[A. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL]
[00:00:06]
IT'S 130. LET'S CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. WITH THAT, CAN WE HAVE A ROLL CALL? MR. ROACH, MISS WEMLINGER CHAIR. OYSTER. MR. FARNSWORTH HERE, MR. TITUS HERE. OKAY. WITH THAT, WE'LL HAVE A MOMENT OF SILENCE AND THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. ALL RIGHT. WELCOME, EVERYBODY, TO THE FIRST PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE NEW YEAR. I SEE WE HAVE THREE ITEMS UP THERE. SO WHEN YOUR ITEM IS CALLED AND IF YOU'RE. SWEARING IN FOR MR. ROACH FOR HIS NEW TERM. OH, SURE. COME ON UP. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AT THE END FOR ME. I SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL
[Additional Item]
SUPPORT, SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THE STATE OF OHIO, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE STATE OF OHIO, AND WILL OBEY THE LAWS THEREOF AND OBEY THE LAWS. AND THAT I WILL IN ALL RESPECTS. I WILL IN ALL RESPECTS OBSERVE THE PROVISIONS OF THE CHARTER, OBSERVE THE PROVISIONS OF THE CHARTER AND ORDINANCES OF THIS CITY, AND ORDINANCES OF THIS CITY, AND WILL FAITHFULLY DISCHARGE THE DUTIES AND TERMS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER UPON WHICH I'M ABOUT TO ENTER, UPON WHICH I'M ABOUT TO ENTER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WITH THAT, DO WE HAVE AN APPROVAL FOR THE[C. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES – December 2, 2025]
MEETING MINUTES? CHAIR, I MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES. SECOND. MISS WEMLINGER. YES, MR. FARNSWORTH? YES, MR. TITUS? YES. MR. ROACH? YES. LET'S MOVE TO THE NEXT.[D. ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS]
WE'RE GOING TO DO OUR ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS FIRST. CHAIR, I MAKE THE MOTION THAT FOR WE ELECT CHAIRMAN. CHAIRMAN, MRS. OYSTER AND VICE ELECT, MR. FARNSWORTH. SECOND. MR. FARNSWORTH. YES, MR. TITUS. YES, MR. ROACH? YES, MISS. WEMLINGER. YES. LET'S MOVE NEXT TO OUR OUR THREE ITEMS AND AGAIN IS YOUR ITEM IS CALLED. IF YOU COME UP TO THE STAND, JUST STATE YOUR NAME. AND ONCE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT GOES THROUGH THE READING, JUST STAY UP THERE FOR[1. APPLICATION: Pinnacle Land Holdings – Lot Split]
ANY QUESTIONS. YOU KNOW THAT MAY MAY COME. SO START WITH APPLICATION ONE. PINNACLE LANDING LAND HOLDINGS LOT SPLIT. HELLO MY NAME IS ALEX BENSON, 2926 BADGER DRIVE, HILLIARD, OHIO. THANK YOU. I JUST NEED TO NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT I NEED TO RECUSE MYSELF FOR THIS AS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. THERE WE GO. THIS PROPOSAL IS TO SPLIT 0.289 ACRES FROM 8.889 ACRE TRACT WITHIN THE PINNACLE DEVELOPMENT. IN 2015. THE PARCELS. THE PARCEL WAS ZONED PDR WITH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND WAS APPROVED AS PART OF THE PINNACLE WOODS DEVELOPMENT. THIS PROPOSAL IS TO SPLIT THE EASTERN, UNDEVELOPED SECTION OF PINNACLE WOODS. THE PROPOSED SPLIT OF 2.89 ACRES WILL CREATE A LOT THAT WILL BE ADDED TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AT 1203 PINNACLE CLUB DRIVE TO PREVENT THE RESIDENTIAL PARCEL FROM BEING CREATED WITH NO ACCESS TO A PUBLIC ROAD AND A PARCEL THAT DOES NOT CONFORM WITH THE LOT STANDARDS OF THE PUD ZONING TEXT. AFTER REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION, THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE THE LOT SPLIT WITH THE STIPULATION AS[00:05:02]
NOTED. MR. VINCENT, ANYTHING TO ADD? NOPE. YOU SUMMARIZED IT PERFECTLY. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION? NOPE. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC? WITH THAT, I'LL ASK FOR A MOTION ON APPLICATION. PINNACLE LAND HOLDINGS LOT SPLIT. CHAIR, I MAKE THE MOTION. WE APPROVE. LOT SPLIT. APPLICATION ONE FOR PINNACLE LAND HOLDINGS WITH THE ONE STIPULATION. SECOND. MR. ROACH? YES, MR. FARNSWORTH. YES. MR. TITUS. YES. THANK YOU,[2. APPLICATION: ACT Investments Jackpot Road – Special Use Permit (Retail Dispensing of Medical and Recreational Marijuana)]
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MOVE NEXT TO APPLICATION NUMBER TWO, THE ACT INVESTMENT JACKPOT. ROADS, SPECIAL USE PERMIT, RETAIL DISPENSING OF MEDICAL AND RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA. GOOD AFTERNOON. YOUR NAME PLEASE. I'M CHRIS WELSH, 3560 DAWSON COURT, CARROLL, OHIO. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE RETAIL DISPENSING OF MARIJUANA AT 3989 JACKPOT ROAD. CITY COUNCIL PASSED ORDINANCE C, 3224, IN AUGUST OF 2024, ESTABLISHING THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT PROCESS FOR EVALUATING REVIEWING PROPOSED DISPENSARY USES. IN ADDITION TO MODIFICATIONS TO THESE REGULATIONS, WERE APPROVED IN 2025 AND STATING AN ANNUAL REVIEW BY THE SAFETY DIRECTOR FOR ALL RETAIL MARIJUANA SALES LOCATIONS AGAINST STATE AND CITY RULES AND REGULATIONS, AND MODIFYING HOW THE DISTANCES MEASURED BETWEEN DISPENSARY LOCATIONS AND SENSITIVE LAND USES NOTED IN CODE. A PREVIOUS SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION TO ALLOW FOR THE RETAIL DISPENSING MARIJUANA ON THE SITE WAS DENIED BY CITY COUNCIL IN NOVEMBER OF 2025, WITH CONCERNS EXPRESSED REGARDING THE POTENTIAL IMPACT SUCH A USE MAY HAVE ON ADJACENT AREA PROPERTIES, AS WELL AS POTENTIAL TRAFFIC IMPACTS. THE SUBMITTED SUBMITTED MATERIALS SUBSTANTIALLY REFLECT THOSE OF THE PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED AND DENIED APPLICATION. ASIDE FROM A MODIFICATION OF ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC GENERATION. WHILE PROJECT MATERIALS STATE THE APPLICANT HAS REACHED OUT TO PARTIES IMPACTED BY THE PROJECT IN ORDER TO ADDRESS CONCERNS SHARED AT THE COUNCIL MEETING, NO FURTHER INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT TO INDICATE THESE CONCERNS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED WITH THE REVISED APPLICATION AND SUBMITTED MATERIALS INDICATE THE DOCUMENTATION OF THESE EFFORTS IS IN PROCESS AND WILL BE PROVIDED ONCE OBTAINED. THE PROPOSED DISPENSARY COMPLIES WITH THE 500 FOOT REQUIREMENT FROM SENSITIVE LAND USES OUTLINED IN CODE, AND IS 508.9FT FROM THE TREATMENT FACILITY LOCATED NORTH ON JACKPOT ROAD. PROPOSED HOURS OF OPERATION ARE 10 A.M. TO 8 P.M. MONDAY THROUGH SUNDAY. THE PROJECT MATERIALS STATE THAT 400 CUSTOMERS AND 380 VEHICLES ARE EXPECTED DAILY. THESE NUMBERS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THAN THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES AND CUSTOMERS PROVIDED WITH THE PREVIOUSLY DENIED APPLICATION, AND NO JUSTIFICATION WAS PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT FOR THE DECREASE. WITHOUT AN ANALYSIS TO SHOW THE ADJUSTMENT IN ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC OR TRAFFIC, STUDY. TO SHOW THE ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC GENERATION BY THE PROPOSED USE WILL NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT AREA ROADWAYS. STAFF DO NOT BELIEVE THE SUBMITTED MATERIALS ADDRESS THE CONCERNS NOTED DURING THE DENIAL OF THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION FOR THIS USE AT THIS SITE. MATERIAL STATE THAT NO MORE THAN 20 CUSTOMERS WILL BE ALLOWED IN THE BUILDING AT ANY GIVEN TIME, AND CUSTOMERS ARE EXPECTED TO SPEND BETWEEN 8 TO 12 MINUTES INSIDE THE BUILDING. THE PROPOSED USE WILL OCCUPY THE EXISTING 4284 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING, AND WILL UNDERGO RENOVATIONS TO CONFORM WITH DIVISION OF CANNABIS CONTROL, SAFETY AND SECURITY REQUIREMENTS. CODE REQUIRES THAT SITES BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF LANDSCAPING CODE WHEN A CHANGE OF USE OCCURS, AND MATERIALS INDICATE THAT IF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS APPROVED, THE APPLICANT WILL BRING THE SITE INTO COMPLIANCE WITH CODE.ADDITIONALLY, THE BUILDING DIVISION ISSUED A NOTICE OF PROPERTY MAINTENANCE VIOLATIONS FOR THE SITE ON DECEMBER 30TH, WHICH NOTED THE ACCUMULATION OF RUBBISH AND GARBAGE ON THE SITE AND BROKEN CURBS AROUND THE SITE. BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE APPLICATION MATERIALS, THE USE CAN COMPLY WITH THE SUPPLEMENTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SUCH USE ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCES C 3224 AND MODIFIED BY C 3125. HOWEVER, STAFF DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT SUFFICIENT INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED TO DEMONSTRATE THE PROPOSED USE COMPLIES WITH THE GENERAL SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN CODE IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND IMPACTS TO AREA PROPERTIES. AFTER REVIEWING CONSIDERATION, STAFF DOES NOT BELIEVE THIS INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED TO ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS. DURING THE DENIAL OF PREVIOUS APPLICATION FOR THE USE AT THIS LOCATION AND THEREFORE, AFTER REVIEWING CONSIDERATION, THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS PLANNING COMMISSION MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OF DISAPPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THANK YOU, MR. WELCH. DO YOU HAVE
[00:10:01]
ANYTHING TO ADD? I DO, IN REGARDS TO THE TRAFFIC, WHICH WAS PREDOMINANTLY THE MAIN CONCERNS OF THE COUNCIL AND PLANNING MEETINGS PREVIOUSLY, AS I STATED IN THE PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, WE HAD MISINTERPRETED THE QUESTION OF THE TRAFFIC VOLUME. WE THOUGHT IT WAS A STRESS TEST, SO WE SUBMITTED UNREALISTIC TRAFFIC NUMBERS THAT WERE REALLY NOT REFLECTIVE OF WHAT THE PROGRAM ACTUALLY ENTAILS. WE WE SUBMITTED NUMBERS THAT WERE ENORMOUSLY HIGH. WE REVISED THOSE NUMBERS DOWN BASED ON THE MOST RECENT SALES DATA PROVIDED BY THE OHIO DIVISION OF CANNABIS CONTROL. IT TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION THE CURRENT WHOLESALE AND RETAIL PRICES, CURRENT CUSTOMER TRAFFIC FLOW, AND AVERAGE DISPENSARY STORE SALES VOLUME. THE REVISED NUMBER REPRESENTS THE MAXIMUM SALES VOLUME THAT WE WOULD ANTICIPATE EXPERIENCING ON A GIVEN DAY. 400 CUSTOMERS PER DAY EQUATES TO AN AVERAGE OF SEVEN MINUTES ACROSS SIX POINT OF SALE STATIONS. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS 400 VERSUS THE NUMBER OF CARS WHICH WE ESTIMATED 380 IS IS THE LIKELY LIKELIHOOD OF MULTIPLE PEOPLE RIDING IN THE SAME VEHICLE. AND THERE WILL BE BUSY DAYS AND SLOW DAYS. 400 CUSTOMERS WOULD BE AN EXTREMELY BUSY DAY. I DID CONDUCT A BRIEF TIME STUDY ON AN EXISTING DISPENSARY, SIMILAR TO SIMILAR COMMUNITY, AND THE LIKELY NUMBER ON A NORMAL AVERAGE DAY IS 200 CARS PER DAY. AND SO THAT IS HOW WE CAME UP WITH 400 CAR, 400 CUSTOMERS, 380 CARS VERSUS THE PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED 800 CUSTOMERS. IT AGAIN, IT WAS A MISINTERPRETATION OF OF HOW WE VIEWED THE QUESTION INITIALLY. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM PLANNING COMMISSION? HAVE YOU HAD A TRAFFIC STUDY CONDUCTED BESIDES YOUR OWN RESEARCH? I MEAN BY A THIRD PARTY INDEPENDENT PERSON? WELL. THE TRAFFIC STUDY, I THINK WOULD BE BEST REPRESENTED IN WHAT WE PLAN TO SUBMIT DURING THE COUNCIL MEETING WOULD BE ACTUALLY A TIME STUDY OF AN EXISTING DISPENSARY, WHICH WOULD GIVE THE BEST REFLECTION OF WHAT THAT TRAFFIC VOLUME WOULD BE. WE WANT HIGH DAYS. WE WANT LOW DAYS, WE WANT WEEKENDS, WE WANT WEEKDAYS. WE WANT TO GET THE TRAFFIC COUNT FOR SPECIFIC HOURS WITH THE DISPENSARY. THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD BE VERY SIMILAR TO THIS LOCATION. SO YOU'VE HAD AN INDEPENDENT COMPANY DO AN ANALYSIS OF A LOCATION OR IS THIS JUST YOU DOING THE STUDY? THIS IS US DOING OUR OWN STUDY WITH A DISPENSARY THAT WE'VE LOCATED THAT'S SIMILAR. I PERSONALLY JUST CAN'T GET PAST THE LOCATION. AND THE FACT THAT THERE'S AN ADDICTION RECOVERY CENTER JUST 508FT AWAY, I JUST THINK IT UNDERMINES WHAT THEY'RE DOING. AND I JUST, IN GOOD FAITH, CANNOT VOTE FOR IT FOR THAT REASON. SO THAT'S JUST BUT I'M ONE PERSON. UNDERSTOOD.ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC. OKAY. JUST BRIEFLY I SEE THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED DISAPPROVAL TO KEEP A RECORD CLEAN. ANY MOTION WE'D LIKE TO FRAME AS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. AND IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT, VOTE YES. IF YOU WANT TO RECOMMEND DISAPPROVAL, VOTE. OKAY. DO I HAVE A RECOMMENDATION? CHAIR I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER TWO MARIJUANA DISPENSARY ON JACKPOT ROAD. SECOND, MISS WEMLINGER.
NO. MR. FARNSWORTH. NO. MR. TITUS, NO. MR. ROACH. YES. THANK YOU. HI. JARED. EISENTHAL,
[3. APPLICATION: Green Oaks of Grove City – Rezoning]
566 WEST LAKE STREET, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVAL TO REZONE 4.14 ACRES AT 4745 BIG RUN SOUTH ROAD FROM SF ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO PDR.PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL WITH A ZONING TEXT. THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO CONSTRUCT A 120 UNIT ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, AND A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
[00:15:01]
FOR THE SITE WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL IN OCTOBER OF 2025, WITH RESOLUTION C 4525. IF THE ZONING IS APPROVED, THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION WILL BE REVIEWED AGAINST THE STANDARDS OUTLINED IN THE APPROVED ZONING TEXT. THE GROVE CITY 2050 FUTURE LAND USE AND CHARACTER MAP DESIGNATES THE SITE AS SUBURBAN LIVING LOW INTENSITY, WHICH RECOMMENDS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AS THE PRIMARY USE, WITH SECONDARY USES OF CIVIC, INSTITUTIONAL, AND PARKS AND OPEN SPACE. STAFF BELIEVE THE PROPOSED USE OF AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY ACTS AS AN APPROPRIATE TRANSITIONAL USE BETWEEN THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO THE EAST AND OTHER AREA DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING THE SOUTH-WESTERN CAREER ACADEMY AND THE APARTMENT COMPLEX ACROSS HOLT ROAD IN THE CITY OF COLUMBUS. PERMITTED USES ON THE SITE INCLUDE AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY FOR PERSONS AGED 65 AND OLDER, AS WELL AS AUXILIARY USES IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE SERVICES AND AMENITIES FOR RESIDENTS LIMITED TO USE BY RESIDENTS, OCCUPANTS AND THEIR GUESTS. THE TEXT ALLOWS FOR A MAXIMUM OF 120 UNITS ON THE PROPERTY IN ONE THREE STORY BUILDING. AND ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS REQUIRING ELEMENTS SUCH AS BAYS, ROOF, GABLES AND A MIX OF FINISHED MATERIALS ARE INCLUDED IN THE TEXT TO BREAK UP THE BUILDING'S MASSING. THE TEXT ALSO REQUIRES ELEVATIONS VISIBLE FROM A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY TO FEATURE ENHANCED FINISHES, INCLUDING ADDITIONAL BRICK, STONE, OR MASONRY. TEXT ESTABLISHES PARKING STANDARDS FOR THE SITE THAT DEVIATE FROM CODE REQUIREMENTS, AS THE STANDARD MULTIFAMILY A1 DEVELOPMENT WOULD REQUIRE 300 SPACES BASED ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS PROPOSED. THE TEXT ALLOWS FOR A MINIMUM OF 70 SPACES, AND MATERIALS INDICATE THE PEAK PARKING DEMAND IS ESTIMATED AT 65 VEHICLES. BASED ON THE INSTITUTE OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERS TRIP GENERATION MANUAL STAFF SUPPORT THIS PROPOSED DEVIATION, NOTING THAT THE PROPOSED USE IS NOT A HIGH TRIP GENERATOR DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT OTHER RECENT ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES HAVE BEEN GRANTED SIMILAR DEVIATIONS FROM PARKING REQUIREMENTS OF CODE AND FUNCTION EFFECTIVELY WITH SIMILAR PARKING RATIOS AS THOSE PROPOSED. ADDITIONALLY, NOTING THAT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, THE TEXT ALLOWS FOR A DEVIATION FROM THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS OF CODE PROVIDED. DEVELOPMENT INCLUDES RECREATIONAL, EDUCATIONAL, AND SOCIAL FACILITIES, AND MATERIALS INDICATE THE DEVELOPMENT WILL INCLUDE NUMEROUS AMENITIES FOR RESIDENT RECREATION. STAFF SUPPORT THIS DEVIATION, NOTING THE AMENITIES INCLUDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT WILL OFFSET THE OPEN SPACE REQUIRED BY CODE, AND ARE SIMILAR TO DEVIATIONS GRANTED TO OTHER SIMILAR FACILITIES WITHIN THE CITY. NOTING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS LOWER INTENSITY LAND USE THAN OTHER LAND USES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA, AND WILL ADD HOUSING TO SERVE THE AGING RESIDENTS IN THE COMMUNITY. AFTER REVIEWING CONSIDERATION, THE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS PLANNING COMMISSION MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE REZONING AS SUBMITTED. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S? JUST PROVIDE A BRIEF UPDATE ON WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THE PROJECT. THANKS, DASH. WE CONTINUE TO BELIEVE THIS IS GOING TO BE A VALUABLE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE COMMUNITY, NOT ONLY FOR THE SENIORS, BUT IN THIS CORRIDOR TOWN, CREATING ECONOMIC VITALITY. OVER THE PAST FEW MONTHS, WE'VE CONTINUED TO ADVANCE THE PLANS, WHETHER ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING, WORKING WITH JACKSON TOWNSHIP ON ON THE FIRE PLANNING AS WELL AS STORMWATER CAPACITY ON SITE. WE'VE WORKED HAND IN HAND WITH DASH AND THE PLAN REVIEWERS. WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE WORK TO DO THERE BEFORE WE CAN SUBMIT THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WHICH WE HOPE TO DO SOON. HERE TO COME BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION IN FEBRUARY. WE HAVE OUR FINANCING COMMITMENTS SECURED FOR THE PROJECT, HAVE ONE EQUITY INVESTOR WHO'S EXCITED AND INTERESTED IN THE DEAL, GONE THROUGH FULL UNDERWRITING APPROVAL THERE, AS WELL AS THE FULL CAPITAL STACK AND APPROVALS FROM THE STATE TO DO THIS SORT OF ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY. SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING WORKING WITH YOU AND PROVIDING UPDATES ON THE PROJECT. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM PLANNING COMMISSION? I HAVE ONE, AND THIS IS PROBABLY FOR THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. BUT JUST I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS LATER WHEN WE WHEN IT CAME BEFORE US BEFORE, IS THERE GOING TO BE SOME SORT OF SCREENING BETWEEN THE LIKE? BECAUSE BEING A THREE STORY BUILDING, LOOKING DOWN ON RESIDENTIAL HOMES. SO I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT'S. YEAH. YEAH. THE THE ZONING TEXT WILL REQUIRE THAT SCREENING BE PROVIDED BETWEEN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND EXISTING RESIDENTIAL. AND THAT WILL BE FINALIZED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. PERFECT. THANKS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC? WITH THAT, DO WE HAVE A MOTION CHAIR? I MAKE THE MOTION. WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO OUR CITY COUNCIL APPLICATION. THREE GREEN OAKS OF GROVE CITY REZONING SECOND. MR. FARNSWORTH. YES. MR. TITUS. YES, MR. ROACH? YES. MISS.WENDLINGER? YES. THANK YOU. WITH THAT, WE'LL HAVE THE OTHER BUSINESS. OUR MEETING'S
[00:20:09]
ADJOURNED.