[00:00:03]
AFTERNOON. IT'S 1 30. WELCOME TO ALL. I CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AND WE'LL START WITH ROLL CALL.
[A. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL]
MR ROCK HERE. MR PRE PRESIDENT. CHAIR OYSTER HERE. MR FARNSWORTH. MR TITUS HERE. AND IF YOU JOIN ME IN STEALING FOR A MOMENT OF SILENT PRAYER, FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. STATION. AND YOU FELT STANDS. ONE NATION. AND JUSTICE.[C. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES]
PLANNING COMMISSION HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE MEETING MINUTES OF OUR LAST MEETING, WHICH WAS FEBRUARY 7TH. IF THERE ARE NO COMMENTS, WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH EMOTION. BIG MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED. SECOND REAL CALL. MR ROCK. YES MR FREE . YES. OYSTER YES, MR FARNSWORTH ? YES, MR TITUS? YES. RIGHT. WE HAVE FOUR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TODAY. WHEN YOUR ITEM IS CALLED IF YOU OR THE APPLICANT COME UP TO THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME AS WELL AS YOUR ADDRESS, IT CAN BE YOUR HOME ADDRESS OR CAN BE YOUR BUSINESS ADDRESS. AND THEN ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE IF YOU COULD. ALSO IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY SIGN IN, UM RIGHT THERE AT THE PODIUM AS WELL. ITEM NUMBER ONE. PHANTOM FIREWORKS FINAL DEVELOPMENT[1. APPLICATION: Phantom Fireworks – Final Development Plan]
PLAN. AND JUST FOR CLARITY'S SAKE. I'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT, UM WE WILL BE, UM THIS IS A REALLY A PROPOSAL TO REVIEW SIGNAGE AT PHANTOM FIREWORKS. WE USE THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TITLE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE USE IN ORDER TO REVIEW SIGNAGE. UM MY NAME IS CALLING BRINKMAN WITH DAY NIGHT SIGN COMPANY. UM 16 40. HARMON AVENUE, COLUMBUS, OHIO, UM YEAH, WE'RE JUST HERE TODAY. WE'RE TRYING TO GET THREE WALL SIGNS APPROVED AND THEN ALSO A GROUND. SIGN OUT FRONT.UM THIS WAS A FORMERLY IN HH GREGG. AND THIS LOCATION HAS BEEN, UM SORRY. NO YOU'RE GOOD.
SORRY UH, IN THIS LOCATION HAS BEEN VACANT FOR FIVE YEARS NOW, SO WE'RE KIND OF FIREWORKS ARE TRYING TO OBTAIN THE BUILDING AND GET THE SIGNS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE ON THE BUILDING. UM, AND THIS WAS FORMERLY AN HH GREGG, WHICH HAD THIS BELIEVE, LIKE 430 SQUARE FEET OF SIGNAGE, AND WE'RE ASKING FOR JUST A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN THAT ON THE BUILDING, AND IT DOES HAVE GREAT VISIBILITY FROM 71 IN THE EXIT RENT THERE, SO WE'RE TRYING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT, UM, VISIBILITY ON THE YOU KNOW THE HIGHWAY THERE. UM AND THEN ALSO WITH THE MONUMENT SIGN BEING UPFRONT, WE WOULD LIKE THAT, JUST FOR, YOU KNOW, DIRECTION MORE OF LIKE A ENTRYWAY SIGNAGE TO THE BUILDING ITSELF. UM SO, UM, I DO KNOW THERE'S THE 200 SQUARE FOOT LIMITING GROVE CITY , BUT JUST WITH THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING, UM VISIBILITY FROM THE HIGHWAY AND THE PREVIOUS TENANT BEING A LOT OF THAT AMOUNT OF SIGNAGE, WE WOULD LIKE TO YEAH, HOPEFULLY GET APPROVAL FOR THE AMOUNT OF WALL SIGNAGE IN THE MONUMENT. SIGN OUT FRONT AS WELL FOR THIS LOCATION, SO THANK YOU.
THE AFRICAN IS APPLYING FOR A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO REVIEW SIGNS AT 1700 BUCKEYE PLACE. ZONING TEXT FOR THE SITE WAS ESTABLISHED WHEN THE PROPERTY WAS REZONED PDC IN 2002. WHILE THE TEXT INCLUDES LANGUAGE REGARDING THE CHARACTER OF THE SIGNAGE, THERE WERE NO REQUIREMENTS REGARDING SIMONE SIZE OR DIMENSIONS, THEREFORE, STANDARDS OF THE PROPERTY REVERTS TO CHAPTER 11 45 IN 2007 . A DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS APPROVED FOR HH GREGG AT THIS LOCATION, WHICH INCLUDED A STIPULATION PERMITTED PERMITTING. THE DEVELOPMENT TO EXCEED 200 SQUARE FOOT MAXIMUM PERMITTED FOR CODE, HOWEVER, BECAUSE THIS REQUEST IS TIRED, IS NOT TIED TO THE H. H. GREGG. THE APPLICATION WILL BE REQUIRED TO MEET THE CURRENT CODE
[00:05:04]
REQUIREMENTS. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INCLUDES THREE WALL SIGNS TOTALING 420.4 SQUARE FEET AND A 40 FT. MONUMENTS SIGNED WITH A BRICK BASE. THE SOUTH ELEVATION HAS A CIRCULAR PHANTOM FIREWORKS LOGO SIGN CONSISTING OF PURPLE, GREEN, YELLOW, BLACK, WHITE AND ORANGE COLORING. THE WEST ELEVATION HAS A 217 SQUARE FOOT SIGN WITH THE SAME LOGO AS THE SOUTH ELEVATION AND THE WORDS PHANTOM FIREWORKS. THIS ELEVATION FACES I 71. THE NORTH ELEVATION HAS ASSIGNED DISPLAYING THE SAME LOGO AND WORDING AS THE WEST ELEVATION WITH A TOTAL SIGN SIZE OF 139 AND A HALF SQUARE FEET. ELEVATION FACES STRING TOWN ROAD AND I 71 STAFF IS NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE AS IT EXCEEDS THE SIZE PERMITTED BY CODE, AND IT'S NOT IN CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND OTHER BUILDINGS APPROVED AS PART OF ORDINANCE C. 0202. WOW OTHER BUILDINGS WITHIN THE EU DE WERE PERMITTED TO EXCEED THE STANDARD CODE ALLOTMENT OF 200 SQUARE FEET. THOSE BUILDINGS ARE AT LEAST FOUR STORIES IN HEIGHT AND HAVE A LARGER FACADES. NO OTHER SINGLE STORY BUILDING WITHIN THE EU DE OR HAVING FRONTAGE ON I 71 ASIDE FROM THE HH GREGG BUILDING HAS BEEN PERMITTED TO EXCEED THE 200 SQUARE FEET. ALLOTMENT FOR WALL SIGNS. ADDITIONALLY NO OTHER HIGHWAY FRONTING SIGN IN THE PD UTILIZES MORE THAN TWO COLORS. IN ADDITION TO BLACK AND WHITE STAFF BELIEVES THAT IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS OF THE ZONING TEXT IN TERMS OF CREATING A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT APPEARANCE, SCIENCE SHOULD BE IN SCALE WITH THE ONE STORY BUILDING AND UTILIZE MORE NO MORE THAN TWO COLORS. IN ADDITION TO BLACK AND WHITE, HMM , STAFF DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT MEETS THE GROVE CITY 2050. PRINCIPLES OF PRESERVING THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA OR UTILIZING QUALITY DESIGN FOR THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE REALM, NOTING PREVIOUS CONCERNS REGARDING THE SCALE OF THE SIGNAGE IN THE AREA. AFTER REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION. THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS PLANNING COMMISSION MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OF DISAPPROVAL. TWO. CITY COUNCIL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK IF YOU COULD JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS? I'M JOKER TUPLE AND I'M FROM YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO. I'M REPRESENTING THE OWNER, PHANTOM FIREWORKS. UM, YOU KNOW, I JUST LIKE TO STATE THAT YOU KNOW IT'S A LARGE BUILDING, AND IT'S HARD TO GET TO AND AGAIN. IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR OVER. FIVE YEARS, UM IF THE BUILDING WAS TALLER, LIKE THE ADJACENT HOTELS. YOU KNOW, THERE'S SIGNAGE IS VERY VISIBLE BECAUSE THE HEIGHT OF THEIR BUILDING, UM YOU KNOW, IN THIS CASE, YOU KNOW WE'RE WE'VE GOT A HARD TIME OF IT, AND I THINK YOU KNOW, THE OWNERS OF THE BUILDING HAVE HAD A HARD TIME, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO FIND A TENANT FOR THE SPACE SO WE'RE STEPPING UP TO THE PLATE AND INVESTING. A LOT OF MONEY IN THIS LOCATION, AND WE HOPE IT TO BE VERY SUCCESSFUL , BUT PEOPLE HAVE TO FIND US.THE SIGNAGE THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR. IS MAINLY JUST FOR THAT PURPOSE. SO I KNOW. YOU DON'T LIKE TO HAVE YOU KNOW A LARGE AMOUNT OF SIGNAGE EVERYWHERE, YOU KNOW, BUT IN THIS CASE IN THIS CASE, I KNOW YOU ALSO DON'T LIKE TO HAVE VACANT BUILDINGS. SO UM, YOU KNOW, I JUST ASKED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THE YOU KNOW, TO GIVE US A LEND US A HELPING HAND HERE TO YOU KNOW, HAVE PEOPLE BE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE OUR BUILDING AND BE ABLE TO GET BACK TO IT SO WHATEVER YOU CAN DO. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. AND IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY IF YOU COULD SIGN IN PERFECT, OKAY.
QUESTIONS OF PLANNING COMMISSION. THE SIGNAGE BACKLIT SIGN. OR IS IT A SIGN FRONT LIT SIGN WHERE THE LIGHT ELEMENT COMES FROM BEHIND THE. SIGN, OR IS IT A SPOTLIGHT ONTO THE SIGN? IT'S INTERNALLY LATE, INTERNALLY BACKLIT. OKAY AND THEN THE HOURS THAT IT MIGHT BE ON OR OFF. IS IT ONLY ALL NIGHT LONG OR IS IT ON ONLY WHEN THE STORES OPEN WOULD ONLY BE ON ONE STORES OPEN, SO WE'RE GENERALLY OPEN FROM 9 TO 9. UM SO THAT WOULD CORRESPOND TO DAYLIGHT HOURS, SO DURING OUR SEASON. IT WOULD BE YOU KNOW? IT WOULD ONLY COME ON ABOUT 8 30 AT NIGHT AND KIND OF BE OFF. BY 10 OR SO JUST CONFIRM LIKE BACKLIT. IT'S A FACELIFT SIGN, BUT THE L E. D S ARE PHYSICALLY INSIDE OF THE SIDE. ACCORDING TO THE DRONES, YEAH. WE'VE PLACED AS LITTLE AMOUNT
[00:10:01]
YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF IT'S KIND OF A DIFFERENT KIND OF SCENARIO. WE PLACED A LITTLE AMOUNT OF SIGNAGE AS WE COULD ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING. FACING THE YOU KNOW. THE KIND OF THE RESIDENTIAL AREA HOTELS AREN'T THOSE SIGNAGE. WAS INCREASED ON THE SIDES TOWARD THE HIGHWAY AND TOWARDS THE BACK, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT H H. GREGG DID, BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE HE NEEDED TO HELP FIND THE BUILDING. SO. THERE ARE BANK AND THAT DISCUSSES OUR MAIN CONCERN OUR MAIN CONCERNS THAT PEOPLE CAN FIND US GET AROUND HER. YOU KNOW A LOT OF TRAFFIC ON THAT ROAD AND BUILDING, YOU KNOW, TO GET AROUND AND FIND HARD LOCATIONS SO THANK YOU. HAVE YOU DONE? ANY RENDERINGS ACTUALLY MEETS OUR CODE ON THAT BUILDING. UM, I WOULD JUST COMMENT THAT I AGREE WITH STAFF'S ASSESSMENT HERE THAT THIS SIGN DOESN'T MEAN THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT. I EITHER IN ITS OVERALL SIZE OR IN ITS NUMBER OF COLORS. AND I ALSO DON'T FIND THAT THE PREVIOUS TENANTS SIGN SIZE IS RELEVANT IN ANY WAY. SO I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS EXCEPTION. I'M ALSO CONCERNED WITH THE WORDING OF THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN BECAUSE IT'S SORT OF IMPLIES THAT WE'RE DOING MORE OF APPROVAL OF THE USE OF THE BUILDING AND JUST THE SIGN SO. YEAH IT'S INTERESTING. YOU SAY THAT BECAUSE THIS IS ONE THAT I'VE STRUGGLED WITH AND FIRST OF ALL, I AGREE WITH YOU THAT WHEN IT COMES TO WHAT HAPPENED WITH H. H. GREGG, IT'S IRRELEVANT. THAT WAS DONE AS PART OF THE ZONING PROCESS. THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHERE THERE WERE A LOT OF NEGOTIATE LINES THAT WENT IN THERE. THE STORES THAT SO LONG THAT WHAT HAPPENED THERE, BASICALLY THE RIGHTS THAT THEY HAD THAT SIGN OF GONE AWAY. SO THIS APPLICATION HAS TO BE NEW AND CONSIDERED ON ITS OWN MERITS, REGARDLESS OF WHAT CURRENTLY EXISTS. I DON'T LOVE THE IDEA OF THIS BEING CALLED A FINAL. EXCUSE ME. DEVELOPMENT PLAN, EITHER BECAUSE TRULY, IT'S A SIGN ISSUE. I MEAN, WE'VE ALREADY ESTABLISHED AND I'VE HAD MANY MEETINGS WITH THE RESIDENTS AND THE WHOLE WORLD ABOUT THIS PROJECT THAT FROM HIS PERSPECTIVE, MISUSE IS 100% ACCEPTABLE, SO NORMALLY DURING A FOUND DEVELOPMENT PLAN WE'RE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW MORE SPECIFICS THAN ONE THING OF THE SIGN, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE HERE , BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANOTHER MECHANISM IN WHICH TO KIND OF GET THIS IN FRONT OF YOU FOR YOU TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL, WHICH IS WHY IT'S PHRASED IN THE WAY THAT IT IS. QUESTIONS OF PLANNING COMMISSION . JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF PARTICULARLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT HERE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE DIMENSIONS OF THE ONE SCIENCE ON THE GROUND AH, IT'S EIGHT FT. AND I THOUGHT WE HAD A LIMIT OF FOUR. WE WENT THROUGH ONE OF THE RESTAURANTS THAT WAS GOING THROUGH. YEAH. I BELIEVE THE PREVIOUS CASE THAT YOU'RE DISCUSSING WAS LINE ITEM IN A BEAUTY ZONING TEXT THAT WAS FOR PARKER CENTER EAST BELIEVE SO THIS BEAUTY HAS A DIFFERENT SET OF STANDARDS. UM ACTUALLY, THERE ARE NO SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR THE DIMENSIONS FOR SIGNAGE AND THAT PEUT TEXT, WHICH IS WHY IT REVERTS TO 11 45. FOR STRAIGHT ZONING, 11 45, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO MONUMENT SIGN FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS. 50 SQUARE FEET UP TO EIGHT FT IN HEIGHT. AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION. I KNOW THIS IS JUST THE SIGNING CHEER ON THE BUILDING. WHAT ABOUT ANY FREEWAY SIGNAGE? IS THAT IN THE WORKS OR THE PLANS AS WELL? WORD. DAY NIGHT SIGNS, JUST THE INSTALLER OF THE SIGNS. SO UM, I'M NOT TOO FAMILIAR WITH THAT. I WILL. BYE. I CAN ADDRESS THAT. IT'S NOT PERMITTED, SO DON'T GIVE HIM THAT IDEA. KNOW THAT THEY'RE IN THIS INSTANCE THEY ARE LIMITED TO THE MONUMENT SIGN, AND THEN THE SIGNS ON THE BUILDING UP TO 200 SQUARE FEET. THEY WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED TO HAVE ANY TYPE OF FREESTANDING HIGHWAY SIGN. IN FACT, WE'VE DONE OUR BEST OVER THE LAST TWO DECADES OF MAKING A LOT OF THOSE GO AWAY WHEN WE CAN. GOOD, THANK YOU. ALL THE QUESTIONS I DID. ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. MHM HEARING NONE WERE READY FOR A MOTION. SURE ALL MAJOR SAY ONE LAST THING. I MEAN, I'M GOING TO REPEAT THE FACT THAT THIS BUILDING SAT NAKED FOR OVER FIVE YEARS, AND THAT'S PROBABLY THE REASON YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION AND THAT IT'S HARD TO GET TO SO THAT'S YOU KNOW. THE SIGNAGE IS. YOU KNOW, BASICALLY LOCATE THE BUILDING AND HELP PEOPLE GET TO IT. SO WHATEVER. YOU GUYS FINDING YOUR BRENT. WE APPRECIATE MY. YOU CAN STATE[00:15:05]
YOUR NAME AS WELL AS LESTER AND LEMASTER AND I'M A COMMONWEALTH SANG WE ARE THE MANUFACTURER OR ALL PHANTOM FIREWORK PRODUCTS. PROBABLY BEEN DOING THEIR WORK FOR 10 YEARS OR MORE. AND. TWO POINTS. I CAME INTO TOWN TODAY JUST TO LOOK AT THE JOB SITE AND I WORKED FOR DAY NUTS AND THEIR INSTALLER HERE. AND I'VE I'VE SEEN IT. BUT I COULDN'T FIND IT. I WAS IN A MOTEL PARKING LOT.THEN I WAS SOMEWHERE ELSE. AND THAT'S JUST FROM A JUST THE GUY. I JUST WANT TO HIT THE EXIT. SO ALSO AS DOING WORK FOR PHANTOM FIREWORKS FOR ALL THESE YEARS. THERE THE WORD FIREWORKS. YOU MAY THINK THE TENT SIDE OF THE ROAD SO SLEAZY GUY SELLING FIREWORKS. BUT THIS IS A FIRST CLASS. COS THE LANDSCAPING AND OTHER BUILDINGS, THEIR INTERIOR IS CLEAN. I MEAN, IT'S NOT IT'S REALLY THEY TAKE CARE OF THEIR PARKING LOTS ARE CLEAN. THANK YOU THERE SIGNS. LET ONLY THE BEST WHEN IT COMES TO SALVAGE AND THERE ARE FIRST CLASS. YOU KNOW, THERE'S A STARBUCKS FIREWORK BUSINESS IF I MUST SAY SO I JUST YOU KNOW, WANTED TO 25 CENTS, THEN. MADAM MADAM CHAIR IF I MAY, CAN I MAKE ONE CLARIFICATION TO THIS GENTLEMAN'S POINT, HE SAID, WHAT THIS SPORT IS WILLING TO GRANT. UM FROM THIS SPORTS PERSPECTIVE . THERE ARE ONLY A RECOMMENDING BODY SO THEY CAN'T GRANT ANYTHING. ALL THEY CAN DO IS FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION EITHER POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE TO CITY COUNCIL IN CITY COUNCIL WILL THEN CONSIDER IT SO. AT THE END OF THE DAY. YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TWO BITES AT THE APPLE WITH THIS ARGUMENT, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS HERE TODAY, THEY CAN'T GRANT ANYTHING THEY CAN JUST RECOMMEND. THANK YOU.
RIGHT WITH THAT. ALL READY TO MAKE A MOTION MOVE, AND I'M GONNA MAKE THIS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. UM, SO IT'S A LITTLE WORDED A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY THAN IT IS ON THE DEVELOPMENT AROUND THE SHEET HERE. I WILL MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER FOUR PHANTOM FIREWORKS FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. I'M SORRY. I DON'T NUMBER ONE. THERE WERE TWO AGENDAS.
SEND OUT SO WHICHEVER ITEM IT IS FOR PHANTOM FIREWORKS, SECOND. MR FREE. NO. MR ROCK. NO. CHAIR OF OYSTER. NO. MR TITUS. AND MR FARNSWORTH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH , LIKE LIKE HE MENTIONED THIS WILL GO BEFORE CITY COUNCIL IN TWO WEEKS. WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT 30. YES, I'LL MEET YOU IN THE HALLWAY. HEY ITEM NUMBER TWO SOUTH GATE BUSINESS PARK LOT SPLIT. ETHNIC
[2. APPLICATION: Southgate Business Park – Lot Split]
AFTERNOON. FLOYD WICKS W. M ONE CORPORATION AND, YEAH, WE'RE PRESENTING THE LOT SPLIT THERE ON HAN ROAD. FROM OUR CURRENT 18 ACRE PARCEL TO INCLUDE 2.28 OR PARCEL AND THE BALANCE REMAINING. YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE . 699 FAIR AVENUE, BEXLEY, OHIO, 43209. APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE SUPPORT TO SPLIT 2.2 ACRES FROM A 17.9 88 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HAN ROAD BACKING UP TO I 71 HMM. IN 2022 CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE ANNEXATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 63 ACRES ON THE EAST SIDE OF HOT ROAD, WHICH INCLUDED THE PARCEL BEING PROPOSED WITH THE SPLIT.FOLLOWING CLINTON'S COMMISSION. FOLLOWING PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL, THE LOTS OF WHAT CAN BE TAKEN TO FRANKLIN COUNTY FOR FINALIZATION. THIS PARCEL IS OWNED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL I N D ONE AND IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING SPLIT TO CREATE A LOT THAT WILL MEET THE LOT REQUIREMENTS OF THE LIGHT INDUSTRY. I N D ONE. STANDARDS PER THE ZONING CODE MATERIAL SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT STATE. THE REASON BEHIND THE LOCK CONFIGURATION IS TO ACCOMMODATE FUTURE ROADWAYS AS SHOWN ON THE GROVE CITY THOROUGHFARE MAP. AFTER REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS PLAYING COMMISSION APPROVED THE LOSS OF SPORT ESTIMATED. WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING? NO, NOT UNLESS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ME. QUESTIONS ARE PLANNING COMMISSION. WE HAVE A THOROUGHFARE MAP. THE FUTURE RATE THAT WE CAN BRING UP. JUST
[00:20:02]
TO SEE HOW THIS THINGS. ONE KIND OF OTHER BOTTOM SCREEN DOWN THERE WITH THE GREEN GREEN DATA LINE GOES RIGHT WHERE THIS SITE IS. I SEE THE REASON FOR YOUR GENERAL CURVE. YES. THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION. WE HAD IT SURVEYED SO THAT THAT GENERAL CURVE SITS JUST OUTSIDE WHAT MIGHT BE PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY IN THE FUTURE. AND IN DISCUSSION WITH STAFF WITH KIM AND KYLE. WE TALKED ABOUT, UM BEING ABLE TO DEDICATE THE REST OF THAT OR DEEDED. I SHOULDN'T SAY TO WHOEVER THE LOT OWNER IS AT THAT TIME AND THEN IT WOULD JUST BE FRONTAGE ON THE NEW ROAD. BUT SINCE IT'S NOT ENGINEERED AND DESIGNED YET WE LEFT IT JUST OUTSIDE. MAKES TOTAL SENSE NOW.THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS OF PLANNING COMMISSION. JUST WANTED . IT'S JUST ON THE DOCUMENTATION. I NOTICED TWO REFERENCES FOR DUE TO TWO DIFFERENT ACREAGE. SO 17.988 AND ONE IS 17.863. NOTHING ELSE ON THE APPLICATION. THAT'S MY EXPERT. IN THE SPLIT WOULD JUST REFER TO WHATEVER THE LEGAL THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IN THE SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPLICATION IS WHAT WOULD SET THE ACTUAL BOUNDARIES OF THE SPLIT, SO IT WOULD JUST DIFFER. SOMETIMES THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF DISCREPANCY IN TERMS OF CALCULATED ACREAGE VERSUS A SURVEYED ACREAGE ON THE AUDITORS WEBSITE, SO THAT MAY BE WHERE THE DISCREPANCY IS. FOR TAX PURPOSES WILL TAKE THE SMALLER ONE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF PLANNING COMMISSION. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK HEARING NONE. WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH EMOTION.
HERE I MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVED THE 2.2 ACRE VERSE LOT SPLIT. ITEM NUMBER TWO ON THE EAST SIDE OF POND ROAD. SECOND BROKE ALL. MR FARNSWORTH. YES. MR FREE? YES. MR TITUS? YES. MR BROCK? YES. CHAIR. WORCESTER. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HOW YOU DOING? NUMBER
[3. APPLICATION: Tobacco King – Certificate of Appropriateness]
THREE TOBACCO KING CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. AND THIS IS ANOTHER CLARIFICATION THAT I JUST LIKE TO MENTION, UM THE PROPOSAL WAS FOR EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS BECAUSE THE BUILDING IS IN THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION AREA. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS. NOT NOT EXAMINING PROPOSED USES TODAY. IS JULIE ALLISON. THE PRIORITY PARTNERS, UM 13 98 GOOD AT BOULEVARD. COLUMBUS, OHIO. WE ARE SEEKING THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS THAT YOU MENTIONED FOR THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. THERE ARE SOME CODE CHANGES THAT HAVE HAPPENED SINCE THE LAST TIME. ANYTHING THAT WAS DONE WITH THE PROPERTY AND WE'RE TRYING TO MEET THOSE AS WELL WITH THE 10 FT SETBACKS AND WE WORK IN THE PARKING AND REWORKING THE LANDSCAPING AND EVERYTHING HERE PER COOK SO YEAH. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE BUILDING AT 35 86 BROADWAY, LOCATED IN THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION AREA. THIS APPLICATION ORIGINATED AT THE BUILDING DIVISION WHO DEEMED THE MODIFICATION SIGNIFICANT REQUIRING THE AFRICAN TO ATTEND A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. FROM PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCILOR PER CODE. THIS APPLICATION IS TO EXAMINE THE PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS OF MATERIALS ARE APPROPRIATE, GIVEN THE SIZE LOCATION IN THE HP A AND DOES NOT EXAMINE THE PROPOSAL USE AS RETAIL IS PERMITTED IN THE SEA TO RETAIL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT. THE BUILDING IS PROPOSED TO BE MODIFIED TO ACCOMMODATE RETAIL TENANTS WITH THE INSTALLATION OF ALUMINUM STORE FRONT DOORS AND WINDOWS.CAST STONE VENEERS PROPOSED ALONG THE NORTH AND EAST ELEVATIONS WHICH FRONT ON PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. BOTH THE ALUMINUM STOREFRONT AND STONE VENEER PROPOSED TO BE COLORED SMOKE GRAY. THE EXISTING VERTICAL SIGHTING ON THE BUILDING IS TO BE PAINTED GRAY. AND THE EXISTING WOOD SHAKE ROOF IS TO BE PAINTED GUNPOWDER. THE EXISTING BRICK PILLARS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING WILL ALSO BE PAINTED TO MATCH THE WOODEN SHAKES. STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROPOSED COLORS AS BOTH THE GUNPOWDER AND AGATE GRAY COLORS ARE INCLUDED IN THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION AREA COLOR PALETTE. PER CHAPTER 11 36 OF CITY CODE WHENEVER THERE'S A CHANGE OF USE ASSOCIATE ASSOCIATED WITH THE STRUCTURE, ALL EXISTING NON COMPLYING PARKING AREAS AND DR ISLES ARE REQUIRED TO BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH CODE. THE EXISTING PARKING LOT ON SITE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THESE REQUIREMENTS, AND THEY HAVE TO
[00:25:02]
PROPOSING TO BRING THE PARKING LOT INTO COMPLIANCE. THE REQUIRED 10 FT PARKING AND DRIVE . I'LL SETBACK WILL BE ESTABLISHED ALONG BROADWAY AND SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD. CONTINUOUS THREE FT HIGH ROW SHRUBS PROPOSAL ON THE PARKING LOT FRONTAGE TO SCREEN HEADLIGHTS FROM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. ADDITIONALLY TERESA PROPOSAL ON THE SITES BROADWAY IN SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD FRINGES, MEANING THE PARKING LOT PERIMETER PLANNING REQUIREMENTS OUTLINING CODE. NEW SITE. LIGHTING WILL ALSO BE ADDED TO THE SITE TO MEET THE MINIMUM OF 0.5 FT. CANDLES REQUIRED BY CODE AND MATERIALS INDICATE POSED. PICTURES WILL MATCH THOSE USED ON THE CBS SITE ACROSS BROADWAY. AFTER REVIEWING CONSIDERATION, THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS PLANNING COMMISSION MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL. FURTHER CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HAS SUBMITTED. OR ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD. OKAY QUESTIONS OF PLANNING COMMISSION. HOW MUCH OF THAT SPACE ARE YOU GOING TO OCCUPY? THERE'S GOING BACK AND FORTH RIGHT NOW ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE NOT OCCUPIED THE WHOLE THING OR HALF OF IT. I THINK THEY'RE STILL TRYING TO DEBATE IN OHIO HERE HOW MUCH SPACE THEY ACTUALLY NEED FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT. I SAID, I APPRECIATE YOU CLEANING THAT CORNER UP. IT'S A MESS. IT LOOKS GREAT. THAT WAS PART OF THE FUN PART OF TRYING TO PLAY AROUND THE BUILDING A LITTLE BIT AND MATERIALS AND COLORS TO IT. THAT KIND OF FRESHEN IT UP. MY COMMENTS WILL BE LIKE ECHOING YOURS THAT IT'S A NICE UPGRADE TO THE BUILDING AND A LOT, TOO. UM AND THIS IS MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. I SAW RECOMMENDATION OF NARROWING THE CURB CUT A MAXIMUM OF 36. FT. DID THAT GET DONE? NO. WE MADE THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE ADVOCATE BASED ON WHAT WE FELT COULD HELP IMPROVE CIRCULATION ON SITE. BUT IN THE RESPONSE OF THE APPLICATORS INDICATED THEIR WISH TO LEAVE IT, AS IS AND THAT PURSUE. NARROWING IT. HALF SUPPORTIVE OF CURB CUT NOTING THE CURRENT WE WERE ALWAYS. LOOKING TO TRY TO NARROW CURB CUTS WHEN POSSIBLE. UM BUT NOTING THAT ITS EXISTING AND IT'S NOT REALLY SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE CHANGE WITH THIS APPLICATION. WHERE OKAY WITH THEM, LEAVING ANALYSIS. UM AND IS THIS A DOES THIS LOOK FULL IN FULL OUT ON BROADWAY FOR HMM. BECAUSE IT'S SO CLOSE TO THE INTERSECTION, IT LOOKS LIKE IT SHOULD BE A RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT ON BROADWAY. I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S CURRENTLY UM, DESIGNATED OR STRIPED AS AS SUCH. UM, BUT. IT APPEARS THAT IT MIGHT POTENTIALLY BE A FULL IN FULL OUT CURVE CUT. THIS WILL BE MY CONCERNS WITH LOVE WHAT YOU'RE DOING WITH THE PROPERTY, BUT, UM I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THAT INTERSECTION. SO IN THAT CURB CUTS SO CLOSE UM HOW WOULD YOU FEEL ABOUT EITHER NARROWING THE CURB CUTS OR CHANGING, CHANGING THAT TO A RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT ON BROADWAY. I THINK WE'LL BE FINE WITH THE RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT ON FRAUD. I DIDN'T SPEAK TO THE CLIENT, BUT I FEEL LIKE THAT'S PROBABLY A DECENT FIX TO IT. IT'S MY QUESTION IS.THE WAY THE PARKING LOTS CAN FIGURED ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY REAR MAN DOOR ENTRY IN OR OUT OF THE SEPARATE SECTIONS. TO THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. NO ACCESS AT ALL TO THE BACK. I DON'T BELIEVE I DO. YEAH. IN THE FUTURE. IF YOU NEED A DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE AND DUMPSTER BEING THE EAR NET STORY PRESERVATION AREA. WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE TUCKED IN BEHIND THE BUILDING OR RIGHT NOW? BASICALLY THEY GOTTA STOCK ALL THE STOREFRONTS FROM THE FRONT DOOR. REFUGE GOES OUT THE FRONT DOOR WAS JUST THINKING THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE TO THE REAR. MIGHT AND SOME REAR DOORS JUST FOR SAFETY, YOU KNOW, SECOND WAY IN AND OUT OF YOUR UNITS. MIGHT BE SAFETY CONSIDERATION. YEAH I THINK WE HAVE THE ROOM THERE TO PUT A DUMPSTER ON THE BACKSIDE OF THE BUILDING AND COULD PROBABLY CERTAINLY LOOK AT DOORS AS WELL. THAT WOULD REQUIRE OFFICES, SIDEWALK ON THE BACKSIDE AND MAKING SURE WE'RE MEETING ACCESSIBILITY FOR THOSE ITEMS, TOO. PAVEMENT. MIND THAT BUILDING CURRENTLY, I NO. CURRENTLY IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SEE ON THIS. BUT CURRENTLY FROM THE BACK OF THE BUILDING, THE PROPERTY LINE IS JUST GRASS. WOULD THAT BE? WOULD HE HAVE THAT POTENTIAL TO HAVE A DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE BACK THERE IS IF HE WISHED HE COULD CERTAINLY
[00:30:05]
PUT ONE BACK THERE. UM THE SCREENING AND ENCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS ARE IN CODE SO YOU WOULD NEED TO COMPLY WITH THOSE UM, ANYWAY AND THEN WHEN THE BILL IN DIVISION GOES OUT AND DOES THEIR INSPECTION, THEY WILL MAKE SURE THAT IT COMPLIES WITH THOSE REQUIREMENTS. THAT'S JUST WANT ME TO HAVE A BUILDING THAT'S MORE FUNCTIONAL, HAS REAR ACCESS IN AND OUT FOR STOCKING PURPOSES AND REFUGE AND YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT ALL WE LIKE GOING IN AND OUT THE FRONT DOOR WITH YOUR CLIENTELE AT THE SAME TIME. WOULD YOU BE IN A GREEN? YEAH. SO I HAD. BUT YOU NEED TO MAKE A FURTHER COMMENT ON THAT. LOOK LIKE YOU WERE THINKING OF LOOKING TO SEE WHERE THE BEST PLACE TO PUT A DUMPSTER WOULD BE THAT WOULD MAKE IT EASY FOR THE TRIP TO GET IN AND OUT TO IT.THAT WAS ALL I WAS LOOKING AT IT RIGHT BEHIND THE BUILDING. AND YOU BASICALLY THE TRUCK HAD HIT RIGHT OFF THE SOUTHWEST. KICK HIM RIGHT INTO IT. PROBABLY YOUR ONLY OPTION. YEAH, I AGREE.
THAT'S KIND OF THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS LOOKING AT. AS HE WAS TALKING ABOUT IT. I MY MIND WAS GOING AS HE WAS TALKING THEIR QUESTIONS OF PLANNING COMMISSION. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK YES. IT WAS YOUR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS KEVIN TIEFER ON THE SAFETY DIRECTOR HERE FOR THE CITY OF GROWTH CITY, AND I JUST WANT MY PURPOSE FOR PRESENTING TODAY IS JUST AS AN INFORMATION SHARING ONLY TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THE ADMINISTRATION FEELS THAT IT HAS A PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY. UM INTEREST IN THIS ISSUE, AND WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF DRAFTING LEGISLATION. THAT WILL LIKELY REQUIRE PERMITS TO SELL OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS HERE IN THE CITY, ASSUMING THAT THE COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL APPROVES THAT WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF DRAFTING THE LEGISLATION, AND WE'LL BE PRESENTING THAT SOON.
SO ANSWERING QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY DID YOU CLARIFY THAT WE'RE ONLY LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. WE'RE NOT. COMMENTING ON WHO THE POTENTIAL TENANT OR OWNER IS? YES, SIR.
THAT'S CORRECT. HOW FAR OUT ARE YOU ON THAT LEGISLATION WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH WILL BE PRESENTING THAT LEGISLATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? HEARING AFTER HEARING THAT NO, IT WOULD ASSUME THAT OUR KLEIN THEY HAD TO GET PERMITS WOULD GO THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS. ANYWAYS IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN A LIQUOR LICENSE IN A SENSE. THE OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. WE'RE READY FOR EMOTION. JEREMY THE MOTION. FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL RECOMMENDATION TO OUR CITY COUNCIL FOR 35 86 BROADWAY. TOBACCO KING WITH THREE STIPULATIONS RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT ON BROADWAY REAR DUMPSTER. AND REAR DOORS FOR THE TENANT SPACES. MY SECOND BROKE UP. CHAIR WASTER? YES. MR TITUS? YES. MR FARNSWORTH? YES. MR FREE? YES. MR ROCK. YES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ITEM NUMBER FOUR CASTRO ROSE AVENUE REZONING R
[4. APPLICATION: Castro Rose Avenue – Rezoning (R-2 to PUD-R)]
TWO P. D. R. AFTERNOON CHAIRWOMAN PLANNING COMMISSION. UM MY NAME IS PATRICK CASTRO.4016 OR BEAUTIES AVENUE. GROWTH CITY, OHIO. THE APPLICANTS REQUESTING APPROVAL TO REZONE 0.189 ACRES ON ROSE AVENUE FROM OUR TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TWO P U D ARE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL WITH THE ZONING TEXT. THE PROPOSED REZONING.
WOULD ALLOW FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS ON SITE WITH PROPOSED DUPLEX AND CARRIAGE HOUSE GARAGE WITH SECOND STORY APARTMENT. PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT WAS RECOMMENDED FOR DISAPPROVAL BY PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE NOVEMBER 8TH 2022 MEETINGS AND DENIED BY CITY COUNCIL AT THE NOVEMBER 21ST 2022 MEETING. DURING THESE MEETINGS, CONCERNS WERE VOICED OVER SEVERAL ITEMS WITH PROPOSED PROJECT INCLUDING NUMBER OF UNITS, BUILDING PLACEMENT ON SITE. AND PARKING. GROVE CITY 2050 COMMUNITY LAND USE COMMUNITY PLAN, LAND USE AND CHARACTER MAP DESIGNATES THIS PARCEL AS TOWN CENTER CORE NEIGHBORHOOD. WHICH LISTS MULTI
[00:35:03]
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AS A PRIMARY USE. TOWN CENTER CORE NEIGHBORHOOD ALSO PROMOTES A VARIETY OF BUILDING TYPES AND HOUSING WITH DETACHED GARAGES LOCATED OFF RALLIES. ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY MAY MEET THE GENERAL LAND USE IDENTIFIED IN THE GROWTH CITY 2050 COMMUNITY PLAN. STAFF IS NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROPOSED REZONING, NOTING THE PREVIOUS DENIAL OF THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN BY CITY COUNCIL. AND THAT'S PROPOSAL IN TEXT WOULD RESULT IN THE SAME DENSITY AND DESIGN DISPLAYED ON THE PRELIMINARY PLANE. PROPOSAL ANY TEXT PERMITS ONE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE CONTAINING TWO RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AND THE CARRIAGE HOUSE GARAGE WITH SECOND STORY APARTMENT FOR A TOTAL OF THREE UNITS ON SITE. PROPOSED CARRIAGE HOUSE WOULD BE ACCESSED FROM THE ALLEY ALONG THE REAR OF A LOT.FOR THE TEXT. THE DUPLEX STRUCTURE IS TO BE A MINIMUM OF 2635 SQUARE FEET, AND THE ABOVE GARAGE UNIT IS TO BE A MINIMUM OF 873 SQUARE FEET. SETBACKS ARE ESTABLISHED IN THE ZONE TEXT FOR THE DUPLEX STRUCTURE. THAT INCLUDES 34 FT FRONT SETBACK FROM ROSE AVENUE AND SIDE SET PACKS OF FIVE FT. THE CARRIAGE HOUSE GARAGE WILL BE SET BACK 15 FT FROM THE ALLEY AND REQUIRED A SIDE SETBACKS OF EIGHT FT. ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS ARE ALSO INCLUDED IN THE TEXT TO ENSURE QUALITY DEVELOPMENT ON SITE AND THE TECH STATES OF THE ELEVATION FRONTING ON ROSE AVENUE MUST CONTAIN AT LEAST THREE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS PER ELEVATION. FOR THE TEXT. THE HOME IS TO BE FINISHED WITH VINYL VERTICAL BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING IN GRAY OR OTHER NEUTRAL EARTH TONES. THE PROPOSED TRIM ON THE HOME IS TO BE COLORS COMPLEMENTARY TO THE SIGHTING.
THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE DUPLEX STRUCTURE IS PROPOSED TO BE 35 FT AND THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE CARRIAGE HOUSE GARAGE IS PROPOSED TO BE 28 FT FROM GRADE TO PEAK OF THE ROOF. ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED PRESIDENTIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY MAY MEET THE GENERAL LAND USE IDENTIFIED IN THE GROWTH CITY 2050 COMMUNITY PLAN. AFTER VIEWING CONSIDERATION, BASED ON FEEDBACK RECEIVED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL ON THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS PLANNING COMMISSION MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OF DISAPPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE REZONING ESTIMATED. MR CASTRO. DO YOU LIKE TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS ON THEIR PROPERTY? YES UM SO GOING BACK TO THE PRELIMINARY IN THE CURRENT DISAPPROVAL THE WAY IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IS SINCE WE WENT THROUGH PRELIMINARY IN CITY COUNCIL. DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DOES HAVE TO RECOMMEND DISAPPROVAL. UM A LOT OF THINGS THAT WERE TALKED ABOUT DURING THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION ADDRESSED ON THE PLANS. I'VE TALKED SPOKEN WITH SOME OF YOU GUYS HAVE REACHED OUT TO ALL THE NEIGHBORS. I'VE SENT THEM LETTERS. I'VE HAND DELIVERED LETTERS. I TALKED A COUPLE OF THEM AND FOR PLANNING COMMISSION. UM SOME OF THE STUFF THAT THERE VOICING THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT OR OUT OF MY CONTROL. I CAN'T CONTROL WHAT DELIVERY TRUCKS GO UP AND DOWN THAT STREET. ADDING TWO MORE RESIDENCES. ON THAT STREET. THERE'S NOT GOING TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF AMAZON VEHICLES DOWN. OR FEDEX, UM IT IS PART OF THE TOWN CENTER COORDINATOR WHO I KNOW SOME OF THE RESIDENTS THINK OF IT AS IT'S THEIR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD, THEIR OWN STREET. UM WITHIN. LESS THAN A QUARTER MILE, THERE'S OVER 100. MULTI FAMILY UNITS. JUST FROM A QUICK RESEARCH. I WAS ABLE TO FOLLOW.
UM SO WHAT I'M ASKING TODAY IS WHAT ARE THE CONCERNS? YOU GUYS HAVE A LOT OF IT WAS PARKING IN THE REAR ALLEY. PARKING. WE DID GET ANSWERS BACK FROM THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. WE HAVE EXCEEDED THE NUMBER OF PARKING WE HAVE EXCEEDED THE NUMBER OF PARKING THAT WAS GRANTED TO A PROPERTY ON PARK STREET. SIMILAR SIZE THREE UNIT PROPERTIES. SO I'M LOOKING FOR WHAT RECOMMENDATIONS? DO YOU GUYS HAVE AND IF WE WANT TO LOOK AT STEP BY STEP. THE PARKING THE EASEMENTS ON EITHER SIDE, THE SETBACKS FROM EITHER SIDE WE CAN LOOK AT THOSE. I HAVE A FEW IDEAS I'VE SHARED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. AND WITH SOME OF YOU GUYS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THANK YOU. UM. MOVE FORWARD WISDOM QUESTIONS OF PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN I THINK WE'LL GET INTO THE DIALOGUE, DIFFERENT IDEAS. QUESTIONS APPOINTED COMMISSION.
I'M STRUGGLING TO FIND WHAT'S DIFFERENT ABOUT YOUR PROPOSAL THIS TIME AROUND. VERSUS LAST TIME. SO COULD YOU GIVE A HIGHLIGHT OF ANY MAJOR CHANGES EITHER IN THE NUMBER OF TENANTS OR IN THE PLACEMENT OF THE BUILDINGS OR THE SIZE OF THE BUILDINGS? THE BUILDINGS ARE THE SAME. UM WE WERE BELOW THREE PARKING UNITS PER TENANT. NOW WE HAVE EXCEEDED THAT. UM THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND WHAT THE CODE IS THIS 2.5 WE'VE
[00:40:01]
EXCEEDED THAT WERE THREE AND WE CAN GO UP AND ADD ONE ADDITIONAL SPOT. WE CAN OPEN UP. THE GARAGE TO BE A THREE BIG GARAGE INSTEAD OF A TUBE, A AND THAT WILL TAKE IT FROM THE CURRENT, UM. NINE SPOTS ON THE LOT TO 10 SPOTS. UM THERE WAS PROPERTY ON PARK STREET. WHERE THEY HAD 10 AND PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL. HAD IT KNOCKED DOWN TO EIGHT THEY THOUGHT IT WAS SUFFICIENT. SO WHEN IT COMES TO PARKING HOW CAN ONE SIMILAR SIZED LOT. SIMILAR THREE PLEX.BE RECOMMENDED. FOR EIGHT MEAN DISAPPROVED FOR EIGHT. NOW I HAVE NINE IN THE PARKING STILL BE CONCERNED. JUST TO SUMMARIZE , THEN THE DIFFERENCE IN YOUR PROPOSAL THIS TIME IS THE NUMBER OF PARKING. IT'S NOT IN THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS RIGHT RESIDENCES OR THE ORIENTATION OF THE PLACEMENT OR THE SIZE AND WE CAN MOVE. UM THE BUILDING OVER THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST. UH, PART OF PURCHASING THIS LOT. HE WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTIONS TO ANY VARIANCES NEEDED TO BUILD A PROPERTY. SO IF WE WANTED TO SHIFT THE HOUSE OVER TO THE WEST. AND TAKE THAT FROM 5.3 FT.
DOWN TO 4.3. INCREASE THE OTHER. SPACE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE TO 6.3, WHICH IS OVER. THE MINIMUM EASEMENT. I'M OPEN TO SHIFTING THE HOUSE. WHEN IT COMES TO GREEN SPACE AND PARKING. UH UM, ONE OF THINGS I'VE MENTIONED TO THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. AND TO CITY COUNCIL. AND ALSO MENTIONED IT TO SOME PEOPLE AND PLANNING COMMISSION IS OVER THERE CURRENTLY. ESPECIALLY ON THIS END OF THE STREET. THERE IS NO DRIVEWAYS. AND IF YOU GUYS WANT EXAMPLES, I HAVE PICTURES OF THAT I TOOK YESTERDAY. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THANK YOU AROUND FOR YOU GUYS. AND ALSO IN THIS I HAVE INCLUDED, UM PICTURES TAKEN AT DIFFERENT TIMES OF THE DAY. UM THAT SHOWS THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF PARKING. BEING UTILIZED ON THAT STREET. IF YOU GUYS WANT TO. OR ACROSS THE STREET FROM. WHITE HOUSE OR THE LOT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO BE REASON ROSE. THIS IS ROSE. STEROIDS IF I MAY JUST TO TOUCH ON SOMETHING QUICK, UM THE TEXT IS DRAFTED NOW IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN BASED OFF THIS PLANE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN. SO IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES, SUCH AS BUILDING PLACEMENT, THAT TEXT WOULD NEED TO BE REVISED TO REFLECT THOSE CHANGES. THIS IS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. YES, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. AH! WITH THE PROPOSED PARKING IN FRONT. YOU CAN'T PARK ON THE CURB IN FRONT OF A CUT AND EAT THEM. SO BYE. CREATING WORKING FOR FOREIGN FRONT. WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING AWAY WITH PARKING FOR TWO ON THE STREET. SO REAL NET GAME IS ONLY TWO CARS.
BECAUSE YOU KNOW YOU DON'T PARK IN FRONT OF SOMEONE'S DRIVEWAY. SO WHAT? IF TWO CARS AND PARKING WAS ADDED TO THE REAR OF THE ALLEY. AND THERE WAS NO PARKING IN THE FRONT YARD. SO TO SAY, I'M DESCRIBING IT. BUT THERE'S TWO SPOTS WERE AVAILABLE BACK ON THE STREET. I THINK WE'RE GONNA NET ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT OF CARS. IN THAT VICINITY IS THAT AN OPTION TO HAVE A GREEN SPACE FRONT YARD BACK LIKE SO MANY ON THE STREET. JUST MOVED TO CARS TO THE REAR. WE CAN MOVE EVERYTHING. LIKE WHAT? WHAT I'M ASSUMING JIM IS TRYING TO SAY IS TAKE THE CURRENT HOUSE WHERE IT SITS INSTEAD OF HAVING PARKING UPFRONT. BRING IT FORWARD TO MATCH MOST OF THE OTHER HOUSES ON ROSE. TAKE THE CARRIAGE HOUSE, MOVE IT CLOSER TO FORWARD, UM, ROSE AVENUE. EACH TENANT, THEN GETS ONE GARAGE SPACE. AND TWO DRIVEWAY SPACE BEHIND. AND WE LEAVE THE ORIGINAL TWO SPOTS OUT FRONT THAT THE APRONS ARE ESSENTIALLY DOING AWAY WITH. BUT PARKER.
THAT'S. PRETTY MUCH THE SAME AMOUNT OF CARS. THAT'S CERTAINLY AN OPTION THAT COULD BE PURSUED DEPENDING ON MR CASTRO CHOSE TO, BUT IT'S UP TO. IT'S UP TO THE AFRICAN IF THAT'S SOMETHING HE
[00:45:01]
WISHES TO PURSUE. THIS MIGHT BE A LITTLE MORE PLEASANT FIT FOR THE STREET ON THE GREEN SPACE IN THE FRONT YARD. AND IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION YOU GUYS WANT ME TO GO. THAT'S WHAT I'M SEEKING.TODAY IS GIVE ME A GROCERY SHOPPING LIST OF WHAT TO FIXED. LET ME FIX IT BECAUSE ONE OF WE'RE HERE FOR THE PRELIMINARY AND FOR THE CITY COUNCIL. THERE WAS NO DIRECT. OKAY WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS, BUT WE NEED THIS WEEK. WE NEED THAT WEEK. IT WASN'T UNTIL AFTER THE FACT OF CITY COUNCIL. THAT I REACHED OUT TO A COUPLE OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. AND THEY TALKED ABOUT WHAT IF YOU LIMIT THE NUMBER OF TENANTS TO EACH SIDE. BECAUSE THAT WAS SOMEBODY'S QUESTION OF OVERCROWDING. WHAT HAPPENS IF. A LADY WITH THREE KIDS AND HER BOYFRIEND WITH THREE KIDS. AND NOW YOU HAVE THE PEOPLE IN THE UNIT. IS A LANDLORD. I CAN CONTROL THAT. WE CAN WRITE THAT IN THE TEXT THAT TWO DOCUMENTS PER BEDROOM. THESE DON'T HAVE BASEMENTS, SO IT'S NOT LIKE SOMEBODY'S GONNA BE STAYING IN THE BASEMENT. UM WE CAN LOOK AT THAT. THE MAIN THING IS THIS IS TOWN CITY CORE. OR TOWN CENTER CORE, AND IT'S PART OF THE 2050 PLAN. THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENING ON PARK STREET. SO. WHAT DEVIATES PARK STREET. FROM ROSE AVENUE IF IT'S PART OF THE TUNNEL CENTER CORE. YOU GUYS FOR INPUT AND I'LL SHARE DIRECTLY WITH MY THOUGHTS ARE REALLY WASNT ABOUT PARKING MINE WAS TOO MANY RESIDENTS IS ON THAT LOT. DUPLEX HAVING IT SET IN FRONT OF THE TWO HOUSES THAT SIT NEXT TO IT. EVEN THOUGH THOSE ARE A LITTLE FURTHER BACK THAN THE REST OF THE ROAD. SO YOU'VE GOT IT SITTING OUT BASICALLY IN THEIR FRONT YARD. OCCUPYING THE WHOLE PARCEL. AND THEN THE REAL CONCERN WAS THAT THE GARAGE AND CARRIAGE HOUSE WITH THE RESIDENTS ABOVE THAT IN THE BACK. IF THAT HAD BEEN AN ATTACHED GARAGE WITHOUT A RESIDENT. OR NO GARAGE AT ALL. I'D BE A LOT MORE AMENABLE TO IT. BUT 33 SEPARATE RESIDENCES ON THIS SMALL LOT IS, UM, TOO MUCH IN MY OPINION. BUT ON A LIKE SIZED LOT ON PARK STREET.
IT'S BEEN APPROVED. I CAN'T SPEAK TO PARKS. AS PART OF THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD CORE. UH UM.
AND MOVING THE HOUSE BACK. NEXT TO EACH ONE OF THEIR EXISTING PROPERTIES. MOST OF THE HOUSES ON THE STREET OR FORWARD. UM WHEN I FIRST LAID OUT THIS PLAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ASKED ME WHAT IS THE AVERAGE SET BACK ON THE STREET. WE WANT TO MATCH THE AVERAGE SETBACK. IF WE SLIDE THIS HOUSE NEXT TO IT. THEN SOMEBODY COULD BE LOOKING AT THEIR SIDE WINDOW INTO SOMEBODY'S KITCHEN WINDOW HERE. IT GIVES A LITTLE BIT OF BUFFER. UM AND IF WE SEPARATE THEM FURTHER LIKE JIM AND MENTIONED THEN. WE'RE KEEPING THE GREEN SPACE LOOKING OUTSIDE WINDOWS.
THEY'RE LOOKING AT A BACKYARD. THEY'RE NOT LOOKING TO STRUCTURE. UM AND THAT'S A PERSONAL OPINION. WHAT'S BETTER LOOKING AT GREEN SPACE OR LOOKING AT A STRUCTURE I SORT OF LIKE JIM'S IDEA OF MOVING SHIFTING EVERYTHING FORWARD. AND BY DOING SO. UM THEN WE'RE NOT ANYWHERE CLOSE TO THE OTHER STRUCTURES THAT ARE THERE. THAT ARE ACTUALLY CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND WHAT I'M EVEN SEEKING. I WOULD DEFER THAT TO THE RESIDENTS ON THE STREET.
WHAT THEIR PREFERENCES ARE MY COMMENT IS I DON'T BELIEVE THAT RESIDENTS OVER THE CARRIAGE HOUSE IS APPROPRIATE. OKAY? UM. I'LL TAKE THAT IN CONSIDERATION . I'M JUST A LITTLE STUMPED ON WHY IT'S A APPROPRIATE FOR TOWN CENTER CORE BUT NOT APPROPRIATE FOR MY LOT. IS IT BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH MULTI FAMILY. WHERE I'M AT BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT LESS MULTI FAMILY. ON PARK STREET. THEN THERE IS WHERE I'M TRYING TO BUILD A MULTI FAMILY. SO I'M HAVING HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING WHY THAT CONCERN IT'S SUCH A CONCERN. IF THERE'S SO MANY MULTI FAMILIES AND I DO HAVE A LIST OF WHERE THE MULTI FAMILIES ARE. AND HOW CLOSE THEY ARE. ON THE STREET. THERE'S ALREADY A THREE FAMILY ON THAT STREET. THERE'S A THREE FAMILY, UM ON THE HOUSE THAT THIS LOT. THERE'S A THREE FAMILY DIRECTLY BEHIND THEM. SO THERE IS. HISTORY OF ALLOWING THREE FAMILIES ON SMALL LOTS. WE TALKED TO THE DRIVEWAYS. MAYBE IN THE FRONT. I RECALL THE LAST TIME WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THAT AND JUST HAD SOME CONVERSATION. UM DO YOU? ARE YOU THINKING THAT
[00:50:06]
THERE'S PARKING LOTS WILL BE SIMILAR OR DRIVEWAYS RATHER WOULD BE SIMILAR, OR IS THERE ANY WOULD THERE BE ANY CHANGES? WE ACTUALLY MADE THEM LONGER. AND SO WE HAVE THE 36 FT. AND I HAVE, UM. SO WE MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS PLENTY OF SPACE. UM FOR THE AVERAGE CAR. ON THEIR WORD BEFORE WE WERE A LITTLE BIT SHORT. SO WHAT WE ENDED UP DOING WAS INCORPORATING THE SIDEWALK.THAT WAS SEPARATED. INTO THE DRIVEWAY SO THE TENANTS CAN PULL UP AND STACK TWO CARS. THEN YOU CAN SEE THEM. UNDERNEATH THE TEXT. ARE THOSE PAVED? I'M OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS FROM, UM, PLAYING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL. EVERYTHING IS CURRENTLY DESIGNED AS CONCRETE. OVER THERE. YOU HAVE CONCRETE. YOU HAVE BLACK TOP. YEAH GRAVEL AS YOU GUYS CAN SEE IN THE PICTURES. THERE'S GRASS STRIPS IN THE MIDDLE. UM. I WOULD BE OPEN TO IF WE DID WE HAVE A 12 FT WIDE DRIVEWAY. IF WE DID FOUR FT WIDE STRIPS SORT OF LIKE WHAT THEY DID WITH GRAVEL. LET'S DO THAT WITH CONCRETE. AND THEN, UM, UNI BLOCK HAS A PRODUCT. THAT I BROUGHT A SAMPLE OF TODAY. THAT IS BASICALLY LIVING DRIVEWAY, SOME IN THE CENTER OF IT, IT WOULD HAVE GRASS. OR WE COULD FILL IT IN WITH A ROCK LIKE THOSE DRIVEWAYS ARE IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE 100. UM SOLID. I'M OPEN. TO WHATEVER DIRECTION WE WANT TO GO TO THE DIRECTION OF JIM AND HAVE ALL THE PARKING IN THE BACK. AND HAVE GREEN SPACE UP FRONT. THAT MOVES THE HOUSE FORWARD. WHICH DAVID WANTS TO MOVE THE HOUSE BACKWARDS. SO THERE'S SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS THAT I MAY LOOKING FOR DIRECTION OF WHICH WAY TO GO. AND HERE'S A SAMPLE OF THE. AND WE COULD DO THIS ON THE DRIVEWAY FOR THE BACK AND THE FRONT.
STAFF THAT IS A DEDICATED CITY ALLEY BEHIND IT, CORRECT OR IS THAT A STREET? WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ISLAND INDUSTRY? THAT'S AN ALLEY RIGHT NOW. UM IS IT? IT'S RIGHT AWAY.
SO THIS PUBLIC PUBLIC YES. NOW IT IS INTERESTING THAT TO TURN AROUND ONCE YOU GET TO THE BACK OF THE ALLEY, YOU HAVE TO GO ONTO PRIVATE PROPERTY INTO THE YEAH. THE APARTMENT COMPLEX.
ESSENTIALLY WITHOUT THAT IT WOULD BE LIKE A DEAD END ALLEY. BUT I GUESS IS DEPARTMENTS.
ACCESS TO THEIR REAR PARKING WERE MOST PARKING LOT. I JUST BEING FAVORED? YOU KNOW, MAYBE SEEING SOME REDESIGNED POTENTIAL WITH THE PARKING IN THE REAR. FRONT LINE LIKE THE MAJORITY OF THE HOUSES ON THAT STREET HALF THAT WE'RE BUILDING WAS MOVED ESSENTIALLY FORWARD A CAR LENGTH. THAT WOULD LET YOU THAT COUPLE MORE CARS BACK THERE. IF YOU WANT THREE BAY, LIKE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT IT HAVE NINE SPOTS RIGHT? WHICH SHOULD BE MORE THAN ENOUGH. AND STILL RETAIN THE TWO ON THE STREETS AND OUR AT 11. YEAH BUT YOU COULD MAYBE EVEN DO AWAY WITH TWO IN THE BACK BECAUSE WITHOUT APRONS AREA YOU'VE GOT TWO MORE PARKING ON THE STREET CORRECT AND THE CONCERN ABOUT SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS WAS THE STREETS CROWDED AND THERE'S TOO MANY PEOPLE PARKING ON THE STREET NOW. ONE LADY THAT DID DOES LIVE ACROSS FROM THE LOT. SHE LIKED THE IDEA. NOBODY WOULD BE ABLE TO PARK BEHIND HER. THE WAY THE LOTS ARE BECAUSE THEN SHE WOULDN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT BACKING INTO SOMEBODY. SO I'M OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS AND DIRECTIONS ON WHICH WAY WE WANT TO GO. DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. I THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE NICE. BUT I THINK TO JIM'S POINT IF THE PARKING COULD BE IN THE REAR THAN THAT JUST HELPS YOU AESTHETICS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THE FRONT YARD.
I AGREE, SO YOU LEFT. THE FIGURE IS THAT TOO, AND I ALSO AGREE WITH NOT HAVING LIVING SPACE IN THE BACK SO IT WOULD BASICALLY BE A GARAGE. FOR THE TENANTS, YOU KNOW, UPFRONT IN YOUR DEBT PARKING AND YOU KNOW AND BACK. AND THEN THE YOU KNOW THE FRONT YARDS OR IT'LL BE ALL PRETTY
[00:55:05]
SIMILAR THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WITHOUT HAVING PARKING LIKE THAT. SO IS THE CONCERN NUMBER OF BEDROOMS. OR NUMBER OF UNITS. WHAT IS THE BEDROOM COUNT IN THE UNITS? BEDROOM COUNT RIGHT NOW IS EACH DUPLEX HAS THREE FIRST FLOOR MASTER. UH ON THE DUPLEX SIDE, ALL WIDER DOORWAYS FOR UH UM. ELDERLY POPULATION FOR WALKERS, WHEELCHAIRS. UM UPSTAIRS, IS CURRENTLY AN EN SUITE. BEDROOM AN ADDITIONAL BEDROOM, BUT WE CAN REMOVE THE CLOSET. MAKE THAT FLEX SPACE DAN OFFICE. OPEN IT UP, MAKE IT ALOFT AND REDUCE THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FROM EIGHT ON THE TOTAL PROPERTY DOWN TO SIX. POTENTIAL FOR THE CARRIAGE HOUSE TO BE A ONE BEDROOM UNIT.POSSIBLY AND THAT GOES BACK TO IS IT A BEDROOM COUNT? FOR OCCUPANCY, OR IS IT A NUMBER OF UNITS? SO IF WE WANT TO SAY OKAY ON THIS LOT PATRICK. WE'D LIKE YOU TO SEE IT. GET DOWN TO SIX BEDROOMS. WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO GET DOWN TO SIX BEDROOMS? I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT. GOING DOWN TO FIVE BEDROOMS. THAT'S A BIG CUT. GOING TO SIX. SO THAT'S SOMETHING FOR DIRECTION FROM YOU GUYS, IS, IS IT A I CAN BE SEEN THERE. DO THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS OR IS IT UNITS? MAYOR WAS THE NUMBER OF UNITS OKAY? BUT THE. SO THE NUMBER OF UNITS IS A CONCERN FROM YOU GUYS. UM WHAT ABOUT THE. SIX FT. SHIFTING THE HOUSE OVER TO THE. WEST SIDE. IS THAT SOMETHING YOU GUYS WANT TO SEE? DON. MERIT SISTER BAREFOOT VARIANCES ARE REQUIRED RIGHT NOW. FIRST FOOTPRINT WHERE IT'S OKAY. ALL RIGHT NOW IT'S A PDF ZONE UNTIL THE TEXT IS WRITTEN.
BRITAIN TO MEET HIS PLAN SO YOU TEXT WAS JUST KIND OF CAME WHATEVER SETBACK HIS PLAN. IT'S GOING TO HAVE AT THAT POINT, YOU'RE NOT. HE'S NOT REQUESTING ANY VARIANCES. WELL CODE FOR CODE REQUIRES A SIX FT SIGN SETBACK AND THE CURRENT R TWO ZONING. HE'S SHOWING A 5.29. SO WHAT HE'S PROPOSING NOW IS SLIGHTLY LESS THAN WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED BY CODE WITH THE CURRENT ZONING. YEAH, AND THE TEXT ALLOWS THEM TO GO DOWN TO FIVE. SO IT'S THE TEXT IS AFOOT LESS THAN WHAT WOULD BE PERMITTED. THE PURPOSE OF MOVING IT. SIX FT TO THE WEST. BECAUSE THEN I WOULD ONLY BE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE ON ONE SIDE OF THE SETBACK GOING BACK THROUGH SOME OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION NOTES ON OTHER PROJECTS. UM, YOU GUYS HAVE AND I USE THAT GENERALLY AS PLANNING COMMISSION. CITY COUNCIL HAVE APPROVED STUFF WITH A SETBACK. LESS THAN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF ON ONE SIDE OF THE BUILDING. NO ON THE OTHER SIDE EXCEEDS THE SETBACK. SO IF THAT WAS ONE OF THE STICKING POINTS IS EIGHT INCHES. THAT BIG OF A DIFFERENCE. BUT IT GETS US OVER THE SIX FT. ON THE ONE SIDE. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM MOVING IT OVER. DISTANCE WOULD YOU HAVE TO MOVE IT OVER TO MAKE THAT WORK? UH IT'S 5.29 NOW. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT BASICALLY EIGHT INCHES. SO YEAH. ONE SIDE WILL BECOME SIX. FT AND THE OTHER SIDE WOULD BE KIND OF LIKE, UM 4.5. WILSON NOT REDUCE THIS PREACHING NOT ALSO REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING AND LIVE WITHIN THE SETBACKS. HITTING A DUPLEX. MUCH NEARER THAN 36 INCHES. IS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT WHEN YOU HAVE A STAIRCASE AND YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE THE WIDER WALKWAYS FOR WALKERS AND WHEELCHAIRS. WHICH THERE IS A NEED IN GROVE CITY FOR THAT REALLY POPULATION HOUSING. WE'VE BUILT. SIX 55 OLDER COMMUNITIES IN THE PAST FOUR YEARS. IN GROVE CITY. SO THE NEEDS HERE FOR THIS TYPE OF UNIT AND GOING BACK TO THE TWO BEDROOM VERSUS A ONE BEDROOM. ON THE CARRIAGE HOUSE.
I DID ADDRESS THAT. TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS. AND A LOT OF TIMES IN A TWO BEDROOM PROPERTY.
YOU END UP WITH WORKING PROFESSIONAL COUPLE. ESPECIALLY IN TODAY'S SOCIETY OF PEOPLE
[01:00:05]
WORKING REMOTELY AND WORKING FROM HOME. THAT ONE BEDROOM BECOMES AN OFFICE. SO IT'S WE WANTED TO STIPULATE. THE TWO ROOMS IN THE DUPLEX. OUR OFFICES AND NOT BEDROOMS AND REMOVE THE CLOSETS. AND THEN IT BRINGS DOWN THE TOTAL CAPACITY OF EVERYTHING. THAT TO ME IS THE BEST WAY TO DO IT. BECAUSE AN EXTRA BEDROOM DOES NOT ADD. THAT MUCH MORE IS HAVING AN EXTRA UNIT. YOU GUYS WANT TO TAKE TIME AND. UM, LET DASCHLE NO RECOMMENDATIONS. WE CAN TABLE THE VOTE. AND THEN WE CAN LOOK AT WHAT RECOMMENDATIONS. COME IN. WHAT'S FEASIBLE. AND THEN WE CAN GO FROM THERE. BASED ON WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT TODAY. YOU WOULD NEED TO REVISE THE TEXT.SOMEBODY'S SCIENCE. YEAH THAT WOULD BE THE CLEANEST WAY TO DO INSTEAD OF IN THIS CASE, PARTICULARLY STUFF BECAUSE IF WE GO IN AND CHANGE THE TEXT TO REFLECT DISCUSSION POINTS HERE, THEN IT'S CLEAN, AND IT'S ALL ADDRESSED BY THE TIME IT COMES BACK. BEFORE YOU AND CITY COUNCIL THAT WOULD BE THE CLEANEST WAY TO DO IT. EVEN IF WE WENT BACK TO AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, IF WE CHANGE HIS ONLY TEXT ENOUGH WHERE WE REDO STUFF. MOVE THE SETBACKS OF THE HOUSE AND STUFF LIKE THAT. IF WE HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH AND START PRELIMINARY AND GET IT APPROVED THERE BY CHANGING ALL THE TEXT. I'M OPEN THAT WE JUST NEED DIRECTION ON EXACTLY WHAT IT IS WHEN WE WENT THROUGH PRELIMINARY, BOTH PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL.
WHERE THEY MAY HAVE APPROVED SOMETHING OF PRELIMINARY AND SAID HEY, WE'RE APPROVING IT BASED ON THESE CHANGES. UM THEN WE WOULD HAVE DIRECTION. UM BUT DID NOT RECEIVE THAT. EVERYBODY IF WE WERE TO MOVE TO POSTPONING HER TABLING, I'D STILL LIKE TO HEAR IF THERE ARE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS BECAUSE I THINK HEARING FROM THE RESIDENCES PROBABLY MORE IMPORTANT THAN HEARING FROM US WHAT WE THINK. ABSOLUTELY GET THERE AND TO TOUCH ON THAT. ALSO YOU MENTIONED HEARING FROM THE RESIDENTS. UM THAT'S WHAT DID GIVE ME THE CONCERN FROM THE NEIGHBOR TO THE RIGHT. AND, UM THE BIGGEST CONCERN. I HAVE, UM, THAT IS, UM OFFICIAL GUIDELINES.
A WONDERFUL UNIT IS AN OWNER OCCUPIED UNIT. HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT. BE AN OWNER OCCUPIED UNIT. IT'S UNDER FOUR UNITS IN THE FUTURE, IT MAY BECOME AN OWNER OCCUPIED UNITS. EVERYBODY DOESN'T STAY IN THEIR HOME FOREVER. YOU KNOW WHEN I'M 70 YEARS OLD? IS THIS GOING TO BE MY OWNER OCCUPIED UNITS? AND THE OTHER THING IS WHAT HAPPENS TO OTHER RENTALS. I'M NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY COMMENTS ON THAT. ABOUT 33 06 PROBLEM WITH TENANTS. I SHOULD NOT BE PENALIZED OR CONDEMNED FOR SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS. THEN I HAVE NO CONTROL OVER. AND WHEN IT DOES COME TO AN INVESTMENT PROPERTY. YOU GUYS ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO LOOK AT THE THREE AND GROWTH CITY. I HAVE. I CAN SHARE THE ADDRESSES WITH YOU GUYS. THEY'RE ALL KEPT WELL. UM. AND THE GENTLEMAN THAT IS TALKING ABOUT THIS. YOU GUYS HAVE PICTURES OF HIS FRONT YARD.
WOULD YOU BE ACCEPTABLE IF THAT WAS YOUR FRONT YARD NEIGHBOR? I GUESS I HAVE ONE OF THE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF TO BEFORE WE WRAP THIS UP A LITTLE BIT. THE HOUSE ON THE EAST SIDE. IT SURE LOOKS LIKE THAT COMES AWFUL CLOSE TO ENCROACHING. THE PROPERTY LINE, POTENTIALLY. IS THAT GET DEALT WITH BECAUSE OF SOME KIND OF LOOKING AT WHAT I BELIEVE OUR SURVEY PIN MARKS. DO WE HAVE ANOTHER. POTENTIAL ISSUE . ENCROACHMENT, COMMENT PROPERTY BOTH OF THEIR HOUSES HAVE ENCROACHED ON THE SIX FT. OH, AND WE DEAL WITH THAT. AHEAD OF TIME. I MEAN, IT'S THESE ARE
[01:05:05]
HISTORIC LOTS. IT'S. UM IN THESE NARROWER OLDER LOTS. IT'S FAIRLY COMMON FOR THIS SETBACK.REGULATIONS WERE LIKELY VERY DIFFERENT AT THE TIME THAT THOSE WERE DEVELOPED SO WHILE THEY MAY NOT COMPLY WITH OUR CURRENT SIX FT SETBACK, OR WHATEVER, MAYBE THROUGHOUT THE CITY FOR THOSE INDIVIDUAL LOTS BECAUSE THEY WERE DEVELOPED UNDER DIFFERENT STANDARDS, THEIR LEGAL NONCONFORMITY IS SO IT'S REALLY NOT AN ISSUE. YEAH. IN TERMS OF DO SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. BUT AT THE SAME TIME , CHARACTER WISE IF WE'RE LOOKING AT DEVIATIONS FROM SIDE SETBACKS, IT'S BLOOD LINE AND SETBACKS ARE DIFFERENT IN THIS AREA BECAUSE OF THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE LOT. THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. IT'S NOT A CLEAN AREA. I THINK YOU WILL FIND SIDE SETBACK, INFRINGEMENT AND A LOT OF PROPERTIES IN THE TOWN CENTER AND THESE HISTORIC CLOTS SETBACK , BUT THE PROPERTY LINES SOMETIMES YEAH. SO, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THE BUILDING, FOOTPRINTS OR WHATNOT ARE TAKEN FROM AERIALS AND G. I S AND THERE'S ALWAYS YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'RE DOING WORKING WITH THE AERIAL IMAGERY, AND JS IS A COUPLE OF FEET OF LEEWAY THAT YOU HAVE TO GIVE JUST BASED ON HOW IT'S TIED DOWN AND WHATNOT. HI. THANK YOU. HONEY MASK HIM ONE QUESTION. SO UM, YOU MENTIONED STUFF WAS DONE HISTORICALLY. UH, HIS ANYTHING CHANGED SENSE. NOVEMBER, 2020. IN THE TOWN CENTER CORE. FOR DENSITY REDUCTIONS. OR FOR THE NUMBER OF UNITS PER LOT. ARE YOU ASKING IN TERMS OF IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GROWTH CITY 2050 PLAN OR OTHER DEVELOPMENTS WITH THAT SAME FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION. UM WHAT I'M ASKING IS IN 2020. THERE WAS MULTI THREE FAMILY APPROVED FOR A LOT. SIMILAR SIZE. IN TOWN CENTER CORE AND I WAS WONDERING IS ANYTHING CHANGED? YOUR EYES FROM NOVEMBER 2020 TILL NOW. THAT ONE WAS APPROVED. SHOULD WE BE LOOKING AT TRYING TO MIMIC WHAT THEY HAD APPROVED. I WOULD JUST SAY THAT BECAUSE WITH THE P U D WERE RELEASED ZONING TO MATCH THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA. THAT'S WHERE GETTING THE FEEDBACK FROM PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL IS GOING TO BE SO KEY TO ENSURE THAT WHAT IS DESIGNED HERE IN IN THEIR OPINION IS APPROPRIATE JUST BECAUSE IT WORKED ON PARK STREET, ALTHOUGH IT IS UNDER THE SAME FUTURE LADIES DESIGNATION OF 2050. THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A GREAT DIVERSITY AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS JUST HERE IN THE TOWN CENTER CORE. AND SO MAKING SURE THAT THE STANDARDS THAT ARE DRAFTED FOR ROSE AVENUE ARE APPROPRIATE FOR ROSE AVENUE, AND THAT MAY NOT BE EXACTLY WHAT WAS APPROVED ON PARK STREET. YOU KNOW IT IS CHANNEL CENTER QUARTER CRAPPED OUT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS PLANNING COMMISSION.
IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. ME. SAYING NONE. SO. FIRST OF ALL, QUICK QUESTION. TWO DASH AGAIN SO KNOWING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDES THE TEXT IT WOULD BE CLEANER FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD. YES. WE GAVE YOU TIME TO DO THAT. YEAH. AND. GO AHEAD FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE THAT WOULD BE PREFERRED. BUT AGAIN, THAT'S UP TO MR CASTRO. HE IF HE WANTS TO TAKE THE TIME TO DO THAT, OR IF HE WANTS TO HAVE A NOTE TAKEN TODAY. I WOULD SAY, LET'S TABLE IT. YOU GUYS LET HIM KNOW WHAT TEXTS AND CONCERNS THERE ARE AND THEN WE'LL MOVE FORWARD FROM THAT POINT. IN WHAT I DO TAKE THAT IN CONSIDERATION. IF ONE PERSON HAS ONE IDEA, AND THE OTHER PERSON HAS ANOTHER, AND I HAVE THREE IDEAS OF THE SAME. I WILL WORK WITH THE NATIONAL TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS THE BEST. OUT OF THE THREE IDEAS. BECAUSE WITH FOUR OR FIVE PEOPLE UP THERE.
WE'LL PROVIDE OUR IDEAS, BUT YOU ALWAYS WORK WITH THE CITY IN ORDER TO GET THINGS WORKED OUT.
ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. ABSOLUTELY. I THINK WE'RE READY FOR A MOTION. I MOVE WE
[01:10:06]
TABLE ITEM NUMBER. FOR CASTRO ROSE AVENUE REZONING TO A FUTURE MEETING. SECOND. MR ROCK? YES.CHAIR. ROYSTER? YES. MR FREE? YES. MR FARNSWORTH. MR TITUS. WITHOUT BEING THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA. THE MEETING'S ADJOURNED THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.