May 05, 2025 Planning Commission

[I. Call to order]

[00:00:11]

READING OF THE NEW ALBANY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR MONDAY, MAY 5TH, TO ORDER. IF WE COULD HAVE THE ROLL, PLEASE, MR. KIRBY. MR. WALLACE, PRESENT. MR. SHELL. PRESENT. MISS BRIGGS HERE, MR. LARSON. PRESENT. THERE ARE FOUR VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT. WE HAVE COUNCIL MEMBER WILTROUT HERE. SORRY, FOUR VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT. WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU. FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA

[III. Action on minutes: April 21, 2025]

[V. Hearing of visitors for items not on tonight's agenda ]

IT'S BEEN THERE FOR MORE THAN A MONTH. IT'S NEVER BEEN THERE BEFORE. EVEN WHEN IT WAS DRY BACK A FEW WEEKS AGO, IT NEVER FULLY WENT AWAY. SO THIS HAS BEEN MORE THAN A MONTH THAT IT'S SITTING THERE. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IT FOR A COUPLE REASONS. ONE, IF IT DOESN'T GO AWAY THIS SUMMER, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MOSQUITOES BREEDING IN THAT STANDING WATER. TWO IT'S LEAKING ACROSS OUR PROPERTY, SO IT IS SENDING MORE WATER BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENED IS WHEN THEY TOOK THE TREES DOWN, THEY TOOK THE TOPSOIL OFF AND THEY COMPACTED THE GROUND UNDERNEATH IT. AND ON THE SIDE CLOSEST TO MY PROPERTY IS THE LOW SIDE. SO THE WATER IS FUNNELED THERE. IT'S SITTING THERE BECAUSE IT'S COMPACTED NOW. IT'S NOT SEEPING INTO THE GROUND WATER TABLE. IT'S COMING ACROSS. I MEAN, THEY HAVE PUT UP, THEY'VE DONE SEVERAL THINGS AND I'VE GONE THERE, I DON'T KNOW, THEY'RE CONSTRUCTION WORKERS. THEY'RE HAVE, HAVE WE'VE TRIED TO WORK WITH THEM TO GET THINGS DONE AND THEY PUT UP SOME ADDITIONAL THOSE BAGS THAT THEY PUT ACROSS THOSE LONG TUBES TO TRY AND STOP IT. IT'S STILL FLOWING ACROSS. IT IS FLOODING MY SEPTIC FIELD IN THE FRONT OF MY HOUSE. THERE'S WATER THERE THAT NORMALLY AFTER RAIN THERE MIGHT PUDDLE WATER DOWN THERE, BUT WITHIN AN HOUR OF THE RAIN STOPPING, IT'S GONE. LIKE IN THE LAST DAY. THE WATER STAYED FOR THE FULL TIME UNTIL IT STARTED RAINING AND IT WAS STILL THERE. IT NEVER WENT AWAY. IT'S LITERALLY FLOWING FROM THEIR SITE TO OURS. WE HAVE TALKED TO THEM, BUT IT'S JUST GETTING TO THE POINT NOW THAT, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T USE THAT PROPERTY, THAT PART OF MY YARD FOR THE DOG TO RUN AROUND BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE MUDDY. SO THAT IS A CONCERN. I DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN

[00:05:07]

BUT IT IS A CONDITION THAT WE'RE AWARE OF AND WE'RE ACTIVELY KIND OF FIXING AND GOING TO GET TAKEN CARE OF. IS THERE A IS THERE A PROCESS IN PLACE TO KEEP THE HOMEOWNER INFORMED OF, OF THE REVIEW AND, AND THESE STEPS THAT, YEAH, WE'LL WE'LL CONTINUE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE ADDRESSED. WE'RE ACTIVELY PUTTING OUT ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE AND FILTER SOCK ALONG THAT AREA JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT ANY WATER THAT'S RUNNING OFF FROM THAT BERM THAT WASN'T ANTICIPATED TO BE THERE IS GOING TO BE FILTERED THROUGH. OVERALL, THERE'S STILL WE HAVE EXPERIENCED A LOT OF RAIN RECENTLY AND IT'S JUST A WET CONDITION. AND THERE'S WE'RE JUST TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, MANAGE IT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT IT'S INSPECTED ON A DAILY BASIS. GREAT. MISS DAVIS, DO YOU HAVE HIS CONTACT INFORMATION? DO YOU NOT CURRENTLY? OKAY, SO YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT EMAIL. THE THING IS I DON'T SEE THIS AS BEING UNFORESEEN. I MEAN, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PART OF THE PLANNING PROCESS. WE KNEW IT'S LOWER ON THAT SIDE OF THE PIECE OF PROPERTY. IT'S BEEN MORE THAN A MONTH SINCE THEY TOOK THAT TOPSOIL OUT OF THERE. THEY'VE BEEN WORKING HARD ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, BUT THAT POND HAS BEEN SITTING THERE FOR A MONTH. GRANTED, RIGHT NOW IT'S, YOU KNOW, TWICE, THREE TIMES THE SIZE OF WHAT IT WAS, BUT I GUESS I DON'T SEE THAT UNFORESEEN BECAUSE I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BASED ON THE SLOPE OF THE PROPERTY. AND IT'S BEEN MORE THAN A MONTH THAT THEY SHOULD

[00:10:03]

[VI. Cases]

THE AEP SUBSTATION. CAN WE HEAR FROM STAFF? YEAH. I DON'T THINK SIERRA HAS ANYTHING TO ADD RIGHT NOW. SO SHE ASKED IF I WOULD JUST JUMP IN SINCE I LEFT YOU GUYS OR WROTE YOU A NOTE REGARDING THE STANDARDS AND SOME BACKGROUND AS TO WHAT'S HAPPENED SINCE THE MATTER WAS TABLED. AND HERE WITH ME TODAY IS ROBERT DOVE. HE'S A PARTNER AT KEGLER BROWN, WHO DOES A LOT OF ENERGY STUFF TO HELP OUT WITH ISSUES AS THEY MAY ARISE. BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, I TRIED TO OUTLINE SOME OF THE CONSIDERATIONS AND STANDARDS THAT WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT LAST TIME. AND GENERALLY SPEAKING, BECAUSE THIS CAME UP. AEP, IF THEY ESTABLISH CERTAIN CRITERIA THAT LIMITS YOUR AUTHORITY AND YOUR ABILITY TO REGULATE THE CONSTRUCTION, LOCATION AND USE OF THE SUBSTATION, AS YOU SAW IN THE NOTE THAT I SENT, AEP HAS SENT AN EMAIL ASSERTING THAT THEIR DEVELOPMENT MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A PUBLIC UTILITY FACILITY. AND THEN WHEN YOU LOOK AT A PUBLIC UTILITY FACILITY AND WHAT THE CITY CAN AND CANNOT REGULATE, ONCE THEY ESTABLISH OR TRY TO ESTABLISH THE THREE ADDITIONAL CRITERIA, AT THAT POINT, THE CITY CANNOT UNREASONABLY REGULATE THE AGAIN, THE CONSTRUCTION, LOCATION, USE OF THE PUBLIC FACILITY AND THE THREE CRITERIA. AND AGAIN, I TRIED TO OUTLINE WHAT THEY WERE AND HOW AEP RESPONDED TO THEM LEADING UP TO THIS MEETING. BUT THE FIRST ONE IS THE SERVICE NECESSARY FOR THE CONVENIENCE OR WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC SERVED BY THE PUBLIC UTILITY. THE SECOND ONE IS IT CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED SAFETY STANDARDS, AND THREE, DOES IT NOT UNREASONABLY AFFECT WITH THE WELFARE OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC? AND AGAIN, AEP WOULD ASSERT THAT IT MEETS ALL OF THOSE CRITERIA, THEREBY LIMITING YOUR ABILITY TO ISSUE REGULATIONS OR RESTRICTIONS, I GUESS I SHOULD SAY, AS IT RELATES TO THE USE, LOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE SITE, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE HERE TONIGHT. WE HAD SOME WRANGLING BACK AND FORTH. I THINK AEP TOOK THE POSITION WELL. I KNOW THEY TOOK THE POSITION BECAUSE THEY SAID IT THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE HERE TONIGHT. WE DISAGREE. THEY CERTAINLY HAVE TO BE HERE AND PUT ON THE RECORD THAT THEY MEET THOSE STANDARDS. YOU STILL CAN HAVE INTERACTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS AND TRY TO WORK ON SOME REGULATIONS OR RESTRICTIONS. BUT IF AEP VIEWS THOSE AS BEING UNREASONABLE AND YOU STILL TRY TO ASSERT THEM ON THEM, THEN THE COURT, THE MATTER JUST PROCEEDS TO COURT IN THIS SITUATION. BUT AGAIN, I THINK AEP IS HERE TONIGHT TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND MEET THEIR OBLIGATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER THE CODE. AND CAN I ASK A QUESTION, WHO IS WHAT IS THE ENTITY THAT MAKES THE DETERMINATION IF THOSE THREE REQUIREMENTS ARE SATISFIED? IS THAT UNDER OUR JURISDICTION. YEAH. SO IT'S FOR THE PLANNING.

SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD DECIDE THEY'RE GOING TO GET THE EVIDENCE. AND AGAIN THEY'VE ALREADY SUBMITTED AN EMAIL SAYING THEY MEET IT. AND I THINK PLANNING COMMISSION CAN ASK THEM QUESTIONS AND THEY CAN SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH YOU. AND THEN ULTIMATELY FOR PLANNING COMMISSION TO DECIDE WHAT RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, IT WANTS TO PUT ON THERE. AND AGAIN, IF AEP IS NOT HAPPY WITH IT OR THEY BELIEVE THAT IT'S AN UNREASONABLE RESTRICTION ON THEIR USE, CONSTRUCTION AND LOCATION, THEN THEIR REMEDY IS TO GO TO COURT AND THE COURT WILL DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE'VE ACTED REASONABLY OR UNREASONABLY. OKAY. AND THE

[00:15:01]

CORRECT. WELL, THE RESTRICTIONS WOULD BE LIKE IF THEY PUT A CERTAIN REQUIREMENT OR CONDITION ON THE DEVELOPMENT, THAT WOULD BE SO IF, IF, IF AEP GETS UP, PRESENTS ALL THE INFORMATION, SAYS THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM THOSE PROVISIONS, THE PLANNING COMMISSION SAYS NO, WE STILL WANT TO PUT THESE CONDITIONS OUT THERE. AND AEP WOULD VIEW THAT AS UNREASONABLE. THEN IT WOULD GO TO THE COURT AT THAT POINT. SO RIGHT NOW, STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED TWO CONDITIONS TO THE APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION. AND WHEN WE WERE HERE BACK IN FEBRUARY, THERE WAS EXTENSIVE DISCUSSION ABOUT LANDSCAPING AND SOME SCREENING ISSUES THAT THE ADJACENT LANDOWNERS AND HOMEOWNERS HAD RAISED BEFORE THE COMMISSION. AND I THINK WE TABLED THE APPLICATION THAT EVERYBODY'S AGREEMENT SO THAT THERE COULD BE SOME ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION BETWEEN AEP AND THE HOMEOWNERS. IS THAT EVERYBODY'S RECOLLECTION? IT'S MY RECOLLECTION. IS THAT A YES? OKAY. THERE WAS ALSO DISCUSSION. I LOOKED WHEN I LOOKED AT THE MINUTES ABOUT SOME SORT OF A RENDERING OF WHAT THE FACILITY WAS GOING TO LOOK LIKE, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GET ANY SORT OF RENDERING OR, OR. THREE DIMENSIONAL DEPICTION OF WHAT THE FACILITY WAS GOING TO LOOK LIKE. AND I DIDN'T SEE SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN OUR PACKET. DID WE RECEIVE ANYTHING LIKE THAT FROM FROM AEP? I DO NOT BELIEVE SO. I DO KNOW AEP HAS SOME DISPLAYS THAT THEY WANT TO PUT UP. OH SUPER. THAT'D BE CORRECT. OKAY. THAT'D BE GREAT. ALL RIGHT. WELL WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT JUST YET. YEAH. AND I THINK YOU RECEIVED THE EMAIL THAT AEP SUBMITTED, I GUESS, EXPLAINING HOW THEY THEY BELIEVE THEY'VE MET THE CRITERIA. SO I THINK THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. BUT AS FAR AS ANYTHING ELSE, I'M NOT SURE. YEAH, WE I DID SEE THAT I HAD A THEN I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. SO AS I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT TONIGHT AS THE WAY YOU JUST EXPLAINED IT TONIGHT, AND THEN IN THE MATERIALS YOU SENT US IN THE STAFF REPORT. SO.

IF, IF AEP MEETS THE DEFINITION FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT OF A PUBLIC UTILITY FACILITY, THEN AS LONG AS AEP SATISFIES THOSE THREE CRITERIA THAT YOU MENTIONED BEFORE, THEN THAT MAY BE ALL THE REGULATION THAT WE CAN REQUIRE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE DISCUSSION THAT YOU PUT IN THE STAFF REPORT. OF THAT SUPREME COURT DECISION THAT TALKED ABOUT HOW THE PUBLIC UTILITY HAS TO MAKE SOME SORT OF SINCERE ATTEMPT TO COMPLY WITH THE REGULATIONS. YEAH. SO THAT'S WHAT THE COURTS HAVE SAID. AND THERE'S CERTAINLY PROVISIONS STILL WITHIN THAT STATUTE THAT SAYS THEY STILL HAVE TO COME FOR YOU AND GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND TALK. IT'S JUST ONCE THEY MEET THOSE CRITERIA, THEN YOU'RE MUCH MORE LIMITED, IF AT ALL, ON THE, THE, THE CONSTRUCTION LOCATION AND USE. SO YOU CAN HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS. AND AGAIN, THAT'S WHERE THE REASONABLENESS OF WHATEVER RESTRICTIONS LEADS THE PARTIES TO COURT. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS. AGAIN, YOU CAN TALK ABOUT IT. AND I KNOW THAT THERE WERE LIKE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT STAFF HAS TALKED WITH THEM ABOUT THAT THEY WORK THROUGH ALREADY THAT THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CONTINUE TO HAVE THOSE TYPES OF DISCUSSIONS. SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THAT SUPREME COURT CASE, THAT'S THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING VERSUS LAKEWOOD CASE THAT YOU PUT IN THERE. THE REFERENCE TO REGULATIONS OF THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION WOULD BE WOULD WOULD INCLUDE OUR LOCAL ORDINANCES. YES, AS WELL AS ANY CONDITIONS THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO PLACE ON THE APPLICATION, I BELIEVE. YES. AND SO IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING CONDITIONS ON THE APPLICATION, THEN WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT SORT OF THE LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING ISSUES THAT WE DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY. IS THAT FAIR? SURE. I MEAN, THOSE ARE CERTAINLY TWO EXAMPLES OF CONDITIONS. I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE'VE HAD IN THE COUPLE OF YEARS I'VE BEEN HERE, THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF CONDITIONS THAT HAVE COME UP. BUT THOSE ARE CERTAINLY TWO EXAMPLES. CERTAINLY. ALL RIGHT. AND IS THE APPLICANT BEEN MADE AWARE OF THE CONDITIONS NOTED IN OUR STAFF REPORT? YES, THEY HAVE. AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE THEY'RE AGREEABLE TO THE TWO CONDITIONS. SO THE TWO ALREADY IN THERE, THEY'RE THE TWO ALREADY. YES. OKAY. WE'LL WE'LL PROBABLY COVER THAT LATER, BUT OKAY. DOES EVER DO THE COMMISSION MEMBERS HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT THE STANDARD IS THAT WE'RE NEEDING TO APPLY TONIGHT AND, AND YEAH, WE'RE READY TO GO. OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE FURTHER FROM STAFF OTHER THAN THAN THE LAW DIRECTORS SORT OF PREAMBLE, SO TO SPEAK? NO, I DO KNOW THAT AEP HAS SOME PEOPLE

[00:20:04]

WE'RE HOPING TO HAVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD SHARE WITH THE COMMUNITY IN THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS, WHERE WE WOULD PRESENT TO THE COMMUNITY THE PROJECT AS A WHOLE, BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT THE TRANSMISSION LINES AS WELL AS THE SUBSTATION SHARE THE VISUAL SYSTEMS WE WERE GOING TO SHARE TONIGHT AS WELL, HAVE A PROJECT WEBSITE AND BE ABLE TO SHARE THOSE DETAILS WITH THE COMMUNITY. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE PROCEED. THANK YOU. SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT.

I JUST. MAYBE. OKAY. SORRY. WHILE WE'RE WAITING FOR THE SETUP, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT MR. KIRBY HAS ARRIVED AT THE MEETING. THANK YOU. MR. TO THE USE OF THE SUBSTATION. ONE QUICK. CAN YOU MAKE SURE YOU GET THEM TURNED SO THE PUBLIC AS WELL AS WE CAN SEE. MAYBE ONE EACH OR SOMETHING THAT SHOULD WORK. AND IF ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC WANTS TO MOVE AROUND A LITTLE BIT TO GET A BETTER LOOK, I'M CERTAINLY COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. SO, DAN, THERE'S NO HANDOUTS OF THESE. CORRECT. THEY'RE NOT AVAILABLE YET FOR DISTRIBUTION, BUT I COULD HAND THEM I HAVE A COUPLE COPIES I CAN YOU GUYS. SO WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT ANGLES OF THE SUBSTATION THAT WE SHOW. SO THE ONE OVER HERE TO MY LEFT WOULD BE FROM ACTUALLY MR. TONY'S PROPERTY. MR. TONY WAS ONE OF THE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE PUBLIC THAT HAD SPOKEN AT THE LAST MEETING. AND SO HE HAD SOME CONCERNS, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE TOP PHOTO THAT IS THAT INITIAL PLANTING. SO THE TREES AT THAT HEIGHT ARE ABOUT 6 TO 7FT TALL. BUT AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE BOTTOM

[00:25:04]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THESE ARE COPIES OF WHAT ARE ON THE EASELS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. JUST A QUICK REFERENCE. THE. ON THAT ON THAT THE BUILDING THAT WE SEE IS CANINE COMPANIONS, CORRECT? YES. THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. SOME OF THE OTHER CONCERNS THAT WERE ADDRESSED WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING WAS THERE'S A LEISURE TRAIL THAT WAS REQUESTED. YOU CAN SEE THAT IN THE PHOTO VISUAL. TO MY RIGHT THERE IS A TRAIL THAT GOES ALONG THE ROAD THERE, AS WELL AS THE HORSE FENCE AS WELL. SO THAT IS ADDED.

ARE THESE TREES ON THE MICROPHONE ON ARE THESE. IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S SOME SORT OF MOUNTINGS OR LIKE A BERM ON THE VISUAL FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY. YES. THERE WAS A REQUEST TO EXTEND THAT MOUND. SO WE DID EXTEND THE MOUND AND ADDED THE TREES. AND HOW TALL IS THE MOUNDING? 6 TO 6 TO EIGHT FEET. QUICK, QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF WITH WITH THE ADDITIONAL MOUNDING AND THE TALK ABOUT THE LIGHTS ON DEMAND, SINCE THEY'VE ALREADY AGREED TO DO THAT, DO WE STILL NEED TO MAKE THOSE PART OF PART OF THE RECORD AND PART OF THE CONDITIONS? YEAH, AND I KNOW THEY DID ADD THE TREES IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER. THEY'RE NOT TECHNICALLY NATURALIZED. SO I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THAT CONDITION IN THERE. THANK YOU. SO.

YOU REFERENCED IT EARLIER, BUT CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE FEASIBILITY STUDY THAT YOU'RE GOING UNDERGOING RIGHT NOW. AND JUST LIKE KIND OF TIMELINE ON WHEN YOU THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON THAT. AND THAT WAS FOR THE TRANSMISSION LINE. IS THAT CORRECT. SO WE'RE CURRENTLY EVALUATING WHERE TO LOCATE THE TRANSMISSION LINE. SO THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY WE DON'T HAVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON WHERE THAT'S GOING TO GO. WE DO KNOW THAT WE NEED TO CONNECT TO AN EXISTING LINE THAT IS LOCATED TO THE NORTHWEST. I DO HAVE. AN AERIAL VIEW IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE WHERE THAT EXISTING TRANSMISSION LINE IS LOCATED, THAT'D BE HELPFUL.

THANK YOU. OKAY, SO I THINK YOU HAVE ENOUGH FOR ALL OF US. YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY.

[00:30:09]

IS IT RUNNING DOWN THE ROAD? IS IT ON WALNUT STREET? WHAT ROAD IS THAT A ROAD? NO, NO OKAY.

THAT'S RIGHT. WALNUT IS ONE BLOCK DOWN. YEAH. THIS IS WALNUT OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. WHAT WAS THE ANSWER? WHAT WAS THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION? IT'S NOT ALONG THE ROAD OKAY. IT'S THE PROBLEM IS YOU'RE YOU'RE SITTING THERE IN THE MICROPHONE IS NOT GOING TO PICK UP WHAT YOU SAID. SO I WAS TRYING TO MAKE SURE THE RECORD HAS THAT. WHY DON'T YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND REPEAT WHAT YOU HAD SAID PREVIOUSLY. FOR THE RECORD, JENNIFER WILLIS, I'M WITH AEP AND THE LINE, THE CURRENT LINE THAT EXISTS GOES THROUGH ROCKY FORK PARK. IF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THAT. YEAH.

OKAY. YES. GOOD. THANK YOU. YEAH. I DROVE THROUGH THE AREA. I DID NOT SEE ANY LARGE TRANSMISSION LINES THAT WERE ACTUALLY VISIBLE WHEN I WENT UP TO SOUDER EXTENSION THERE, SO I WAS WONDERING WHERE THE LINES WERE. SO I APPRECIATE YOUR CLARIFYING THAT. SURE.

[00:35:11]

OKAY, I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR SOME COMMENT. TONIGHT'S MEETING ON EACH OF THOSE THREE ELEMENTS. THAT'S MY CUE NAME AND HECTOR GARCIA, SANTANA AND COUNSEL FOR AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER HIGHER TRANSMISSION COMPANY. THE APPLICANT AND I CAN PROVIDE EXTENSIVE INFORMATION AS NECESSARY ABOUT HOW THIS WORKS IN TERMS OF ITS RELATIONSHIP TO THE FACILITIES THAT WILL BE EVALUATED BY THE OHIO POWER SITING BOARD, WHICH ARE THE JURISDICTION OF TRANSMISSION LINES THAT CONNECT INTO IT, AND HOW THAT INTERPLAYS WITH WHAT THIS SUBSTATION IS, WHICH IS WHAT THEY CALL A STEP DOWN SUBSTATION, WHICH IS NOT OHIO PARASITE IN ONE JURISDICTION.

AND INSTEAD IT'S SIMPLY SUBJECT TO THE WHAT THEY CALL THE HOT WIRES ACT. SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THAT INTERPLAYS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. AND I CAN REITERATE THE EMAIL THAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO QUOTES, MY STATEMENTS. AND, AND I VOUCH FOR THEM TO BE ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. OKAY. SO WHO ACTUALLY ANSWERED THESE QUESTIONS? WAS THAT COUNCIL OR WAS THAT SOMEBODY FROM AEP? AND ARE YOU SUPPORTIVE OF THE ANSWER? YEAH, TO THE EXTENT THAT I REVIEWED THE STAFF REPORT AND I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING THERE THAT GAVE ME ANY CONCERN, IT SEEMS ACTUALLY VERY WELL PREPARED. AND AGAIN, THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE ESTABLISHED, THERE SEEM TO BE ENTIRELY WITHIN WHAT CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH THE PROJECT, AND IT DOES MAKE REFERENCE TO RESPONSES ABOUT HOW, FOR EXAMPLE, THE FACILITIES ARE GOING TO BE OPERATING AT OR GREATER THAN WHAT THEY CALL 22 KV, 22,000 KILOWATT VOLTS. AND YEAH, THOSE STATEMENTS ARE MY. MAYBE WE I DON'T WANT TO TAKE THIS MEETING FROM YOU ALL, BUT IT MIGHT IT MIGHT BE GOOD TO GO THROUGH EACH OF THE BUCKETS HERE AND JUST KIND OF ASK HECTOR ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WERE THE FINDINGS AND IF THERE'S ANY MORE SORT OF HARD FACTS THAT SUPPORT THOSE. SURE, I THINK SO. THAT'D BE FINE. IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO, I CAN PROBABLY TRY TO GO THROUGH THE STATEMENTS MYSELF. IF YOU PREFER TO ASK ME QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. LET'S SEE IF I CAN FIND THE MATERIALS HERE. I THINK IT'S PAGE TWO OF EIGHT OF THE STAFF REPORT. I THINK THAT I HAVE IT. MY EYESIGHT IS NOT WHAT IT USED TO BE. SO THERE'S A FIRST A REFERENCE OF A PUBLIC UTILITY. IT IS AP. IT'S ACTUALLY ONE OF THE LARGEST UTILITIES IN THE COUNTRY. OWNS. IT'S PROBABLY THE UTILITY THAT HAS THE MOST TRANSMISSION LINES IN THE COUNTRY, AND CERTAINLY IN THE STATE OF OHIO. AEP HAS ACTUALLY QUITE A BIT OF TRANSMISSION DEVELOPMENT IN WILDERNESS, BUT YOU MAY BE AWARE OF. IT ALSO MAKES REFERENCE TO THE FACILITIES BEING NECESSARY TO SERVE THE PUBLIC. AND AS IT WAS STATED BEFORE, THESE ARE ACTUALLY CRITICAL. THERE ARE FORECASTS OF THE NEEDS FOR THE AREA THAT INDICATES THAT EXISTING FACILITIES ARE INSUFFICIENT TO OPERATE APPROPRIATELY. IT'S WHAT THEY CALL SYSTEM OVERLOADS. AND WITHOUT THESE FACILITIES, PARTICULARLY IN LIGHT OF SPECIFIC SERVICE AT PRESENT, REQUIRE REQUESTED BY EXISTING CUSTOMERS, THESE ARE NECESSARY IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THAT SYSTEM. DO YOU HAVE ANY OF THAT DATA WITH YOU TODAY? I DON'T KNOW IF

[00:40:04]

IT'S WHAT THEY CALL A REGIONAL TRANSMISSION ORGANIZATION THAT COORDINATES THE PLANNING NOT ONLY IN OHIO, BUT IN 13 STATES AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. OKAY. SO LIKE A HALF THE SORT OF A VERY LARGE REGION SHOWING THE POWER. YEAH. AND WITHIN THAT SYSTEM, THIS TYPE OF PROJECT GETS EVALUATED FOR WHAT THEY CALL A DO NO HARM ANALYSIS. SO THEY NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S PLUGGED INTO THE ENTIRE. MODEL OF HOW THE ELECTRIC SYSTEM WORKS REGIONALLY, AND THAT THESE FACILITIES ARE EXPECTED TO OPERATE AS THEY ARE INTENDED TO, AND THEN THEY'RE ESSENTIALLY MODELED. IT'S WHAT THEY CALL THE M-3 PROCESS. IT'S REGULATED BY FERC, I SHOULD SAY, THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION. YEAH. SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO MOVE ON FROM THAT POINT, THE ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION MEMBERS ON THE FIRST? YEAH. FACTOR, I GUESS, AND MAYBE THE BEST WAY TO ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THAT FIRST FACTOR, THE NECESSITY FACTOR. NOT FOR ME. I MEAN, HECTOR HAS INDICATED THERE WAS ANALYZES AND FORECASTS THAT WERE DONE THAT INDICATE THAT THAT THIS STEPPED DOWN STATION IS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE THE ELECTRICAL CAPABILITY. AND THE NEW ALBANY AREA AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. THAT'S CORRECT. THE COMPANY IS RESPONSIBLE REGIONALLY FOR MAKING THAT ANALYSIS AND THEN SUBMITTING THAT ANALYSIS TO PJM TO BE INTEGRATED INTO THE REGIONAL ANALYSIS. SO THAT'S CORRECT. AND PJM AGREED, AGREED WITH THE NEED. YEAH, PJM ACTUALLY FOR THIS TYPE OF PROJECT, WHAT THEY DO IS THAT THEY DO I MENTIONED IT NO HARM ANALYSIS. SO WHAT THEY DO IS THAT THEY MAKE A DETERMINATION THAT THE FACILITIES THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED BY THE LOCAL UTILITY ARE, IN FACT, SOMETHING THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT. AND THEN THAT ACTUALLY GOING TO SELL EASES THE GREATER REGIONAL NEEDS, BECAUSE THE MORE THAT THE LOCAL SYSTEMS ARE BUILT UP, THAT ACTUALLY MAKES THE SYSTEM AS A WHOLE STURDIER, MORE RESILIENT. AND THEY IDENTIFIED THIS PROJECT AS A AS A PART OF THAT. OH, ABSOLUTELY. THIS IS THIS SOUDER ROAD PROJECT. YEAH, THIS AND A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER ONES. BUT YEAH, PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING. THE WORD THAT THEY USE IS TOPOLOGY. ANYTHING THAT CHANGES THE STRUCTURE, ELECTRICAL STRUCTURE OF THE SYSTEM NEEDS TO BE SUBMITTED TO PJM SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE SURE THAT THE SYSTEM IS WORKING IN AN INTEGRATED BASIS, A LONG WAY OF SAYING THE SYSTEM DOESN'T FRY ITSELF. YEAH. SECOND FACTOR. YEAH. SO IF I UNDERSTAND THE OTHER, ANOTHER ONE OF THE FACTORS IS THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAFETY REQUIREMENTS. AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT THOSE ARE VERY STRINGENT. THERE IS A. A GENERAL GUIDANCE THAT IT'S APPLICABLE TO ESSENTIALLY ANYTHING THAT IT'S IN THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. IT'S CALLED THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL SAFETY CODE. AND OF COURSE, ALL ALL OF THESE FACILITIES ARE REQUIRED TO MEET THE STANDARDS THAT ARE SET SET IN THERE. AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT FOR PRACTICAL PURPOSES, THOSE STANDARDS ARE EXCEEDED, OFTEN BY QUITE A MARGIN. IT'S NECESSARY IN ORDER TO PERFORM GOOD UTILITY PRACTICE. BUT FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW, AS FAR AS THE STATUTE REQUIRES, THE STANDARDS BOTH AS TO SAFETY AND OF THE OPERATION AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FACILITIES, IT'S STRINGENT AND THE FACILITIES ARE REQUIRED TO MEET THOSE STANDARDS. HOW IS COMPLIANCE WITH THE STANDARDS ENFORCED OR UNINSURED? IS IT A SELF CERTIFICATION PROCESS, OR IS THERE SOME SORT OF OUTSIDE REVIEW? IF IT WAS NECESSARY, THERE WOULD BE AN OUTSIDE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS. WE NEVER GET IT TO GET REMOTELY CLOSE TO THAT. AND THEN ON TOP OF THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL SAFETY CODE, WHICH IS KIND OF LIKE MORE SPECIFIC, THERE IS A LARGER SYSTEM OF RELIABILITY ENFORCED BY A FEDERAL AGENCY CALLED NEWARK. WHICH IS ALSO DESCRIBED

[00:45:02]

AND IF SOMEBODY COULD HELP ME I THINK THERE IS A OH OF COURSE WHETHER THESE ARE IMPOSING AN UNREASONABLE. IMPOSITION ON THE ON THE COMMUNITY, I CAN TELL YOU WE ACTUALLY TAKE THAT QUITE SERIOUSLY. AND THE SITING PROCESS FOR DECIDING WHERE TO PUT THESE THINGS AND HOW TO ESSENTIALLY PUT THEM IN SUCH A WAY THAT THEY CAN SERVE THE PUBLIC WITHOUT IMPOSING AN UNREASONABLE BURDEN ON WHERE THEY ARE LOCATED. THAT'S IF I MAY ROUTINE. WE ARE REQUIRED TO DO THAT. WE TRY TO DO IT EVERYWHERE. AND. ONE OF THE REASONS WE ARE HERE AND MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED, IS BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING TO ESSENTIALLY BE GOOD NEIGHBORS. WE HAVE FOUND THAT IT'S IN THE LONG RUN, NOT THE WAY TO DO THINGS FOR US TO TRY TO. I'M GOING TO SAY, CHAFE OUR ENVIRONMENT. WE FIND THAT IT'S MUCH BETTER FOR US TO TRY TO COOPERATE AND MAKE SURE THAT IF THERE IS A CONCERN, TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN ADDRESS IT, WE DO. ONE THING THAT I WOULD HIGHLIGHT IS THAT WE ARE ALSO STEWARDS OF THE COST OF THE SYSTEM. SO SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO SAY NO. WE TRY NOT TO SAY NO, BUT THERE ARE LIMITS TO THE THINGS THAT CAN REASONABLY BE DONE IN ORDER TO ADDRESS A CONCERN. COULD YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO THE SELECTION OF THIS PARTICULAR SITE AND SORT OF THE, YOU KNOW, QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL DISCUSSED WHEN DETERMINING THAT THE LOCATION OF THE SITE, WHICH YOU KNOW, IS, YOU KNOW, NEAR NEIGHBOR NEIGHBORHOODS, THAT IT WOULD NOT UNREASONABLY AFFECT THE WELFARE OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC. YEAH, CERTAINLY. ALTHOUGH FOR THE DETAILS, I PROBABLY SHOULD TAG IN ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES THAT IT'S INSULTING. AND IF YOU NEED FURTHER QUESTIONS, I CAN COME BACK. YEAH. THAT'S THE BEST WAY YOU CAN. LOCATION WISE. OUR CUSTOMERS ARE RIGHT WITHIN THE AREA. WE DO NEED TO REASONABLY BE CLOSE TO THEM TO BE ABLE TO FACILITATE POWER IN A REASONABLE MANNER. SO THE LOCATION IS SERVING CUSTOMERS THAT ARE NEARBY THE STATION LOCATION. AND THAT'S ESSENTIALLY THE REASON THE LOCATION WAS SELECTED. AND CAN YOU GIVE US SORT OF A DEFINITION OF NEARBY IS THERE I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS OR ISN'T, BUT USUALLY IT'S A IT'S A LITTLE VAGUE NEARBY. IT'S A LITTLE VAGUE. I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S A STANDARD THAT I THINK THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE ASKING IS HOW CLOSE THIS ONE IS. IN FACT, IN GENERAL. YEAH. CONTRACTUALLY. ARE WE ANSWERING THAT THERE THERE ARE TWO CUSTOMERS THAT WILL BE SERVED IN ADDITION TO THE PUBLIC OUT OF THE STATION. THERE IS ONE WITHIN A STONE'S THROW AWAY. AND THEN THERE IS ONE THAT IS PROBABLY A HALF A MILE AWAY. OH, OKAY. I THINK THAT FALLS WITHIN NEARBY HALF A MILE, I WOULD SAY. OKAY. WERE THERE OTHER SITES CONSIDERED? YES. AND HOW DID YOU ULTIMATELY DECIDE ON THIS ONE? USUALLY IT COMES DOWN TO A SELECTION OF LOCATION AND THEN PRICE, AND THEN WHERE WE CAN REASONABLY FIT WITHIN OUR FOOTPRINT AND WHAT THE NEEDS ARE FOR THE STATION. IS THERE. ARE THERE LIMITS ON HOW CLOSE NEARBY MUST BE? IN OTHER WORDS, I'M NOT. THAT'S NOT A VERY GOOD QUESTION. BUT WHAT I'M ASKING, I GUESS, IS, IS HOW FAR? HOW FAR AWAY FROM YOUR CUSTOMER CAN YOU BE AND STILL BE CLOSE ENOUGH? WE'VE ESTABLISHED, I THINK, THAT HALF A MILE, I THINK, IS I'M SATISFIED. HALF A MILE IS PRETTY MUCH NEARBY. BUT DOES IT HAVE TO BE HALF A MILE? COULD IT BE A MILE? COULD IT BE TWO MILES? COULD IT BE THREE MILES? I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S AN EXACT I APOLOGIZE, IT TURNED OUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S AN EXACT DEFINITION TO HOW FAR IT CAN BE. THE NECESSITY JUST DICTATES THAT WE GET AS CLOSE AS WE CAN, AND WE ARE ABLE TO THEN BE THOSE CUSTOMERS SAFELY. THE LONGER, THE FARTHER YOU ARE AWAY FROM THE STATION, THE EASIER IT IS TO CREATE MORE ISSUES. OKAY. IF NOTHING ELSE, THE POWER LOSS

[00:50:03]

OKAY. SO I THINK WE'VE GONE OVER I THINK WHAT A INITIAL SORT OF BURDEN, IF THAT'S THE RIGHT WORD, IS. AND WE HEARD IN THE ORIGINAL PRESENTATION FROM MAGGIE WHAT CERTAIN ADDITIONAL AGREEMENTS THEY'VE MADE IN TERMS OF SOME LANDSCAPING, SOME THE LIGHTING MOUNTING, ETC. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT OF THE APPLICANT BEFORE WE OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC ON EITHER THE I WANT TO CALL THEM CONCESSIONS, BUT BUT THE AGREEMENTS THAT AEP HAS MADE IN RESPONSE TO OUR FEBRUARY MEETING, IS THERE ANYTHING ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR ANY FURTHER ANALYSIS, ANYTHING MORE THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD WANT TO ASK THEM AT THIS POINT? I GUESS I'M OPENING IT UP BEFORE WE OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC. NONE HERE. ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD. ALL RIGHT.

WELL, WHY DON'T WE OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC? I'M ASSUMING FROM WHEN I SWORE EVERYONE IN, THERE WERE SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT HAD INDICATED THEY WANTED TO SPEAK. DO WE HAVE SPEAKER? MR. CHAIR, I HAVE SOME SPEAKER CARDS. BUT BEFORE I FORGET, FOR THE RECORD, I WANT TO CALL TO YOUR ATTENTION AN EMAIL THAT I PUT AT EACH OF EACH OF YOUR PLACES FROM LOGAN BUREAU AND AN ATTACHMENT AND JUST ONE DOCUMENTS MOTION HAPPENS THAT THOSE WILL BE ADMITTED INTO THE RECORD. OH YEAH. WE WERE DEFINITELY GOING TO GET THAT. THE LEUKEMIA IN RESIDENCE ARTICLE WAS ATTACHED TO THAT EMAIL. OKAY. WELL, IF WE JUST REMIND ME IN THE END TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE BRING EVERYTHING INTO THE RECORD, ASSUMING WE DO THAT AT THE END OF THE CASE, THAT WE BRING THIS IN, AS WELL AS THE DEPICTIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT IN, ANYTHING ELSE ON AP MIGHT HAVE. THANK YOU. AND I HAVE FOUR SPEAKER CARDS. OKAY. MR. CRAIG SERBA. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS CRAIG SAVA. I LIVE AT 6837 EAST WALNUT STREET AND I'M THE CLOSEST NORTHERN NEIGHBOR TO THIS PROPOSED SUBSTATION. I'M GOING TO COMMENT FIRST ON WHAT WAS SAID BY AEP DURING THE MEETING TONIGHT. BEFORE I GET INTO A PRESENTATION THAT CONCERNS THE PAPERS THAT ARE BEING HANDED OUT TO YOU RIGHT NOW, THE I. I LOOK AT THESE DEPICTIONS OF WHAT THEY PLAN TO BUILD, AND I ASK, HOW TALL ARE THESE POSTS THAT THESE THESE TRANSMISSION LINES ARE ON NEXT TO THE STATION? IS IT 75FT? I'M SORRY YOU'RE ASKING. YES. COME UP. YES, YES. WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO. SORRY, BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE FOR A DIRECT QUESTION IS GET AN ANSWER RIGHT AWAY. SO FROM THE APPLICANT GO AHEAD. YEAH. KIND OF MAKES SENSE IF HAS A QUESTION A SPECIFIC QUESTION THAT THAT WE WANT AN ANSWER TO MIGHT BE HELPFUL. IF SOMEBODY FROM AEP JUST POP UP AND ANSWER IT.

BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE'LL HAVE TO KEEP TRACK AND GO BACK THROUGH. AND THAT MIGHT BE PROBLEMATIC. I MIGHT LOSE ONE. YEAH. MIGHT COME TO THE MIC JUST TO MAKE SURE WE GET IT ON THE RECORD. SORRY. ARE THESE STRUCTURES WE DO ANTICIPATE TO BE ANYWHERE FROM 130 TO 150, DEPENDING ON ENGINEERING IS NOT HERE TO SPEAK TO THOSE, BUT THAT IS WHAT WE WOULD TYPICALLY EXPECT. SO WE HAVE SHOWN THAT THE RENDERINGS OF ALL OF THESE POLES, I DON'T HAVE AN EXACT HEIGHT AND IT'S A PROPOSED HEIGHT AS WELL DEPENDING ON. DID THAT. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. LOOK AT. SO LET ME JUST JUST TO CLARIFY. WE'RE NOT CERTAIN WHAT THE HEIGHT WILL BE. YEAH, YEAH. IT MAY BE HELPFUL TO CREATE A CLARIFICATION HERE. THE SUBSTATION IT'S INTERCONNECTED

[00:55:05]

IT'S LIKE WE CAN SIMPLY PROVIDE INFORMATION GENERALLY ABOUT WHAT THOSE FACILITIES ARE GOING TO BE LIKE. BUT ONCE THEY ARE SPECIFIC, THAT IS ACTUALLY A MATTER THAT IT'S FOR THE OHIO POWER SITING BOARD. WHAT WOULD THE RANGE OF HEIGHT BE THE HIGHEST IT COULD BE VERSUS THE LOWEST? WELL, THOSE THINGS CHANGE DEPENDING ON THE SPECIFICS OF THE PROJECT. BUT IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, YOU SAY 150. YEAH, 150FT IS NOT UNUSUAL FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS 138 KV.

IT'S ACTUALLY SIGNIFICANT INFRASTRUCTURE, OKAY. AND THOSE ACTUALLY NEED TO BE AT THAT HEIGHT FOR IT TO BE SAFE ESSENTIALLY. THANK YOU. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? MR. SIR, AT LEAST ON THE HEIGHT DOES NOT, BECAUSE I WAS TOLD BY AP THAT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ON THE STATION WAS GOING TO BE 75FT. OKAY. WITH TWO DIFFERENT QUESTIONS HERE TO TEASE OUT. SO YEAH. SO WHAT IS THE HEIGHT IN THE FOOTPRINT OF THIS WITHIN THE SUBSTATION ITSELF. THE MAX HEIGHT IS 75FT. WHAT WE WERE REFERRING TO WAS THE TRANSMISSION LINES THAT ARE EXITING THE SUBSTATION. RIGHT, RIGHT IN FRONT OF AND SUBSTATION. CORRECT. GET BEHIND THE TRANSMISSION LINES. THAT'S ON THE SITE. CORRECT? YES. SO THAT THE MIC DON'T BE BEHIND THE MIC TRANSMISSION POLES THAT ARE ON THE SITE ON SOLDER ROAD THAT'S ON THE SITE. HOW TALL ARE THOSE POLES? YEAH, THOSE WOULD BE LIKE I SAID, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ENGINEERED AT THIS TIME. SO THEY COULD BE ANYWHERE BETWEEN 130 AND 150FT. ONCE THAT FINAL ENGINEERING DESIGN IS DONE. BUT THAT IS ALL PART OF THE OHIO POWER SITING BOARD AND NOT PART OF THE SUBSTATION ITSELF. IT FEEDS INTO THE SUBSTATION TO CONNECT THE SUBSTATION TO THE EXISTING TRANSMISSION LINE. AND JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT, BECAUSE THERE WAS REFERENCE TO THE OHIO SITING BOARD OR THE POWER SITING BOARD, AND WHEN IT'S UNDER THAT JURISDICTION, WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER IT.

SO IF IT FALLS UNDER THAT, THAT DEFINITION OF THE MAJOR UTILITY FACILITY AND UNDER THAT BOARD, WE CAN'T TOUCH IT. DO WE HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THE PROJECT AS A WHOLE, INCLUDING THESE INITIAL LINES ON THE PROPERTY NOW? SO AGAIN, IT DEPENDS. OKAY. IF IT MEETS IF THE COMMISSION'S SATISFIED THE AEP HAS MET THOSE THREE CRITERIA. YES. THE CITY CANNOT RESTRICT THE CONSTRUCTION LOCATION OR USE OF IT. SO AT THAT POINT, I MEAN, WE HAVE WE HAVE JURISDICTION BECAUSE WE'RE HERE AND THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS AND THEY'VE GOT TO TRY TO WORK WITH US. BUT IF THEY MEET THOSE, MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS, WE AND PLANNING COMMISSION'S HAPPY WITH IT. WE CANNOT RESTRICT THE LOCATION, USE OR CONSTRUCTION OF IT. GOT IT. DO THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW THE RULES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION? THE APPLICATION PROCESS? WE'RE HERE. SO I'D SAY, YEAH, THEY'VE FILED AN APPLICATION. OKAY. THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS. SO WE'RE WE'RE HERE ON THAT OKAY. SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT. IF WE HAVE JURISDICTION, THE ONLY JURISDICTION, THE ONLY AREA WE HAVE JURISDICTION OVER IS THE SITE ITSELF. BECAUSE THE POLES COMING INTO THE STATION, BRINGING THE POWER IN ARE AT A HIGH ENOUGH VOLTAGE OR WHATEVER, THAT THEY FALL UNDER THE POWER SITING JURISDICTION, WHICH WE CAN'T TOUCH. SO IF THEY IF, IF, IF, IF IT TURNS OUT THAT THAT BASED ON THE TYPE OF ENERGY THAT'S COMING THROUGH THERE, THAT IT FALLS UNDER THAT, THAT JURISDICTION, THE POWER BOARD, THEY CAN BE WHATEVER HEIGHT THEY ARE. WE HAVE NO SAY IN IT. AND I'LL LET ROBERT RESPOND TO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE, BECAUSE HE HAS MUCH MORE EXPERIENCE WITH THE SITING BOARD. BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THAT. THERE'S A PROCESS AT THE SITING BOARD WHERE THE CITY CAN INTERVENE AND PROVIDE COMMENT, I SUPPOSE, BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS NO SAY OVER THAT. SO YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT YOUR JURISDICTION OF THE SITE. AND THE SITE IS KIND OF A AN AMORPHOUS TERM BECAUSE THE SITE COULD INCLUDE THE TRANSMISSION POLES AS WELL AS THE SUBSTATION, THE SUBSTATION, TO MY UNDERSTANDING, FROM WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED, IS A DISTRIBUTION SUBSTATION. THAT

[01:00:03]

OKAY, I THINK YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTION. AND THAT'S I THINK THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING AT, IS THAT THE HEIGHT OF THOSE POLES COMING IN, IF THEY'RE UNDER THAT OTHER JURISDICTION, WE CANNOT LIMIT IT. WE CAN'T BE WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE THAT THAT FALLS UNDER THE OHIO POWER SITING BOARD'S PURVIEW. BUT THE SITE ITSELF AND THE SUBSTATION, THE SUBSTATION, THE SUBSTATION SEPARATING OUT THE POLES COMING IN IS WE HAVE SOME JURISDICTION OVER THAT, ALTHOUGH I UNDERSTAND THAT'S CONTESTED AS WELL. BUT, BUT BUT AS BEN MENTIONED A PIECE HERE AND THEY'VE MADE SOME AGREEMENTS ON WHAT SUBSTATION MIGHT LOOK LIKE. OKAY. I THINK WE CAN MOVE ON. GO AHEAD, MR. SAWYER. KEEP GOING. SO THE SCREENING THAT THEY SAID THEY'RE GOING TO PUT IN SHOWN ON THIS RENDITION OVER HERE OF THE I'M NOT SURE THE HARBOR LIGHTS THAT ARE PLANTED THERE ON TOP OF THE SIX FOOT MOUND THAT THEY SAY THEY'RE GOING TO INSTALL THERE. IF YOU LOOK OVER THE TOP OF THEM, YOU CAN SEE THAT YOU SEE SO MUCH OF THE SITE ALREADY. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN WAIT FOR 15 YEARS FOR THOSE TREES TO GET TALL ENOUGH TO BLOCK WHAT'S GOING TO BE ON THE SITE. OKAY, SO WHY DON'T YOU STOP THERE FOR A SECOND? OKAY. ALL RIGHT, LET'S BRING AP BACK UP. OKAY.

ACTUALLY, YOU DON'T KNOW. SO WHAT MR. IS SAYING IS I THINK I'M GOING TO INTERPRET HIS STATEMENT. IS THERE ANY WAY FOR AP TO PUT MORE MATURE TREES IN NOW THAT WILL BE MORE WILL BE LARGER AND BE BE MORE SCREENING AT THIS POINT. GO AHEAD, GO AHEAD. BUT I'M TRYING TO JUST BEFORE I DO THAT, I'VE REQUESTED A 12 FOOT MOUND FROM AEP. OKAY. WITH THE SCREENING THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT ON TOP OF THAT MOUND, BECAUSE THE EQUIPMENT ON THIS SITE IS SO TALL. OKAY, SO TO REPHRASE WHAT THE QUESTION TO AP IS, IS, IS THERE A WILL? IS THERE AN ABILITY TO GO TO 12FT AND MORE MATURE TREES. TO 12FT? YES. JOHN, COULD YOU TAKE THAT ONE JUST TO UNDERSTAND MORE ABOUT THE LANDSCAPE THAT EXISTS? AND I UNDERSTAND WE ALL I MEAN, THE COMMISSION IS WELL AWARE THAT AS, AS THE, AS THE, AS THE AS THE HEIGHT GOES UP ON THE MOUND, IT LOOKS IT DOESN'T LOOK AS NATURAL. WE'RE ALL AWARE OF THAT. PLEASE. BEAR ASSOCIATES FROM NEW PHILADELPHIA, OHIO, CIVIL ENGINEERING. THE QUESTION REGARDING A 12 FOOT MOUND. THERE'S NOT ENOUGH HORIZONTAL SPACE TO RIGHT NOW WE'RE PROJECTING TO GET TO 6 TO 8. YOU HAVE 2 TO 1 SIDE SLOPES TO GET A SIX FOOT WIDE. IS THAT ON THE SITE? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? THIS PROJECTED MOUND AT THE TOP THAT MATCHES THE EXISTING MOUND THAT'S IN THAT'S IN THE AGREEMENT FROM WHEN THE ORIGINAL SITE DEVELOPMENT THAT ADJOINS HIS PROPERTY. RIGHT. BUT WITH THE STATION, THE FOOTPRINT, LOCATION, THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE EXISTING WATER LINE, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOM TO GO WIDE ENOUGH AT THE BASE, BUT THAT'S ON THE THAT'S ON THE SITE, CORRECT. ON THE SITE. WHAT IF MR. SERVER WAS WILLING TO USE HIS PROPERTY TO BE PART OF THE MOUND AND HAVE THE MOUND EXTEND ONTO HIS PROPERTY? WELL, THAT WOULD I MEAN, THE ANSWER WOULD BE UNLIMITED AT THAT POINT IF HE DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH GROUND HE GAVE UP. OKAY. UNFORTUNATELY, WHERE WE DID AT THE MOUND AND OVER HERE, THAT IS NOT THE ADJOINING PROPERTY FOR YOURS, I BELIEVE. SO THAT WOULD BE MR. TONY'S PROPERTY. AND I NOW, I BELIEVE A NEW OWNER, SO WE WOULD HAVE TO DISCUSS THAT WITH THEM. OKAY. SO IT'S NOT IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN'T DO. I THOUGHT MR. PROPERTY WAS ADJACENT, BUT IT IS. IT'S JUST WHERE THERE'S TREES AND EXISTING MOUND. OH I SEE OKAY. THERE'S ALREADY AN EXISTING MOUND ADJACENT TO THIS. YEAH THAT'S RIGHT. BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE HE WAS ASKING FOR THE MOUND TO BE IMPROVED, SO TO SPEAK. AND THAT IS WHAT WE CAN'T DO WITHOUT IT BEING HIS PROPERTY AND WHO THE NEW OWNER IS. WE COULD EXTEND IT IF WE HAD THAT PERMISSION AND DISCUSSION ABOUT IT. BUT WE'RE LIMITED TO WHAT WE HAVE ON OUR PROPERTY. AND THAT'S THE SIX EIGHT FOOT EXTENSION. OKAY. WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO HAVE AS A CONDITION THAT HAVING THAT DISCUSSION WITH THE NEIGHBORS IS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL, AND WHETHER YOU COME TO AN AGREEMENT OR NOT IS NOT MANDATED, BUT HAVING THE DISCUSSION WOULD BE, IS THAT OKAY? WELL, YOU WOULD HAVE TO TAKE DOWN A LOT OF TREES TO BUILD THAT MOUNTAIN. YEAH, I'M NOT THRILLED WITH THAT. BUT I DON'T LIVE THERE. BUT THAT'S A MIX I WOULD DECLINE OKAY. THAT POSSIBILITY SO WE CAN STOP TALKING ABOUT. SO YOU'RE NOT INTERESTED IN THAT OKAY. THANK YOU. THE MY ARGUMENT FOR THIS IS THAT YES, THE EXISTING MOUND WAS ONLY SIX FEET, BUT THE EXISTING

[01:05:06]

NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMEBODY COMING IN AND DOING STUFF 75, 150. WHO KNOWS? OKAY. SO THAT KIND OF CHANGES THE METRICS. AND YOU'LL FIND OUT LATER IN MY THE NEXT PART OF MY DISCUSSION ABOUT WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT, WHY THIS IS WHY I'M ASKING FOR THESE THINGS. I'M NOT TRYING TO BE UNREASONABLE TO AEP. I DON'T WANT THEM TO DO THINGS THAT THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO DO. BUT WITH THEM COMING INTO THIS AREA, INTO ALREADY ZONED AREA THAT THE PUBLIC THAT WAS AROUND THERE WENT TO MEETINGS AND FOUGHT FOR WHAT THEY THOUGHT SHOULD BE DONE TO HAVE AEP COME IN NOW AND SAY, WE CAN PUT ANYTHING WE WANT, ANYWHERE WE WANT 150FT TALL. THAT'S OKAY. WITHOUT MAKING SOME KIND OF CONCESSION, SAYING, WELL, MAYBE THERE'S A WAY WE CAN GO AHEAD AND PUT A 12 FOOT MOUND IN. AND IN FACT, I'LL SHOW YOU IN A PICTURE IN THE REST OF MY PRESENTATION ABOUT WHAT THAT 12 FOOT WOULD LOOK LIKE. I'M STILL TRYING TO WORK THROUGH THE ANSWERS THAT THESE GUYS GAVE FOR THE INITIAL PART OF THIS MEETING, AND I INTERRUPTED YOU, SO I KNOW THAT'S OKAY. SO HOW TALL IS THE THIS IS ANOTHER QUESTION FOR AEP. HOW TALL IS THE MOUNTAIN ON THE HARLEM ROAD SUBSTATION THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT? HARLEM MOUNTAIN? I. DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT STATION IS.

RIGHT. IT WAS BECAUSE YOU WERE SAYING YOU WERE RUNNING OUT OF POWER FROM THE SUBSTATION. YEAH.

WE WERE, YEAH. WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE NEED FOR THE PROJECT, WE BROUGHT UP THE CORRIDOR STATION, WHICH IS LOCATED NEAR HARLEM ROAD. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S MOUNDING ON THAT SUBSTATION OR NOT. OKAY, I DON'T KNOW, AND I DON'T KNOW THE HEIGHT OF THAT. OKAY. THERE IS AND IT'S ABOUT 20FT TALL. SO IT'S A BIG SUBSTATION. THE RENDERINGS THAT YOU HAVE HERE OF THE SOUDER ROAD SUBSTATION, WHAT HOW MANY MEGAVOLT AMPS ARE THESE RENDERINGS OF THIS THING? AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION. HOW MANY MEGAVOLT AMPS IS THIS? THE DEPICTION OF THIS SUBSTATION? YEAH. FREE TRANSFORM OR THE TOTAL TOTAL 50 MVA FOR TRANSPORT UP TO THE MIC. I THINK YOU BETTER COME TO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE. NAME AND ADDRESS DAVE HOGGARD, AEP STATION ENGINEERING. WE HAVE FIVE TRANSFORMERS IN THE STATION. EACH ARE 50 MW TRANSFORMERS 138 TO 34 FIVE. SO WHAT'S THE TOTAL MVA? THE SUBSTATION? I MEAN, OUTSIDE OF JUST SAYING 250 I DON'T I DON'T OKAY, I'LL GET TO THAT LATER. OKAY. I DON'T HAVE IT IN MY QUESTIONS OKAY. SO I'LL CLEAR THAT UP LATER. AND I'M GOING TO SAY I'LL START THIS. I'LL PROBABLY END UP TALKING MORE ABOUT THIS. BUT THE SUBSTATION THIS SUBSTATION IS NECESSARY FOR DATA CENTERS. IT'S NOT NECESSARY FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC, GENERAL BUSINESSES, HOUSEHOLDS OR ANY OTHER REASON.

IT'S THE DATA CENTERS THAT ARE DRIVING THESE SUBSTATIONS. EVERYWHERE I LOOK ON GOOGLE EARTH, AROUND NEW ALBANY, EVERYWHERE THERE'S A DATA CENTER, THERE'S A SUBSTATION.

THAT'S WHAT'S DRAWN ALL THE POWER AND CREATING THE NEED FOR THIS. THEY'RE SETTING IT IN THIS BUSINESS PARK BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE A DATA CENTER ON NEW ALBANY ROAD THAT THEY NEED TO GET POWER TO. THEY'LL HAVE AT LEAST 1 OR 2 MORE IN THE PROPERTY THAT'S BEHIND US. YOU KNOW, NATURALLY, THERE COULD BE A FIFTH OR SOMETHING, BUT THAT'S PROBABLY ABOUT IT. BUT THE NEED FOR THIS IS BECAUSE OF THOSE DATA CENTERS THAT ARE COMING IN. IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF HOUSEHOLD USE, INCREASE IN SUBDIVISIONS. EVERYTHING STAYED THE SAME. IT WAS WORKING PROPERLY BEFORE NOTHING WAS NEEDED UNTIL DATA CENTERS STARTED COMING IN. THAT'S WHAT'S DRIVING THE NEED FOR THIS, BECAUSE SO TO SAY THAT THIS IS FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE SO MUCH ISN'T NECESSARILY TRUE. IT WILL HELP. IT IS A BACKUP. IT CAN BE USED FOR OTHER THINGS. I'M SURE THAT SOME OF THE POWER FROM THIS WILL GO TO THE GRID TO BE USED FOR OTHER HOUSES AND STUFF, BUT THAT'S NOT THE PRIMARY REASON FOR THIS BEING BUILT IN THIS LOCATION. AND I JUST THINK THAT THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT. OKAY. SO LET ME GET LET ME GET ON WITH THE ORIGINAL, THE ORIGINAL PRESENTATION AND THE PAMPHLETS THAT I HANDED OUT TO YOU, THE INFORMATION I HANDED OUT.

[01:10:04]

THANK YOU. I HAVE SIX ATTACHMENTS TO SHARE WITH YOU THAT THAT THAT SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO THE MEETING MINUTES, AS WELL AS COPIES FOR EACH COUNCIL MEMBER. I WAS ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH AEP BY EMAIL ONLY, NOT IN PERSON, BY THEIR CHOICE. A RESPONSE TO MY REQUEST HAVE BEEN LESS THAN SINCERE. MY LAST REQUEST TO THEM WAS ON FOUR EIGHT OF 25, WITH NO NEW RESPONSES FROM THEM SINCE THEN. PLEASE REFER TO ATTACHMENTS ONE, NUMBER ONE, NUMBER TWO, AND NUMBER THREE. THE SIMILAR SUBSTATION AEP PHOTOGRAPH PROVIDED TO US AT THE FIRST MEETING WAS ACTUALLY A 1.9 ACRE PAD ON A 6.2 ACRE PARCEL. SADR IS A FIVE ACRE PARCEL ON A 9.5 ACRE PARCEL, TWO AND A HALF TIMES LARGER THAN THE EXAMPLE THEY PRESENTED US. THE ANTICIPATED EQUIPMENT HEIGHT ON THIS SITE, WHICH I WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, WAS I WAS TOLD WAS GOING TO BE 75FT ALREADY, 30FT TALLER THAN THE ZONING APPROVED FOR THIS LOCATION. SEE ATTACHMENT NUMBER FOUR. SOLDER SUBSTATION IS ANTICIPATING A TOTAL LOAD OF 24 MEGAVOLT AMPERES, WITH A FUTURE LOAD OF OVER FOUR TIMES THAT AMOUNT TO 100 MEGAVOLT AMPERAGE AT THIS SUBSTATION, ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN ESTIMATES IN THEIR DOCUMENT. THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE A COPY OF THEIR AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE FOUR. IT SAYS THE PROPOSED SUBSTATION WILL HAVE FIVE 84,000 AMP BREAKERS LAID OUT IN A FIVE CB RING BUS FOR FUTURE EXPANSION TO A SIX CB RING. THAT DESCRIPTION MEANS LITTLE TO ME, SO I REACHED OUT TO AEP AND ASKED IF THEY COULD START THE BUILD OF THIS SITE AT THIS SUBSTATION ON THE SOUTH END OF THE PAD FIRST, AND PROGRESSED TO THE NORTH. AS THEY WERE GOING TO INCREASE THE MEGAVOLTS OF THIS SITE SO THAT WE WOULD HAVE A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME BEFORE THIS IS BUILT UP TO WHATEVER IT'S GOING TO BE. I WAS JUST TRYING TO DETERMINE THE FUTURE EXPANSION OF THIS SO THAT THAT EQUIPMENT COULD BE ADDED TO THE PAD OVER A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME TO CREATE MORE SEPARATION FROM RESIDENTIAL. THIS SITE IS GOING TO BE A MONSTER ON THIS PATH. THIS WAS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT FROM THEIR WEBSITE. THE C ATTACHMENT NUMBER FIVE PLEASE. THE 12 FOOT MOUND EXAMPLE IN THE LANDSCAPE PLAN ON SHEET 103. AND CAN I HAVE A POINTER? I ASKED AEP FOR THE AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ALL NOISE PRODUCING EQUIPMENT ON THE PAD, BUT RECEIVED NO ANSWER. I ASKED FOR 12 FOOT MOUNDING BECAUSE OF THE TWO AND A HALF TIME LARGER SUBSTATION, BUT RECEIVED NO RESPONSE. I'VE ATTACHED AN EXAMPLE OF A 12 FOOT MOUND AND THAT'S LOCATED RIGHT THERE. THAT WAS WHEN THEY EXTENDED SOLDER ROAD NORTH. THEY EXTRA MATERIALS AND STUFF WERE MOUNTED UP THERE AND HAVE BEEN THERE SINCE. AND WHAT THEY DID WITH THAT MOUND WAS THEY OVERSTEPPED ABOUT HALFWAY INTO THE EXISTING SIX FOOT MOUND. THAT MOUND IS ABOUT 12FT TALL, AND YOU CAN SEE WHERE IT COMES OUT TO WHERE THEY HAVE THE SUBSTATION LAID OUT. IF THIS WAS THE SAME AS THE SUBSTATION, THEY PRESENTED US AT THE INITIAL MEETING PAD SIZE OF TWO AND A HALF ACRES, SIMILAR TO THAT, MAYBE THREE COULD BE FOUR. THEIR PAD WOULD FIT ON THAT SITE AND NOT DISTURB THAT MOUND, THE ONE THAT'S THERE ALREADY. SO WHAT I'M ASKING THEM TO DO IS ADD LEAVE THAT MOUND WHERE IT IS, ADD TO THAT MOUND, AND WE DON'T EVEN CARE IF THE IF THE SIDES CAN'T BE MAINTAINED. THERE ARE NO TREES ON THE SIDE OF THIS MOUND. IT'S JUST GRASSES AND

[01:15:04]

IT'S NOT A REASONABLE OR EFFECTIVE SCREENING METHOD. IF THAT SCREENING IS REMOVED, THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE SUBSTATION CHAIN LINK FENCE SHOULD BE REPLACED WITH A SOUND WALL TO SCREEN THE EXPOSED EQUIPMENT ON THE PAD FROM PUBLIC VIEW, AND IF THEY DO THAT, ALL THE SOUND FROM THE ENTIRE PAD IS GOING TO GO UP THIS WAY, UP THROUGH THIS OPENING WHERE THERE IS NO MOUND, AND INTO RESIDENTIAL. THERE'S NOTHING TO STOP IT. AND THE SOUND IS GOING TO BE TRAVELING LOW TO THE GROUND. THAT SOUND WALL WOULD STOP THAT. IT'S GOING TO GO. THERE ARE TREES IN HERE, BUT IT'S GOING TO GO UNDER THOSE TREES AND RIGHT ON INTO RESIDENTIAL. AND SO THAT BRINGS ME TO ANOTHER SECTION WHERE IF. THAT'S GOING TO BE ALLOWED TO BE IN THIS CONDITION WITH NO SCREENING AT ALL AND NO SOUND WALL AT ALL IN HERE, I'M GOING TO REQUEST THAT THE CITY PUT A MOUNT ACROSS THE END OF SOUDER ROAD, OR A SOUND WALL, AS WAS REQUIRED BY THE CODIFIED ORDINANCE WHEN THAT MOUND WAS INSTALLED. AT THAT POINT IN TIME. THAT WAS WHEN NATIONWIDE WAS BEING BUILT. SO THERE WAS NO SOLDER ROAD EXTENSION. THERE WERE NO UTILITIES, NOTHING WAS THERE AT THAT TIME. WE DIDN'T CARE THAT THAT OPENING WAS IN THAT MOUND. AND IF YOU'LL REMEMBER BACK, I FOUGHT FOR YEARS TO GET SOLDER ROAD EXTENDED TO THE NORTH, AND THEY SAID THEY COULDN'T DO THAT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHERE THE ROAD WAS GOING TO GO. AND THAT WAS AFTER THAT MOUND WAS INSTALLED AND THAT OPENING WAS STILL OPEN. SO DOES THAT MAKE

[01:20:09]

THAT IS ANTICIPATED FOR THE SITE PLAN. NOT PLANNED, BUT ANTICIPATED FOR WHAT WE THINK BEST FITS ON THE PROPERTY. ALL RIGHT. AND THE REASON YOU CAN'T DO. MOUNTING OR ANYTHING THERE IS SIMPLY HEIGHT. AND THE TRANSMISSION FACILITY HAS A CERTAIN ALTITUDE REQUIREMENT THAT YOU HAVE TO KEEP WOODY STEMMED VEGETATION IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE ALLOW UNDER OUR EASEMENTS AND LINES. EXACTLY. OKAY. AND TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT WOULD BE UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE SITING BOARD, I DON'T THINK WE CAN SET A CONDITION ON THERE THAT WOULD IMPACT THAT. RIGHT. CAN WE CHANGE THE LANDSCAPE? CAN WE HAVE IT IN THE LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT WHEREVER TRANSMISSION ACTUALLY DOES COME IN, DOESN'T GET LANDSCAPING BECAUSE IT'S UNFEASIBLE. BUT IF IT IF THEY CHANGE WHERE TRANSMISSION COMES IN, THEN THE LANDSCAPE, THE PART HERE THAT'S NOT CURRENTLY LANDSCAPED. BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE CONTROLLED. I'M SO SORRY. I THOUGHT HE WAS ASKING THAT QUESTION TO YOU. I WAS TRYING TO THINK WE'RE TRYING TO FOLLOW THE QUESTION. NORMALLY WE WOULD SAY LANDSCAPE ALL THE WAY AROUND. POWER SITING BOARD SAYS NO, YOU DON'T. OKAY. WHERE THE 138 KV LINES COME IN, YOU WANT THAT FLAT AND NOTHING STICKING UP, AND YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO MOW IT SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE SAFETY ISSUES. BUT IF IT DOESN'T GO THERE, WE WANT THE LANDSCAPING THAT WOULD HAVE GONE THERE. SO IF THE LINES THERE AND THEY MOVE THE LINE, THEN I THINK WE CAN HAVE THE LANDSCAPING OR ASK THEM TO LANDSCAPE IT. IF THERE'S NO LINE COMING IN, I THINK YOU'D ASK THEM TO LANDSCAPE IT. BUT ONCE THAT LINE'S THERE, WE'VE GOT I'M NOT I'M NOT ARGUING ABOUT THE I'M, I'M SAYING IF THEY NEED TO MOVE IT, WE GET LANDSCAPING WHERE WE DIDN'T RIGHT NOW THEY COULD. IF THE POWER SITING BOARD SAYS IT COMES IN FROM THE SOUTH. OKAY. THEY HAVE THIS EASTERN FACE THAT HAS NO LANDSCAPING AND HAS NO LINES.

SO I THINK WE CAN PUT THAT CONDITION IN THERE. BUT AEP, IF THEY VIEW IT AS AN UNREASONABLE RESTRICTION ON THE LOCATION, USE AND CONSTRUCTION THAT THAT THAT BECOMES A THEIR ARGUMENT. I GUESS AT THAT POINT WE CAN CERTAINLY PUT IT OUT THERE. BUT THEN THEY COULD ARGUE. YES. IF AGAIN, HECTOR GARCIA SANTANA, WE HAVE THE APPLICANT TO THE EXTENT THAT IS FEASIBLE AND IT DOESN'T INTERFERE WITH THE FACILITIES THAT ARE GOING TO BE APPROVED BY THE OHIO POWER SITING BOARD. AND CONSISTENT WITH ANYTHING ON THE GROUND THAT MAY BE PRESENT. SO THERE MAY BE OTHER CONSTRAINTS.

BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT THOSE CONSTRAINTS CONSTRAINTS DO NOT INTERFERE WITH THE OPERATION AND CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE LINE, THE COMPANY, THIS IS THE TYPE OF THING THAT WE ROUTINELY TRY TO COMPLY WITH IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF FACILITIES, SO THAT CAN BE DONE TO THE EXTENT THAT IT DOESN'T INTERFERE WITH THE OPERATION OF THE LINES THEMSELVES AND ON ANYTHING ON THE GROUND. THANK YOU. OKAY. I WAS I WAS GOING TO ASK I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK A QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU. YOU HAD NOTED THE EXISTING LANDSCAPING. DID YOU MEAN YOU REFERRING TO WHAT COULD BE THERE, THE STREET TREES THAT WERE ADDING? THERE'S NOT EXISTING LANDSCAPING. SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WAS ANSWERING CORRECTLY. LET ME LET ME JUST JUMP IN HERE. SO I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT, BUT CAN WE HAVE A REMINDER OF WHAT? BECAUSE I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE LANDSCAPING IS, BECAUSE I HEARD MR. SERBA SAY THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE NO LANDSCAPING IN HERE. AND I THOUGHT WHEN I WHEN HE MENTIONED IT, HE MEANT ALONG THE ENTIRE EASTERN SORT OF SIDE OF THE SITE, FROM THE SOUTH POINT TO THE NORTH POINT, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT LANDSCAPING IS GOING TO BE IN THERE. THE IMAGE YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU, JUST THE REFLECTION OF THIS IMAGE RIGHT HERE. THAT IS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AS DESIGNED RIGHT HERE ON THE VISUAL. GOT IT.

OKAY, OKAY. BUT DURING THE FIRST INITIAL MEETING, THE FDP I THINK HAD LANDSCAPING ALL THE WAY UP.

RIGHT, IF I REMEMBER NOW, IT'S GONE. AND MY REQUEST FOR THE SOUNDWALL IS FOR REPLACEMENT OF THIS PART OF THE FENCE, WHICH IS GOING TO BE THERE THIS ENTIRE TIME WHEN THEY'RE PUTTING THE LINES UP, WHEN THEY'RE MAINTAINING THINGS, THAT SECURITY FENCE IS GOING TO BE THERE. THAT FENCE. HOW TALL IS THAT SECURITY FENCE? THAT'S. SEVEN FOOT OF CHAIN LINK WITH

[01:25:10]

SO A LOT OF THESE ASK MAY BE UNREASONABLE IN SIZE. WHAT AM I MISTAKEN THAT HECTOR JUST SAID? THAT WOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM IF THE SITING BOARD DIDN'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT. YEAH, YEAH, AND WHAT I STATED, I THINK THAT I CAN STATE THIS WITH CONFIDENCE TO THE EXTENT THAT IT DOESN'T INTERFERE WITH THE OPERATION OF THE OF THE EQUIPMENT, BOTH THE SUBSTATION AND THE TRANSMISSION LINE. AND IT DOESN'T CREATE AN UNREASONABLE PROBLEM WITH THE ON THE GROUND FACILITIES. THIS IS THE TYPE OF THING THAT WE ROUTINELY ADDRESS THAT WITHIN ALSO THE, THE SCOPE OF WHAT I MENTIONED BEFORE, WHICH IS THERE IS A LIMIT TO WHAT THE COMPANY CAN DO IN TERMS OF ACCOMMODATING REQUESTS BECAUSE THERE ARE COMPETING INTERESTS. AND ONE OF THOSE INTERESTS IS MAKING SURE THAT THE COST OF THE FACILITIES DOES NOT INCREASE MORE THAN IT HAS TO. THERE IS THERE IS A BALANCE TO BE STRUCK THERE. AND IF I MAY, THERE HAS BEEN SOME SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER THERE IS A LEGAL REQUIREMENT. AND I CAN TELL YOU THIS, THE COMPANY GOES BEYOND WHAT THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS ARE. AND EVEN IF IT'S NOT EXPLICIT CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL, IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IT'S REQUESTED AND WE CAN ACCOMMODATE IT, WE WILL. AND IF WE CAN'T, WE TRY TO LIKE FIND SOME SPACE IN THE MIDDLE UNTIL WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE CANNOT ACCOMMODATE, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE, THE, THE FENCE THAT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT HAS SOME FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THOSE WERE TO BE COMPROMISED, THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CANNOT FIX. BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT IT ISN'T, THIS IS THE TYPE OF THING THAT WE DO IN ORDER TO TRY TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF FACILITIES IN THEIR PLACE WHERE THEY ARE LOCATED. KIND OF THING. TAKE THAT AS A YES TO THE SOUND. YES, IN THE STATION, THE TRANSFORMER PREDOMINANTLY SOUND PRODUCER, PRODUCES A LOW HUM AROUND 75DB THAT THAT'S TAKEN FROM ABOUT A METER AWAY WHEN IT'S STUDIED. I THINK THAT'S ABOUT A WASHING MACHINE. SO ONCE YOU GET TO THE STATION FENCE, PRACTICALLY NIL AS FAR AS SOUND FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SO I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT. AND THAT'S AN IEEE SPEC FOR MEASURING THAT. AND WHAT ABOUT SWITCHGEAR. SO WE HAVE CIRCUIT BREAKERS IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO. CIRCUIT BREAKERS.

SAME WITHIN THE IEEE SPEC NORMAL OPERATION AROUND 70DB IF THEY TRIP OR OPERATE 90 TO 100DB A LITTLE BIT LOUDER. BUT THAT'S YOU KNOW, IN THE EVENT OF, YOU KNOW, A FAULT, THAT'S A MOMENTARY SOUND. MOMENTARY SOUND. CORRECT? YES. ALL RIGHT. AND IS THERE ANY OTHER SOUND PRODUCING EQUIPMENT ON THE PAD? THE GENERATOR? A SWITCH OPERATING COULD MAKE NOISE. BUT AGAIN, THAT'S THAT'S A MECHANICAL COMPONENT. IT'S NOT YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE AUTOMATED SWITCHING HERE. SO YOU HAD MENTIONED GENERATORS FOR ON SITE POWER IN THE CASE OF A POWER OUTAGE. SO TYPICALLY TFS IN THE EVENT OF A POWER OUTAGE THEY BRING THEIR OWN CART WITH LIGHTS ON IT. SO IT WOULD BE PROBABLY A GAS POWERED GENERATOR WITH FLOODLIGHTS. TRANSLATION SERVICES. YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT GETS RID OF ONE. SO THAT'S THAT'S A TRUCK. THAT'S A MOBILE TRUCK. AND IT GOES AWAY. YEAH OKAY. CORRECT. WITH OTHER USERS WE'VE ASKED THAT THEY

[01:30:01]

[01:35:03]

SIX ACRE. WHAT IS IT? I MEAN, THAT TO ME THAT BOTHERS ME. I WOULD MUCH RATHER THEY CAME IN AND SAID, WE'RE GOING TO DO WE'RE PUTTING IN AN EIGHT ACRE SUBSTATION. AND HERE'S A PICTURE OF, YOU KNOW, OF A TEN. IT'S GOING TO BE LESS THAN THIS. BUT THEY DIDN'T. SO THERE'S SOME DECEIVING GOING ON THERE. AND I DON'T LIKE THAT. AND A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS THAT THEY'VE ANSWERED TONIGHT I ASKED AND DIDN'T GET ANSWERS TO WHEN I WAS TRYING TO DO THIS BY EMAIL. AND I REALLY WANTED TO MEET SOMEBODY AT THE SITE. MY WIFE TALKED TO SOMEBODY THAT WAS OVER THERE IN A TRUCK THAT PULLED UP WITH FLASHING LIGHTS FROM AEP AND TALKED TO HIM ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON HERE, THE POWER LINES OR SOMETHING. AND THEN THE LAST MESSAGE THAT I GOT FROM STEPHANIE THAT I WAS TALKING TO AT ARP, SHE SAID, DON'T TALK TO ANYBODY ON THE SITE. WE DON'T WANT YOU DOING THAT. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, SEND THEM TO ME. WELL, I DID THAT. AND THEN FOR THE LAST ALMOST MONTH, I HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANY RESPONSE. SO I'VE ASKED QUESTIONS. NO ANSWERS HAVE COME FORWARD UNTIL TONIGHT. WELL, AND I KNOW THAT A LOT OF THE FRUSTRATION. BUT THAT'S WHY WE'RE HAVING THE MEETING TONIGHT. RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE BEEN GOING FOR AN HOUR AND A HALF SO FAR. SO I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO KEEP GOING UNTIL EVERYBODY HAS THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO, TO ASK THEIR STATE. SO ANOTHER FACT TOO, FOR THIS IS THAT I KEEP HEARING TALK FROM HECTOR AND STUFF THAT THEY'VE GOT TO WATCH THEIR BUDGET. WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO BUDGET. WE CAN'T GO OVER. WE CAN'T DO THIS. AND I'VE LOOKED UP SOME INFORMATION, FOUND OUT THAT AEP REQUIRES DATA CENTERS TO PAY 85% OF THEIR PROJECTED ENERGY USE EACH MONTH FOR 12 YEARS IN A CONTRACT IF THEY'RE GOING TO SUPPLY THEM WITH POWER, EVEN IF THEY USE LESS, THEY'RE CONTRACTED FOR THAT. THEY'RE GOING TO PAY IT REGARDLESS. AND THAT'S TO COVER THE COST OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT SERVES THEM AND THE COST OF WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO ON THIS. SO THEY RECOUP THESE COSTS. AND I DON'T THINK THIS, THIS ZONING DISTRICT THAT THEY CHOSE TO BUILD THIS

[01:40:02]

WE'RE NOT EXACTLY CLEAR WHERE YOU GOT THAT FROM. NO MATTER THE ENTIRE STATION, CIRCUIT BREAKERS, BUS WORK EVERYTHING. TRANSFORMERS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE TRANSFORMER, WILL BE INSTALLED AT THE SAME TIME. THE ONLY PLAN FOR EXPANSION IS A TRANSFORMER, SO EVERYTHING ELSE WILL BE BUILT OUT IN THIS INITIAL PHASE. STARTING WHERE? EVERYWHERE. THE ENTIRE PAD.

EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE READY. OKAY, FROM THE SUBSTATION THAT I SHOWED YOU ON PARSONS AVENUE, THE ONE THAT THEY SHOWED US, THE OVERHEAD VIEW OF THAT IT SHOWS ALL THE EQUIPMENT TOWARDS THE RIGHT END OF THE PAD. THERE'S BLANK SPACE ON THE LEFT HAND. IS THAT THE WAY EVERY SUBSTATION IS DONE? I DON'T SEE OTHER SUBSTATIONS WHERE EVERYTHING'S COMPLETELY ALL OVER, STARTING FROM THE BEGINNING TO THE END. AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT INCLUDES THAT EXPANSION THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. GOING. I, I'M VERY UNCLEAR. I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PARSONS AVENUE, AND I'M TRYING TO WRAP MY BRAIN ON WHY WE PULLED PARSONS IN PARTICULAR. I THOUGHT IT WAS HEIGHT OF EQUIPMENT, THAT WE SHARED THAT IMAGE, NOT NECESSARILY SIZE OR MAYBE PERHAPS EQUIVALENT BREAKER SIZE OR TRANSFORMER OR POWER LOAD. NO MATTER WHAT. BUT THE EXPANSION THAT IS, IT'S JUST HOW THE STATION IS PLANNED. SO IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE NEEDS ARE FOR THE AREA, THE EXPANSION OF IF THERE IS PLANNED EXPANSION. BUT THIS STATION IS UNIQUE IN THAT WE ONLY HAVE ONE TRANSFORMER THAT WILL NOT BE INSTALLED IN IN THIS PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR FUTURE USE. THERE IS NO OTHER PLANS OUT OF HOW MANY TRANSFORMERS THEY'LL BE INSTALLED INITIALLY, AND THERE'S GOING TO BE SPACE FOR A SIX. SO THEY GO FROM 5 TO 6. YEAH, BUT EVERYTHING ELSE WILL BE INSTALLED WITHIN THE SPACE BREAKERS AND ALL. YEAH. AND IF I MAY, YOUR HONOR, THAT WOULD BE A TYPICAL EXAMPLE OF THE TYPE OF THING THAT CANNOT BE RESTRICTED BECAUSE THE ENGINEERING DECISIONS ACTUALLY ARE DICTATED BY HOW THINGS NEED TO BE SET UP IN ORDER FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO BE DONE SAFELY, EFFECTIVELY, AND WITH AN EYE TO HOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE DEVELOPED IN THE FUTURE. SO THAT WOULD BE THE TYPE OF THING THAT CANNOT BE RESTRICTED BY A RULE, BECAUSE THAT'S WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF ESSENTIALLY THE ENGINEERING REQUIRED FOR THE

[01:45:07]

YEAH. IF YOU WANT TO PUT A MORE MATURE TREE ON THAT BERM, YOU CAN'T BUILD THE BERM AS HIGH BECAUSE THERE WON'T BE ENOUGH ROOM FOR THE ROOT BALL FOR MORE MATURE TREE. SO YOU'RE KIND OF LIKE IF YOU WANT TO PUT MATURE TREES IN IT, YOU'RE BETTER OFF WITHOUT A MOUND. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO EVALUATE. GOTCHA. NOT NOT PUTTING THEM ON TOP OF THE MOUND. THANK YOU FOR SAVING ME A WHOLE COUPLE OF DAYS. OKAY. BUT YOU WOULD LOOK AT SOMETHING THAT PROVIDES MORE OPACITY FASTER. I'M SO SORRY. YOU WOULD YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO LOOK AT OTHER METHODS TO PROVIDE MORE OPACITY FASTER. SURE. I THINK THAT IS OUR GENERALLY ACCEPTED.

ONCE WE START GETTING CLOSER TO THE STATION AND WE START GETTING A LITTLE MORE CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT WE ARE WILLING TO INSTALL. WHAT IS IT? LEAFY? HOW CLOSE ARE THE POWER LINES, THINGS LIKE THAT THAT WE ARE JUST QUITE FRANKLY, WE DON'T DO AND ARE PROVIDING TYPICALLY ARE THE THINGS THAT WE

[01:50:02]

YEAH. WHY DON'T WE? WHY DON'T WE TAKE A BREAK? I KNOW THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO SPEAK, BUT WE'VE BEEN GOING ALMOST TWO HOURS. LET'S TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK AND THEN WE'LL OPEN IT UP TO THE REST OF THE FOLKS FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK BEFORE THE COMMISSION. IT'S THAT AEP IS COMING IN AND GOING, COMING, COMING INTO THIS SITE. AEP SHOULD, AS A MATTER OF RESPECT TO THE LOCAL PEOPLE, THE SURROUNDING AREA, VOLUNTARILY ADHERE TO THE EXISTING ZONING OF THIS SITE, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY LEGALLY HAVE TO OR NOT. THEY SHOULD COMMIT TO BURY POWER LINES WITHIN THIS ZONE. DISTRICT IS REQUIRED IN THIS DISTRICT, AND THAT ELIMINATES A LOT OF THE PROBLEMS THAT THEY BROUGHT UP ABOUT BEING OVERHEAD DOING. AND THESE 130, 38 VOLT LINES CAN BE BURIED UNDER LINE UNDERGROUND. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IS STAFF READY? ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND RESUME THE MEETING HERE MOMENTARILY IF EVERYBODY CAN TAKE A SEAT. CHRISTINE, ARE WE READY? AWESOME. READY. ALL RIGHT. GOOD TO. CATHERINE. IS GOING TO DO SO. YOU DON'T NEED ME. YOU CAN DO IT. YOU DON'T NEED THIS. I ACCORDING TO I WOULD JUST TO THE EXTENT YOU'RE DISCUSSING IT, YOU MIGHT WANT TO PUT IT ON THE RECORD INSTEAD OF, YEAH, I'M GOING TO DO THAT. ALL THOSE DISCUSSIONS HAVE TO BE IN SUNSHINE THERE. ARE WE ON THE RECORD? YES, SIR. YES, SIR. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. LET'S CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER. MR. SERVIA WANTED TO MAKE ONE ADDITIONAL. ONE LAST POINT, HONEST. THE LAST PICTURE THAT YOU HAD THAT I SHOWED YOU WAS OF THAT 300 YEAR OLD OAK TREE THAT WAS STANDING AT THE FIRST MEETING THAT WE CAME TO, THAT NOW HAS BEEN CUT DOWN ALONG WITH THREE OTHERS ON THAT SITE. AND IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE NOTES THAT I READ AFTER THAT FIRST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, THAT THEY WEREN'T ALLOWED TO TOUCH ANYTHING ON THE SITE WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT OR CONSTRUCTION PERMIT. WHAT THE INFORMATION SAYS AT THE END OF THAT MEETING, THAT'S IN THE RECORD. THANK YOU. TREE REMOVAL IS ALWAYS ALLOWED. A BUILDING PERMIT OR EVEN AN ENGINEERING PERMIT IS NOT REQUIRED TO TAKE DOWN TREES ASIDE FROM EPA CALENDAR LIMITS, CORRECT? YES.

WHICH IS PROBABLY WHY IT CAME DOWN IN MARCH. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO APPROACH THE ON THE AEP CASE? I WAS TOLD WHEN WE BROKE THAT THERE WAS THREE OTHER SPEAKER CARDS, WITH THEIR. FOR THE NEXT PRESENTATION, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE. ALL RIGHT, ANYTHING FURTHER FROM AEP? ANYTHING FURTHER FROM THE COMMISSION. ANY FINAL QUESTIONS, ANY ISSUES, ANY COMMENTS TO BE MADE? ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO SEE. SO MOVED TO ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORT AND RELATED DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD FOR THIS CASE, INCLUDING THE DEPICTIONS THAT AEP BROUGHT TONIGHT, INCLUDING THE ADDITIONAL EMAIL AND ATTACHMENT THAT WE RECEIVED FOR THE COMMISSION AND INCLUDING THE MATERIALS MR. SZCZERBA PRESENTED

[01:55:02]

YES, MR. LAWSON. YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES TO ADMIT THE DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING THE PHOTOS FROM AEP. THE EMAIL FROM MR. BURER AND THE ARTICLE FROM MR. BURR AND MR. SERVE AS DOCUMENTS. THANK YOU. SO. GIVE US JUST A MOMENT. I'M GOING TO THERE WERE SOME SOME CONDITIONS THAT WE DISCUSSED ON MOTHERE THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE TOGETHER. SO WE HAVE THE TWO CONDITIONS. THE STAFF REPORT THAT AEP HAS INDICATED. THEY HAVE NO, NO OBJECTION TO. I HAD WRITTEN SOME OTHER ITEMS DOWN THAT I THOUGHT MIGHT BE CONDITIONS. ONE WAS THAT THE LIGHTING WOULD BE ALARM BASED, WHICH AEP HAS AGREED TO DO. THE OTHER WAS EXTENDING MOUNDING IN THE NORTHWEST CORRIDOR. AEP AGREED TO EXTEND MOUNDING IN THE SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR OR CORNER.

AEP AGREED THAT THEY WOULD RESTRICT ROUTINE MAINTENANCE TO ONLY OCCUR DURING BUSINESS HOURS. AP COMMITTED THAT TO THE EXTENT. THAT THEY WERE AGREEABLE TO ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING OVER AND ABOVE WHAT HAS BEEN DEPICTED IN THE IN THE MATERIALS BROUGHT TONIGHT. TO THE EXTENT IT IS FEASIBLE AND DOESN'T RUN AFOUL OF ANY REGULATORY OR OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR THE OPERATION OF THE SUBSTATION. IS THAT CLEAR? AND DID I GET THAT CORRECT? I WAS TRYING TO CAPTURE WHAT WHAT HECTOR HAD INDICATED IS THAT THE MORE OPACITY FASTER. NO, WE'RE NOT THERE YET. YOU HAD MENTIONED MOUNDING IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. DID YOU MEAN NORTHWEST? NO, I THOUGHT I HEARD BOTH THERE. THERE IS NO EXISTING MOUNDING AND WE WERE NOT PUTTING ANY MOUNDING IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. DID YOU SAY ADDITIONAL TREES? WAS IT TREES OR THERE IS ADDITIONAL. I HAD A NOTE OF ADDITIONAL TREES IN THE SOUTHWEST. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT. I HADN'T MISHEARD THAT. SO THE FIFTH CONDITION WOULD BE ADDING TREES IN THE IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER, SOUTHEAST SOUTHEAST CORNER. SORRY. THANK YOU. AND YOU HAD ONE. I DON'T THINK I HAVE THAT ONE WRITTEN DOWN. BORDER LANDSCAPING IN PLACES THAT DON'T FALL UNDER THE POWER SIDING BOARD. I THINK THAT'S CAPTURED IN SEVEN. BUT WHY DON'T WE MAKE THAT? WE CAN MAKE THAT ADDITIONAL CONDITION. AND YOU MENTIONED ONE ABOUT THE. WILLING TO REVIEW, PROVIDING MORE OPACITY FASTER ON THE FASTER ON THE MOUNDING. ON THE WAS IT THE SOUND? THIS IS JUST A NOTE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT OUR CODE DOES EXEMPT PUBLIC UTILITIES FROM EVEN HOURS OF WORK, HOURS OF REGULATIONS REGARDING HOURS OF WORK, THERE'S AN EXEMPTION FOR CODE FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITY PROVIDERS. SO WE CAN'T A PRIORI MANDATE. BUT IF THEY OFFER, CAN WE ACCEPT THEIR OFFER, CAN ACCEPT THEIR OFFER. BUT I THINK IF WE WERE TO COME INTO A SITUATION WHERE WE WERE TO ENFORCE IT, WE WOULD OUR OUR CODE SAYS THAT THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM HOURS OF OPERATION.

YEAH, PLEASE. I CAN PROVIDE A CLARIFICATION. THE WAY YOU ARTICULATED THE CONDITION WAS A LITTLE NARROWER. YES. GO AHEAD. WE WERE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE BECAUSE THERE IS A SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ARE NOT CONTROLLED BY THE OHIO POWER SITING BOARD. THAT WOULD STILL BE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS OR OPERATION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE OPERATION. SO IF I MAY SUGGEST ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGE. TO LIMIT IT TO. A CONDITION THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT IT DOESN'T INTERFERE

[02:00:09]

OKAY. THE TWO CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT ARE AGREED TO, AND THE WALLACE CONDITIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS. THAT THE LIGHTING IS ALARM BASED, THE ADDITION OF TREES IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER.

AND THEN THERE WAS THE MOUNDING AND THE BEING EXTENDED IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER AND THE EXTENSION. I THINK THAT WAS MOUNTING. I HAD THAT ONE AS THE FOURTH CONDITION, AND THE FIFTH CONDITION WAS THE TREES AND THE IN THE. SOUTHEAST CORNER. FOR THAT CONDITION. STAFF JUST WANT TO ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION. THEY ARE PROPOSING TREES IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. DO YOU WANT TO SEE MORE TREES AND WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING ON THE SCREEN? I THINK WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE LOTS MORE TREES EVERYWHERE, BUT WE BUT WE'RE KIND OF LIMITED TO WHAT, YOU KNOW, AEP IS WILLING TO COMMIT TO. THEY'VE COMMITTED TO WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN THEN. AND THAT THAT WOULD BE THE ADDITIONAL AN EXTENSION OF THE TREE LINE IN THAT SOUTHEAST CORNER. RIGHT. SOMEBODY COME TO THE MIC REAL QUICK AND JUST SAY YES. THERE WERE A BUNCH OF NODS. COULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? I'M SO SORRY. YES. STAFF MENTIONED THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A COMMITMENT ON THIS PARTICULAR. ON THIS PICTURE, ON THIS PARTICULAR PICTURE HERE, THAT ADDITIONAL TREES ARE ARE BEING AGREED TO IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. AND STAFF JUST MENTIONED THAT, YOU KNOW, DOES DOES THE COMMISSION WANT, WOULD COMMISSION BE WANTING MORE TREES. AND I PUT IT BACK TO AP.

YOU'VE MADE THIS COMMITMENT OF, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WOULD COMMIT TO AT LEAST CONSIDERING ADDITIONAL TREES, THAT WOULD BE WE WOULD PUT THAT IN THE AS A PART OF THAT CONDITION. I WANT TO SAY WE'RE A LITTLE TAPPED OUT IN THIS AREA. THAT DITCH THAT GOES ALONG THAT AREA IS A DRY AREA.

WE EXPECT THAT TREES WOULD NOT THRIVE DOWN THERE. AND IT'S ALSO REALLY SOME OF THE DRAINAGE, I BELIEVE. JOHN, IN ADDITION. TO REPEAT THIS RENDITION MATCHES THOSE. YES. SORRY. SO OUR VISUAL SIM ALSO, AS WE HAD POINTED OUT PREVIOUSLY, DOES SHOW WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE AT FULL GROWTH.

AND OF COURSE THIS IS FULL GROWTH AND INITIAL PLANTINGS, BUT THAT IS THAT IMAGE. WE CAN TRY TO SQUEEZE MORE IN, BUT I JUST DON'T WANT TO OVERCROWD EITHER. OKAY. WE STILL HAVE TO BE ABLE TO GET IN INTO THE POND AREA, MAKE SURE THAT MAINTENANCE IS OKAY. BE ABLE TO MOW AROUND THINGS AS WELL. OKAY. WHY DON'T WE MAKE THE CONDITION THAT THAT THAT TREES WILL BE. INCLUDED IN THE LANDSCAPING AS DEPICTED IN THE SLIDE, AND CONSIDERATION WILL BE GIVEN TO ADDITIONAL ADDITIONAL TREE PLANTINGS AS WELL, TO THE EXTENT THEY FIT. AND CAN WE ADD SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL FOR THAT? ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU. MOUNDING SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL AS WELL I THINK. YES THAT WOULD. I'M SORRY, CHRISTINA, WE'RE INTERRUPTING YOU. BUT WHAT'S

[02:05:07]

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AND NEXT I HAVE CONDITIONAL LANDSCAPING OVER AND ABOVE COMMITMENT TO THE EXTENT THAT IT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH THE OPERATION OF THIS LINE OR WOULD INTERFERE WITH THE OPERATIONS OR ANYTHING UNDERGROUND. I'M MISSING LINE OPERATIONS. OKAY. YEAH, THAT SOUNDS GOOD. AND THEN THEN I HAVE THAT. THEY'RE WILLING TO REVIEW THE PROVISIONS OF FOR OPACITY TO SEE WHETHER OPACITY CAN BE ACHIEVED FASTER. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND YES. GO PLEASE. THE CONDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ONE THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED. CAN YOU GUYS BE A LITTLE MORE CLEAR ON THAT? I THINK EVERYTHING ELSE WAS VERY CLEAR WITH THE MOUNDING AND LANDSCAPING AND REVIEWING TREES AND OPACITY, BUT I'M NOT CLEAR ON THAT ONE THAT MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT CAME UP IN THE DISCUSSION OF THE SOUND WALL. OKAY. AND THE IDEA THAT MAYBE MORE SCREENING OR PLANTINGS OR LANDSCAPING MIGHT BE, MIGHT BE WELCOME ON THE NORTH, SOUTH, NORTH, SOUTH, OR I SHOULD SAY THE EASTERN BORDER OF THE PROPERTY. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. IS THAT CLEARER? OKAY. AND THERE'S I MEAN OBVIOUSLY THERE'S NO SPECIFIC COMMITMENT THERE. IT'S JUST A YOU'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IT. AND TO THE EXTENT THAT IT'S FEASIBLE, COST EFFECTIVE AND DOESN'T INTERFERE WITH THE REGULAR OPERATIONS OR END UP IN A RIGHT OF WAY, YOU'RE GOING TO YOU'LL YOU'LL LOOK AT IT AND YOU'LL PUT THEM IN TO MAKE IT LOOK NICE IF YOU CAN. ALL RIGHT. CAN YOU ALSO PLEASE MAKE THAT SUBJECT TO APPROVAL? AND OF COURSE, THAT'S ALL SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL AS WELL. ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO APPROVE THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION. FDP OH FIVE 2025. SUBJECT TO THE TWO CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF APPROVAL AND TO THE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS THAT WE JUST LAID OUT ON THE RECORD, WITHOUT GOING OVER THEM FOR THE THIRD OR FOURTH TIME, I THINK THEY'RE ALL CLEAR. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT. SO ANY DISCUSSION ON THE ON THE MOTION? IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE COMMISSION AS TO WHETHER AEP HAS MET THE PRESENTED SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SATISFY THE THREE REQUIREMENTS THAT THAT WOULD FURTHER LIMIT OUR ABILITY TO PLACE CONDITIONS. IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION OR COMMENTARY ON THAT BEFORE WE VOTE? I'M READY FOR THE VOTES. ALL RIGHT, LET'S HEAR THE ROLL, MR. WALLACE. YES, MR. LAWSON? YES, MR. SHELL. YES, MISS BRIGGS. YES, MR. KIRBY? YES. THE MOTION PASSES WITH ALL VOTES IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION, SUBJECT TO THE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF THE STAFF REPORT AND THE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE COMMISSION. THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY. THIS WAS A RELATIVELY LONG MEETING, BUT I APPRECIATE THE INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC, APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT AEP CAME PREPARED TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES AND QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP AT THE FIRST MEETING, AND I APPRECIATE THEIR LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT. I THINK THERE'S AT LEAST SIX AEP FOLKS THAT CAME TONIGHT. SO IT'S GREATLY APPRECIATED. AND GOOD LUCK AND PLEASE CONTINUE TO WORK WITH, ESPECIALLY ON THE LANDSCAPING ISSUES THAT WE DISCUSSED. IF YOU COULD CONTINUE TO WORK WITH MR. SERBA, MAYBE KEEP THAT LINE OF COMMUNICATION. SO WHEN YOU DISCUSS THE LANDSCAPING, WHEN YOU DISCUSS ESPECIALLY THE NORTHWEST MOUND, IT'D BE VERY HELPFUL IF YOU COULD INCLUDE MR. SERBA THOSE DISCUSSIONS AND, YOU KNOW, AND MAYBE REACH AGREEMENT ON WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE. BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR EVERYBODY TIME. SO LET'S MOVE ON TO OTHER

[VII. Other business]

[02:10:02]

WE DID HAVE TWO MEMBERS OF OUR STEERING COMMITTEE THAT ARE ALSO ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, COUNCIL MEMBER TRIAL AND BRUCE LARSON. SO BEFORE WE TURN IT OVER TO, I'D JUST LIKE TO GIVE THEM BOTH AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY ANY WORDS OR ANYTHING ELSE I HAVE TO ADD. YEAH. SO THANK YOU TO THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE HERE FROM THE STEERING COMMITTEE FOR STAYING AND ANYBODY HERE WHO WANTS TO HELP MAKE THIS BETTER. THIS WAS A REALLY FUN PROCESS. I FELT LIKE GOING THROUGH. I FEEL LIKE WE HAD A LOT OF RESIDENT PARTICIPATION. WE EXPANDED IT TO GET A LOT OF VOICES HEARD. AND I, I THINK THAT THEY REALLY COME UP WITH SOMETHING SPECIAL. I KNOW THERE WILL BE A LOT OF INPUT, AND I KNOW THAT THAT INPUT WILL ONLY IMPROVE THE PROJECT. SO THIS CHRIS IS GOING TO, I'M SURE, DO HIS THING WHERE HE'S LIKE, THIS IS WHERE THIS IS IN THE TIMELINE AND IT'S LATE. I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE MAYBE BE STREAMING AT HOME. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THIS IS NOT THE BE ALL, END ALL TIME THAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS. RIGHT? SO LET'S TALK ABOUT IT AS MUCH AS WE CAN AND KEEP MAKING IT BETTER. YEAH. YEAH. AND I THINK I JUST WANTED TO SAY IT WAS A VERY COLLABORATIVE PROCESS WITH A LARGE GROUP OF PEOPLE WITH A LARGE PART OF THE POPULATION THAT WAS IN THIS HERE PARTICIPATING WERE RESIDENTS WITHIN THE AREA OR NEAR THE AREA AND KNEW WHAT THE. IMPLICATIONS OR WHAT THAT KIND OF AREA SHOULD POTENTIALLY BE IN THEIR MIND.

AND I THINK HAVING LOCAL RESIDENTS PARTICIPATING AND GIVING THEIR VOICE TO IT IS IMPORTANT. AND I THINK THAT WAS A KEY PART OF THIS HEARING. WE'VE GOTTEN A LONG WAYS, AND WE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS, AND IT WAS A GREAT, GREAT PROCESS. I THINK THE MOST ENGAGING THAT I'VE SEEN IN MY CAREER, DEFINITELY THE MOST PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT WE'VE EVER HAD IN ANY VERSION OF OUR STRATEGIC PLAN, WHICH IS REALLY EXCITING. SO YEAH, THANK YOU BOTH FOR THOSE THOSE WORDS, SARAH, LILY AND HERE FROM MXQ TO GO THROUGH, WE HOPE TO KEEP IT TO ABOUT 30 MINUTES, GET THROUGH OUR ENTIRE PRESENTATION AND THEN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE AT THE END. SO THANK YOU. OH YEAH 30 MINUTES. OH. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS SARAH LILY. I'M AN ASSOCIATE PLANNER WITH MXQ. AND YOU CAN. HI. GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. I'M SWARTZ I'M ALSO A PLANNER AT MXQ. SO WE'LL TRY TO KEEP THIS PRETTY BRIEF TONIGHT, BUT JUST WANTED TO GO OVER A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND REALLY FOCUS IN ON THE FUTURE LAND USE AND FUTURE THOROUGHFARE COMPONENTS OF THE PLAN. SO AS AS WE MENTIONED, THIS IS AN ADDENDUM TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN.

SO REALLY ZOOMING INTO OUR FOCUS AREA WHICH IS SHOWN HERE IN BLUE. AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS PLAN WOULD OVERRIDE THE EXISTING RECOMMENDATIONS LIKE LAND USE AND THOROUGHFARE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THIS SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHY. BUT IT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT GEOGRAPHY FOR THE CITY FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. IT'S A VERY TRANSITIONAL AREA WITHIN THE CITY, BOTH FROM THE VILLAGE CENTER TO NORTH OF THE VILLAGE CENTER, FROM RESIDENTIAL AREAS TO ON, LIKE THE WEST TO BUSINESS PARK ON THE EAST. EVEN OLDER PARTS OF THE BUSINESS PARK TO KIND OF THE NEWER SECTIONS OF THE BUSINESS PARK. IT'S A MAJOR GATEWAY INTO THE CITY FROM THE NORTH, AND IT REALLY IS ONE OF THE MAJOR LAST KIND OF SPOTS IN THE CITY TO DO SOMETHING REALLY SPECIAL. THERE'S A LOT OF UNDEVELOPED GROUND HERE, AND IT'S REALLY CONNECTED IN TO THE VILLAGE CENTER TO THE SOUTH, AS WELL AS THE PARCEL DIRECTLY TO SOUTH OF 161, WITH SOME OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL BE HAPPENING THERE WITH THE 161 FRONTAGE. AND OF COURSE, IT'S NAMED AFTER THE US 62 CORRIDOR. SO THAT'S A MAJOR COMPONENT OF THIS GEOGRAPHY, WHICH INCLUDES ABOUT 200 RESIDENTS, ABOUT 573 ACRES, QUITE A LOT OF BUSINESSES

[02:15:07]

DURING THE PROCESS. WE HAD PUBLIC SURVEY RUN DURING THE SUMMER LAST YEAR, AND WE ALSO HAD A SOCIAL PINPOINT ENGAGEMENT HUB. AND REALLY WHAT THAT WAS WAS AN INTERACTIVE TOOL FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO PROVIDE INPUT ON DIFFERENT TYPES OF LAND USES AND WHERE THEY MAY BE APPROPRIATE, BUT ALSO TO SORT OF IDENTIFY DIFFERENT CONCERNS OR OPPORTUNITIES THAT THEY SEE THROUGHOUT THE THROUGHOUT THE FOCUS AREA. AND THAT WAS A GREAT TOOL FOR US TO ALSO HEAR A LOT ABOUT, SPECIFICALLY INTERSECTIONS AND TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS THROUGHOUT THE FOCUS AREA,ECAUSE THESE ARE FOLKS THAT ARE INTERACTING WITH THIS, THIS AREA EVERY DAY. SO.

IT'S REALLY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ALSO IN YOUR PLAN. YOU'LL SEE THIS IS A REAL HIGH LEVEL, YOU KNOW, IF YOU NEED TO KNOW FIVE THINGS ABOUT WHAT THE COMMUNITY SAID, THINK A REAL BIG ONE HERE.

THAT ALSO HELPED INFORM OUR MARKET. OUR MARKET STUDY WAS, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTS, THEY PREFER A DIFFERENT KIND OF RESTAURANT SERVICES AND RETAIL THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY OFFERED IN THE FOCUS AREA. YOU KNOW, NOT JUST NOT JUST NECESSARILY THE QUALITY, BUT, YOU KNOW, SIT DOWN RESTAURANT VERSUS A VERSUS A DRIVE THROUGH RESTAURANT OR SORT OF MORE OF A FAMILY ORIENTED

[02:20:06]

AND THE SHADED BLUE. SO THIS DOESN'T NECESSARILY FUNCTION IN A VACUUM. AND WE HAD TO KIND OF LOOK OUTWARD AND SEE HOW IT PLAYS A ROLE REGION. AND WHAT YOU'LL SEE IS THERE'S BEEN THERE'S BEEN STEADY GROWTH IN THIS AREA, YOU KNOW, EVER SINCE 2010, YOU KNOW, RETAIL HAS KIND OF BEEN LAGGING BEHIND THE RESIDENTIAL GROWTH AND WORKFORCE GROWTH IN THE CITY. AND IT STARTED TO CATCH UP TO THAT THAT LEVEL OF GROWTH, ESPECIALLY AS AS THE WORKFORCE HAS GREATLY INCREASED COMPARED TO RESIDENTIAL GROWTH. AND THAT ACTUALLY PLAYS A ROLE IN THE TYPES OF RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL USES WE END UP SEEING, ESPECIALLY ON HIGHWAY INTERCHANGES, WHERE IT'S ACCESSIBLE FOR THE WORKFORCE TO QUICKLY GRAB SOMETHING BEFORE THEY'RE HEADING BACK TO WORK OR BEFORE THEY'RE HEADING HOME. AND THROUGH THIS PROCESS, THE OTHER THING WE LEARNED IS REALLY, YOU KNOW, AT THIS CONTINUED MARKET GROWTH, THE FOCUS AREA CAN PROBABLY CAPTURE AN ADDITIONAL 15 TO 30,000 SQUARE FOOT OF COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE. AND IF YOU WANT TO THINK ABOUT THAT IN TERMS OF POTENTIALLY BUILDINGS, RIGHT, THAT'S MAYBE 3 OR 4 ADDITIONAL, YOU KNOW, SHEETS EQUIVALENTS OR MAYBE A CAR WASH. RIGHT. THOSE TYPES OF, YOU KNOW, AUTO BODY SHOP TYPES OF BUILDING FOOTPRINTS. BUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY IS THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE DIRECTION THAT THE COMMUNITY ASPIRES FOR THIS AREA. RIGHT? SO, YOU KNOW, TODAY, YOU KNOW, WITH A RELATIVELY HEALTHY AUTO ORIENTED MARKET, WE KNOW THAT THIS IS BEING SUPPORTED BY A PRETTY A PRETTY HEALTHY WORKFORCE. YOU KNOW, IN THE CITY MARKET, THERE ARE STILL THINGS WE CAN DO, RIGHT? WE CAN WE CAN INCORPORATE SORT OF THIS IDEA OF A MINI NODE, WHICH IS BASICALLY IN BEST PRACTICE. YOU ALREADY HAVE SOME OF THIS THERE, RIGHT? IF YOU THINK ABOUT BLUE AGAVE, THAT'S BASICALLY A MINI NODE. IT'S JUST A WAY TO CONSOLIDATE ACCESS INTO, YOU KNOW, CLUSTER A GROUP OF BUSINESSES TOGETHER THAT THEY CAN SUCCESSFULLY, YOU KNOW, LOCATE TOGETHER. BUT THEN YOU CAN ALSO KIND OF WORK ON TENANT CURATION, WHICH IS A WAY TO WORK WITH LANDOWNERS TO SORT OF FIGURE OUT A BETTER SOLUTION FOR THE FOR THE TYPES OF TENANTS THAT ARE, THAT ARE WITHIN THESE BUILDINGS. AND THAT'S SORT OF AN ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE THAT CAN HELP SORT OF ALIGN THE TYPES OF USES WITH, WITH WHAT THE COMMUNITY ASPIRES TO THIS AREA. BUT THEN THIS IS KIND OF WHERE WE WHERE WE TRANSITION AND START THINKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE WHAT ARE SOME STRATEGIC PLACEMAKING THAT WE CAN DO IN THIS AREA TO MAYBE INFLUENCE THE MARKET THAT CAN CLOSELY ALIGN IT WITH WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS FOR THIS AREA? RIGHT. AND SO IF YOU THINK ABOUT THIS, YOU KNOW, THE BLACK LINE IS THE OBSERVED GROWTH TREND. YOU KNOW, WITHOUT INTERVENTION YOU'RE STILL GOING TO GET A STEADY DEMAND. YOU'LL STILL GET, YOU KNOW, A FEW MORE SIMILAR USES ALONG THE US 60 CORRIDOR. AND THAT'S KIND OF THE MARKET CAPTION YOU MIGHT SEE IN THAT PURPLE. BUT REALLY THE QUESTION THAT WE, WE, WE STARTED ASKING WAS, HOW CAN WE SHIFT THE MARKET SO THAT WE CAN INTRODUCE A BIT MORE VARIETY AND A BIT MORE DEMAND AND THAT KIND OF THAT'S KIND OF THE PREFACE TO HOW WE STARTED THINKING ABOUT OUR LAND USE STRATEGY. SO I'LL HAND IT BACK TO YOU. OH YEAH. SO I GUESS JUST TO REITERATE, WE

[02:25:08]

YEAH. SO WE TOOK THE PIPELINE DEVELOPMENT. WE EVEN INCLUDED FULL BUILD OUT OF THE VILLAGE CENTER. AND SO THAT'S HOW WE ARRIVED AT THAT, THAT 25 TO 30,000FT■!S. AND THAT'S WHAT THE OUR FOCUS AREA COULD CAPTURE THE DEMAND. THE RETAIL DEMAND IN THE CITY AS A WHOLE IS SLIGHTLY LARGER. I THINK WE TOOK ABOUT 50% OF THE TOTAL RETAIL DEMAND AND SAID WE THINK THE FOCUS AREA COULD CAPTURE ABOUT THAT MUCH RETAIL. THAT DOES INCLUDE PIPELINE PROJECTS. YEAH, INCLUDING THE HAMLET AND VILLAGE CENTER. GREAT QUESTION. SO THERE'S LOTS OF COLORS HAPPENING ON THIS MAP, BUT THE BIG TAKEAWAYS HERE IS A LOT OF WHAT'S THERE TODAY IS PROBABLY UNLIKELY TO CHANGE IN THE SHORT TERM TO MID-TERM. SO THE COLORS THAT WE'RE FOCUSING IN ON THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING NEW AND DIFFERENT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING. HERE ARE THE WHAT WE'RE CALLING THE NORTH GATEWAY DISTRICT, WHICH IS THIS DARK PURPLE, LIGHT PURPLE, AND THE YELLOW COLORS YOU SEE ON THE MAP. AND I'LL EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHY WE HAVE THOSE THREE DIFFERENT COLORS. BUT BASICALLY EVERYTHING THAT IS NOT CURRENTLY COMMERCIAL TODAY. AND IN THE GROUND, WE'RE SORT OF SHOWING AS THIS POTENTIAL NORTH GATEWAY DISTRICT. AND WE DIVIDED IT UP INTO THREE SUBDISTRICTS FOR THE SAKE OF TRYING TO CREATE STANDARDS AROUND THIS IDEA OF A DEVELOPMENT GRADIENT. SO WE REALLY WANTED TO BE CONTEXT SENSITIVE. WE KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT IS A TOUCHY ISSUE FOR A LOT OF FOLKS, AND THERE'S A LOT OF EXISTING NEIGHBORS AROUND THIS FOCUS AREA. SO WE WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THAT WHILE STILL TRYING TO. GET THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD HELP TO SHIFT THAT MARKET THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT. SO OUR APPROACH IS TO REALLY FOCUS IN MORE INTENSE DEVELOPMENT, INTENSE IN QUOTATIONS ALONG OUR MAJOR CORRIDORS OF US 62 AND WALTON PARKWAY, AND THEN TRY TO STEP THAT DOWN IN SO IT BLENDS RIGHT INTO THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE SURROUNDING THERE, INCLUDING THE STUFF YOU SEE ALONG CENTRAL COLLEGE AND KITZMILLER TODAY. SO THE DARK PURPLE AREA HAS IN IN THE PLAN A MAX HEIGHT OF FOUR STORIES. THE LIGHT PURPLE WOULD BE THREE, AND THEN IT WOULD STEP DOWN INTO KIND OF TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INTO THE YELLOW AS AS TO TRY TO ILLUSTRATE THAT DEVELOPMENT GRADIENT THAT'S HAPPENING. BUT REALLY OUR, YOU KNOW, OUR OVERARCHING DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES FOR THIS DISTRICT IS ABOUT MORE OF A COMPACT, WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD PATTERN OR DEVELOPMENT PATTERN THAT'S UP TO THE QUALITY AND CHARACTER OF THE REST OF THE CITY OF NEW ALBANY. REALLY A MAJOR FOCUS ON WALKABLE MIX OF USES, BUT ALSO INTERSPERSING RECREATION AND CIVIC SPACES WHERE WHERE WE CAN. INTRODUCING A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES AT DIFFERENT SCALES, BUT AGAIN, STILL TRYING TO REMAIN SENSITIVE TO SURROUNDING CONTEXT AND REALLY ALSO TRYING TO ACTIVATE MORE OF THOSE GREEN SPACES IN THE AREA THAT REALLY KIND OF WORK, EMPHASIZE THOSE IMPORTANT TRAILS AND PARKS CONTINUE TO BE

[02:30:02]

[02:35:05]

BUSINESS PARK TRANSITIONAL IS STILL ALONG CENTRAL COLLEGE ROAD, WHICH STILL REFLECTS THE PREVIOUS PLAN. BUT THEN IF WE START LOOKING AT VALHALLA ROAD, WE INTRODUCED THIS NEW TRANSITIONAL CLASSIFICATION. AND REALLY WHEN YOU LOOK, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DIMENSIONAL CHART WITHIN THERE, YOU'LL SEE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE SOME FLEXIBILITY SINCE THERE'S MULTIPLE TYPES OF USES THAT ARE FRONTING BILHEIMER AT THE MOMENT. AND THE CHARACTER ROADWAY PERHAPS CALLS FOR SOMETHING SLIGHTLY MORE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT IF IT'S FRONTING AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL LOT VERSUS A COMMERCIAL. SO YOU'LL SEE THAT THE DIFFERENCES THERE IS BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THERE'S A HORSE FENCE FRONTING IT AND POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY. MAYBE IF WE GO, SORRY. WE COULD PROBABLY DO THESE. YEAH. I MEAN, IF YOU GUYS HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE THOROUGHFARE CLASSIFICATION. BUT REALLY, I MEAN, A BIG TAKEAWAY HERE IS 62 IS GOING TO REMAIN A MAJOR CORRIDOR. SO PART OF CREATING THAT WALKABLE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SO MUCH IS KIND OF GETTING PEOPLE OFF 62 ONTO THOSE TYPOLOGY A AND B STREETS, WHICH ARE MORE THOSE PERPENDICULAR KIND OF INTERIOR NETWORK ROADWAYS. OBVIOUSLY THOSE ARE KIND OF JUST.

ALIGNMENTS. NOT LIKE EXACT. THEY HAVEN'T BEEN, YOU KNOW, STUDIED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO SHOW KIND OF THE A TO B CONNECTIONS THAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN. BUT YEAH, I THINK WE'VE GOT SOME OTHER SLIDES HERE WE CAN TALK THROUGH. BUT I THINK THE PUBLIC REALM IMPROVEMENTS TO I'LL JUST EMPHASIZE THE COMMUNITY REALLY THAT WOULD GO A LONG WAY IN THIS AREA, JUST FILLING IN LEISURE TRAIL GAPS AND MAKING SOME KIND OF INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS.

FIVE POINTS. THAT'S TALKED ABOUT A LOT AS A CONCERN. AND THEN WHAT WE KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THE ODOT

[02:40:04]

SO POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, THE CITY COULD CONTINUE TO MONITOR DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS AS THEY COME IN AND AS THEY COME IN, THAT GROSS DENSITY STARTS TO DECREASE OVER TIME. THE THERE'S CHECKS AND BALANCES TO THAT TOO, BECAUSE OF THE HEIGHT MAX AND BECAUSE OF THE OPEN SPACE. SO YOU WOULDN'T HAVE A DEVELOPMENT THAT COMES IN AT LIKE 50 UNITS TO AN ACRE, AND THEN ONE THAT COMES IN AT ONE UNIT TO AN ACRE, IT WOULD BE MORE REASONABLE NUMBERS, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. WE USE THE BUILDING TYPOLOGIES AND THEIR DIMENSIONAL CONSIDERATIONS TO GET TO THAT. YEAH. IN ADDITION TO THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS. YEAH. SO IT'S A VERY IT'S A VERY REALISTIC NUMBER. BUT AT FULL BUILD OUT OF THE. OUT OF THAT TOO. YEAH. ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. THERE'S THREE FOLKS THAT HUNG AROUND TO THE BITTER END. MR. CHAIRMAN I HAVE A. SAMANTHA RUFO. NAME ADDRESS AND. GOOD EVENING, I'M SAMANTHA RUFO. I LIVE AT 9175 LEE HALL COURT IN TIDEWATER. I WAS ON THE ROUTE 62 STEERING COMMITTEE. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE TIDEWATER HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. AND FIRST, I DO WANT TO SINCERELY THANK THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD, CITY STAFF, THE CONSULTANTS THAT HELPED US BUILD THIS PLAN, CITY COUNCIL, FOR ALL THE EXTENSIVE WORK THAT WENT INTO PUTTING THIS US 62 INTERCHANGE FOCUS AREA PLAN INTO PLACE, THE STUDIES, COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS, SURVEYS, STEERING COMMITTEE MEETINGS REPRESENT A SIGNIFICANT EFFORT TO ENGAGE THE RESIDENTS AND THOUGHTFULLY PLAN FOR THE FUTURE OF THIS IMPORTANT CORRIDOR. DEVELOPING THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVIDES A VALUABLE ROADMAP AS WE MOVE FORWARD. I DO APPRECIATE THE DETAILED RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED AND, LIKE MANY RESIDENTS, AM KEEN TO UNDERSTAND THE NEXT STEPS AND IMPLEMENTATION. IMPLEMENTATION IMPLICATIONS I DO HAVE SOME SPECIFIC CONCERNS I'D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT. THERE ARE MORE THAN A DOZEN PAGES IN THE PLAN THAT DIRECTLY MENTION AN IMPACT. THE TIDEWATER NEIGHBORHOOD YET, AND EVEN 4% OF THE SURVEY RESPONDENTS PAGE 37, WERE FROM TIDEWATER COMMUNITY. YET WE'RE NOT INCLUDED ANYWHERE IN THIS MAP AT ALL, EVEN THOUGH THE ANSWER. IT'S MANY OF THE POINTS THAT I'LL BRING UP DIRECTLY AFFECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I

[02:45:06]

I THINK THERE'S AT LEAST 2 OR 3 TIDEWATER RESIDENTS ON THE STEERING COMMITTEE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THIS DOES HAVE AN IMPACT ON YOU GUYS. THAT'S HOW WE REPRESENTED THAT IN THE PLAN.

BUT WE'RE ALSO FULLY AWARE THAT REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCELS ARE PROBABLY PROBABLY NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. OKAY, SO LET ME GO A LITTLE MORE DETAIL OF WHY WE FEEL THIS HAS A BIGGER IMPACT THAN THAN MAYBE THOUGHT. THE PROPOSED TIDEWATER PARK DEVELOPMENT, WHILE ADDITIONAL PARK SPACE IS EXTREMELY WELCOME, WE HAVE NONE NEAR US. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR INCREASED TRAFFIC CONGESTION IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA RESULTING FROM PARK ACCESS POINTS, PARTICULARLY WHEN PARKING IS ADDED. I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT TREE REMOVAL DURING THE PARK DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WILL ADD TO THE CURRENT NOISE POLLUTION THAT WE GET FROM ROUTE 62, SPECIFICALLY FROM THE AMOUNT OF INCREASED TRAFFIC THAT WE'VE HAD ALONG THERE, AS WELL AS ENGINE BRAKING, WE GET A TON OF THAT. I ALSO WANT TO PRIORITIZE FOR YOU TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PRESERVE AS MUCH OF THAT TREE CANOPY AS WE CAN, BECAUSE THOSE TREES ARE REALLY GOOD. SOUND BARRIER BETWEEN US AND 62. SECOND, I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROPOSAL TO CLOSE OFF KITZMILLER DIRECT ACCESS TO THE FIVE POINTS INTERSECTION AS PART OF THE KITZMILLER SCENIC PARKWAY CONCEPT, AS THE PLAN ITSELF NOTES, KITZMILLER ROAD CURRENTLY SERVES AS A CRUCIAL BUFFER BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND THE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY ON ROUTE 62. IN THE TWO YEAR OLD ODOT STUDY THAT WAS USED IN THE PLAN BEFORE ALL THE CURRENT TRAFFIC THAT WE HAVE, IT HIGHLIGHTS THAT THERE ARE 24 OVER 24,000 CARS ALONG ROUTE 62 AND THIS NORTH MILLS GATEWAY. NO STUDY THAT I'M AWARE OF WAS DONE ON THE INTERSECTION OF CENTRAL COLLEGE AND KITZMILLER FOR RESIDENTS, AND TIDEWATER AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, KITZMILLER IS A VITAL THOROUGHFARE, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE HEAVY VOLUMES OF TRAFFIC AND CONGESTION ON 62 ALREADY PRESEN. REROUTING OR LIMITING ACCESS VIA KITZMILLER WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT OUR DAILY TRAVEL, AS WELL AS ACCESS TO SERVICES LIKE POLICE AND FIRE. IT'S GOING TO PUSH MORE TRAFFIC ONTO ALREADY STRESSED ROUTES. IT GOES AGAINST THE ROUTE 62 PLAN THAT MENTIONS ON PAGE 83. STREET NETWORKS SHOULD PROVIDE MULTIPLE CONNECTIONS TO MITIGATE CONGESTION AT ENTRANCES OR KEY INTERSECTIONS. OKAY, TO MY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS. AND I'M GOING TO SKIP ONE. GO RIGHT INTO ANOTHER ONE. CAN WE MINIMIZE THE SIGNIFICANT TREE REMOVAL WHICH HELPS BLOCK THAT TRAFFIC NOISE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A TIDEWATER PARK? YEAH, I THINK WITHOUT KNOWING I CAN FOLLOW UP AFTERWARDS. THERE'S SIGNIFICANT RESTRICTIONS ON WHAT CAN HAPPEN ON THAT PROPERTY. I DON'T HAVE THOSE PULLED UP AND MEMORIZED IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I DON'T. I'M NOT EVEN SURE IF ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN BACK THERE, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, BUT I CAN CERTAINLY FOLLOW UP WITH YOU AND LET YOU KNOW. BUT NOTHING IN THIS PLAN WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THOSE THOSE THOSE THINGS BE REMOVED. AND I KIND OF THOUGHT THAT BECAUSE SO MUCH OF THAT LAND. SO I REALLY WASN'T SURE, BUT THE RENDERING LOOKS LIKE IT'S MOSTLY JUST PART MOWED FLAT SPACE. OH, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IN THE TIDEWATER, THE NEW TIDEWATER PARK. YEAH, THERE WAS NONE OF THAT IS I DON'T THINK ANY OF THOSE ILLUSTRATIONS WERE TO INDICATE THAT THE TREES WOULD BE REMOVED AT ALL. BUT ARE THERE ZONING RESTRICTIONS ON THAT LAID DOWN? I CAN CHECK, I'M PRETTY SURE IT'S FEMA LAND. IT'S FEMA, IT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS. THERE'S DEED RESTRICTIONS IN THAT PROPERTY, BUT I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD FOR SURE. THE BLACKLICK CREEK. YEAH, WE DEFINITELY ARE VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF KEEPING TREE CANOPY. JUST FOR THE RECORD, THE TIDEWATER AND KITZMILLER PARK RENDERINGS WE DIDN'T CREATE SPECIFIC TO THIS PLAN. WE ARE CARRYING THOSE FORWARD FROM THE PARKS FRAMEWORK PLAN. JUST JUST TO PUT THAT OUT THERE AND JUST

[02:50:05]

[02:55:01]

RATHER THAN ELIMINATING THIS CRITICAL ROADWAY, A MORE EFFECTIVE AND FORWARD THINKING SOLUTION WOULD BE THE INSTALLATION OF A ROUNDABOUT AT THE INTERSECTION OF CENTRAL COLLEGE, KITZMILLER AND JOHNSTON ROAD. A ROUNDABOUT WOULD IMPROVE TRAFFIC FLOW, REDUCE DELAYS, ENHANCE SAFETY BY LOWERING VEHICLE SPEEDS, AND ACCOMMODATE THE VOLUME OF VEHICLES MORE EFFECTIVELY THAN STOP SIGNS OR SIGNAL LIGHTS. MAINTAINING ACCESS THROUGH KITZMILLER AND INVESTING IN A ROUNDABOUT WOULD PRESERVE ESSENTIAL TRAFFIC MOVEMENT WHILE ADDRESSING SAFETY CONCERNS AND CONGESTION, BENEFITING THE COMMUNITY FAR MORE THAN A FULL ROAD CLOSURE EVER COULD. THEN I HAVE SARAH CHATTERJEE, 5335, ALDIE MILL. WE APPRECIATE THE TIME AND EFFORT THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN TO GET FEEDBACK ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF 62. WE DO NOT FEEL THAT TIDEWATER HAS BEEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN CUTTING OFF ACCESS TO KITZMILLER. WE ALREADY FACE ISSUES WITH INCREASING TRAFFIC FLOW FROM A AND F AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION COMING FROM BEACH ROAD. WE ARE ABLE TO USE KITZMILLER TO BE ABLE TO NOT ONLY HAVE A MORE SCENIC ROAD HOME, BUT ALSO GET HOME IN A TIMELY MANNER. THIS IS ALSO CRUCIAL CRITICAL FOR OUR FAMILY AS WE HAVE A SPECIAL NEEDS CHILD IN OUR FAMILY AND WAITING LONG PERIODS IN TRAFFIC IS VERY FRUSTRATING FOR HER AND CAN CAUSE HER ISSUES. I DON'T SEE HOW THIS PROPOSAL IS FEASIBLE UNLESS THERE'S ALSO A SIGNIFICANT EXPANSION OF ROUTE 62 INTO A FOUR LANE ROAD. AT MINIMUM, IT FEELS LIKE THIS PROPOSAL IS NOT ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF TRAFFIC FLOW FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. INSTEAD, IT'S MAKING IT WORSE. QUESTION FOR STAFF KITZMILLER RIGHT NOW AT THE TOP IS WRITING RIGHT OUT, CORRECT? YES. CANNOT TURN LEFT AND IT GETS GOING RIGHT INTO OR OUT OF INTO KITZMILLER ROAD. YOU CAN GO SOUTH. SO IF YOU GO YES PLEASE. OKAY. SORRY. EXCUSE ME.

INTRODUCE MYSELF. YES. PLEASE GO AHEAD. NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. SURE. THANK YOU. SAM. MY NAME IS JAMES AND I'M A RESIDENT OF TIDEWATER. I LIVE AT 9140 MCCLELLAN DRIVE. SO TO ANSWER THE QUESTION THAT WAS POSED THE INTERSECTION WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO THE WEST ON CENTRAL COLLEGE, YOU CANNOT TURN LEFT ONTO ON TO KITZMILLER. WHEN YOU'RE GOING SOUTH ON 62, YOU CAN MAKE A SLIGHT LEFT ON THE KITZMILLER. SO THERE IS SOUTH ACCESS. IT'S JUST NOT FROM CENTRAL COLLEGE.

SURE. BECAUSE YOU'RE EFFECTIVELY ON CENTRAL COLLEGE TURNING RIGHT ONTO KITZMILLER. CENTRAL COLLEGE EAST RIGHT TO CENTRAL TO KITZMILLER SOUTH. BUT IF YOU'RE GOING WEST YOU CAN'T TURN DOWN KITZMILLER OKAY. NOW TO THAT POINT THE SOUTH ACCESS ON KITZMILLER I THINK IS ESSENTIAL.

I'M ALSO I'M THE DIRECTOR OF STRATEGY FOR MOUNT CARMEL HEALTH SYSTEM, OUR EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT THERE ON SMITH. SMELL YOUR OPTIONS TO GET THERE IN A VERY QUICK WAY. WHETHER YOU'D BE AMBULANCE OR A SELF-DRIVING EMERGENCY PATIENT, YOU EITHER HAVE TO GO WAIT THROUGH ALL THE LIGHTS ON 62, OR YOU GO DOWN KITZMILLER AND GET THERE IN A STRAIGHT SHOT. WE'D MUCH PREFER THAT TO BE AN ACTIVE WAY TO GET TO THAT EMERGENCY ROOM. I DON'T WANT TO SOUND FLIP, BUT THE RESIDENTS OF KITZMILLER WOULD REALLY RATHER YOU DIDN'T DO ALL THAT AND LOTS OF TRAFFIC, BUT GO AHEAD. SO THE ALL THE REASONS THAT THAT SAMANTHA JUST CALLED OUT, I ECHO. AND HONESTLY IF THERE WAS A CHOICE BETWEEN ROUNDABOUT OR NOT AND HAVING A ROUNDABOUT WOULD CLOSE OFF KITZMILLER, IT'S A BETTER OPTION JUST TO NOT CLOSE KITZMILLER AND LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS. I THINK IT WOULD BE MAKING IT WORSE TO CLOSE THAT. THAT'S MY OPINION. SO I WANTED TO ADD THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. WERE YOU DONE? I WAS JUST GOING TO THANK YOU. ONE SIDE NOTE AND I PROBABLY SHOULDN'T SAY IT ON RECORD, BUT WHEN YOU'RE ON CENTRAL COLLEGE AND YOU WE SUPPOSEDLY HAVE A NO LEFT TURN. HOWEVER, THAT SIGN WAS TAKEN OUT BY A TRACTOR TRAILER, SO IT SO IN A SENSE YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO GO LEFT ONTO KITZMILLER. HOWEVER, I HAVE SEEN EMERGENCY VEHICLES, POLICE OFFICERS AND CITY OF NEW ALBANY CARS ALL TURN LEFT THERE. YOU HAVE LAW ABIDING CITIZENS THAT WILL TURN LEFT THERE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANOTHER OPTION BECAUSE WE'RE

[03:00:03]

THANK YOU, THANK YOU. DID YOU SIR DID YOU WANT TO. OH SORRY. GO AHEAD. SORRY I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WE'RE GOOD WITH THESE CHANGES ALSO IF THAT HELPS. LIKE WE CAN DEFINITELY INCLUDE I THINK WE DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THIS WAS SUCH A HOT BUTTON ISSUE. AND WE CAN DEFINITELY SOFTEN THE LANGUAGE IN THE PLAN. AND OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD NEED TO BE STUDIED MUCH FURTHER. BUT YEAH, I'M I'M IN FAVOR OF MULTIPLICITY OF CONNECTIONS AND NOT CUL DE SAC OR ROAD UNNECESSARILY. SO THAT'S I THINK THE CITY'S GOOD WITH THAT TOO, IF THAT HELPS ALLEVIATE ANY CONCERNS. THANK YOU. I KNOW I'M THE LAST PERSON HERE. MY NAME IS JIM RUFO. I LIVE AT 9175 COURT IN TIDEWATER WITH MY BEAUTIFUL WIFE. WE'VE LIVED HERE FOR NINE YEARS. WE'RE ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE COMMUNITY. I WILL SAY THIS. THANK YOU BECAUSE WE'VE HAD THE CHANCE TO BE INVOLVED WITH THIS PROCESS THROUGH THE YEARS. I DO REMEMBER WHEN THIS INITIAL I THINK THE MEETING WAS BACK IN MAY, AND I REMEMBER SEEING THE LITTLE ORANGE DOTS ON THE BOARDS, AND WITHOUT A DOUBT, THAT INTERSECTION IS THE NUMBER ONE PAIN POINT FOR ALL OF US.

THE NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS THAT OCCUR THERE IS INCREDIBLE. THE TRAFFIC IS INCREASED BECAUSE OF THE BUILD OUT WITH INTEL. NOW YOU'RE GOING TO ADD 120 HOMES PLUS IN HEINZ CREEK, WHICH LOOK ON AVERAGE HOW MANY CARS ARE IN A HOME THESE DAYS? 2 TO 3. SO NOW YOU'RE TALKING 200 PLUS MORE CARS. CENTRAL COLLEGE EAST OF 62 WAS NEVER MEANT FOR WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW. I'VE BEEN INVOLVED PERSONALLY WITH TWO ACCIDENTS AT THAT INTERSECTION, AND YOU CAN SEE IT THE ONE TIME MY WIFE AND I WERE SITTING IN THE CAR FACING WEST ON CENTRAL COLLEGE, THERE'S A POLICE OFFICER SITTING RIGHT THERE BY THE ELECTRICAL POWER UNIT OR WHATEVER STATION THERE PERSON TAKES A LEFT ON KITZMILLER AT THE LIGHT AND GOES DOWN. AND SO THE PROPOSAL AS IT IS RIGHT NOW IS JUST GOING TO TAKE TRAFFIC AND PUT IT BACK ON 62. AND WE'VE SEEN IT THE, THE, THE ONE OF THE BIGGEST CONCERNS IS WITH THIS WHOLE AREA. AND WE'RE YOU KNOW, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND SOUTH OF KITZMILLER AND THAT GREEN AREA COULD BE A PARK. THERE IS NO GREEN SPACE CURRENTLY EAST OF 62 AND TIDEWATER HEINZ CREEK IS BEING DEVELOPED. BUT HOW DO WE GET DOWN THERE IF THERE'S NOT, YOU KNOW, SIDEWALKS AND WALKING PATHS TO GET THERE? IN ESSENCE, OUR CONCERN IS CLOSING OFF KITZMILLER. AND I'M JUST GOING TO BE FRANK, IS GOING TO DISCONNECT TIDEWATER AND HEINZ CREEK FROM NEW ALBANY, BECAUSE THAT IS THE ONLY WAY FOR US, THE NUMBER OF TRAFFIC THAT GOES, THE TRAFFIC THAT GOES DOWN FROM 62 SOUTHBOUND ON THE KITZMILLER IN THE MORNING IS INCREDIBLE. IT IS BECAUSE EVERYONE WANTS TO AVOID STAY AROUND 62 AS YOU HEAD FURTHER SOUTH. IF YOU'RE THERE IN THE MORNING, YOU KNOW AS WELL AS I DO THAT TRAFFIC WILL BACK UP TO CENTRAL COLLEGE EVEN NORTH OF 62 HEADING SOUTH, AND IT AT NIGHTTIME THAT TRAFFIC GOING NORTHBOUND ON 62 WILL BACK UP TO SMITHVILLE. THERE ARE SOME SOLVES AND MAYBE ONE OF THEM. WE SAW THIS I THINK IT WAS NEW ALBANY. THEY ACTUALLY BUILT A TUNNEL UNDER THE ROAD THAT TOOK THE NEIGHBORHOOD UNDERNEATH, LIKE CENTRAL COLLEGE, BECAUSE WE WOULD LIKE TO GET ACCESS TO THAT GREEN SPACE THAT POTENTIALLY COULD BE COMING THERE. THAT'D BE GREAT. THE OTHER PART OF IT, TOO, IS IF YOU LOOK AT IT, PUT A NO TRUCK SIGN ON CENTRAL COLLEGE AS YOU HAVE ON SMITHVILLE RIGHT NOW. GOING EASTBOUND ON SMITHVILLE, THERE'S A NO TRUCK SIGN. IF YOU ALLEVIATED SOME OF THAT TRAFFIC THAT'S GETTING BUILT FOR INTEL AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT SHOULD BE ON ON 161 TO BEECH ROAD AND GOING BACK AND FORTH RATHER GOING THROUGH A ROAD THAT WAS NOT MADE FOR IT. SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS. THE BIGGEST CONCERN IS THE SAFETY, BECAUSE IF YOU BLOCK OFF KITZMILLER, AND THAT MEANS WE'D HAVE TO WALK ACROSS A MORE HEAVILY TRAFFICKED ROAD. TRAFFIC ROAD AS WELL AS THE FACT AND I KNOW IT'S BEEN MENTIONED, WHAT'S RESPONSE TIME FOR POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENT IF THEY'RE TRYING TO GET UP 62 AND THERE'S AN EMERGENCY OR A FIRE OR SOMETHING FOR US, AS WELL AS NOW THE BUILD OUT WITH HEINZ CREEK, WE LIVED IN POWELL, OHIO. WE MOVED HERE SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE

[03:05:02]

AND WE DO APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S EFFORTS. BUT IT IS A BIG CONCERN WITH THE 60 RESIDENTS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I KNOW AS WELL AS I'M SURE WITH THE FUTURE RESIDENTS OF HEINZ CREEK. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? THERE'S NO VOTE THAT'S NEEDED ON THIS, RIGHT? YEAH. IT WOULD BE A VOTE TO FOR A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY. OH THERE IS A VOTE FOR ON THE TERMS OF NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS. HOW DOES THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS THIS WILL ADD COMPARED TO WHAT IT HAD BEEN PRIOR UNDER THE MASTER POD OF 98 AND THEIR THEIR BANK OF THE RESIDENTIAL BANK. WHAT OUR NUMBERS LOOK LIKE COMPARED TO THOSE NUMBERS, LIKE HOW MUCH ARE THOSE BANK. HOW MUCH IS THAT BANK. YEAH. HOW MANY IS IN THE BANK? BECAUSE THAT'S A I NOT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD I MEAN SO 800 I THINK. OKAY. AND WHAT'S THE TOTAL NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS WE WERE LOOKING AT IN THE DISTRICT HERE TO BE ADDED IF THEY BUILD IT OUT. WE HAD SOME BREAK, BUT I DIDN'T SEE WHAT THE TOTAL MATH WAS. LET ME SEE. OR OR THREE PER GROSS ACRE. ACTUALLY, IF I COULD CALL THE GROSS ACREAGE, WE COULD JUST DO THAT. WELL. HOW MANY ACRES OF STUDY ARE. THE STUDY AREA ITSELF IS 547, RIGHT? 2500 1500 DUE FOR THE. THAT'S AGAIN, ASSUMING THE ENTIRE AREA IS REDEVELOPED FOR RESIDENTIAL. YES. YEAH. AND HALF THAT ALONE IS IN NACO'S HOUSING BANK ALREADY. YEAH. I GUESS I'M NOT SURE WHAT COMPARISON YOU'RE MAKING, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS. THIS IS SEPARATE THAN NACO'S HOUSING BANK. THIS IS NOT BECAUSE WHEN A ZILLION PEOPLE WITH PITCHFORKS AND TORCHES REPRESENTING THE SCHOOLS COME OUT AND SAY, NOT ANOTHER HOUSE, DARN IT, MINE WAS THE LAST HOUSE YOU WANTED TO BUILD. IT'S LIKE FLORIDA THAT EVERYONE WHO MOVES HERE SAYS, MY HOUSE WAS THE LAST ONE YOU SHOULD HAVE BUILT, AND NO ONE ELSE SHOULD MOVE IN AFTER ME. AS A WE'VE WATCHED THIS. WE WAVE.

I'VE BEEN HERE 40 YEARS. I'VE WATCHED WAVES OF THIS. AND COMPARING THIS TO WHAT'S BUYER RIGHTS AVAILABLE TO NEW ALBANY COMPANY AND THE BANK AND THE ZONING THAT'S ON THE GROUND.

RIGHT. WE LOST. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY HOUSES WHEN THIS BUILT IS COMMERCIAL INSTEAD OF WHAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY IN HIS TRUST CORE AND AROUND HERE. SO ONE IS NO SURPRISES TO THE SCHOOLS. AND TWO, THEY ALREADY KNEW THAT THIS COULD HAPPEN IN A DIFFERENT GUISE. THAT'S WHERE I WAS LOOKING AT FOR NUMBERS OF DUE IS TO PROVIDE CONTEXT OF THINGS WE COULD COMPARE IT TO. YEAH WE COULD, WE COULD ADD THOSE EXPLICIT NUMBERS IN THE PLAN IF YOU'D LIKE, BEFORE WE TAKE IT TO COUNCIL OR WHEN WE TAKE IT TO COUNCILS OR AS YOU'RE PART OF YOUR RECOMMENDATION. YES.

BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT LOOKS LIKE HERE'S 1500 HOUSES. WHERE DID THAT COME FROM? AND IT'S ALREADY BEEN IT'S A LOT OF IT HAD ALREADY WAS ZONED THERE PRIOR HAS BEEN REMOVED AS NACO DIDN'T DEVELOP. NICE OKAY. YEAH OKAY. YEAH I THINK WE COULD IF THAT'S PART OF YOUR RECOMMENDATION WE COULD ADD MORE IF YOU'D BE SO KIND BECAUSE. FOR THE EXISTING ZONING HERE IN THE EXISTING ZONING THAT I'M ASSUMING THAT NACO BOUGHT SOME OF THE LAND, THEY'VE ALREADY GOT ACCESS TO TRANSFER HOUSING TO, IT'S NOT A SHOCK. YEAH. THANK YOU. THAT'S A VALID POINT. RIGHT. BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO SEE RESIDENTS COME IN WITH THAT EXACT CONVERSATION. YEAH. ESPECIALLY AFTER THEY HAVE TO. YEAH THEY HANDLE IT. THEY'RE LIKE YOU KNOW, HIGH DENSITY HOUSING I'M ALLERGIC TO IT. YOU KNOW LIKE ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. SO HOW DO WE ADDRESS THE COMMENTS ABOUT THE INTERSECTION AT KITZMILLER COLLEGE, CENTRAL COLLEGE IN 62. AND THEN HOW DO WE ADDRESS THE COMMENT THAT NEIL JUST MADE ABOUT DENSITY IN TERMS OF MAKING A MOTION AND A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED YOU COULD MAKE SOME CHANGES, CHRIS, BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL. YEP. YES, YOU CAN HANDLE IT JUST LIKE YOU DO. ANY OTHER CONDITION OF APPROVAL. WE CAN WE CAN MAKE THOSE CHANGES BEFORE COUNCIL. SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF THAT WHEN THAT GETS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL, THE KITZMILLER ROAD CONCERNS ARE BROUGHT UP AS PART OF WHAT HAPPENED AT PLANNING COMMISSION. AND DO ALL THE UNITS GET. DEFINITELY. ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD

[03:10:06]

COUNCIL AND SECOND, THE DWELLING UNIT OF DWELLING UNIT DISCUSSION ALSO BE PART OF THAT. THE CONCERNS RAISED TO COUNCIL THANKS TO THE PRESENTATION. THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION.

VERY WELL. THANKS FOR THE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

REALLY APPRECIATE IT. AND THAT'S THAT'S THE END OF OUR CASES. ANY COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS? NO. SORRY FOR BEING LATE. I JUST HAVE A VERY BRIEF ONE. I JUST WANTED TO SAY I THINK IT WAS LESS THAN IDEAL THAT WE COVERED SUCH A BIG TOPIC TONIGHT SO LATE, AND I DID WANT TO THANK YOU GUYS FOR STAYING. I'M SURE THERE'S PEOPLE MAYBE ONLINE. I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE IDEAL TO HAVE THIS. MAYBE AT ANOTHER MEETING, MORE IN DEPTH DISCUSSION, MORE RESIDENT INPUT. BUT I UNDERSTAND HOW THE MEETINGS GO SOMETIMES. I JUST WANTED TO CHIME IN ON THAT AND AGAIN, THANK THE RESIDENTS FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION SO LATE. ALL RIGHT, WE'RE

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.