BASE. SO WE DID DO SOME RESEARCH ON THAT. AGAIN, THERE'S A FULL EVALUATION OF THAT IN OUR STAFF REPORT, BUT, THOSE ARE A COUPLE OF THE HIGHLIGHTS THERE. AND WITH THAT I THINK THAT'S. YEP, YEP. GO AHEAD. I WANTED TO CLARIFY ON THAT. I THOUGHT MY NOTES FROM LAST TIME SAID THAT THAT WAS A COMMITMENT THAT THEY ONLY WANTED THE WAIVER. DID I GET THIS WRONG THAT THEY ONLY WANTED THE WAIVE, THEY THEY DID NOT WANT THE WAIVER FOR THE COMMERCIAL ON THE GROUND FLOOR. THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S STILL THE CASE. THAT'S CORRECT. SO THERE'S A CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY AGREED TO, THAT 80% OF ALL THE GROUND FLOOR USES HAVE TO BE. GOSH, I'M GOING TO BOTCH THIS, BUT, OPEN TO THE PUBLIC FOR THE GENERAL SALE OF GOODS AND SERVICES. SO RESTAURANTS, COFFEE SHOPS AND THAT THIS WAIVER WOULD NOT APPLY TO THE GROUND FLOOR. IT WOULD REQUIRE THAT AT LEAST 80% OF THOSE USES ON THE GROUND FLOOR BE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, THAT MAKES SENSE. THANKS. YEAH YEAH. AND THAT WAS IN RESPONSE TO, FEEDBACK THAT WE HEARD, THROUGHOUT OUR INFORMAL PRESENTATIONS. AND COUNCIL MEMBER BRISK AS WELL AND STILL LIMITED TO THE 10,000. YES

[00:50:02]

SO I'M, I'M GOING TO KEEP MY PORTION KIND OF SIMPLE, SO I'M JUST GOING TO TAKE A FEW MINUTES. I'M JUST GOING TO KIND OF GIVE YOU A SENSE OF WHERE WE'RE HEADED WITH THIS. I'LL JUST TAKE A FEW MINUTES TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT AGAIN, OF THE SITE WHERE WE'VE BEEN WORKING FOR THE PAST FEW MONTHS AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING, BRIAN FROM TORTI GALLAS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, HE'LL SPEND MAYBE TEN, 15 MINUTES GOING BACK SOME OF YOU HEARD HIS PRESENTATION ON SORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL THESIS OF THE HAMLET AND HOW WE GOT WHERE WE ARE. WE'LL GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THAT, BUT THEN GIVE A LITTLE MORE CONTEXT FOR THE PLAN SPECIFICS. AND THE PUBLIC SPACES AND THE AND THE FRAMING OF THE ARCHITECTURE, AND THEN AARON WILL JUST GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF MORE CONTEXT ON, ON THOSE WAIVERS. SO, JUST TO AGAIN, TO, TO START AND REMIND FOLKS OF THE, OF THE SITE, THIS HAS BEEN A CHALLENGING SITE FROM A PLANNING AND ARCHITECTURE PERSPECTIVE, TO OUR WEST, AS YOU ARE ALL AWARE, THIS IS THE JURISDICTIONAL LINE BETWEEN NEW ALBANY AND THE CITY OF COLUMBUS. SO OUR DIRECT WESTERN NEIGHBOR IS ACTUALLY TACO BELL. SO WE HAVE THAT ON ON ONE SIDE, WE HAVE THE DISCOVER CAMPUS TO OUR NORTH, WE HAVE THE LOADING DOCK OF CVG TO OUR SOUTH, AND THEN WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL, ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND THEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE ENCLAVE TO OUR EAST. SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING PRETTY DILIGENTLY OVER THESE MONTHS AND YEARS TO FIND A WAY TO MAKE THIS PLAN WORK WITH ALL THOSE UNIQUE EDGE CONDITIONS AND STILL MAKE IT ALL LOOK LIKE IT MAKES SENSE AND WORKS, SO THIS IS THE PLAN. IT'S ABOUT TWO PLUS YEARS IN THE MAKING, WE'VE BEEN MEETING WITH THE CITY EVERY OTHER WEEK, AND THEN ON THE OFF WEEKS, OUR TEAM DESIGN TEAM GETS TOGETHER AND WE KIND OF WORK THROUGH THE PIECES. SO I'LL GIVE YOU A SENSE OF THE DESIGN TEAM. EMH AND T HAS BEEN OUR CIVIL DESIGNER ON THIS. THEY ALSO HAVE BEEN BRINGING THEIR ENTIRE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE TEAM, FRANCO AND VAL AND, BRIAN AND HIS TEAM ARE WORKING ON THAT. THE STRATEGIC VISION FOR THE LANDSCAPE HAS BEEN KEITH MYERS, SO WE BROUGHT HIM ON BOARD. HE'S BEEN KIND OF WORKING WITH US KIND OF STEP BY STEP, AND ALL OF THOSE BIWEEKLY MEETINGS TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING IT RIGHT. AND THEN TORTI GALLAS AND PARTNERS, WE BROUGHT THEM IN FROM WASHINGTON DC TO ALSO BE PART OF THE MASTER PLANNING TEAM, AND ALSO SPECIFICALLY TO HELP WITH THE ARCHITECTURE, BRIAN AND I HAVE ACTUALLY WORKED TOGETHER FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS NOW, STARTING IN VIRGINIA, THEN ALL THE WAY HERE. WHAT I LIKE ABOUT

[00:55:02]

SOMETIMES OUR PARTNERS DON'T LOVE HIM AS MUCH BECAUSE HE'S A, CAN BE A, YOU KNOW, HE'S SORT OF OUR BULLDOG ON ON SOME OF THESE ITEMS. I THINK WHAT WE'VE BEEN STRIVING FOR IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN, AND I THINK WE MENTIONED THIS PREVIOUSLY, THERE WAS A DESIRE FOR THIS NOT TO BE COOKIE CUTTER. AND SO ONE OF OUR MAIN MOVES WAS WE DON'T WANT ONE BUILDER OR ONE ARCHITECT TO COME IN HERE AND DO THE ENTIRE PROJECT. WE WANT SORT OF THE MASTER PLANNING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT TEAM TO BE OVERSEEING IT ALL, BUT WE WANT TO HAVE A VARIETY OF DESIGNERS, A VARIETY OF BUILDERS THAT WE CAN WORK WITH TO BRING SORT OF THAT ORGANIC GROWTH AND SORT OF EVOLUTION OF THE SITE. AND THAT'S HARD TO DO WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IT IN ALL ONE, ONE SCOOP. SO ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS WE DID DO IS BRIAN AND HIS TEAM WROTE US A PRIVATE SET OF GUIDELINES, OUR PATTERN BOOK. AND SO EACH TIME WE WORK WITH OUR PARTNERS AND OUR BUILDERS AND THEIR ARCHITECTS, WE GIVE THEM OUR SORT OF PRIVATE SET OF GUIDELINES, GIVE THEM OUR EXPECTATIONS OF WHAT THEY NEED TO ACHIEVE. AND WE'VE BEEN KIND OF DOING THAT FOR ABOUT A YEAR OR SO WITH ALL OF THEM, TO GET KIND OF WHERE WE ARE. I'D SAY THE PAST SIX WEEKS WHERE OUR EFFORT HAS BEEN IS, TAKING ALL OF THOSE. WE'RE REALLY CLOSE WITH EVERYTHING. AND THEN DOING SORT OF THE FINAL WEAVING OF THAT STORY TOGETHER, MAKING SURE ALL THE DETAILS ARE RIGHT. YOU CAN SEE ALL THE BRICK THAT'S OVER HERE. A LOT OF SCRUTINY ON OKAY, DO THEY ALL WORK TOGETHER? BUT THEY'RE DISTINCT ENOUGH THAT IT DOESN'T LOOK TOO MATCHY MATCHY. AND IT IT ALL FLOWS WELL TOGETHER, AS CHRIS MENTIONED, WE'VE MET WITH THE CITY ARCHITECT THREE TIMES, EACH TIME KIND OF TAKING THAT FEEDBACK, MAKING ADJUSTMENTS, GOING BACK. THAT'S REALLY BEEN OVER THE PAST SIX WEEKS. MXQ I THINK WE'VE MET WITH THEM DOZENS OF TIMES TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ADDRESSING ALL OF THEIR COMMENTS. WE'VE COME HERE TO PARKS AND TRAILS AND PLANNING COMMISSION. WE PRESENTED ALL OF OUR DRAFT WAIVERS. WE PRESENTED THE PLANS AND SOME DRAFT ELEVATIONS SEEKING FEEDBACK. YOU'LL EVEN I KNOW SOME OF THOSE WAIVERS HAVE CHANGED OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS, AS WE'VE BEEN RESPONDING TO COMMENTS WE'VE HEARD IN THE PUBLIC FORUMS, AND WE'VE HEARD FROM PEOPLE COMING BACK AND SAYING, HEY, YOU MAY WANT TO MAKE SOME OF THOSE ADJUSTMENTS.

I THINK EVEN TRICIA, YOU MENTIONED THE CONCERN ABOUT WE USE THE TERM HUMBLE ARCHITECTUR.

SO THAT WAS ONE THING FROM OUR LAST SESSION. WE SAID, OKAY, WHAT DO WE GO BACK AND TALK TO DAVE? WE'LL TALK TO BRIAN. WHAT ARE THE LITTLE ADJUSTMENTS TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE FORMAL, WHICH WAS ADJUSTING SOME COLORS. SUBAREA THREE WE REALLY TWEAKED SOME OF THE DETAILING SO IT WASN'T AS I DON'T KNOW, IT WAS JUST A IT'S A CLEANER, MORE FORMAL AND KIND OF BUTTONED UP FEEL THAT WE FELT WE ACHIEVED. TO GIVE A LITTLE UPDATE BEFORE WE JUMP INTO ARCHITECTURE, I DO WANT TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT ON, ON THE PARKLAND LAYOUT. SO AS CHRIS MENTIONED, WE HAVE A SERIES OF DIFFERENT PLAYGROUNDS. WE HAVE SOME IN THIS AREA AND WE HAVE SOME IN THIS AREA, WE'RE ACTUALLY SOME FOLKS MAY HAVE HEARD WE'RE WORKING WITH HALEY DEETER FROM HER ART GALLERY. SO IF THINGS GO WELL IN THE NEXT WEEK, WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE RFP READY TO GO OUT. AND SO SHE'LL BE HOSTING AN RFP PROCESS SO YOU CAN SEE IT SHOWS UP BETTER. ON THE OTHER PLAN, WE HAVE SCULPTURAL ELEMENTS KIND OF ROUTING THROUGHOUT THIS NATURAL CORRIDOR. AND THEN WE HAVE THESE KIND OF BIRD BOXES, AREAS THAT ARE ALSO GOING TO BE DESIGNED BY ARTISTS. SO THERE'S GOING TO BE AN ENTIRE ART PROGRAM THAT ALSO KIND OF REINFORCES A LOT OF WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THAT, IN THAT PUBLIC AREA. SO WITH THAT, I WILL NOW HAND IT OFF TO BRIAN, WHO WILL GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT ON THE ARCHITECTUR. HI, EVERYONE. HELLO I HAVE THE HONOR OF REPRESENTING FIVE SEPARATE TEAMS OF ARCHITECTS WHO HAVE WORKED ON THIS PROJECT, I'M

[01:00:05]

[01:07:56]

SO, WE AGREE AND FEEL THAT THAT CHARACTER AND QUALITIES. HERE'S ANOTHER IMAGE, ARE APPROPRIATE.

SIMILARLY, IN THE, IN YOUR STRATEGIC PLAN, YOU MENTIONED IRON AS A PRECEDENT, AND I KNOW THE PROJECT PRETTY WELL. I ACTUALLY TOOK THAT PHOTO ON THE LOWER RIGHT, AND AGAIN, LOOKING AT ALL THESE PROJECTS AND HOW TO MAKE A HAMLET RETAIL DESTINATION, WE BROUGHT THEM TOGETHER TO FIND THE, THE, THE RIGHT NOTES FOR WHAT WE WOULD DO HERE IN NEW ALBANY, SO WE DECONSTRUCTED THE RETAIL BUILDINGS IN WAYS THAT MADE THEM APPROPRIATE, RELOCATED THE IDENTITIES IN, IN PLACES THAT WOULD LIKELY BE ANCHORED SO THAT EACH RETAIL TENANT WOULD HAVE THEIR OWN ARCHITECTURAL IDENTITY AND THEREFORE EMBRACE THE FORM AND EMBRACE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND MAKE IT MORE AUTHENTIC AND REAL. AND WE USED A VARIETY OF FORMS THAT, COME FROM THE DIFFERENT

[01:10:10]

SO PART OF THE REASON FOR REQUESTING THAT VERY WAIVER. SO THIS IS THE FLATS BUILDING ALONG THE, MAIN ROADWAY MOVING INTO THE SITE, WHICH WE STILL DON'T HAVE A NAME FOR, RIGHT. OKAY, OOPS. AND AGAIN, YOU COULD SEE IN ELEVATION THE DIFFERENT THE MARCHING OF THE IDENTITIES THAT WORK REALLY WELL ON THE LONG VIEW, THE SIDE ELEVATION HERE. SHOWING HOW THE BUILDING IS FORMED AND PARKS BELOW. IF YOU'RE WONDERING HOW IT WORKS. ALL RIGHT. THERE. YES SO ON THIS BUILDING, THERE WAS A LOT OF CARE. AND THE PEOPLE WE MENTIONED THIS, LAST MONTH, THIS IS A SITE WHERE WE ACTUALLY HAVE A 54 INCH PINE OAK TREE THAT IS LOCATED RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT COURTYARD, SO THE ARCHITECTURE OF THAT BUILDING AND THE SPACING, THE DESIGN, ALL OF IT WAS TO. OKAY, WHAT WHERE IS THAT TREE, BRIAN'S TEAM ACTUALLY HIRED AN ARBORIST TO GO OUT AND IDENTIFY WHERE THE ROOT, WHATEVER. THAT'S THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE IS, AND SO THAT WAS THEN PLOTTED ONTO THE PLAN, AND THEN THE BUILDING WAS MODIFIED AROUND THAT CRITICAL ROOT ZONE TO PROTECT THAT TREE. AND THEN ALSO JUST TO THE WEST OF THAT, THERE'S ANOTHER 54 INCH PINE OAK. AND THAT SAME MODIFICATION WAS MADE ON DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE PLAN WITH SOME OF THE PARKING, SOME OF THE ARCHITECTURE TO SORT OF WEAVE ITS WAY THROUGH THOSE NATURE ELEMENTS, BECAUSE WHEN THEY TESTED IT, THEY WERE HEALTHY. THEY'RE GOOD. SO THEY HAD MANY YEARS LEFT. AND SO WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAD MANY MORE YEARS TO BE KIND OF AN ELEMENT ON THE SITE. AND I SHOULD JUST ADD THAT EACH OF THE SPACES HAVE A DIFFERENT

[01:15:01]

AND SO WE'RE PROBABLY THREE, THREE AND A HALF YEARS INTO THIS, AND I WALK YOU THROUGH THAT HISTORY FOR THE REASON THAT, THIS THIS WAS VERY NEW TO EVERYBODY, THIS CONCEPT THAT WAS IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN, I THINK WE'VE COME TO A GREAT RESULT. BUT EVERYTHING THAT WE DID IN THOSE EARLIER TIMES WERE A PREDICTION OF THE FUTURE. AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT ZONING IS TO A GREAT EXTENT, IS YOU'RE YOU'RE TRYING TO SEE FORWARD AND ACCOMMODATE WHAT YOU WANT TO ACCOMPLISH WHILE GIVING THE CITY THE SAFETY NETS TO MAKE SURE THEY GET THE PRODUCT THAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR. AND, I THINK WE LARGELY ACCOMPLISHED THAT HERE, I THINK THE USE OF THE TERM WAIVERS HERE, IS A VERY SMART THING THAT THE URBAN CENTER CODE HAS, BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE IN THESE TIGHTER ENVIRONMENTS WITH A LOT OF DENSITY, VARIANCE IS REALLY NOT THE RIGHT WORD. A VARIANCE IS A LEGAL STANDARD. AND I DEAL WITH THIS AS A ZONING ATTORNEY ALL THE TIME WHERE YOU HAVE TO PROVE DIFFERENT THINGS IN ORDER TO MEET THAT LEGAL STANDARD. THIS THE WAIVER PROCESS, I THINK, ON PURPOSE IS A LESSER STANDARD THAT, ALLOWS FOR SOME CREATIVITY AND FLEXIBILITY SO THAT WHEN YOU HAVE A COMPLEX PROJECT LIKE THIS ACROSS A PRETTY GOOD PIECE OF LAND THAT, YOU'RE, YOU'RE GIVING YOURSELF THE FLEXIBILITY TO LATER ON ADJUST TO MAKE A BETTER END PRODUCT. SO AS YOU'RE GOING THROUGH THE WAIVERS, I ASK YOU TO KEEP THAT IN MIND. AND I SAY THIS, TO WHEN I'M WHEN I'M PRESENTING VARIANCES AS WELL. VARIANCES ARE NOT A BAD WORD. I THINK THEY'RE OFTENTIMES LOOKED AT AS YOU'RE TRYING TO SKIRT THE RULES. HOWEVER THEY ARE, THOSE ARE THOSE ARE IN PLACE IN ORDER TO TAKE THESE, THESE SITUATIONS WHERE YOU HAVE REALLY A UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT CAN'T BE ADDRESSED IN ANY OTHER WAY AND COULDN'T HAVE BEEN PREDICTED. I THINK SIMILARLY HERE, WE, YOU KNOW, WE COULDN'T QUITE HAVE PREDICTED EVERYTHING. I MEAN,

[01:20:04]

QUESTIONS. AND IF YOU WANT BRIAN TO PRESENT THE BRICK SAMPLES, THOSE ARE AVAILABLE AS WELL. LET ME JUST SEE WHAT STAFF MEMBERS I DO HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION FOR STAFF. WHAT IS THE APPROVAL PROCESS WITH THE HAMLET PLAN FOR THE INDIVIDUAL ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS IN THE INDIVIDUAL AREAS? IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN A WHEN A SINGLE HOME OR BUILDING WOULD COME BEFORE THIS BOARD, YOU KNOW, IN THE VILLAGE CENTER, WE ARE REVIEWING THAT INDIVIDUALLY. BUT IN THIS CASE IT'S MORE OF A PUD STYLE APPROACH IS THAT I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO CONFIRM IN TERMS OF WHERE THE JURISDICTION OF BOARDS STOP AND WHERE THE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT HAS FULL RESPONSIBILITY. YEAH YEAH. WHAT YOU DESCRIBED IS CORRECT, SIMILAR TO ANY OTHER LIKE SINGLE FAMILY HOME DEVELOPMENT AND EVEN THE VILLAGE CENTER, YOU KNOW, THE ARB MAY APPROVE THE ZONING, THE STANDARDS FOR THAT. AND, YOU KNOW, THE GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL, DESIGN OR APPROACH FOR THOSE SUBDIVISIONS. BUT THE INDIVIDUAL HOUSES ARE APPROVED AND BUILT AS PART OF THE PERMITTING PROCESS.

WE WORK WITH THE CITY ARCHITECT VERY, VERY CLOSELY TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING'S BUTTONED UP REALLY NICELY. BUT WE WON'T SEE IT AGAIN. THIS IS UNDERSTOOD. RIGHT. BUT THE CITY ARCHITECT WILL STILL HAVE, REVIEW OF THE INDIVIDUAL PERMITS OF THE INDIVIDUAL HOMES. AND IF A DEVIATION WERE TO OCCUR, THEN IT COULD COME BACK TO THIS BOARD. BUT UNLIKELY, GIVEN THE NATURE OF THE APPROVAL THAT'S BEING REQUESTED. YES YEAH. IF THERE IS A WAIVER REQUEST THAT IT WOULD COME BACK BEFORE A PUBLIC BOARD, SIMILAR TO ANY OTHER HOUSE. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU, WHILE I HAVE THE HOT MIC, I DID WANT TO ASK ONE OTHER QUESTION OR MAKE A COMMENT AS WE CONSIDER THE WAIVER REQUEST ABOUT, THE TWO FOOT HEIGHT OFF THE OFF OF GRADE OR ABOVE GRADE, I WONDER IF STAFF COULD CONSIDER A REQUIREMENT, AT LEAST FOR POSITIVE SLOPE FROM THE FOUNDATION TO THE ADJACENT SIDEWALK OR STREET. I THINK WHAT WE SEE A LOT IN NEW ALBANY IS WE DON'T SEE IT A LOT, BUT WHEN WE DO SEE IT, IT'S VERY OBVIOUS, WHICH IS THE BUILDING HASN'T BEEN SUFFICIENTLY PLACED ABOVE GRADE AND IT HAS A VERY DISTRACTING ESTHETIC TO IT. I COULD CITE SOME EXAMPLES. I WON'T. I THINK WE ALL KNOW WHERE SOME OF THOSE EXIST AND, I'D LIKE TO AT LEAST I APPRECIATE THE NEED TO AT LEAST MINIMIZE OR HAVE THE LATITUDE TO MINIMIZE THE NUMBER OF STEPS FOR, FOR ALL THE REASONS THAT WERE ARTICULATED. BUT I WOULD ASK THAT FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER, SO LONG AS THERE IS A MINIMUM GRADE SLOPE FROM FACE OF FOUNDATION TO ADJACENT STREET OR SIDEWALK, 3% OR WHATEVER IS APPROPRIATE. YOU KNOW, BY, BY THE OVERALL GRADING STANDARDS OF THE, OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I JUST I'D HATE TO SEE THAT RESULT IN BUILDINGS THAT DON'T LOOK SUFFICIENTLY PERCHED ABOVE GRADE AND THAT WOULD VIOLATE ALL KINDS OF OTHER ARCHITECTURAL PRECEDENT. AND SO I, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE INTENT, BUT I THINK THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME CLARIFYING LANGUAGE CONSIDERED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WILL WORK AS INTENDED. YEAH. AND WE I THINK WE SPECIFICALLY SAID WE STILL EXPECT TWO STEPS AS A MINIMUM. ON EVERY, ON EVERY HOME BECAUSE WE DON'T FEEL ONE STEP OR EVEN FLAT IS AN APPROPRIATE, ESTHETIC FOR BEING WITH IN THIS AREA. SO TOTALLY AGREE WITH THAT. THE DIFFERENCE FROM 12IN OR 18IN TO 24, IT WAS THAT THAT LATE LAST EIGHT INCHES HAS WAS WHERE IT GOT MORE COMPLICATED. THANK YOU, MR. HENSON. DOES IT MAKE SENSE IN TERMS OF GETTING COMMENTS OR PROCESSING THIS TO MAYBE GO THROUGH THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS AND, AND HAVE THE BOARD COMMENT AS WE GO THROUGH BY SUB AREA, BY, BY SUB AREA, AND I WOULD I WOULD SUGGEST THAT

[01:25:08]

PLEASE. I THINK OKAY, SO WE'RE IN SUB AREA ONE, SO I COUNTED 4 OR 5 ROOF COLORS, WHICH I FEEL IS NOT, THE LOOK THAT NEW ALBANY TYPICALLY HAS. I FEEL LIKE IT'S A LOT OF, DISTRACTION. AND I UNDERSTAND THE ONE HAS, THE GREEN METAL AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE DOING WITH THAT. BUT THERE'S GEORGETOWN GRAY, BIRCHWOOD THUNDERSTORM GRAY. POSSIBLY TERRACOTTA. THAT'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT, COLORS. AND I FEEL LIKE YOU CAN STILL ACHIEVE THE SAME LOOK BUT HAVE SOME COHESIVENESS WITH, OKAY. ONE COLOR. CONSISTENT IN THAT AREA, I, WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT AT ALL, SO. OKAY WOULD YOU LIKE US TO INDICATE, THE TWO ROOF COLORS THAT WE WOULD USE AND. I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THIS. YOU PROBABLY DON'T HAVE THE SAMPLES OF THE ROOF COLORS. I DON'T HERE. I MEAN, I THINK IT SHOULD BE, IT SHOULD PLAY WITH THE REST OF THE HAMLET AREA, YOU KNOW, LIKE THE RED. I FEEL LIKE A RED ROOF DOESN'T REALLY FIT INTO THE LOOK AND FEEL OF NEW ALBANY. OKAY AND THEN WE CAN GET RID OF THE RED. A COUPLE DIFFERENT GRAYS, LIKE, I CAN'T REMEMBER. BIRCHWOOD WAS A BROWN, BUT I FEEL LIKE THERE'S A PRETTY CONSISTENT, COLOR OF ROOFS, WE CAN GO TO ONE CONSISTENT COLOR IF YOU'D LIKE. I PERSONALLY THINK THAT WOULD BE. THAT'S FIN. YEAH. WE'LL DEFAULT TO THE OH OF COURSE. THANK YOU. DO WE DO WE WANT TO LIMIT IT TO JUST ONE OR CAN WE LIKE LIMIT IT TO TWO MAYBE TWO. BUT THERE'S A LOT.

YEAH THERE'S A LOT I AGREE WITH YOU I THINK IT'S A IT'S A BIT OF A TUG OF WAR. THERE'S ENOUGH VARIETY OF FORM AND USE THAT IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE APPROPRIATE TO HAVE ONE. I MEAN, I'D BE I'D BE OKAY WITH 2 TO 3, BUT THAT PROBABLY IS WHAT I'M THINKING. BUT I DO WANT TO LET ME JUST RESPOND TO THAT. WE COULD CERTAINLY DO TWO COLORS AND THEN ALTERNATE THEM SO WE GET ENOUGH VARIETY WITH THE FORMS. IF YOU'D LIKE, IF THAT WOULD WORK, IF THAT WOULD PLEASE DEFER TO OTHERS ON THAT, I DO WANT TO ASK ABOUT SIGNAGE. HAS I HATE TO OPEN UP A CAN OF WORMS ON THIS TOPIC, AS THE BOARD IS PRONE TO DEBATE SIGNAGE MIGHTILY, BUT HAS IT BEEN CONTEMPLATED IN THESE ELEVATIONS FOR THE FOR THE RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL USE? AND WHERE WHERE WOULD THAT BE? AND HOW IS THAT BEING, HOW IS THAT BEING MANAGED BY BY THE ADMINISTRATION AS FAR AS APPROVALS AND SUCH? I MEAN, I PRESUME THAT'LL HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE US ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS OR NOT. NO, IT WOULD NOT. THEY WOULD BE RESTRICTED TO WHAT'S, WHAT'S WHAT'S PERMITTED IN CITY CODE. UNLESS THERE'S A PROVISION IN THE TEXT THAT THEY CAN COME BACK WITH A MASTER SIGN PLAN FOR THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. BUT AT THIS TIME, THEY'RE JUST STICKING WITH WHAT'S PERMITTED A CITY CODE. BUT THAT WOULD NOT COME BACK TO THE AREA. OKAY, OKAY. SO WE ON THE ON THE ON THE COLOR COMMENT JUST TO KIND OF COME BACK TO THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER ANYBODY ELSE HAVE COMMENTS. I MEAN, IT I MEAN IT SOUNDS LIKE WE WANT SOUNDS LIKE WE I'VE HEARD TWO COLORS BUT NO RED ONE TWO COLORS, NO RED METALS. OKAY. FOR THE ONE METAL ITEM, I THINK THAT'S YEAH, I THINK SO. WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK I'M OKAY WITH THE METAL? OKAY. I LIKE A VARIETY. I LIKE THE WAY THIS LOOKS. FIVE IS I THINK YOUR TO YOUR POINT IS GOOD. I'D BE FINE WITH THREE, TO GIVE SOME FLEXIBILITY, BUT I'D BE FINE WITH THREE. I AGREE, MAYBE WE ELIMINATE THE RED. THAT'S FINE.

BUT WHAT'S THE PRECEDENT ON THE, THE CEDAR SIDING? DO WE HAVE PRECEDENT FOR THAT, OR WHAT WAS

[01:30:06]

THE THE PROJECT, THOSE TWO BUILDINGS THAT HAVE THE SHAKES ON THEM ARE THE TWO THAT LEAD INTO THE WOODS. AND SO IT WAS AN EFFORT TO SOFTEN THE PROJECT AS IT LEADS INTO THE WOODLANDS. SO THAT THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE SHAKES. I DON'T THINK THERE IS A SPECIFIC PRECEDENT IN, IN NEW ALBANY PROPER. I WOULD, SAY THERE ARE PRECEDENTS IN OHIO AND OTHER OLDER OHIO, NEW ALBANY, OHIO. I KNOW THERE'S A SHAKE. I THINK THERE'S A SHAKE IN THE COURT. SO WHAT'S THE BOARD'S THOUGHTS ON THAT? AND LONG TERM MAINTENANCE WORK IS, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THAT CAN I LIKE IT? I MEAN, IT'S OBVIOUSLY AGAIN, DIFFERENT TEXTURES. I WOULDN'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO IT. WHICH BUILDING IS THAT ON. THERE'S TWO BUILDINGS. THIS ONE HERE. SO THE IT'S THIS BUILDING AND THIS BUILDING, THE TWO BUILDINGS ADJACENT TO THE WOODLANDS. OKAY. THAT GO INTO THE SUGAR. RIGHT.

SO HERE'S THE, THE SECOND BUILDING. SO THE MR. MEYER, DO YOU KNOW, ISN'T THAT THE SAME ROOF THAT'S REQUIRED ALONG, ALONG THE, THE GOLF COURSE MAYBE. OR IS THAT LONG? I THINK THAT'S WHAT I HAD IN MY OGDEN WOODS HOUSE. RIGHT. WASN'T THAT THE CEDAR SHAKE ROOF THAT WAS REQUIRED? MAYBE BECAUSE IT WAS ALONG THE BOULEVARD STREET? YEAH. THERE ARE MULTIPLE I THINK, WE DO HAVE THE COUNTRY CLUB THAT HAVE WOOD. YEAH, THAT REQUIRE WOOD SHAKE, ROOFING MATERIALS. SO IT CERTAINLY EXISTS IN THAT FORM IN NEW ALBANY. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SIDING. RIGHT. AND WOULD THE SIDING BE NATURAL OR WOULD IT BE SIMULATED. THESE ARE NATURAL.

THIS IS THE PUSH AND PULL BETWEEN HE AND I, THIS ONE, WAS INTENDED TO BE A REAL THE OTHER ONE WITH THE HIGHER UP IS, IS GOING TO BE SIMULATED. OKAY THAT ONE. OKAY.

I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS. ON THIS SECTION, I, I'D LIKE TO SEE SAMPLES OF THAT. I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE KEARSLEY SAMPLES OF THAT SYNTHETIC MATERIAL THAT WOULD BE PROPOSED.

OR PHOTOS WHERE IT'S BEEN USED. IN OTHER BUILDINGS AND OTHER PROJECTS. SO IT SAYS IT'S A FIBER CEMENT SHAKE. WHICH IS REFERRED. TO AS. FIBER CEMENT SHAKES, I JUST HAVEN'T. IT'S YOU KNOW, I'M TRYING TO VISUALIZE IT. I THINK, LIKE MR. HANSON IS LIKE WHAT IT. BECAUSE WE JUST DON'T HAVE THAT HERE AND HOW IT'S GOING TO FIT IN WITH THE REST OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE MORE TRADITIONAL TOWNHOMES AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT ARE AROUND IT.

THANK YOU. BRIAN. YEAH PUBLIC COMMENT. IS IT GOING TO BE PAINTED TO LOOK LIKE A WEATHERED SHINGLE, OR IS IT GOING TO BE PAINTED, SOLID COLOR TO LIKE IT'S AN OLD SHINGLE THAT'S BEEN PAINTED OVER WITH PAINT. YEAH, YOU CAN DO THAT. YES. OKAY.

[01:35:07]

SO I'M HEARING I HAVE NO OTHER COMMENTS FOR THIS BUILDING. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE USED ON THE LOWER LEVEL TWO ON THE WEST ELEVATION OF, BUILDING. 33 AND 32, I THINK IT IS. IS THAT ACCURATE? IS THAT YOU'LL USE TH, THE, CEMENT FIBER SHAKE ON THAT ONE. THE FIRST ONE RIGHT THERE.

YEAH. IS THAT ACCURATE? YOU'LL IT'LL BE THE FIBER CEMENT, SHAKE WILL ALSO BE ON THE FIRST FLOOR.

SO IT'LL BE ON THE FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR OF THOSE BUILDINGS. OKAY.

OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE WE CAN. SO JUST FROM IN TERMS OF TRYING TO KEEP TRACK OF WHAT WE'RE SAYING, ARE WE SAYING WE'RE OBJECTING TO IT OR WE'RE SAYING WE'VE NOW NOTED IT AND I ACCEPT THAT. I THINK IT'S A IT'S A GOOD TEXTURE UP ABOVE. BUT TO YOUR POINT, MAYBE NOT DOWN BELOW. YEAH.

THERE IS NOWHERE JUST TO ANSWER THAT POINT. THERE'S NOWHERE WHERE IT HITS THE GROUND.

THERE'S ALWAYS STONE OR, DIMENSIONAL CAST STONE AT THE BASE OF ALL SIDING IN THE COMMERCIAL AREA. I DON'T I ASKED THE QUESTION, BUT I DON'T WANT TO LEAD THE WITNESS. I DON'T OBJECT TO A SIMULATED MATERIAL. I THINK ONE THING ABOUT CEDAR SHAKES IS THAT IF THEY IF THEY WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO CURL AND WHEN THEY CURL, THEY'RE GOING TO SHRINK. AND WHEN THEY SHRINK, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE LOOK THAT THEY MAY HAVE IN THE IN THE RENDERS THAT WE SEE HERE. SO THERE'S MERIT TO A SIMULATED MATERIAL IN THIS. IN THIS INSTANCE, I, I MEAN, ONCE AGAIN, I'LL, I'LL DEFER TO THE REST OF THE BOARD ON THIS, BUT I DON'T OBJECT TO IT. I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHAT WE WERE. I DIDN'T WHAT WE WERE GETTING. I DON'T OBJECT TO IT. YEAH, I GUESS I DON'T OBJECT TO IT. I GUESS THE ESPECIALLY THE SIMULATED SIMULATED ONES, BUT THE OTHER ONES THAT ARE NATURAL ARE JUST CONCERNS ABOUT THE LONG TERM. YEAH. YEAH I AGREE TO THE POINT. WHERE DO WE EVEN WANT A NATURAL MATERIAL? I THINK IF YOU WANT, WE'D BE HAPPY TO GO ALL SIMULATED WITH THEM. I DON'T THINK THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH THAT. IT'S A LOT LESS MAINTENANCE AND LESS CONCERNS. YEAH. AND I THINK CONSISTENCY WOULD PROBABLY BE VALUABLE IN THAT INSTANCE. OKAY I AGREE I JUST THINK THAT WE SHOULD KEEP IT CONSISTENT AND NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE LONG TERM LOOK OF IT. ALL RIGHT. SO THE TAKE AWAY IS ALL SYNTHETIC SHAKE SIDING. I APPROVE THAT OKAY. THIS AGAIN IS IN SOME IN SOME AREA ONE, WHICH IS THE ONLY PLACE THAT THAT'S CORRECT. AND REPLACING IT. YES. THAT'S WHAT SIMULATED. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING. THE WHERE ANY ANY OTHER OTHER COMMENTS. IN SUMMARY ONE I HAVE ONE MORE BUILDINGS 29 THROUGH 37 HAVE A LOT OF BRIGHT DETAILS. SO IT LOOKS, JUST LIGHTER AND THEN WHEN YOU TRANSITION TO BUILDING 26, IT LOOKS VERY DARK. MORE MORE OF A, LIKE A MUCH MORE SOMBER FEEL IS THAT THE RENDERING OR THESE ARE THE MATERIALS THAT DARK. NO. SO THIS IS, SO I ACTUALLY PULLED THE SLIDES FROM LAST PRESENTATION THAT WE DID, BUT, THE JEFFERSON JEFFERSONIAN VISION THAT YOU HAVE IN THE CORE OF THE BUILDING IS RED BRICK AND WHITE TRIM. CORRECT IN THE HISTORIC COMMUNITIES THAT PREDATED 1835, WHEN NEW ALBANY

[01:40:06]

[01:45:03]

THE, THE PEDIMENT ROOF AND COLUMNS LOOK TO BE OUT OF SCALE WITH THE REST OF THE ARCHITECTURE, AND I ONLY BRING THIS UP BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN SCRUTINIZED BY THIS BOARD ON PREVIOUS APPROVALS, IS THAT WE WANT TO I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT THAT WE ASKED THE APPLICANT TO MAINTAIN THE APPROPRIATE PROPORTIONS OF COLUMNS, DIAMETER TO HEIGHT, FRIEZE BOARDS AND ALL THE OTHER ASSOCIATED ELEMENTS THAT MAKE UP THE APPROPRIATE SCALED ENTRY THAT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT BUILDING IN THE OVERALL CONTEXT OF THE DEVELOPMENT. AND IT IT DOES TO ME APPEAR TO BE SOMEWHAT UNRESOLVED ON THOSE ISSUES, AND I WOULDN'T HAVE OTHERWISE COMMENTED IF NOT FOR THE SORT OF FINALITY OF WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO REVIEW TONIGHT. I THINK THAT ALSO COULD BE SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK THAT WE THAT WE CALL THAT OUT AS A AS A REQUIREMENT, BECAUSE WHEN NOT DONE PROPERLY, IT CAN REALLY DIMINISH THE OVERALL ESTHETIC. YEAH THANK YOU. CITY ARCHITECT DID REVIEW THOSE SPECIFICALLY, BUT WE CAN HAVE HIM TAKE ANOTHER LOOK.

YEAH. AND THE PATTERN BOOK REQUIRES THE ADHERENCE TO WHERE'S AMERICAN VIGNOLA. NOT TO SAY THEY DIDN'T ADHERE TO IT, BUT WE TRIED AND SO WE COULD GIVE IT ANOTHER, SET OF POLISH.

I WILL SAY THIS BUILDING WENT THROUGH A LOT OF PROGRESSION. A IS IT KIND OF WORKED AROUND THE ROOT ZONE AND ALL THOSE DETAILS. THIS THE THREE SUB AREA THREE AND THIS BUILDING, SPECIFICALLY THE EACH ITERATION WITH DAVID WAS WAS VERY THOROUGH. SO BUT I THINK AS WE GET TO THAT FINAL DETAILING AND PERMITTING GET FLESHED OUT. ANYTHING ELSE ON SUB AREA ONE, WE MOVE TO SUB AREA TWO. YES. LET'S DO THAT. SO I HAD MY FIRST COMMENT HERE. MAYBE, WELL LET'S, LET'S, LET'S START HERE ON THE STREETSCAPE. JUST BECAUSE I CAN PROBABLY GET THEM ALL, SAY, OKAY. SO MY FIRST QUESTION WAS WHEN I GET INTO THESE BUILDINGS HERE, IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF BLANK WALL SPACE THERE. I AGREE, AND I AND AT LEAST IN TERMS OF MAYBE FROM THE STREETSCAPE, I DIDN'T SEE ANY FOLK, ANY FAUX WINDOWS OR ANYTHING. MAYBE THEY ARE IN THE DETAILS. SO HELP ME OUT. I MEAN, WHEN WE GET TO THOSE. BUT THAT WAS THE FIRST MY FIRST REACTION AND WE CAN MAYBE LOOK CLOSER, AT THEM WHEN WE GET TO THE INDIVIDUAL PAGES. THE OTHER COMMENT JUST GENERALLY HERE, AND I'LL JUST OFFER IT TO THE BOARD. I SHOWED THIS TO MY WIFE AND SHE'S ON THE BOARD AT MIAMI OF OHIO, AND SHE SAID THAT PARTICULARLY HERE, AND I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ONES WHERE WE HAVE THE FULL THREE STOREYS PLUS THE PLUS OUR, OUR HALF, SHE SAID. THEY LOOK LIKE DORMS AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER ANYBODY ELSE HAD THAT REACTION AND WHETHER THERE'S ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE. BUT THAT WAS KIND OF A HER REACTION. AND SO IT FEELS VERY INSTITUTIONAL. I FEEL LIKE THAT IT'S SO REPETITIVE. AND THEN THE ENDS ARE MISSING. I MEAN, NOT THAT YOU WANT MORE WINDOWS, BUT I FEEL LIKE IT'S LACKING DETAIL. AND AGAIN, IT'S VERY DARK. IT FEELS IT FEELS VERY DARK. SO MAYBE, MAYBE WE CAN GET. YEAH HERE WE ARE IN THE FIRST DETAIL.

AND ARE THERE AGAIN. ARE THERE. WHAT PAGE IS THAT? THAT IS BECAUSE THERE ARE NO PAGES 24.

PAGE 24. OKAY LET'S SEE IF I CAN FIND IT BECAUSE I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THERE. OTHER THAN THE WATER TABLE. CORRECT. ON THE. YEAH, THERE'S A WATER TABLE ON THIS. AND THIS IS, AND THIS IS THE ELEVATION. AND I MAY I MAY FEEL LESS PROBLEMATIC TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE'S SOMETHING IN IT, BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT THESE ARE SEEN FROM THE STREET, THAT BOTHERED ME TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY LOOKED DIRECTLY INTO ANOTHER BUILDING, THEY PROBABLY DON'T BOTHER ME AS MUCH. BUT I'LL I'LL LET THE BOARD REACT. I DO THINK WHERE THERE'S AN EXPOSURE OF THE THIRD LEVEL,

[01:50:04]

[01:55:06]

AND I ACTUALLY THIS IS A GOOD ELEVATION TO PAUSE ON IS I THINK THE LACK OF RESIDENTIAL SCALE MIGHT BE WORKING AGAINST US. I MEAN, THERE'S THE OTHER SUB AREAS HAVE CHIMNEYS. THESE LACK ANY ANY CHIMNEYS FROM WHAT I CAN TELL. AND I'M NOT SAYING A CHIMNEY IN AND OF ITSELF WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM. AND I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE JUST PUT FALSE CHIMNEYS UP ALONG THERE TO ADDRESS SCALE, BUT IT'S NOTICEABLY ABSENT AS I LOOK AT IT. THE SECOND THING IS THE STRETCHED, ROOF PITCHES. I'M STRUGGLING WITH THAT. SO LOWER LEFT HAND CORNER, UPPER RIGHT MIDDLE, LOOKED LIKE YOU WERE GOING FROM A 612 TO A 10 OR 1112, PITCH. AND I THINK THAT IS PULLING AND STRETCHING THE ELEVATION IN WAYS THAT JUST FEELS A LITTLE FORCED, BUT TAKEN IN, ITS ENTIRETY, THOSE OTHER COMMENTS SORT OF FEED THE NARRATIVE THAT I THINK WE'RE ALL STRUGGLING WITH HERE, I AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND THE DENSITY AND MASS AND SCALE. AND I WAS ALSO GOING TO ADD, I DON'T KNOW THAT THE DORMERS PARTICULARLY ENHANCE OR DETRACT FROM THE SUCCESS OF THE OF THE DESIGN. I UNDERSTAND THAT WAS PART OF THE CONVERSATION WITH STAFF AND I'LL, I'LL GO ALONG WITH IT. I CERTAINLY AM NOT OBJECTING TO IT EITHER WAY, BUT I THINK MY COMMENTS ARE JUST FROM A MASSING STANDPOINT. IT JUST SO TO RESPOND TO THAT, WE WORKED WITH YOUR CITY ARCHITECT, AND WHAT WE DID IS WE ESTABLISHED IN THE KEY PLACES ON THE SITE THESE RETURNS TO RESOLVE THOSE REFORMS AT THE CORNERS WHERE IT MIGHT BE REVEALED. SO WHEN YOU SEE IT EXPOSED AT AN AND IT'S REALLY MID-BLOCK, SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GETTING EXPOSED TO THE, AS, AS IT'S BEING SHOWN HERE. I MEAN, THIS IS JUST TO SHOW AN ELEVATION NOT TO SHOW THE MASSING OF IT. UNDERSTOOD AND WE CAN ZOOM IN ON. SO I'M SHOWING THE LARGER ELEVATIONS. I CAN SHOW SOME MORE OF THE LARGER ELEVATIONS FOR YOU. ZOOM INTO THIS ONE ON THE UPPER SIDE HERE.

TOP LEFT. THAT'S GOOD. YEAH, YEAH. THAT HELPS. CAN WE? ZOOM OUT A LITTLE BIT? I MEAN, AGAIN, JUST TO SHOW THE. THIS ARCH AND THESE ARCHES WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE, ARCH MASONRY. SO I, I THINK THESE HAVE AN APPROPRIATE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER. I WOULD CHALLENGE THE THOUGHT THAT THESE AREN'T RESIDENTIAL. I THINK THE ENTRANCES, THE SPEED TO A RESIDENTIAL FRONT DOOR, RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, THE BAYS, SPEAK TO HABITATION, THE WINDOWS WITH THE TRANSOM ON THE GROUND FLOOR. TALKS TO RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, NOT TO A, A FACTORY OR OTHER KIND OF, YOU KNOW, YOU NEVER SEE THAT IN A DORMITORY. WILL THESE BE, SIMULATED, DIVIDED LIGHT WINDOWS WITH A SPECT? I DIDN'T CATCH THAT. YOU HAVE TO. YOU HAVE TO BE. YEAH, YEAH. OKAY SO. SO I THINK THERE'S A NUMBER OF GESTURES HERE THAT, TALK TO ITS RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER, AND CAN YOU JUST. I'M TRYING TO AGAIN GO FROM THAT TO THE BUILDING NUMBERS ON HERE. SO WHAT'S IT.

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT NUMBERS, WHAT NUMBER OF ZOOM OU. SO THESE ARE, ON THIS DAY, SO 2015 OR NO, 24 AND 23. IS THAT WHAT ALL OF THESE, ALL OF THESE IN THIS AREA WOULD BE LIKE? YES.

NO, I GET IT. I'M CURIOUS. GIVING DETAILS. AND THAT'S TRUE IN AGAIN WHAT I, WE WERE LOOKING

[02:00:10]

THE, WE ARE NOT AT 12 INCH ROOF, BUT AGAIN, WE'RE TRYING TO BE MORE, VERNACULAR IN OUR ARCHITECTURE. SO IT'S A IT'S LESS IT IS A MORE SUBTLE CORNICE ON THE, ON THE TOP. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO CAN I, CAN I GO BACK TO THE NORTH ELEVATION OF BUILDING ONE? NORTH ELEVATION BUILDING ONE, BUILDING ONE. YEA. 35. I THINK THIS IS THAT'S THE NORTH ELEVATION. YEAH. THAT'S THAT CAN'T BE IT BASED ON BASED UPON WHAT I'M SAYING. AND MAYBE IT'S THAT. MAYBE IT IS ACTUALLY ONE. MAYBE MAYBE IT'S THE NORTH MELBOURNE I WANT TO WHAT BUILDING IS THAT? LET ME TAKE YOU BACK. THAT'S THE SIDE OF BUILDING 15. THAT'S THAT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THEN I GUESS, ADAM, I'M TURNED AROUND. BY THE WAY, IT'S SO THE SIDE. SO IT'S SO THE NORTH ELEVATION OF BUILDING 15. SORRY OH I SEE, I KNOW BUILDING ONE BECAUSE. YEAH. NO, NO I CAN I GET CAN WE ZOOM IN ON THE UPPER ON THE UPPER PORTION OF THAT ON BUILDING ONE, I JUST WANT TO LOOK FOR THE AGAIN, WE SAW A LOT OF DETAILING THERE WITH THE ONE THAT HAD THE FRAME, AND I JUST WANTED TO TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT THAT ONE. AND, AND BECAUSE THAT'S THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT I THINK MY WIFE FELT WERE MORE DORM LIKE, AS OPPOSED TO THE ONES THAT HAD THE HAD SOME FRAME IN THEM. AND I GUESS.

MR. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER MR. DAVEY AND OTHERS, I MEAN, IF, IF EVERYONE ELSE IS SATISFIED, THEN THEN I'LL MOVE. MOVE ON. NO I THINK I FEEL LIKE THERE NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTRAST AND DETAIL, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE IT'S NOT FEELING AS RESIDENTIAL AS I THINK WE ALL WANT IT TO BE.

EVEN IF THERE WERE SOME DIFFERENT TREATMENT OF THE WINDOW SIZES AND TYPES, SO IT DIDN'T REPEAT EVERY LEVEL, SOMETHING WHEN THERE IS MORE OF A STANDARD. WE ACTUALLY WERE INSTRUCTED TO NOT. YEAH. TO CONSTRUCT THE BACK TO A MORE CONSISTENT WINDOW. I THINK THAT'S WHEN IT'S HARD TO IS THAT WE'RE RESPONDING TO THE FINAL PRODUCT WITHOUT THE PROCESS. AND YEAH I MEAN I'M NOT. INSTEAD OF ADDING VARIETY, LEFT TO RIGHT, MAYBE ADDING VARIETY UP AND DOWN WOULD BE, YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO. OKAY SO MAYBE A WINDOW ON THE GROUND FLOOR THAT'S TALLER. YES ALL RIGHT. SO THIS THIS IS BUILDING BUILDING ONE AND ONE AND OTHER BUILDINGS THAT ARE SIMILAR BECAUSE THERE'S OTHER BUILDINGS THAT LOOK SIMILAR TO THIS. CORRECT? YEAH SO THIS IS PART OF THAT GROUP. SO WE SO BASICALLY A TALLER LARGE TALLER WINDOWS IN THE FIRST FLOOR OKAY. OKAY ALL RIGHT. SO NOW CAN I AGAIN GOING BACK TO THAT'S A VERY SPECIFIC DESIGN SOLUTION IS THAT LIKE I JUST OR OR OR OR OR OTHER OR OTHER CHANGE TO PROVIDE MORE OF A VARIETY VERTICALLY OR VERTICAL VARIETY. OKAY ALL RIGHT. THE, THE VERTICAL VARIETY, THAT SOUNDS LIKE A TECHNICAL TERM. IF YOU COULD BRING UP PAGE NINE, AN ARCHITECTURAL TERM. THERE IS PRECEDENCE FOR VARIETY AND MR. MALTZ, CAN WE BRING UP PAGE 19. HIERARCHY I THINK IS THE

[02:05:06]

SO I GUESS IT'S BUILDING THIS NORTH ELEVATION BUILDING 15 IS WHAT I THINK SOMEBODY TOLD ME I WANTED. YEAH AS THEY GO UP, CAN WE BRING UP THE NORTH ELEVATION OF BUILDING 15? YEAH, YEAH. ON THIS PAGE IT'S ZOOMED OUT. EXACTLY. YEAH YEP. AND I THINK THIS IS GREAT. 13. YEAH. IT'S A TWO STEP LOW. 605 AND CENTRAL COLLEGE IF YOU IF YOU ZOOM OUT ON THIS IMAGE YOU'LL SEE IT IN THE FAR LEFT HAND. THIS ONE. YEAH. BUT THAT'S THE ONLY THERE'S NO BLOW UP ON THAT.

THAT'S THE ONLY. SO GOING BACK AGAIN I THINK THAT'S WHAT I HIGHLIGHTED EARLY ON IS DOES THAT BOTHER ANYBODY ELSE IF THAT'S GOING TO BE SEEN. YES YES YES. WHAT CAN WHAT CAN WE DO TO ADD MORE INTEREST. CAN WE AT LEAST PUT SOME FALSE PANELS HERE? ANDREW, YOU'RE THE SOLUTION TO THIS. WHAT WHAT WHAT WOULD YOU I THINK ALL OF THE ABOVE I MEAN IT THIS IS I MEAN, FOUR SIDED ARCHITECTURE HAS BEEN A CORNERSTONE OF THE NEW ALBANY STRATEGIC PLAN. SO I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF WAYS THAT THIS COULD BE RESOLVED TO OUR SATISFACTION. WHETHER IT'S I KNOW YOU MENTIONED THE HERRINGBONE, FALSE WINDOWS ON SOME OF THE OTHER ELEVATIONS OR BITING THE BULLET AND, YOU KNOW, PUTTING THAT EXTRA WINDOW IN AND WORKING AROUND IT ON THE OTHER CORNER TO STEPPING THAT ELEVATION, I MEAN, ANY, ANY AND ALL OF THE I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF SUITABLE SOLUTIONS HERE. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO BE THAT PRESCRIPTIVE AS A BOARD. I WOULD LIKE MORE ARCHITECTURAL INTEREST ON THIS ELEVATION AND ANYTHING EQUIVALENT THAT'S VISIBLE FROM, FROM ONE OF THE STREETS. IF IT IF IT JUST FACES INTO ANOTHER BUILDING. CONDITIONS LIKE THAT.

IT'S THE EAST SIDE OF BUILDING 14. IT'S THE NORTH SIDE OF BUILDING 15. AND THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CENTER NORTH OF BUILDING ONE. IF THAT APPLIES. SO TO ADD. I GUESS. YEP, YEP. ELEVATION, THE NORTH ELEVATION. AND THEN THE SOUTH. AND WHAT ABOUT BUILDING ONE MORE BUILDING ONE.

IS IT THAT THAT WAS THAT WAS MORE INTERESTING THAT WAS MORE INTERESTING? I MISSPOKE SINCE I'M COMPLETELY TURNED AROUND AND LOOKING AT THESE IN TERMS OF, THE PORCH ELEMENT ADDED, THERE ARE MORE. YEAH. WINNING DETAILS AND A VERY RECENT SWITCHING. SO 1517. AND WHAT'S THE OTHER ONE? I DIDN'T WRITE DOWN 14, 15 AND 17. OKAY. GOT IT. THANK YOU. SO I HAD I HAD ONE THING ON THE ON THE PAGES THAT SHOWED THE GARAGES HERE IN AREA TWO. SO LET ME JUST WRAP THIS ONE UP IF YOU DON'T MIND. SO WE'RE GOING TO ADD MORE DETAIL. YES YES. WITHOUT US TELLING YOU WHAT WHAT IT TO BE. YOU WILL. YOU'VE DONE GREAT WORK. AND SO WE KNOW THAT WE'LL LIKE IT. SO ON THE ON THE GROUND CAN I LOOK AT GET SOME OF THE ANY ONE OF THE ONES SHOWING THE GARAGES IN THIS SECTION.

WHATEVER. WHICHEVER ONE SHOWS GARAGES. PAGE 21. ELEVATIONS. YEAH. PAGE 34. PAGE 35. YEAH.

THAT'S A GOOD THAT I THINK THEY'RE ALL THEY'RE ALL MORE OR LESS THE SAME. SO CAN I GET CAN I ZOOM IN ON THOSE BECAUSE I, I MEAN SO WHAT I WAS LOOKING AT THE PUD AND WHAT THE PUD SEEMS TO SAY FOR, FOR SUBAREA TWO IS INDIVIDUAL BAY DOORS OR DOUBLE WIDE GARAGE DOORS THAT HAVE THE APPEARANCE OF INDIVIDUAL BAY DOORS, WHEN CLOSED, SHALL BE REQUIRED. AND THOSE DON'T SEEM

[02:10:03]

I THINK I'D STIPULATE THAT THE COLORS WOULD BE WORKED OUT WITH STAFF FROM THE HISTORICAL PALETTE AS WE MOVE FORWARD. I THINK AN OVERARCHING SOUNDS LIKE AN OVERARCHING THEME IS TO SORT OF MAYBE LIGHTEN ACROSS THE BOARD. YES. AND I THINK IT'S A MATTER OF FINDING THE RIGHT THE RIGHT OPTION. I DID NOT. THE INTENTION WAS FOR THAT GRAY OR THAT, YOU KNOW, COLOR TO MATCH THE FLATS THAT WE WERE JUST LOOKING AT. IF IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DIFFERENT OR IF IT WAS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT, BUT IN THE SAME, OKAY, A LITTLE BIT DARKER. BUT I THINK WE CAN LIGHTEN EVERYTHING UP. OKAY. THAT'S GREAT. THANK YOU, WHILE WE'RE HERE, LET ME JUST. I'LL JUST POSE THE QUESTION TO SEE IF ANYBODY, I MEAN, THIS THESE ARE ALL IN THE REVERSE. OBVIOUSLY THAT'S NOT A VERY GEORGIAN APPEARANCE, BUT DO WE CARE? I'M OKAY WITH IT. OKAY. I MEAN, I, I WANTED TO CALL IT OUT. I WASN'T I WASN'T DEEPLY OFFENDED, BUT I WANTED TO JUST I GUESS I DO HAVE A QUESTION HERE, TOO. SORRY ABOUT THE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M DOING THERE. OKAY. SO IF I'M READING THIS CORRECTLY, THAT MAY BE AN EIGHT FOOT DOOR, MAYBE A SIX FOOT EIGHT DOOR, BUT MORE THAN LIKELY AN EIGHT FOOT DOOR THAT WOULD PUT THE HEAD OF THOSE WINDOWS. ARE WE STEPPING UP FROM THIS TO THIS IN THE PLAN LAYOUT? BECAUSE THAT PUTS THE HEAD OF THOSE WINDOWS AT TEN AND THE SILL OF THOSE WINDOWS ABOVE FOUR FEET. I'M TRYING TO MAKE SENSE OF WHAT'S GOING ON THERE. COULD YOU. MAYBE EXPLAIN ON THAT? BECAUSE I THINK THE COMMENT ABOUT THE COMPOSITION ON THIS, I JUST AGAIN, SOMETHING THAT WE'VE SCRUTINIZED AS A BOARD IN THE PAST WOULD BE MAINTAINING COMMON HEAD HEIGHTS, TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE PROPORTIONS OF THE, OF THE WINDOWS VERSUS THE DIVIDED LIGHT CUTS. AND IT JUST STRUCK ME AS I'M LOOKING AT THESE, THESE HEAD HEIGHTS, THAT MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING THERE THAT IS EITHER EXAGGERATED OR PERHAPS INTENTIONAL. I JUST WANTED TO GET SOME EXPLANATION ON THAT, I BELIEVE THE COUNTERS ARE WHAT CAUSES THE WINDOWS TO BE UP SO HIGH, BUT I CAN DOUBLE CHECK THE PLANS WITH THE WITH THE TEAM ARCHITECT, BUT THAT'S THE THAT'S WHAT'S LOCKING THEM UP. KITCHEN BEHIND. YEAH KITCHEN COUNTER BEHIND. I BELIEVE I HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK WITH THE PLANS. THAT MUST STEP DOWN. SOMETHING LOOKS A LITTLE OFF THERE. YEAH, YEAH, PARTICULARLY WITH THE RAILINGS ARE WHERE THEY ARE. YEAH. YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S PRETTY 42. MIGHT MAYBE. BUT THAT LOOKS PRETTY TALL. YEAH IT WOULD. AND I ONLY BRING THAT UP BECAUSE IF THAT WAS OFFSET IT WOULD PROBABLY SMOOTH OUT THAT ELEVATION. IF IT WERE BROUGHT DOWN. UNLESS YOU'RE STEPPING UP. THAT'S RIGHT. OR OR DOWN. YEAH YEAH YEAH. WE'LL LOOK AT THAT TO, TO ADJUST IT IF POSSIBLE. OKAY. AND I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED. IS IT A LIKE A BRICK. IS IT A LITTLE PATIO THAT YOU CAN SIT? I CAN'T TELL BECAUSE THERE'S A LINE ACROSS THE DOOR. SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT I'M READING THERE. THAT'S A RAILING. I THINK YOU'RE LOOKING AT A CUTAWAY. OH, THERE IT IS. YEAH OH, SO. OH, IT'S JUST A LITTLE, I DON'T KNOW, THREE, FOUR FEET, LITTLE AREA OUTSIDE OF THE DOOR, SOME ARE DEEP. JULIET BALCONY. THERE'S A 7 OR 8 HERE, RIGHT? YEAH. IT'S OKAY. AND WHAT IS THE RAILING? IS IT. IS IT METAL? METAL? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO MUCH FOR

[02:15:03]

OKAY. WITH THAT PARTIAL PARKING I MIGHT JUST MAKE A SUGGESTION THAT WE ASK THAT THE REAR ELEVATIONS OF THAT SUB AREA BE REVIEWED WITH STAFF FOR CONFORMITY TO THE TO THE NEW ALBANY ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES THAT WE'RE FOLLOWING WITH THESE COMMENTS. I THINK IT'S RESOLVABLE, BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY LOOK TO BE RESOLVED YET ON SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS, I AGREE.

I HAVE A SUB AREA 1 OR 3 SUB AREA TWO QUESTION OR COMMENT, BUT IT SOMEWHAT RELATES TO THE WAIVER. I DON'T KNOW IF I BRING IT UP NOW OR OH. NO BETTER TIME THAN THE PRESENT OR. YEAH, I MEAN I THINK WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS THE WAIVERS MORE FULLY LATER, BUT JUST BECAUSE IT IS SOMEWHAT RELATED TO THE ARCHITECTURE AS WELL. SO ON PAGE 19, JUST TO SEE THAT OVERALL NORTH ELEVATION VIEW AGAIN. I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT SO THESE ALL HAVE THE STANDARD HEIGHT ALONG CENTRAL COLLEGE HERE. AND THEN AS WE GET INTO THAT WAIVER, THIS BUILDING IS INCLUDED IN THAT WAIVER. ACTUALLY, I SHOULD MENTION WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE ELEVATION. YOU'RE SEEING A COMPRESSED ELEVATION THERE. THERE'S ACTUALLY THE SITE. SO SOME OF THOSE STEPS YOU'RE SEEING ARE PULLED AWAY FROM THE HOUSE. SO THERE'S A RUN OF STEPS. AND THEN YOU COME UP TO THE HOUSE. AND I THINK SOME OF THOSE ARE ONLY TWO IN A ROW.

YEAH. SEE BUT YES THAT THAT ONE IS. AND IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE 35, I THINK THAT'S WHERE, A LOT OF FOCUS HAS BEEN WITH, DAVID TO. OKAY, HOW DO WE. DROP OFF HOW DO WE MAKE THAT FEEL? RIGHT. SO, WE'VE BEEN FLIPPING THE ROOF LINES, AND ADDING SOME ELEMENTS. YEAH. AND I APPRECIATE THE TREATMENT OF THE BUILDING. I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO DRAW ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT WE HAVE FRONT. ALL THE BUILDINGS ON THAT SIDE ARE FRONT FRONTING THE STREET, AND THEN THAT ONE ROTATED TO. THEN HAVE A HIGHER HEIGHT. AND I'M JUST I'M. I UNDERSTAND THE REASON FOR THE HEIGHT WAIVER, I JUST TO ME IT WOULD SEEM LIKE THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE KEY PLAN EVEN HERE, IF WE ZOOM OUT THAT. I GUESS I WOULD SEE A REASON TO CONTINUE THE FRONT FRONTAGE ON THAT ROW OF BUILDINGS. BUT THIS ONE ROTATES AND THEN HAS A HIGHER HEIGHT. IT JUST SEEMS KIND OF TO NOT FIT IN WITH THE AREA FOR WAIVER C OR I GUESS AN ARGUMENT COULD BE MADE THAT IT DOES NOT, I COULD SEE THE TREATMENT BEING FRONTAL BUILDINGS HERE AND ACHIEVING THE SAME THING. I WOULD NORMALLY AGREE, BUT BECAUSE OUR COMMERCIAL STREET, OUR ENERGY IS ON THE NEW STREET, THAT'S UNNAMED. THAT'S WHY I THINK THE DOORS BELONG THERE. THERE'S MORE ADDRESSES, MORE LIFE. THAT'S WHERE THE ENERGY IS. SO WE I WOULD THINK THAT THAT HAS PRIMACY IN THIS PARTICULAR CONDITION, WHICH IS WHY THE ENTRANCES ARE ON THESE, ON THE, ON THE COMMERCIAL STREE.

AND I, I TOTALLY AGREE. I THINK IF I WAS TO PUT MYSELF AS SOMEONE LIVING THERE, WOULD I WANT TO BE ON CENTRAL COLLEGE OR WOULD I WANT TO BE FACING THE INTERIOR, SO I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO AT LEAST DRAW ATTENTION TO THAT. AND AS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT, I THINK OUR STRUGGLE WITH AS WE STUDY THAT IS WHERE DOES IT STOP, BECAUSE IF WE BUILD UP THAT

[02:20:01]

I MEAN, THE TREES, WHATEVER. WELL I THINK THIS THIS ALSO DOES SOMEWHAT OF ACHIEVING MORE VISUAL INTEREST ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING. YEAH, THAT WAS THE OTHER ONE THAT WASN'T ON MY HIT LIST. YEAH. SO, I WOULD DRAW ATTENTION TO THAT. YEAH. HE I FIRST HEARD, WELL, YOU MAY BE OVER HERE ON THE. YEAH, WE ENDED UP I VERY CONSCIOUSLY STARTED OVER HERE. FLIPPING THAT ROOF LINE TO BASICALLY HAVE THE GABLE RUN PARALLEL WITH THE STREET, BECAUSE WHEN IT WAS THE OTHER WAY, THEN IT EXAGGERATED THAT HEIGHT, BUT AS THAT STEPPING, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT TOO FAR OFF. SO THAT WAS, THAT WAS KIND OF OUR, OUR THEORY. AND NOT JUMPING TO A WAIVER ITEM. BUT, SO ALL OF OUR, THESE UNITS ON AVERAGE ARE 36FT, ON THE, ON THE FRONT, THE BACK SIDES ARE ACTUALLY 44FT. AND SO THAT'S WHEN PEOPLE SAY, HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH 44FT? IT'S BECAUSE THE FRONT'S OOPS, SORRY ALL ALONG THAT FRONTAGE, THOSE ARE 36. WHEN YOU DO THE AVERAGE OF THE FOUR CORNERS PER THE REQUIREMENT, YOU END UP WITH THE AVERAGE OF 40, SO TO HAVE CONSISTENCY ACROSS ALL THE BACK, EVERYTHING MATCHED UP AT 44. AND THAT'S ULTIMATELY WHY WE SAID WE'LL FOREGO THE OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO 50FT, IN SUBAREA TWO IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS. AND WE SAID WE'LL FORGO, YOU KNOW, THE ABILITY TO DO 50FT ANYWHERE, SO THAT WE CAN HAVE THAT SORT OF CONTIGUOUS DOWN THE LINE, THAT 44. SO ADAM, IS THERE ANYTHING WE'LL TAKE AWAY OR. NO, WE'VE DISCUSSED IT AND WE UNDERSTAND IT FROM THE ARCHITECTURAL STANDPOINT. I JUST WANTED TO BRING IT UP. OKAY, GOOD. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE ON TWO. HERE YOU TWO ARE SUBAREA TWO. WE'VE COVERED BOTH. YES, YES. YEAH I THINK I THINK ANYTHING ON ANY PART OF SUBAREA TWO. NO. NOTHING ELSE FOR ME. I HAVE NOTHING ELSE, MOVE ON TO ALL THOSE COMMENTS. YEAH YEAH. SUB AREA THREE. SUB AREA THREE. LEAVING ASIDE FOR THE MOMENT THE WAIVER. CORRECT YEAH. I HAD. NOTHING I, I SEE THE TWO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES SHOW LANDSCAPING ELEMENT AND THIS OVERALL WEST ELEVATION. BUT I DON'T SEE THAT. REFLECTED ANYWHERE WHEN YOU GET LIKE ON PAGE 42, THERE'S, SO ON PAGE SORRY, 39, FOR INSTANCE, THERE'S THAT LANDSCAPING ELEMENT. IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE ATTACHED TO THESE HOUSES. YEAH. THE HARDSCAPE THERE, BUT NONE OF THAT SHOWS UP IN THE IN THESE ON THE, YES. PAGE 42. WE WOULD DEFER TO THE LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR THAT. THAT MAY BE SOMETHING IN THE MODEL THAT. SO WE SHOULD LOOK AT THE LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR ANYTHING RELATED TO LANDSCAPE. IT MAY ALSO BE THE FAR END OF THE STREET. YEAH. LOOKING AT THE LONG TERMINATION. YEAH THE PATH. YEAH. I THINK IT JUST CONTINUES ON. YOU MAY HAVE SEEN THOSE BACK THERE. NOW THAT IS THAT. YEAH OKAY. SO WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS AT THE END OF THE STREET RATHER THAN AT 605. IS THAT WHAT THE ANSWER IS? OKAY. YES. OKAY. AND JUST, SPEAK TO. WELL, YEAH. SO

[02:25:08]

IT'S A GLITCH. TWO WINGS OF THE HOUSE. AND PART OF THE HOUSE IS. NO, I MEAN, THESE ARE. I CAN ALMOST SOMEONE WHO'S HAD TO DO. YEAH, I THINK IT'S JUST. A VESTIGE FROM THE OLD PLAN.

THAT'S ALL RIGHT. SO, NO. OKAY. THESE TWO WINGS. OKAY NO. YEAH, I LIKE IT. I THINK ONE, ONE OTHER NOTE IS I INITIALLY WE HAD, LIKE, SUBAREA FIVE. WHERE, LIKE ELY AND OTHER AREAS, WE DID NOT HAVE THE FULL DETAIL. WE WERE GIVING MORE INSPIRATION IMAGES. THAT IS MORE TRADITIONAL FOR SINGLE FAMILY, YOU KNOW, NEIGHBORHOODS, SO THIS AREA, WHILE IT'S VERY DEVELOPED AND IT'S VERY SPECIFIC, I DID NOTE THAT EACH OF THOSE IS EACH IS GOING TO BE CUSTOM. SO THERE IS THE CHANCE THAT SOME OF THESE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, AS THEY'RE BEING CUSTOM DESIGNED, CUSTOM BUILT, THERE MIGHT BE SOME, MORE MODIFICATIONS HERE THAN IN THE LIKE SUB AREA. 1 OR 2. OKAY. ALL OF THESE DUPLEXES AND THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN SUB AREA THREE IS THEY ALL HAVE CONSISTENT ROOF COLOR. YES AND BRICK AND BRICK. YEAH. WELL THERE IS SOMEBODY HAS THEIR OWN COLOR BUT WE. RIGHT.

BUT THERE'S ALL ALL OF IT LOOKS LIKE ALL OF THESE HAVE THE SAME ROOF. YES I WILL SAY THE AS YOU GET TOWARDS THE EAST END, OBVIOUSLY THE ARCHITECTURE STARTS TO CHANGE. SO ONCE WE GOT OFF 605 AND CENTRAL COLLEGE AND WE BECAME INTERNAL TO THE SITE, IT HAS A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURAL FEEL AS AS YOU CAN SEE. AND SO THERE IS A LITTLE BIT MORE VARIETY ON THESE ON THESE IT'S MORE FORMAL AND MORE STRUCTURED ON THE PRIMARY ROADS. BUT THEN AS YOU GET INTERIOR, IT'S A LITTLE BIT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE VARIATION. I THINK IN ELEVATIONS ONE AND TWO, SO NOT THE ONES WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE, BUT THE ON THE TOP OF THE PAGE, THEY'RE BEAUTIFUL BUILDINGS. BUT I, I FEEL LIKE IF YOU WERE TO SHOW THAT TO SOMEONE, THEY WOULD NEVER GUESS THAT THAT'S IN NEW ALBANY. WHEREAS ALL THE OTHER SUB AREAS, IF YOU FLASHED AN ELEVATION, SOMEONE WOULD SAY, YEP, THAT LOOKS LIKE NEW ALBANY. SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE I'M STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT IS, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THIS WHOLE HAMLET AREA AND I UNDERSTAND THESE ARE DIFFERENT, BUT THE NEW ALBANY FEEL SEEMS TO HAVE DROPPED OFF WITH THESE. YEAH. NO, WE YOU KNOW, THAT'S A CHALLENGE. THE PRECEDENT IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN, I THINK EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD WOULD SAY IS NOT NEW ALBANY. AND SO THE CHALLENGE WAS, HOW DO WE COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT'S HAMLET APPROPRIATE? THAT'S ALSO NEW ALBANY APPROPRIATE. AND SO I THINK WE WORKED HARD WITH YOUR CITY ARCHITECT TO GET TO A RESOLUTION THAT DID THAT, THE WAY WE REVISED THIS ELEVATION IS WE ADDED THESE, EAVE RETURNS. WE PUT, PUT A TOP ON THESE THAT MADE IT MORE FORMAL AND MORE NEW ALBANY. WE, ADDED THE DORMER ON THE TOP. WE CAN ACTUALLY ADJUST THIS EVEN FURTHER FOR THE MOST RECENT COMMENTS FROM THE CITY ARCHITECT, AND THEN WE THINNED UP THE CHIMNEY TO MAKE IT AGAIN.

ALL THESE ARE JUSTTAKE THIS TYPO THE FOLD OF WHAT? WHAT IS A NEW ALBANY BUILDING? AND I LIKE IT.

I LOVE THE DETAILS. I JUST I DON'T FEEL IT, I DON'T. DO YOU GUYS FEEL THAT. WHAT COLOR IS THE BRICK? YEAH, IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. WHAT'S THE BRICK? CAN YOU ZOOM IN ON THAT? THERE YOU GO, OKAY. OKAY CORNICE DETAIL. TYPICAL WORK. IS THAT DETAILED ROOFLINE TYPICAL OF GEORGIAN ARCHITECTURE. THE BRICK IS DORMERS, THE BRACKETS. IT'S IT ALMOST LOOKS KIND OF, VICTORIAN NEO-VICTORIAN. YEAH IT'S I AGREE, THERE'S DEFINITELY THE, THE PITCH OF THE ROOFS SAYS VICTORIAN. OH. BELCREST. YEAH THIS IS THE FIRST BRICK WE'RE GETTING INTO. IT'S APPROPRIATE.

[02:30:03]

YEAH. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. I CONCUR WITH YOUR COMMENTS, ANDREW. I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THESE SAME, BUILDINGS AS WELL. THERE'S NO ALLEY BEHIND THEM. ARE THESE GOING TO HAVE DRIVEWAYS TO THE SIDES? OKAY. THEY SHARE SHARED DRIVEWAY. THAT GOES EITHER WAY. OKAY AND CAN I JUST ASK EVEN THOUGH I GUESS A TECHNICAL QUESTION, HOW, LIKE THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN HERE AND THESE THAT ARE DUPLEXES, HOW DO THEY GET REVIEWED COMPARED TO A SUB AREA FIVE WOULD BE VERY

[02:35:08]

SUCH AS.

A SUB AREA THREE. THE EAST ELEVATION. ELIMINATE OVERLAPPING ROOF LINES, WHICH IS WHERE WE WERE. I'M ONLY REFERENCING TEST. THAT'S PART OF THE STANDARD BY WHICH STAFF AND CITY ARCHITECT WOULD BE EVALUATING THESE AGAINST. TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE REVIEW PROCESS, I AGAIN, I'M QUESTIONING HOW PRESCRIPTIVE YOU WANT TO BE. I'M TRYING TO AVOID THE OBVIOUS PITFALLS THAT THAT WE CAN, THAT WE CAN. SO OVERLAPPING FORMS WOULD BE A OVERLAPPING FORMS. YES. OKAY.

THAT, THAT SORRY I WANT TO I WOULD JUST DISCOURAGE THE USE OF OVERLAPPING FORMS OKAY.

DISCOURAGE OKAY. JUST NOT STRONGLY JUST DISCOURAGE DISCOURAGE OVERLAPPING FORMS. GOT IT. THANK YOU. AS THE AS THE GUY WHO'S TRYING TO TAKE NOTES. ANYTHING ELSE ON THREE. SO WHAT WERE WE ULTIMATELY DECIDE ON TH. I I AGREE WITH ANDREW. I MEAN I'M I'M IT'S A LITTLE JARRING TO ME, BUT BUT IT IT'S PERMITTED HERE AND. I THINK THE LIGHTER COLOR WILL HELP BECAUSE YOU HAVE LIGHTER COLORS IN THE SUB AREA. SO THIS WILL HELP TIE IT IN. BUT I MEAN, I HEAR YOU, IT'S A DIFFERENT STYLE. IT JUST DOESN'T FEEL WELCOMING TO ME. WE HAVE A BROAD. YES ANDREW. WHAT DID YOU SAY? COMFORTABLY UNCOMFORTABLE YES I DID, I LIKE THAT. ANYTHING ELSE ON THREE. SO THEN THAT GIVEN THAT FOUR IS KIND OF A PARK STUFF, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ON FOUR? THE SIDEWALKS ON FOUR. AS PART OF THE ON THE WAIVER. THAT'S THE WAIVER. YEAH NO WAIT FOUR. WE DIDN'T WAIT FOUR IS THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE ON FOUR PARK. YEAH. SORRY. YEAH. IS SOME OF THE PARK LAND. IT LOOKS LIKE THE CITY IS GOING TO OWN THE OTHER PARTS. THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS ARE GOING TO OWN. IS THERE A CLAUSE OF LIKE THE SOME OF THE OTHER COUNTRY CLUB NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE IN 25 OR 30 YEARS, IT COMES BACK TO THE CITY? SO NO, IT'S PERMANENTLY OKAY. WHAT WHAT WAS LIKE THERE'S A LITTLE SECTION. I FORGET WHAT NUMBER IT IS IN THE, RIGHT BY SUB AREA FIVE. THAT'S NOT PART OF THE PARK PLAN. IT'S LIKE A SMALL. RIGHT. THERE'S NO NO ONE POINTER. IS THAT RIGHT HERE? WHAT'S THE THINKING? WHY IS THIS PIECE HOMEOWNER VERSUS PARK? IT'S WHERE OUR MAILBOXES ARE. YEAH. SO WE HAVE A WE HAVE A MAILBOX, A LITTLE PAVILION AND A LITTLE KIND OF, PAUSING AREA, BASICALLY. OKAY, THAT MAKES SENSE. WE JUST KIND OF RAN OUT OF RAN OUT OF ROOM. YEAH YEAH.

AND IT'S A IT'S A GATHERING PLACE. AND EVERYTHING AND. YEAH, THERE WE GO. AND THIS IS SET BACK, PER OUR ZONING A WHILE BACK, IF WE NEED TO DEAL WITH THAT AT THE TIME. OKAY THANK YO.

[02:40:06]

BUT, YOU CAN. YEAH. SO WE THE I THINK WE HAD THREE OPTIONS. SENIOR LIVING, DETACHED, SINGLE FAMILY OR ATTACHED TOWNHOMES. SORRY. AND, THE MARKET SORT OF SHIFTED OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS WHERE SENIOR LIVING WAS NOT THE OPTIMAL USE. TOWNHOMES. WE FELT WE HAD ENOUGH OF THAT.

AND THIS WAS JUST ADDING A NICE VARIETY. I, WE LIKE THE PLAN IS THAT, IT'S A WONDERFUL TREED AREA. AND WHILE WE CAN'T SAVE THEM ALL, IN THE PLANS, YOU'LL SEE WE'VE ACTUALLY SAVED A PRETTY GOOD NUMBER RIGHT IN HERE. SO IT'LL FEEL MATURE EARLY, AND THEN OBVIOUSLY ALL OF THIS BEING PRESERVED, IT KIND OF HAS A GREAT FEEL EARLY. AND IF IT'S NOT, IF IT HASN'T COME UP, THAT SECTION OF ROAD WILL BE PERMEABLE. PAVERS SO IT'S GOING TO, IT'S GOING TO HAVE A BRICK FEEL TO IT. AND THIS WHOLE ROAD, WILL ALSO BE PERMEABLE PAVERS AS WELL. SO IT KIND OF REINFORCES THAT MORE INTIMATE SCALE, WHICH THEN WHEN WE GET TO WAIVERS, IT ALSO RELATES TO WHERE WE'VE IDENTIFIED KIND OF NARROWER SIDEWALKS. ARE YOU REQUIRED TO HAVE THIS STEM BECAUSE THIS IS THE CITY OF COLUMBUS HERE. THAT THAT IS YES. AND YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE THIS STEM. WE OR WE WERE REQUIRED. YES. OH RIGHT. OKAY. SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, WOULD IT MAKE SENSE FOR US TO NOW ACT ON THE UNLESS ANYBODY HAS ANY COMMENTS RELATING TO OTHER ASPECTS OF THAT DON'T THAT ARE NOT THE WAIVER. I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION. ALL RIGHT. THE A COUPLE DIFFERENT DRAWINGS. IT WAS CLEAR IS THE CITY GOING TO OWN THE SIDEWALK OR WOULD THAT BE PART OF THE. YEAH I THINK YEAH. YEAH I CAN SEE WHERE IT KIND OF GOES IN AND OUT OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE AREAS. BUT ANYTHING THAT'S IN THE LIGHTER GREEN YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD OWN. YEAH. SO THIS WILL BE, THIS WILL BE A PUBLIC SIDEWALK. IT WON'T BE PART OF THE. CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. SO WOULD IT WOULD. AND I GUESS I'LL ASK STAFF THIS. WOULD IT MAKE SENSE FOR US TO ACT FIRST ON ON THE PLAN ITSELF, ABSENT THE WAIVERS AND ESSENTIALLY WE ARE ACTING TO RECOMMEND OR NOT RECOMMEND, AS THE CASE MAY BE, BUT ACTUALLY TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE REVISIONS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT.

AND I HAVE I HAVE TEN. SO HOPEFULLY PEOPLE CAN CAN SEE IF I'VE BEEN INACCURATE ACCURATE.

SCRIVENER IS THAT MR. CHAIRMAN, DOES THAT SOUND LIKE IT'S IN ORDER I, I AGREE WITH YOU. THAT WOULD BE IN ORDER. AND I'LL STATE AGAIN AS I'VE SEEN BEFORE, VERY NICE WORK. I MEAN, TO THE EXTENT THAT WE'VE, WE'VE QUIBBLED HERE A LITTLE BIT HOPEFULLY, AND KEPT YOU HERE LATE, IT THIS IS VERY NICE. I'M VERY EXCITED FOR IT. SO SO LET ME THEN MAKE A MOTION, IF I MAY, TO I MOVE THAT THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE, I GUESS THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. IS THAT WHAT I'M. YEAH. THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS SUBMITTED, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING, REVISIONS OR REQUESTED REVISIONS. ONE IS THAT IN SUBAREA ONE, THE RED ROOF COLOR BE ELIMINATED. METAL ROOFS ARE OKAY, AND THERE WILL BE NO MORE THAN THREE COLORS. TWO. AND I THINK THIS ONLY APPLIES TO SUBAREA ONE THAT ALL SYNTHETIC THAT ALL THE SIDING IS SYNTHETI.

THREE FOR, IN BUILDING 26 THAT THE COLOR THE IN THE NATURE OF LITCHFIELD GRAY WITH THE TRIM SHADE BEING DARKER FOR ALSO ON BUILDING 26 THAT THERE BE A REVIEW TO ASSURE THAT THE PROPORTIONS OF THE SCALE OF THE COLUMNS IS THAT RIGHT? MR. COLUMNS. COLUMNS COLUMNS, FRIEZES AND FASCIA, SUBJECT TO STAFF REVIEW. FIVE THAT ON BUILDING 11 AND SIMILAR

[02:45:06]

AND WE'VE NOW CONFIRMED THAT THERE IS NO WALL THERE. YEAH, YEAH. WHERE THE ROADS WHERE THE WHERE THE ROAD GOES. AND FINALLY IN SUBAREA THREE ON THE EAST ELEVATION THAT WE WOULD DISCOURAGE OVERLAPPING FORMS. SO WE HAVE ONE MORE WAY. YEAH. ONE MORE. ALL RIGHT. WELL THEN SOMEBODY, SOMEBODY OTHER THAN ME BETTER BETTER STATED REVIEW THE BACK ELEVATIONS OF SUBAREA NUMBER TWO. TO WITH STAFF APPROVAL. YEAH CONSISTENCY AND COMMON. COMMON HEAD HEIGHT OF WINDOWS AND DOORS. WINDOW DOORS AND ELEVATIONS. COMMON CONSISTENCY AND OR COMMON HEIGHT OF WINDOWS AND DOORS ON THAT ELEVATION. EXACTLY AS MR. MALIK STATED, I COULD NOT STATE IT BETTER THUS END OF MY MOTION. CAN I HAVE? YES, IT'S NOTES, BUT BUT YES, YOU CAN HAVE IT. I'LL SECOND THAT. MR. ITEMS. YES, YES. MR. HENSON. YES, MISS MOORE. YES MR. MALIK. YES MR. BROWN. YES MR. STROLLER. YES MR. DAVY. YES THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AS STATED BY MR. ITEM. THAT PIECE. YEAH. NOW WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THE WAIVERS. SHALL WE TURN TO THE WAIVERS? MR. HENSON, PLEASE, LET'S TURN THE WAIVERS. MR. ITE, WE WERE A, THE HAMLET ZONING TEXT SECTIONS IVC FOUR, BCC THREE, AND V IE2 TO ALLOW PUBLIC SIDEWALKS BE FOUR FEET WIDE IN SOME AREAS. TWO, THREE AND FIVE, WHERE THE TEXT REQUIRES A FIVE FOOT WIDTH. THANK YOU. SO I, I SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT THIS UP EARLIER WHEN I TALKED ABOUT THE PUBLIC STREET E BUT IN PUBLIC STREET BE ONE OF THE CROSS VIEW OF IT SHOWS B1 AS A SIX FOOT SIDEWALK, B2 AS A FIVE FOOT SIDEWALK. AND THEN THERE'S THE INTERSECTING WAIVER FOR FOUR FOOT SIDEWALKS. AND THEY ALL COME TOGETHER THERE IN THAT CURVE. SO I GUESS MY QUESTION I, IS B1 CORRECTLY STATED? IT'S GOING TO BE A SIX FOOT SIDEWALK VERSUS A FIVE FOOT SOFTEN B2? YES. CERTAIN PORTIONS OF IT. AND THEY'D HAVE TO WEAVE IN AND OUT OF THAT. I JUST WANT TO CORRECT ME FOR MY I DON'T THINK THERE'S A FOUR FOOT WAIVER REQUEST FOR B. HOLD ON. SORRY. ON THE ONE PICTURE IT HAD A CIRCLE AROUND. SO THE CIRCLE AROUND IT. SO THIS IS PROBABLY THE OVER MARKING THE PLAN. SO FOUR FOOT SIDEWALKS ARE ALLOWED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. ON PUBLIC PROPERTY. THEY HAVE TO BE

[02:50:05]

YES. OKAY YEP. AND THEN B2 GOES DOWN TO FIVE FOOT WHEN IT GOES AROUND THE CIRCLE OR GOES AROUND THE TURN. OKAY. YEP THE MINIMUM IS FIVE FOOT. AND THE TEXT. YEP. FOR THE PUBLIC SIDEWALKS. YEAH, YEAH. OKAY. I HAVE NO OBJECTIONS TO THE FOUR FOOT. SO I WILL. ONE COMMENT JUST FOR THE BOARD'S PURPOSES, I THINK IN TERMS OF THE STAFF REPORT, THERE WAS A THERE WAS A TYPO THAT OUR THE STANDARDS THERE ON THE FOR THE WAIVERS, THE STAFF USED INCORRECTLY INCLUDED THE WORD CONSTRAINT WHICH WAS IS NOT IN FACT, IN THE PUD CONDITION. THE PUD SUCH AS SUCH LIKE OUR, OUR WAIVER STATUTE USES THE WORD CONDITION. SO WE ARE NOT WE DO NOT HAVE THE TO STRUGGLE WITH THE WORD CONSTRAINT ON ON THIS ONE. I WAS SATISFIED THAT IT WAS AN APPROPRIATE DESIGN OR PATTERN OR DEVELOPMENT. I WAS SATISFIED THAT IT MEANT THE INTENT, I CAN I THINK IT'S MY CONCLUSION.

ALTHOUGH ALTHOUGH I STRUGGLE WITH THE THIRD ONE A LOT, AS AS YOU ALL KNOW THAT THE, THE CONTEXT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT HERE, IS SUCH THAT, THAT IT IS APPROPRIATE AND THEREFORE THAT THAT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THIS IS WORKING AND, AND BECAUSE OF THE OF THE OF THE SETBACK FOR THE BUILDINGS THAT A FIVE FOOT SIDEWALK REALLY WOULD BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT. THEREFORE, IT'S A SITE I FIND A SITE SPECIFIC CONDITION AND THAT RELIEF IS NECESSARY FOR, FOR FAIRNESS IN THIS CASE. AND THERE WAS NOTHING ABOUT THIS THAT STRUCK THAT THAT SEEMED TO TROUBLE MY PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE CONCERNS. ONE OF THESE DAYS, WE'LL GET ONE OF THOSE. I GUESS. OKAY, SO I WAS I WAS CONTENT AS TO WAIVER REQUES, I GUESS IT'S A, A STUDY OUTSIDE BECAUSE I WASN'T SURE WHAT THE TYPICAL RESPONSE WOULD BE LIKE. YOU WOULD NEVER HAVE TWO BIKERS STAY OFF AND YOU COULD GET INVOLVED. YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S. NOW LET'S HAVE MR. MALLOWS AND I GO AT EACH OTHER ON THE BIKE AND SEE WHERE. SO, I THINK I'D LIKE TO HANDLE THESE ONE AT A TIME, MR. HENSON. IS THAT ALL RIGHT? YES, PLEASE, SO I WOULD MOVE THAT THE ARB RECOMMEND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE, WAIVER A AND LET'S SEE, WHERE WAS THERE ANYTHING STAFF WANTED US TO DO ON THAT ONE. NO, I DON'T THINK SO, SO THUS END IS MY MOTION. SECOND. MR. ITEM YES, MR. MALITZ. YES, MISS MOORE. YES. MR. HENSON YES. MR. BROWN YES, MR. STROLLER YES. MR. DAVEY? YES. MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR. THE NEXT WAIVER REQUEST IS FOR WAIVER TO HAMLET ZONING. TEXT SECTION V B TO ALLOW TWO SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES TO FRONTAL NEW ALBANY, CONDIT ROAD AND SUBAREA THREE, WHERE THE TEXT ALLOWS TOWNHOMES TO FRONT ONTO THIS ROADWAY. ANY DISCUSSION? I STILL STRUGGLE WITH THIS. I'M TRYING, BUT I FEEL LIKE IT WOULD BE BETTER TO NOT HAVE THAT ONE HOUSE AT THE PARK. I DON'T KNOW WHO WOULD WANT TO LIVE THERE

[02:55:03]

NO, THAT IS THE ONE THAT, BECAUSE OF THAT, THAT IS THE ONE UNIT THAT'S ALREADY THE PRICES GOING UP. I DON'T KNOW. SO THE OTHER PLACE WE'VE DONE THIS IS I WAS I DON'T KNOW IF THE BOARD EVEN REVIEWED THIS WAS BEFORE MY TIME, BUT OXFORD HAS THE SAME THING. WHEN YOU GO IN THEY PUT THEY PUT THE ONE HOUSE ON THE SIDE TO, TO MAKE ON EACH SIDE. SO YOU CAME IN WITH THE THERE'S JUST THE, THE, THE TRAIL GOES BEHIND IT AND THERE'S A STORMWATER RETENTION. AND THEN IT GOES INTO THE OXFORD PARK. SO THERE'S THAT ONE CASE WE HAVE WHERE THEY JUST HAVE THAT ONE HOUSE SITTING ON THE ONE SIDE TO MAKE IT BALANCED ON THE ENTRANCE. IT'S FRAMING THE ENTRY INTO THIS SUBSECTION. AND I, I UNDERSTAND THE TUG OF WAR. I THINK IT'S BEYOND THE CHARGE OF THIS BOARD TO SPECULATE ON THE MARKETABILITY OF IT. BUT I, I, I THINK IT'S NECESSARY FOR BALANC.

BUT I, I UNDERSTAND THAT IT FEELS LIKE AN ORPHAN ON THAT CORNER. I MIGHT SUGGEST THAT LANDSCAPING PLAY A ROLE IN THAT. IN THAT ONE PARCEL, I THINK SOME KIND OF STRUCTURED SCREENING THAT WOULD DELIBERATELY IDENTIFY THE LINE BETWEEN PARK AND RESIDENCE WOULD BE IMPORTANT AND FAIR TO ALL PARTIES. SO IF WE CAN SOMEHOW GET SOME BUY IN IN AGREEMENT ON THAT, I THINK IT WOULD GO A LONG WAY TOWARD EASING OUR. YEAH THAT'S ACTUALLY IN OUR KIND OF ONGOING MEETINGS WITH MXQ AND KEITH. THAT'S BEEN OKAY. WHAT IS THE BRICK WALL DETAIL THAT'S GOING TO BE HERE AND THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF PUSH AND PULL WHERE WHERE'S THE PUBLIC AND WHERE IS THE PRIVATE, SOME OF THE EARLIER RENDERINGS HAD THE PLAYGROUND FURTHER UP AND THEN THE PLAYGROUND GOT PUSHED BACK. THERE'S BEEN A LITTLE PUSH AND PULL ON KEITH'S VERSION OF THE GROVE NEXT TO THAT BUILDING VERSUS MXPX'S VERSION OF THE GROVE NEXT TO THAT BUILDING. SO THERE ARE I CAN TELL YOU, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF FOCUS ON IT AND SPECIFICALLY HOW IT FRONTS AND BACKS AND ALL THOSE PIECES. SO IT'S THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF SCRUTINY ON THE OXFORD LOCATION, DOES HAVE HEAVY LANDSCAPING BETWEEN IT AND THE HOUSE. SO IMPORTANT. I WOULD SAY IF WE CAN ASSURE THAT THAT IS GIVEN THE SCRUTINY IT DESERVES, IT WOULD RAISE MY COMFORT LEVEL. WE COULD MAKE WE CAN GIVE OUR PUT CONDITION ON OUR RECOMMENDATION. SURE. I JUST WANTED TO VOICE MY OPINION THAT TRACY, YOU'RE NOT ALONE. I IMMEDIATELY CIRCLED IT AND I SAID, IT DOESN'T FEEL RIGHT TO ME AT ALL, YOU HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THEN YOU HAVE A HOUSE THAT'S ON ITS OWN, AND IT ALMOST FEELS LIKE YOU'RE GIVING THIS HOUSE PRIME PARK ACCESS, AND IT'S KIND OF TURNING ITS NOSE TO THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I, I UNDERSTAND THE IDEA OF CREATING THIS PORTAL ENTRY, BUT I DON'T FEEL LIKE IT. I DON'T KNOW, I JUST FEEL LIKE THAT COULD BE MET IN OTHER WAYS. AND IT ALMOST FEELS LIKE THERE SHOULD BE SOMETHING PUBLIC IN THAT SPOT, BUT IT'S GIVEN TO A HOME, AND I JUST WANTED TO. VOICE THAT. YEAH, I THINK CANALETTO, YOU KNOW, THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE A DUPLEX FOR THE ZONING TEXT. SO IT HAS TO BE SOME SORT OF RESIDENTIAL ON THAT CORNER. IT CAN'T BE ALL PARK. I THINK THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO ANYTHING.

YEAH, YEAH, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S SO MANY. THE CHALLENGE IS THEY'VE THEY'VE THEY'VE GIVEN SO MUCH. YEAH. LAND TO PARK. THERE'S LIKE SAY HERE YOU NEED TO HAVE MORE RIGHT. THAT'S THAT'S THE THING THAT THAT I STRUGGLE WITH. YEAH AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT STREET LINES UP. SO THAT IS, THAT'S SE. ANOTHER WAY. LIKE I PUT IT IN PUTTING IT IN MY IN ACCORDING TO THE PUD WAIVER TEXT, I THINK WE'VE GOT TWO MEMBERS WHO HAVE EXPRESSED AT LEAST RESERVATIONS ABOUT WHETHER IT IS AN APPROPRIATE DESIGN OR PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT. I'M FINE. I THINK IT'S A NICE APPLICATION FOR WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE STUCK WITH, AND I AGREE WITH THE THOUGHT OF MAYBE ADDING SOME ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING OR SOME SCREENING TO DEFINE IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER. I I'M GOOD WITH THE APPLICATION. YEAH I LIKE HOW IT FRAMES THE, THE STREET ENTRY. AND IF YOU CAN

[03:00:08]

OH, OH, WHICH WE'RE MOVING TO RECOMMEND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO BE, RECOMMEND. I WOULD MOVE TO RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL OF WAIVER. BE TO ALLOW A TWO TO ALLOW TWO SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES TO FRONT NEW ALBANY, CONDIT ROAD AND SUBAREA THREE, WHERE THE TEXT ONLY ALLOWS TOWNHOME TO FRONT ON THIS ROADWAY. THANK YOU FOR THE AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION. OH AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION OF ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ON THE SOUTH AND EAST PROPERTY LINES OF THAT OF THE PARCEL SOUTH OF THE STREET, TO BE NAMED LATER, UNLESS THAT STREET HAS A NAME.

I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. MR. MULLINS. YES, MR. ITEM? YES, MISS MOORE? NO MR. HINSON. YES MR. BROWN? YES MR. STROLLER? YES MR. DAVEY? NO THE MOTION PASSES WITH FIVE VOTES IN FAVOR WITH THE ADDITIONAL CONDITION THAT ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ON THE SOUTH AND EAST OF THE PROPERTY LINE BE ADDED FACING THE STREET TO BE NAMED FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT VOTED NO. IF YOU WANT TO.

AGAIN, JUST CONFIRM FOR THE RECORD WHY IT WAS A NO. I JUST I THINK IT FEELS IT FEELS ODD. IT DOESN'T FEEL SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH FOR AN ENTRY AND I DON'T LIKE THAT ONE HOUSE BEING ON ITS OWN, BORDERING THE PARK. AND I DON'T FEEL IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THE SOUTH SIDE NEIGHBORING THE PARK. THANK YOU. CALL, MOVING ON TO WAIVER. SEE WHICH IS A WAIVER TO HAMLET ZONING. TEXT SECTION FIVE THREE AND NEW ALBANY, GR, SECTION FIVE TWO D1 TO ALLOW TOWNHOMES AND SUBAREA TWO TO BE 44FT TALL AND THREE AND A HALF STORIES WHERE THERE IS A MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMITATION OF 40FT TALL AND THREE STORIES. SO ON THIS ONE, I WOULD AT LEAST I BIFURCATE THIS BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S REALLY TWO ELEMENTS. THE FIRST ELEMENT IS 44FT TALL AND THE SECOND ELEMENT IS THE THREE AND A HALF STORY. BECAUSE I THINK MAYBE THERE THERE'S A LITTLE BIT THERE'S A SLIGHT IN MY VIEW, THERE'S A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT ANALYTICAL APPROACH TO THEM, SO LET ME HAVING NOW RAISED THAT, LET ME I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE 44FT TALL BECAUSE AGAIN, THE ONE THAT I ALWAYS STRUGGLE WITH IS NUMBER THREE. BE NECESSARY FOR REASONS OF FAIRNESS DUE TO UNUSUAL BUILDING STRUCTURE AND SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS. AND HERE THE SLOPE, THE SLOPE GOING DOWN PRESENTS TO ME THAT WE HAVE WE HAVE A SITE SPECIFIC CONDITION AND AS A

[03:05:05]

SO, SO I GUESS MY THANK YOU AND I GUESS MY QUESTION, THOUGH, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT, IS, IS IT IS IT REQUIRED THAT WE ALLOW THREE AND A HALF STORIES IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE'RE ACCEPTING 44FT, IS THERE A STIPULATION FROM FROM STAFF OR FROM THE OWNERS THAT STIPULATE THAT WE HAVE TO ALSO ALLOW OR CAN WE JUST REMAIN SILENT ON IT AND ALLOW YOU TO INSTALL DORMERS? THEY'RE NOT IT'S NOT OCCUPIED SPACE ANYWAY, CORRECT? YEAH IT'S JUST RIGHT. IT'S THE PROBLEM IS STAFF'S INTERPRETATION OF THIS. AND YOU'RE SAYING STAFF AND DORMERS INTRODUCED THE HALF STORY DEFINITION. I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT OUR CITY ARCHITECT IS THE ONE THAT PUSHED THEM TO ADD DORMERS ONTO IT, BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT THAT HE THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS THE. AND I'M NOT SAYING I OPPOSE THEM, I'M JUST SAYING THAT I HAVE TO FIND ANALYTICALLY FOR ME TO BE INTELLECTUALLY HONEST, THE SLOPE DOESN'T DOESN'T PROVIDE TO ME THE UNUSUAL SITE SPECIFIC CONDITION.

SO SOMETHING ELSE HAS GOT TO DO THAT. MAYBE THE UNUSUAL CONDITION IS, IS THAT WE DISAGREE WITH STAFF'S INTERPRETATION. IN THIS CASE, IN WHICH CASE MAYBE WE MAYBE WE APPROVE IT THAT WAY. BUT IT'S JUST IT'S MORE THE ANALYTIC I MEAN, I LIKE IT. YEAH. FROM MY STANDPOINT. AND I WANT TO APPROVE IT. BUT THE SLOPE DOESN'T GET ME THERE. THAT'S THERE'S NOTHING ABOUT THE SLOPE THAT MAKES ME APPROVE. THREE AND A HALF STORIES IS THE ZONING TO SAY THREE STORIES. THAT'S WHAT'S LIMITING IS. NO, IT'S THE DJI. SO I MEAN I'LL, I'LL POSE IT TO I'LL POSE IT TO YOU GUYS. WHAT WHAT IS HOW DO I GET HOW DO I FIND SOMETHING THAT'S NECESSARY BY. THAT'S NECESSARY FOR REASONS OF FAIRNESS. AND WHAT IS THE UNUSUAL BUILDING STRUCTURE OR SITE SPECIFIC CONDITION HERE THAT THAT GETS ME THERE. I'M PROBABLY GOING TO SHOOT MYSELF IN THE FOOT. I'M NOT SURE I CAN GIVE YOU A CLEAR ONE, BUT ON THE FLIP SIDE, I YOU KNOW, IT'S AN INTERPRETATION. IS IT A DORMER OR IS IT A, YOU KNOW, IT'S A DECORATIVE VENT, YOU KNOW, WHERE'S POTATO TOTS? I DON'T KNOW, LIKE, THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING. SO IT DOESN'T HAVE A WINDOW. IT'S NOT OCCUPIABLE. RIGHT, A CUPOLA IS ALLOWED GOING TO 50FT. IN THEORY, SO IT'S. WE COULD TREAT THIS AS AN APPEAL. AND STAFF'S INTERPRETATION. YEAH, THAT WOULD BE THE FAIRNESS TALK, RIGHT? THAT YOU'RE SEEKING FAIRNESS FROM THEIR INTERPRETATION. YEAH. THE THAT'S A DIFFERENT APPEAL. AND THAT MIGHT HAVE RAMIFICATIONS ELSEWHERE BEYOND THIS. YOU KNOW, THIS SPECIFIC, I KNOW I THINK YOU MAY HAVE TO BE COMFORTABLY UNCOMFORTABLE AGAIN, THAT IS OUR NEXT THROUGH MY T SHIRT. SO I GUESS WHAT I'LL, I SO LET ME I THINK IN THIS CASE IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS, OF THIS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, ALL SINCE I'M THE ONLY ONE WHO REALLY WORRIES ABOUT THIS, I'LL SAY THAT I DO FIND THAT THAT THE REASONS OF FAIRNESS HERE, BECAUSE OF THE OF THE INTERPRETATION OF STAFF, WHICH TO ME IN THIS CONTEXT, IT MAKES SENSE TO US TO HAVE, TO FIND THAT THE THAT THE, THE UNFAIRNESS REQUIREMENT IS MET. YOU BETTER MAKE THE MOTION. IS THAT A MOTION TO APPROVE WAIVER. YEAH. SO IN THAT CASE, I THINK WE CAN I DON'T THINK WE DON'T.

THANKFULLY WE DON'T HAVE TO. ALL RIGHT. SO LET ME MOVE LET ME MOVE ON. LET ME MOVE ON THIS ONE, IF I MAY. ALL RIGHT I MOVE THAT THE ARB RECOMMEND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF

[03:10:04]

MR. ITEM YES. MR. DAVY. YES. MR. MISS MOORE. YES, MR. HENSON. YES MR. MALITZ YES. MR. BROWN YES.

MR. STROLLER, YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR, ON THE CONDITION THAT NO BUILDINGS CAN BE TALLER THAN 44FT, AND THE APPLICANT FORGOES THE 50FT HEIGHT ALLOWANCE.

WAIVER D IS TO NEW ALBANY JR SECTION FIVE TO D, TWO TO ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT THAT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENTRANCES MUST BE TWO FEET ABOVE GRADE. I THINK WE DISCUSSED MOST OF THIS ALREADY SUPERFICIALLY, BUT LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR COMMENTS. THIS WAS THE REMARK I MADE ABOUT POSITIVE SLOPE FROM THE FROM THE BUILDING TOWARD THE RIGHT OF WAY, OR NEGATIVE SLOPE, I GUESS YOU WOULD SAY. BUT, I WOULD OFFER THAT IF WE COULD INCORPORATE THAT RECOMMENDATION INTO THE WAIVER REQUEST, THAT I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF IT. IN ADDITION TO THE TWO STEPS THAT HAVE BEEN AGREED TO. CORRECT? YEAH. AND THE APPLICANT BROUGHT THIS UP TO THE STAFF TO BE NOTED. YEAH. THE TWO STEPS I AGREE WITH, BUT TWO STEPS DO NOT A DIMENSION MAKE. THEY COULD BE THREE INCH STEPS, FIVE INCH STEPS. SIX. WE WANT TO WE WANT TO STATE WHAT THEY NEED TO BE. I DON'T WANT TO PUT THAT CONSTRAINT ON THE APPLICANT BECAUSE THE SITE CONDITIONS WILL MAKE THAT ALMOST AN IMPOSSIBLE THING TO CONFORM TO, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE, THAT GRADE, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE BEST WAY TO, TO WORD THIS THAT, THAT WE RECOMMEND THAT IN LIEU OF THE TWO FOOT REQUIREMENT THAT THE GRADE AT THE PERIMETER OR BASE OR ENTRY OF THE BUILDINGS, WHATEVER WE THINK IS THE RIGHT WORD. SLOPE AWAY FROM THE BUILDING TOWARD THE NEAREST RIGHT OF WAY, PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY TO MAINTAIN A HIGHER ELEVATION AT THE BUILDING WE'RE BUILDING MEETS GRADE VERSUS WHERE SIDEWALK MEETS GRADE. MR. RIGHT. AND I'M STRUGGLING WITH HOW YOU DO WHAT YOU DO. SO HELP ME OUT HERE. WELL, I'M JUST WRITING DOWN WHAT YOU SAY. I'M OVER HERE TRYING TO MAKE A NOTE. WELL I'M LOST WHILE WHILE MR. MALIK IS PAST MY BEDTIME, WHILE MR. MALIK THINKS ABOUT WHAT HE WANTS. REALLY WANTS TO SAY. CAN I POSE AT LEAST ONE MORE POINT HERE? WHICH IS SO IN. I'M GOING TO TAKE STAFF'S. I HAVE NO RECOLLECTION OF A WAIVER FOR THE FOR THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS FOR, BUT I STAFF I'M SURE REMEMBERS CORRECTLY. BUT IN THE OTHER IN THE OTHER INSTANCES WE HAD CASES WHERE WE WHERE WE KNEW AS A MATTER OF THE ZONING THAT IT WAS 55 AND THE STATED THE STATED RATIONALE HERE IS THAT IT YOU KNOW, IT'S WHAT WE WANT TO APPEAL TO THE OLDER, OLDER CROWD. AND SO THE QUESTION IS, ARE WE COMFORTABLE WAVING THIS IN A CONTEXT WHERE THERE'S NO SUCH REQUIREMENT HERE? I MEAN, THIS MAY ALL BE WILD. TEENAGERS PARTYING. AND IF WE'RE OKAY WITH THEM GETTING RID OF THE TWO FOOT, THEN THAT'S FINE. BUT YOU KNOW, WE GAVE IT PREVIOUSLY TO MY SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE, IN CASES WHERE WE KNEW IT WAS 55 AND OLDER, AND IT WAS IT WAS REQUIRED BY ZONING. YEAH. NO, NO, PLEASE SPEAK. SPEAK FOR ME. THIS IS IF YOU GO BACK TO MY PRESENTATION. SORRY TO PUSH YOU

[03:15:03]

IS THE LAST ONE. I'M NOT RACIST. OH, YEAH. THANK YOU. THANKS MR. ITEM. YES MR. STROLLER? YES, YE, MR. HENSON. YES. MR. MALIK. YES, MR. BROWN, YES. MR. DAVID YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT AT LEAST THAT THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO STEPS FROM THE BUILDING TO THE GRADE AND THAT IT SLOPES AWAY FROM THE BUILDING TO THE NEAREST PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. THANK YOU. THE FIFTH WAIVER E HAS TO THE HAMLET ZONING TEXT SECTION ROMAN NUMERAL NUMERAL THREE B2 TO ALLOW NON-RETAIL TENANT SPACES TO BE LARGER THAN 10,000FT■!S IN SIZE WITHIN SUBAREA ONE. WHAT'S THE UNUSUAL BUILDING STRUCTURE OR SITE SPECIFIC CONDITION? SO THIS ONE, HAS GARNERED A LOT OF DISCUSSION AS WE'VE GONE ALONG THROUGH THE INFORMAL REVIEWS, AND I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE WE'RE FACING A MARKET REALITY HERE. AND THE FUNDAMENTAL. LET ME GET

[03:20:01]

[03:25:08]

YOU DON'T HAVE TO CONSIDER IT. I TRIED THAT MR. COUNCILMAN. CONSIDER THIS ANYWAY. WELL, WE COULD, WE COULD, WE COULD, WE COULD SAY WE COULD RECOMMEND TO THE TO THE TO THE WE COULD RECOMMEND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT THEY WE TAKE NO POSITION ON THIS BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THAT WE CAN'T THAT THAT A WAIVER IS NOT APPROPRIATE. I, I STARTED THERE BUT THE REALITY IS THIS THAT IN ORDER FOR WE'VE TAKEN STEPS THIS EVENING TO APPROVE WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED TO US. SO I'LL SPEAK FOR MYSELF, WHETHER IT'S APPROPRIATE AS, AS A BOARD MEMBER. BUT I THINK WE DO HAVE A FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THE BEST POSSIBLE OUTCOME OF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. AND IF WE WERE TO OBJECT TO THE IF WE WERE TO OBJECT TO ALLOWING SPACE, COMMERCIAL OFFICE SPACE TO EXCEED TEN ZERO ZERO ZERO SQUARE FEET, WE'RE PUTTING A LIMITATION ON THE DEVELOPMENT THAT COULD POTENTIALLY FORGET PROFITABILITY. IT COULD LEAD TO POTENTIAL VACANCY. BUT BUT ARE WE ARE WE BASICALLY SUPPLANTING COUNCIL'S JUDGMENT HERE BECAUSE COUNCIL HAS SAID DO IT ONLY IF THERE'S A UNIQUE AND UNUSUAL BUILDING STRUCTURE OR SITE SPECIFIC CONDITION. AND COUNCIL COUNSEL LOOKED AT THIS. I MEAN COUNCIL THE COUNCIL LOOKED AT I.

COUNCIL HAD WAS LOOKING AT SPACES WITH ONE AND TWO STORY BUILDINGS IN IN, IN THE COMMERCIAL AREA. AND BOY, I JUST FEEL LIKE I'M SECOND GUESSING I'M, I'M OVER OVERTURNING COUNCIL GENERALLY IS WHAT I'M WHAT I THINK I'M DOING. I THINK COUNCIL WILL BE OKAY WITH IT BECAUSE I THINK THEY WANT THIS TO GO FORWARD IN WHICH CASE MAYBE WHO CARES WHAT I THINK? BUT THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I COME DOWN. I'M JUST I'M RELUCTANT. I'M RELUCTANT TO STRETCH THIS PROVISION ALL THE WAY OVER TO THINGS EXTERNAL TO WHAT THIS SAYS, BUILDING STRUCTURE OR SITE SPECIFIC CONDITION. BUT AGAIN, I'M, I'M THE SITE IS THE SITE SPECIFIC CONDITION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ABOVE GRADE SPACE AND NOT ON GRADE SPACE BECAUSE OF THE DENSITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT, IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR US TO ALLOW THAT CONDITION BECAUSE OF THE SITE SPECIFIC FACT THAT IT'S NOT. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE DISCOVER CAMPUS, WHERE WE'RE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OFFICE SPACE ON GRADE OR COMMERCIAL SPACE ON GRADE. I MEAN, THAT IS A UNIQUE CONDITION BECAUSE I UNLESS I'M MISTAKEN, ARE THERE ANY CONDITIONS WHERE THIS WOULD APPLY TO AN ON GRADE CONDITION? NOT THAT I CAN THINK OF. I THINK. YEAH. SO I THINK IT'S I THINK THE WHEN WE, I THINK THE KIND OF FEEDBACK WE GOT WAS WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE GROUND FLOOR IS APPROPRIATE AND ACTIVE AND ENERGIZED. THAT'S WHERE WE KIND OF SAID, ALL RIGHT, 80% SEEMS RIGHT BECAUSE 20% GIVES YOU WHETHER IT'S A LOBBY OR THERE'S SOME OTHER PIECE AND IT IS IT'S THE YOU KNOW, WE HAVE FOLKS THAT ARE KIND OF WAITING BECAUSE THEY DON'T REALLY WANT TO TALK TO US UNTIL THEY KNOW HOW THIS SETTLES OUT. AND IN IT'S NOT PROPOSED FOR THE GROUND FLOOR. IT WAS SORT OF A YEAH, IT WAS OUR BEST GUESS. AND, AND IT'S IT IS THE OUTCOME, BUT IT RELATES TO THE UPPER FLOOR. I THINK IT MAKES SENSE FOR US. I'M FINE WITH IT BECAUSE IF THERE IS A VACANCY UP ABOVE, IT'S UP ABOVE. THIS IS A PEDESTRIAN SCALE AREA. SO THE FROM THE LOOKS OF IT, IT'S A BUNCH OF, FACADES LIKE RETAIL SPACE OPENINGS VERSUS A BIG HOME DEPOT OR SOMETHING. SO TO ME, FROM AN ESTHETIC STANDPOINT, I THINK IT MAKES SENSE IT. BUT I WANT TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS. I ALSO FEEL IT'S ALMOST LIKE THE NUMBER ITSELF IS ARBITRARY, BECAUSE ARE WE IS IT GOING TO BE 10,500FT■!S OR 30,000FT■!S? AND I ALSO, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE OVERALL AVAILABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS. SO HOW'S THIS 10,000 NUMBER AFFECT THE OVERALL SQUARE FOOTAGE? YEAH. WHAT IS THE IF YOU DON'T MIND, WHAT IS THE GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF SECOND FLOOR SPACE IN AREA ONE? BALLPARK, 20,000FT. THAT'S THE GROSS TOTAL OF SECOND FLOOR SPACE. TOTAL? TOTAL COMMERCIAL AREA IS 52,052. OKAY, FOR THE ENTIRE THING. AND THEN.

OKAY, ABOUT WHAT'S TOP OF MY HEAD? 18 TO 20 OF THAT IS ON THE SECOND LEVEL. SO WHAT WE'RE

[03:30:04]

YES. SO IT DOESN'T REALLY HELP US BUT IT'S I JUST FIGURED I'D THAT'S I'M INVITING THE BOARD TO PASS THIS OVER. MY OBJECTION IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY. AND THAT'S I'M NOT GOING TO GET THERE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WASN'T A BIG CORPORATE BUILDING THAT'S TAKING UP GROUND.

COMPLETELY AGREE. YEAH, EXACTLY. THE ESTHETIC THAT WE WANT I WOULD SO MAKE A MOTION. SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WAIVER E TO THE HAMLET ZONING TEXT ROMAN NUMERAL THREE B2 TO ALLOW NON-RETAIL TENANT SPACES TO BE LARGER THAN 10,000FT■!S IN SIZE WITHIN SUB AREA ONE SUBJECT TO, NON-RETAIL USES HAVE, TO HAVE A LARGER TENANT SPACE AS LONG AS 80% OF THE GROUND FLOOR MUST BE ACTIVE AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC FOR SALE OR OFFERING OF GOODS AND SERVICES. I SECOND. MR. STROLLER? YES, MISS MOORE? YES, MR. ITEM NO, ON THE GROUNDS THAT, AS STATED IN PREVIOUSLY, THAT THERE IS NO UNUSUAL BUILDING STRUCTURE OR SITE SPECIFIC CONDITION. MR. HENSON YES. MR. MALITZ YES. MR. BROWN NO. WHAT? JOHN SAID. MR. DAVY YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH FIVE VOTES IN FAVOR AND TWO VOTES OPPOSED ON THE CONDITION, AS STATED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

OKAY, SO I HATE TO BRING THIS UP, BUT WE MISSED A CONDITION THAT WAS IN THE STAFF REPORT IN OUR ORIGINAL THING ABOUT THE, ADDRESSING THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS COMMENTS, CAN WE GO BACK AND ADD THAT AS A CONDITION? IS THAT POSSIBLE? WE CAN ALSO JUST MAKE SURE THAT IT'S IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IT IS IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS WELL. SO WE'LL RELY ON THEM. WE'LL GET A BETTER JOB. GOOD CATCH. ALL RIGHT. THANK YO.

ANY OTHER BUSINESS HERE BEFORE THE BOARD? I APPRECIATE THE, ALL THE PRESENTATIONS AND ALL THE HARD WORK. THANK YOU. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THIS. YEAH. WELL DONE. THANK CAN I MAKE A MOTION? I MOVE THAT WE. I MOVED TO ADJOURN SECOND. STAFF WANT TO GIVE US A REPORT ON SOMETHING.

DON'T WE NEED, LIKE A WORKSHOP OR SOMETHING

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.