[ I. Call to order]
          [00:00:08]
          IT'S DEFINITELY COMMISSIONER. I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FOR MONDAY, NOVEMBER 18TH, 2024. CAN YOU HEAR THE ROLL, PLEASE? MR. KIRBY? PRESENT. MR. WALLACE. 
          [III. Action on minutes: October 21, 2024]
PRESENT. MR. SHELL. PRESENT. MISS BRIGGS HERE. MR. LARSON. PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          WILTROUT. PRESENT. ALL VOTING MEMBERS ARE PRESENT. THE COMMISSION HAS A QUORUM. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS TO OUR OCTOBER 21ST MEETING? MINUTES. NONE. NONE FOR ME. I DID ON. PAGE THREE. I THOUGHT THAT THE FIRST TWO QUESTIONS THAT ARE REFLECTED IN THE VA 6008 20, 24 QUESTIONS. I ASKED THOSE QUESTIONS AS OPPOSED TO BRUCE, AND BRUCE ASKED THE THIRD QUESTION THAT'S LISTED. BUT MY RECOLLECTION MAY BE INCORRECT, BUT THAT'S THAT WOULD BE THE CHANGE. I WOULD SUGGEST. I'M HAPPY TO CHECK THE RECORDING. OKAY. ANY OTHER CORRECTIONS TO OUR MOTION FOR THE MINUTES FROM OCTOBER 21ST? I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE OCTOBER 21, 2024 MEETING. DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? OKAY. ROLL, PLEASE. MR. WALLACE? YES. MISS BRIGGS. YES. MR. SHELL. YES. MR. LARSON. YES. MR. KIRBY. YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH FIVE VOTES IN FAVOR OF THE MINUTES, NOTING THE. THAT THE CLERK WILL CONFIRM THE ASKER OF THE QUESTIONS ON PAGE THREE. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA? OKAY. WOULD EVERYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION TONIGHT PLEASE RISE? DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU. THAT WOULD BE A GREAT TIME FOR ALL OF US TO MAKE OUR PHONES SILENT. ITEM FIVE HEARING OF 
          [VI. Cases]
VISITORS FOR ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. DO WE HAVE ANY SUCH VISITORS? HEARING NONE, WE MOVE TO OUR CASES. OUR FIRST CASE IS VARIANCE 61 2024. VARIANCE. RECONSIDERATION REQUEST. CAN WE HEAR FROM STAFF, PLEASE? YES. THANK YOU. SO THIS IS FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE NOTTINGHAM TRAIL SUBDIVISION. AS OUTLINED IN RED HERE. SO THIS HEARING TONIGHT IS WHETHER OR NOT TO GRANT A RECONSIDERATION FOR A VARIANCE THAT WAS HEARD AND DENIED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION BACK IN SEPTEMBER OF THIS YEAR. SO IN SEPTEMBER, THE APPLICATION INCLUDED A REAR YARD SETBACK VARIANCE. SO THERE IS A 29 FOOT REQUIRED MINIMUM SETBACK FOR COVERED PORCHES AND PATIOS AND THINGS LIKE FIREPLACES. SO PREVIOUSLY, THE SETBACK OR I SHOULD SAY PREVIOUSLY THE SETBACK LINE IS SHOWN HERE. AND THE THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL PORCH AND FIREPLACE ENCROACHMENTS. THAT WAS A MAXIMUM OF SIX FEET INTO THE REAR YARD, PROJECTING BEHIND. SO THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS SUBMITTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, INCLUDING A NEW SITE PLAN THAT HAS CHANGED THE CONFIGURATION AND THE AMOUNT OF THE ENCROACHMENT. SO THE NEW REQUEST. SO THIS IS THE SAME 29, SORRY, SAME 29 FOOT SETBACK ALONG THE REAR YARD HERE. BUT NOW THE APPLICANT HAS MOVED THE FIREPLACE SO IT NO LONGER ENCROACHES INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK. AND THE AMOUNT OF THE COVERED PORCH REAR PORCH SPACE HAS BEEN REDUCED FROM ABOUT 2.5FT ON THIS SIDE AND THREE FEET ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE. SO IN ADDITION TO THAT, THEY HAVE ALSO SUBMITTED OTHER INFORMATION FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECONSIDERATION. SO THIS ALSO INCLUDES ADDITIONAL PICTURES THAT WEREN'T PRESENT AT THE 1ST SEPTEMBER HEARING THAT SHOWS THE AMOUNT OF EXISTING LANDSCAPING ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE IN ADDITION TO THE RECONFIGURED REAR YARD SETBACK. WHAT HAS ALSO BEEN SUBMITTED IS A NEIGHBOR LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE PROPERTY THAT IS BEHIND THE APPLICANT'S HOME. SO THIS IS JUST THREE ITEMS THE STAFF REPORT CONTAINS A SERIES OF SERIES OF OTHER THINGS THAT ARE INCLUDED WITH A COVER MEMO, AND EXHIBITS THAT WERE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. SO JUST I GUESS, ONE PART OF THE OVERALL 
          [00:05:01]
LOGISTICS FOR WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS HEARING TONIGHT. SO OUR CITY CODE SAYS THAT ANY BOARD OR COMMISSION THAT HAS DISAPPROVED AN APPLICATION MAY GRANT A RECONSIDERATION REQUEST IF ONE OF THE FOLLOWING IS MET. SO CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OR AN ITEM UNDER CONSIDERATION HAVE SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGED, OR NEW INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE THAT COULD NOT, WITH REASONABLE DILIGENCE, HAVE BEEN PRESENTED AT A PREVIOUS HEARING. SO IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FINDS THAT ONE OF THESE TWO CRITERIA ARE MET. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MOVE TO RECONSIDER THE VARIANCE APPLICATION 61 2024 PURSUANT TO THIS CODE SECTION AND JUST A PROCEDURAL THING, SINCE THIS IS JUST A MOTION TO WHETHER OR NOT TO RECONSIDER THE ACTUAL REHEARING OF THE VARIANCE, APPLICATION ITSELF WILL OCCUR AT THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. AND THAT'S WHY STAFF ALSO RECOMMENDS THAT IF YOU DO DECIDE TO RECONSIDER IT, TO TABLE VARIANCE APPLICATION UNTIL THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND THAT WAY, STAFF CAN NOTIFY NEIGHBORS OF THAT HEARING AND ALSO PROVIDE A FULL STAFF REPORT AND EVALUATION OF THE NEW VARIANCE. REQUEST. THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. I TAKE IT THERE'S NO ENGINEERING. CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, PLEASE? THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU. AS THE STAFF MEMBERS HAVE NOTED NOTED, WE HAVE REVISED THE PLAN. I BELIEVE THE NUMBERS MAY BE JUST A LITTLE BIT IN VARIANCE, BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE MEASUREMENTS, THE VARIANCE THAT I'M REQUESTING IS 2.03FT. INSTEAD OF THE PROPOSED FOUR FEET. I KNOW THAT IT SAYS 2.5 TO 3FT, BUT I THINK THAT'S BECAUSE MY ACCORDING TO MY CONTRACTOR WHO IS HERE, JEFF BOROVITZ, AND HE CAN ADDRESS THIS IF YOU NEED HIM TO. 
          WHENEVER YOU HAVE THE ORIGINAL DRAWING AND THEN YOU MAKE A COPY OF IT, IT STRETCHES THE LINES A LITTLE BIT. SO IT'S NOT REALLY ACCURATE TO USE ONE OF YOUR LITTLE RULERS, YOU KNOW, THAT HAS THE LITTLE LINES ON ALL OF THAT. THAT DOESN'T GIVE YOU A COMPLETELY ACCURATE MEASUREMENT. 
          YOU DOING IT BY A RULER. SO INSTEAD YOU LOOK AT THE FOOT MEASUREMENTS. SO IF YOU DO THAT I'VE ADDRESSED THAT IN MY PRESENTATION. THE MY TOTAL REAR YARD IS 38.97FT, THAT THERE IS A RECESS ON THE HOUSE, BUT THE PORCH WOULD SIT IN THE RECESSED AREA. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 38.97FT. THERE'S A 35 FOOT SPECIAL SETBACK AND THEN SIX FEET MINIMUM. I MEAN, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO GO SIX FEET INTO THAT SETBACK. SO WHEN YOU CALCULATE ALL THOSE NUMBERS THERE, WOULD THE DIFFERENCE IS 2.03FT. AND IF THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT THE MEASUREMENTS OR WHATEVER, I KNOW MR. BOROVITZ WOULD BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS THAT. NOW, LOOKING AT SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS, AS MR. HARVEY NOTICED, MY MAYOR NOTICED I SUBMITTED A LETTER FROM THE PROPERTY OWNERS. THEY WERE THE ONES FOR WHOM THE BENEFIT OF THIS 35 FOOT SETBACK WAS IMPLEMENTED. THAT PROPERTY HAS CHANGED HANDS AND THE CURRENT OWNERS DID WRITE A LETTER SAYING THEY HAVE NO OBJECTION TO A VARIANCE. IN ADDITION, THAT HOUSE IS OVER 200FT FROM MY PROPERTY WITH A TREE LINE, SO IT'S NOT LIKE THERE'S MUCH TO OBSERVE FROM EITHER SIDE. ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT AT THE OTHER HEARING WAS THE OTHER PATIOS ON MY SIDE OF THE STREET. THE LITTLE STRIP OF HOUSES THAT ARE ON MY SIDE OF THE STREET, AND THE PROPERTY THAT'S LOCATED AT 62, 91 CALLOWAY SQUARE WEST, WHICH IS THREE HOUSES EAST OF MY PROPERTY, HAS A TEN BY 12 SCREENED PORCH, ACCORDING TO THE FRANKLIN COUNTY AUDITOR'S WEBSITE. AND I DO HAVE COPIES OF ALL OF THIS INFO I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU. I'D BE HAPPY TO PROVIDE THOSE. WOULD YOU LIKE THEM NOW BEFORE I SPEAK OR AT THE END? KEEP GOING. OKAY, SO THEN THE PROPERTY AT 6303 CALLAWAY SQUARE WEST, WHICH IS IMMEDIATELY EAST OF MY PROPERTY. I'M SORRY. SOUTH. I'M USING THE WRONG DIMENSIONS. THE FIRST ONE. 
          THESE ARE SOUTH OF MY PROPERTY, HAS A NINE BY 12 PATIO. ACCORDING TO THE FRANKLIN COUNTY AUDITOR'S WEBSITE. AND THAT FIRST ONE I SAID IT WAS A PATIO, BUT I THINK I SAID IT WAS A 
          [00:10:03]
PATIO, BUT IT'S A SCREENED PORCH. THE SECOND ONE IS A NINE BY 12 PATIO. THEN THE PROPERTY AT 6315 CALLAWAY SQUARE WEST, WHICH IS IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF MY PROPERTY, HAS A 12 BY 22 PATIO, ACCORDING TO FRANKLIN COUNTY AUDITOR'S WEBSITE. WHEN I CONTRACTED TO BUILD MY HOUSE, I REQUESTED AN ESTIMATE FROM PULTE FOR A PATIO IN MY BACKYARD, AND THEY PROVIDED ME WITH A QUOTE FOR A 12 BY 13.58FT PATIO. I DIDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS OPTION BECAUSE IT WAS A CONCRETE PAD, AND I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE PAVERS, BUT I HAVE COPIES OF THIS REQUEST, AND THE NEIGHBORING PATIOS AND PORCH DIMENSIONS. AND THEN THE FINAL HOUSE ON MY SIDE OF THE OF THE STREET THAT HAS PATIO IS THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6321 CALLAWAY SQUARE WEST. THAT'S TWO HOUSES NORTH OF MY PROPERTY THAT HAS A 12 BY 22 FOOT PATIO AND A COPY OF THE PERMIT WAS ATTACHED TO THE MATERIALS THAT YOU RECEIVED AS EXHIBIT G, AND IT SHOWS THAT THAT PATIO DOES, IN FACT, GO ALMOST TWO FEET INTO THE SETBACK MORE THAN IS ALLOWED. MY POINT IN ALL OF THIS IS BASICALLY JUST TO SAY THAT A 12 FOOT WIDE PATIO APPEARS TO BE PRETTY MUCH STANDARD IN THE NORM, AND NOTTINGHAM TRACE, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I'M REQUESTING. NOW, I KNOW THAT THE COMMISSION AND THE STAFF DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF SHRINKING THE PATIO AS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO A VARIANCE. UNDER DUNCAN, THE QUESTION WOULD BE WHETHER THE PROPERTY OWNER'S PREDICAMENT FEASIBLY CAN BE OBVIATED THROUGH SOME METHOD OTHER THAN A VARIANCE. FEASIBLY IS DEFINED AS POSSIBLE OR PRACTICAL. REDUCING THE PATIO TO A TEN FOOT WIDE IS NOT PRACTICAL OR VIABLE ALTERNATIVE, BECAUSE IT'S NOT SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMMODATE A DINING AREA OF 6 TO 8 PEOPLE OR A WHEELCHAIR. AND IN FACT, MR. BOROVETS, MY CONTRACTOR, PREVIOUSLY TESTIFIED THAT THE WIDTH OF A PORCH AT 12FT IS KIND OF A MINIMUM FOR IT TO BE USABLE SPACE TO PUT FURNITURE AND A TABLE AND CHAIRS ON. THE DUNCAN QUESTION IS, DOES A PROPERTY OWNER ENCOUNTER PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES WHENEVER AN AREA ZONING REQUIREMENT, SUCH AS A SETBACK, UNREASONABLY DEPRIVES HIM OF A PERMITTED USE OF HIS PROPERTY? THE KEY TO THIS IS WHETHER THE AREA ZONING REQUIREMENT, AS APPLIED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER IN QUESTION IS REASONABLE, SO I WANTED TO JUST QUICKLY GO THROUGH THE DUNCAN FACTORS AND HOW I SEE THEM APPLYING TO MY SITUATION. SO THE FIRST ONE IS WHETHER THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WILL YIELD A REASONABLE RETURN, OR WHETHER THERE CAN BE ANY BENEFICIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY WITHOUT THE VARIANCE. WELL, I GUESS I COULD BUILD A SKINNY, NOT VERY USABLE PATIO. I MEAN, THAT IS POSSIBLE, BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM VERY PRACTICAL. MY STANDPOINT. SECOND ONE IS WHETHER THE VARIANCE IS SUBSTANTIAL, AND THE STAFF CONCLUDED AT THE LAST HEARING THAT THE VARIANCE IS NOT SUBSTANTIAL IN THIS CASE. THIRD IS WHETHER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY ALTERED, OR WHETHER ADJOINING PROPERTIES WOULD SUFFER A SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT AS A RESULT OF THE VARIANCE AT THE PREVIOUS HEARING, THE STAFF ALSO FOUND THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE AN ESSENTIAL CHANGE TO THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IN THIS SITUATION THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER WOULD NOT SUFFER A SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT AND IN FACT HAS AFFIRMATIVELY WRITTEN THE LETTER STATING THAT THEY HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE VARIANCE. THE NEXT IS WHETHER THE VARIANCE WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THE DELIVERY OF GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES, WHICH OBVIOUSLY THAT IS NO. FIVE WHETHER THE PROPERTY OWNER PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THE ZONING VARIANCE, AND I KNOW THAT IS ALWAYS PRESUMED, ALTHOUGH I WOULD NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT THIS PARTICULAR SETBACK DOES NOT APPEAR IN OUR DEEDS. THE FINAL PLAT MAP OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. SIX WHETHER THE PROPERTY OWNER'S PREDICAMENT FEASIBLY CAN BE ALLEVIATED THROUGH SOME METHOD OTHER THAN A VARIANCE, AND I'VE ALREADY MADE MY ARGUMENT ABOUT THAT. I DON'T I DON'T THINK SHRINKING THE PORCH TO TEN FEET IS REALLY A PRACTICAL ALTERNATIVE. AND THEN SEVEN, WHETHER THE SPIRIT AND INTENT BEHIND THE ZONING REQUIREMENT WOULD BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE DONE BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE. I WOULD ALSO JUST LIKE TO NOTE THAT TWO OF THE COMMISSIONERS WHO OPPOSED THE VARIANCE AT THE LAST HEARIN, 
          [00:15:05]
SAID THEY DID NOT THINK THAT THE VARIANCE MET THE DUNCAN CRITERIA. AND IN PARTICULAR, THEY DISCUSSED THAT THE CONDITION IS NOT PARTICULAR TO MY HOUSE AND ISN'T A UNIQUE CONDITION. AND I WOULD JUST RESPECTFULLY NOTE THAT THE UNIQUENESS IS NOT A FACTOR IN THE SEVEN DUNCAN CRITERIA THAT I JUST READ. FINALLY, THE RECORDED PLAT MAP INDEED IDENTIFY MY PROPERTY AS LOT 107. THERE'S A DISCREPANCY A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE ZONING REGULATIONS AND THE PLAT MAP, WHICH IN MY ESTIMATION, RAISES POTENTIAL LEGAL QUESTIONS BECAUSE I'M TOLD THAT I DIDN'T REALLY BUY LOT 107, ALTHOUGH THAT'S WHAT MY DEED AND THE PLAT MAP SAY, THAT I BOUGHT LOT 101. IN CLOSING, I BELIEVE THE APPLICATION FOR THE AREA ZONING REQUIREMENT OF A 35 FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK TO MY PROPERTY IS UNREASONABLE AND INEQUITABLE. WHEN I ONLY HAVE A LITTLE OVER 38FT IN THE BACK YARD, I BELIEVE THE SPIRIT AND INTENT BEHIND THE ZONING REQUIREMENT WOULD BE OBSERVED AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE DONE BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE, AND I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE COMMISSION TO GRANT MY VARIANCE APPLICATION AS REVISED AND APPROVE A 12 BY 27.10FT PATIO FOR MY PROPERTY. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME? NONE FOR YOU. 
          QUESTION FOR STAFF. WHERE DID THAT SLIP BACK? GET RECORDED? I'M SORRY. OH, THAT A QUESTION. 
          SO THE SETBACK WAS SET WITH THE ZONING THAT WAS ESTABLISHED. SO IT'S A REAR YARD. SO THE CITY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS SAY THAT ONLY FRONT YARD SETBACKS OR THE BUILD TO LINE ARE RECORDED ON PLATS. ALL OTHER SETBACKS FOR SIDE AND REAR AND FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. LIVE IN A ZONING TEXT. OKAY. MAY I ALSO ADDRESS THAT? GO AHEAD. RESPECTFULLY. THE FINAL PLAT MAP IS THE FINAL LEGAL DOCUMENT THAT SETS OUT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND TO ME, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU HAVE TO GO BY WHAT THAT SAYS. AND IF THAT WERE THE CASE, LOT 107 HAS A 15 FOOT SETBACK. NOW I UNDERSTAND THAT THE STAFF DOESN'T, YOU KNOW, AGREE WITH THAT. BUT MY QUESTION TO THE STAFF WAS HOW WOULD I EVER EVEN KNOW THAT THERE WAS ANY SORT OF A SETBACK LIKE THAT? BECAUSE IF I WERE LOOKING IN ANY OF YOUR DOCUMENTS, I WOULD BE LOOKING FOR LOT 107, NOT LOT 101 AND NOT SOME OBSCURE YOU KNOW. OH, WELL, WE YES, THE PRELIMINARY PLAT MAP HAD MY LOT AS 101, BUT THE FINAL PLAT MAP SAYS 107 AND IT DOES NOT CONTAIN ANYTHING ABOUT THIS 35 FOOT SPECIAL SETBACK. SO IF I MAY APPROACH, CAN I GIVE YOU THESE COPIES OF THE. SURE. MAKE SURE STAFF GETS HIM. YEAH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NOT FOR YOU AT THE MOMENT FOR OUR LEGAL FOLKS, THE CHANGING IN THE NUMBERING IS THAT AN ISSUE HERE? AND I CAN EXPLAIN JUST REAL QUICK WHAT HAPPENED. SO DURING THE REZONING PROCESS WE ALWAYS HAVE A OVERALL SUBDIVISION SITE PLAN THAT'S SUBMITTED. AND SO THAT SHOWS THE GENERAL LAYOUT OF THE LOTS AND THE STREETS. AND IN THIS CASE FOR THIS SUBDIVISION, THERE WERE VARYING REAR YARD SETBACKS BASED ON COMMENTS FROM EXISTING PROPERTY OWNERS OUTSIDE OF THE SUBDIVISION. SO WHEN THE REZONING WAS APPROVED, IT REFERS TO CERTAIN LOT NUMBERS THAT HAVE CERTAIN SETBACKS. AND SO THAT'S A COMMON THING THAT HAPPENS WITH ZONING TEXTS. HOWEVER, WHAT THE DEVELOPER DID IN THIS CASE IS WHEN THEY PLATTED THE LOTS, THEY WENT IN A DIFFERENT ORDER OF NUMBERING THAN THEY DID WITH THE REZONING. SO THE FINAL PLAT THAT HAS ONE LOT NUMBER HAS A DIFFERENT LOT NUMBER AND LOT NUMBER SEQUENCING THAN THE ZONING. AND SO, ACCORDING TO THE FRANKLIN COUNTY AUDITOR'S WEBSITES WITH THE PLATS, THIS IS LOT 107. HOWEVER, IN THE EYES OF THE ZONING CODE AND THE AND THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED WITH THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, THIS IS A DIFFERENT LOT NUMBER. AND SO THAT WAS CAUGHT BY STAFF DURING THE REVIEW OF THIS PERMI. 
          WOULD I COULD I ALSO ADD THAT IF I DID SUBMIT THE ONE NEIGHBORS APPLICATION PERMITTING 
          [00:20:06]
APPLICATION FOR THEIR PATIO, IT'S THAT NEIGHBOR THAT'S TWO HOUSES WEST NORTH OF ME AND IN THEIR SURVEY AND WHAT WAS SUBMITTED, THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT 35FT AND NOTHING IS WRITTEN IN THERE. NOTHING IS EVEN, YOU KNOW, I, I WONDER IF MINE MY APPLICATION WAS FLAGGED BECAUSE I WAS ASKING FOR A COVERED PORCH AND PEOPLE THOUGHT, OH, COVERED PORCH. 
          THAT'S STRUCTURE THAT HAS TO GO THROUGH ZONING VERSUS A PATIO, WHICH APPARENTLY IT DOES GOES THROUGH ZONING. WELL, I MEAN, THIS THE ZONING DID APPROVE THIS. YES. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS IN MY OTHER NEIGHBOR, I'VE LOOKED AT HER APPLICATION. NONE OF THE APPLICATIONS SAY ANYTHING ABOUT A 35 FOOT SETBACK ANYWHERE EXCEPT MINE. WHEN YOU KNOW MY CONTRACTOR PRESENTED IT, HE CAME BACK TO ME AND SAID, OH, THERE'S A 35 FOOT SETBACK HERE. SO I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO WHY IT WAS LOOKED AT IN SOME CASES, BUT NOT IN OTHERS. SO FOR THE OTHER LOT IN QUESTION TO THE NORTH, WE ARE LOOKING INTO THAT. WE DO THINK THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN PERMITTED ERRONEOUSLY. AND SO WE'RE CURRENTLY EVALUATING WHAT THE APPROPRIATE NEXT STEPS ARE. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S MORE THAN ONE OF THESE THAT ARE ENCROACHING, POTENTIALLY ONE ADDITIONAL ONE TO THE NORTH THAT MRS. WILLIS MENTIONED. OKAY. AND QUICK CHECK ON ROBERT'S RULES. IT DOESN'T TAKE A MOTION FROM ONE OF THE MEMBERS THAT CARRIED THE VOTE TO DO. OR CAN ANYONE DO THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION? I BELIEVE ANYBODY ON THE COMMISSION CAN MAKE THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. REALLY, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO COME FROM THE MAJORITY OF. OKAY, BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS AN INDEPENDENT REQUEST AT THIS POINT TO DO THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION ON THIS ONE. OKAY. STEVE, DID YOU SAY THAT THE OTHER THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY IS BEING LOOKED AT? THAT'S RIGHT. IS THAT RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. AND WHAT EXACTLY IS THE REVIEW THAT'S UNDERWAY FOR THAT PROPERTY. SO WE'RE DOUBLE CHECKING TO SEE IF IT INDEED WAS OR IF THAT OPEN PATIO IS MEETING THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OR IF THAT WAS INCORRECTLY PERMITTED BY STAFF FOR CONSTRUCTION. BUT WE ARE LOOKING TO SEE IF IT IS ENCROACHING BY TWO OR SO FEET. AS MISS WILLIS. IF IT IS, IF IT IS ENCROACHING AND IT WAS INCORRECTLY PERMITTED, WHAT WOULD THEN BE THE NEXT STEP BY THE CITY? SO IN THAT CASE, YOU KNOW, SO STAFF IS HUMAN TOO. SO IN THAT CASE WE WOULD NOTIFY THEM OF THAT ERROR AND WE WOULD LET THEM KNOW THAT THEY WOULD NEED A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THAT TO REMAIN, OR THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO REVISE THEIR, THEIR PATIO TO MEET CODE REQUIREMENTS. AND WE'VE CONSIDERED, AS I RECALL, WE'VE CONSIDERED SOME APPLICATIONS LIKE THAT IN THE PAST, CORRECT. I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW WE CAME OUT ON THOSE, YOU KNOW, NOT OFFHAND, BUT I'M PRETTY SURE AT LEAST A FEW OF THOSE WERE GRANTED. BUT I YEAH, I WAS GOING TO SAY, I THINK THAT WAS A CIRCUMSTANCE BEYOND THE APPLICANT'S CONTROL. RIGHT. SO HE SAID YOU COULD DO WHAT THEY DID AT RIGHT. AND THAT I BELIEVE THE COMMISSION RELEASED A MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION AND THOSE ONE OR MORE OF THOSE CASES, SAID THAT IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE DUNCAN REQUIREMENTS WOULD BE MET AND THE VARIANCE WAS APPROVED. THERE COULD BE A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE AN ADJACENT PROPERTY WOULD POTENTIALLY POSSIBLY GET A VARIANCE IN SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES TO WHAT THIS APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR. THAT'S CORRECT. SO I WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON SOMETHING. MR. KIRBY ASKED. HE'S RIGHT ABOUT THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. I JUST CHECKED THAT OUT, BUT OUR OUR RULES DON'T SPECIFY THAT IT HAS TO BE BROUGHT. IT JUST SAYS IT'S ON A MOTION OF THE BOARD FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THE RULES ARE AS SPECIFIC, BUT ROBERT'S RULES WOULD REQUIRE SOMEONE WHO VOTED YES TO MAKE THE MOTION. SO I STAND CORRECTED. STEVE, GOING BACK TO MY QUESTION. DO YOU HAVE A TIMELINE FOR THE REVIEW OF 
          [00:25:06]
THIS SITUATION THAT IS RELATED TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OR NOT ADJACENT, BUT PROXIMAL PROPERTY OWNER? YEAH, THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD CERTAINLY REPORT BACK AT AT THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. OKAY. FOR STAFF, IS IT POSSIBLE WE COULD PUT A NOTE ON FINAL PLAT SINCE THEY CHECK THE ZONING TEXT FOR OTHER SETBACKS? CERTAINLY. COULD WE MAKE THAT A PRACTICE SO THAT WE DON'T? SO THAT WHEN SOMEONE'S LOOKING AT THE FINAL PLAT AND THEY DON'T SEE A LINE ON THERE, THERE IS, AT LEAST IN THE NOTES BLOCK, IF THEY'RE IF THEY'RE READING THE WHOLE FINAL PLAT THAT THERE MAY BE OTHER SETBACKS THAT ARE STATED IN THE ZONING TEXT THAT ARE NOT SHOWN ON THIS DIAGRAM. 
          YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. AND MRS. WILLIS IS CORRECT. IT'S THESE HOMES. SO HERS IS OUTLINED IN RED. IT'S THESE SERIES OF HOMES BEHIND HERE THAT HAVE THE MOST RESTRICTIVE REAR YARD SETBACKS BECAUSE, AS SHE MENTIONED, THE PREVIOUS PROPERTY HERE I THINK WAS THE ZAPATILLAS HAD REQUESTED A LARGER REAR YARD SETBACK FROM THEIR HOME. AND SO THAT WAS GRANTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE TIME. BUT SINCE THEN, THE PROPERTY HAS CHANGED HANDS. AND SHE DOES HAVE THAT LETTER OF SUPPORT. SO HOW MANY? ONE. TWO. THREE. FOUR. SO WE'VE GOT LIKE 7 OR 8. IT'S TEN. TEN OF THOSE. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. NO, 8 OR 9. THEN. YEAH. 9 OR 10 OKAY. TEN. 
          YES. YEAH. CAN WE GET THIS ONE. YES. AND WHAT'S THE SETBACK IN THE 101. WAS THE REQUIREMENT FOR THAT LOT 101 FOUR. I'M SORRY. SAY IT AGAIN. THE SETBACK ON LOT 101. IS IT DIFFERENT THAN LOT 107 FOR THIS REAR. YES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT YES. ALL OF THESE HAVE THAT 35 FOOT REAR YARD SETBACKS AND OTHER AREAS THAT ARE INTERNAL HERE. YOU CAN SEE I THINK IT'S AS LITTLE AS LIKE 10 OR 15FT, WHICH IS TYPICAL. AND THAT'S TRUE IN OTHER PORTIONS AS WELL. AND THAT'S WHERE THAT ONE WOULD BE LOCATED IN ONE OF THOSE SPACES. OKAY. OKAY. DOES ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC HAVE ANY QUESTION OR COMMENT ON THIS? COULD I ASK ONE MORE QUESTION OF STAFF IF TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER ADJACENT PROPERTY AND WE'RE LOOKING INTO THAT FOR POSSIBLE I GUESS STAFF ERROR. COULD WE POTENTIALLY VIEW THE INFORMATION ON THAT ONE BEFORE RULING ON THIS ONE? OH, IF I CAN COMMENT ON THAT, I WAS GOING TO SAY IF WE IF WE ALLOW THE RECONSIDERATION, WE CAN CONTINUE TO TABLE THE RECONSIDERATION UNTIL THAT. THAT'S BECAUSE I DON'T THINK OUR NEXT MEETING POTENTIALLY I MAYBE I DON'T KNOW THE RECONSIDERATION OR THE VARIANCE ITSELF. THE VARIANCE. 
          SO IF I MISSPOKE, BUT IF WE YEAH, WE COULD WE COULD CONTINUE THE CONSIDERATION OF THE VARIANCE ITSELF. YES. AND BECAUSE ALSO BECAUSE OUR NEXT MEETING DATE IS TBD. LIKE I THINK THE DECEMBER 2ND MEETING. WELL, IT WOULD BE THE I MEAN, IT IS THE RECONSIDERATION WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO RECONSIDER IF WE IF WE MOVE TO RECONSIDER, THEN WE'RE RECONSIDERING. RIGHT. 
          SO IF WE'RE RECONSIDERING THE APPLICATION, SAY, AT THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING, BUT THIS REVIEW OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OR PROXIMAL PROPERTY IS NOT COMPLETED. WE COULD JUST TABLE THAT IS WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET AT. SO YEAH. GOT IT. OTHER QUESTIONS ON NO I'M GOOD NOW. THANK YOU. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ON THE RECORD WHICH WAY THE VOTES WENT ON THAT. IT'S IN THE YEAH IT'S IN THE MINUTES FROM TWO I CAN TELL YOU THE THREE NO'S. ONE. YES I MINUTES FROM THAT MEETING. OKAY OKAY. SO THIS IS 62 6061. 
          QUESTION FOR STAFF. SO WOULD ANOTHER WAY TO LOOK AT THIS IS IF THAT NEIGHBOR THAT WAS BEHIND THAT REQUESTED THE LARGER SETBACK IS NO LONGER THERE TO MOVE THE SETBACK LINE IF IT WAS APPROPRIATE. AND THAT WOULD RESOLVE IT TOO, I DON'T KNOW. YES. YEAH. GO AHEAD. HERE. ANY OTHERS MAY HAVE ALSO BEEN HERE WHEN THE ZONING FOR THE PROJECT THAT WOULD TELL YOU WHAT MR. 
          [00:30:03]
BERTELLI, THE GENTLEMAN AND THE FAMILY THAT LIVED IN THAT HOME, WAS VERY VOCAL AND OPPOSED TO THE PROJECT. IT'S MORE THAN ANECDOTAL TO KNOW THAT MR. SABATELLI NOW LIVES IN THE PULTE PROJECT. SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE BOARD TO JUST BE AWARE OF THAT. THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. OKAY, SO A COUPLE FEET HERE, A COUPLEERE. OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS. 
          SO I MOVE TO ACCEPT. DO YOU HAVE PAPERWORK OR DOCUMENTS YOU WANTED US TO SEE. YES. ALL RIGH. 
          THANK YOU. THESE ARE THE FRANKLIN COUNTY AUDITOR WEBSITE. PORCH AND PATIO. SO THE PROPERTY IS ON THE RIGHT SIDE, HAVE FOUR DIFFERENT I'M SORRY, I'M SHORT ON. OKAY. THIS IS THE SAME THING THAT YOU ALSO MY APPLICATION, MY ORIGINAL APPLICATION FOR A PATI. AND YOU KNOW, THE SCHEMATIC OF WHERE IT WOULD BE AT THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY LINES AND ALL THAT, AND THERE WAS NOTHING SAID ABOUT, OH, WE COULDN'T DO THIS BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE IN A SETBACK. OKAY. 
          I GOT A BUNCH OF COPIES OF I THINK IT'S A MOTION. YEAH, I THINK IT'S THE SAME. I'M WAITING FOR A SECOND. OH, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR THAT MOTION. I WAS ABOUT TO ASK FOR IT. WAS THERE A SECOND? NO, WE DIDN'T MOVE. I THOUGHT YOU MOVED. NO, I WAS ABOUT TO. AND THAT'S WHY I. IN THINKING ABOUT THAT, I ASKED FOR THESE. GOTCHA. OKAY. ON THE COPIES EVERYBODY ELSE GOT, CAN I HAVE LIKE, SIX OF THE SIX OF THE SAME THING. YEAH. I'LL, I'LL ALBERTA. ALISON. OKAY. THESE ARE THEY'RE NOT COLLATED. ALL RIGHT. SO I'VE GOT SIX COPIES OF, YOU KNOW, PARTIAL ID THAT ENDS IN TWO, TWO, 9-00. YEAH, YEAH, IT'S DIFFERENT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, SO EVERYONE PULL A PAPER AND SPREAD THESE OUT. YEAH, IT'LL BE THE SAME. SO HERE'S MY. PACKAGE AND, WELL, NO, IT'S THE YOU HAVE MULTIPLE COPIES OF THE SAME THING. AND SO I GOT SIX OF ONE. THEY GOT SIX OF ANOTHER. THEY GOT SIX OF ANOTHER. YOU KNOW IT'S OKAY. YEAH. TAKE ONE AND PASS IT. NO PROBLEM. THAT'S WHAT I WAS DOING. WAS I PASSING THEM DOWN MAKING SURE THE LAST MINUTE. SURE. THAT ONE'S OKAY. 
          WELL HERE'S THE SEVEN SEVEN, SEVEN FOR SOMEBODY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. EXCUSE ME. OKAY, SO LET'S GET PASSED DOWN. OKAY. I'M NOT SURE WHAT'S WHAT HERE. SO WE ALL HAVE NOW THE COPY OF THE PARCEL. THAT'S FOR THE COLONIES. HERE'S ANOTHER DIFFERENT PARCEL THERE. ALL RIGHT. THIS IS STERN. 
          YEAH. SO WE PASSED THOSE ALL THE WAY AROUND. I'VE GOT STERN HERE. THIS IS MINE. THOSE ARE ALL THE STERN'S. OKAY? YEAH. ARE THERE TWO TOTAL OR HOW MANY ARE THERE? HOW MANY DIFFERENT ONES? STERN. 
          IS IT STERN AND VOGEL OR CO? NO, I ALSO HAVE ELLISON. ELLISON. ELLISON WAS SENT DOWN. ELLISON. 
          AND THEN IT SHOULD BE STINSON. ELLISON. STINSON. VOGEL. STERN. AND THEN MY COPY. OKAY, WELL, I THINK THE KEY IS TO GET THIS IN THE RECORD, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO NECESSARILY SEE THESE. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANTED TO HAVE A GLANCE AT A FEW OF THEM. SO THESE ALL SHOW WHAT DO YOU HAVE OVER THERE? I HAVE A COHEN AND VOGEL AND STERN. HERE'S ELLISON. IS THERE ANOTHER ONE? I THOUGHT I THOUGHT I SENT ELLISON DOWN. OKAY, SO FOR THE RECORD, EVERYONE TAKE A LOOK. I DON'T KNOW, I GOT STINSON AND STINSON. HERE'S ELLISON. I'M SO SORRY. NO PROBLEM. MUSICAL PAPER COMING YOUR WAY. WE APPRECIATE ALL YOUR WORK AND RESEARCH. IS THERE A TOTAL OF FOUR? THERE'S FOUR. AND THEN THE PULTE SHEET. GOTCHA. YES, YES. GREAT. I THINK I THINK I THINK CHRISTINA HAS A COPY OF EVERYTHING YOU SUBMITTE. STINSON. VOGEL. SO, FOR THE RECORD, TO GIVE A VERBAL DESCRIPTION OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN SOME CASES, THE PORCH DOESN'T EXTEND ANY FURTHER THAN THE HOUSE. AND IT'S ONLY NINE. THERE'S A NINE BY 12 PORCH, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT DOES NOT EXTEND 
          [00:35:01]
PAST THE HOUSE. THERE'S TWO AT LEAST 12 FOOT PORCHES THAT DO EXTEND PAST THE HOUSE. SO THERE'S A ACCORDING TO THE AUDITOR'S WEBSITE, WHICH PROBABLY ISN'T DEFINITIVE HERE, BUT CLOSE ARE INDICATIVE. OKAY, I MOVE WE ACCEPT THE DOCUMENTS AND THE STAFF REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD, INCLUDING THE ONES THAT WE WERE JUST HANDED FOR. 
          VARIANCE RECONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE 61. DO I HEAR A SECOND ON THE DOCUMENTS MOTION? SECOND IS THAT ANY DISCUSSION ON THE DOCUMENTS MOTION. COULD YOU THE ROLL PLEASE, MR. KIRBY? YES, MR. SHELL? YES. MISS BRIGGS YES, MR. LARSON. YES, MR. WALLACE? YES. MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF ACCEPTING THE DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD, INCLUDING THE FIVE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. OKAY. DO I HEAR A MOTION FOR THE RECONSIDERATION REQUEST? I WILL MOVE TO HEAR A RECONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION VAR-61-2024. BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT, WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. DO I HEAR A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT. OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION? CAN IT ROLL, PLEASE? MISS BRIGGS? YES, MR. SHELL? YES. MR. LARSON. YES. MR. KIRBY? YES, MR. WALLACE. YES. 
          THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF RECONSIDERATION SO THAT PUTS IT BACK ON THE AGENDA. 
          AND THE STAFF REQUEST WAS TO TABLE THAT. YEP. DO WE WANT DO WE NEED TO MOVE TO TABLE IT? YES WE DO, BUT DO WE WANT TO. SO THEY GRANTED THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION AND IT'LL COME BACK. I WAS JUST TELLING YOU THEY GRANTED THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OKAY. AND THEY WILL COME. YOU WILL COME BACK AND PRESENT THIS MOTION AGAIN. SO I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR DILIGENCE WITH THE MOTION TO TABLE, THOUGH. DO WE WANT TO LEAVE IT A LITTLE BIT VAGUE? YES. I WAS SUGGESTING THAT THE MOTION TO TABLE WOULD BE THE FIRST REGULAR MEETING AFTER STAFF COMPLETES THE WORK ON FINDING OUT OTHER ENCROACHMENTS. ALL RIGHT, I'M GOING TO MAKE IT OKAY. I MOVED TO TABLE VARIANCE 61 2024 UNTIL THE REGULAR MEETING. AFTER STAFF COMPLETES THE REQUESTED EVALUATION OF SIMILAR PROPERTIE. 
          DO I HEAR A SECOND? IS THAT MOTION SUFFICIENTLY SPECIFIC? YEAH, I THINK I FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THAT MOTION. YEAH, YEAH. AND IT WELL GIVEN THINGS LIKE NOTIFICATION TIMES ETC. YEAH. 
          OKAY. DID YOU HAVE. I THINK THAT'S GOOD. I THINK WE'RE GOOD WITH THAT. ALL RIGHT I WILL SECOND. YES. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO TABLE CALL THE ROLL PLEASE MR. KIRBY. YES. MR. LARSON YES. MR. SHELL YES, MISS BRIGGS? YES, MR. WALLACE. YES. THE MOTION TO TABLE PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF TABLING UNTIL THE FIRST REGULAR MEETING. AFTER STAFF COMPLETES THE REQUESTED EVALUATION OF SIMILAR PROPERTIES. THANK YOU. TAKES US TO ZONING CHANGE, 7130 .04 ACRES. CAN WE HEAR FROM STAFF, PLEASE? YES. THANK YOU. THIS APPLICATION IS FOR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO REZONE 30.04 ACRES FROM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO INFILL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. ADDITIONALLY, THERE IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AS WELL, AND I WILL BE PRESENTING THESE TWO APPLICATIONS SIMULTANEOUSLY. HERE IS AN OVERALL MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE SITE, WHICH IS GENERALLY SOUTH OF BRANDON ROAD AND NORTH AND WEST OF LAMPTON PARK ROAD. JUST FOR SOME BACKGROUND, HERE IS THE REZONING PROCESS. SHOULD THIS APPLICATION BE APPROVED TONIGHT, THE APPLICANT WOULD THEN GO TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE FIRST READING ON DECEMBER 3RD AND THE SECOND READING ON DECEMBER 17TH. IF APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL, THE APPLICANT MUST COME BACK BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. DUE TO THE PROPOSED REZONING TO INFILL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INCLUDES TWO SUB AREAS SHOWN HERE. SUB AREA ONE, SHOWN IN GREEN, WILL CONSIST OF 29 UNITS AND SUB AREA TWO, SHOWN IN ORANGE, WILL CONSIST OF 11 UNITS. THE SITE WAS PREVIOUSLY PLATTED IN 2021 FOR A 36 LOT SUBDIVISION. 
          HOWEVER, NO LOTS HAVE BEEN SOLD AND NO HOMES HAVE BEEN BUILT. THE APPLICANT IS NOW PROPOSING 40 LOTS. THE ENGAGE NEW ALBANY STRATEGIC PLAN STATES THAT THE GROSS DENSITY IS ONE DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE. THE DENSITY FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT IS 1.33 UNITS AN ACRE. HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT 
          [00:40:03]
COMMITS TO WITHDRAWAL THE ADDITIONAL FOUR UNITS FROM THE HOUSING BANK SUB AREA ONE WILL HAVE THE FOLLOWING SETBACKS. FRONT YARDS OF 20FT, SITE SIDE YARDS OF 15FT AND REAR YARDS OF 25FT. SUB AREA TWO ALLOWS FOR A ZERO LOT LINE DEVELOPMENT SINCE ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ARE PERMITTED. THE PREVIOUSLY THREE PLATTED STREETS WILL REMAIN. HOWEVER, A PORTION OF HEAD OF POND ROAD ADJACENT TO SUB AREA TWO, AS DEPICTED BY THE RED ARROW, WILL BE MODIFIED. THE REPLAT FOR THIS SUBDIVISION WILL PROVIDE FOR THE DEDICATION OF RIGHT OF WAY TO THE CITY, AS NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE THE MODIFIED RIGHT OF WAY, AS WELL AS ANY DEDICATION TO NECESSARY ASSOCIATED EASEMENTS. THERE ARE SIX PROPOSED RESERVES THAT TOTAL 5.7 ACRES. NEW ALBANY'S CODIFIED ORDINANCE REQUIRES 2400FT■!S PER HOME AND 20% OF TOTAL ACRES IN THE SUBDIVISION SHALL BE DEDICATED AS OPEN SPACE. TOTAL OPEN SPACE REQUIRED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT IS 8.2 ACRES. THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO OFFSET THE SHORTAGE OF PARKLAND BY USING THE PARKLAND BANK CREDITS ON RECORD, WITH THE CITY, THE ZONING TEXT STATES. STREET TREES SHALL BE PERMITTED BUT NOT REQUIRED IN SUBAREA TWO. IF TREES ARE PROVIDED IN THE SUB AREA, THE SPACING AND SIZING WILL BE PROVIDED AT THE TIME OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. PARKLAND BUFFERING. LANDSCAPING, OPEN SPACE AND SCREENING WILL ALSO BE EVALUATED AS PART OF THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS WILL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S DESIGN GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS AND THAT ALSO WILL BE EVALUATED AT THE TIME OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GENERALLY CONFORMS OR I'M SORRY. YEAH, THE FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL GENERALLY CONFORM TO THE COUNTRY CLUB STANDARDS. SUB AREA ONE WILL HAVE PARKING ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET AND SUB AREA TWO WILL HAVE PARKING ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET. THIS WILL BE REVIEWED DURING THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE ZONING TEXT PERMITS PUBLIC BRICK SIDEWALKS AND THE EXISTING SIDEWALKS AND LEISURE PATHS ARE PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED TO ACCOMMODATE THE BRICK SIDEWALKS. THAT WILL BE A MINIMUM OF FOUR FEET IN WIDTH. THE REZONING IS GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE RESIDENTIAL LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NEW ALBANY STRATEGIC PLAN. 
          ALTHOUGH THE DENSITY AND THE OPEN SPACE DO NOT MEET CITY REQUIREMENTS. IN THE 1998 PUD PROVIDES FOR HOUSING AND PARKLAND BANK TO OFFSET THESE DEVIATIONS, WHICH HAS BEEN USED FOR OTHER PROJECTS. THE NEW DEVELOPMENT WILL COMPLEMENT THE ESTABLISHED CHARACTER OF THE IMMEDIATE AREA AND MAINTAIN CURRENT CONNECTIVITY. A LIST OF THE CONDITIONS FOR BOTH THE REZONING AND THE PRELIMINARY PLAT CAN BE FOUND AT THE END OF EACH STAFF REPORT, AND I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. SO WE ARE REDOING PASSING SIDEWALK IN FAVOR OF THE BRICK. 
          DO WE LOSE THE LEISURE TRAIL IN PARTS OR. I WASN'T SURE. DO YOU WANT ME TO PULL UP YOUR. YEAH. 
          SO NEIL, CURRENTLY THERE'S AN EIGHT. WELL I'M SORRY. YOU MIGHT REMEMBER THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE. THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE. CAN YOU GO BACK? MAYBE TO THE BIG. YEP. THERE WE GO TO THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE, THERE WAS A REQUEST TO EXTEND THE LEISURE TRAIL WHERE IT TERMINATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF BORMAN GRANT AND BRANDON. BRING IT DOWN SO THE LEISURE TRAIL TODAY EXTENDS THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE THIS. AND CONNECTS BACK TO LANGDON PARK ROAD. WE WERE ALSO ASKED TO EXTEND THE LEISURE TRAIL ALONG THIS SINGLE LOADED ROAD THROUGH THE GOLF COURSE, AND CONNECT INTO THIS POCKET PARK HERE AT THE AT THIS INTERSECTION, THIS LEISURE TRAIL WILL REMAIN THE LEISURE TRAIL ONCE IT HITS. AND I'LL GET INTO THE DETAILS OF THIS IN MY PRESENTATION ONCE IT HITS THE MAIN ENTRANCE HERE, THE NEW MAIN ENTRANCE AT THE NORTHERN EDGE WOULD CHANGE FROM EIGHT FOOT WIDE ASPHALT PATH TO BRICK SIDEWALK ALL THE WAY AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE SITE, AND THEN CONNECT IT BACK INTO THE ASPHALT LEISURE PATH. 
          DOWN HERE. WE DID GO INFORMALLY TO PARKS AND TRAILS AND START TALKING ABOUT THAT, SO THEY'VE HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT I NEED THAT THEY ASK THAT I ANSWER, BUT ON THE SURFACE THEY HAVEN'T APPROVED IT YET. IT HAS TO GO BEFORE THIS BOARD FIRST. ON THE SURFACE, THEY WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT OF THIS MODIFICATION. OKAY. I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD. ALL RIGHT. WERE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE ZONING PART OF IT? WELL, I JUST HAVE A QUICK FOLLOW UP TO THAT. TOM. IS THERE OTHER AREAS CAN YOU REMIND ME IF THERE ARE OTHER AREAS IN THE COUNTRY CLUB COMMUNITY THAT HAVE BRICKS FOR SIDEWALKS? I CAN'T THINK OF ANY QUICK HAS BRICK SIDEWALKS. THERE ARE BRICK 
          [00:45:02]
SIDEWALKS IN EXCUSE ME, ELY CROSSING, PICKETT PLACE AND ASHTON GROVE. SO I THINK THERE ARE A TOTAL OF FOUR EDGE OF WOODS, PICKETT, ELY AND ASHTON. AND WHAT'S THE THEORY BEHIND IT? IS IT MORE OF JUST AN ESTHETIC? IT'S MORE ESTHETICALLY PLEASING. INSTEAD OF THE ASPHALT. SO I CAN CHANGE THAT. YEAH. HERE. HERE'S THE MOUSE. IT WILL JUST GO. IF YOU JUST ROLL IT, IT'LL GO TO THE NEXT ONE. THERE WE GO. SO THIS PLAN ILLUSTRATES THAT, THAT POINT A LITTLE A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO READ, BUT IT IS ESTHETICALLY DRIVEN TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THAT IT WOULD BE A BRICK SIDEWALK. IT WOULD HAVE STREET TREES DIRECTLY BEHIND THE CURB, SEVEN FOOT WIDE TREE LAWN. 
          AND THEN IT WOULD BE A BRICK SIDEWALK WITH, YOU'LL NOTICE THIS. BRICK FENCE AND THIS BRICK FENCE AND GATE DETAIL THAT WILL EXTEND THE LENGTH OF THAT ROAD ON THE ESTATE LOT. SO THAT WOULD HAVE CALLING THE ESTATE LOT SIDE OF THE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THAT EXISTS ALONG WHERE THE WHERE THE ASPHALT PATH IS TODAY. THAT WOULD BE SIDEWALK WITH THAT LOW BRICK PLINTH AND METAL FENCING. THERE ARE A TOTAL OF SIX WHAT I'M CALLING ESTATE LOTS AN ACRE OR LARGER ON THE INSIDE. 
          AND THE IDEA WAS TO KIND OF SET THAT ASIDE WITH A SEPARATE STREET FRONTAGE TREE SIMILAR TO THE RESERVE, PERHAPS IN A SENSE, WITH THE BRICK SIDEWALK AND SOME SOME OF THOSE HAVE LITTLE WALLS WHERE THE BRICK. YES, YES, EXACTLY. THAT'S WHAT YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IT IN THIS PICTURE. 
          YEAH. THAT ONE. JUST TALK TO ME ABOUT THE RESERVE A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEARLY UP HERE IN THE UPPER RIGHT HAND CORNER. I'M SORRY. I THINK THIS WAS ALREADY ADDRESSED. IS THERE A BRICK SIDEWALK ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT OR JUST AROUND THESE LOTS? NO. BOTH SIDES OF THE ROA. 
          THAT'S JUST THE AREA WHERE WE WOULD ELIMINATE THE ASPHALT PATH. OKAY. SO THERE ARE BRICK SIDEWALKS THROUGHOUT. BRICK SIDEWALKS THROUGHOUT. THERE IS A ASPHALT LEISURE PATH ALONG THIS ALONG THE GOLF COURSE SIDE OF THIS CUL DE SAC. OKAY. THAT CUTS THROUGH THE COURSE AND CONNECTS INTO THAT POCKET PARK. AND THAT STAYS. THAT STAYS. OKAY. SO THIS ELIMINATE THE LEISURE TRAIL. 
          THEN WHERE THAT IS. RIGHT. BECAUSE THAT BRICK PATH, THE, THE, THE ASPHALT PATH WOULD BE REPLACED WITH THE SIDEWALK AND THEN IT WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED LEISURE PATH. IT WOULD NOT BE EIGHT FOOT WIDE ASPHALT, IT WOULD BE FOUR FOOT WIDE BRICK. CORRECT. OKAY. SO AGAIN I'VE PRESENTED IT INFORMALLY TO THE PARKS AND TRAILS COMMISSION, THE ONE THAT KIND OF, FOR THE MOST PART OVERSEES THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. AGAIN, STAFF CAN SPEAK TO THIS. ON THE SURFACE. THEY WERE ACCEPTING OF IT. THEY HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT ADA COMPLIANCE. THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT LEGAL PATH CONNECTS INTO THE POCKET PARK AT THE INTERSECTION OF BRANDON AND BACHMAN. GRANT REMAINED, AND THEY HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE TRANSITION FROM ASPHALT PATH TO BRICK SIDEWALK. SHOULD THAT BE A CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT THE PARKS AND TRAILS BOARD APPROVES THE NATURE? IF YOU WAN. WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO QUANTIFY THE PERCENTAGE OF PATH THAT WOULD BE CHANGED FROM ASPHALT TO BRICK FOR US, JUST SO WE COULD PICTURE IT? THE LINEAL FOOTAGE IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING, IF THAT IF THAT MAKES SENSE TO YOU. BUT JUST LIKE, HOW MUCH OF THE HOW MUCH OF THE LEISURE PATH IS GOING TO CHANGE? OH, BOY. I'M GOING TO SAY, GIVE ME A MINUTE HERE. JUST SHY OF A THOUSAND LINEAL FEET. AND THAT IS IN PROPORTION TO HOW MANY LINEAL FEET WOULD BE IN THE PROJECT TOTAL. WELL, GEEZ. OVER 2000FT WERE WERE INSTALLED WHEN WE CAME IN THE LAST TIME BECAUSE AGAIN, IT EXTENDED BEYOND THE BOUNDARIES OF THE SITE. THAT WAS PROBABLY ANOTHER 1000 LINEAL FEET. SO MAYBE HALF OF THE TRAIL WOULD BE CHANGED. ALL RIGHT. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU. IT JUST HELPS ME. SO WOULD IT BE CONDUCIVE TO LIKE BICYCLES OR ROLLER SKATING 
          [00:50:02]
OR IS THAT THE USE BECOME LESS. DESIRABLE FOR THAT KIND OF PATH. SO CAN I CAN I BACK UP. THESE ARE ALL THESE ARE ALL GREAT QUESTIONS. BUT I HATE TO ANSWER THEM IN THE CONTEXT OF JUST THE LEISURE PATH. SURE, THERE IS. I'M GOING TO START FROM THE BEGINNING HERE AND GO THROUGH WHY ARE WE DOING THIS RIGHT? SO AGAIN, SEVERAL YEARS AGO I WAS BEFORE THIS BOARD. THE GROUND WAS ORIGINALLY ZONED FOR 88 LOTS. WE CAME IN AND ZONED IT FOR 36 LOTS, BUILT THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND NEVER RELEASED THE LOTS. THE REASON WHY WE NEVER RELEASED THOSE LOTS IS LOOK THE NEW ALBANY COMPANY IS A SMALL STAFF OF PEOPLE THAT WAS FOCUSED ON DEVELOPMENTS IN THE BUSINESS CAMPUS, MOST NOTABLY INTEL AND ALL OF THE WORK AND THINGS THAT WERE GOING ON OUT THERE. THINGS HAVE CALMED DOWN A BIT. THIS HAS COME BACK AND SAID, GUYS, WE'VE GOT TO GET BACK ON THIS. BUT BEFORE WE DO THAT, LET'S MAKE SURE WE'RE RIGHT. WE DUSTED OFF THE PLANS, LOOK AT LOOKED AT THEM AGAIN, REVISITED THEM, AND NOW HAVE OUR PROPOSAL. WHILE IT'S AN INCREASE OF LOTS FROM 36 TO 40, IT IS A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT OR ELEVATION OF BOTH THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. ON THE SCREEN ARE HIGHLIGHTED FIVE AREAS THAT JUST KIND OF ENCAPSULATE WHAT THE MAJOR CHANGES ARE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF LOTS THAT'S PRIMARILY DRIVEN BY THIS, WHAT WE'RE CALLING SUBAREA TWO DOWN IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SITE, THAT WOULD BE A TOTAL OF TEN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT WOULD BE CLUSTER TYPE HOMES. YOU. THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE, I DISCUSSED HOW IT'S NOT UNLIKE EDGE OF WOODS OR SESSIONS VILLAGE IN BEXLEY. SO THAT'S THAT. IN ADDITION TO ADDING A ADDING A GATE HOUSE DOWN AT THIS ENTRANCE, AGAIN, FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT WERE AT THE PART OF THIS PROCESS WHEN WE REZONE IT A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, THERE WAS LOTS OF DISCUSSION AND CONCERN ABOUT CUT THROUGH TRAFFIC ALONG HEAD OF POND ROAD. AND WHAT CAN WE DO TO NARROW THE ROAD? WHAT CAN WE DO TO MAKE IT NOT FEEL AND ACT LIKE A CUT THROUGH? WE'RE ACTUALLY NOW PROPOSING TO ADD A LOT ADJACENT TO THAT EXISTING BRICK WALL AS WELL. SO THAT'S OUR TOTAL OF 40. I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE INDIVIDUALLY. THIS IS THAT ENTRANCE. THE SOUTHERN ENTRANCE. 
          MY BACK IS AT HEAD OF POND ROAD LOOKING TO THE NORTH. SO THE NEW PLAN INCLUDES A VERY SMALL SINGLE FAMILY LOT JUST BEYOND THAT GATE. THE HOME WOULD BE BETWEEN 1500 AND 2000FT■!S IN SIZE. SMALL, BUT FUNCTION AND FEEL AS IF IT WERE A PRIVATE GATE HOUSE. TOM, LET ME JUST INTERRUPT YOU, BECAUSE I DID HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS BECAUSE IT THAT GATE HOUSE IS GOING TO BE IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN SUBSECTION TWO. RIGHT? THAT IS PART OF SUBSECTION TWO. YES. OR SUB LOT TWO, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO. SO MY CONCERN WAS THAT IN SUB LOT TWO THOUGH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ZERO SETBACKS. THERE'S YOU KNOW THERE'S NO PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT THE GATE HOUSE, WHICH IS GOING TO BE A LOT LIKE A HOUSE BECAUSE I THINK WHEN WE WERE HERE LAST TIME, YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO BE SMALL AND A SMALL FAMILY COULD LIVE IN IT OR, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT I GUESS IN LOOKING AT THIS, IT BOTHERED ME THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT THERE WEREN'T ANY SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OR THE, THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT LITTLE HOUSE WERE GOING TO BE THE SAME AS, YOU KNOW, THE ONES OVER THERE THAT BOTHERED ME. SO WE DID HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW WE DEAL WITH THAT. SO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A HOME ON THAT SITE IS A REAL RIDDLE. RIGHT. SO THERE'S A THERE'S THE GOLF COURSE IS RIGHT BEHIND IT. 
          RIGHT. THE GOLF COURSE IS RIGHT HERE. THERE'S A TEE BOX RIGHT HERE. AND THERE ARE SOME BEAUTIFUL MATURE TREES. BUT THE REASON WHY WE PUT THAT IN CATEGORY TWO IS THAT SUBAREA TWO IS IT NEEDS TO WE NEED TO SOLVE THE RIDDLE TO MAKE SURE THAT IT FITS. AND IT WORKS NOT ONLY RELATED TO TREE PRESERVATION, BUT MAINTAINING THAT GATE, MAINTAINING THE WALL. WHAT DO THE SETBACKS NEED OR WANT TO BE? I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. UNTIL WE DESIGN THE HOME MUCH 
          [00:55:04]
LIKE THAT CUL DE SAC DOWN IN THE CORNER, THE VISION, THE CONCEPT IS. BUT MY CONCERN IS THAT THAT THE GATE HOUSE ISN'T ANYTHING LIKE THE CLUSTER HOMES. ONE OF THESE IS NOT LIKE THE OTHERS. 
          THEY'RE COMPLETELY DISSIMILAR AND BUT YET THE STANDARDS ARE GOING TO THAT ARE GOING TO APPLY TO BOTH ARE THE SAME. AND THAT'S PROBLEMATIC. AND YOU'VE EVEN CONCEDED A MOMENT AGO, IT'S KIND OF A RIDDLE. AND I'M A LITTLE RELUCTANT TO APPROVE A RIDDLE, TO BE HONEST. NOT I DON'T MEAN TO BE FACETIOUS, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? THAT THAT LOOK, THAT THAT'S EXACTLY WHY I NEED TO COME BACK HERE WITH A PLAN THAT ILLUSTRATES WHAT I'M TRYING TO DESCRIBE AS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE. AGAIN, THE IDEA IS SIGNIFICANT ADDITIONAL PLANTINGS, BOTH IN THE FOREGROUND, CLOSER TO LANGDON PARK ROAD, BETWEEN THE BRICK WALL AND THE LEISURE PARK AND BEHIND IT, COMMITTING TO LOOK, I DON'T KNOW, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE COMMITTING TO SETBACKS AND STANDARDS UNTIL WE HAVE SOMETHING TO RESPOND TO, AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT MAKES SENSE, THAT DOESN'T CREATE, THAT ISN'T ONEROUS TO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE THERE, BUT ADDITIVE TO IT. YEAH, I LIKE THE VISION. PART OF ME SAYS THAT THE BY RIGHTS ZONING IS SOMETHING THAT THE HOMEOWNER THEN TAKES A LOOK AT. AND YES, THERE'LL BE AN ARC ON THERE, BUT AS WE JUST SAW THAT AND THEN THE PORCHES GROW AND SOMEONE SAYS, YEAH, I'M IN THE COUNTRY CLUB. I DON'T HAVE A POOL, YOU KNOW, OR AND SO FOR THAT ONE HOUSE ONLY TIGHTENING THAT ONE DOWN, GETTING IT RIGHT. SO WHY HOW IT IS SIMILAR TO THE EDGE OF WOODS NEIGHBORHOOD IS THAT WE WILL NOT JUST SELL A LOT HERE. WE WILL NOT JUST SELL TEN LOTS HERE. WE WILL AGAIN MUCH LIKE EDGE OF WOODS, WE WILL DESIGN THE HOMES, THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOME. YOU WILL BUY A LOT IN A PLAN. YOU MAY END UP BUYING A LOT IN THE HOME YEARS AGO WHEN THE CLUB WAS COUNTRY CLUB COMMUNITIES WERE FIRST DEVELOPED, BOTH BOTTOMLEY CRESCENT AS WELL AS EDGE OF WOODS WERE DONE. THAT WAY. YOU BOUGHT A SHELL RIGHT? THE SAME THING NEEDS TO HAPPEN HERE. WE CAN'T SELL A LOT AND SAY, HERE YOU GO. NOW DESIGN YOUR HOME. IT NEEDS TO BE PREDESIGNED FOR THAT ENTRANCE GATE AND FOR THE TEN LOTS AROUND AROUND THE PERIMETE. THE DETAILS OF THAT ARE WHAT WILL COME BACK BEFORE THIS COMMISSION. AS PART OF THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. REVIEW. DOES THAT HELP ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ALLAY SOME OF YOUR WORK? WE'RE HALFWAY THERE. IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF DOES THE ZONING. AND BECAUSE THIS IS THE ZONING. YES. GIVE ABILITIES OR SOMETHING THERE THAT WE DON'T WANT, THERE IS THE THING I'M WORRIED ABOUT. IF SOMEONE SAYS, WELL, I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO HAVE A DUPLEX RIGHT HERE, AND I'M ALLOWED TO BY MY ZONING, I MEAN, IT MAY NOT FLY BY ARC. I DON'T KNOW THAT. YOU KNOW, I, I APPRECIATE THAT, BUT MY GUT AND MY HISTORY WITH THE CITY IS LET'S NOT RELY ON ARC TO SOLVE THE CITY'S PROBLEMS AS A POTENTIAL SOLUTION. WHAT FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE IS HOW DO YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION OR A RECOMMENDATION? RIGHT? WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS TO COME BACK TO THIS COMMISSION WITH THE DETAILS OF THE CLUSTER. LOTS AND THE DETAILS OF THIS ENTRY GATE HOUS, BUT THEY NEED THE LATITUDE TO BE ABLE TO IMPACT. I DON'T THINK HOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, BUT ITS LOCATION AND SIZE AND IMPACT ON THE ROAD AND GATE AND THE GOLF COURSE, RIGHT? BUT WOULD IT BE MORE APPROPRIATE, JUST AS A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH EVERYTHING AT THAT POINT? THAT'S WHAT I'M SUGGESTING. BUT THE CHAIRMAN IS SAYING, LOOK, THIS IS THE ZONING. YOU'RE APPROVING THE RIGHT TO BE ABLE TO DO IT. WHAT WHAT WOULD BE, I GUESS, IF I CAN SPEAK TO YOU, WHAT WOULD BE THEIR BASIS FOR DENYING IT? WHEN I COME BACK WITH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN? SO I THINK BACK WHEN WE DID THE OXFORD SUBDIVISION, THOSE TWO FRONT LOTS. SO I THINK IT'S A SIMILAR SITUATION WHERE WE WEREN'T SURE WHAT THOSE LOTS WERE GOING TO LOOK LIKE IN PARALLEL TO US 62. AND SO I THINK IT WAS WRITTEN IN THE ZONING TEXT THAT THE 
          [01:00:03]
PLANNING COMMISSION HAD A HAD TO TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE LOTS. YEAH, BUT THAT'S A SIMILAR SITUATION WHERE THERE WAS A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY THERE. AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAD FINAL SAY AT THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO SAY IT HAD TO BE ORIENTED THIS WAY OR THE ARCHITECTURE HAD TO LOOK THAT WAY. YEAH. SO I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN BAKE INTO THE ZONING REGULATIONS TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THOSE THINGS NEED TO BE LOOKED AT AS PART OF THE OVERALL, THE SPECIFICS OF THIS LOT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT. AND AT THE SAME TIME, WITH THE OVERALL SUBDIVISION. AND WITH THAT, THINGS LIKE THE ZERO LOT LINE. OKAY, THAT'S THAT LETS YOU MAKE DUPLEXES OR ATTACHED WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, WORK AS A FACT THAT I DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A SETBACK ON THAT SIDE. SO WE COULD HAVE A COMMON BRICK WALL. DON'T NEED THAT HERE. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY. CAN WE CAN WE TAKE THE, THE PART PORTION OF SUB LOT TWO THAT IT'S GOING TO BE THE LOCATION OF THE GATE HOUSE. AND TAKE IT OUT OF THE MAKE IT ITS OWN SUB AREA AND MAKE IT ITS OWN. YEAH. OKAY. YEAH. SURE. THAT MAKES SENSE. YES. I'LL MAKE IT A JOHNSON. 
          JUST TO ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE COLOR TO THIS, I WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT THAT HOME WILL BE BUILT UP FRONT AND LOGICALLY I DON'T HAVE ANYONE'S COMPLETE ENDORSEMENT ON THIS, BUT BUT MY VISION AND SEVERAL OTHERS ARE THAT THAT WILL BE BUILT. AND THAT'S WHERE IT MAY FUNCTION AS A MODEL HOME. RIGHT. IT'S TALKED ABOUT THAT WITH WITH THE BRICK AND THE SLATE AND ALL OF THE BUILDING STUFF. MATERIAL EXPECTATIONS WILL BE ON THAT. THERE'S A PROCESS FOR A LOT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT WILL HAPPEN, BUT THAT'S A LOGICAL CONCEPT. IN MY MIND, THAT MEANS THAT THAT WILL BE BUILT VERY EARLY ON IN THE PROCESS AND USED TO SELL THE LOTS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THROUGH THE YEARS THAT IT WILL TAKE TO ABSORB THIS, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. YEAH. 
          AT THE 1.5 MILLION AND UP STARTING STARTING NUMBERS THAT TAKE A WHILE AND THEN AND THEN WHAT BECOMES OF THE HOUSE AND THEN YOU SELL IT RIGHT? THEN YOU SELL IT MUCH LIKE, MUCH LIKE WE DID AT I CAME UP WITH. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT YOU D. YOU MIGHT START WITH THAT. SO IT'S ULTIMATELY SOLD AS A SINGLE FAMILY SEPARATE SUB AREA. THAT TO BE DECIDED I WAS THINKING OF. 
          YEAH. HOW ABOUT SOME. YEAH. IT BECOMES SUB AREA THREE. OH. SO SUB AREA THREE TO BE DETERMINED IN FINAL DEVELOPMENT SOMETHING. WELL WE HAVE TO SCALE AND SIZE AND IMPACT TO BE EVALUATED AT THE TIME OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. I THINK THAT YOU'RE RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT WE DID IN THE OXFORD NEIGHBORHOOD. GO AHEAD. YOU WERE ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONSEFORE B WE MOVE TO THE NEXT? YEAH. NO, I THINK WE'VE ADDRESSED THE ISSUES. I HAD WITH THAT, WITH THAT AREA. THAT WAS THE MAIN CONCERN I HAD COMING INTO THIS AREA. YOU WERE DOING A PRESENTATION AND WALKING US THROUGH. GO AHEAD. YEAH. SORRY ABOUT THAT. NO NO NO, PLEASE. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE THE NEXT ITEM IS ON THE SOUTHERN END OF THE. THE EXISTING STORMWATER RETENTION BASIN WILL BE MOVED TO THE WEST. IT WILL BE MADE DEEPER. THERE WILL BE WETLAND PLANTINGS AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE BASIN. THE BOARDWALK. THERE'S AN EXISTING BOARDWALK ON THE SOUTH END. 
          WE'LL ALSO HAVE TO MOVE AS THE RETENTION BASIN IS BEING MOVED. AND THE IDEA IS THAT WE'LL HAVE A PIER ON THAT SOUTHERN EDGE EXTENDING FROM THE BOARDWALK INTO THE BASIN WITH A, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE PAVILION, SORRY, PAVILION, EXACTLY AT THE END OF THAT, WITH A BENCH AND KIND OF A VERY ROMANTIC IDEA. THE SOUTHERN END, KIND OF A LITTLE PROBABLY THE WRONG IDEA. THE FENCING WON'T BE WHITE, BUT A LITTLE TRELLIS WILL BE WHITE. IT'LL HAVE WOOD SHINGLES ON TOP OF IT. 
          YOU CAN SEE THE START OF THE WETLAND PLANTING CONCEPT AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE BASIN. 
          THERE, AS WELL. ON THE NORTHERN END OF THE STORMWATER BASIN, THERE'S A LITTLE BRICK ELLIPTICAL OVERLOOK THAT WILL ALSO BE SIGNIFICANTLY REWORKED. IT'S VERY HEAVY RIGHT NOW WITH THICK BRICK COLUMNS, SOME PRETTY DELICATE METAL HANDRAIL THAT WILL BE EXPANDED. BUT THOSE THICK METAL OR THOSE THICK BRICK COLUMNS WILL BE ELIMINATED AND REDESIGNED. IT WILL BE A 
          [01:05:08]
SIGNIFICANT PLANTING BETWEEN THE ROAD AND THE ELLIPTICAL OVERLOOK AS WELL. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE BRICK SIDEWALK CONCEPT THROUGH HERE, AS WELL AS LITTLE SEATING NODES ALONG THOSE TWO LITTLE WINGS THAT TAKE YOU TO THE TO THE ELLIPTICAL AS WELL. THAT'S A CREST IN THE MIDDLE OF THE OVERLOOK THAT WOULD BE EMBEDDED INTO THE INTO THE BRICK. THE NORTHERN ENTRANCE. I THINK THE LAST TIME WE SPOKE, I TALKED ABOUT HOW CONFUSING IT IS RIGHT NOW FOR THE NORTHERN ENTRANCE. 
          SO THE IDEA AGAIN, THIS IS HOFFMAN GRANT ROAD. THERE IS AN EXISTING GOLF CART CROSSING WITH GRANITE COBBLES IN THE ROAD THAT WILL ALL REMAIN IN ITS EXISTING LOCATION AND CONDITION. RIGHT BEHIND THAT DROP GOLF CART CROSSING ARE TWO LOW ENTRY GATES WITH WHITE WALL POLE FENCE. 
          THOSE WILL BE TORN OUT, ELIMINATED. THE IDEA IS TO CREATE A NEW ENTRANCE MUCH FURTHER SOUTH, AND AGAIN DENSE PLANTINGS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD SO THAT THERE'S A FEELING OF ENTRANCE WHEN YOU ENTER THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE SIZE OF THIS KIND OF ILLUSTRATES THE CONCEPT. 
          THIS IS WHERE YOU WOULD START THE TRANSITION FROM THE USER PATH TO BRICK SIDEWALK, BRICK PIER, BRICK PIER, BRICK SIDEWALK ON THAT SIDE AS WELL SEPARATING THE GOLF CART CROSSING FROM THE REAL FEELING OF ENTRANCE INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK IT'S A SAFETY THING AS AS MUCH AS ANYTHING ELSE. HEY, TOM. YEAH, LOOKING AT THIS WAS ONE OF WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT PARKS AND TRAILS HAD THAT BY TRANSITIONING FROM THE BROAD LEISURE PATH DOWN INTO THE FOUR FOOT SIDEWALK WAS KIND OF RESTRICTING OR SUGGESTING THAT THE COMMUNITY, THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY WASN'T REALLY INVITED INTO THIS, THIS AREA. NO, NO, NOT AT ALL. NOT NOT AT ALL. THE IDEA ISN'T ISN'T FOLKS AREN'T INVITED. THE IDEA IS WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE THIS PLACE FEEL EVEN MORE SPECIAL? RIGHT. I MEAN, THESE ARE ALL PUBLIC ROADS. I THINK AS YOU GO THROUGH THE STAFF REPORT, I'LL GET TO THIS IN A MINUTE. AREAS WHERE WE'LL PULL OUT THE ASPHALT AND PUT IN BRICK, NOT UNLIKE HIGHGROVE AND HIGHGROVE FARMS. THERE ARE BRICK SIDEWALKS IN HYDRO FARMS. IT'S NOT AN UNINVITING PLACE, BUT IT IS A SPECIAL AND UNIQUE PLACE. AND YOU DRIVE BY OR WALK PAST THOSE BRICK PIERS AND YOU KNOW IT. YOU KNOW IT BY THE LANDSCAPE, YOU KNOW IT BY THE STREETSCAPE. YOU KNOW IT BY THE QUALITY OF THE MATERIALS THAT YOU TOUCH AND FEEL. SO THAT THAT WAS THE CONCEPT. IS IT GOING TO IS IT GOING TO IS IT GOING TO TAPER INTO THE IS IT GOING TO TAPER FROM THE WIDE? THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT PARKS AND TRAILS WERE ASKING ABOUT. HOW DO YOU MAKE THAT TRANSITION? AND I'M WORKING THROUGH THOSE ANSWERS AS WELL AS THE ADA REGULATIONS. YEAH. AND THAT WAS WHERE I WAS GOING NEXT THAT THE OPENINGS WHEN YOU GO BETWEEN THE PIERS MIGHT BE WIDER THAN THE ACTUAL PAVED SIDEWALK OR THE BRICK SIDEWALK. SO THAT IT'S NOT INTIMIDATING FOR SOMEONE WHO'S IN A FOUR WHEEL CART. THERE ARE AREAS WHERE WE'VE DONE THAT. AGAIN, IMAGINE THIS. THE AREAS WHERE WE'VE DONE THAT WELL AND AREAS WHERE WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT WELL, AN AREA WHERE WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT WELL IS RIGHT HERE ON MAIN STREET IN LONDON PARK ROAD, WHERE THE TWO BRICK PIERS ARE SO DARN CLOSE IT. YOU FEEL SQUISHED. YEP. 
          DIFFERENT THAN THE BRICK PIERS AND THE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION INTO HIGHGROVE FROM NORTHGATE. 
          THANK YOU. THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT. I WAS TRYING TO MAKE THAT DIMENSION IS CRITICAL. OKAY, I ACTUALLY THINK IT WORKS QUITE WELL TO THE SOUTH THAT HAD A POND, HAD THE SECTION THAT'S BUILT. YEAH. STREET TREES ARE NOT REQUIRED IN SUBAREA TWO, BUT MOST OF THE SUBAREA TWO DIAGRAMS SHOWED LOTS OF TREES. BEAR WITH ME. I'LL GET THERE IN JUST ONE SECOND. CARRY ON. SO WE WENT THROUGH THAT. WENT THROUGH THAT. HERE WE GO. SO THIS THIS IS SUBAREA TWO. THE EDGE OF THE WOODS PIECE. THE IDEA WHEN YOU DRIVE IT NOW IT'S A IT'S A LONG GREEN SPACE. THERE'S A SPECIMEN TREE AT THE END. THE IDEA IS THAT WILL TAKE ALL OF THAT OUT. THIS IS WHERE THE BRICK WOULD OCCUR. AND THE GRANITE CURBS AGAIN, IT'S A QUESTION MARK, THE DETAILS OF WHICH HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE THIS BOARD TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT. BUT THE BASIC CONCEPT IS THAT THAT INSTEAD OF A LANDSCAPE ISLAND, IT ACTUALLY TURNS INTO A PARK. SO IT'S DIVIDED INTO THREE SECTIONS. 
          [01:10:03]
THERE ARE TREES AROUND THE PERIMETER. THIS DIAGRAM DOESN'T SHOW STREET TREES. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S STREET TREES OR NOT. EDGE OF WOODS DOES NOT HAVE STREET TREES. THERE ARE TREES WITHIN THE TWO PARKS IN EDGE OF WOODS. AND FRANKLY, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT ANSWER IS HERE, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO EVALUATE. AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO EVALUATE. IT'S BREAKING THE STANDARD. IT'S DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE DO EVERYWHERE ELSE. THE IDEA ISN'T TO MAKE IT CHEAPER. THE IDEA IS TO MAKE IT LOOK NICER AND CREATING THAT URBAN FORM IS QUITE DIFFICULT. ALL OF THE THINGS THAT YOU DON'T SEE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE THINGS THAT YOU DO. SEE AT THIS, AT THIS STAGE, WHERE ARE THE ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER BOXES? WHERE IS THE GAS CONNECTION? WHERE? WHAT DOES THAT STREET FRONTAGE LOOK LIKE? HOW DO YOU MAKE THAT FEEL? LIKE A PARK RIGHT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S NOT THAT BIG. BUT THIS ISN'T NEW. THIS HAS BEEN SOLVED BEFORE. WE NEED THE FLEXIBILITY TO, TO, TO SOLVE THE RIDDLE, MUCH LIKE THE ENTRANCE, AND COME BACK HERE AND PRESENT TO YOU WHAT THE ANSWER IS. THIS IS NOTHING MORE THAN MASSING DIAGRAMS TO SHOW HOW WE CAN MAKE THIS WORK WITH EITHER TWO CAR OR THREE CAR GARAGES. WHEN WE COME BACK, IT WILL LOOK, I SUSPECT, DIFFERENT THAN THIS. THE BASIC IDEA OF A PARK IN THE MIDDLE THAT FEELS LIKE A VERY SPECIAL PARK, NOT UNLIKE THE PARKS IN EDGE OF WOODS IS THE OBJECTIVE. IT'S NOT PART OF OUR PARKLAND DEDICATION REQUIREMENT. IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK THROUGH WITH THE CITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S ALL CALCULATED PROPERLY. BUT THIS THIS IS THE THIS IS THE VISION IN THAT PARTICULAR TOP PICTURE. SO THE TOP PICTURE IS A DRONE SHOT RIGHT? I'M LOOKING TO THE NORTH AND WEST. SO THAT'S THE ESTATE LOT RIGHT. JUST OFF THE EDGE THERE. THERE'S MY LITTLE BRICK SIDEWALK IN THE LITTLE WALL. RIGHT. THE POND IS UP HERE. THIS IS THE OTHER PERSPECTIVE. SO THIS IS THE ENTRANCE INTO EDGE OF WOODS FROM THE HEAD OF POND ROAD. THIS IS WAY TOO HEAVY AND BLOCKING. WE DON'T WANT TO BLOCK THE VIEW OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FROM THAT ROAD. SO THESE WILL PROBABLY BE OPEN. I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF WORK YET TO BE DONE. THE REASON I'M SHARING THIS WITH YOU IS TO GIVE YOU KIND OF A BASIC UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE'RE GETTING AT AS IT RELATES TO THE PARK, AND IT'S NOT GATED LIKE EDGE OF WOODS. IT'S NOT GATED. NOW, THERE MAY BE FAKE GATES LIKE WE HAVE AT THE ENTRANCE. RIGHT. BUT THIS WILL BE A PUBLICLY DEDICATED ROAD, WILL NOT BE GATED. THAT MAY BE SOME TYPE OF CRUSHED GRANITE. RIGHT. THERE MAY BE SOME THAT IS BENCHES. PARDON ME. I PUT MY POINTER ON THERE. THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE SEEING THE CRUSHED GRANITE IS. YEAH. MAYBE. WOULDN'T THAT BE COOL. ALL RIGHT. MY I DON'T MIND THAT HAVING THERE BUT THEN I WOULD MANDATE THE STREET TREE THE TREES. OH OKAY. IT'S OKAY BY ME IF THE STREET TREES ARE NOT ON THE HOUSE SIDE OF THE STREET IN THIS CASE. BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE BRICK, THE BRICK STREET AND A NON GREEN AS IT'S NOT GROWING, THAT'S NOT GRASS, THAT'S NOT BUSHES, CENTRAL PARK, THEN WE NEED THE TREES ON THE OUTSIDE TO KEEP THIS FROM BEING ONE KILLER. YEAH. THAT YOU KNOW HEAT ISLAND IN THE SUMMER. THOSE TREES WOULD DO IT. YEAH TOTALLY. 
          SO THAT'S NOT GRASS THAT'S IN THIS EXHIBIT, RIGHT? RIGHT. DECOMPOSED GRANITE. THIS IS GRASS. THIS IS GRASS. OKAY. THIS IS SOME TYPE OF WALKING PATH. THAT'S A BOXWOOD HEDGE. THERE'S A FENCE. THERE ARE BENCHES. I'M GOOD WITH HEDGES AND TREES. THERE. BUT GETTING THE CANOPY OUT OVER A LITTLE BIT OVER THE BRICK ROADWAY AND A LITTLE BIT INTO THE PARK SO THAT PEOPLE CAN WALK THERE WITHOUT FEELING LIKE THEY'RE ON 350 FOR TWO, YOU KNOW. YEAH. 25 MINUTES. I WANT TO BE CLEAR. THESE ARE DREAMS AND IMAGES, THE DETAILS OF WHICH THE ONE THING I KNOW FOR CERTAIN IS IT WON'T LOOK LIKE THIS WHEN I COME BACK BEFORE YOU SURE. IT WILL BE A PARK IN THE MIDDLE. 
          HOW IT'S TREATED? WILL WE HAVE STREET TREES ON THE OUTSIDE? MAYBE. I'D LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO NOT DO THAT MUCH LIKE EDGE OF WOODS, BUT THE ONLY WAY WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET AWAY WITH NOT DOING THAT IS A PRETTY WELL THOUGHT OUT STREETSCAPE FRONTAGE IN FRONT OF THOSE HOMES, RIGHT? SO IN EDGE OF WOODS, EACH HOME HAS A DIFFERENT, VERY DETAILED METAL GATE AND EVERY HOME HAS ITS OWN VOCABULARY. IT IS A RECIPE OF STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WORK AND YOU DON'T DRIVE THROUGH THERE AND THINK, HEY, WHERE ARE THE STREET TREES YOU DRIVE 
          [01:15:04]
THROUGH THERE AND THINK, WOW, ISN'T THAT SPECIAL? AND UNIQUE? THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING FOR HER. 
          OKAY, THE REASON WHY I ASK IS THAT IT'S IN THE ZONING TEXT THAT'S BEFORE US TONIGHT. YES. 
          IN THE ZONING TEXT IT SAYS I'M PERMITTED TO NOT DO STREET TREES IN AREA TWO. IN ZONE TWO. YEAH. 
          DOES THIS APPLY TO WHICH THEREFORE APPLIES IT TO THE LITTLE HOUSE ZONE THREE. OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. GREAT. WE ARE ALSO I'M SORRY. WE ARE ALSO THE STREET TREES THAT ARE INSTALLED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ARE AMERICAN HOMES. WE WILL BE REMOVING THOSE STREET TREES TO THE PERIMETER AND REPLACING THE STREET TREES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WITH LARGER, DIFFERENT SPECIES. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'LL BE ELMS OR OAKS. THE SPECIES WILL BE SELECTED BASED ON AVAILABILITY AND QUALITY OF TREE SPECIES. BUT THE AMERICAN ELMS ARE A LITTLE FLAT. WE'RE GOING TO BE PUTTING THEM AS PART OF THE VOCABULARY FOR THE SCREENING FROM THE GOLF COURSE. 
          SO YOU CAN EXPECT THAT TO HAPPEN AS WELL. ONE FINAL COMMENT I TALKED ABOUT MOVING THE POND. 
          THERE WILL BE A SIGNIFICANT REGRADING OF THE SUBDIVISION. THE LOTS TODAY LOOK LIKE ANY OTHER LOT. THEY'RE FILLED WITH ROCKS AND WEEDS AND JUNK THAT WON'T BE THE CASE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. WE'LL ACTUALLY GO IN AND INSTALL TOPSOIL AND SEED SO THAT THESE LOTS LOOK LIKE FINISHED LAWN. NOT A LOT LIKE YOU SEE IN EBRINGTON OR WHAT YOU SEE OUT THERE TODAY. SO IT'S A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT. AN EXPENSIVE IMPROVEMENT THAT WE ARE REALLY EXCITED TO START WORKING ON. WE HAVE JUST SIGNED OUR AGREEMENT WITH AN ARCHITECTURAL FIRM, RAMSEY, YOU'VE HEARD ME TALK ABOUT THEM. THAT WILL BE OUR PARTNER IN DESIGNING THE EDGE OF WOODS NEIGHBORHOOD, AS WELL AS THE GATEHOUSE. AND WE WILL GET STARTED ON THAT HOPEFULLY WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS. OKAY. IS THERE MORE STUFF YOU WANTED TO WALK THROUGH? OKAY. FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION ON THE ZONING PART. OKAY, SO WE HA. ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WITH ANY QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS? IF YOU COME TO THE MIC, GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND ASK YOUR QUESTION AND WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN GET AN ANSWER. I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION ABOUT YOUR THE GATEHOUSE THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF. OH, MA'AM, WE NEED YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. OH, I'M SORRY, MARGARET FERRITER, AND I'M 7489 LAMPTON PARK ROAD. SO RIGHT ACROSS FROM THERE. AND IT IS BEHIND ONE OF THE HOLES. AND WE WALK IT OFTEN AND THERE'S LOTS OF GOLF BALLS. SO IS THAT GOING TO BE CHANGING THE GOLF COURSE THEN? SO THE OBJECTIVE IS NOT TO CHANGE THE GOLF COURSE. WE WOULD NOT MOVE THE HOLE. WE WOULD NOT MAKE THE HOLE SMALLER OR MODIFY IT IN ANY WAY. THERE ARE LOTS OF GOLF BALLS. SO AGAIN I DESCRIBED KIND OF THE DIFFICULTY IN BUILDING THAT THERE. WE THINK IT'S AN ADDITIVE IMPROVEMENT TO THE ENTRANCE SEQUENCE WHEN YOU WHEN YOU ENTER THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          BUT HOW YOU DO IT, THE HEIGHT, THE MASSING, THE PROXIMITY TO GOLF COURSE, THE PROXIMITY TO THE ROAD, THE PROXIMITY TO THE WALL. DOES THE WALL BECOME PART OF THE HOUSE? MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. I DO KNOW THAT WE WILL NOT BE CHANGING THE GOLF COURSE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT HOME. I'M NOT NORMALLY A FAN OF PRIVET HEDGE BECAUSE I OWN ONE, BUT SOMETHING LIKE THAT. MAYBE A DECENT GOLF BALL CATCHER. SO. AND AMERICAN BEACH, IF YOU DON'T TRIM IT DOWN, RETAINS ITS LOW LEVEL BRANCHES. I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION, TOM. WHEN WE WERE HERE BEFORE, WHEN YOU DID THE PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF THIS, I REMEMBER YOU MENTIONING SOMETHING ABOUT SOME SORT OF RECONFIGURATION OF THE POND TO THE NORTH AND SOME SORT OF RECONFIGURATION OF THE WETLAND AREA, OR CAN YOU. YEAH. THANK YOU. I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT THERE'S AN EXISTING WETLAND POND IN THE NORTHERN EDGE OF THE SITE. THERE ARE ACTUALLY SWANS THERE, A NEW BABY SWAN THAT HAS PASSED. HE'S GREAT. HE'S FUN TO WATCH. HE'S IN HIS POND TO. WE WILL DREDGE THAT EXISTING WET. SO IT'S UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE ARMY OR THE EPA FIRST AND FOREMOST. BUT YOU GO OUT THERE AND LOOK AT IT NOW, AND IT HAS NOT BEEN WELL MAINTAINED THROUGH THE YEARS. CATTAILS HAVE OVERTAKEN DEAD TREES IN THE MIDDLE OF IT. WATER LILIES HAVE 
          [01:20:08]
OVERTAKEN IT. SO WE WILL WORK WITH THOSE REGULATING AGENCIES ALONG WITH FEMA, TO GO IN AND DREDGE IT, REPLANT AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THAT POND. WE WON'T BE EXPANDING IT OR SHRINKING THE SIZE OF IT, BUT TRYING TO IMPACT IT ESTHETICALLY, GIVEN THE SAFEGUARDS THAT ARE IN PLACE BY THOSE TWO AGENCIES. BUT IT WILL BE IF WE'RE IF WE'RE SUCCESSFUL, IT'LL BE SIGNIFICANT CHANGE. 
          CATTAILS ELIMINATED, WATER LILIES THINNED OUT AND REPLANTING AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE OF THE BASIN ON THE GULF SIDE, GOLF COURSE SIDE OR THE PROPERTY SIDE. BOTH. THE WHOLE THE ENTIRE TIME. OKAY. THANK YO. DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? OH, I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT I THOUGHT I SAW YOU WAS ABOUT TO STAND UP AND TOM STOOD UP. ALL RIGHT. DID WE COVER EVERYTHING FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT ON THIS ALREADY? OKAY, SO. I HAVE TWO ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS. OKAY, SO I'VE GOT. PARKS AND TRAILS APPROVED. REMOVAL OF THE TRAIL IN THE SIDEWALK. ONE WAS IT PARKS AND TRAIL APPROVED. THE REMOVAL OF THE OF THE ASPHALT LEISURE TRAIL. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAD. PARKS AND TRAILS APPROVE. BRICK SIDEWALK AND TRAIL LOCATIONS AND CONNECTIONS. I LIKE YOURS BETTER. OKAY. AND WE HAD AT THE GATEHOUSE. IT WAS A SEPARATE SUB AREA. THIS WILL BE THE FIRST I HAD. THE SUB AREA TWO IS NOT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE AREA WHERE THE GATEHOUSE IS GOING TO BE. IT'S GOING TO BE RELABELED SUB AREA THREE AND THIS AND THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR SETBACKS LOCATIONS. ET CETERA. ARE GOING TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE PLAN. MUCH BETTER ABOUT THAT. ALL RIGHT OKAY. WE'RE READY FOR MOTION. I'LL MAKE I JUST OH YEAH. WE GOT TO DO WORKING ON WORKING MY WAY THROUGH AND CHECKING OTHER PEOPLE'S LISTS. 
          I'M GOOD NOW. THANK YOU. OKAY. I'M GOOD. THANK YOU. OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING PARTICULAR TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAT? DO ANY OF THESE CONDITIONS NEED TO BE MAD? CONDITIONS TO THE. TO THE ANY OF THE CONDITIONS WE'RE PUTTING ON THE ZONING AMENDMENT NEED TO BE PUT IN THE PLAT. I'M JUST ASKING. I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T ACTUALLY WE'RE GOOD. OKAY. YEAH. I DON'T THINK THE CONDITIONS HAVE TO BE ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT. JUST REZONING. YEP. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO LET ME DO THE MAGIC OF TRIVIA. I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD FOR ZONING CHANGE. 71 2024. DO I HEAR A SECOND ON THE DOCUMENTS? I'LL SECOND IT. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE DOCUMENTS? CAN YOU THE ROLL, PLEASE? MR. KIRBY? YES, MR. LARSON? YES, MISS BRIGGS? YES, MR. WALLACE? YES, MR. SHELL. YES. MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF ADMITTING THE DOCUMENT. I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT. I WAS GOING TO RUN THE DOCKS ON BOTH FIRST. GOT IT. MAKES SENSE. OKAY. OH, THAT'S FOR MY PLAT 76. I THINK 76 2024, 2024. DO I HEAR A SECOND ON THE DOCUMENTS FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT? I'LL SECOND THAT. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION FOR THE DOCUMENTS? CAN I HAVE THE ROLL, PLEASE, MR. KIRBY? YES, MR. SHELL? YES, MR. LARSON. YES, MISS BRIGGS. YES, MR. WALLACE? YES. MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF ADMITTING THE DOCUMENTS. DO A MOTION ON THE ZONING CHANGE. I MOVED TO APPROVE REZONING, PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION ZC 71 2024, BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT, WITH THE FOUR CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT PLUS TWO ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS. CONDITION FIVE THAT THE PARKS AND TRAILS BOARD WILL APPROVE THE BRICK SIDEWALK AND LEISURE TRAIL LOCATIONS AND CONNECTIONS. 
          IS THAT CLEAR AND ADDITIONAL CONDITION NUMBER SIX, THAT SUBAREA TWO WILL NOT INCLUDE THE AREA WHERE THE GATEHOUSE IS TO BE LOCATED. THIS AREA IS GOING TO BE RELABELED AS SUBAREA THREE, AND THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR SETBACKS, LOCATIONS, ETC. RELATING TO THIS NEW SUBAREA THREE WILL BE ADDRESSED AT FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. I'LL SECOND THAT. IS THAT CLEAR? 
          [01:25:10]
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEAR THE ROLL, PLEASE, MR. WALLACE? YES, MR. KIRBY? YES, MISS BRIGGS? YES, MR. LARSEN? YES, MR. SHELL. YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE ZONING, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT AND TWO ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS. CONDITION NUMBER FIVE, THAT THE PARKS AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD APPROVED THE BRICK SIDEWALK AND LEISURE TRAILS AND CONDITION SIX. THAT SUBAREA TWO DOES NOT INCLUDE THE GATEHOUSE. THE GATEHOUSE WILL BE SUBAREA THREE. AND SPECIFICATIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR SETBACKS WILL BE ADDRESSED AT FINAL DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO CLOSE ENOUGH TO YOUR MOTION ON PRELIMINARY PLAT 76. I MOVE TO APPROVE APPLICATION PL 76 2024 BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT, THAT'S ALL SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. SECOND, I'LL SECOND THAT. OKAY. BEFORE I CALL THAT, WAS THERE ANY ENGINEERING WE NEEDED TO HEAR ABOUT THAT I DID NOT CALL FOR NONE FOR THE ZONING AND FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT. JUST WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT TO GET SOME EASEMENT LANGUAGE IN REGARDS TO THE LANDSCAPING EASEMENTS. MAKE SURE ENGINEERING IS ON THE RIGHT PLANT. CITY ENGINEER COMMENTS ADDRESSED. SUBJECT STAFF APPROVAL. SO WE'VE GOT YOU COVERED. OKAY, SO IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE PLAT? THANK YOU. CAN WE ROLL PLEASE? MR. WALLACE? YES. MR. SHELL. YES. MR. LARSON? YES. MISS BRIGGS. 
          YES. MR. KIRBY. YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT. I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THIS WHEN IT COMES BACK. 
          THANKS, TOM. THAT BRINGS US TO FINAL PLAT, 85 COURTYARDS. HAINES CREEK. CAN WE HEAR FROM STAFF, PLEASE? YES. THANK YOU. SO THIS APPLICATION IS FOR FINAL PLAT, AS YOU MENTIONED, FOR PHASE ONE OF THE COURTYARDS AT HAINES CREEK SUBDIVISION, WHICH IS LOCATED HERE AS OUTLINED IN RED. PRETTY SURE EVERYONE KNOWS WHERE THIS IS AT, BUT JUST FOR THE FOLKS AT HOME, THIS HERE ON THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE IS GENERALLY WHERE THE WHERE THE COUNTY LINE IS. THIS IS JUDGE STREET HERE, AND THIS IS THE TIDEWATER SUBDIVISION OVER HERE ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SCREEN. 
          THIS PHASE ONE PLAT INCLUDES 46 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, SIX RESERVES AND SEVEN NEW STREETS. THE SUBDIVISION, AS A REMINDER, WILL BE ACCESSED OFF THE STREET HERE AS WELL AS HERE. A COUPLE OF NOTES FROM THE STAFF REPORT. JUST BETWEEN WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT IN THIS WHEN THE STAFF REPORT WAS PUBLISHED AND THIS MEETING. SO IN LIGHT OF SOME OF THE COMMENTS MADE ON THE PLAT FOR NOTTINGHAM TRAILS EARLIER DURING OUR MEETING TODAY, I DID GO BACK AND DOUBLE CHECK THAT ALL THE LOT NUMBERS ON THE PLAT ARE THE SAME AS THE LOT NUMBERS AS THEY WERE SHOWN IN THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. AND THEN CONDITION NUMBER TWO IN YOUR STAFF REPORT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED, WHICH IS THAT EVIDENCE OF ANY PERMITS RECEIVED FROM THE OHIO EPA SHALL BE PROVIDED TO CITY STAFF. THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE THOSE BETWEEN THE TIME OF THE STAFF REPORT WAS PUBLISHED IN THE MEETING. I'LL LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK ABOUT THIS, BUT THERE WAS THEY NOTICED THAT THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE IN A SMALL CALCULATION ERROR, AND THE RESERVE NUMBER FOR THE SUBDIVISION. SO THE NUMBER IN YOUR STAFF REPORT IS SLIGHTLY LOWER THAN THE ACTUAL AMOUNT OF PARKLAND THAT'S BEING DEDICATED AS PART OF THIS PLAT. I'LL LET THEM TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE. AND THEN THEY DID MENTION THERE'S A CONDITION IN THE STAFF REPORT ABOUT THE APPRAISAL FOR THE FEE IN LIEU AMOUNT FOR THE OPEN SPACE. INITIALLY WHEN THE PROJECT WENT THROUGH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN STAGE, THEY INITIALLY THOUGHT THEY WOULD HAVE A DEFICIT OF ONE ACRE OF OPEN SPACE FOR THE PROJECT. AND THEY'VE SINCE REDUCED THAT THROUGH SOME REDESIGN OF THEIR STORMWATER BASINS TO 10TH OF AN ACRE, WHICH IS GREAT. I'LL LET THEM TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THAT. WHERE THE WHERE THOSE SHRINKS WERE MADE IN THE PROJECT. AND THEN OVERALL, THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. 
          THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARD EARLIER THIS YEAR, AS WELL AS THE APPROVED FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. LET ME DO ENGINEERING FIRST. SO WE RECOMMEND THAT THE EXCUSE ME APPLICANT HAVE THE PLAT REVIEWED BY THE FRANKLIN COUNTY ENGINEER'S OFFICE AND HAVE A SUMMARY OF THOSE COMMENTS AND THE DISPOSITION OF COMMENTS FOR OUR FILES AND SHEET. TWO OF THE PLATTE RIVER REFERS TO A MAY 2024 FLOODPLAIN STUDY AND, IF 
          [01:30:05]
AVAILABLE, PLEASE LABEL THE MOST CURRENT FIRM PANEL NUMBER ON THE SHEET. CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT. PATRICIA BROWN WITH EMH AND T 5500 NEW ALBANY ROAD, COLUMBUS, OHIO. 
          ADDRESSING THE ENGINEERING COMMENTS FIRST. THE FLOODPLAIN DOES HAVE A NOTE ON SHEET THREE FOR THE FLOODPLAIN FIRM PANEL. SO ALREADY TAKEN CARE OF AND WE ABSOLUTELY WILL SUBMIT TO THE FRANKLIN COUNTY MAP ROOM TO GET THEIR COMMENTS AND ADDRESS ALL THAT NOTE. NO BIG DEAL. AS FAR AS THE RESERVE ACREAGE THAT WE DID FIND JUST THIS MORNING, ACTUALLY A DISCREPANCY IN THE RESERVE ACREAGE LISTED IN THE ACREAGE BREAKDOWN ON SHEET THREE. IT IS ACTUALLY 14.52 ACRES IN THE RESERVE. INADVERTENTLY, WHEN THE NUMBERS WERE TALLIED, THERE ARE THREE VERY SMALL RESERVES. RESERVES F, ONE, G AND I. THEY JUST DIDN'T GET ADDED INTO THE NUMBERS. OUR APOLOGIES. IT WILL BE CORRECTED. AND ACTUALLY ALREADY HAS BEEN. WE'VE SUBMITTED IT TO CITY STAFF THAT IS ACTUALLY ALREADY UPDATED IN THE FILES, BUT WANTED TO MAKE SURE FOR TRANSPARENCY THAT WE BROUGHT IT UP NOW. THE OTHER ITEM THAT I DO WANT TO ADDRESS IS WHEN WE WERE WORKING THROUGH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WE DID HAVE A DEFICIENCY OF THE PARKLAND DEDICATION. WE WERE DEFICIENT ONE ACRE AND THIS WAS AT THE TIME OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE STORMWATER DESIGNS AND ALL OF THE FULL ENGINEERING HAD NOT BEEN COMPLETED AT THAT TIME. THE CITY OF NEW ALBANY, OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, YOUR REGULATIONS DON'T ALLOW FOR STORMWATER FACILITIES TO BE LOCATED OR TO BE COUNTED TOWARDS YOUR OPEN SPACE. SO WHEN WE DO THOSE CALCULATIONS, WE ARE GIVING AN ESTIMATE TO OUR BEST ABILITY. AT THAT POINT, WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THE FINAL ENGINEERING OVER THE FOLLOWING MONTHS. WE WERE ABLE TO REFINE THOSE NUMBERS AND WE ACTUALLY ARE ONLY ONE TENTH OF AN ACRE IN DEFICIT NOW, WHICH IS MUCH CLOSER TO WHAT PLANNING COMMISSION OBVIOUSLY HAD ASKED AND COUNCIL HAD ASKED US TO DO SO IN EVERY EFFORT WE TRIED TO MEET ON SITE. WE'RE AT A 10TH, SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT. WITH THAT, WE WOULD REQUEST THAT OUR FEE IN LIEU THAT WE ARE REQUESTING OBVIOUSLY BE REDUCED TO WHAT OUR DEFICIENCY IS. AND BECAUSE WE'RE ONLY AT A 10TH INSTEAD OF AN ACRE, BUT ALL FOR CONSIDERATION AND OPEN TO ANY QUESTIONS, I GUESS. PEOPLE ARE STILL TAKING NOTES. I THINK. THIS SEEMS STRAIGHTFORWARD. AND WHILE WE'RE WAITING HERE, ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THEY'D LIKE ANSWERED? MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE TWO SPEAKER CARDS. OKAY, GO AHEAD AND CALL THE FIRST ONE, PLEASE. I HAVE TAMARA DAVIES, 8200 CENTRAL COLLEGE ROAD. HELLO. MY NAME IS TAMARA DAVIES. 
          I OWN THE PROPERTIES AT 8200 CENTRAL COLLEGE ROAD AND 8238 CENTRAL COLLEGE ROAD, WHICH MAKES UP FOR THE FINAL PHASE. THERE, OR PHASE ONE THERE. IT MAKES UP THE WHOLE LEFT OR THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE BOUNDARY. ON THIS. AND WHEN IT'S THE WHOLE PROJECT, IT'S ABOUT TWO THIRDS OF THE WESTERN BOUNDARY IS OUR PROPERTY. NOW, WHEN WE ORIGINALLY MOVED TO OUR PROPERTY, WHICH IS ABOUT TEN ACRES ON CENTRAL COLLEGE ROAD, THAT WHOLE AREA TO OUR EAST OR WEST AND OUR NORTH WAS ZONED ESTATE PROPERTIES, ONE HOME PER TEN ACRES. NOW IT'S CHANGED. 
          IT'S NOT ANYTHING WE'VE ASKED FOR, BUT I WANT TO GO OVER A FEW THINGS HERE. HOPEFULLY. THIS IS GREAT. OKAY. IN THE COMMISSION IN THE STAFF REPORTS, IT SAYS THE COMMISSION SHOULD CONSIDER AT A MINIMUM THE FOLLOWING THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS CONSISTENT IN ALL RESPECTS WITH THE PROPOSED INTENT AND APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF THE ZONING CODE AND UNDER THAT SAYS BUILDING HEIGHTS OF ALL STRUCTURES WITH REGARD TO THEIR VISUAL IMPACT ON ADJACENT 
          [01:35:04]
FACILITIES. THE PROBLEM IS HOW MUCH THEY'RE GOING TO ELEVATE THIS PROPERTY. AND I DON'T MEAN JUST THE BUILDINGS. I MEAN THE DIRT. AND MY FIRST QUESTION IS AT WHAT POINT IS THE MASTER GRADING PLAN REVIEWED AND APPROVED, AND WHAT'S THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL? I MEAN, I DON'T SEE THAT IN ANY DOCUMENTS. AND IN THIS CASE, IT'S A VERY MATERIAL ITEM BECAUSE THEY'RE PLANNING ON RAISING MY THE WHOLE SIDE TO THE WEST. THEY'RE GOING TO RAISE IT 7 TO 8FT ABOVE WHAT'S CURRENTLY THERE. SO I THINK THAT'S MATERIAL. AND THAT WAS NEVER BROUGHT UP IN THE MATERIAL THAT WAS PUT BEFORE THE PLANE. ROCKY FORK BLACKLICK ACCORD PANEL AND THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANS DID NOT SHOW THIS GRADING. IT WASN'T UNTIL THE LAST MEETING RIGHT BEFORE IT THAT THIS WAS THROWN INTO THE PACKET, AND I THINK IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED AT SOME POINT AHEAD OF TIME, CONSIDERING THE HUGE CHANGE THAT'S GOING TO GO ON. LET ME STOP YOU JUST FOR A SECOND SO WE CAN ADDRESS THESE ONE AT A TIME. GRADING PLANS ARE PART OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND NOT PRELIMINARY. THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWED THE GRADING FOR THE SITE WITH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THEN THE FINAL MASTER GRADING PLAN IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. SO THE CITY ENGINEER AND PLANNING STAFF REVIEW THE GRADING PLAN FOR CONSTRUCTION TO ENSURE THAT IT'S IN CONFORMANCE WITH THAT APPROVED FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. 
          SO I DO BELIEVE WE HAVE DRAFT PLANS SUBMITTED TO OUR OFFICE THAT HAVEN'T BEEN APPROVED YET, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO SHARE THOSE WITH YOU SO YOU CAN SEE OUTSIDE OF THIS MEETING AND ALONG THAT LINE, ARE WE EXPECTING ELEVATION CHANGES ON WHAT I BELIEVE WOULD BE THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HERE? I DON'T BELIEVE WE'RE EXPECTING ANY FROM STAFF. NO. OKAY. YEAH. IN THIS PICTURE, THE WESTERN EDGE IS THE BOTTOM EDGE. NOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU PEOPLE ARE USED TO LOOKING AT MAPS AND GRADIENTS AND LINES AND GRADIENT LINES. NOW, THE CURRENT GEOGRAPHIC FEATURES UP HERE ARE IN THE COLORED LINES. SO THE BRIGHT GREEN UP IN THE TOP LEFT CORNER IS CURRENTLY THE HIGHEST POINT ON THAT PROPERTY. IN EACH LINE COLOR. AS YOU GO DOWN REPRESENT ANOTHER FOOT IN ELEVATION GAIN. I MEAN SORRY, ELEVATION LOSS AS YOU'RE COMING ACROSS THE PROPERTY. SO IF WATER WAS IN THAT TOP LEFT, IT'S GOING TO FLOW DOWN TOWARDS THE BOTTOM RIGHT BECAUSE THAT'S THE ELEVATION CHANGE GOING. THAT DIRECTION IS GOING TO COME DOWN AND ACROSS AND DOWN TOWARDS THE RIGHT, BECAUSE YOU'RE LOSING ELEVATION AS YOU GO ACROSS THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY. NOW THE BLACK LINES ON THERE REPRESENT THEIR PLAN. NOW IF YOU LOOK AT THE GRADIENT LINES ON THIS ONE AND IN MOST OF THE PLOT THINGS, THEY DON'T SHOW THE ELEVATION. AND SO WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT A LOT OF THESE PLANS, YOU DON'T SEE THE ELEVATION. AND SO I THINK THAT'S A BIG SHORTCOMING OF THE PROCESS IS THAT YOU'RE NOT LOOKING AT THESE ELEVATION CHANGES BECAUSE THAT WHOLE PART THERE, YOU SEE ALL THOSE LINES TIED TOGETHER. LIKE IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT A REAL MAP AND YOU SEE LINES TIED TOGETHER, THAT MEANS A CLIFF IN THIS CASE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE COMING DOWN IN PLACES SEVEN FEET FROM THOSE PIECES OF PROPERTY. THEY'RE RAISING THAT UP SEVEN FEET, SEVEN, EIGHT FEET. THEY CAN PROBABLY TELL YOU. BUT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT THESE THINGS, IT SAYS, WELL, YOU KNOW, THE LOTS ARE GOING TO BE AT THE SAME ELEVATION AS A STREET THAT'S TRUE BECAUSE YOU RAISE THE STREET. SO THAT'S WHY IT'S IN CONFORMITY. WHEN YOU GO INTO THE ENTRANCE, YOU'RE GOING TO BE COMING UP A RISE FROM THE ENTRANCE INTO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD OF SEVEN FEET, PROBABLY. SO THE PROBLEM IS, AS MY HOME AT 8238 CENTRAL COLLEGE ROAD, THERE IS CURRENTLY AT GRADE AND THAT'S SO YOU SEE THE HOME THERE. IT'S AT GRADE. AND THAT FIRST LOT 102 IS BASICALLY WHERE THE BOTTOM OF THAT HOUSE IS GOING TO BE, IS GOING TO BE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE ROOF LINE FOR THE HOUSE AT THAT LOCATION. AND THEY ARE TAKING OUT TREES THERE. THOSE TREES THAT YOU SEE ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THOSE ARE ALL GOING TO BE GOING AWAY. NOT THAT A TREE CAN ADEQUATELY COVER SOMETHING THAT'S SITTING UP AT ROOF HEIGHT, BECAUSE IN THE 
          [01:40:03]
WINTERTIME, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO TREES, THERE'S NO LEAVES ON THEM. YOU JUST HAVE TO STICK STANDING THERE. SO I THINK THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER THE HEIGHT AS IT'S AFFECTING NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, SINCE THIS WAS NOT IN SOME OF THE ORIGINAL PLANNING DOCUMENTS LIKE I SAID, IT IS A REAL SHORTCOMING TO YOUR PROCESS. AND THEN THIS WAS LIKE ORIGINALLY THEY WANTED TO BUILD A WALL THERE THAT WAS GOING TO BE A WALL. AND I THINK THE STAFF MUST HAVE TALKED THEM OUT OF IT, BECAUSE THAT WAS GOING TO BE WITH PAVERS OR YOU KNOW, THE BOX THAT WAS GOING TO BE 7 OR 8FT HIGH. NOW IT'S A SLOPE, BUT IT STILL PUTS THOSE HOMES SIGNIFICANTLY ABOVE OURS. AND WHEN SOMEONE COMES IN TO FINISH THAT ROAD EXTENSION THERE, IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO COME DOWN IF IT EVER IS FINISHED TO JOIN. WHERE IT IS IN TIDEWATER, WHERE IT CONNECTS, THERE. AND THIS IS WHERE THE ENTRANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          THIS IS A PICTURE I TOOK A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WHEN WE HAD FLOODING IN THAT AREA. SO YOU CAN IMAGINE THAT WATER RUSHING DOWN THAT STREET, DOWN THAT SLOPE ON THE CENTRAL COLLEGE. 
          THIS IS CENTRAL COLLEGE ROAD, RIGHT IN FRONT OF EPCON PROPERTY. A FARM PROPERTY IS TO THE LEFT. SO MY QUESTION IS, WHO'S MEASURED THE DRAINAGE THAT IS NOT ALLOWED TO DECREASE OR INCREASE THE DRAINAGE ONTO ADJOINING PROPERTIES? WHO HAS MEASURED THE CURRENT DRAINAGE AND WHO'S APPROVED? YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO CHANGE HERE. LET'S CAN WE ADDRESS THAT? YEAH. 
          SO THE GRADES AND THE LANDSCAPING AND THE PRESERVATION PRESERVATION AREAS THAT WERE JUST BROUGHT UP. SO THOSE WERE PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THOROUGHLY EVALUATED BY CITY STAFF DURING THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN STAGE. SO THOSE HAVE BEEN APPROVED. SO ANYTHING WITH GRADING IS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF A FINAL PLAT APPLICATION. A FINAL PLAT APPLICATION IS JUST A LEGAL DOCUMENT THAT SETS OWNERSHIP AND LOT BOUNDARIES, AND MAINTENANCE, ALONG WITH EASEMENTS. AS FAR AS WHO IS MEASURING THE STORMWATER DRAINAGE. SO THE DEVELOPER'S ENGINEERING TEAM DOES A STORMWATER PLAN. THAT WAS ALSO IN CONSIDERATION AS PART OF THAT FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN STAGE. THAT IS SUBMITTED TO CITY STAFF. 
          WE REVIEW AND EVALUATE THAT AS PART OF THEIR OVERALL ENGINEERING PACKAGE THAT OCCURS AFTER THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. SO THE CITY'S ENGINEERING STAFF WILL REVIEW AND APPROVE THE STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SITE. OUT OF CURIOSITY, ARE THERE ANY CATCH BASINS ON THAT EDGE IN THE BACK? THERE ARE NO CATCH BASINS ON THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE. WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE ARE TAKING ALL OF THE ROOF DRAINS. WE ARE TAKING TO THE PUBLIC STREET TO THEN BE ROUTED INTO THE STORMWATER BASINS TO CONTROL THE STORMWATER, SO THAT IT WILL HAVE A CONTROLLED RELEASE, INSTEAD OF CREATING WHAT IS HAPPENING TODAY. SO WE CATCH THE GUTTER WATER. WE CATCH. I TAKE THE DRIVEWAYS SLOPE DOWN TO THE STREET. CORRECT. SO IT WILL ALL GO INTO THE STORMWATER BASIN, INTO THE TO CONTROLLED STORMWATER BASINS. OH, I SEE UP HERE THERE'S STORMWATER. SEE THAT YELLOW LINE UP THERE. THOSE ARE DRAINS CORRECT. OKAY. SO ANY WATER THAT FALLS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN, WHICH IS ACTUALLY IN THIS HIMSELF, RIGHT, WOULD COME DOWN THAT SLOPE ON CENTRAL COLLEGE ROAD, CORRECT. THAT TRIBUTARY ACREAGE IS MUCH SMALLER THAN WHAT IS THE TRIBUTARY ACREAGE THAT YOU ARE SEEING OF WHAT ATTRIBUTING TO THE DRAINAGE PICTURE THAT YOU ARE SEEING RIGHT HERE. THAT'S PRETTY FAR RIGHT. IT'S NOT IT'S JUST KIND OF THE DRAINS ALONG THE STREET ARE NOT HANDLED. CORRECT? CORRECT. WE'RE CAPTURING, THOUGH, EVERYTHING FROM THE SITE THAT'S ATTRIBUTING TO WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN THE ACTUAL REAL PICTURE THAT YOU'RE, THAT YOU TOOK A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. AND WE ARE CAPTURING THE MAJORITY OF THE SITE WITH ONLY A COUPLE HUNDRED FEET OF THE ROADWAY. AND WE'RE PUTTING THAT INTO THE STORMWATER BASIN TO CONTROL IT TO THE CITY OF NEW ALBANY AND THE OHIO EPA STANDARDS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DOES NOT CREATE A WORSE SITUATION THAN WHAT IS EXISTING TODAY. AND WE ARE ACTUALLY DOING SLOW RELEASE RATES TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MITIGATE ANYTHING THAT IS HAPPENING WITHIN THE COLLEGE TODAY. AS FAR AS FILES THAT GO UNDER THAT 
          [01:45:03]
PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY. AND I'M ASSUMING THESE FARM FILES ARE WHAT'S FEEDING THE TREES ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE. SO IF YOU REMOVE ALL THE WATER UP TO LIKE 30FT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, ALL THAT WATER THAT USED TO COME THAT DIRECTION, WHETHER IT'S IN THE FARM PILES OR ABOVEGROUND, IF YOU REMOVE THAT, ARE THOSE TREES AND BE ABLE TO SURVIVE. I MEAN, WHO IS MEASURE THAT? THAT'S, YOU KNOW, FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, LET'S SAY THAT WAS THAT WAS. RIGHT. WE DO HAVE THE 50FT OR SO PLUS ALL OF RESERVE JAY. THAT IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO FEED THOSE TREES AS WELL. AND THAT'S WHY WE ALSO DIDN'T PUT ANY STORMWATER BASINS ON THAT WESTERN PROPERTY LINE AT ALL, TO NOT REMOVE ANY OF THE WATER FROM WHAT'S FEEDING THE TREES. THAT LIKE I SAID, I DON'T KNOW WHO'S ACTUALLY MEASURED THIS. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE DIAGRAMS. TWO ENGINEERS. YEAH. PUSHING IT, BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN NUMBERS. OKAY. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? I'M WE'VE TALKED ABOUT ALL THAT SHOULD WORK, BUT WHERE'S THE NUMBERS? CHECK WITH STAFF. NOW WHAT I UNDERSTAND IS, DO THEY HAVE THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS APPROVAL YET? WE GOT THAT FROM YOU OR NOT? WE DID GET THAT. 
          OKAY. AND THEN THE OHIO EPA. YES. OKAY. AND THEN WE. THEN WE NEED THE FRANKLIN COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT NEEDS TO REVIEW IT. THEY WOULD REVIEW THE PLAT ITSELF TO MAKE SURE IT'S PROPERLY SURVEYED. AND MEASURED. BUT ANY PART OF THE ENGINEERING AS FAR AS LIKE STORMWATER GOES AND GRADING, THAT'S ALL DONE BY CITY OF NEW ALBANY STAFF. OKAY. NOW, WHEN WE BROUGHT THIS UP BEFORE, YOU KNOW, THEY TALKED ABOUT HOW BENEFICIAL THIS IS TO THE CITY BECAUSE THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE MANY KIDS THERE. BUT I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT WHAT WAS ON INSTAGRAM BEFORE THE RECENT ELECTION AND WHEN THE FLINT TOWNSHIP FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS ASKING FOR MORE MONEY, ONE OF THE REASONS THEY PUT DOWN THERE WAS THAT THEY NEED TO BE CLOSE TO FOUR AGE BASED NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          SO THESE THESE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE NOT WITHOUT THEIR BURDEN ON THE CITY, EVEN THOUGH IT'S KIND OF BEEN PUT FORWARD THAT THEY DON'T HAVE A BURDEN ON THE CITY. I MEAN, RIGHT THERE, IT SAYS THAT APPARENTLY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT THINKS THEY ARE. NOW, IN THE STAFF REPORT, LIKE FOR THE LAST MEETING, THERE WAS A STATEMENT THAT OVERALL, THE EXISTING COURTYARDS AT NEW ALBANY, AT NEW ALBANY SUBDIVISION, LOCATED ON STATE ROUTE 605, THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL. SO THAT WAS THE STAFF'S OPINION. I GUESS THEY CONSIDERED THIS TO BE SUCCESSFUL. EPCON DID SELL ALL THEIR PROPERTIES, BUT I DON'T THINK THIS IS WHAT YOU WOULD WANT ON THAT. 30 ACRES IN THE COUNTRY CLUB, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE PUT NEXT TO MY HOUSE. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OTHERS WE. SPEAKER CARD. YEP. RON DAVIES. HEY GOOD EVENING RON DAVIES, 8200 CENTRAL COLLEGE ROAD. I DON'T HAVE ANY MATERIALS, BUT I'D LIKE TO REFERENCE PAGE 129 OF THE PACKET, WHICH I BELIEVE IS THE FINAL PLAT MAP. SINCE WE HAD A GREAT INTRODUCTION THIS EVENING REGARDING THE ISSUES AROUND NOTTINGHAM TRACE AND PLAT MAPS, I WOULD POINT OUT THAT THE SETBACKS ARE NOT ON THIS MAP. I'M ASSUMING NOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT SETBACKS ON THE FINAL PLAT MAPS THAT GET RECORDED, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ON THIS MAP. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE ACTUAL SETBACKS, BUT THE FACT THAT THEY ARE SETBACKS PRESENT WAS THE REQUEST ON THE NOTE THAT THERE WOULD BE A NOTE TO DIRECT PEOPLE TO THE ZONING TEXT FOR THE REST OF THE SETBACKS. YEAH, I THINK A GOOD QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT IF THEY'D BE OKAY WITH THAT CONDITION OF APPROVAL, MAYBE TO ADD THAT NOTE, YES. OKAY, WE GET IT. WE GET A YES FROM THE APPLICANT. SO THAT'D BE GREAT IF WE COULD HAVE SETBACKS JUST SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY FUTURE CONFUSION. YOU KNOW, DOWN THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY OR EASTERN SIDE OF OURS. AND OF COURSE, THERE'S ALONG DIANA'S HOUSE ON THE EASTERN SIDE. THAT'S GREAT. SO ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS, OBVIOUSLY, MY WIFE'S POINTING OUT, RIGHT, AS YOU LOOK AT THIS MAP, YOU DON'T PICTURE THE THREE DIMENSIONAL ASPECT OF THIS, BUT YOU KNOW, THERE IS STILL 18 HOMES RUNNING UP THE EASTERN SIDE OF MY PROPERTY, WESTERN SIDE OF THE THIS PROJECT WITH A CARVE OUT 
          [01:50:05]
AROUND THE VICINITY OF OUR HOUSE, WHICH WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE. WE DO THINK THERE'S STILL A GRADING ISSUE. THE NEXT PIECE IS THE BUILDING LINES ARE NOT DEMARCATED ON THIS LINE, BUT THAT'S INSTRUMENTAL TO ESTABLISHING THE SETBACK. RIGHT IS IN THIS PROJECT, THE BUILDING LINE, WHICH IS 50FT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, IS THE SETBACK. AND SO AGAIN, WHY I WANT TO REINFORCE THAT WE HAVE THAT ON THIS DOCUMENT SO THAT NONE ARE CONFUSED. FUTURE HOMEOWNERS HAVE A CLARITY THAT THERE'S 50 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH THEY CAN'T NOT ENCROACH WITHOUT. A I GUESS, A VARIANCE REQUEST. SO AGAIN, THANKS TO NANCY FOR BRINGING A LOT OF EMOTIONS TO MY TO MY ATTENTION THROUGH THIS PROJECT. THE NEXT PIECE I'D LIKE TO BRING UP IS EASEMENTS. WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT EASEMENTS THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS AT QUITE SOME LENGTH. I'VE TALKED A BIT WITH THE CITY STAFF AND BROUGHT IT UP BEFORE, SO I HAVE ONE COPY OF THE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DATED JULY 18TH, 2023. I'LL PROVIDE IT TO THE COMMISSION. 
          YOU KNOW, I DON'T NEED TO KEEP IT, BUT ON PAGE 13 OF THOSE MINUTES, THERE IS A CONVERSATION THAT'S DOCUMENTED AND APPROVED WHEREBY THE APPLICANT CONFIRMS THAT THERE WILL BE AN EASEMENT ON THEIR EASTERN. I'M SORRY, ON THEIR WESTERN SIDE, MY EDGE. I SHOWED THIS BEFORE IN THIS COUNCIL, I BELIEVE AND HONESTLY, I FELT LIKE I WAS MY INTEGRITY WAS CHALLENGED BY THE APPLICANT. 
          AND SO I'LL JUST SAY IT THAT WAY. SO I PROVIDED THE EXACT QUOTES AND CITATIONS. AND THEN I ACTUALLY HAD PICTURES OF THE DOCUMENT IN WHICH THEY SAID, WELL, WE'RE NOT SURE OF THE CONTEXT. SO ALL THAT IS. SO I'D LIKE TO REFER AND INCORPORATE TO THIS MEETING ALL THE MINUTES. ON JULY 18TH, 2023 FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, OF WHICH MR. UNDERHILL CONFIRMS THAT THERE WOULD BE A EASEMENT ON THE ENTIRE EAST AND WEST SIDE OF THESE HOMES AND THAT THIS PLAT THEREFORE SHOW THAT EASEMENT BEFORE FINAL APPROVALS OR AS A CONDITION ON FINAL APPROVALS. 
          STAFF CANNOT COMMENT ON DO EASEMENTS, ONLY GET PUT ON EASEMENTS ARE PUT ON THE PLATS RIGHT. I'M NOT SURE THAT EASEMENT WAS ANYTHING MORE THAN LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND DISCUSSION THOUGH ON THAT MATTER. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WAS INCLUDED AS A FINAL CONDITION, BUT RATHER JUST DISCUSSION BACK AND FORTH WITH COUNCIL. IT WASN'T INCLUDED AS A REQUIREMENT, BUT JUST DISCUSSIO. WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF THE EASEMENT? IT WAS A BACK AND FORTH CONVERSATION, IN MY OPINION, THAT WAS DOCUMENTED IN THE MINUTES WITH THE MAYOR ASKED THE APPLICANT TO CONFIRM DECISIVELY THAT THERE WAS AN EASEMENT ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE, AND HE CONFIRMED DECISIVELY, PER THOSE MINUTES THAT WERE APPROVED SUBSEQUENTLY BY THE CITY COUNCIL AS ACCURATE AND HAVE SINCE BEEN DOCUMENTED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD OF WHICH I REFERRED THIS COMMISSION TO, AND THE CITY STAFF. SEVERAL TIMES NOW. AND WHAT WAS THE CONTEXT OF THE EASEMENT? I DON'T ACTUALLY RECALL HAVING THAT DISCUSSION OR IT BEING A CONDITION, BUT NO, I, I APPRECIATE THERE'S SO MUCH STUFF THAT GOES THROUGH. I, I DON'T KNOW. SO THE CONTEXT WAS AND I SHARED A COPY THERE. THESE ARE BUILDING BLOCKS OF PROTECTIONS. RIGHT. SO WE HAVE POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, 18 FUTURE VARIANCE MEETINGS HERE WHEN SOMEBODY WANTS TO PUT SOMETHING BEHIND THESE HOUSES AND SETBACKS, WHICH YOU SAW THE EARLIER THIS EVENING. RIGHT. 
          THERE WAS A CASE JUST LIKE THAT THAT THAT'S THE TIME FRAME. SO THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS FOR THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF THAT THE CITY STAFF, I'VE BEEN VERY PROACTIVE IN SAYING, HERE'S WHAT I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT, HERE'S MY CONCERNS. HERE'S THE BUILDING BLOCKS OF PROTECTIONS THAT WE SEE AS LANDOWNERS TO THE WEST. AND THAT PARTICULARLY IS LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE VARIOUS DOCUMENTS AROUND EASEMENTS THAT PERMEATE THESE DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE HOA DOCUMENTS. I'VE ONLY SEEN A DRAFT, THE HOA DOCUMENTS, BUT AND SO THAT EASEMENT IS A BUILDING BLOCK, SO YOU CAN'T ENCROACH UPON IT. AND IT'S VERY SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT YOU CAN'T ENCROACH UPON. I UNDERSTAND WHAT AN EASEMENT IS. I IT WAS IT A UTILITY EASEMENT. THANK YOU. 
          THAT'S A QUESTION THAT I ASKED EARLIER. YEAH. WHAT WAS THE WHAT WAS THE EASEMENT FOR. SO I'M INDIFFERENT WHAT THAT EASEMENT IS FOR OKAY. WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE EASEMENT IS PRESENT. RIGHT. THERE WILL BE I WOULD EXPECT UTILITIES AS MY WIFE SHOWED THE DRAWING THERE THAT THERE'S UTILITIES GOING THROUGH THERE. THERE'S A GRADING PROCESS THAT'S GOING TO BE GOING THROUGH THERE. THAT EASEMENT GIVES US PROTECTIONS UPON ENCROACHMENTS, NOT JUST YOUR EASEMENT IS THE EASEMENT. IT DEPENDS ON THE TYPE OF EASEMENT. IT IS. IT'S JUST A IT'S JUST A UTILITY EASEMENT. IT'S JUST THE EASEMENT GIVES THE UTILITY THE RIGHT TO GO INTO THAT AREA AND DO THINGS. IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY PROTECT AN ADJACENT HOMEOWNER. SO IT'S REALLY, 
          [01:55:04]
REALLY IMPORTANT. IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR I MEAN WE WANT TO LISTEN, BUT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO TELL US WHICH EASEMENT, UNLESS YOU'RE REFERRING TO A SETBACK, BECAUSE THE WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER IN THE EARLIER CASE WAS, WAS A SETBACK THAT WASN'T BEING MET. THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS BUILT INTO THE ZONING ANYWAY. SO IT DOESN'T HELP US IF YOU SAY, WELL, THERE WAS REFERENCE TO AN EASEMENT AND I WANT AN ENFORCEABLE, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. WE WANT TO HELP YOU OUT IF WE CAN. AND MAKE SURE THAT THE APPLICANT IS DOING WHAT WHAT THEY'VE AGREED TO DO AND WHAT THE ZONING REQUIRES THEM TO DO. 
          BUT RIGHT NOW, I THINK YOU'VE GOT US AT A DISADVANTAGE BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW PRECISELY WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO. AND I CAN APPRECIATE IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S A YEAR AND A HALF AGO. RIGHT. SO I DON'T THINK IT'S A MEMORY PROBLEM. I THINK IT'S I THINK I THINK MAYBE IF THERE IF, IF THERE'S AN EASEMENT, IF THERE'S A YOU KNOW, IF AEP HAS AN EASEMENT. RIGHT. AND FOR WHATEVER REASON DIDN'T GET RECORDED THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD BRING TO OUR ATTENTION. RIGHT? I DON'T I, I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S A MATTER OF MY MISREMEMBERING OR IT BEING A YEAR AND A HALF THAT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT WE GAVE YOU THAT, THAT THERE WAS A HOMEOWNER EASEMENT. RIGHT? RIGHT. SO OKAY, LET ME TRY TO REPHRASE IT IN THE DOCUMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION AND ALL THE DOCUMENTS AND MEETINGS WE'VE HAD, THERE ARE PROHIBITED THINGS YOU CAN DO AS THE FUTURE LAND OWNER, PROPERTY OWNER CAN DO ON THEIR EASEMENTS. SO THEY COME TO YOU FOR AN ENCROACHMENT BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT IT'S ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE. THEY COME TO YOU ALL THROUGH A PROCESS TO GET A VARIANCE. THE EASEMENT THOUGH, IS HAS HIGHER LEVEL OF PROTECTION FROM THEM, ADDING TO IT AT LEAST THAT'S ALL THE READINGS THAT I'VE READ. IF YOU LOOK AT THE DOCUMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION, THERE IS SPECIFIC PROHIBITED ITEMS THAT YOU CANNOT DO WITH AN EASEMENT. AND I'D LIKE THOSE PROTECTIONS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I THINK WE WERE COMMITTED TO. WE'D LOVE TO SEE THE EASEMENT. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. I'VE BEEN ASKING FOR THIS FOR A YEAR AND A HALF, RIGHT AFTER JULY OF 23, JUST SAYING THAT THE SETBACK EASEMENT, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY TWO MONTHS EARLIER, WE START AT THE MIC. THERE YOU GO. OKAY. SO WHAT HE'S REALLY ASKING FOR IS INSTEAD OF JUST CALLING IT A SETBACK OF 50FT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, YOU LABEL IT AN EASEMENT BECAUSE WE AS WE SAW EARLIER TODAY, THOSE SETBACKS. 
          THERE'S BEEN VARIANCES TO THESE SETBACKS. BUT YOU CAN'T BUILD ON AN EASEMENT. WELL UNDERSTOOD. 
          THAT'S THAT'S WHAT HE'S LOOKING FOR AS AN EXTRA PROTECTION FOR THAT AREA THAT SOMEONE DOESN'T COME BACK HERE IN FIVE YEARS AND SAY, I WANT TO BUILD A PATIO OUT THE BACK. IT HAS SIMILAR ENFORCEMENT, ALTHOUGH IT'S PROBABLY EASIER TO DO WITH AN EASEMENT THAT GETS ENCROACHED THAN PERHAPS THE SETBACK THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE ACCIDENTALLY SCREW UP EASEMENTS AND PUT STUFF IN EASEMENTS AND FIND THEY HAVE TO REMOVE THEM. AND WE'VE HAD CASES WHERE PEOPLE HAVE ASKED FOR A VARIANCE AND FOUND THEMSELVES HAVING TO REMOVE PAVERS AND STUFF FROM THEIR BACKYARD. THE THEIR PARALLEL SIMILAR. THEY'RE NOT THE SAME. AND THIS BODY DOESN'T HAVE THE POWER. AND CERTAINLY ON THIS DOCUMENT I'M GOING TO CHECK I'M ABOUT TO MAKE A STATEMENT. I WANT YOU TO SAY YES OR NO. WE DON'T HAVE THE POWER TO PUT AN EASEMENT DOWN ON THIS DOCUMENT TONIGHT, BECAUSE THAT SHIP, IF IT WAS GOING TO BE ONE, SAILED WITH THE ZONING PROBABLY, BUT IT WAS IN THE RECORD. SO WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. SO LET'S SO YOUR ANSWER. THE SHORT ANSWER IS THAT SHIP HAS SAILED. YOU'RE RIGHT. YOU CAN'T YOU CAN'T CHANGE IT NOW. AND THEY'RE RIGHT. THERE'S DISCUSSION IN THE MINUTES ABOUT AN EASEMENT ALONG THE EAST. AND WEST. ENTIRE EAST AND WEST HOMES HAVE EASEMENTS BEHIND THEM FOR DRAINAGE. IS WHAT THE LEGISLATIVE DISCUSSION SAYS. BUT WHEN WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT ANYTHING AS FAR AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL OR ANY TYPE OF REQUIREMENT, THAT'S NOT IN THE DOCUMENT. SO AT THIS POINT, WHAT WE HAVE TO GO WITH IS WHAT WAS APPROVED AS FAR AS THE CONDITION, I THINK GOING FORWARD, AS OPPOSED TO TRYING TO DO THAT NOW. SO IN SUMMATION, THEY TALKED ABOUT IT BUT DID NOT REQUIRE IT. RIGHT. SO THAT WAY IF THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION, MAYBE THIS LEGISLATIVE DISCUSSION IS HELPFUL IN INTERPRETING A TERM, BUT THERE'S NO TERM TO INTERPRET THAT WAS APPROVED OR REQUIRED UPON THE PROPERTY OWNERS. YOU DESCRIBED IT AS A DRAINAGE EASEMENT. THAT'S WHAT THE MINUTES REFER TO. AND WHAT WOULD A DRAINAGE EASEMENT DO? I PRESUME DEAL WITH DRAINAGE ISSUES, ALLOW THEM TO PUT STUFF. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT, BUT I THOUGHT SO. I MEAN, I'M NOT SURE. SO YEAH. I MEAN, HOW HOW WOULD THAT HOW WOULD THAT INURE TO THE BENEFIT OF AN ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER. 
          SO ANY TYPE OF EASEMENTS DOESN'T CAUSE RESTRICTIONS. IT ACTUALLY ALLOWS. IT PUTS IN PLACE ALLOWANCES. AND SO DRAINAGE EASEMENTS IN THE CITY ARE USED FOR ABOVE AND BELOW STORMWATER STRUCTURES. SO IT CAN BE USED TO PUT IN UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE PIPES OR PUT IN SWALES TO CONVEY 
          [02:00:03]
STORMWATER. BUT WITH THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE REMOVAL OF THE TREES ALONG WITH THAT. AND SO I THINK DURING THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN STAGE. SO THE STAFF HAD EXPRESSED. SO A DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS THERE IN CASE THERE IS AN ISSUE THAT ARISES WITH THE MANNER IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS HANDLING DRAINAGE ISSUES. THAT'S TRUE. AND IF THERE IS A PROBLEM IN DRAINAGE THAT ARISES DOWN THE ROAD, THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT ALLOWS THE CITY TO COME IN AND ADDRESS. THE PROBLEM IS THAT IS THAT A GOOD SUMMARY? IF IT'S IN THE CITY, IF THE EASEMENT IS IN THE CITY'S FAVOR OR WHOEVER, IT WOULD ALLOW SOMEONE TO COME IN. YEAH. SOMEONE TO COME IN. YEAH. SO THAT REALLY SO WITH ALL I DON'T I'M NOT SURE THAT THE EASEMENT THAT YOU'VE REFERRED TO THAT WAS DISCUSSED REALLY DIRECTLY IMPACTS YOUR ADJACENT PROPERTY RIGHTS, OTHER THAN TO THE EXTENT THAT DRAINAGE IS AFFECTING YOUR PROPERTY. THERE'S YOU CAN RAISE IT WITH THE CITY AS A POTENTIAL ZONING VIOLATION IF THEY'RE NOT MEETING THEIR DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS, AND THEN THE CITY WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO COME IN AND HELP FIX IT BY GOING ONTO THEIR PROPERTY WHERE THE EASEMENT IS AND HELPING TO FIX IT. SO I THINK, DOES THAT HELP TO HELP YOU A LITTLE BIT? I THINK I'M SORRY, SIR, BUT IT'S, IT'S NOT BECAUSE THE DOCUMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT STIPULATE PROHIBITIONS OF THINGS. YOU CANNOT DO WHEN THERE'S AN EASEMENT IN PLACE FOR THE FUTURE HOMEOWNERS. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BEING FOR THE FUTURE HOMEOWNERS. WHAT I DON'T WANT AS A HOMEOWNER ON THE WEST SIDE, ON THE EAST WEST SIDE IS SOMEONE TO ENCROACH, AND THERE'S A LOT OF VERBIAGE ABOUT ENCROACHMENTS NOT ABLE TO HAPPEN ON THE FRONT. AND THEN AROUND THE BACK, IT GETS WORD SALAD. AND WHEN I SAY WORD SALAD, I START THINKING, WELL, WAIT A MINUTE, WHY ISN'T THIS JUST SIMPLE? AND THEN, AS PLANNER MAYER KNOWS, I BROUGHT THIS UP OVER AND OVER AGAIN. IF IT'S A BUILDING BLOCK TO MAKE SURE NOTHING HAPPENS IN THE BACK OF THESE HOMES, RIGHT. THAT IT'S IT IS CLEAR WHAT THEY HAVE. SO IF IT'S AN EASEMENT FOR DRAINAGE OR AN EASEMENT FOR AIR, YOU KNOW, IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT AND AS YOU SAW EARLIER TONIGHT IN THE EARLIER MEETING, I THINK YOU WERE HERE. RIGHT. SO THAT APPLICANT CAME IN AND WANTED TO PUT A PORCH IN WHEN SHE WASN'T ALLOWED TO DO IT. SO SHE HAD TO COME IN AND ASK US TO DO IT. AND THE FIRST TIME SHE CAME IN, WE SAID, NO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU NEED TO MEET. NOW, THAT CASE IS A LITTLE BIT UNIQUE BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES CAME UP, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME OUT OF THAT MEETING WAS THE POINT THAT SHE MADE, WHERE SHE SAID THERE WAS SOME ISSUE WITH WHETHER THE WHETHER THE RESTRICTION THAT HAD BEEN PLACED ON OUR PROPERTY WAS, WAS EVIDENT TO HER BASED ON THE DOCUMENTS SHE WAS SEEING AND WHAT WE DISCUSSED THEN. AND I THINK WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ASK AS A CONDITION HERE, I THINK I HEARD THAT EARLIER, WE'RE GOING TO PUT LANGUAGE IN THAT SAYS EVEN IF IT'S NOT DIRECTLY ON CERTAIN PLOTS, YOU HAVE TO GO TO OTHER AREAS TO LOOK AT YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO FIGURE IT OUT. AND WE'RE GOING TO TELL THEM TO GO THERE, WHICH HELPS CREATE ANOTHER LAYER OF PROTECTION FOR THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER LIKE YOURSELF. THAT MAY NOT WANT WHAT'S GOING TO WHAT THEY'RE ASKING TO DO. THERE. SO WE'RE DOING THAT. THERE ARE THE SETBACKS AND THOSE REQUIREMENTS ARE THAT ARE BAKED INTO THE ZONING RIGHT NOW THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT MAY OR MAY NOT PROTECT YOU. BUT YOU WERE HERE AT THE OTHER TWO MEETINGS, AND I THINK WE PROVIDED AS MUCH AS WE COULD GET TO PROTECT ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. WHEN THE COMMISSION MET BOTH TIMES, WHEN WE WHEN WE CONSIDERED THOSE SO ANYWAY, HAVING SAID ALL THAT, PLEASE FINISH YOUR YOUR YOUR PRESENTATION. BUT I WITH REGARD TO THE EASEMENT ISSUE, I THINK I THINK WE WANT TO JUST CLARIFY THAT, THAT I THINK, WELL, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT. SO NO GO AHEAD. AND I APPRECIATE THAT. I, I THINK AS A AS A TAKEAWAY THOUGH, WE HAD A FIRM CONVERSATION AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING DOCUMENTED THAT X WOULD HAPPEN. X IS NOT HAPPENING. AND SO YOU'RE APPROVING A PLAN THAT THEY'VE COMMITTED TO SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T EXIST IN TODAY'S PLAN. THEY TALKED ABOUT IT, BUT THEY DID NOT COMMIT IT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T PUT IT IN THE THING THEY PASSED. LIKE WE'RE PUTTING CONDITIONS DOWN HERE LIKE THE ONE ABOUT NOT ON THE PLAT SHALL CONSULT THE ZONING TEXT FOR OTHER SETBACKS TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE SHOW UP. ALL SUCH THINGS START OUT AS DISCUSSION, BUT IF THEY DON'T MAKE IT TO THE PAPER ABOUT WHAT ACTUALLY GOT PASSED, THEN THEY DIDN'T COME TO PASS. OKAY, NOW I APPRECIATE THE ROGERS RULES AND PROCEDURES. 
          IT'S IN THE DOCUMENT WHERE THEY MAY OR SPECIFICALLY ASKED AND GOT AN ANSWER. AND I GUESS SHAME ON HIM FOR NOT PUTTING IT INTO THE CONCLUSION. SO YEAH, TWO POINTS ON THAT. JUST TO WRAP THIS UP, NUMBER ONE, IT'S NOT CLEAR AS, AS AS COUNCIL INDICATED AND AS AS NEIL, JUST 
          [02:05:07]
MENTIONED, TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT EASEMENT, IT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE FINAL APPROVAL. SO IT DIDN'T BECOME LAW, SO TO SPEAK, IN THE, IN THE ZONING. BUT SECONDLY, THE DISCUSSION WE HAD PREVIOUSLY SUGGESTS THAT EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT 100% CLEAR EXACTLY WHAT WAS BEING DISCUSSED, IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THE KIND OF EASEMENT THAT IS GOING TO DIRECTLY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS NEGATIVELY. SO WITH WITH THAT COMMENT, I WILL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT WHAT YOUR PRESENTATION AND WE THANK YOU FOR IT. FAIR ENOUGH. I THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLI, THERE'S THE ONLY TWO SPEAKER CARDS WE HAD. WERE THERE OTHERS? OKAY. SO MIKE. INSTEAD OF ADDING THAT VERBIAGE UP THERE SO SOMEONE HAS TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT SEVERAL DOCUMENTS, COULD WE NOT JUST WRITE IN THERE THAT THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF THIS DEVELOPMENT HAVE A 50 FOOT SETBACK? I MEAN, IT WOULD BE CLEARER THAN SAYING GO, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, IF I WAS THE HOME BUYER AND THEY PRESENTED THIS PLAT TO ME AND NOW IT SAYS, GO TO YOUR RESEARCH, YOU KNOW, WELL, IT TELLS YOU WHERE IT IS TO PUT IT RIGHT THERE ON THAT PIECE OF PAPER. I MEAN, IT JUST YOU COULD PUT, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THOSE LITTLE WRITING, YOU KNOW, THINGS YOU DON'T HAVE TO EVEN DRAW IT ON. THERE. JUST PUT THAT THERE'S A 50 FOOT SETBACK. YEAH. 
          WHERE WOULD CAN YOU SHOW CHRIS WHERE IT WOULD LOOK LIKE. WHERE WOULD WHERE IT WOULD BE? I'M SURE WE COULD FIND THIS. I DON'T HAVE MY LITTLE NOTE THING OR I THINK I SEE SOMETHING UP THERE. 
          YEAH, THAT DOTTED LINE. MAYBE. SO. YEAH. THERE'S. OH, SORRY. HE WAS BLINDED. SOMEONE I THINK. 
          YEAH. SO TYPICALLY ON PLATS WE HAVE. AND I'M NOT EVEN GONNA TRY TO POINT IT OUT, BUT THERE'S FRONT YARD SETBACKS. ANY EASEMENTS ARE USUALLY OUTLINED. ANY TREE PROTECTION ZONES ARE OUTLINED. WHICH ON THE BACK OF THESE LOTS ON THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE, THERE IS A TREE PROTECTION ZONE OUTLINED. I BELIEVE IT'S 30FT. WITHOUT LOOKING AT MY NOTES HERE, I THINK THE PERSONALLY, JUST FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE STANDPOINT, I THINK IT'S EASIER TO REFER BACK TO THE ZONING TEXT BECAUSE THERE ARE MULTIPLE DIFFERENT TYPES OF SETBACKS DEPENDING ON WHICH LOT IT IS. I'M SURE YOU KNOW, OPEN TO WHAT THE APPLICANT THINKS. BUT ULTIMATELY, WE PROBABLY COULD JUST GO AHEAD AND ADD THAT SETBACK LINE ALONG THESE THESE, THESE LOTS HERE. BUT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL SETBACKS THAT APPLY TO OTHER LOTS THAT ARE NOT THESE WESTERN PROPERTY LINES. THAT MIGHT BE WORTH REFERRING BACK TO THE ZONING TEXT, TOO. IS IT STANDARD CITY PROCEDURE TO HAVE ALL OF THE ZONING SETBACKS ON THE PLAT, OR IS IT STANDARD ZONING PROCEDURE, CITY PROCEDURE TO HAVE IT BE REFERENCED ACROSS ALL THE DOCUMENTS? WE WOULD REFERENCE IT ON OUR OWN ACROSS THE MULTIPLE DOCUMENTS. JUST THE FRONT, FRONT YARD AND ANY SIDE YARD OR JUST FRONT YARD. 
          SETBACKS ARE USUALLY WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THE PLAT. YEAH, YEAH, IT I THINK IT WOULD BE CONFUSING IF IT WAS THE PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE TO HAVE EVERYTHING DEMARCATED ON ONE DOCUMENT, AND I THINK THAT'S I HONOR THE CITY'S PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE TO HAVE THAT BE REFERENCED, TO GIVE REFERENCE TO ALL OF THE RECORDED DOCUMENTS THEY REFER. BUT YEAH. YEAH. REFERRED BACK TO THE ZONING TEXT. I THINK THAT'S A REALLY GOOD IDEA. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. YEAH, THAT'S ALL RIGHT. OF COURSE. COMMISSION MEMBERS, I DON'T THINK SO. THANK YOU ALL RIGHT. I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD FOR FPL 85 2024. DO I HEAR A SECOND ON THE DOCUMENTS MOTION? SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION ON THE DOCUMENTS? GIVE ME THE ROLL, PLEASE, MR. KIRBY. YES, MISS BRIGGS? YES, MR. WALLACE? YES, MR. LAWSON. YES, MR. SCHULTZ. YES. MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF ADMITTING THE DOCUMENTS. OKA. AS FAR AS THE PLANT ITSELF, I HAVE A FOURTH CONDITION NOTE ON THE PLAT. THERE WILL BE A NOTE PUT ON THE PLAT TO CONSULT THE ZONING TEXT FOR OTHER SETBACKS. DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE PLAT ITSELF? I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE FINAL PLAT APPLICATION FPL 85 2024, SUBJECT TO THE THREE CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE STAFF REPORT, PLUS THE ADDITIONAL FOURTH CONDITION. IN THE MANNER I HAD IT WRITTEN DOWN, WHICH IS THAT THE PLAT BE MODIFIED TO INCLUDE A REFERENCE THAT THE ZONING TEXT BE REFERRED TO FOR ANY ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS OR REQUIREMENTS. COULD YOU PUT THE WORD SETBACKS IN THERE EXPLICITLY, INCLUDING SETBACKS AND OTHER SUCH THINGS? IT COULD BE MORE THAN JUST A SETBACK, IT SEEMS TO ME, BUT. DO I HEAR A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? 
          [02:10:09]
YES. GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONER WALLACE, WOULD YOU PLEASE RESTATE YOUR VERSION OF THE CONDITION? CANNOT BE MODIFIED TO INCLUDE REFERENCE THAT THE ZONING TEXT BE REFERRED TO FOR ANY ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS, SUCH AS SETBACKS. THANK YOU. AND THAT WOULD BE A NOTE ON THE PLANT. YEAH. YOU CAN MAKE IT CHANGE TO INCLUDE A NOTE ON THE ON THE ON THE PLANT. THAT'S FIN. 
          ARE YOU GOOD WITH THAT. YES. I'M WATCHING HER. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTIO? OKAY. THE ROLL PLEASE. MR. WALLACE? YES, MR. LARSEN? YES. MR. KIRBY? YES, MISS BRIGGS? YES, MR. SHELL? YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE APPLICATION. 
          SUB SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE ADDITIONAL AND THE ADDITIONAL CONDITION THAT THE PLAT BE MODIFIED TO INCLUDE. REFERENCE THAT THE ZONING TEXT BE REFERRED TO INCLUDE THE SETBACK FOR RESTRICTIONS AND SETBACKS, INCLUDING THE SETBACKS. THERE WE GO. OKAY. AND YOU COULD SAY THANK YOU COULD BE MODIFIED TO INCLUDE A NOTE. YEAH. THANK YOU. 
          MODIFIED TO INCLUDE A NOTE. THANK YOU. DO WE NEED TO TAKE A BREAK? LET'S TAKE A TEN MINUTE. 
          WHAT DOES BEAT WHAT. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S TRY TO MAKE BE KIND TO EVERYBODY. TAKES US TO FINAL PLAN MODIFICATION EIGHT. CAN WE HEAR FROM STAFF. YES. THANK YOU. 
          AS YOU MENTIONED, THIS IS A FINAL PLAT MODIFICATION FOR EIGHT HAWKSMOOR DRIVE, WHICH IS THE PROPERTY OUTLINED IN THE PICTURE HERE. THIS IS LOCATED AT THE END OF THE CUL DE SAC OF THE HAWKSMOOR SUBDIVISION. 605 IS LOCATED JUST OFF THE SCREEN HERE ON THE RIGHT. SO I'M GOING TO KIND OF WALK YOU THROUGH THIS SLOWLY HERE AS BEST AS I CAN. SO THIS APPLICATION REALLY IS GOING TO DO THREE THINGS. SO THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE A JUST UNDER A 10TH OF AN ACRE TREE PRESERVATION ZONE. IT'S ALSO A NO BUILD ZONE AND A DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON THE PROPERTY. THEY WOULD CREATE A NEW, SLIGHTLY LARGER TREE PRESERVATION ZONE JUST SOUTH OF IT. AND I'LL WALK YOU THROUGH THOSE THIS MAP HERE IN JUST A SECOND. AND THEY WOULD ALSO BE ADDING A NEW VERY SMALL STORM EASEMENT ON THE PROPERTY. SO I STARTED WITH THIS IMAGE HERE. 
          REALLY WHAT THIS THESE MODIFICATIONS WOULD ALLOW FOR IS A NEW HOME ADDITION TO BE BUILT, WHICH IS IN THIS DARKER GRAY COLOR. AND I'LL WALK THROUGH THIS HERE IN A SECOND. BUT THIS GREEN LINE HERE IS WHERE THE TREE PRESERVATION ZONE IS NOW. TREE PRESERVATION SLASH NO BUILD ZONE. SO IF THE NEW HOME ADDITION CANNOT BE BUILT AS LONG AS THAT NO BUILD ZONE IS EXISTS IN THE PROPERTY, IT'S STILL REALLY HARD TO SEE. AND I APOLOGIZE, BUT THE TOP IMAGE SHOWS THE EXISTING TREE PRESERVATION ZONE. THE MIDDLE IMAGE SHOWS WHERE THE NEW STORM EASEMENT WOULD BE. THE EXISTING. THE EXISTING TREE PRESERVATION ZONE IS KIND OF ENCOMPASSED INTO THE TOP OF THIS. FOLLOWING MY OUTLINE HERE. SO THE APPLICANT WOULD PROPOSE TO DO THIS NEW STORM SEWER EASEMENT AND THEN MOVE THE TREE PRESERVATION ZONE APPROXIMATELY 50FT SOUTH OF WHERE IT EXISTS TODAY ALONG THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE, AGAIN SLIGHTLY ENLARGING THE TREE PRESERVATION ZONE. THE APPLICANT DID SUBMIT THIS TREE SURVEY. YOU'LL SEE A CONDITION OF APPROVAL IN OUR IN THE STAFF REPORT. OR I SORRY, I MISSPOKE. IT'S NOT A CONDITION OF APPROVAL. WE JUST RECOMMENDED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONFIRM WITH THE APPLICANT. IT'S REALLY HARD TO TELL WHERE THESE NEW LINES ARE IN RELATION TO THE EXISTING TREES IN THE PROPERTY. 
          I WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT THIS MORNING TO ATTEMPT TO OVERLAY THIS ON AN AERIAL HERE. IF YOU DID A PRETTY GOOD JOB GOING OVER THIS AGAIN, THIS GREEN LINE IS WHERE THE EXISTING TREE PRESERVATION ZONE IS. THE PINK LINE IS WHERE THE STORM SEWER EASEMENT WILL BE, AND THEN THE NEW TREE PRESERVATION ZONE IS IN PURPLE HERE ALONG THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE. AND AGAIN WE DON'T HAVE EXACT LOCATIONS OF THESE TREES IN RELATION TO THESE LINES, BUT JUST KIND OF VISUALLY HERE ON THE SCREEN, I'LL LET THE APPLICANT BEAR THE WEIGHT OF THIS. BUT JUST VISUALLY HERE IT LOOKS LIKE THERE ARE A LOT MORE TREES IN THE NEW TREE PRESERVATION ZONE, JUST BASED ON THE AERIAL IMAGE. THERE ARE SOME CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION. THERE ARE 
          [02:15:04]
NOTATIONS AND WE LIKE THESE NOTATIONS THAT THERE BE MARKERS ADDED TO WHERE MARKERS ADDED ON THE PROPERTY TO WHERE THIS NEW TREE PRESERVATION ZONE IS. THERE'S SOME NOTES ON THE PLAT THAT AREN'T VERY CLEAR AS TO WHERE THOSE THOSE MARKERS ARE TO BE LOCATED. SO WE JUST ASK THAT TO BE MODIFIED. THE PLAT REFERS TO LOTS EIGHT THROUGH 11 WHEN THIS PLOT OR THE PLAT. SORRY, THE PLAT REFERS TO LOTS EIGHT THROUGH 11. WE REQUEST THAT IT BE MODIFIED TO JUST REFER ONLY TO LOT EIGHT, BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY LOT THAT'S BEING MODIFIED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION. AND THEN ANY CITY ENGINEER COMMENTS MUST BE ADDRESSED, AND I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. LET ME DO ENGINEERING. SO WE RECOMMEND THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE WRITTEN LETTERS FROM PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES IDENTIFYING WHAT UTILITIES, IF ANY, HAVE BEEN INSTALLED IN THE AREA WHERE THE PRESERVATION ZONES ARE TO BE RELOCATED. WE RECOMMEND THAT STORM EASEMENT BE BE RETITLED AS DRAINAGE EASEMENT BE ONLY. STORM SEWER IS TO BE INSTALLED IN THIS EASEMENT WITH THE NO. ABOVE, NO ABOVE GRADE STRUCTURES PERMITTE. WORK WITH STAFF TO DETERMINE IF ANY EXISTING TREES IN THE AREA WHERE THE TREE PRESERVATION ZONE IS TO BE VACATED SHOULD BE RELOCATED. HAVE A PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR SIGN AND STAMP SHEET. NUMBER ONE. AND JUST LIKE CHRIS SAID, OBTAIN MARKERS FROM STAFF AND PLEASE PLACE SIGNAGE AROUND THE NEW TREE PRESERVATION ZONE. AND WE ALSO RECOMMEND THAT THE APPLICANT HAVE THE AREA THAT IS TO BE REPLANTED REVIEWED BY THE FRANKLIN COUNTY ENGINEER'S OFFICE AND TO GIVE US THOSE COMMENTS AND THE DISSERTATION OF THE COMMENTS FOR OUR FILES. 
          THANK YOU. CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? CURTIS ECKLEBERRY, ADVANCED CIVIL DESIGN. SO A FEW YEARS AGO, THE LOT LINE USED TO COME THROUGH HERE AND SPLIT THIS EXISTING TREE PRESERVATION ZONE. 
          AND THEY REPLANTED THIS LOT DOWN TO MOVE THE LOT LINE DOWN HERE. SO WHAT WE'RE DOING IS JUST TRYING TO PUT THIS TREE PRESERVATION IN CLOSER TO THE LOT LINE AND PRESERVE A LOT MORE TREES THAT IS THE SAME, IF NOT LARGER. I BELIEVE WE SHOW THAT IT'S LARGER THAN WHAT THE EXISTING WAS. WHY WAS THE LOT LINE LIKE, WHY WAS IT REPLANTED AND WHY THE LOT LINE MOVE? DID THE DID THEY ACQUIRE ADDITIONAL PROPERTY? YES. SO I BELIEVE THERE WAS A FEW DIFFERENT LOT LINES. THAT'S WHY I THINK THE PLAT NEEDS UPDATED TO SAY JUST LOT EIGHT, WHICH I THINK IS A LOT 19 BECAUSE OF THE REPLAT, THERE WAS A FEW DIFFERENT LOTS THAT CHANGED AND THEY ACQUIRED MORE LAND TO THE SOUTH. IS THERE A NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH? THERE IS, BUT IT'S OBVIOUSLY FOR FURTHER SOUTH. YEAH. AND WAS THERE AN ADDITIONAL LOT THAT THEY ACQUIRED OR THEY JUST ACQUIRED LAND FROM THAT NEIGHBOR? I BELIEVE THEY ACQUIRED LAND ON THAT. CHRIS, CAN YOU CAN YOU CAN YOU PUT SOMETHING UP THAT KIND OF SHOWS US WHAT THAT AREA LOOKS LIKE AND WHAT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY LOT LOOKS LIKE. THERE WE GO. OKAY, SO WE'RE. YEAH. BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE LOTS WERE BIG ISH AND GOT MADE BIGGER. YEAH. CAN WE SKIP THE STORY? LIKE HOW THIS ALL HAPPENED. YEAH. SO THE ORIGINAL RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS EIGHT THROUGH 11, IT WAS A RE I GUESS TECHNICALLY IT WAS A RE SUBDIVISION BECAUSE THEY HAD A PLAT IT, BUT IT ESSENTIALLY TOOK FOUR LOTS AND MADE THEM THREE. AND SO I THINK THAT WAS AS WAS MENTIONED, THAT'S ALL THE SUBSTANTIVE WORK THAT WAS DONE AT THE PLAT. SO THEY TOOK FOUR LOTS AND MADE THEM THREE. THAT'S CORRECT. AND YOU, THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU. AND THEN THE APPLICANT OWNS HOW MANY OF THOSE LOTS AN EXPANDED VERSION OF THEIR ORIGINAL LOT. YEAH, I THINK AT THE TIME IT WAS ONE OWNER THAT OWNED ALL OF THE LOTS. ESSENTIALLY THEY ELIMINATED LOT NINE AT THE TIME. 
          SO THE ORIGINAL IT WAS LOTS EIGHT, NINE, TEN AND 11. OKAY. AND THIS WAS BACK IN 2013. OKAY. 
          IS WHEN THEY ELIMINATED LOT NINE. SO THAT'S HOW THEY WENT FROM FOUR LOTS TO THREE. OKAY. 
          I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE CURRENT OWNERSHIP IS OF THOSE REMAINING THREE LOTS OKAY. SO WHAT'S THE GOAL FOR THIS APPLICATION. SO I THINK AS THE APPLICANT MENTIONED, THE GOAL OF THIS IS TO MOVE THE TREE PRESERVATION ZONE. SINCE IT WAS NOT RELOCATED WITH THE LOT LINES BACK IN 2013, SO THAT THE TREE PRESERVATION ZONES SORT OF HUG. AND IS IT ADJACENT TO THE SIDE PROPERTY 
          [02:20:04]
LINES AS IT USED TO BE, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST SORT OF LIKE A PENINSULA SHOOTING OUT INTO THE MIDDLE OF THE LOTS OR NOT THE MIDDLE, BUT IT'S ON THE SIDE. SO WHAT THAT DOES ARTIFICIALLY IS LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPABLE SPACE. SO IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S STILL SORT OF LIMITED BY THAT SORT OF GHOST OF THE OLD PARCEL LINES. OKAY. SO IT IS TO FREE UP LAND THAT WAS IN TREE PRESERVATION ZONE OUT OF A TREE PRESERVATION ZONE AND RIGHTSIZE THE TREE PRESERVATION ZONE TO WHERE THE ACTUAL TREES ARE. GIVEN THAT THE OWNERSHIP EXTENDS OVER THAT ENTIRE SPACE. 
          YEAH, I THINK THAT WAS A GREAT SUMMARY. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. SIR. DO YOU HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THE CONDITIONS AND STAFF REPORT? NO, WE HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THE COMMENTS FROM STAFF. 
          ALL RIGHT. ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC, ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGH. FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. YEAH. THERE WAS A ARE YOU GOING TO GET I DON'T KNOW I THINK STAFF INDICATED THAT WE SHOULD PROBABLY GO THROUGH THE TREES ON THAT DIAGRAM AND FIGURE OUT WHAT TREES ARE GOING TO BE REMOVED, I GUESS. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANTED US TO DO, CHRIS, OR. YEAH, I THINK AT THE I THINK IT REALLY SHOULD BE A LITTLE MORE DESCRIPTIVE. AT THE BARE MINIMUM, IT WOULD BE NICE TO JUST HAVE THAT THOSE LINES OVERLAID ON THAT TREE PRESERVATION PLAN JUST FOR OUR RECORDS SO THAT WE COULD, YOU KNOW, THE TREE SURVEY. YEAH, THE TREE SURVEY. SORRY. BASED ON THE VISUAL AIDS YOU PROVIDED THIS MORNING, IT LOOKS LIKE A LOT OF THEM ARE BEING PRESERVED ALONG THAT SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE. BUT IT'D JUST BE NICE TO HAVE IT IN OUR DOCUMENTATION. AND SO I THINK I WENT THROUGH THAT WITH SIERRA. GOTCHA. OKAY. SO THAT MAY BE IN THERE. OKAY. YEAH. BECAUSE I THINK I GAVE HER AN EMAIL, AN EXPLANATION OF WHAT TREES WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THE NEW ADDITION. AND STORM. GOTCHA. OKAY. YEAH. WE COULD WORK TOGETHER ON GETTING THAT PAPERWORK TOGETHER. YEAH, I THINK THAT WOULD WORK. OKAY. 
          OTHER STUFF WE MISSED. ALL RIGHT. I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD FOR FPM 81 2024. DO I HEAR A SECOND ON THE DOCUMENTS? I'LL SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION ON THE DOCUMENTS? MOTION TO THE ROLL, PLEASE. MR. KIRBY? YES, MR. LARSEN? YES, MR. SHELL? YES. MR. WALLACE. OH, YES. SORRY, MISS BRIGGS. YES. MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF ADMITTING THE DOCUMENT. DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE PLAN? MODIFICATION ITSELF? I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE APPLICATION FPM 8124. BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT. WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT, SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. CAN I OFFER A FOURTH CONDITION TO INCLUDE A DOCUMENT SHOWING THE NEW TREE PRESERVATION ZONE OVERLAID ON THE TREE? SURVEY DOC? YES. OKAY. DO I HEAR A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION WHICH NOW HAS FOUR. RESTATE IT. ONE MORE TIME. INCLUDE IN THE SUBMITTAL WORK STAFF INCLUDED DOCUMENTS SHOWING THE NEW TREE PRESERVATION ZONE OVERLAID ON THE TREE SURVEY DOCUMENT. OKAY, SO A NEW TREE PRESERVATION. WHO'S A SECOND? BRUCE. FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. YEAH, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY. I MAY BE A LITTLE OUT OF ORDER, BUT I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. NO, THAT'S FINE. I THINK THIS IS TO THE APPLICANT. HAVE THE TREES ALREADY BEEN REMOVED? OKAY. THANK YOU. FURTHER DISCUSSION. GOOD, GOOD CATCH. OKAY. THE ROLL PLEASE, MR. SHELL. YES, MR. LARSEN? YES, MR. WALLACE? YES, MR. KIRBY. YES, MISS BRIGGS? YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE APPLICATION WITH THE CONDITIONS 
          [VIII. Poll members for comment]
IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE CONDITION AS STATED BY CHAIR KIRBY. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS? OH, GOOD LUCK. GOOD LUCK. BOARD MEMBERS FOR COMMENT. SARAH. NOTHING FOR ME. NO COMMENT. THANKS. NOTHING FOR ME. DAVE. AS A MEMBER OF THE CRA COMMITTEE, WE HAD OUR ANNUAL MEETING WHERE WE SURVEY THE. VARIOUS COMPANIES THAT HAVE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING AND STUFF. 
          AND WE DID OUR ANNUAL WE HAD OUR ANNUAL MEETING. WE APPROVED ALL THE MINUTES AND DID A QUICK TOUR 
          [02:25:02]
OF WHAT WAS THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW ALBANY. AND THAT'S ALL I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW, I CARRIED OUT MY DUTY AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE TO THAT BODY. 
          APPRECIATE THAT. BRUCE. YEAH. SO FOR THE AREA, US 62 OR WHATEVER IT'S CALLED, WHAT'S THE 62 ZONE? YEAH, THERE YOU GO. EXCUSE ME, THE TRIANGLE THING, BUT I CAN'T GET THAT IN MY HEAD. SO THE WE'RE ALL MEETING TOMORROW IS OUR LAST FOURTH AND LAST MEETING ON THAT. WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW THAT TOMORROW MORNING. GO THROUGH THAT IN DETAIL. AND THEN THERE'S GOING TO BE A OPEN HOUSE FOR THAT DECEMBER 2ND. YEP. FROM 6 TO 8. YEP. SO PEOPLE CAN GO BACK AND COMMENT AND LOOK AT IT. 
          SO JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU AN
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.