[00:00:01]
GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
YOU CAN JOIN THE MEETING IN PERSON AT 55 55 PERIMETER DRIVE OR ACCESS VIA THE LIVE STREAM ON, ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
WE WELCOME PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, INCLUDING COMMENTS ON CASES AT THIS TIME.
IF YOU'LL PLEASE JOIN ME AND STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
IF YOU COULD PLEASE CALL OUR ROLE MS. CALL HERE.
OUR MICROPHONES SEEM TO BE SHUTTING OFF AGGRESSIVELY THIS EVENING.
[ACCEPTANCE OF DOCUMENTS AND APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES]
AT THIS TIME I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD AND, UH, APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES FROM THE OCTOBER 2ND MEETING.UH, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD TO CITY COUNCIL WHEN REZONING AND PLANNING OF PROPERTY ARE UNDER CONSIDERATION.
IN SUCH CASES, UH, THE CITY COUNCIL RECEIVES A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSION.
IN OTHER CASES, THE COMMISSION HAS THE FINAL DECISION MAKING RESPONSIBILITY, THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STATE THAT NO NEW AGENDA ITEMS ARE TO BE INTRODUCED.
AFTER 10:30 PM UH, PROCEDURES FOR THIS EVENING, THE APPLICANT WILL FIRST PRESENT HIS OR HER CASE FOLLOWED BY STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION.
AT THAT TIME, THE COMMISSION WILL ASK QUESTIONS OF BOTH THE APPLICANT AND OF STAFF.
FOLLOWING THOSE QUESTIONS, WE WILL ALLOW TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF PUBLIC COMMENT, WE WILL THEN DELIBERATE ON EACH CASE.
ANYONE WISHING TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE INVITED IN TURN UNDER EACH APPLICATION TO THE MICROPHONE, WE DO ASK THAT YOU LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES OR LESS FOR AN EXPEDITIOUS MEETING.
AT THIS TIME, IF ANYONE INTENDS TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, WE DO ASK THAT YOU PLEASE STAND, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND ANSWER IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.
IF YOU THINK YOU MIGHT, IF YOU COULD STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THIS COMMISSION? YOU MAY BE SEATED AT
[Case #25-097INF]
THIS TIME.WE WILL PROCEED WITH OUR FIRST CASE THIS EVENING.
THIS IS WRIGHT PAT CREDIT UNION FOR AN INFORMAL REVIEW, A REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND NON BITING FEEDBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DRIVE THROUGH FACILITY FOR A BANK CONVERSION, PLUS MINOR SITE IMPROVEMENTS.
THIS APPROXIMATELY ONE ACRE SITE IS ZONED BSDC BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT COMMERCIAL AND IS LOCATED AT 48 CORBIN'S MILL DRIVE.
DO WE HAVE AN APPLICANT FOR PRESENTATION THIS EVENING? WE DO, AND I BELIEVE THEY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SOME REMARKS.
WE WOULD INVITE YOU, UM, PLEASE ENSURE THAT THE GREEN LIGHT ON YOUR MICROPHONE IS TURNED ON AND THE THREE MINUTE RULE DOES NOT APPLY TO THE APPLICANT.
JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, UH, NOPE.
JUST GRAB MY NOTES HERE REALLY QUICKLY.
STUDIO, UH, 2 2 6 SOUTH, UH, MARKET STREET, TROY, OHIO.
UM, I AM REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT STEVEN BUTLER, WITH COMMUNITY CIVIL ENGINEERS WHO IS OUT THE COUNTRY.
AND, UH, WE ARE REPRESENTING WRIGHT PAT CREDIT UNION, WHO IS THE PROSPECTIVE BUYER OF THE PROPERTY AT, UH, 48 CORBINS MILL DRIVE.
UH, WRIGHT, PAT CREDIT UNION IS A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION.
UM, THEY HAVE SEVERAL BRANCHES IN THE COLUMBUS MARKET ALREADY.
UM, AND WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL TO COME INTO, UH, TO DUBLIN AND, UH, INTO THIS PROPERTY.
[00:05:01]
THEY'RE IN A DUE DILIGENCE PHASE OF ACQUIRING THE PROPERTY, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY ARE, UH, ANXIOUS TO FIND OUT IS WHETHER THERE IS ANY FEASIBILITY FOR DOING A, UH, A REMOTE DRIVE THROUGH OF VIRTUAL TELLER MACHINE ON THE PROPERTY.UM, SO THAT IS WHAT WE HAD SENT A, UM, STEVE BUTLER, THE, THE CIVIL ENGINEER HAD SENT A, UM, AN EARLY CONCEPTUAL, UM, PLAN THAT HAD A COUPLE OF, UH, HAD HAD TWO, UM, POTENTIAL VTM LOCATIONS, UH, INDICATED.
WE HAD A, UM, AN INFORMAL, UH, ZOOM MEETING WITH STAFF AND GOT SOME COMMENTS BACK FROM THAT.
AND THEN WE, UH, BASED ON THAT, WE HAD AMENDED THAT DOWN TO JUST A SINGLE, UH, UH, VTM TELLER LOCATION AND CANOPY, UH, THAT WAS, THAT WE ARE TENTATIVELY, UH, LOCATING ON THE EAST PART OF THE, THE PROPERTY.
UM, I BELIEVE THERE'S A SITE PLAN THAT'S GONNA SHOW THAT AND SHOULD BE IN THE STAFF'S REPORT, UM, TO ADDRESS, UH, THE CONCERNS.
SO TO, TO TRY TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT HAD COME UP IN THAT, UH, PRELIMINARY MEETING WITH STAFF.
WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATED THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE PRELIMINARY WITH THEM, AND THEN OBVIOUSLY TO COME HERE AND GET A PRELIMINARY READ FROM PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, SO I, WHAT I WAS HOPING TO DO WAS MAYBE ADDRESS A COUPLE OF THE, UM, THE COMMENTS THAT WE, WE HAVE IN THE STAFF REPORT.
UH, I KNOW ONE OF THE BIGGEST CONCERNS IS, UM, THE PEDESTRIAN NATURE OF THE, THE, THE LONG-TERM PLAN FOR THAT PROPERTY.
UM, ONE THING I DID WANNA MENTION BEFORE WE WENT TOO, TOO MUCH FURTHER IS THE BUILDING WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT AS A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION AND HAD DRIVE-THROUGH, HAD A DRIVE-THROUGH ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
AND THERE WAS ACTUALLY A SECOND CURB CUT, UH, THAT WENT OUT ONTO CORBIN'S MILL AT ONE TIME.
I BELIEVE THAT WAS ALL CHANGED IN 2017, SO FAIRLY RECENTLY, UH, AS PART OF AN ADDITION TO THE BUILDING.
UM, AND ONE, UH, OTHER, UH, THING TO NOTE THAT WAS PROBABLY NOT IN OUR SUBMITTAL PACKAGE IS THAT THE INTENT FOR RIGHT PACK CREDIT UNION IS TO BRING NOT ONLY A BRANCH HERE, BUT ALSO TO BRING, UH, LENDERS OFFICES INTO SOME OF THE SPACE.
'CAUSE THE BUILDING'S LARGER THAN THEY WOULD NEED FOR, UH, THE SCALE OF BRANCH THAT THEY ANTICIPATE HERE.
SO, UM, THEY HAD, UH, LENDER OFFICES IN A, ANOTHER BUILDING IN THE COMMUNITY FAIRLY RECENTLY, BUT, BUT MOVED THOSE OUT TO ANOTHER PLACE.
THEY WANT TO BRING THOSE BACK AS PART OF THIS POTENTIAL MOVE TO THE, TO THIS, UH, TO THIS ADDRESS.
UH, ADDITIONALLY THERE WAS, UH, DISCUSSION IN THE, UM, PRELIMINARY STAFF REVIEW, OR I SHOULD SAY THE ONLINE, THE ZOOM MEETING WITH STAFF THAT, UH, THERE MAY BE A POTENTIAL IN THE FUTURE FOR CLOSING OF THE CURB CUT, UH, NORTH OF THE PROPERTY ONTO BRIDGE STREET.
THE POTENTIAL BUYER OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THAT, UM, FOR A BRANCH THIS SIZE, AND WITH THE VOLUME THAT THEY, UM, ANTICIPATE AT THIS BRANCH, UM, THEY FEEL LIKE ONE CURB CUT ONTO CORMAN'S MILL IS SUFFICIENT FOR ALL OF THE TRAFFIC FOR THIS PROPERTY.
SO, UM, WE ARE, WE ARE POTENTIALLY PROPOSING TO, AGAIN, HAVE AN ADAPTIVE REUSE OF THE EXISTING BUILDING.
SO WE WANT TO MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER, THE ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER OF THE BUILDING.
AND, UM, IN ADDITION TO THAT, UH, WE WOULD NOT BE PROPOSING ANY CHANGE TO THE CURB CUT OR SIDEWALK PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, UH, ALONG CORMAN'S MILL.
AND IN THE FUTURE, THE, UH, POTENTIAL BUYER OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF CLOSING, UH, BRIDGE, THE BRIDGE STREET CURB CUT FOR ADDITIONAL, UH, PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THAT, THAT MAIN THOROUGHFARE.
I JUST WANTED TO, TO NOTE THAT.
I BELIEVE THERE WAS A, A, A COMMENT IN STAFF'S REPORT ABOUT, UM, THERE'S, THERE'S ALREADY MATURE ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
THERE'S A RESIDENCE, UM, JUST SOUTH OF THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE, UH, CLOSE TO WHERE THIS CURB CUT, THE EXISTING CURB CUT IS INTO THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S EXISTING, THERE'S AN EXISTING PRIVACY FENCE AND EXISTING MATURE SCREENING THAT OBVIOUSLY THE, UM, THE POTENTIAL BUYER WOULD, A POTENTIAL, UH, PROPERTY OWNER WOULD WANT TO MAINTAIN, UM, AND AUGMENT IN ANY WAY THAT, UM, THE, UH, THE CITY WOULD, UH, REQUIRE.
SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE IN EVERY COMMUNITY THEY GO INTO, THEY TRY TO BE REALLY GOOD NEIGHBORS.
SO IT WOULD BE REALLY IMPORTANT TO TRY TO KEEP THAT PARKING LOT, UH, SCREENED AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
UM, THERE WAS A COMMENT ABOUT, UM, THE, THE NATURE OF THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY LOCATION AND THE DRIVEWAY STRUCTURE.
UM, IT'S A BIT OF A UNIQUE PARCEL IN THAT THE PARKING IS ALL BEHIND THE BUILDING.
SO YOU'VE GOT A TWO-SIDED, UH, TWO, TWO SORT OF TWO MAIN FACADES TO THE BUILDING, OBVIOUSLY THE, THE CORBIN'S MILL FACADE, THE STREET FACING STR, UH,
[00:10:01]
UH, SIDE, BUT THEN THE, THE TRUE MAIN ENTRANCE WHERE ALL OF THE PARKING IS, IS, IS ON THE EAST.SO, UM, THERE WAS A COMMENT, I BELIEVE ABOUT THE PREFERENCE WOULD BE IF YOU WERE GONNA DO A DRIVE TO HAVE IT INTEGRATED WITH THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE BUILDING.
AND THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS ORIGINALLY WHEN IT WAS TO THE NORTH, BUT THERE WAS A SECOND CURB CUT.
NOW, THERE'S NOT THAT OPPORTUNITY.
THE ONLY PLACE THAT YOU COULD DO THAT IS OUT TOWARDS THE PARKING LOT, WHICH IS REALLY WHERE THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF THE FACILITY WOULD BE.
UM, THE OTHER FEELING WAS THAT WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE IS A CANOPY STRUCTURE THAT'S ROUGHLY EIGHT BY 16.
SO IT'S ABOUT THE SIZE OF A SMALL OFFICE.
UM, AND SO THE IDEA WAS TO TRY TO POSITION IT SOMEWHERE TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AS DISCREETLY AS POSSIBLE.
UM, BOTH THE, SO THAT THE SCREENING OF THE, IT WOULD BE SCREENED BY THE BUILDING AND BE SCREENED BY THE MATURE LANDSCAPING, UH, AND PRIVACY FENCE ON THE SOUTH AND ON THE NORTH.
AND THEN OBVIOUSLY IF THE SHARED DRIVE ON THE NORTH WERE TO BE CLOSED, THEN UM, ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING, UH, COULD BE INSTALLED.
SO THE IDEA IS NOT TO MAKE THIS A, A LARGE, UM, OBTRUSIVE ELEMENT.
THE IDEA IS TO TRY TO MAKE THIS AS SMALL AS POSSIBLE.
I BELIEVE THERE'S SOME SIMILAR CANOPIES.
UM, I BELIEVE POLARIS HAS THE SAME, THEIR POLARIS LOCATION HAS SIMILAR, UH, CANOPY STRUCTURES THERE.
THEY HAD MORE, IN THIS CASE, THEY DON'T REALLY ANTICIPATE A LOT OF VEHICULAR TRAFFIC BASED ON THE, THE VOLUME THAT THEY ANTICIPATE ON THIS BRANCH.
SO, UM, THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT STACKING AGAIN, UM, THE STACKING THAT WE INDICATE, WE BELIEVE TO BE MORE THAN SUFFICIENT FOR THE NUMBERS BASED ON HISTORICAL DATA AND THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THE MARKET.
SO AGAIN, THIS IS NOT, UM, IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOTHING LIKE THE, UH, LIKE A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN TERMS OF, OR A STARBUCKS OR ANYTHING IN TERMS OF THE VOLUME THAT COME TO THESE, UH, THESE ITMS. AND I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE, UM, THAT THE, THE ACTUAL SITE PLAN DESIGN IS STILL PRELIMINARY.
SO AS FAR AS THE SPECIFICS OF WHERE THAT, WHERE THAT WOULD BE LOCATED, HOW THAT INTEGRATES WITH THE EXISTING PARKING, ALL OF THOSE THINGS I THINK ARE COMPLETELY NEGOTIABLE.
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DETERMINE, UH, OUR GOAL IN THIS IS REALLY TO FIND OUT WHETHER, UM, THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY, A FEASIBILITY FOR THIS CONDITIONAL USE AS IT'S, UM, KIND OF HINGING THE, THE, THE DECISION TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTIES.
KIND OF HINGING ON, ON THAT, UH, DECISION BY COUNCIL, UH, BY, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, LEMME JUST REVIEW REALLY QUICK AND MAKE SURE I'VE GOT EVERYTHING.
I, I THINK THOSE WERE THE HIGH POINTS.
UM, AGAIN, WE WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND IN THE CITY, AND, UM, WE WANT TO TRY TO MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE BUILDING AND TIME AND THE INTEGRITY OF THE PEDESTRIAN PATHWAYS AND, UH, TRY TO MAKE THIS THING WORK TO EVERYONE'S BENEFIT IN THE MOST DISCREET WAY POSSIBLE.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, AND GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
UH, AS THE APPLICANT MENTIONED, WE ARE HERE FOR AN INFORMAL, AND THE PURPOSE TONIGHT IS TO DISCUSS A POTENTIAL CONDITIONAL USE, UM, WHICH IS REQUIRED BY THE BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT CODE FOR A DRIVE-THROUGH.
AND THE MAIN GOAL IS TO SEE IF THERE'S SUPPORT FOR THIS REQUEST.
A LITTLE BIT OF LOCATIONAL INFORMATION.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN YELLOW.
IT'S THE SITE OF THE RED ROOSTER QUILT SHOP.
THESE EXISTING BUILDING FACES CORBIN'S MILL, AND AS NOTED, THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL DRIVEWAY ON WEST BRIDGE, AND THAT WILL GO AWAY AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.
THE SITE SITS BETWEEN THE BSD HISTORIC TRANSITION NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THE SITE ITSELF IS ZONED COMMERCIAL.
AND THIS IS MEANT TO BE A HOLDING ZONE, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, FOR OLDER ESTABLISHMENTS, WITH THE GOAL TO EVENTUALLY REDEVELOP TOWARDS MORE OF THE VISION OF THE BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT OVER TIME.
SO, STARTING THE DISCUSSION WITH THE BROADEST CONCEPTS, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE TO MORE SPECIFICS.
WE'RE LOOKING AT THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN.
AND THIS SITE IS NOTED AS MIXED USE VILLAGE.
IT EMPHASIZES A PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED DISTRICT.
IT IS DEVELOPED IN CONCERT WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT CHARACTER WHERE VEHICLES ARE MEANT TO BE DEEMPHASIZED, LOOKING MORE DEEPLY INTO THE COMMUNITY PLAN.
THE SITE, AGAIN, IN YELLOW, IS OVERLAYING ON THE SPECIAL AREA PLAN, WHICH
[00:15:01]
CONFIRMS AGAIN, THE SITE AS HISTORIC TRANSITION AND WEST BRIDGE STREET.AND WE SEE CONFIRMED IS A SHIFT AWAY FROM HIGHWAY TO WALKABLE MIXED USE WITH THE GOAL TO TRANSITION INTO A PEDESTRIAN PLACE.
AND IT'S INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT THE WEST BRIDGE STREET PLAN IS CURRENTLY UNDERWAY TO FIGURE OUT SPECIFICALLY HOW WE GET THERE.
NOW, WE MOVE INTO ACTUAL ZONING, AND AS I MENTIONED THIS, UM, PARTICULAR PARCEL IS BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT COMMERCIAL.
AND IT IS ESSENTIALLY A HOLDING ZONE UNTIL, UH, MORE DENSITY COMES ALONG.
BUT WE EMPHASIZE THE MOVE TOWARDS THE VISION OF THE BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT.
AND AGAIN, UNDER THIS ZONE, A DRIVE-THROUGH IS A CONDITIONAL USE.
SO THAT MEANS IT'S NOT AN IMMEDIATE BEST FIT, AND OTHER CRITERIA HAVE TO BE MET IN ORDER TO, UH, ENSURE COMPATIBILITY AND ACHIEVE THAT CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL.
DIVING IN A LITTLE BIT DEEPER, THIS IS THE BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT STREET NETWORK PLAN, WHICH IS PART OF ZONING.
CORBIN'S MILL IS A PRINCIPAL FRONTAGE STREET WHERE WE WOULD EXPECT FRONT FACING BUILDINGS, AND WE HAVE THAT IN THIS INSTANCE.
THE GOAL HERE IS TO LIMIT CONFLICTS BETWEEN PEDESTRIANS AND VEHICLES.
AND DRIVEWAYS ARE NOT NORMALLY PERMITTED ON OUR PRINCIPAL FRONTAGE STREET.
WHEN THE WEST BRIDGE ACCESS GOES AWAY, WHICH WILL BE FOR SAFETY REASONS, CORBIN'S MILL IS GOING TO BE THE ONLY ACCESS POINT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO MAINTAIN THAT OBVIOUSLY, UM, BUT THE ADDITION OF A DRIVE-THROUGH COULD FURTHER IMPACT THOSE PEDESTRIAN VEHICULAR CONFLICTS.
SO WE'RE VERY MINDFUL OF THAT.
ALSO, PLEASE NOTE THE FUTURE EAST WEST STREET CONNECTION, SOMEWHERE BETWEEN MONTEREY AND CORBIN'S MILL.
THIS IS THE DASHED GREEN LINE ON THE SLIDE IN FRONT OF YOU.
THIS EXACT LOCATION IS NOT YET DETERMINED, BUT IT WILL BE A NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND IT'S THERE TO SUPPORT, AGAIN, A FINER GRAINED WALKABLE AREA.
SO MOVING INTO THE SITE ITSELF, THE FIRST PHOTO IS THE VIEW FROM CORBIN'S MILL.
THE SECOND IS LOOKING AT THE SITE FROM BRIDGE STREET.
THE SYMBOL INDICATES THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF THE DRIVE-THROUGH.
AND THEN THE THIRD PHOTO IS LOOKING INTO THE SITE FROM CORBIN'S MILL ITSELF.
UH, FOUR STACKING SPACES ARE PROVIDED.
EIGHT ARE REQUIRED BY CODE, AND THIS SHOWS THE APPROXIMATE LENGTH OF THE EIGHT CARS.
UH, THIS WOULD BLOCK ACCESS TO THE NEAREST PARKING ON SITE, AND STAFF IS CONCERNED THAT IT WILL OVERWHELM THE SITE WITH AUTO RELATED USES.
WHEN THE ACCESS TO BRIDGE STREET GOES AWAY, INCREASED CONGESTION MAY OCCUR.
AND AS WE MENTIONED, UM, THAT COULD IMPACT PEDESTRIAN VEHICULAR CONFLICTS.
UM, ALONG THAT PRINCIPLE, FRONTAGE, STREET, CORBINS MILL, I'LL ALSO NOTE THAT PARKING REQUIREMENTS WOULD HAVE TO BE MET SHOULD THE PROJECT MOVE FORWARD.
SO WE'RE PROPOSING A, A RANGE OF QUESTIONS FROM THE BROAD TO THE SPECIFIC, AND THE COMMISSION IS ASKED TO COMMENT ON THE DRIVE-THROUGH USE SPECIFICALLY, AND ITS APPROPRIATENESS RELATIVE TO ENVISION DUBLIN AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND THE BRIDGE STREET CODE.
AND KEEPING THAT IN MIND, IS THERE SUPPORT FOR A CONDITIONAL USE? THE FIRST CRITERION UNDER CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW IS ITS CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMMUNITY PLAN AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
WE'RE ALSO REQUESTING SOME COMMENTS ON LAYOUT AND THEN ANY OTHER CONSIDERATIONS.
SO WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, LET'S START WITH MR. ALEXANDER THIS EVENING.
ALRIGHT, A COUPLE QUESTIONS, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT.
UH, HAVE THEY BUILT ANY OF THESE FACILITIES WITHOUT CANOPY? SO YOU HAVE A DRIVE THROUGH, YOU HAVE A REMOTE TELLER, YOU HAVE A SIMPLE, SMALL OBJECT.
[00:20:02]
TO MY KNOWLEDGE, ALL OF THE ONES THAT WE HAVE DONE GOING BACK TO 2016 HAVE ALL HAD, UM, DRIVE THROUGH CANOPIES, BUT THEY'RE AN INDEPENDENT FOR EACH LANE IS TYPICALLY THE WAY, WELL, I SHOULD SAY THEY'VE DONE 'EM BOTH WAYS.THEY'VE DONE SOME THAT, THAT WERE MULTIPLE LANES WITH THE STRUCTURE THAT COVERED ALL THE, ALL THE LANES, YOUR TYPICAL, UH, DETACHED, UM, UH, FINANCIAL INSTITUTION DRIVE-THROUGH.
THEY HAVE SHIFTED TO MORE OF THESE SMALLER ONES THAT ARE INDEPENDENT FOR EACH LANE.
AND SO THIS IS, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE, THE, UM, THE ONLY ONE THAT I KNOW OF THAT THEY WERE ONLY PROPOSING ONE DRIVE THROUGH LANE.
ALL OF THE OTHER ONES HAD AT LEAST TWO, UM, AND SOMETIMES THREE.
SO I THINK PART OF THIS WAS THE VOLUME THAT THEY WERE ANTICIPATING HERE OF, OF VEHICULAR USE WAS ACTUALLY LOWER THAN SOME OF THE OTHER LOCATIONS.
UM, THE OTHER JUST COMMENT I WANTED TO MAKE ABOUT THE LAYOUT AGAIN, WAS THAT, UH, THAT WAS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND REALLY DESIGNED TO LOSE THE LEAST AMOUNT OF PARKING ON THE SITE.
BUT WE DO HAVE SOME ROOM, I THINK, ON THE EAST TO POTENTIALLY WORK WITH STAFF AND, AND, UH, COMMISSION TO DETERMINE IF THERE'S A BETTER CONFIGURATION AS FAR AS, UH, ANY STACKING ISSUES OR ANY TRAFFIC PATTERN ISSUES.
BUT NO, AS TO MY KNOWLEDGE, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, UM, THE, ALL OF THE, ALL OF THE, UH, BRANCHES THAT I'M AWARE OF HAVE IT HAVE A SEPARATE, UH, DRIVE-THROUGH.
DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA ABOUT THE TRANSACTION RATE PER HOUR OR DURING PEAK TIMES? I DON'T HAVE THAT DATA, BUT WE COULD CERTAINLY PROVIDE THAT AT A, UM, AGAIN, BASED ON THE PRELIMINARY NATURE OF, OF THIS REQUEST, UH, WE COULD CERTAINLY PROVIDE THAT AT A, AT A FUTURE, UM, AS PART OF A FUTURE APPLICATION FOR A FINAL, UH, LAYOUT.
I THINK THAT, AND, YOU KNOW, WHETHER, UH, TRAFFIC COUNTS OR ANYTHING ELSE WERE, ANY DATA THAT WOULD, WOULD BE REQUIRED, UH, TO PROVIDE, UH, SUPPORTING DATA, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO PROVIDE THAT.
AND THEN SARAH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.
UH, AND I HAD TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM THE PROPOSAL THAT WAS TO THE EAST OF THIS PROPERTY, BUT THE LAST PROPOSAL THAT WE SAW TO THE EAST OF THIS PROPERTY WAS ESSENTIALLY A SINGLE USE OVER THE WHOLE SITE AND WITH A LOT OF, WITH A LOT OF PARKING THAT YES, YOU'RE NODDING YOUR HEAD.
I, I KNOW THE ONE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
THAT'S, I'M NOT, I'LL TALK FULLY ACQUAINTED WITH THAT APPLICATION.
I'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT IN DELIBERATION STAGE.
SO CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE MORE ABOUT THAT PROPOSED LIKE ACCESS ROAD OR NEW THAT, THAT ROAD THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED THE POTENTIAL? AND IT KIND OF GOES WITH A LITTLE BIT WHAT GARY WAS SAYING ABOUT THAT.
THE OTHER, THE OTHER PROPERTY THERE.
I'M JUST CURIOUS YOU, WHERE WOULD THAT BE WITH THE, THE CURRENT BUILDING THERE? THIS IS IN REGARDS TO, THIS IS IN REGARDS TO THE PARK.
OH, WE KNOW THAT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE, SHE BROUGHT IT UP ABOUT THE, THAT PROPOSED ROAD, THE DOTTED LINE.
AND I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR YOUR QUESTION.
DO WE KNOW WHERE THAT ACTUALLY CONFLICTS WITH THE, THE PROPERTY? DO WE KNOW WHERE IT ENDS UP? WHERE THE CURRENT BUILDING IS? YEAH.
CAN CAN YOU BRING UP THE LAYOUT PLEASE, SARAH? YES, YES I CAN.
SO THIS IS AN APPROXIMATION AND NOT, UM, A DEFINITE, BUT IT SHOWS IT ESSENTIALLY TOWARDS THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY.
BUT AGAIN, THIS IS NOT, NOT FINALIZED.
SO HOW DOES, SO, SO TELL ME A LITTLE MORE, HOW, HOW DOES THEN, HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO EVALUATE THIS IF THE CITY DOWN THE LINE IS GONNA WANT POTENTIALLY A, A, A ROAD THERE? AND IT LOOKS LIKE IT GOES RIGHT THROUGH THIS, THIS LOT.
SO WHAT WE'RE REALLY ASKING HERE IS TO EVALUATE THE POTENTIAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A DRIVE THROUGH.
SO THAT DETAIL OF WHERE THAT ROAD WOULD GO, I THINK MIGHT BE FOR ANOTHER DAY WHERE THE APPLICANT IS SIMPLY WANTING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE APPETITE WOULD BE FOR A CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE DRIVE THROUGH.
SO MS. HOLT, IF I COULD KIND OF RESTATE AND SEE IF IT OFFERS CLARITY.
THERE'S A BUILDING THERE TODAY.
[00:25:01]
NO REQUEST TO CHANGE THE BUILDING THAT'S THERE TODAY WITH THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION.THE SOLE ITEM THAT WE ARE BEING ASKED TO CONSIDER IS THE INTEGRATION OF A CANOPY, ATM DRIVE THROUGH WITH NO OTHER CONSIDERATIONS, UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'RE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
SO WE ALWAYS THINK PLANNING AND LONG TERM AND THAT SORT OF THING.
BUT FOR THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION, THE ONLY ITEMS THAT WE ARE ASKED TO CONSIDER ARE THIS PARTICULAR DRIVE-THROUGH.
I MEAN, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT AGAIN, THAT'S SHORTSIGHTED.
WHAT'S THE CITY'S POSITION THEN ON THE, THE DRIVE-THROUGH? YOU KNOW, IN THE REPORT THERE'S ESSENTIALLY AN OPPOSITION TO THAT COMPONENT.
IS THAT, IS THAT FAIR? THAT, THAT IS FAIR? WE DON'T FEEL THAT IT, UM, COMPORTS WITH ENVISION DUBLIN AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
AND THE VERY FACT THAT IT IS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THIS ZONE MEANS THAT THERE'S AN EXTRA LAYER OF SCRUTINY BECAUSE IT MAY OR MAY NOT FIT THE INTENT OF THE DISTRICT.
AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS MOVING TOWARDS A MORE PEDESTRIANIZED DISTRICT.
AND THIS APPEARS TO BE TAKING A STEP BACK AWAY FROM THAT.
IS THERE, UH, ON THE, ON THE BUILDING THAT'S THERE, IS THERE A CONSIDERATION FOR AN AUTOMATED TELLER VIA PEDESTRIAN USE ON THE BUILDING? AND YOUR, YOUR MICROPHONE IS CURRENTLY OFF.
SORRY, I DIDN'T WANT TO GET ANY AMBIENT NOISE.
AND UM, I, I, WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN SO FAR AS TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THE ACTUAL LAYOUT OF THE BRANCH IS OR HOW MANY TELLERS VERSUS ITMS. THERE'S ALWAYS A, UH, A SORT OF A DEBATE BASED ON THE MARKET, UH, FACTORS OF HOW MUCH OF, OF THOSE THINGS THEY DO.
BUT THERE WOULD BE, UH, A, A AN INTENT TO HAVE WALK-UP OPPORTUNITIES AS WELL, UM, AGAIN, AND, AND TO TALK ABOUT THE, UM, THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC AND ADDING TO THIS.
IT'S, IT'S NOT REALLY BOTH, IT'S EITHER OR.
AND SO THAT'S WHERE THE COMMENT EARLIER ABOUT THE, UH, THE, THE AMOUNT OF STACKING, REGARDLESS OF WHERE THAT THING WOULD BE POSITIONED, UM, YOU RARELY, IF EVER SEE MORE THAN TWO OR THREE CARS IN ANY OF THESE TYPES OF, UH, OF, UH, DRIVE UP LOCATIONS LIKE THIS.
AND MOST PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'RE DOING THE, THE CONVENTIONAL BANKING, STILL TEND TO WANT TO GO INTO THE BRANCH.
AND AGAIN, THIS ONE'S A BRANCH, IT'S A SMALL BRANCH WITH OFFICES.
SO IT'S A, IT'S A LITTLE BIT UNIQUE IN THAT REGARD.
I THINK THE, THE, UM, THE USE, UH, OR THE, THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC IS ACTUALLY GONNA BE A LITTLE BIT LOWER THAN SOME OF THE OTHER STANDALONE BRANCH LOCATIONS, IS WHAT THEY'RE ANTICIPATING.
UM, THE, THE ONLY OTHER COMMENT I I, I WOULD JUST MAKE AGAIN ABOUT THE COULD, WOULD YOU MIND PULLING UP THE, THE MAP WITH, UH, WITH THE, UM, THE USES? AGAIN, I, I THINK ALL OF US IN THE DESIGN SIDE ARE ALL FOR HIGHER AND BETTER USES OF PROPERTIES.
UH, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE REALITIES OF EXISTING BUILDINGS AND EXISTING USES.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STRUCK ME IN LOOKING AT THIS PARTICULAR SITE IS THAT THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE BASICALLY LINES UP WITH THE NORTH FACE OF THE DUBLIN PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER, AND THE DRIVEWAY CURB CUT ROUGHLY LINES UP WITH THE DRIVEWAY CURB CUT INTO THE SHOPPING CENTER PARKING LOT.
AND SO, UH, AGAIN, WITH THE, UH, WITH THE NOTION THAT, UM, WE WANT TO PRESERVE ALL OF THOSE, UM, ADJACENCIES ACCESS POINTS, WE WANT TO PRESERVE THE NATURE OF THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE BUILDING.
WE WANNA PRESERVE THE, UH, THE EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PATHWAYS AND THE OWNER'S POTENTIALLY, UH, IN SUPPORT OF I IMPROVING THE IMPROVEMENTS, UM, PROPOSED FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE BRIDGE STREET PEDESTRIAN, UM, CONNECTION POINT AT THE, AT THE NORTH.
UM, WE FEEL LIKE WE CAN MAKE ALL OF THIS WORK JUST USING, UTILIZING THE ONE SINGLE, UH, DRIVE THROUGH CANOPY.
AND AGAIN, THIS ISN'T A, A HIGH VOLUME, HIGH TRAFFIC, UM, UH, USE.
AND IT'S NOT REALLY ADDING TO THE, TO THE, UM, ANY MORE THAN A, THE, THE, THE SIMPLE NEW OCCUPANCY IS GONNA ADD ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC TO THE SITE.
UM, THE CANOPY IN AND OF ITSELF IS NOT GOING TO ADD, AND WE ARE NOT ANTICIPATING ADDING ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC TO THE SITE JUST BASED ON THAT.
SIMPLY THE CHANGE OF USE AND CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY WILL DRIVE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC TO THE, TO THE SITE.
I HOPE THAT ANSWERED THE QUESTION.
HAVE YOU LOOKED AT INCORPORATING ANY KIND OF DRIVE THROUGH COMPONENT INTO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE? SO THE PROBLEM, AND I'M, I'M SORRY IF I SKIPPED PAST THAT EARLY ON,
[00:30:02]
THE CHALLENGE THERE IS THAT IF YOU WERE GOING TO DO THAT, IT WOULD'VE BEEN THE WAY THAT THE BUILDING WAS CONFIGURED PRE PRIOR TO THE CHANGES IN 2017.SO THE, THE, WHEN IT HAD THE ADDITIONAL CURB CUT ONTO CORBIN'S MILL TO THE NORTH, AND THE STRUCTURE WOULD'VE COME OFF THE, THE NORTH END OF THE BUILDING, BECAUSE THE PROBLEM WITH A CONFIGURATION LIKE THIS WHERE YOU HAVE THE BULK OF THE PARKING, EVEN THOUGH THERE IS A STREET FRONTAGE AND YOU WANT TO PRESERVE THAT ARCHITECTURALLY, THE REALITY IS THE BULK OF THE TRAFFIC IS GONNA COME FROM THE BACK OF THE BUILDING.
SO IT'S TWO-SIDED ARCHITECTURE.
AND SO IF YOU'VE GOT THE MAIN ENTRANCE, UH, FOR THE BRANCH ON THE EAST SIDE, IT'S, IT'S CHALLENGING.
IT'S, IT'S REALLY PROBABLY NOT SAFE TO LOOK AT SOME TYPE OF A CANOPY STRUCTURE COMING OFF THE, THAT'S INTEGRATED INTO THE ARCHITECTURE GOING EAST, WHICH AT THIS POINT WITH THAT ADDITION TO THE NORTH IS REALLY THE ONLY VIABLE LOCATION.
SO IN THIS CASE, FOR SAFETY AND FOR THE AMOUNT OF USE, WE FELT LIKE IT, IT WOULD BE BETTER TO TRY TO PUSH THIS, UM, CANOPY AND DRIVE THROUGH STRUCTURE THE, THE ITM STRUCTURE FURTHER TO THE EAST.
UM, SO FOR STAFF, WHEN THE BRIDGE STREET CURB CUT IS CLOSED, THIS I, I WANNA CALL IT A RIGHT OF WAY, BUT IT'S, IT WOULD BE OWNED LAND.
WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY WOULD IT BE TO DEVELOP THAT, AND WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPETUS FOR TEARING OUT THE DRIVE THROUGH THEIR CURRENTLY? IS THAT PROPERTY OF THE GAS STATION OR WOULD THAT BE INVOLVED WITH AT THIS POINT? WE DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT.
SO I GUESS I'D ASK, DO YOU SEE THIS AS IMPROVING WALKABILITY OR PEDESTRIAN ORIENTATION MORE, OR DO YOU KIND OF SEE IT AS THIS IS THE EXISTING USE OF THIS BUILDING? WE'RE JUST CONTINUING ON, I, I THINK THE WAY I KINDA SEE IT IS THE BUILDING WAS ORIGINALLY PURPOSED AS A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION WITH A DRIVE-THROUGH.
AND WE'RE KIND OF TAKING IT BACK TO WHERE IT ORIGINALLY WAS FOR THE POTENTIAL OPERATOR.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS A COMMUNITY-BASED CREDIT UNION THAT'S GOT, UH, SUCCESSFUL BRANCHES ALL OVER COLUMBUS, ALL OVER THE SOUTHWEST OHIO.
UM, AND THEY WANT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS EVERYWHERE THEY GO.
SO THEY WANT TO DO THIS IN THE, IN THE, IN A, AS MUCH AS THERE CAN BE A WIN-WIN, UH, SCENARIO.
UM, I THINK THE BIGGEST THING IN TERMS OF THE WALKABILITY, AGAIN, OUR, TO ME OUR, WE'RE NOT TOUCHING ANYTHING ALONG CORBIN'S MILL.
THERE'S NO PROPOSAL TO WIDEN THE CURB CUT.
THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO REQUEST TO CHANGE THE SIDEWALK OR THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS THROUGH THERE.
UH, WE WANNA MAINTAIN A, A PEDESTRIAN ACCESS INTO THE BUILDING FROM THAT SIDE.
AND THEN ADDITIONALLY, THE POTENTIAL BUYER OF THE PROPERTY WOULD SUPPORT THE, UM, THE ELIMINATION OF THE FLAG, UH, UP TO BRIDGE AND, AND IMPROVEMENTS, UH, ON THE PEDESTRIAN WAY, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THAT ENDED UP BEING.
WHETHER THAT WAS A PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY OR LANDSCAPE SCREENING OR WHATEVER IT ENDED UP NEEDING TO BE, I THINK WE WOULD BE MORE THAN WILLING TO WORK WITH STAFF AND, AND THE COMMISSION ON EXACTLY HOW THAT GETS DONE AND WHAT THAT TURNS INTO, WHETHER THAT'S NOW OR THAT'S IN THE FUTURE.
BUT WE DID TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT BASED OFF, AND AGAIN, I REALLY APPRECIATED STAFF, UM, HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO SCHEDULE THE, THE ZOOM MEETINGS AND GET THEIR FEEDBACK BEFORE WE EVEN CAME HERE.
UM, AND THAT WAS PART OF IT, TO, TO KNOW THAT THAT WAS POTENTIALLY, UM, IN THE CARDS, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WITH THE, WITH RIGHT PAT CREDIT UNION, THAT THEY WERE, UH, AMENABLE TO THAT AND THEY WERE, AND WE HAD A LAY LAYOUT THAT WOULD WORK REGARDLESS OF, UH, OF THAT BECAUSE WE WERE ONLY REALLY MAINTAINING THAT EXISTING CURB CUT.
AND I GUESS BACK FOR STAFF, I, UH, MAY HAVE GOTTEN CONFUSED BETWEEN A COUPLE OF THE CASES.
COULD YOU LET ME KNOW WHERE THEY'RE AT ON THIS PLAN? AND, AND I KNOW WE'RE FOCUSED ON THE VTM, BUT IN PARKING RELATIVE TO THE REQUIREMENTS, WE HAVEN'T EVALUATED THAT YET.
UM, AGAIN, OUR, OUR PURPOSE HERE IS TO LOOK AT THE FEASIBILITY OF A CONDITIONAL USE JUST FOR THE DRIVE-THROUGH.
AND THE REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE I THINK THIS WILL GET INTO DELIBERATION, SO I'LL LIMIT IT, BUT I THINK THAT THE POTENTIAL SPACE AVAILABLE HERE, UM, PLAYS INTO MY THOUGHTS ON THE VTN.
AND, AND WE HAD, WE HAD LOOKED AT, UM, AND APOLOGIES, WE DO WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE STICK TO QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.
AND SO WE HAVE A, A LOT OF MATERIAL.
SO THANK YOU MR. GARVIN, ARE YOU DONE? ALL SET? THANKS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. WE THANK YOU.
UM, SARAH, I WANTED TO GO BACK TO THE GRAPHIC THAT SHOWED THE, I WANNA BE CLEAR THAT EIGHT SPACES ARE REQUIRED FOR THE DRIVE THROUGH AS IN TERMS OF STACKING, UH, DISTANCE.
UM, AND WHEN IT COMES UP OF NOTE,
[00:35:01]
WHEN, WHEN THE, THERE WE GO, THAT, THAT IF THERE WAS CARS STACKED IN THAT QUANTITY, THAT THEY WOULD BLOCK THE FLOW OF THE PARKING, UM, TO THE APPLICANT.HAD, HAD YOU CONSIDERED THE IMPACT OF THE, THE REQUIRED EIGHT SPACES BEING DESIGNATED FOR THE DRIVE-THROUGH? YES, SIR.
UM, AND I, AGAIN, I'M, I APOLOGIZE IF I SKIPPED OVER IT EARLIER.
UM, ONE OF THE, AGAIN, THIS IS A VERY PRELIMINARY LAYOUT.
WE WERE BASING THAT MORE OFF OF THE ANTICIPATED NEEDS OF THE, OF THE OPERATOR, NOT NECESSARILY THE CODE REQUIREMENTS.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE, WE DO FEEL LIKE THERE'S ROOM POTENTIALLY TO REWORK THE PROPERTY OF THE PARKING LOTS OF THE EAST.
UH, AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE BACK AND FORTH WITH SOME POTENTIAL HORSE TRADING ON THE, ON THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
BUT THAT, THAT DRIVE COULD SHIFT THE DRIVE, THE STACKING THAT'S INDICATED ON THE BOTTOM OF THAT COULD SHIFT FURTHER SOUTH AND THE ENTIRE DRIVE LANE COULD SHIFT TO THE, TO THE EAST, LEAVING THE, THERE'S EXISTING PARKING BASICALLY WHERE THAT DRIVE IS CURRENTLY.
SO GIVE OR TAKE, IF YOU, IF YOU, IT WOULD, IT WOULD PROBABLY COST SOME PARKING SPACES.
BUT AGAIN, THAT WOULD ALSO THEN GET INTO, DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHANGE ANYTHING IN THE, UH, THE NORTHEAST CORNER AT THIS POINT, OR DO WE NEED TO LEAVE THAT ALONE NOT KNOWING WHAT THE FUTURE OF THE ACCESS DRIVE TO WESTBRIDGE IS.
SO AT THAT POINT, WE WOULD ABSOLUTELY LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH STAFF AND COMMISSION ON A FINAL LAYOUT THAT ADDRESS THAT ITEM.
BUT I THINK THAT'S, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE JUST BY SHIFTING POTENTIALLY THE CONFIGURATION OR THE LOCATION OF THAT DRIVE IT, IT REALLY SHOULD BE FURTHER TO THE SOUTH SEA.
YOU'RE NOT IN THE, THE OUTBOUND LANE, UM, COMING UP.
THANK YOU MS. HERER, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
UM, A COUPLE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE IS, UM, THE HOURS OF OPERATION THAT OF, OF THIS AREA AND SO FORTH THAT YOU WOULD HAVE, UM, GOING INTO THE EVENING.
THERE'S AN ATM THERE, IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT IT? IT'S AN, YEAH, I BELIEVE THE, THE FUNCTION OF THAT IS, IT'S A, IT'S, I BELIEVE IT'S A 24 HOUR ACCESSIBLE, UH, UNIT.
SO I JUST, JUST THAT UNIT AND THEN, THEN I, I'M NOT SURE IN THIS CASE IF THERE WOULD BE A WALKUP, ATM AS PART OF THAT AS WELL.
WE HAVEN'T QUITE GOTTEN THAT FAR WITH RIGHT PAT ON, ON THEIR, UM, ON ALL THOSE DETAILS.
SO JUST CLARIFYING THE WALKUP, UM, JUST SAFETY AND SO FORTH LIKE THAT, MANY OF THEM HAVE THEM WITHIN THE MAIN BUILDING ITSELF TOO.
IS THAT A POSSIBILITY FOR A WALK? CERTAINLY.
AND, AND IN THIS CASE WITH A UNIQUE BUILDING THAT FRONTS, IT HAS, IT HAS PEDESTRIAN FRONTAGE ONTO ONTO THE, THE, THE MAIN THOROUGHFARE AND IT HAS THE PARKING ACCESS, WE COULD CERTAINLY LOOK AT WHERE THAT MAKES SENSE TO DO THAT IN THE BEST POSSIBLE WAY.
UM, THE SAME THING WITH ANY NIGHT DROPS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
AND WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO BRING THOSE DETAILS BACK TO STAFF AND TO, AND TO COMMISSION, UM, WITH, UH, WITH A FINAL APPLICATION ONCE WE, IF WE ARE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO GAIN, UM, YOU KNOW, A FAVORABLE RULING TONIGHT WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THE PARKING LOT MM-HMM
THERE'S UPFRONT BY THE BUILDING.
THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE KIND OF THINKING THAT, UM, IF YOU'RE COMING, UH, AS A, AS A CUSTOMER, YES.
THAT'S WHO WOULD BE THERE THEN, THEN THERE IS THE DRIVE THROUGH AND THEN THERE'S ADDITIONAL PARKING.
IS THAT FOR STAFF AND THE OTHER OFFICES OR, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE THERE THAT YOU'RE THINKING OF PARKING THERE? YES.
AND I THINK THE, AGAIN, THAT, THAT LAYOUT OF THAT EAST PART OF THE PARKING LOT MAY CHANGE AS WE, AS WE ADDRESS, UH, OBVIOUSLY THE PRIORITY NEEDS TO BE THE SAFETY OF THAT, UH, OF THAT DRIVE THROUGH.
BUT IT LOOKED LIKE WE, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO, YOU EVEN IF WE SHIFTED THE, THE DRIVE TO THE EAST, YOU'RE ONLY LOSING ABOUT FOUR PARKING SPACES.
SO AS LONG AS WE CAN COME TO SOME KIND OF, UH, AGREEMENT ON THE, ON THE COUNT AS PART OF THAT, WE CERTAINLY WOULD WANT THE PUBLIC, THE THE PUBLIC, THE, THE HANDICAP PARKING, THE ITINERANT PARKING, THE CUSTOMER BASE PARKING CLOSER TO THE BUILDING, UH, AT, AT ANY TIME OF, OF DAY.
BUT CERTAINLY, UH, IN THE EVENING TIME IF THERE IS A WALKUP, ATM.
SO FOLLOWING UP ON THE, THE, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
THE, THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, JUST TO BE CLEAR, WHEN THE ACCESS OR THE BRIDGE STREET GOES AWAY, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE ANY, YOU DON'T ANTICIPATE ANY PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, ANY SIDEWALK OR ANY WAY YOU'RE DRIVING EVERYBODY FROM A PEDESTRIAN STANDPOINT TO, TO GO DOWN CORPORATE'S MILL INTO THE FRONT WOULD BE THE, THE GOAL, RIGHT? I THINK SO.
BUT AGAIN, UM, TO STAFF, UH, TO THE STAFF COMMENTS, UM, THAT, THAT ALL WE KNOW AT THIS POINT AS FAR AS FROM AN APPLICANT'S STANDPOINT IS THAT THE GOAL WOULD BE TO, IN THE FUTURE, CLOSE THAT DRIVEWAY DRIVE LANE OFF.
AND SO THE REALLY IS, WE'VE ONLY TAKEN IT AS FAR AS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE, THE OWNER OR THE POTENTIAL OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND OPERATOR OF THE, OF THE LOCATION WAS OKAY WITH ONLY
[00:40:01]
HAVING THE ONE VEHICULAR ACCESS IN AND OUT.BUT YEAH, WHETHER THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE, IF THE CITY DETERMINED THAT THEY WANTED SOME PEDESTRIAN ACCESS THROUGH THAT AREA, I DON'T THINK THAT THE, THE, UH, THE POTENTIAL, UH, OWNER OF THE PROPERTY WOULD HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT.
AND AGAIN, IF THEY SAID, NO, WE JUST WANT SCREENING OR WE JUST WANT, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER, WHATEVER THE, THE CITY REALLY WANTS THERE AS FAR AS WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT DRIVE, I THINK WE'D BE AGREEABLE TO, BECAUSE I APPRECIATE THAT 'CAUSE IT'S AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TWO BECAUSE IF WE'RE HAVING PEDESTRIAN ACCESS AND ENVISION DUBLIN COMING FROM THE B BEHIND, OR FROM THAT POINT, WE'D, I GUESS THE QUESTION IS WOULD YOU BE AMICABLE? AND I THINK YOU ANSWERED IT TO KIND OF DRIVING PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC FOR SAFETY TO THE FRONT OFF OF CORBIN'S MILL AND ABSOLUTELY KEEPING THE BA OKAY, PERFECT.
AND, AND IF WHATEVER WORKS WITH THE, WITH THE LONG-TERM PLAN AND THEN OBVIOUSLY THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL TO THE FURTHER TO THE EAST, IF THERE WERE A NEED TO, TO DO, UH, PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS OR PATHWAYS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, I THINK, I THINK ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE ON THE TABLE A HUNDRED PERCENT.
AND THEN A QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE JUST TO, I KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS, BUT I WANT TO GET IT OUT THERE.
IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THE LIMITED, UH, STACK CAR STACK, IT'S JUST APPLICABLE TO THIS APPLICATION, SO FUTURE USES IT WOULD BE, WE'D BE RE UM, REVIEWING IT, I GUESS AGAIN TO, UH, THAT'S RIGHT.
AT THIS TIME, WE'D LIKE TO INVITE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC TO COME FORWARD AND TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE THE COMMISSION, UM, STARTS ON OUR PUB, UH, EXCUSE ME, ON OUR DELIBERATION, IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION? HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENT SINCE THE MEETING BEGAN? ALRIGHT, WE INVITE YOU TO SIT DOWN AT THIS TIME.
WE WILL, UH, START OUR, UH, DELIBERATION AND MR. ALEXANDER WILL KEEP THE SAME ORDER.
I GUESS IT'S ONLY FAIR SINCE DAN USUALLY STARTS
SO, UM, I AGREE WITH STAFF, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I'M FRUSTRATED BY THE LOT TO THE EAST BECAUSE OUR ENVISIONED DUBLIN PLAN CALLS FOR MIXED USE CALLS, NOT SINGLE USE ON A LOT THAT BIG.
THE SUGGESTION IS THERE SHOULD BE HOUSING OVER THERE WITH COMMERCIAL USES.
SO IF THERE, IF IT DID FOLLOW THE ENVISIONED DUBLIN PLAN AND WE HAD A MIXED USE, THEN THERE'S MORE POTENTIAL FOR PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS ACROSS THE SITE.
AND SO, UM, THEN THE MOVEMENT FROM EAST TO WEST, I THINK IT BECOMES MORE OF AN ISSUE.
BUT IF IT'S A SINGLE COMMERCIAL USE, LIKE WHAT WAS PROPOSED IN THE LAST SUBMISSION, I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GONNA GET ANY KIND OF PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS ACROSS THERE.
THEY'RE GONNA GO FROM THAT BIG PARKING LOT INTO THOSE COMMERCIAL USES.
SO IT, IT, IT, IN SOME WAYS, IT DOESN'T SEEM FAIR TO HOLD THEM TO A STANDARD THAT NOW I WASN'T PART OF THOSE DELIBERATIONS, BUT IT SOUNDED LIKE EVERYTHING WAS PRETTY POSITIVE FOR THAT APPLICANT.
WE HOLD THEM TO A STANDARD THAT THEN WE SHOULD REALLY HOLD THAT TO, TO THE STANDARD, THE SAME STANDARD TO THE, THOSE PEOPLE IF THEY COME BACK PROPERTY AT EAST.
SO I, I'M A LITTLE UNCOMFORTABLE, IT SEEMS TO ME, TREATING PEOPLE A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY.
UM, THE OTHER ISSUE I HAVE, WHICH IS KIND OF CONTRARY TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION, IS WE BANK SO DIFFERENTLY NOW COMPARED TO 20 AND 30 YEARS AGO.
WE BANK ON OUR PHONES, WE BANK ON OUR COMPUTERS.
WE DON'T, THERE'S, THERE'S NOT THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC AT DRIVE-THROUGHS THERE USED TO BE BECAUSE OF THAT, SO MUCH MORE OF IT'S DONE ONLINE.
SO, YOU KNOW, TO HOLD THEM TO A STANDARD OF ALL THOSE STACKING SPACES, I I, I WONDER IF OUR CODE HAS BEEN IN THAT AREA, HAS BEEN UPDATED WITH THE CHANGE OF THE WAY WE BANK.
SO I, I, I MIGHT, I'M KIND OF ON THE, I'M DEFINITELY ON THE FENCE.
I AGREE WITH STAFF, BUT I FEEL LIKE THE BIGGER LOT, WE'RE NOT HOLDING THEM TO THE STANDARD SO FAR.
SO THEN TO HOLD THEM THEM TO THE STANDARD DOESN'T SEEM FAIR.
IT'S ALSO A TINY LOT, SO IT'S HARD TO DEVELOP.
SO TRYING TO MAKE THAT LOT OF MIXED USE WITH SOME HOUSING AND SOME COMMERCIAL SEEMS VERY, VERY DIFFICULT.
SO THOSE ARE MY INITIAL THOUGHTS.
ALRIGHT, SO GARY BROUGHT A COUPLE POINTS THAT I WAS GONNA TALK ABOUT.
I, AND, AND THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY SAID IT A LOT, UH, UN UNBEKNOWNST TO SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC, BUT INDICATED IT'S PROBABLY NOT GONNA BE THAT MUCH.
I REALLY DON'T SEE THE NEED TO HAVE A, A DRIVE THROUGH IN THIS COMPONENT.
UH, WE'RE TRYING TO SQUEEZE SOMETHING IN THERE, SOME TRAFFIC ISSUES.
UH, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS WE CAN COME BACK AND REDESIGN THE BUILDING OR MAKE SOME CHANGES TO THE BUILDING TO MAKE IT MAYBE A LITTLE EASIER FOR, FOR, FOR DRIVE THROUGH ASSETS ON THE
[00:45:01]
BUILDING.BUT I DON'T, I DON'T REALLY THINK IT'S NECESSARY.
UM, AND THAT'S REALLY JUST BASED OFF WHAT THE APPLICANT WAS SAYING.
SO IF, IF WE'RE GONNA TRY TO FORCE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC, UH, FOR THAT TELLER, BUT EVERYBODY CAN DO A LOT OF STUFF ON THEIR PHONES AT HOME.
IF THERE COULD BE AN ATM ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING THAT REALLY ALLEVIATES ALL THOSE ISSUES AND TRY TO FORCE A CONCEPT INTO THAT, INTO THAT LOT, THAT, THAT'S WHERE I'M AT.
I, UH, GENERALLY AGREE WITH STAFF THAT THE DRIVE THROUGH DOESN'T FIT POTE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTATION.
UM, AS FAR AS THE NEED, I, YOU KNOW, WANTED TO REITERATE WHAT GARY SAID.
I WOULD REALLY BE CURIOUS TO SEE THE NUMBERS OF, OF USAGE, HOW YOU PROJECT IT USED, USED, UM, AND YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, HOW YOU GUYS DECIDE WHETHER TO HAVE A WALKUP OR DRIVE THROUGH.
UM, IS IT JUST CONVENIENCE OR DOES IT ACTUALLY PROMOTE MORE USAGE? UM, SO BEING GENERALLY OPPOSED TO IT, I WILL SAY, I THINK THAT THERE'S A WAY THAT YOU COULD MOVE.
I ASKED ABOUT THE PARKING SPACE.
I THINK THERE'S A WAY YOU COULD MOVE BACK THE DRIVE THROUGH TO ALLEVIATE THE STACKING ISSUE.
UM, I THINK TO JAMIE'S POINT, THERE'S A WAY TO PUT AN EMPHASIS ON PEDESTRIAN USE AND ROUTED AWAY FROM THE PARKING LOT.
UM, SO I, I GUESS WHAT I, WHAT I'D SAY IS THAT I COULD BE, I COULD BE MORE SUPPORTIVE OF IT IF I COULD SEE SOME OF THOSE FURTHER PLANS ON HOW YOU WOULD MAKE THIS PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED AND, AND HAVE, SEE SOME OF THOSE IDEAS.
IT'S HARD FOR, FOR ME TO KIND OF ENVISION WHAT ALL OPPORTUNITY YOU'D HAVE TO DO THAT.
BUT I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT IF WE'RE LOOKING TO MAKE ANY STEPS TOWARDS THE TRANSITION OF WHAT WE WANT THIS DISTRICT TO BE, UM, THAT WE TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO AT LEAST MOVE TOWARDS THAT.
SO, UM, IN TERMS OF THE PROPOSED SITE LAYOUT, IF THERE'S A-V-T-M-I DO SUPPORT, YOU KNOW, THE EXISTING, UH, ORIENTATION OF THE BUILDING TO BLOCK THAT DRIVE THROUGH TRAFFIC FROM CORBIN'S MILL.
I THINK, UH, I'M, I WAS GLAD TO HEAR YOU'RE AT LEAST POTENTIALLY THAT YOU THINK THAT THE APP APPLICANT WOULD BE POTENTIALLY OPEN TO CONVERTING THAT SHUTDOWN CURB CUT FROM BRIDGE PARK INTO SOME SORT OF FEATURE WALKWAY THAT MIGHT ALSO, UH, SUPPORT THAT TRANSITION.
UM, BUT I'M A, I'M A SLIGHT LEAN AGAINST THE VTM AS I SEE IT NOW BECAUSE I DO THINK IT'S ANTITHETICAL TOWARDS, I THINK IT MOVES AWAY FROM THE CITY'S VISION RATHER THAN TOWARDS IT.
MR. WE, MR. GARVIN JUST TOOK THE WORDS OUT OF MY MOUTH A LITTLE BIT.
UM, THE APPLICANT SAID THAT THIS USED TO BE, UM, A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION WITH A DRIVE THROUGH, AND WE'RE KIND OF GOING BACK THERE.
AND AGAIN, TO, TO DAN'S POINT, ENVISION DUBLIN AS A FORWARD THINKING DOCUMENT.
AND SO I WOULD HATE TO THINK THAT WE'RE GOING BACKWARDS, THAT WE NEED TO BE GOING FORWARDS.
UM, AND AGAIN, THE OTHER THING THAT ENVISION DUBLIN TALKS ABOUT KIND OF FLIPS THE PARADIGM THAT, THAT WE'RE PUTTING PEOPLE FIRST AND CARS BEHIND THAT.
AND SO A MORE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED PLACE IS WHAT ENVISION DUBLIN IS TRYING TO PROMOTE.
AND I THINK, UM, THE IDEA OF THE DRIVE THROUGH TO ME PUTS CARS FIRST BEFORE PEOPLE.
AND SO I DON'T SUPPORT THE, THE DRIVE THROUGH.
UM, AND I, AND IF IT'S FUNDAMENTAL TO THE BUSINESS PLAN OF THIS, THIS PROJECT, THEN, THEN THAT'S AN ISSUE.
I ALSO THINK, AGAIN, WE HAVEN'T, YOU HAVEN'T MET CODE YET, EVEN THOUGH IF THE CODE, AS GARY SAID IS THE CODE OUTTA DATE, WELL ALL WE CAN DO IS LOOK AT THE CODE NOW AND SAY, DOES THIS MEET CODE? AND RIGHT NOW I DON'T THINK IT'S FUNCTIONAL THE WAY IT'S LAID OUT, BUT I DON'T, AGAIN, I'M, I'M CHALLENGING THE IDEA THAT WE, WE WANT TO CREATE OR A NEW FACILITY THAT'S PUTTING CARS BEFORE PEOPLE.
AND SO, UM, I DON'T SUPPORT IT IN THAT RESPECT.
THANK YOU, MR. MIKE, MS. HARDER, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR BEING HERE AND US ALL THINKING THROUGH THIS.
AND IT MAKES US THINK ABOUT A LOT OF DIFFERENT, UM, THAT WHOLE AREA.
AND, UM, I AM NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THE DRIVE THROUGH.
UH, ONE REASON IS THAT WE QUICKLY, WHEN PEOPLE ARE GETTING OFF A 33, 2 70, WE'RE LIKE, LET'S SLOW 'EM DOWN AND LET'S GET IT TO 25 AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THAT WE DON'T GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET RID OF THEIR CAR.
AND THIS IS ANOTHER SPOT WHERE THAT GETS THAT CONFUSION GOING, WHICH TAKES US AWAY FROM ALL THESE PLANS THAT WE'VE MADE FOR THE FUTURE.
SO IN THAT REGARD, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SITE AND, AND TRYING TO WORK AROUND IT AND THINGS LIKE THAT, I'M NOT SURE THAT'S, THAT, THAT WOULD WORK AS WELL TOO.
[00:50:01]
COULD GO SOMEPLACE ELSE THAT, BUT THIS SPOT IS A BIT, UM, DIFFICULT, UH, WITH THE LAYOUT ON THAT.SO, UM, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU ALL BEING HERE.
UM, BUT I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.
I ALSO THINK THAT WE'RE ALSO COUNTING LIKE HOW MANY MINUTES IT TAKES US FROM ANOTHER PART OF, OF THE AREA TO GET TO THAT PART, TO GET OVER TO KROGER'S.
AND THAT WOULD JUST BE ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S JUST ANOTHER CONFLICT WITH THAT.
THANK YOU MS. HARD, MR. CHINNER.
UH, SO I THINK UNFORTUNATELY FOR THE APPLICANT, THERE'S A LOT OF IFS UH, ON THIS SITE.
AND I THINK JASON BROUGHT UP A A POINT WHERE IT'S VERY HARD TO LOOK AT THIS IN A, WHICH WE'RE DOING.
WE'RE LOOKING AT A VACUUM AND NOT, AND WE'RE ASKED TO NOT CONSIDER EVERYTHING ELSE AROUND, YOU KNOW, ENVISION DUBLIN AND WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN, YOU KNOW, DOWN THE ROAD.
SO THAT'S, THAT, THAT LEAVES SOME HESITATION FOR ME TO, UH, TO MOVE FORWARD.
THAT SAID, I
I WAS GOING THE DIFFERENT DIRECTION WITH FORWARD THINKING.
IF YOU CAN COME UP WITH A WAY TO MAKE THIS PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY AND KEEP THE DRIVE THROUGH IN THERE, THEN I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF IT.
I THINK THAT IT'S GONNA BE A CHALLENGE IN THIS AREA GOING FORWARD.
BUT THE DRIVE THROUGHS, I MEAN, LIKE IT OR NOT, DRIVE-THROUGHS AREN'T GOING AWAY.
UM, I THINK LIMITED DRIVE THROUGH, YOU KNOW, I TOTALLY, I THINK WE NEED TO OBVIOUSLY CHANGE THE STACKING REQUIREMENT.
'CAUSE TO YOUR POINT, WE DON'T NEED THAT MANY, BUT I THINK THERE'S STILL GOING TO BE, NEED, A NEED FOR DRIVE THROUGH IN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, BUT HOW CAN WE MIX THE TWO WITH PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, WHICH IS UTMOST CONCERN HERE, AND MAKING IT MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY, LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT SOME OF THOSE AMENITIES.
SO I THINK THERE'S A CHALLENGE THERE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER THAT.
AND IF YOU COME BACK WITH A, YOU KNOW, VERY, VERY PEDESTRIAN FORWARD AND HERE'S HOW THE, THE, UH, THE, THE DRIVE UPS GONNA WORK, THEN I'D BE, I'D BE, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'D DEFINITELY CONSIDER IT OR I WOULD DEFINITELY CONSIDER IT.
UH, I ECHO A LOT OF WHAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE SAID.
WE ARE A FORWARD THINKING CITY, AND SO IF WE, UH, LOOKED AT WHAT WAS VERSUS WHAT MIGHT BE THEN DUBLIN WOULD LOOK A LOT DIFFERENT.
AND WHILE ALL OF US LOVE OUR GREEN SPACE AND, AND, UH, DUBLIN HAS DONE A GREAT JOB AT PRESERVING THAT.
WE ALSO DON'T WANNA A CITY UP STRIP MALLS.
AND SO STRIP MALLS WERE VERY POPULAR IN THE EIGHTIES AND NINETIES, BUT WE FORWARD THINK, AND I ACTUALLY LEFT IT IN THE CAR, BUT THAT ENVISION DUBLIN LOVED DOCUMENT THAT IS, WELL ABOUT FIVE POUNDS AND TWO YEARS OF LABOR WOULD BE MOOT IF WE JUST SAID, WELL, WE USED TO HAVE, AND WE COULD GO BACK THERE.
UH, BUT LIKE MR. CHINOOK SAID, I THINK THAT THERE'S OPPORTUNITY.
UM, WE DO BANK A LOT, UH, QUITE A BIT DIFFERENTLY THAN WE DID ONCE UPON A TIME.
IT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY, IT COULD BE INSTEAD OF A DRIVE THROUGH, WE'RE NOT GETTING RID OF CARS.
WE, YOU KNOW, EVEN THE JETSONS HAD CARS OF, OF SOME TYPE.
UH, BUT A DRIVE UP AND A DRIVE THROUGH ARE VERY DIFFERENT ITEMS. AND SO A CANOP PO FOR A SINGLE, UM, YOU KNOW, VERY SHORT DWELL TIME, SOMETHING THAT ALLOWS THE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY, WE LIKE OUR REAR PARKING BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT SEAS OF PARKING LOTS, BUT THERE ARE, THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES AND DUBLIN IS NOTHING IF NOT PATIENT.
WE LOOK AT GOOD, BETTER, BEST FOR EVERY PROPOSAL, EVERY OPPORTUNITY THAT COMES ACROSS OUR DESKS.
AND I KNOW CITY COUNCIL DOES THE SAME, SO WE CAN DO GOOD, BUT WE CAN ALSO DO BETTER AND BEST.
AND WE LIKE TO CHALLENGE OURSELVES TO MAKE SOMETHING BEST.
UH, WE APPRECIATE WHEN NEW BUSINESSES WANT TO COME INTO OUR COMMUNITY.
THAT'S ALWAYS SOMETHING THAT DUBLIN AS A CITY DESIRES, BUT WE WANNA DO IT RIGHT.
AND I THINK THIS PARTICULAR, UH, CONDITIONAL USE HAD ITS CHALLENGES, CONDITIONAL USE.
THERE'S A HIGH BAR TO TRY TO JUSTIFY WHY ANY CONDITIONAL USE SHOULD BE ALLOWED WHEN IT'S NOT A PERMITTED USE.
AND I THINK WE'VE FALLEN SHORT.
SO FOR THAT REASON, I AM ALSO NOT SUPPORTIVE OF APPLICATION LOOKING TO MY COMMISSIONERS.
IS THERE ANY FINAL COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION? THIS IS AN INFORMAL REVIEW, SO WE DO NOT REQUIRE, UM, ANY ACTION THIS EVENING, BUT I DO THINK THAT THE COMMISSION WAS PRETTY CLEAR ON ITS, UH, CALLOUTS AND CHALLENGES FOR THIS APPLICATION.
SO WITH THAT, UM, NOT, NOT ASKING FOR A FINAL STATEMENT, BUT MAKING SURE THAT YOU HAVE CLARITY BECAUSE YOU HEAR SEVEN VOICES UP HERE AND SOMETIMES YOU'LL HEAR, UM, MAYBE MIXED LANGUAGE.
[00:55:01]
THAT TONIGHT, BUT IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU SEEK CLARITY ON FOR THIS EVENING? NO, THANK YOU.ALRIGHT, WITH THAT WE WILL MOVE ON
[Case #25-100CP]
TO OUR NEXT CASE, WHICH IS 25 DASH 100 CP LIVEWELL ANIMAL HOSPITAL CONCEPT PLAN.THIS IS A REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND NON BINDING FEEDBACK FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A VETERINARY CLINIC AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS.
THE APPROXIMATELY TWO ACRE SITE IS ZONED B-S-D-S-C-N BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT, SAWMILL CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 415.
APPROXIMATELY 415 FEET WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF WEST DUBLIN GRANDVILLE ROAD AND DUBLIN CENTER DRIVE.
AT THIS TIME, WE'D LIKE TO INVITE OUR APPLICANT FORWARD.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
UH, YOUR MICROPHONE IS CURRENTLY NOT ON NOW.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
MY NAME IS MATT MURPHY WITH TRAINER, UH, TRAINER INC, EXCUSE ME.
UH, 10 40 VERMONT STREET, UH, LAWRENCE, KANSAS.
UH, WE'RE HERE TONIGHT ON BEHALF OF, UH, MISSION, MISSION PET HEALTH, WHICH IS, UH, A RECENT MERGER WITH SOUTHERN VETERINARY PARTNERS, UH, LOOKING TO CONSTRUCT A NEW VETERINARY CLINIC, UH, HERE IN DUBLIN.
UH, THE SITE IS, UH, ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN WHAT WE WOULD NORMALLY USE, SO THAT'S WHY THE PROPOSED LAYOUT IS ACTUALLY, UH, SUBDIVIDING THIS WITH A CONDO PLAT FOR ANOTHER FUTURE USE TO THE EAST OF THE VET CLINIC.
UM, NOT ONLY MYSELF IS HERE, BUT ALSO UH, FROM CRAWFORD HOING.
UH, REESE MOORE IS HERE AS WELL, WHO CAN SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE TO THE BACKGROUND OF THAT AND THE VALIDITY AND THE ALLOWABILITY OF THAT BASED ON THE DEED, RE DEED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH ARE MENTIONED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
SO WE CAN COVER THAT AS WELL IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
BUT WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH SARAH AND STAFF, UH, BACK AND FORTH FOR MANY MONTHS NOW TO, TO THIS POINT.
UH, SO WE'RE HAPPY TO GET TO THIS, UH, SUBMITTAL AND HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION OR DO YOU WANNA TURN IT OVER TO SARAH? PERFECT, MS. HOLT, I'LL TURN THE TIME OVER TO YOU.
AND THANK YOU AGAIN, MADAM CHAIR AND GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING NON-BINDING FEEDBACK TO SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE PROPOSAL, LOOKING AT THE USE AND DENSITY, THE SITE LAYOUT AND THE OPEN SPACE FRAMEWORK.
AND NO DETERMINATION IS REQUIRED ON THIS CASE.
IT IS ZONED BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT, SAWMILL CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD, SURROUNDED ON ALL SIDES.
UH, BUT THE WEST BY THE SAME ZONE ON THE WEST IS OFFICE.
THE ROADWAY NETWORK INCLUDES THE FUTURE VILLAGE PARKWAY ON THE WEST SIDE, THE LOWE'S PRIVATE DRIVEWAY ON THE EAST BANKER, UH, TO THE NORTH IN THIS LOCATION IS PRIVATE AND THEN WEST DUBLIN GRANDVILLE, UH, STATE ROAD 1 61 IS TO THE SOUTH.
WE'RE GONNA VERY MUCH LIKE THE PREVIOUS UH, PRESENTATION.
WE'RE GONNA START WITH THE BROADEST CONCEPTS AND MOVE TO THE MOST SPECIFIC.
SO AS YOU KNOW, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS PART OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN AND FOR THIS SITE, UH, THE MIXED USE URBAN DESIGNATION IS GIVEN, WHICH ENVISIONS A HIGHLY WALKABLE ENVIRONMENT FILLED WITH GENERALLY RETAIL EATING AND DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS, THREE TO SIX STORIES AND HEIGHT, GROUND FLOOR ACTIVATION, AND PUBLIC OPEN SPACES.
LOOKING AT THE SPECIAL AREA PLAN, THIS UM, CONFIRMS THIS LOCATION AS THE EAST BRIDGE STREET AREA.
AND AGAIN, IT IS CONFIRMED AS A MAJOR WALKABLE DISTRICT, ACTIVE ALL THE TIME WITH A STRONG MIX OF USES.
WE'RE MOVING AWAY FROM THE EXISTING AUTO ORIENTED USES.
AND TO THAT END, THE FUTURE BUS RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE IN THE ORANGE DASH IS SHOWN ALONG 1 61 TO FURTHER SUPPORT WALKABILITY.
THE COMMISSION IS ASKED TO COMMENT ON THE SUITABILITY OF, UH, THE PROPOSAL COMPARED TO THIS VISION.
AND HERE THE SITE IS BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT, SAWMILL CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD, AND UH, THE SITE IS OVER LANE IN YELLOW.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE SEEING THIS VISION FOR ACTIVE WALKABLE DESTINATION PLUS A MIX OF USES.
[01:00:01]
NOTE, UH, IN THIS GRAPHIC THAT COMMERCIAL CENTER BUILDING TYPE IS ONLY PERMITTED ALONG SAWMILL AND PART OF BRIDGE PARK AVENUE.AND THIS IS THE RED SIDEWAYS T ON THIS MAP.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A WAIVER FOR THIS TYPE OF BUILDING.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE ARCHITECTURE AND THE LAYOUT SHORTLY, BUT WE WILL BE ASKING FOR YOU TO COMMENT ON THAT WAIVER.
NEXT WE'RE GONNA TAKE A LOOK AT THE STREET NETWORK, WHICH IS PART OF THE ZONING.
AND WEST DUBLIN GRANDVILLE IS A CORRIDOR CONNECTOR AND A PRINCIPAL FRONTAGE STREET.
FUTURE VILLAGE PARKWAY IS A DISTRICT CONNECTOR AND ALSO A PRINCIPAL FRONTAGE STREET.
AND AS YOU READ IN THE REPORT, THOSE STREETS REQUIRE SPECIAL ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATION.
BOTH THE BANKER ROAD OR BANKER DRIVE AND THE LOWE'S PRIVATE DRIVE ARE CATEGORIZED AS NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS AND GETTING TO THE LOT ITSELF.
THE ROW OF TREES IN THE BACK OF THESE PHOTOS IS THE FUTURE VILLAGE PARKWAY LOCATION, JUST FOR ORIENTATION PURPOSES.
SO TAKING A LOOK AT THE PROVIDED SITE PLAN, WEST DUBLIN GRANDVILLE IS AT THE BOTTOM AND AN A EP EASEMENT AND FUTURE VILLAGE PARKWAY ARE ON THE LEFT.
AND YOU CAN SEE THE OTHER ROADS LABELED.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF COMPETING REQUIREMENTS ON THIS SITE.
WE HAVE PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH THE CITY DOES NOT ENFORCE, BUT WE NEED TO BE AWARE OF.
WE HAVE THE BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS, WHICH ARE THE CODE, UM, NEVERTHELESS IN 2022, WE DID HAVE A SUCCESSFUL PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT THIS COMMISSION APPROVED, BUT THE PROJECT WAS NOT PURSUED.
THE APPLICANT IS SHOWING THE VET CLINIC HERE ON THE LOWER LEFT OF THE SITE AND WE ONLY REVIEWED THE VET CLINIC.
NO COMMENTS WERE MADE ABOUT THE FUTURE COFFEE SHOP AND DRIVE THROUGH, 'CAUSE THAT'S A, A WHOLE DIFFERENT DISCUSSION BASED ON DISCUSSIONS IN THE REPORT.
WE DO HAVE CONCERNS THAT THE SECOND BUILDING IS EVEN POSSIBLE, AND I'LL GO INTO THAT IN JUST A SECOND.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A CONDO PLAT AS, AS, UH, HE MENTIONED AND WE HAVE CONCERNS WITH THIS.
SO PRACTICALLY WATER SERVICE IS ENTIRELY PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF COLUMBUS.
WE DON'T HAVE PURVIEW OVER THAT.
THEY MAY OR MAY NOT SUPPORT TO WATER TAPS ON ONE LOT.
SO THAT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT.
THE DEED RESTRICTIONS ON THE LAST TIME THAT THIS WAS HERE, OUR UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS ALLOWED ONE BUILDING AND THAT STARTS TO SET UP SOME QUESTIONS IN OUR MIND.
IF THE SECOND PHASE IS NOT BUILT, FIRST OF ALL, THE REQUIRED FRONT PROPERTY LINE COVERAGE WILL NOT BE MET.
AND THE RESULTING LAYOUT IS GONNA BE VERY SUBURBAN IN STYLE AND NATURE COMPOUNDING THAT THE PARKING IS SHOWN AT GREATER THAN 150% OF THAT ALLOWED BY THE CODE.
SO THAT WOULD REQUIRE A FURTHER WAIVER, WHICH WE'RE ASKING YOU TO COMMENT ON, BUT THAT FURTHER EMPHASIZES THE SUBURBAN CONCEPT.
AND YOU KNOW, LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT WITH THE LAST CASE, KIND OF THE VEHICLES FIRST KIND OF A CONCEPT, THE PROPOSED OPEN SPACE IS SHOWN HERE, UH, RIGHT ALONG WEST DUBLIN GRANDVILLE ROAD.
AND THIS IS A GOOD LOCATION TO ADDRESS THAT ROAD, THE BUILDING ENTRY AND THE FUTURE BRT.
SO THE COMMISSION IS REQUESTED TO COMMENT ON THAT AS WELL.
AND THE APPLICANT IS AWARE THAT ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY IS NEEDED FOR THE BRT PROJECT ALONG WEST DUBLIN GRANDVILLE.
AND IN THIS LOCATION IT'S APPROXIMATELY 17 FEET.
SO WE HAD MENTIONED THAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER FOR USE OF A COMMERCIAL CENTER BUILDING IN THIS LOCATION.
AND TAKING A LITTLE BIT CLOSER LOOK AT THE ELEVATIONS, THE EAST IS THE MAIN ENTRY.
THIS FACES THE INTERIOR OF THE SITE.
THE SOUTH FACES WEST DUBLIN GRANDVILLE, AGAIN, A PRINCIPAL FRONTAGE STREET, WHICH AGAIN
[01:05:01]
HAS ITS OWN ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS.AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING, UH, OVER TIME TO, UH, MASSAGE THE ELEVATIONS.
AND GENERALLY WE DON'T SEE ENOUGH BUILDING ARTICULATION.
HAVING A BOTTOM MIDDLE, TOP TO THE BUILDING WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL AS WOULD WINDOW AND DOOR FENESTRATION DETAILING AND MORE EMPHASIS ON THE ENTRIES.
LIKEWISE FOR THE WEST AND NORTH ELEVATIONS, WE HAVE THE SAME COMMENTS.
UH, THESE ELEVATIONS WILL FACE FUTURE AND EXISTING ROADS.
AND REMEMBER THAT VILLAGE PARKWAY IS A PRINCIPAL FRONTAGE STREET.
SO WE'RE ALSO ASKING THE COMMISSION TO COMMENT ON DESIGN PERMITTED MATERIALS IN BRIDGE STREET INCLUDE BRICK, STONE AND GLASS.
SHOWN OUR CMU BRICK AND GLASS STAFF HAS CAUTIONED ABOUT THE BLACK AND WHITE COLOR SCHEME, PERHAPS SEEKING SOMETHING MORE TRADITIONAL.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE ASKING FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
SO LIKE WITH THE LAST PRESENTATION, WE'RE GONNA MOVE FROM THE BROAD TO THE SPECIFIC FOR THE USE AND LAYOUT.
DOES THE PROPOSAL MEET THE ENVISION DUBLIN AND FUTURE LAND USE AND CODE VISIONS? UH, DOES THE PROPOSAL MEET THE GOAL OF DENSIFICATION AND A PEDESTRIAN FOCUS? AND THEN WOULD THE BUILDING WAIVER MEET THE VISION OF THE CODE AND THE FUTURE LAND USE? AND LIKEWISE, WOULD AN INCREASE IN PARKING DO THE SAME? AND THEN YOUR THOUGHTS ON OPEN SPACE FRAMEWORK AND THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, AND THEN OF COURSE ANY OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO OFFER.
AND WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, WE'RE GONNA FOLLOW THE SAME ORDER THIS EVENING.
SO MR. ALEXANDER, SORRY, YOU GET PICKED ON AGAIN.
UH, CAN YOU BRING THAT ONE PHOTO UP? IT LOOKED LIKE IT HAD LIKE, WAS IT THE BUS LINE, THE FUTURE BUS LINE GOING THROUGH, CAN YOU BRING THAT BACK UP AGAIN PLEASE? THERE'S ONE THAT IT LOOKED LIKE THAT THE, WE WILL NEED THE ROAD, BUT IT WENT RIGHT INTO WHERE THE BUILDING, THE LAYOUT WOULD BE.
THAT ACTUALLY IS THE RIGHT OF WAY.
THE NEEDED ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY.
SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE THE NEEDED RIGHT OF WAY IS ALREADY IN THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT.
UH, AND I'M NOT NECESSARILY CERTAIN THE CONFERENCE CONVERSATIONS YOU HAVE WITH THE CITY, BUT THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF CRITICISM WITH NOT ONLY THE SPLITTING BUT THE TYPE OF BUILDING THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING.
I GUESS, WHAT'S YOUR RESPONSE TO THOSE CRITICISMS? WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THE ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY TAKE THAT JUST CAME UP IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS OR LAST WEEK, THAT'S A VERY NEW ITEM.
SO ACTUALLY THAT WOULD PUSH EVERYTHING BACK FURTHER AND THAT WOULD ACTUALLY SOLVE THE PARKING, UH, PROBLEM BECAUSE WE WOULD LOSE APPROXIMATELY FIVE SPACES OUTTA THIS OUT OF THIS LAYOUT AT LEAST, WHICH WOULD GET US TO A MAXIMUM 15, WHICH IS THE RIGHT AT THE 150%.
SO THAT WOULD BE, WE WOULD NOT BE OVER, WE MIGHT NOT BE PROPOSING ANYTHING OVER THAT INITIAL WAIVER OF 150% JUST DUE TO THE FACT OF THE NUMBER OF STAFF AND PATIENTS IN AND OUT.
IT WAS 15 STALLS COULD STILL BE, WOULD STILL BE SUFFICIENT.
SO THAT KIND OF TAKES CARE OF THAT.
UM, THE OTHER ISSUE IS THAT THE BUILDING TYPE WAS CHOSEN BASED UPON THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
'CAUSE THE DEED RESTRICTION IS FOR A, DOES LIMIT IT TO A ONE STORY BUILDING.
SO WITHIN THE CODE THAT COMMERCIAL BUILDING CENTER OR COMMERCIAL CENTER BUILDING TYPE IS THE MOST AMENABLE.
AND IF WE ADJUST TO ANOTHER BUILDING TYPE, IT WOULD JUST BE A DIFFERENT SERIES OF WAIVERS THAT WOULD BE REQUESTED.
SO IT'S KIND OF A ONE OR THE OTHER.
BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT BASED ON THE SPLITTING THOUGH, WELL THE SPLIT, THE SPLITTING IS ACTUALLY ALLOWED.
IT'S, THAT IS ALSO PART OF THE DEED RESTRICTION.
UM, SO THAT HAS TO, AND THAT HAS ACTUALLY HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED WITH LOWS.
'CAUSE THAT DEED RESTRICTION IS THAT THE LOT TO THE NORTH, THE LOWES LOT IS PART OF THAT DEED RESTRICTION.
SO THE CON IS ALLOWED BY, WELL, I'M NOT, NO, I GUESS I'M NOT SAYING I UNDERSTAND THAT THE, THE SPLITTING IS, IS PERMITTED MM-HMM
BUT THE, THE USE OF THAT SPACE WITH
[01:10:01]
REGARD TO THE CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT AND THE VISION DUBLIN PLAN DOESN'T NECESSARILY ACCOUNT FOR JUST A, A ONE SMALL BUILDING VET CLINIC.AND THAT'S THE SPECIFIC CRITICISM THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
SO THINK ABOUT THE WHOLE LOT TOGETHER.
HAS THERE BEEN CONSIDERATION FOR MAYBE A THREE-STORY BUILDING WITH THE VET CLINIC TAKING UP THE, THE MAIN FLOOR? WELL, THAT AGAIN GETS BACK TO THE DEED RESTRICTION OF ONE STORY.
HELP ME OUT, SARAH, GIVE AN IDEA ABOUT THIS DEED RESTRICTION.
SO FULL DISCLOSURE, I HAVE NOT SEEN IT, HAVE NOT READ IT.
BUT I AM UNDERSTANDING FROM THE 2022 APPLICATION THAT HEIGHT IS LIMITED TO 28 FEET AND IT'S A SINGLE BUILDING WITH A MAXIMUM OF 7,000 SQUARE FEET.
SO YEAH, I'M, YEAH, I'M, I'M KIND OF LOST.
I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE A COPY OF THE DEED RESTRICTION MR BOX.
CAN YOU CHIME IN TO, UH, DEED RESTRICTION WHEN THE CITY WOULD SEE THAT, HOW THAT WOULD AFFECT DELIBERATIONS, HOW THAT WOULD AFFECT LONG TERM, NOT JUST TONIGHT'S DELIBERATIONS, BUT LONG TERM OPPORTUNITIES ON THE SITE.
CAN YOU JUST KIND OF DO A HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW? SURE.
WELL, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PLAYING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY GENERALLY DON'T HAVE A ROLE IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE DEED RESTRICTION.
BUT IT IS AN EXPLANATION FOR SOME OF THE CHOICES THAT THE APPLICANT MAKES ON THE SITE.
UM, THIS DEED RESTRICTION, THE BENEFIT OF IT IS HELD BY LOWE'S.
SO ULTIMATELY IT'S UP TO LOWE'S TO TAKE ACTION TO ENFORCE IT.
UM, BUT IT, IT DOES PROVIDE AT LEAST CONTEXT FOR THE DIFFERENT DESIGN DECISIONS THAT APPLICANTS ARE MAKING.
WAS THAT HELPFUL? IT IS, BUT SO THEN THIS GOES TO MY NEXT QUESTION.
HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO CORRELATE THEN WHAT REPRESENTATION THE APPLICANT IS MAKING WITHOUT SEEING THE DEED RESTRICTION? BECAUSE THE CITY HASN'T SEEN IT AND THEIR STAFF REPORT IS BASED ON ESSENTIALLY THE NON-EXISTENCE OF THE DEED RESTRICTION.
I'M JUST NOT SURE HOW WE'RE SUPPOSED TO EVALUATE THIS.
THE, SO THE, THE CITY'S EVALUATION OF IT FROM A ZONING CODE PERSPECTIVE IS INDEPENDENT OF THE DEED RESTRICTION.
SO THEN WHAT, WHAT IS OUR EVALUATION OF IT? INDEPENDENT OF IT AS WELL? 'CAUSE THAT'S EASY.
I CAN SAY THIS IS NON-COMPLIANT WITH, UH, THE CITY'S ENVISION DUBLIN PLAN AND THE CURRENT ZONING SECTION.
AND THAT, THAT MAKES IT STRAIGHTFORWARD.
BUT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY FAIR TO THE APPLICANT BECAUSE THEY, THERE'S THIS ALLEGED DEED RESTRICTION THAT EXISTS, WHICH PROBABLY COULD BE FURTHER NEGOTIATED, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THAT.
THE, THE DEED RESTRICTION DOES EXIST.
I I HAVE LOOKED AT IT IN THE PAST WHEN THIS, UM, PROPERTY PREVIOUSLY HAS COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION.
AGAIN, I'M STILL NOT SURE WHAT OUR, OUR, OUR, OUR EVALUATION OF THIS IS.
HAVE YOU PROVIDED THE DE RESTRICTION TO THE CITY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS COULD BE, LIKE MR. BOGGS SAID GERMANE TO THE APPLICATION ITSELF? AND MAYBE I AMEND THAT.
HAVE YOU BEEN ASKED BY AND HAVE YOU PROVIDED, UM, REESE MOORE 6 6 4 OH, UH, RIVERSIDE DRIVE, SUITE 500, AMOUT CRAWFORD HO, UH, THE LISTING AGENT? I DO NOT KNOW IF THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH THIS MOST RECENT, UM, SUBMISSION, BUT I DO KNOW THAT IT WAS SUBMITTED YEARS AGO WHEN WE WERE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS TRYING TO DEVELOP THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.
AND MS. HOLT, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THAT'S YOUR 2022 SUBMISSION? CORRECT.
CAN, CAN I INTERJECT ONE THING? I GUESS MAYBE TO TRY TO GET TO MR. ER'S QUESTION.
SO WHEN THIS WAS REVIEWED PREVIOUSLY AND THERE WAS A UP TO, I THINK A, DEFINITELY A CONCEPT PLAN APPROVED FOR THIS.
SO THE COMMISSION WAS, AGAIN, KNOWING THE DEED RESTRICTION WAS A LIMITATION AGAIN, THAT IT'S NOT OUR PURVIEW, BUT PUSHING THE APPLICANT TO COME AS CLOSE TO WHAT COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE COULD LOOK LIKE.
SO THAT PREVIOUS EXAMPLE WAS A SINGLE BUILDING THAT TOOK UP AND MET THAT FRONTAGE REQUIREMENT.
THEY HAD SOME ADDITIONAL HEIGHT TO THE BUILDING.
AGAIN, IT WAS ONE, ONE STORY FUNCTIONALLY, BUT IT LOOKED A LITTLE BIT MORE LIKE A ONE AND A HALF.
SO THEY WERE AGAIN, TRYING TO MAKE THE, MAKE SURE THE APPLICANT AND THE APPLICATION WAS COMING AS CLOSE TO CODE AS POSSIBLE TO SORT OF TRY TO BALANCE THOSE PIECES, IF THAT HELPS.
HOW THAT WAS HANDLED PREVIOUSLY.
'CAUSE THERE WAS SOME INITIAL APPROVALS, NOT A FINAL
[01:15:01]
APPROVAL, BUT KIND OF TO THAT POINT, I MEAN, ANY, ANYTHING IN THE BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT, WHEN YOU SAY IT'S COMING AS CLOSE TO CODE AS POSSIBLE, EVERYTHING IN THE BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT IS GOING TO HAVE WAIVERS OF ONE KIND OR ANOTHER.SO, UM, I THINK OF THE, YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT THINK OF THE DEED RESTRICTION AS KIND OF ANALOGOUS TO, UH, PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS ON A PARTICULAR SITE THAT ARE GOING TO NECESSITATE WAIVERS.
THERE MIGHT BE INSTANCES WHERE KNOWING THAT THIS IS A, A LEGAL LIMITATION ON AN APPLICANT THAT A, A WAIVER MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE AT THE MARGINS.
HAVE YOU HAD ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH LOWE'S ABOUT RENEGOTIATING THE DEED RESTRICTION? MANY OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS? UM, HOW LOWE'S OPERATES IS WHATEVER SOMEONE HAS DONE BEFORE THEM, THEY'RE NEVER TO QUESTION IT.
I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
SO THIS WAS SOMEWHAT ADDRESSED AT THE END HERE, BUT I STILL NEED A LITTLE CLARIFICATION.
SO WHEN IT COMES TO SPLITTING THIS LOT AND PUTTING A SECOND BUILDING ON THERE, YOU'RE CONFIDENT YOU'D GET AN EXCEPTION TO THE DEED RESTRICTION IN THAT CASE? YEAH, SO WE DO HAVE APPROVAL OF THAT FROM LOWE'S, UM, AS OF JANUARY OF 2024.
AND THE REASON THAT THEY'RE ALLOWING THAT IS BECAUSE WE'RE PAYING THEM.
AND, UH, HAVE YOU, DID YOU, AND THE ONLY WE, WE REALLY WANTED TO DEVELOP A MULTIFAMILY BUILDING HERE, BUT THEY WERE OBVIOUSLY AGAINST THAT BECAUSE IT WOULD BLOCK TOO MUCH, UM, UM, OF THEIR SITE.
BUT, UM, YEAH, ESSENTIALLY THEY JUST PUT ALL THESE RESTRICTIONS ON THEIR PROPERTY WHEN THEY DEVELOP ALL THEIR OUTLAWS AND THEN THEY MAKE YOU COME TO THEM AND PAY 'EM TO GET RID OF THINGS, KIND OF HOW THEY OPERATE.
DID YOU, UM, DID YOU SEEK ANY EXCEPTION TO THE BUILDING HEIGHT WITH CLOSE? OH YEAH.
THEY, AND THEY DENIED IT? YES, WE DID.
UM, I KNOW WE'RE REVIEWING THE FIRST BUILDING HERE.
OBVIOUSLY WE'VE ESTABLISHED THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE IF WE'RE STUCK WITH ONE BUILDING THERE, IT WILL NOT MEET THE FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS.
WHAT BACKUP PLAN WOULD YOU HAVE IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THAT AND YOU WERE NOT ABLE TO GET A SECOND BUILDING THERE EITHER DUE TO THE WATER HICCUPS OR, I MEAN, WOULD YOU LOOK AT ADDING MORE FRONTAGE ON, I MEAN, I GUESS WHAT COULD YOU DO AT THAT POINT? WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE ESTABLISHED BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION OF THE VET CLINIC? CAN YOU LIKE, REPEAT THAT AGAIN? SURE.
SO PLEASE, I GUESS MY THOUGHT IS, I'M WONDERING IF WE COULD MAKE A CONDITION THAT THERE WOULD NEED TO BE A SECOND BUILDING TO MEET THAT FRONT INCH REQUIREMENT.
UM, BUT BEFORE EVEN EXPLORING THAT, I'D WANT TO KNOW, I GUESS THE TIMELINE.
WHERE WOULD YOU, WHERE WOULD YOU BE IF, IF YOU HAD A CONDITIONAL REQUIREMENT TO HAVE THE SECOND BUILDING APPROVED TO GO THROUGH, WOULD THAT FIT IN YOUR TIMELINE FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR THE VET CLINIC, OR WOULD THAT BE FEASIBLE? YES, IT WOULD.
UM, AND THEN THE OTHER CLARIFICATION, I THINK I, I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY THAT YOU WOULD ACTUALLY BE OKAY WITH REDUCING THE PARKING.
THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES ISN'T SOMETHING THAT, THAT IS REQUESTED BY THAT IF IT, IF IT INTERFERES WITH THIS RIGHT AWAY, YOU SCOOT BACK AND REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES THAT'D BE AMENABLE OR YOU WOULD STILL NEED NO, THE 15 TO ALSO BE SUFFICIENT AT THIS POINT.
I THINK ANY REDUCTION BEYOND THAT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT, UH, SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE, COULD BE A HINDRANCE.
BUT THE 17 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY TAKE BASICALLY SOLVES THAT PROBLEM.
AND, UM, AGAIN, I WANT TO FOCUS ON WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE, BUT JUST BECAUSE OF THE IMPLICATIONS OF HOW DO YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU HEARD OUR DISCUSSION ON THE DRIVE THROUGH IN WHAT, FROM A PEDESTRIAN PEDESTRIAN ORIENTATION STANDPOINT IS VERY SIMILAR IN THE LAST CASE, UM, BROADLY, UH, OPPOSED TO, TO A DRIVE THROUGH IN THAT SCENARIO.
UH, WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS RESPECTIVE TO FUTURE COFFEE SHOP? ARE THERE OTHER POTENTIAL TENANTS YOU WOULD CONSIDER IN LIGHT OF THAT? OR DO YOU THINK THAT THAT'S YEAH, SO WE, UH, THE ORIGINAL PLAN WAS ACTUALLY TO PUT CARIBOU COFFEE HERE.
UM, CRAWFORD HORN AND SOME OTHERS ARE FRANCHISEES.
[01:20:01]
THEY'RE ON HOLD ALL OVER THE COUNTRY, SO THAT'S NOT WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN.AT LEAST NOT IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE.
UM, BUT YEAH, WE DO SEE A DRIVE THROUGH GOING HERE EVENTUALLY.
UM, WHEN WE ORIGINALLY CAME THROUGH A COUPLE YEARS AGO, THAT WAS KIND OF PART OF OUR, UM, CONCEPTUAL, UM, APPROVAL WAS, YOU KNOW, GIFTING LAND TO THE CITY FOR THE FUTURE VILLAGE PARKWAY IN ORDER TO, UM, GET A DRIVE THROUGH.
SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD OBVIOUSLY COME BACK AND HAVE TO GET APPROVED WITH THIS NEW PLAN, BUT THAT WOULD BE OUR GOAL.
MR. WE, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WAS IN THE PRESENTATION OR NOT, BUT COULD YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE ON THE FIRST FLOOR THAT ARE ON THE GROUND FLOOR OF THE BUILDING? IT'S ONE FLOOR, BUT, AND DO WE HAVE THAT GRAPHIC THAT'S IN OUR PACKET? IT IS IN YOUR PACKET, NOT IN THE PRESENTATION, BUT COULD YOU JUST TALK ABOUT THE USES IN THE BUILDING THAT ARE FACING 1 61? UM, WELL THE ENTIRE BUILDING IS A VET CLINIC.
SO IT'S BASICALLY AS YOU WALK IN FROM THE EAST, YOU WALK INTO GENERAL RECEPTION.
UM, AND THEN IT'S, THERE'S A SERIES OF EXAM ROOMS, OFFICES, AND THEN BACK OF HOUSE FOR, UH, OTHER TYPES OF EXAMS AND SHOTS.
UH, THERE IS A LITTLE, THERE IS A SURGERY CENTER AS WELL, AND THEN BACK OF HOUSE FEATURES SUCH AS SERVICE AND DELIVERIES.
SO IT'S, IT'S NOT REALLY ACTIVITIES THAT ARE HAVING ANY KIND OF, UH, INTERFACE WITH THE SIDEWALK OUTSIDE OR ACTIVITIES ALONG THE STREET.
IT'S BASICALLY AN INTERNAL FOCUS BUILDING, IS THAT CORRECT? IT IS, BUT BUT ONCE YOU ENTER IT FROM THE EAST SIDE, YES.
BUT THAT'S WHY WE'VE ACTUALLY SHIFTED THE ENTRANCE TO THE, THE EAST SIDE WHERE IT FACES, WHERE IT FACES DUBLIN, GRANVILLE ROAD.
IT WAS INITIALLY, BACK WHEN WE STARTED THESE CONVERSATIONS MONTHS AGO WITH SARAH, IT WAS ACTUALLY FACING THE PARKING LOT AS MORE OF A VEHICULAR FOCUS.
BUT WE HAVE FLIPPED SINCE, FLIPPED THAT AND MADE IT MORE PEDESTRIAN FOCUSED.
BUT IT'S A SINGLE USE BUILDING.
IT'S ONLY SO THERE'S NOT MULTIPLE TENANTS IN IT.
AND, AND THE ELEVATION SHOWS A LOT OF GLASS AND ALONG 1 61.
BUT IT, AND IT'S FACING TREATMENT AREAS AND DOCTOR'S OFFICE, LAB RESTROOM, IS IT, DOES THAT LIGHT EFFECT, I MEAN, TYPICALLY THOSE TYPES OF SPACES ARE JUST BLANK SPACES.
THERE'S NO LIGHT OR ANYTHING IN THEM.
IS THAT WE'VE HAD TO REWORK IT BASED ON THE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS OF THE CODE.
AND THERE'S ONE DOOR THOUGH ON THE 1 61 SIDE, BUT IT GOES INTO THE LAB IS WHAT, WHAT WOULD BE THE PURPOSE OF THAT DOOR? IS IT, IT, UH, SOMETIMES FOR THOSE LAB EGRESSES, IT COULD BE FOR ADDITIONAL DELIVERIES THAT DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE CLINIC ITSELF.
AND, AND WHERE WOULD THE DELIVERIES COME FROM? THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME FROM THE BACKSIDE MOST LIKELY AND THEN WALK AROUND THE BUILDING TO GET INTO THE LAB DIRECT.
MS. HERTER, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
UM, ONE QUESTION FOR THE CITY.
ARE THERE ANY NOISE RESTRICTIONS IN THAT AREA THAT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT IN THIS SITUATION? OR IT, IT JUST IN GENERAL NOISE RESTRICTIONS? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
UM, AND I GUESS ON THAT REGARD TOO, YOU HAVE OTHER PLACES YOU'VE DONE THIS, UM, BEFORE.
AND MY QUESTION IS, HOW HAVE YOU MAINTAINED, UM, THE NOISE LEVELS THAT MAY COME? 'CAUSE IT'S A 24 7 PLACE, YOU HAVE BOARDING AND SO FORTH LIKE THAT.
YOU DON'T HAVE ANY BOARDING? 'CAUSE I THOUGHT I NO MA'AM.
NO, THERE, THERE IS FOR ANIMALS THAT COME IN FOR SURGERY, THERE, THERE HAS TO BE PLACES FOR THEM TO BE MONITORED AND, AND DURING THE DAY, BUT THERE'S NOT, THERE'S NOT BOARDING HERE, TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
SO NO DOGS ARE THERE OR NO ANIMALS, I SHOULD SAY ACCEPTED GENERALLY SPEAKING, YES.
THIS, THIS IS NOT A BOARDING FACILITY.
AND THEN, UM, IS THERE A PLACE THAT DOGS WOULD BE WALKING OR, OR YOU NEED TO TAKE THEM OUTSIDE OR THINGS OF THAT SORT? IS THERE AN AREA THAT YOU NEED TO SET ASIDE FOR THAT? UM, IN SOME LOCATIONS WE HAVE THOSE, BUT NOT AT ALL.
IT'S USUALLY VERY SITE SPECIFIC.
THE WINDOWS AS WELL TOO, IT SEEMS LIKE FROM FLOOR TO CEILING, KIND OF, YOU KNOW, WINDOWS AND IN CERTAIN AREAS INSIDE, IF IT'S LIKE A SURGICAL PART, YOU KNOW, AN OR AREA, ARE THEY TINTED OR WHAT IS YOUR, OR WILL YOU BE PUTTING AWNINGS OR ANYTHING OF THAT SORT? THEY WOULD BE EITHER TINTED OR THEY COULD BE SPAND GLASS, SO IT WOULD BE NON VIEW GLASS.
AND JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'VE GOT 'EM ALL.
[01:25:01]
YOU.THANK YOU MS. HER, MR. CHINOOK.
THE, UH, FUTURE VILLAGE PARKWAY HAS, IT'S LABELED HERE ON THE SITE PLAN.
IS THAT WHERE IT'S GONNA BE OR IS IT GONNA BE WHERE THE CURB CUTS ARE ON 1 61? IS IT IT IS NOT THE, THE FUTURE, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN, HOW IT'S LABELED? IS IT, IS IT THAT TIGHT TO THE BUILDING OR? RIGHT.
THAT IS GENERALLY WHERE IT IS GOING TO BE.
SO THE, THE CURB CUTS AS EXIST TODAY ARE, ARE GOING, AREN'T ACCURATE THEN, 'CAUSE IT'S GONNA BE THAT TIGHT.
AND THEN, UM, I, THAT YELLOW LINE I ASSUME IS A, A SIDEWALK PATH.
AND WE'RE CONSIDERING THAT KIND OF THE GREEN SPACE, THAT AREA.
IT IS INSIDE THAT GREEN SORT OF, UH, SCROLLED AREA.
YES, THAT WOULD BE INTENDED PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION.
BECAUSE CURRENTLY NO SIDEWALKS THERE AT, AT THE MOMENT.
THAT'S PART OF THE GREEN SPACE CALCULATION.
AND THEN THE, UM, THE, THE, THE, I GUESS THE, THE LAST QUESTION FOR STAFF, THE DRIVE THROUGH USE, I MEAN, I KNOW WE HAVE A WHOLE DEED CONVERSATION, BUT THE DRIVE THROUGH USE IS AN ACCEPTABLE USE THAT WOULD NEED A CONDITIONAL USE AS WELL.
AND AGAIN, WE DIDN'T LOOK AT THAT.
WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE VET CLINIC TONIGHT.
BUT AGAIN, IT'S HARD TO LOOK AT THESE PROJECTS IN A, IN A VACUUM.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A, I A FEEL FOR WHAT THE APPLICANT IS TRYING TO SUGGEST ON THE OVERALL SITE DEVELOPMENT.
SO THE DRIVE THROUGH WOULD NEED A WAIVER.
IT WOULD NEED A CONDITIONAL USE OR, I'M SORRY.
YOU MENTIONED, UH, BEFORE THAT YOU NEEDED TO REWORK THE BUILDING TO MEET THE CITY COAT.
SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THE, FROM THE STANDARD PROTOTYPE THAT THEY HAVE USED ACROSS IN OTHER LOCATIONS.
CAN YOU TELL ME THE ELEMENTS THAT YOU WERE IN CONFLICT WITH THE CODE AND HOW YOU ADDRESSED THOSE? UM, A LOT OF IT IS THE AMOUNT OF GLAZING, THE CODE DOES REQUIRE A HIGH AMOUNT OF GLAZING PER FRONTAGE, SO THAT WAS SIGNIFICANTLY ADDITIONAL GLAZING ADDED.
WE ALSO HAD TO TREAT THE BUILDING FOR, UH, TWO PRINCIPAL FRONTAGES, WHICH IS NOT, NOT ONLY DO DUBLIN GRANVILLE ROAD, BUT ALSO THE FUTURE VILLAGE PARKWAY.
SO WE HAD TO ADDRESS BOTH OF THOSE AS PRINCIPAL FRONTAGES.
UM, SOME OF THE OTHER CHANGES WERE TRYING TO, AGAIN, UH, AS SARAH MENTIONED, TRYING TO, TO BRING UP THE BUILDING HEIGHT AND TRY TO GIVE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A ONE, ONE AND A HALF STORY HEIGHT.
GETTING RID OF SOME MORE TRADITIONALLY PITCHED ROOFS, UH, BUILDING UP HIGHER PARAPETS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
UM, THE ENTIRE ENTRY WAS COMPLETELY REWORKED TO BE FROM FACING THE PARKING LOT, TO BE MORE PEDESTRIAN FACING TOWARD THE STREET AND INTERACT WITH THE, UM, KIND OF THE PEDESTRIAN PLAZA GATHERING SPACE, THE GREEN SPACE THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'RE SHOWING IN BETWEEN THE VET CLINIC AND THE FUTURE COFFEE SHOP, UM, TO KIND OF MAKE THAT, AGAIN, MORE OF A DESTINATION AND A POINT OF ARRIVAL, UH, SO THAT IT COULD BE USED BY, BY PEOPLE WALKING UP AND DOWN THE STREET AS WELL AS THOSE, UH, PATRONS COMING TO THOSE TWO SITES.
SO YOU MENTIONED A COUPLE OF ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS, SOME, UH, ACTUAL ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS.
THE THREE TO SIX STORY OBVIOUSLY IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE CURRENT PROPOSED AND THEN PEDESTRIAN FRIEND, UM, PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED AND GROUND FLOOR ACTIVATION.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF GROUND FLOOR ACTIVATION AS IT'S REPEATED IN THE CODE CONSISTENTLY AND HOW YOUR APPLICATION ENGAGES WITH GROUND FLOOR APP ACTIVATION? WELL, THIS IS A SINGLE TENANT BUILDING VERSUS MULTI-TENANT.
SO WE TRIED TO, IN ORDER TO DO THAT, TRYING TO BRING THE PEDESTRIAN SCALE DOWN BY HAVING CANOPIES, UH, A LITTLE BIT MORE WINDOWS, UH, STILL HAVING TO HAVE SOME DOORS THAT WOULD FACE OUT TO THAT, TO, UH, FOR OUTSIDE ACTIVATION IN TERMS OF USE IN, INTO THE FACILITY.
UH, AND THAT'S THE PRIMARY, PRIMARY WAYS THAT WE DID THAT, ESPECIALLY ALONG THE PRINCIPAL FRONTAGE OF DUBLIN GRANVILLE ROAD.
IT WAS A LITTLE BIT TRICKIER ON THE BACKSIDE, THE WEST FACING SIDE, BECAUSE THAT IS THE TRADITIONAL BACK OF HOUSE.
SO IT'S MOSTLY SERVICE ORIENTED AREAS BACK THERE.
SO TRYING TO ADD ADDITIONAL GLAZING IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT.
SO MOST OF THAT WOULD BE, HAVE TO BE SPAN OR NON VIEW.
UM, I GUESS ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO THE SAME, OTHER THAN THE ENTRANCE ITSELF FOR THAT DESTINATION, I NEED AN APPOINTMENT AT THE CLINIC FOR A PET.
HOW DOES IT GROUND FLOOR ACTIVATE FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC SPHERE AND NOT THE, JUST
[01:30:01]
THE PERSON WHO'S WALKING IN THE ENTRANCE THAT HAPPENS TO BE ALONG ONE OF THOSE PRINCIPAL FRONTAGES? WELL, YOU'RE WALKING, IF YOU WERE WALKING, IF YOU WERE COMING UP TO THE CLINIC ALONG GRANVILLE ROAD, YOU'D BE ALONG THE SIDEWALK AND YOU WOULD THEN BE, IT DIRECTS YOU INTO THE FACILITY ONTO THE EAST.ANY FINAL QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? THANK YOU BOTH.
AT THIS TIME, WE'D LIKE TO, UH, OFFER OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK.
IF THERE'S ANYONE HERE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK CONCERNING THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION, WE WOULD INVITE YOU TO COME FORWARD.
HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY ADDITIONAL, ALRIGHT, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, AND WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE IN THE SAME ORDER.
MR. ALEXANDER, I APPRECIATE YOUR PRESENTATION.
I LIKE WHAT YOU'RE ATTEMPTING TO DO ON THE ELEVATIONS, ALTHOUGH IT'S PROBABLY INAPPROPRIATE HERE, BUT I, I COULDN'T SUPPORT THIS PROPOSAL.
UM, IT IS SUCH A DEPARTURE FROM OUR CODE, AND IT IS ILLOGICAL ON A, ON A STREET LIKE THIS, THIS IS A GATEWAY STREET TO OUR COMMUNITY.
SO THE, AND IT'S 45 DEGREES, SO THE BUILDING SHOULD BE LARGE SCALE, BIG MASS, SO YOU CAN MAKE A 28 FOOT WALL AND STILL HAVE ONE STORY.
SO I, I JUST THINK THERE'S NOTHING ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL.
I THINK TWO, TWO BUILDINGS, IT'S TOO SMALL ON THERE.
UM, THE BUILDING SHOULD BE MASSIVE, LIKE THE BUILDING WE APPROVED, UH, A LITTLE BIT FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD.
THOSE ARE THE KIND OF BUILDINGS THAT OUR CODE IS CALLING FOR AND ARE MOST APPROPRIATE HERE.
ANYTHING, UH, I CALLED ON YOU BEFORE WE DISPLAYED THE DISCUSSION QUESTION.
SO IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? I I, I, I DON'T SUPPORT ANYTHING THERE.
UNDERSTANDING THAT THE DEED IS IN PLACE, IT'S OBVIOUSLY UNFORTUNATE IN THIS SITUATION.
AGAIN, WE'RE NOT PRIVY TO THOSE DISCUSSIONS WITH LOWE'S ABOUT WHAT COULD OR COULD NOT BE DONE RELATIVE TO RENEGOTIATING THOSE COMPONENTS.
IT SOUNDS LIKE SOME ACTIVITY IS ALREADY OCCURRED ON THAT.
I, THE, THE USE IN AND OF ITSELF OF, OF, UH, YOU KNOW, AN ANIMA HOSPITAL, I, I'M NOT NECESSARILY AGAINST, BUT I THINK ALONG WITH WHAT GARY SAID, THERE COULD BE JUST SOMETHING BETTER DESIGN THAT WOULD TAKE UP THE FULL SIDE OF, OF DUBLIN, DUBLIN GRANDVILLE THERE TO, TO MEET SOME OF THOSE CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ISSUES WITH RELATIVE TO THE DEED, RE THE, THE DEED RESTRICTION.
I THINK ALSO ALLOWING US AN URBAN, NOT PUTTING US IN POSITION ON A CONTINGENCY OF ANOTHER BUILDING IS, IS DIFFICULT FOR US TO ACCEPT AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
UM, YOU KNOW, WITH THAT SAID, AGAIN, I, I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S CERTAINLY AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO, TO DO SOMETHING WITHIN THOSE, THOSE RESTRICTIONS, BUT THIS SEPARATE BUILDING AND THEN THE HOPE FOR ANOTHER COMPONENT IS PROBABLY NOT IT.
I WILL ECHO JASON'S POINT ON THE, THE SECOND BUILDING.
AS YOU NOTED FROM MY QUESTIONS, I, I THINK WE NEED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THAT SECOND BUILDING.
UM, JUST BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, PERSONALLY, I HAVE A HARD TIME SUPPORTING A DRIVE THROUGH THERE.
I THINK WE'VE GOT A LOT OF OPEN QUESTIONS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN RESOLVED.
UH, OBVIOUSLY IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT THE DEED RESTRICTION, I WOULD AGREE, IS IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH THE, UM, I MEAN WITH THE, UH, VISION FOR THAT AREA.
SO, UM, I'D PROBABLY BE MORE AMENABLE THAN WE'VE HEARD SO FAR FROM JASON AND GARY, BUT I HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THE ACTIVATION.
I THINK A LOT MORE COULD BE DONE ON THE 1 61 SIDE TO, UH, IMPROVE WALKABILITY.
I NEED TO SEE A LOT IN, IN THAT DIRECTION.
UM, AND MAYBE SOMETHING, UH, CREATIVE WITH THE MASSING TO GIVE A LARGER IMPRESSION IF, IF I COULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF IT.
UM, BUT REALLY MY PROBLEM IS NOT KNOWING ENOUGH ABOUT THAT SECOND PHASE OF IT, BECAUSE I, I THINK THE WORST CASE SCENARIO IS YOU'RE LEFT WITH THAT OPEN SPACE.
IT CAN'T BE BUILT ON DUE TO DEED RESTRICTIONS OR THE WATER HOOKUP OR FOR WHATEVER REASON.
AND WE'RE LEFT WITH SOMETHING THAT WE'VE APPROVED THAT EVEN, YOU KNOW, MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS LESS THAN IT COULD, GIVEN ALL THE RESTRICTIONS AROUND IT.
SO I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF CHALLENGES.
UM, SO GOING THROUGH PROPOSED USE AND LAYOUT SOMEWHAT, UM, I THINK THE SECOND ONE'S MADE, BEEN MADE IRRELEVANT.
I'M NOT, UH, SUPPORTIVE OF THAT PARKING WAIVER, BUT, UM, PROPOSED OPEN SPACE FRAMEWORK, WE'LL HAVE TO SEE MORE
[01:35:01]
AROUND THAT IF YOU GET BOTH BUILDINGS.I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF ACTIVATING THE SPACE BETWEEN 'EM.
UM, ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, I'M NOT VERY SUPPORTIVE OF AT THIS POINT.
I KNOW YOU'VE GOT, UH, A, A CHAIN CLIENT THAT PROBABLY WANTS TO MATCH THEIR AESTHETIC TO A DEGREE, BUT, UH, THIS LOCATION AND THE, AND THE VISION WE HAVE FOR THIS LOCATION IS PROBABLY VERY DIFFERENT THAN A LOT OF THEIR LOCATIONS AS WELL.
SO, UM, I THINK IT'S NOT INSURMOUNTABLE, BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF CHALLENGES, UH, FOR ME TO SUPPORT FUTURE PRO OF THE, OF THE PROJECT.
I'M, I'M GONNA GO BACK TO WHAT SOME OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE ALREADY SAID, BUT YOU KNOW, THIS STREET IS A GATEWAY STREET IN THE CITY.
GOING THROUGH THE VISION DUBLIN, WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT THE DENSITY ALONG THIS CORRIDOR AND THE ACTIVATION OF THE USES.
I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.
AND THE FACT THAT IT'S NOW GONNA BECOME A MAJOR TRANS TRANSIT CORRIDOR WITH BRT, THAT, UM, I DON'T THINK THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE USE THAT ACHIEVES THE GOALS OF ENVISION DUBLIN SHOULD BE ACTIVATED GROUND FLOOR USES.
I KNOW IT'S ONE STORY, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING THAT REALLY ACTIVATES THE STREET AND, AND LIVENS IT.
AND I DON'T THINK THIS USE DOES THAT.
AND EVEN TO THE POINT WHERE THE APPLICANT SAID THAT THEY'VE HAD TO WORK VERY HARD TO FIT THEIR BUILDING, THEIR TYPICAL BUILDING INTO THE CODE TELLS ME IT'S JUST NOT A RIGHT FIT FOR THIS SITE.
AND SO THAT, OBVIOUSLY, THAT NEGATES ALL THE REST OF THE QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU, MR. WAYNE, MS. HARDER, WE DO APPRECIATE YOU COMING, UM, AND GIVING US THIS THOUGHT.
UH, I AM ALSO NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS.
I THINK THE TIME THAT WAS SPENT ON ENVISION DUBLIN, UM, AND NOT IN FAVOR OF THE WAIVERS, UH, IF IT NEEDED TO BE CLOSER TO SAWMILL ROAD, BRING IT THAT DIRECTION, BUT WHERE IT IS AS THE GATEWAY WE'RE SPEAKING OF IS NOT GOING TO BE, UM, THE, THE, THE GOOD LOCATION FOR IT.
AND ALSO, I, I JUST DON'T FEEL LIKE IT HITS THE PEDESTRIAN, UH, WALKABILITY.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, THE QUESTION IS, IS, IS WATER.
SO, UM, IF, IF YOU COME BACK, I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S THE TELLING TALE, UH, WITH THE CITY OF COLUMBUS AND GETTING, GETTING THAT.
BUT THANK YOU AND MR. MOFF, AGAIN, THANK YOU.
YEAH, THANK YOU FOR, FOR COMING THE PRESENTATION.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT GONNA SAY ANYTHING DIFFERENT.
I, I, I AGREE WITH WHAT'S, WHAT'S BEEN SAID.
UM, I, I WILL, WE WERE, WE TALKED ABOUT ACTIVATION, AND I THINK THE, THE USE IS THE, IS THE TRICK HERE.
AND I THINK WE NEED TO FIND COMPLIMENTARY USES TO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IN THIS AREA.
AND I'M NOT SURE THAT THIS IS, THAT WHAT I WOULD DEEM DEEM A COMPLIMENTARY USE TO THE AREA.
AND THE ONLY OTHER THING I'LL ADD IS THE IMPORTANCE, I THINK OF CON CONSIDERATION OF THE, UM, FUTURE PARKWAY.
I MENTIONED IT EARLIER BEING SHOWN BECAUSE IT'S, IT, IT DOES IMPACT THE SITE.
SO WHENEVER WE COME BACK AND IF WE, WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, IF YOU COME BACK WITH ANOTHER SITE PLAN, I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE BECAUSE IT'S, IT, IT REALLY AFFECTS THE SITE AND IT ALSO AFFECTS THE ARCHITECTURE.
YOU'VE GOT A, YOU'VE GOT A SITUATION WHERE YOU'VE GOT FOUR SIDED ARCHITECTURE.
THE, I MEAN, IT'S, THIS IS SUCH A VISIBLE, YOU KNOW, WE MENTIONED GATEWAY.
UM, WE CAN'T FORGET ALL FOUR SIDES OF THIS BUILDING, ESPECIALLY THE 1 61, I THINK THE ARCHITECTURE HAS PROPOSED, DOESN'T REALLY CONSIDER HOW THE SIGNIFICANCE OF ALL FOUR SIDES OF, OF THE BUILDING.
SO WHATEVER WE, YOU KNOW, IF THIS COMES BACK, UM, WITH THE DIFFERENT USE OR WHATNOT, I THINK THOSE ARE JUST SOME THINGS I, I THINK WE'RE GONNA NEED TO SEE TO, UH, TO MAKE SOME DETERMINATIONS.
UH, I ECHO I HAD DIFFICULTIES WRITTEN DOWN, SO JUST LIKE MY QUESTIONS ALLUDED TO IT, THIS HAS BEEN CHALLENGING, AND IT'S NOT CHALLENGING BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT THIS TYPE OF USE IN THE CITY OF DUBLIN.
IT'S THAT IT DOESN'T FIT HERE.
SO YOU LISTED, YOU KNOW, THE ENTRANCES, THE HEIGHTS, THE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY, THE PARKING, THE OPEN SPACE, THE GROUND FLOOR ACTIVATION.
WELL, THAT'S BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO PUT SOMETHING THAT, THAT DOESN'T REALLY FIT IN A ZONE.
THE VISION OF WHERE DUBLIN SEES THIS ZONE, THEY JUST ARE MISMATCHED.
THERE ARE PLENTY OF PLACES IN DUBLIN THAT YOUR NORMAL, WHILE YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET AWAY, LIKE MR. CHINOOK ALLUDED TO, YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET AWAY FROM FORESIGHTED ARCHITECTURE IN DUBLIN.
WE LIKE OUR BUILDINGS TO LOOK LIKE WE WANT THE REST OF DUBLIN TO LOOK LIKE WE BUILT OVER THE PREVIOUS DECADES.
UM, THE DIFFICULTIES COME FROM A MISMATCH.
AND SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT OTHER OPPORTUNITIES IN THE CITY OF DUBLIN.
WHILE SOMETIMES YOU'RE GOING TO WALK YOUR PET INTO THE FRONT DOOR OF A LOCATION, A LOT OF THE TIMES IT'S GOING TO BE A DRIVE PARKING, AND THAT'S THE CONFLICT.
WHILE SOMETIMES YOU CAN STRETCH A ONE STORY BUILDING INTO A LITTLE BIT HIGHER, YOU'RE NOT GONNA MAKE IT THREE TO SIX.
AND SO IT'S JUST A MISMATCH WITH
[01:40:01]
WHAT WE, AS THE CITY OF DUBLIN ARE ENVISIONING IN THIS LOCATION.SO AGAIN, WE, WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT OTHER OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THE CITY OF DUBLIN, BUT I AM ALSO, UM, NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS PARTICULAR USE IN THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION.
THIS ALSO IS AN INFORMAL REVIEW.
SO, UH, LOOKING TO THE APPLICANT TO SEE IF THERE IS ANY CLARITY NEEDED FROM THIS EVENING.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS LIKE SEVEN VOICES, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR A LOT OF DEVIATION FROM THE MESSAGE THIS EVENING.
WE WILL THEN PROCEED WITH OUR NEXT TWO CASES.
UH, THESE TWO CASES PERTAIN RE REQUEST A RECESS IN BETWEEN, AH, YES, WE WILL ADJOURN.
WE WILL RECONVENE, UM, LET'S SAY, UH, 22 AFTER THE HOUR.
THAT'S SEVEN MINUTES FROM NOW.
WE DO INVITE YOU TO GET UP AND STRETCH YOUR LEGS.
IT'S BEEN A LITTLE BIT THIS EVENING.
WE, ALRIGHT, WELCOME BACK EVERYONE.
[Case #24-128PP & Case #25-026FP]
CONTINUE ON WITH THE TWO, THE TWO NEXT CASES THAT WILL BE HEARD TOGETHER BECAUSE THEY PERTAIN TO THE SAME PROPERTY.UH, SEPARATE ACTIONS WILL BE TAKEN FOR EACH OF THESE APPLICATIONS.
THESE ARE CASES 24 DASH 1 28 PP AND 25 DASH 0 26 FP.
UH, THIS IS COURT PRELIMINARY PLAT AND FINAL PLAT, A REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND FINAL PLAT FOR SEVEN.
FOR A SEVEN LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.
THE APPROXIMATELY 12.8 ACRE SITE IS ZONED R ONE, RESTRICTED SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, AND IS LOCATED AT 71 92 DUBLIN ROAD.
THIS TIME WE'D LIKE TO INVITE THE APPLICANT FORWARD.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND WE WILL TURN TIME OVER TO YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
UH, BEN SCHILLING 25 50 CORPORATE EXCHANGE DRIVE.
UM, WANT TO, UH, UH, THANK THE COMMISSION AND FOR, UH, THANK STAFF FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK HERE AND FOR, UM, ALL THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE GOTTEN BOTH FROM, UH, STAFF THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS AND, UM, FROM YOU ALL BACK IN APRIL.
UM, SINCE THAT TIME, OUR TEAM HAS WORKED CLOSELY WITH STAFF, UM, TO, UH, ADDRESS THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED FROM YOU ALL AND FROM STAFF AS WELL.
UM, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF CONDITIONS THAT WERE ORIGINALLY ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, UM, THAT WE'VE SINCE, UH, ADDRESSED WITH THE HELP OF STAFF.
UM, AND, UH, WE BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSED LAYOUT REMAINS CONSISTENT WITH, UM, THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY AND WITH THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS.
UM, SO REALLY WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY MORE QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE AND, UM, GO FROM THERE.
WE'LL TURN TIME OVER TO STAFF FOR YOUR REPORT.
I'LL TURN THE TIME OVER TO YOU.
UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS, AGAIN, TO REITERATE, THIS IS TWO APPLICATIONS THAT ARE PRESENTED FOR A SINGLE PROPERTY, A PRELIMINARY PLAT, AND A FINAL PLOT, UM, THAT ARE PROCEEDING, UH, BEFORE THE COMMISSION TONIGHT.
UM, IN TERMS OF THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION, WHAT THE, UH, COMMISSION WILL BE CONSIDERING IS A LOT SIZE AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AS WELL AS OPEN SPACE, UH, STREET LOCATIONS AND EASEMENT LOCATIONS.
THESE ARE ALL BASED ON OUR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, UM, AND ARE PERTINENT TO THE APPLICANT'S UH, PROPOSAL.
THE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY A 12 ACRE, UH, SITE ZONED R ONE.
THIS IS A STANDARD ZONING DISTRICT, UM, SPECIFICALLY THE RESTRICTED SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
UH, THIS IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF DUBLIN ROAD, UM, JUST SOUTH OF BROWNING COURT.
UM, THE SITE IS SURROUNDED BY OTHER RESIDENTIAL, UH, SUBDIVISIONS.
COVENTRY WOODS IS PROBABLY THE MOST NOTABLE TO THE, UM, EAST, UM, AND, UH, GALLOWAY ESTATES TO THE NORTH.
THOSE, UH, SUBDIVISIONS HAVE BEEN SUBDIVIDED THROUGH THE R ONE, UH, ZONING DISTRICT AND HAVE SIMILAR, UH, SIZE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.
THERE IS A SINGLE ACCESS POINT FROM DUBLIN ROAD THAT ACCESSES AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE.
THERE IS MATURE VEGETATION THROUGHOUT THE SITE, UM, AND AGAIN, THE APPLICANTS ARE PROPOSING SUBDIVIDING THE ALLOT AND MAINTAINING THE EXISTING RESIDENCE.
IN TERMS OF OUR FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, WE TYPICALLY REFER TO THIS PLAN WHEN WE'RE, UM, CONSIDERING REZONING APPLICATIONS.
BUT FOR THE PROPOSAL, WE THOUGHT IT'D BE, IT WOULD BE PERTINENT TO AT LEAST DISCUSS
[01:45:01]
WHAT THE CITY HAS ENVISIONED FOR THIS PARTICULAR AREA.UM, ENVISION DUBLIN DOES CALL FOR LOW DENSITY, UH, RESIDENTIAL FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITE, WHICH PROPOSES, UH, DENSITIES RANGING FROM HALF OF AN ACRE TO TWO ACRES.
UM, THIS APPLICATION FALLS WITHIN THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL AND RANGES ROUGHLY FROM ONE ACRE TO THREE ACRES IN SIZE.
IN TERMS OF HISTORY, THE APPLICANT ALLUDED TO THE, UH, PROPOSAL THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY BEFORE THE COMMISSION IN APRIL.
THIS WAS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLOT.
UM, THE COMMISSION HAD SIGNIFICANT, UH, CONVERSATIONS IN APRIL, MOSTLY ABOUT SITE DESIGN, LAYOUT, UM, BUILDING ORIENTATION AND NATURAL FEATURES OF THE SITE.
UM, THE APPLICANT WAS, UH, PROVIDED THE OPPORTUNITY TO TABLE THE APPLICATION TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION'S COMMENTS.
UM, IN TERMS OF THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION, THEY DID ADDRESS, UH, THE CONDITIONS SIMILAR TO WHAT THE APPLICANT HAD SAID, THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE PROPOSED FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLOT, AS WELL AS SOME COMMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY STAFF.
UH, JUST SOME, UH, VISUAL, UH, COMPONENTS FOR THE SITE.
LOOKING INTO THE SITE FROM DUBLIN ROAD, THERE'S A, A STONE WALL WITH A, I GUESS A GATE FEATURE, UH, AT THE, UH, ENTRANCE OF THE SITE.
UM, THESE FEATURES ARE GOING TO BE REMOVED, BUT AGAIN, THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE WILL BE RETAINED.
AND JUST LOOKING, UM, ALONG BOTH, UH, UH, DIRECTIONS ALONG DUBLIN ROAD.
UH, THE CURRENT PROPOSAL IS AGAIN FOR SEVEN, UH, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, UH, LOTS THOUGH THERE WILL BE A RESERVE APPROXIMATELY A HALF OF AN ACRE IN THE, I GUESS THE MIDDLE OF THE SITE.
UM, THAT WILL BE PRIMARILY DEDICATED TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE SITE.
UM, THAT WILL, UH, CONTAIN A PATH THAT LEADS INTO A SEATING AREA ALONG THE, UH, RIVER.
UH, THERE WILL BE A LEFT TURN LANE, UM, ALONG DUBLIN ROAD AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF DUBLIN.
AND THERE, THERE WILL ALSO BE A SHARED USE PATH ALONG DUBLIN ROAD.
ONE, UM, DISTINCTION, SINCE THE LAST TIME THAT THE APPLICANT HAD BEEN BEFORE THE COMMISSION, THEY ORIGINALLY HAD TALKED ABOUT IN LIEU OF DOING THE SHARED USE PATH, THEY HAD PROPOSED A FEE IN LIEU.
UM, THEY'VE SINCE, UM, AGREED THAT THEY WOULD ACTUALLY CONSTRUCT THE SHARED USE PATH.
THIS FINAL PLAT SHOWS THE, UH, LOT CONFIGURATION, AGAIN, VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT THE COMMISSION SAW ON APRIL SEVEN LOTS.
UM, ALL MEETING, UH, LOT SIZE AND LOT DIMENSION REQUIREMENTS WITH A SINGULAR, UH, ROADWAY, WHICH WILL BE A A PUBLIC ROAD.
UM, AND THE NAME OF THE ROAD HAS BEEN MODIFIED TO LOU COURT.
THIS IS, UH, SHOWING THE DIMENSIONS AND THE FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH LOT.
OUR FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS ARE ACTUALLY 60 FEET, SO THEY SURPASS, UM, THAT REQUIREMENT AND THE LOTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE A MINIMUM OF 40,000 SQUARE FEET.
UH, AND ALL THE LOTS MEET THAT PARTICULAR REQUIREMENT.
WE ADDED THE FRONT BUILDING LINE SETBACK FOR THESE LOTS, SO WE COULD, UM, INDICATE THAT THERE'S VARYING, UH, SETBACKS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES.
IN TERMS OF THE CRITERIA FOR PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLOT, UM, WE'VE INDICATED THAT THERE, UM, FOR THE FIRST CRITERIA THAT IT'S, UH, MET WITH CONDITIONS.
THERE WERE SEVERAL, SEVERAL CONDITIONS THAT WE HAD ASKED FOR IN THE PRELIMINARY PLOT THAT WE WILL EXTEND TO THE FINAL PLOT AS IT IF IT IN WHEN IT PROCEEDS TO CITY COUNCIL.
AND THAT'S SPECIFIC TO DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS, UM, ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING AND A RESERVE AREA THAT'S A LONG, UM, DUBLIN ROAD, AS WELL AS SOME ENGINEERING COMMENTS.
AND THE, UH, LADDER THREE, UH, CRITERIA HAVE BEEN MET.
SO BASED ON, UM, THE LIMITATIONS OF THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I WILL SAY THAT IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THIS IS A STRAIGHT ZONING DISTRICT.
SO THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TYPICALLY WOULD REVIEW.
UM, SO WE'RE REVIEWING IT STRICTLY UNDER THE GUIDELINES OF THE R ONE ZONING DISTRICT.
AND BASED ON, UH, THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS UNDER THAT ZONING DISTRICT, WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
WE DO HAVE FIVE CRITERIA OR CONDITIONS THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING.
AGAIN, THE FIRST FOUR ARE BASED ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, UM, THAT WE WILL, UM, ASK THAT, UH, TRANSFER TO, UH, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST AS IT PROCEEDS TO COUNSEL.
AND THE LAST IS THAT THEY CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AS IT MOVES FORWARD.
AND IF I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, I WILL SAY THAT WE DID RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT.
THERE WERE FOUR, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WE, UM, FORWARDED TO THE COMMISSION.
THERE WAS A LATTER COMMENT THAT WE JUST
[01:50:01]
RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE MEETING THAT I BELIEVE JENNY, UM, HAD SENT TO THE COMMISSION.SO THERE'S A TOTAL OF FIVE COMMENTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED UP UNTIL THE POINT OF THIS MEETING, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, WE WILL HANDLE COMMISSIONS FOR BOTH STAFF AND THE APPLICANT AT THE SAME TIME, BUT I DO WANT TO GIVE THE COMMISSION OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE ONE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT CAME IN JUST A LITTLE BIT AGO.
SO WE'LL PAUSE FOR A MOMENT TO ENSURE THAT THE COMMISSION HAS OPPORTUNITY TO READ THAT.
REALLY, WE DON'T NEED TO READ IT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT'S NOT PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
BUT IF YOU COULD CONFIRM THAT YOU RECEIVED IT SO THAT YOU'LL HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO READ IT.
UH, WE WILL FOLLOW THE SAME ORDER.
SO GARY, I'M GONNA PICK ON YOU AGAIN.
I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU, TAMMY.
THE, UM, BUILDING SETBACKS THAT ARE ESTABLISHED, HOW DID YOU GO ABOUT ESTABLISHING THOSE? WERE THOSE BASED ON THE SITE PLAN THEY GAVE YOU? AND THEN YOU SAID, OKAY, WE'LL MAKE THESE AS SETBACKS.
SO THE REQUIRED SETBACK IS THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR THE ROAD, AND THEN THAT'S BASED ON THE CENTER LINE OF THE ROAD, SO THERE'S A MINIMUM SETBACK, AND THEN YES, WE DID.
THE NUMBERS THAT YOU SH THAT YOU'VE SEEN ARE BASED ON THOSE BUILDING LOCATIONS THEY PREVIOUS, PREVIOUSLY.
SO YOU KIND OF WORKED BACKWARDS.
YOU WORKED BACKWARDS FROM THE PLAN.
HEY, TAMMY, ON THE, UH, THAT SHARED USE PATH, I WAS TRYING TO LOCATE IT AND MAYBE I MISSED IT.
WHERE DOES THAT RUN TO ACROSS THE PROPERTY? DOES IT GO ALL THE WAY TO BROWNING? DOES IT GO? I CAN'T REALLY TELL IN THERE, I'M SORRY.
SO IT WOULD ONLY BE ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? AND THEN WHAT, WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT'S NOT IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY? SO IT, IT WOULD JUST BE CONNECTED WITH FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AS IT GOES NORTH AND SOUTH.
THAT I THINK THAT'S PRIMARILY WHY THE APPLICANT WAS CONSIDERING THE FEE IN LIEU BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD BE, UH, TOO PREMATURE.
SO, UH, TELL ME HOW, UH, THIS PROCEEDS FORWARD AND THERE'S FAMILIES THAT MOVE INTO THESE HOMES THAT THEY CAN GET ACROSS THE STREET TO THE, THE MAIN PATH ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD.
HOW'S THAT WORK? THAT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION.
JOSH REINEKE WITH THE CITY'S DIVISION OF ENGINEERING.
UH, AS OF RIGHT NOW, THERE WOULD BE NO CROSSWALK PROPOSED FROM LOU COURT ACROSS DUBLIN ROAD.
THERE'S NO, UH, I MEAN, IT'S AN INTERSECTION WITH DUBLIN ROAD, BUT NOT ONE THAT CROSSES DUBLIN ROAD.
SO WE WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR, TYPICALLY OF A CROSSWALK AT THAT LOCATION.
UH, IF THE, OR WHEN THE SHARED USE PATH IS EXTENDED TO THE NORTH PRIMARILY, UH, THAT WOULD BE THE CLOSEST CROSSING IS THEN YOU WOULD BE A BROWNING COURT AND ABLE TO CROSS THERE AND THEN PROCEED SOUTH OR NORTH ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF DUBLIN ROAD.
BUT AGAIN, THAT DOES MEAN THE PATH WOULD NEED TO BE EXTENDED TO THE NORTH, WHICH RIGHT NOW THIS PROJECT IS NOT PROPOSING TO DO AND THE CITY DOES NOT CURRENTLY HAVE THAT SHORT SEGMENT, UH, IN OUR PLANS TO BE DONE IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE.
WHAT, HOW DOES IT WORK FOR CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, TO PUT A TUNNEL IN SIMILAR TO HOW IT IS ON RIVER FOREST UNDERNEATH? UH, AT THE MOMENT, THE CITY IS NOT TYPICALLY IN FAVOR OF BUILDING ADDITIONAL, UH, SHARED USE PATH UNDERPASSES.
UNDER ROADWAYS FROM A, UH, LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE PERSPECTIVE, WE ARE LOOKING TO AVOID BUILDING MORE OF THOSE.
UH, THE EXPECTATION, UH, FROM TRANSPORTATION TO MOBILITY IS THAT A SHARED USE PATH WOULD BE BUILT ALONG DUBLIN ROAD AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.
UM, SOME DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN HAD THAT IF THIS PATH WERE IN PLACE, THEN THE CITY MAY LOOK TO ELEVATE THAT SHORT SEGMENT TO CONNECT IT, UH, TO THE NORTH AT, AT A CLOSER POINT IN TIME THAN IS CURRENTLY ENVISIONED SIMPLY BECAUSE THE PATH IS THERE.
DOES THE CITY HAVE THE EASEMENT THEN ON THE, ALL THE WAY UP TO, TO BROWNING? WE, UH, STRANGELY ENOUGH, THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT IS NORTH OF THIS LOCATION ALONG DUBLIN ROAD IS LIKELY SUFFICIENT AS IT EXISTS TODAY TO BUILD THE PATH WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
UH, BUT YOUR, YOUR, YOUR DISCUSSION HERE THIS EVENING IS WHY ENGINEERING AND TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY ARE STILL, UH, OPEN TO CONVERSATIONS WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT A FEE IN LIEU TO THAT? WE WOULD BE PROVIDED THE RIGHT OF WAY IN ANY EASEMENTS NECESSARY TO BUILD THE PATH BUT NOT BUILD IT TODAY.
[01:55:01]
TO THOSE DISCUSSIONS IN THE FUTURE.I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT TEARING THE PRIMARY RESIDENTS DOWN AND BUILDING A MORE WHOLESOME, YOU KNOW, UH, SUBDIVISION THERE? GOOD EVENING, UH, COMMISSIONER AND, UH, CITY STAFF? UM, YOU, THE QUESTIONS YOU WANT TO ASK ME, WANT TO KEEP THIS BUILDING NOT THE SUB, MORE OR LESS.
WELL, WHAT I'M ASKING IS WHAT, IN YOUR EVALUATION FROM THE, THE SUBDIVISION COMPONENT, WAS THERE CONSIDERATION TO, TO TEAR THAT MAIN STRUCTURE DOWN AND THEN BUILD A MORE UNIFORM COURT WHERE YOU COULD HAVE MORE EQUAL SIZE HOMES ON THAT, ON THAT LAND? UH, ONE THING IS, UM, UH, ECONOMIC, THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
AND, UM, BECAUSE ALL THOSE FUTURE HOUSES WILL BE SIMILAR, LIKE A CHARACTER LIKE WITH MORE STONE OR LIKE THE TRADITIONAL MATERIAL.
SO WE, WE WILL PUT IN LIKE A HOA IN THE FUTURE.
I JUST WANTED, I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR WHAT YOU SAID.
YOU'RE SAYING THAT ECONOMICALLY IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO, TO TEAR THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE DOWN? MM-HMM.
SO I, I DON'T THINK WE CAN CONSIDER THAT.
I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF YOU THOUGHT ABOUT IT, UM, FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE.
HAVE YOU TALKED TO YOUR NEIGHBORS ABOUT HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT HAVING THE COURT THERE? UH, WE, SOME NEIGHBOR CALLED ME AND TALKED TO ME AND, UH, ASKING ME FOR ACCESS FOR THE, UH, COMMON AREAS.
SO WE CANNOT, I GUESS, HAVE YOU RECEIVED ANY SUPPORT FROM ANY OF YOUR NEIGHBORS ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE COURT? UH, I THINK SURROUNDING NEIGHBOR, UM, ACROSS, UH, DUBLIN, ROME AND THEN I THINK SOUTH SIDE, UH, SHOULD SUPPORT AND NORTH SIDE.
I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.
UH, GIVEN THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FEE IN LIEU OF WAIVER FOR THE PATHWAY, ARE YOU, UM, FAVORABLE TO GOING BACK TO THAT FEE IN FEE IN LIEU AND ALLOWING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THAT PATH LATER WHEN IT MAY HAVE A TERM OR MAY NOT TERMINATE ON BOTH SIDES OF YOUR PROPERTY? IT'S FLEXIBLE.
BECAUSE, UH, ORIGINALLY WE ASK FOR FEE IN LIE BECAUSE, UH, MAYBE WE BUILD THIS NICE PASS 10 YEARS LATER, CITY DUBLIN BUILT A NEW PASS, IT WON'T MATCH.
NO, I WOULD DO, I WOULD ACTUALLY AGREE WITH THAT.
WE TRY TO MAKE IT GREAT WORK WITH CITY.
UM, AND SO YOU'RE ALSO UNAWARE OF ANY PUBLIC COMMENT THAT, THAT WE'VE RECEIVED THAT WAS MENTIONED HERE.
YOU HAVEN'T, HAVE YOU NOT SEEN ANY OF THAT? YEAH, BECAUSE WE, UH, WORKED, WORKED VERY DILIGENTLY WITH THE CITY STAFF AND, UH, WE THINK MET ALL THE CODES, ALL THE CONDITIONS MET.
SO I DON'T THINK A NEIGHBOR HAS ANY, LIKE, WE ARE NOT LIKE ASK FOR SUB DIVISION FOR 20 LOTS.
OR, OR MAKE LIKE A COUNT AND DENSE USE.
WE, WE STRICTLY FOLLOW THE RULE OF THE DOUBLE CODE.
AND, UH, SO WE ASK, I DON'T HAVE, I DON'T THINK A NEIGHBOR SAY, OH, I LIKE YOUR VIEW.
THANK YOU MR. GARVIN AND MR. WE,
[02:00:01]
I HAVE NO QUESTIONS.MR. WE AND MI MS. ER, COULD YOU ELABORATE ON THE TREE WAIVER THAT YOU MAY BE ASKING FOR? YES.
YEAH, WE, WE LIKE, UH, I'LL CONSIDER COUNCIL, LIKE APPLY YEAH.
AND WHAT DO YOU, COULD YOU ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT, YOUR GO TO CITY COUNCIL ASKING THEM ABOUT THAT? UM, IS IT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE DEVELOPING, UH, AN AREA, UH, IT KIND OF, YOU RUN INTO THAT AND WAS THAT UNEXPECTED OR? ACTUALLY, PERSONALLY, I LIKE THE NATURAL, THE REASON I LIKE THIS SIDE IS BECAUSE ALL NATURAL MATURE TREES, UM, LIKE EVEN MY, FOR EXAMPLE, MY JLU, WASTON, THE BIG OAK MM-HMM
WE SPEND A LOT OF MONEY TO LIKE, UH, SAVE IT DURING CONSTRUCTION.
WE, WE PUT THE, LIKE THE CAUTION TAPE AROUND THERE MM-HMM
AND MAKE SURE THAT ON THE CANOPY, NO MACHINE, LIKE RUNNING THROUGH ALL THIS, UH, I LIKE THIS MATURE TREES.
AND WE, WE KEEP EVERYTHING IN CONSIDER, LIKE TRY TO SAVE AS MANY AS POSSIBLE SINCE WE, UM, HAVE A PARTICULAR LAND, A CUL-DE-SAC, WE HAVE TO TAKE A FEW TREES LIKE OUT, BUT WILL BE LIKE LESS LIKE NOT SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH.
SO WE CAN STILL APPLY FOR THAT.
UM, AND THEN ALSO IS THERE, HOW, HOW IS THE SUBDIVISION HANDLING, GETTING MAIL? UM, DO YOU, BECAUSE THAT HAS CHANGED AND I JUST HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THAT.
BECAUSE NOW YOU HAVE A PUBLIC STREET, SO EVERY, YOUR LOT YOU HAVE A NICE MAILBOX.
SO YOU ENVISION THAT THIS IS PUBLIC, A MAIL CARRIER WILL GO FROM, OKAY.
BECAUSE THIS IS A PUBLIC ROAD, RIGHT.
IT'S NOT LIKE A PRIVATE, THIS IS CITY WILL PLOW SNOW.
AND MAY I ASK, IS THAT CHANGED TO YOUR REGARD WITH, UH, OR DOES THAT JUST NEED TO BE CHECKED OUT STILL ABOUT HOW TO, HOW YOU'RE RECEIVING MAIL AND PACKAGES, PACKAGES COME TO YOUR DOOR.
UM, MAIL IT MAY BE A, UH, SOMETHING TO CON YOU KNOW, LIKE A A A PLACE WHERE YOU ALL MEET.
WE, WE WOULD ENSURE THAT THAT WILL OCCUR.
AND THEN WHEN I THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THAT AREA THAT'S GONNA TAKE THAT EVERYONE CAN SHARE THAT SHARE USE, AND IT'S GETTING, IT'S CLOSER BY THE RIVER.
IT TAKES YOU OUT THERE FOR A SEATING AREA.
UM, ANY OTHER ENVISIONS TO THAT? 'CAUSE I KNOW THE CITY SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT WHEN YOU'RE DEVELOPING A NEIGHBORHOOD TO REALLY, UM, LOOK AT OTHER AMENITIES AND I I REALLY APPRECIATE THE SITTING AREA.
UH, BUT SINCE THE WATER IS RIGHT THERE, UM, THE RIVER THERE, IS THERE A DOCK THOUGHT OR SOMETHING OF THAT SORT WHERE THERE COULD BE A DOCK OR A BOAT DOCK OR SOMETHING OF THAT SORT FOR THAT PARTICULAR SITE? THE ELEVATION, LIKE FROM THE, THE SITTING AREA TO THE RIVERBANK MM-HMM
THERE'S NO WAY TO PUT A DOCK, I GUESS.
I THINK IT LIKE, UH, IT'S, UH, QUALIFYING MM-HMM
BUT THAT PARTICULAR, THE STREAM OF THERE IS NOT, THEY HAVE A MIDDLE OF A ISLAND THERE, SO IT'S NOT A LIKE PRACTICAL, HAVE A DOG THERE.
I DROVE INTO THE SPACE AND MM-HMM
UM, I APPRECIATE SEEING THAT, BUT I DIDN'T WANNA WALK DOWN, SO IT'S HARD FOR ME TO VISUALIZE IF IT COULD ENHANCE THAT OR NOT.
BUT I THINK ANY OF THE OPPORTUNITIES, I THINK IT'S, IT WILL BE LIKE, UM, THE NEW POTENTIAL, LIKE A RESIDENT, THEY CAN APPLY FROM CITY OF COLUMBUS MM-HMM
BECAUSE THIS IS ALSO A VERY LENGTHY LIKE APPLICATION BECAUSE EPA AND COLUMBUS WANT TO PROTECT THE WATER.
THEY DON'T WANT TO AGREE, LIKE ALLOW YOU TO HAVE DOCK AS MANY AS LIKE EASILY.
SO WE, WE, WE TRY TO BE SENSITIVE TO THAT TOO.
AND I WAS ALSO THINKING OF MAYBE THE CITY CAN HELP WITH THIS TOO, IS ON THE OTHER END WITH DUBLIN ROAD.
[02:05:01]
SEEMS LIKE ON BROWNING BROWN BROWNING, UM, THEY HAVE MORE OF A MOUND THAT, UH, AND IS THAT ANYTHING TO ANTICIPATE OR AS TO KIND OF SOFTEN THAT FIRST HOUSE AND SO FORTH OR INTO THE, INTO THE RESIDENCE AREA? UM, THAT THE ELEVATION'S UP A LITTLE BIT MORE.UM, TREES, WE HAVE A, LIKE A SOPHISTICATED LANDSCAPING, LIKE AROUND THAT NEW, LIKE A MM-HMM
MS. NOBLE, MAYBE YOU CAN ANSWER THAT.
SO WE DID WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO DO THE LANDSCAPE EASEMENT ALONG THE ROADWAY TO GIVE SOME CONSISTENT VIEW ALONG THE ROADWAY.
AND HONESTLY THAT'S ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THEY WOULD TYPICALLY BE REQUIRED TO DO.
UM, SO THAT'S THE EX EXCLUSIVE PURPOSE OF THAT LANDSCAPE EASEMENT.
IT'S INTERESTING WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING BY THERE AND YOU KIND OF SEE THE, THE DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOODS AND SOME ARE UP, SOME ARE DOWN ON THE ROAD.
AND IT JUST CAUGHT MY EYE THAT WAY AS WELL TOO.
MR. CHANEL, I HAVE NO QUESTIONS AND I HAVE NO QUESTIONS.
UM, IF, ARE THERE ANY CONCLUDING QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION FOR EITHER STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? JUST ONE.
MR. GARMAN NOTING THE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR, UH, CONDITIONS.
ARE THERE ANY THAT YOU OPPOSE OUT OF THE LIST THAT YOU'VE SEEN IN FRONT OF YOU? ARE THERE ANY OF THE CONDITIONS HERE THAT YOU WOULD OPPOSE OR ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH THESE? NO, WE, WE'LL FOLLOW EVERY, YEAH, EVERY REQUIREMENT.
UM, AT THIS TIME WE HAVE RECEIVED PUBLIC COMMENT, UM, THE COMMISSION.
HAVE YOU ALL HAD OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE COMMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED IN THE PACKET AND THE ONE ADDITIONAL ONE? HAD THERE BEEN ANY OTHER DIGITALLY SUBMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF THE MEETING? ALRIGHT, WE WOULD THEN LIKE TO OPEN THE MEETING FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
ANYONE WHO IS HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE, UH, COMMENT ON THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION, WE WOULD INVITE YOU FORWARD.
WHEN YOU GET TO THE MICROPHONE, IT'S CURRENTLY OFF.
IF YOU COULD PRESS THE BUTTON AT THE BASE AND THEN STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
UH, NEIL MATHIAS, 1 62 WATERFORD DRIVE, UH, DOWN IN OLD DUBLIN.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO SHARE SOME COMMENTS AND THOUGHTS, UM, ON TWO SUBJECTS.
ONE SPECIFIC TO THIS APPLICATION.
UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY DOG IN THIS FIGHT.
UM, I'VE BEEN A LONG TIME DUBLIN RESIDENT.
UM, I REMEMBER WHEN BOB BARNEY LIVED IN THIS PROPERTY YEARS AGO.
UM, SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH IT.
I WOULD SAY, I WANNA PUT MY SUPPORT BEHIND THIS.
UM, OVER THE YEARS WE'VE SEEN VARIOUS DISCUSSIONS ABOUT DENSITY.
UM, I LOOKED BACK AT THE LAST MEETING AND IT SEEMED LIKE THERE WAS A LOT OF OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT ABOUT WHAT THEY WANTED, WHAT YOU GUYS WANTED IT TO LOOK LIKE, HOW YOU WANTED IT TO FLOW.
UM, IN FACT, THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT TEARING DOWN THE HOUSE, LIKE THAT WOULD MAKE IT MORE DENSE BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE MORE LOTS.
UM, I GUESS IN MY BACKGROUND, WHICH IS REAL ESTATE, I FEEL LIKE IT FALLS ON THE DEVELOPER TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT IS GOOD, WHAT'S BAD, AND IT'S ON THEM BECAUSE THEIR MONEY IS WHAT'S A ON THE TABLE.
IF THEY MAKE A BAD DECISION AND THE DEVELOPMENT DOESN'T SELL BECAUSE THE BIG HOUSE IS TOO BIG, THAT'S THEIR LOSS.
OBVIOUSLY WE WANT TO PROTECT THE CITY AND BALANCE ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
BUT AS A RESIDENT, I WANT TO JUST VOICE MY CONCERN THAT I DON'T WANT MY CITY TO BE VIEWED AS A CITY THAT IS SO HARD TO WORK WITH DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS THAT WE DON'T GET GOOD PROJECTS BECAUSE IT'S JUST PUSHBACK.
AND SO FAR, EVEN TONIGHT, IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF THE COMMENTS WE GET ARE JUST PUSHBACK AND PUSHBACK.
AND I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I WANNA SAY.
I UNDERSTAND THE POSITIONS THAT YOU'RE IN.
UM, BUT I JUST WANNA VOICE THAT AS A RESIDENT, WE WANT GOOD PROJECTS THAT GO FORWARD AND NOT JUST HEARING NO, NO, NO.
THE OTHER COMMENT WHICH I VOICED TO JENNY, AS I'M SURE A LOT OF YOU KNOW, DUBLIN IS GOING THROUGH REDISTRICTING RIGHT NOW, DOESN'T FALL UNDER THE CITY'S PURVIEW IN ANY WAY.
BUT A BIG PART OF THE DISCUSSIONS WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT IS HOW IMPORTANT THE DUBLIN ENVISION PLAN IS, AND THAT IT IS A PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR.
THE TWO DISTRICT MAPS THAT ARE UP FOR PROPOSAL HAVE THE MAJORITY OF DOWNTOWN DUBLIN WATERFORD, MID-CENTURY LOWLAND FARMS BEING TRAFFICKED THROUGH 1 61 AND DUBLIN ROAD.
THAT IS A LARGE AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC THAT IS NOT PEDESTRIAN FOCUSED TO WHATEVER LEVEL YOU CAN.
I WOULD URGE YOU TO VOICE TO THE POWERS THAT ARE MAKING THOSE DECISIONS, THAT THIS IS NOT IN LINE WITH DUBLIN'S ENVISION PLAN,
[02:10:01]
WHICH THEY WERE A PART OF ESTABLISHING YEARS AGO.SO TO NOW REDISTRICT AND PUT PEOPLE THROUGH THIS PEDESTRIAN AREA, I DON'T FEEL IS APPROPRIATE.
AND TO THE LEVEL THAT ANY WAY YOU CAN VOICE THAT, I WOULD BE APPRECIATIVE OF THAT.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION? ALRIGHT, WITH THAT, WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE WILL CONTINUE INTO DELIBERATION.
WE WILL HANDLE THE COMMENTS, THE DELIBERATION FOR THESE TWO ITEMS AT THE SAME TIME.
BUT THEY WILL GET INDEPENDENT MOTIONS.
MR. ALEXANDER, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, SO YOU CAN MAKE, YOU CAN CERTAINLY MAKE THE ARGUMENT IT MEETS OUR ZONING CODE, BUT I THINK THERE ARE SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW WELL THIS IS PLANNED.
AND, AND I MENTIONED LAST MEETING, THE SITE ISSUES AREN'T ADDRESSED.
THE PROMINENCE OF THE EXISTING HOUSE, THE TOPOGRAPHY, YOU NEED TO GO TO ALL SORTS OF GYMNASTICS TO MAKE SEVEN HOUSES WORK ON THAT TOPOGRAPHY.
MORE IMPORTANTLY, MORE IMPORTANTLY, IF YOU LOOK AT, MANY OF YOU MAY HAVE, UM, APPROVED CORTINA, UM, BITS, THIS BEAUTIFUL LITTLE, UH, SUBDIVISION OFF OF MEMORIAL DRIVE, RELATIVELY NEW.
THERE'S THIS GREAT COHESIVE QUALITY TO THAT BECAUSE THE BUILDINGS HAVE SIMILAR SETBACKS.
THEY'RE ARRANGED AROUND A GREEN SPACE.
THEY'RE ARRANGED AROUND THE STREET.
YOU GO TO OUR OLDEST SUBURB, YOU GO TO RIVER FOREST, THEY HAVE HUGE LOTS AND THOSE HOUSES ALL LINE UP.
AND WHEN THERE'S AN UNUSUAL CONDITION WITH THE SITE, THERE'S A BIG SWALE ON ONE OF THE STREETS.
THE HOUSES ALL MOVE BACK TO ADDRESS THAT.
THEY DON'T FILL IT IN, BUT THEY CREATE A CONTINUOUS WALL.
THEY REINFORCE THE STREET, THEY CONNECT WITH EACH OTHER.
SO IN, SO, YOU KNOW, I HAVE, I HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THIS BECAUSE NONE OF THAT'S OCCURRING HERE.
AND SO WE'RE GO, INSTEAD OF LOOKING AT A PLAN FIRST THAT MAKES SENSE, THEN COMING BACK AND TRY TO FIT THAT PLAN INTO OUR ZONING.
IT SEEMS LIKE SOMEBODY SAID, LET'S LOOK AT THE ZONING AND SEE HOW MANY LOTS WE CAN GET ON HERE AND THEN SORT OF WORK, WORK THINGS OUT.
AND I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THESE HOUSES NOT ALIGNING, I THINK THIS IS GONNA LOOK LIKE AN INCOHERENT MASS.
AND IT'S VERY DIFFERENT THAN ANYTHING THAT'S COME BEFORE THIS BOARD SINCE I'VE BEEN ON HERE.
THE LACK OF CONSISTENCY AND CONNECTION BETWEEN THE HOUSES AND EACH OTHER AND THE HOUSES IN THE STREET, I THINK WILL CREATE A CHAOTIC ENVIRONMENT.
AND, AND ALSO WE TALKED LAST TIME, THE SCALE OF THAT HOUSE COMPARED TO WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING, THAT'S A WHOLE NOTHER ISSUE.
SO I I, I REALLY HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS AND I THINK THIS MAY POTENTIALLY LOOK LIKE SORT OF A CHAOTIC MESS WHEN IT'S CONSTRUCTED HOUSES ARRANGED DIFFERENT WAYS, DIFFERENT SETBACKS FROM THE STREET.
YOU DID A BETTER JOB THAN I COULD HAVE DONE EXPLAINING THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU DRIVE BY A HOME, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY YEARS, 30 YEARS, 40 YEARS.
I THINK THAT HOME UNTOUCHED, I GET THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE MIMI NEEDS TO BE DEVELOPMENT AT SOME POINT.
I THINK IT ALSO FEELS TOO DENSE, BUT, UM, I WOULD AGREE THAT IT MEETS THE CRITERIA PUT IN FRONT OF IT.
SO ULTIMATELY, I, I THINK WE'D BE IN, I MEAN, I'D BE, I GUESS, INCLINED TO SUPPORT IT BASED ON THAT.
MR. WE, I UNDERSTAND MR. ALEXANDER'S FRUSTRATION TO SOME DEGREE, BUT YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE SITE, YOU'VE GOT THE EXISTING HOUSE THAT YOU HAVE TO WORK AROUND.
YOU'VE GOT THE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, AND THEN TO TRY TO MAKE SENSE OF LOTS.
I, I THINK THERE'S ACTUALLY, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, TWO GATEWAY SITES AND THEN THERE'S A FLOW THAT I THINK ACTUALLY WORKS, GIVEN AGAIN, THE CONSTRAINTS.
SO I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE APPLICATION.
THANK YOU, MR. WE, MS. HARDER, THANK YOU, UH, FOR BEING HERE AND WORKING WITH THE CITY, UM, AND BEING PATIENT.
I, I BELIEVE YOU ALL HAVE, UH, WORKED VERY HARD TOGETHER, UH, TO COME TO A CONSENSUS, UM, THAT IT'S A, A CLEARER TO US THE DIRECTION THAT YOU'RE GOING.
UM, YOU KNOW, THIS WHOLE EVENING HAS BEEN ABOUT ENVISION DUBLIN AND, AND, UM, AND THE DIRECTION OF THAT.
AND WHEN, WHEN I HEAR THAT YOU HIT THE LOW DENSITY, THOUGH IT FEELS HEAVY STILL.
[02:15:01]
YOU DID HIT THE LOW VENT, THE LOW DENSITY, UM, THEN TO ME IT MEETS THE STANDARD.AND, UM, I DO FEEL THERE ARE LOTS OF PARTICULARS THAT NEED TO BE DONE IN THAT AREA.
BUT IN THAT REGARD, I'M IN FAVOR.
UM, AND I KIND OF EXPRESSED THIS LAST TIME, SO THIS MAY MAY BE NO SURPRISE.
WE LOOK AT ENVISION DELVING IN ON THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE, OF, OF OUR DOCUMENT SAYS THERE'S MANY, MANY REQUIREMENTS OF LAND USE PRINCIPLES, AND ONE OF 'EM IS FOCUSED GROWTH AREAS THAT ARE BEST EQUIPPED TO ACCOMMODATE CHANGE.
AND THIS DOES NOT, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE AREAS THAT IS, DOES NOT FALL INTO THAT.
I THINK IT'S ALREADY A, WE, WE KNOW IT'S ALREADY A STRESSED AREA.
IT'S, WE WE'RE CREATING A HARDSHIP IN THE AREA, WE'RE ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE ROADWAY.
WE BROUGHT UP EARLIER THE SAFETY, PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, AND IT JUST, THIS DEVELOPMENT IN GENERAL JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE FOR THIS AREA OF DUBLIN.
WE TALK A LOT ABOUT THOUGHTFUL DESIGN.
THIS, WE TALK ABOUT THOUGHTFUL DEVELOPMENT.
THIS DOES, THIS DOES NOT IT IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA.
YOU'VE GOT AN ICONIC PIECE OF PROPERTY.
IT'S PART OF THE FABRIC OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THIS, I THINK JUST DOES NOT IMPROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND AGAIN, IT ACTUALLY, I THINK CAUSES A LOT OF HARDSHIP FOR THAT AREA.
AGAIN, WE, WE EXIST HERE TO INTERPRET THE CODE.
UM, THAT'S MY INTERPRETATION OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.
WHEN WE LOOK AT ENVISION, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, FROM A CODE STANDPOINT, IT MIGHT WORK, BUT I THINK AS A COMMISSION WE NEED TO STEP BACK AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, IF AI WAS DOING THIS, IT MIGHT BE DIFFERENT.
BUT WE'RE WE, WE HAVE THE HUMAN TRANSLATION, THE HUMAN ELEMENT HERE, AND WE GOTTA JUST SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, THIS JUST DOESN'T FEEL RIGHT FOR THIS AREA.
I MEAN, AND, AND YOU, AND AGAIN, WE BROUGHT UP, WE BROUGHT UP SOME COMMENTS, AND IF YOU HAVE EVER DRIVEN DOWN DUBLIN ROAD, YOU KNOW, THIS DOES JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE FOR THAT AREA.
I MAY LOOK AT THIS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY BECAUSE WE HAVE DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE CITY AND WE HAVE VERY FEW AREAS OF THE CITY WHERE YOU CAN BUY AN ACRE OF PROPERTY AND BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON IT.
AND SO IF THIS WERE ALREADY SEVEN LOTS, WHERE THE MINIMUM APPEARS TO BE 0.9, TWO ACRES, AND THEN WE HAVE A 1.3 AND A 1.3 AND AND SO ON, ALL THE WAY UP TO THAT THREE ACRE PARCEL.
AND, UH, I LOOK DOWN, YOU KNOW, I'M THINKING OF A POST ROAD THAT HAS KIND OF SIMILAR, SIMILAR ENVIRONMENT WITH THE LARGER LOTS.
IF I OWNED ONE OF THOSE PROPERTIES, IF I OWNED ONE OF THOSE PARCELS AND I WANTED TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON IT, I IMAGINED THAT IT WOULD FEEL A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT TO, TO MEMBERS OF A COMMISSION THAT I'M COMING FORWARD WITH A SINGLE PARCEL.
AND MY NEIGHBOR MAY HAVE A MULTIMILLION DOLLAR HOUSE THAT'S A WHOLE LOT BIGGER ON A DIFFERENT SIZE PROPERTY.
BUT IF THE ZONING CODE SAYS THAT I CAN BUILD MY HOME ON 1.37 ACRES, THEN I WOULD WANT TO BUILD MY HOME ON THE 1.37 ACRES.
THE ZONING CODE SAYS THAT I CAN, IT'S A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.
AND SO WE DON'T SEE A LOT OF ONE, WELL, WE DON'T SEE ANY REALLY SINGLE PROPERTY, SINGLE HOME DEVELOPMENTS.
WE SEE A LOT OF, WE'RE DOING 50, 7200 HOMES.
WE SEE A LOT OF, WE'RE DOING A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY THAT HAS A A LOT OF TEETH IN THE CODE.
A SINGLE PROPERTY, SINGLE FAMILY HOME IN A STRAIGHT ZONING.
I, I MAY NOT LIKE THE WAY MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE LOOKS, BUT THAT DOESN'T GIVE ME THE RIGHT TO TELL THEM HOW TO BUILD THEIR HOUSE.
AND SO THIS ONE'S A LITTLE CHALLENGING.
WE DON'T SEE THIS TYPE OF APPLICATION VERY OFTEN.
I'VE BEEN ON THE COMMISSION, WHAT, SIX AND A HALF, SEVEN YEARS.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE EVER SEEN ONE OF THESE.
AND SO I UNDERSTAND, I CAN UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY HOW THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ARE SPLIT.
AND YOU HEAR THAT DICHOTOMY BETWEEN THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
FOR ME, IT GOES BACK TO STRAIGHT ZONING CODE WITH RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
AND YES, IT IS A PRELIMINARY AND A FINAL PLANT, BUT IT'S A PRELIMINARY AND A FINAL PLANT UNDER THE CONSIDERATION OF RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
AND SO TO ME, FOR THAT REASON, I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION.
UH, WE WILL, I WANT TO GIVE OPPORTUNITY, BECAUSE THERE IS SUCH A A DELTA ON ON THE COMMISSION, I WANNA
[02:20:01]
GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMISSION TO, TO PROVIDE ANY FINAL DELIBERATION.IF THERE'S, UM, YOU KNOW, MR. DESLER YOU'VE BROUGHT UP BEFORE, SOMETIMES SOME MAYBE BACK AND FORTH GETS US TO A BETTER DECISION.
SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE COVERING THAT THIS EVENING IN CASE ANYONE WANTS TO SPEAK TO THAT BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE.
THANK YOU FOR, UM, PUTTING THIS PARTICULAR ONE UP.
SO AT THIS POINT I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL, UM, RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH THE FOLLOWING FIVE CONDITIONS.
I, I THINK YOUR FIRST MOTION IS RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND THEN THE FINAL PLAT HAS THE CONDITIONS.
UM, SO WHAT'S ON OUR SCREEN RIGHT NOW? OH, THANK YOU.
IT'S JUST THAT TOP FOR THE FIRST MOTION, JUST HAVE THEM CONFLATED.
UH, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION OF RECOMMENDATION, UH, UH, OF APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SO MOVED.
AND NOW I WILL ENTERTAIN A RECOMMENDATION, UH, MOTION FOR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE FINAL PLAN WITH THE FIVE CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU, MS. HARDER, MS. MAXWELL, MR. WAY? YES.
THANK YOU FOR COMING FORWARD THIS EVENING.
UM, I, I DO HOPE THAT IT'S, UM, APPRECIATED FROM BOTH THE APPLICANT AND FROM THE PUBLIC HOW CHALLENGING SOME OF THESE DECISIONS CAN BE.
AND, UH, I APPRECIATE OF COURSE THE, THE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES OF THE COMMISSION.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU, UM, AS NEIGHBORS IN THE FUTURE.
ALRIGHT, AND IF THERE IS DISCUSSION, IF YOU COULD MOVE PAST THE KITCHEN, THE ECHO CHAMBER TENDS TO, WELL ECHO.
ALL RIGHT, WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR NEXT ITEM AND I GOT THE PAPERS OUT OF ALIGNMENT.
[Case #25-079FDP & Case #25-081FP]
PERTAIN AGAIN TO THE SAME PROPERTY, UH, PROJECT AND PROPERTY.AND SO THEY WILL BE CONSIDERED TOGETHER THIS EVENING, BUT OF COURSE, JUST LIKE THE PREVIOUS ONES, SEPARATE ACTIONS WILL BE TAKEN FOR EACH CASE.
THIS, THESE ARE CASES 25 0 79 FDP AND 25 DASH 81 FP, BRIGHT ROAD RESERVE, FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND FINAL PLAT.
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND A REQUEST FOR A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR OF A FINAL PLAT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSISTING OF 20 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.
THE 14.2 ACRE SITE IS ZONED PUD PLAN, UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, BRIGHT ROAD RESERVE, AND IS LOCATED NORTH OF THE INTER INTERSECTION OF GRANDY CLIFFS DRIVE AND BRIGHT ROAD.
WITH THAT, I'LL TURN TIME OVER TO THE APPLICANT FOR A PRESENTATION.
CURTIS BERRY, UM, 7 81 SCIENCE BOULEVARD, UH, HANNO, OHIO.
UM, THANK YOU, UH, COMMISSION, UH, WE'RE BRINGING UP FORTH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THIS, UH, DEVELOPMENT OF THE 20 LOTS, UM, THAT YOU GUYS HAVE SEEN BEFORE.
UM, AND COMMENTED ON DURING THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT OR PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAT.
UM, SO THIS, AGAIN, THIS COMMUNITY, UM, IS A, IS NOT A TYPICAL SUBDIVISION.
THIS WAS PLANNED AS A MORE, UM, COHESIVE LIKE SMALL, UH, DEVELOPMENT WHERE THE NEIGHBORS ARE A LOT CLOSER TO THE ROAD AND A LOT MORE, UM, INTERTWINED INTO EACH OTHER.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE KIND OF DEVIATED FROM A LOT OF THE
[02:25:01]
STANDARDS OF A TYPICAL SUBDIVISION.UM, AND WE'VE GONE THROUGH THAT WITH STAFF AND, AND YOU GUYS AND, UM, AND HAVE BROUGHT FORTH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, STILL MAINTAINING OUR NATURAL FEATURES AND OPEN SPACES, UH, STILL HOLDING THAT RURAL CHARACTER, UM, AND JUST BRING IN A HIGH END, UH, DEVELOPMENT, UH, EXISTING CONDITIONS.
HERE, AGAIN, IT'S GOT A SINGLE, IT WAS A SINGLE LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENT LOT, UM, WITH NATURAL FEATURES ON THE EAST AND WEST, AND WE'RE GONNA MAINTAIN THOSE NATURAL FEATURES AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND DEVELOP THAT KIND OF BIG OPEN AREA IN THE MIDDLE.
UM, HERE IS OUR SITE PLAN, UM, SHOWING, UH, GIVING YOU A VISUAL OF WHAT THE ROADWAY NETWORK LOOKS LIKE, WORKING WITH STAFF, UH, WHAT OUR OPEN SPACES LOOK LIKE, MAINTAINING THAT NATURAL FEATURE TO THE EAST AND MAINTAINING AS MUCH NATURAL FEATURES TO THE WEST AS WE CAN, UM, WHILE FITTING IN OUR 20 LOTS.
UM, HERE'S OUR SITE PLAN WITH THE OPEN SPACES, KIND OF HIGHLIGHTING THE GREEN SPACES.
UM, AND THEN THE PURPLE IS OUR TREE PRESERVATION ZONES.
UM, THAT WAS A BIG ITEM THAT WE DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY.
UM, IN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER WE GOT THE OWNERSHIPS AND, UH, MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THOSE OPEN SPACES.
ON THE LEFT, YOU GET THE FEEL OF WHAT THE STREETSCAPE IS GONNA LOOK LIKE, WHERE THE HOUSES ARE CLOSER TO THE ROAD.
UM, WE DID PROVIDE THE CONTINUOUS FIVE FOOT TREE LAWN THAT WAS DISCUSSED, SO IT'S ALL UNIFORM.
AND THEN WE HAVE SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET.
UM, HERE THIS, UH, PLOT PLAN EXHIBIT, UM, AGAIN IN PURPLE IS OUR TREE PRESERVATION ZONES.
THE KIND OF ORANGE COLOR ARE THE PRIVATE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH LOT.
AND THEN THE KIND OF TEAL IS THE OVERALL BUILDABLE AREA OF EACH OF THOSE LOTS.
UM, AND THEN AT THE BOTTOM WE KIND OF LAY OUT WHAT THAT, UM, WHAT ALL THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS ARE THAT WERE SET FORTH IN OUR TEXT AND SHOWING WHAT, WHAT ALL THOSE DIFFERENT COLORATION AREAS MEAN UP ALONG THE NORTH BETWEEN THE TREE PRESERVATION IN THE OPEN SPACE IS A DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT KIND OF SEPARATES THE TREE PRESERVATION IN THE PRIVATE OPEN SPACE.
UM, SAME THING ALONG LOTS ONE AND TWO.
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THAT KIND OF PUSHED THE PRIMARY, UM, RESIDENCE SETBACK FURTHER THAN THE INITIAL DID.
HERE IS, UM, WE KIND OF DID A PLOT PLAN OF A COUPLE OF THE LOTS THAT SEEMED A LITTLE TIGHT TO GIVE YOU A VISUAL.
UM, ON THE LEFT, THIS LOT BACKS UP TO THE RESERVE TO THE WEST.
WE HAVE A 15 FOOT SETBACK, WE HAVE A 15 FOOT OPEN SPACE, AND THEN WE HAVE THE BUILDABLE AREA.
UM, RIGHT NOW THAT KIND OF SKETCH SHOWS A TERRACE THAT DOESN'T QUITE REACH INTO THAT PRIVATE OPEN SPACE, BUT THERE IS THAT AVAILABILITY THERE.
THE LOT TO THE, OR THE PLOT PLAN TO THE RIGHT LOT FIVE IS THAT KIND OF NORTHWEST CORNER LOT AND YOU CAN SEE THE TREE PRESERVATION ZONE ALONG THE NORTH.
AND THEN WE HAVE THE 20 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND THEN WE HAVE THE 20 FOOT PRIVATE OPEN SPACE.
AND THEN YOU HAVE YOUR BUILDABLE LOT, YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE OF THAT, UH, THIS IS KIND OF A JUST KIND OF REPRESENTATION OF, OF SOME OF THE TREES.
UM, THERE ARE GONNA BE TREES THAT ARE GONNA BE CUT DOWN AND WE GOT, UM, ALL OF THESE TREES ARE REPLACEMENT TREES.
UM, YOU SEE, UH, THE TREE ROW ALONG THE NORTH TRYING TO MAINTAIN AS MANY OF THOSE TREES AS WE CAN IN THAT TREE PRESERVATION ZONE.
THE TREES IN THE BLUE ARE STREET TREES.
UH, AS FAR AS STORM WATER UTILITIES, THIS IS THE KIND OF THE DETENTION BASIN ON THAT WESTERN HALF
[02:30:01]
WHERE WE'RE GONNA TRY AND FIT THAT IN WITH THE EXISTING FEATURE LANDSCAPE AROUND IT AND MAKE IT AS MORE MUCH OF A NATURAL FEATURE AS WE CAN.UM, AND THEN WE HAVE THE KIND OF THE ALLEY A WALKWAY FROM THE ROADWAY DOWN TOWARDS THAT, UH, STORM WATER FEATURE THAT'LL HAVE A SITTING AREA FOR RESIDENTS TO KINDA LOOK OUT OVER THAT NATURAL AREA.
HERE AGAIN, IT'S JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, WE TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THE OWNERSHIP AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THESE, UH, STREETS, RIGHT OF WAYS WILL BE PUBLIC OR YEAH, PUBLIC STREETS PUBLICLY MAINTAINED.
STORMWATER MAINTENANCE, UM, WILL BE PUBLIC OWNED, PUBLIC MAINTAINED, BUT AS FAR AS A STORMWATER BASIN, THE BASIN ITSELF WILL BE MAINTAINED BY THE CITY.
BUT THE, THE REST OF THE RESERVE AREA IS MAINTAINED BY THE HOA.
SO THAT'S WHAT THE WESTWOOD RESERVE SHOULD BE MAINTAINED BY.
UM, THE HOA, I THINK IT'S, UH, TEXT IN THE BOTTOM.
BILLINGS LEAK CREEK TO THE EAST, UM, IS GONNA BE RESERVED, OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE CITY.
THE CENTRAL CO COURT IS OWNED BY THE CITY, BUT MAINTAINED BY THE HOA, SAME WITH THE EASTERN COURT THAT'S IN THE CENTER OF THE CUL-DE-SAC BULB.
AND THEN LANDSCAPE EASEMENTS ARE PRIVATELY HELD AND MAINTAINED BY HOA.
AGAIN, WE'RE NOT DEVIATING FROM THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF WHAT, UM, WE CAME FORTH WITH AS THE KIND OF THE ARCHITECTURAL FEEL OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
SO THIS IS, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE IT'S THE SAME IMAGERY THAT WE USED IN THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
AND THAT'S, UH, THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
I'LL TURN THE TIME OVER TO YOU MISSING.
THANK YOU AND GOOD EVENING COMMISSION MEMBERS.
THIS IS A COMBINED FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND A FINAL PLAT APPLICATION.
FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS A THIRD IN THE LAST STAGE OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
THE PURPOSE IS TO ASSURE CONSISTENCY WITH THE PDP AND FINALIZED DETAILS.
MINOR TEXT MODIFICATIONS ARE ALSO CONSIDERED AT THIS STAGE.
THE ATIONS FOR COMMISSION MEMBERS TONIGHT IS THE TEXT ALIGNMENT SITE LAYOUT, ACCESS, CIRCULATION, THE MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS, LANDSCAPING, AS WELL AS COMPLIANCE WITH STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AND UTILITIES.
PCC IS THE FINAL REVIEWING BODY FOR THIS APPLICATION AND A DETERMINATION IS REQUIRED TONIGHT.
THE PLANNING PROCESS IS A TWO STEP PROCESS, WHICH IS HEARD BOTH BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS WELL AS CITY COUNCIL.
IT IS A REQUIRED PROCESS FOR ANY NEW SUBDIVISION WHEN THERE IS A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OR AN OPEN SPACE DEDICATION.
THE ATIONS TONIGHT ARE LOT SIZE COMPLIANCE, OPEN SPACE SIZE COMPLIANCE, STREET LOCATIONS, AS WELL AS EASEMENT LOCATIONS.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL IS REQUIRED TONIGHT BY THE COMMISSION.
AS MENTIONED EARLIER, CITY COUNCIL IS THE FINAL REVIEWING BODY FOR THIS APPLICATION.
THE SITE IS ZONED PUBERTY BRIGHT ROAD RESERVE.
IT IS SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO THE NORTHEAST AND WEST AND FERRE PARK TO SOUTHEAST, SORRY SOUTHWEST AND HOPE ELEMENTARY TO SOUTHEAST.
I'LL QUICKLY RECAP THE HISTORY OF THE SITE EARLIER THIS YEAR.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED THE PDP WITH NINE CONDITIONS.
AT THAT MEETING, THERE WAS AN EXTENSIVE DISCUSSION ON SIDEWALK AND SHARED USE PART WITHIN THE RESERVE A AND THE OPINIONS WERE MIXED REGARDING THE SIDEWALKS AS WELL AS THE SHARED USE PART.
CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE REZONING OF THIS LAND FROM R ONE TO PUD.
BRIGHT ROAD RESERVE CITY COUNCIL ALSO SUPPORTED THE PASSIVE USE OF RESERVE A NOT REQUIRING A CONTINUOUS SHARED USE PATH WITHIN THAT RESERVE AND FAVORED A NATIONALIZED PATH TO ACCESS THIS STORMWATER BASIN FROM THE BRIGHT ROAD.
PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY AND SAFETY WERE ALSO EMPHASIZED AT THAT MEETING REQUIRING THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE SIDEWALK ON BOTH SIDE OF THE STREETS WITHIN THE ENTIRE SUBDIVISION.
COUNCIL ALSO RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT THE MAINTENANCE AND THE OWNERSHIP OF THESE OPEN SPACE RESERVES WHERE THERE ARE FOUR RESERVES.
UM, AS THE INITIAL PRINT PROPOSED BOTH CITY OWNERSHIP AS WELL AS THE MAINTENANCE FEES AT THE MAIN MEETING, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE PLAT
[02:35:01]
WITH FOUR FOOT WIDE SIDEWALK ON BOTH SIDE OF THE STREETS AND REQUIRED THAT THE APPLICANT PLACE THE EASEMENTS OUTSIDE OF THE THREE PRESERVATION ZONE, WHICH IS ON THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE.WITH THE CURRENT FTP APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT HAS LARGELY SATISFIED ALL OF THE CONDITIONS WHICH WERE ESTABLISHED BY CITY COUNCIL.
TO ADDRESS CITY COUNCIL CONCERNS ON MAINTENANCE OWNERSHIP, THE MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE RESERVE A IS NOW SHIFTED TO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION EXCEPT THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT OF THE BASIN, WHICH WILL REMAIN WITH THE CITY.
SIMILARLY, THE MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE RESERVE B IS ALSO SHIFTED TO HOA FROM THE CITY.
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE WATERWAY.
THE APPLICANT HAS TO CORRECT THE WATERWAY DEFICIENCY WITHIN THE RESERVE B, WHICH IS INCLUDED AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO HANDING IT OVER TO THE CITY AT THE PDP APPLICATION AS WELL AS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATIONS.
THE EASEMENTS WERE NOT IDENTIFIED.
20 FOOT EASEMENTS ARE NOW HERE, SHOWN HERE IN THE RED DOTTED LINE.
IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THE MINIMUM PRIVATE OPEN SPACE AND TO MEET THE NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN GUIDELINE REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS TO MAINTAIN THAT BUILDABLE DEPTH ON EACH LOT, THE TREE PRESERVATION ZONE IS NOW BEING REDUCED FROM 20 FEET TO 15 FEET.
THIS WOULD TRIGGER A TEXT MODIFICATION AS 20 FOOT WAS APPROVED FOR THE TEXT TO ENSURE CONNECTIVITY OF THIS DEVELOPMENT WITH THE FUTURE SHARED USE PATH, WHICH WAS PROPOSED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BROW ROAD, A CROSSWALK IS PROPOSED AS HIGHLIGHTED HERE WITH THE BLUE ARROW.
THIS CROSSWALK IS PROPOSED TO BE, UM, INSTALLED AND COORDINATED WITH THE CITY TRAIL PLAN IN THE FUTURE, UM, WHICH WOULD BE APPLICANT'S RESPONSIBILITY.
AND THE APPLICANT WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH STAFF TO ENSURE THAT THIS COMES INTO COMPLIANCE WHEN THE SHARED USE PATH IS DONE WITH ALL THOSE PROPOSED CHANGES.
UM, MINOR TEXT MODIFICATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT TEXT DUE TO THE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS.
THE MINIMUM LOT AREA IS APPROXIMATELY 143 SQUARE FEET LESS THAN WHAT WHAT IS REQUIRED PER THE TEXT.
AS MENTIONED EARLIER, IN ORDER TO ALSO ACHIEVE THAT MINIMUM PRIVATE OPEN SPACE OF 20 FOOT BEHIND THE REAR LOTS FOR LOT FIVE AND FROM LOTS FIVE TO 10, UM, TREE PRESERVATION ZONE IS AGAIN REDUCED FROM 20 FEET TO FIVE FEET, SORRY, 15 FEET.
AND THEN, UM, THE PRINCIPLE SET BACK TO THE REAR, UM, STRUCTURE IS ALSO INCREASED ON LOTS ONE AND TWO AS WELL AS ON LOTS FIVE TO 10, WHICH WOULD INCREASE FROM 40 TO 60 FEET AND 40 TO 55 FEET FOR LOTS, FIVE TO 10.
ALL THESE ADJUSTMENTS WILL ALLOW FOR A PRACTICAL LOT DESIGN AS WELL AS PRESERVE AS MANY EXISTING TREES AS POSSIBLE.
LISTED HERE ARE THE MINOR TEXT MODIFICATION CRITERIA.
THESE REVIEW CRITERIA ARE MET AND THE TEXT CONTINUE TO BE IN CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMMUNITY PLAN AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE EDGES IN DEVELOPMENTS THE PROPOSED TEXT MODIFICATIONS AND SHOW THAT THE DEVELOPMENT IS OF HIGH QUALITY AND MEETS THE NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN GUIDE REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS CONTINUE TO MEET THE TREE PRESERVATION ZONE IN THE BEST POSSIBLE WAY.
LISTED HERE ARE THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN CRITERIA.
MOST OF THE CRITERIA ARE EITHER MIXED WITH TEXT MODIFICATION OR WITH CONDITION.
ALL THE FINAL PR CRITERIA ARE LARGELY MET OR THEY'RE MET WITH CONDITION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING TEXT MODIFICATIONS, WHICH ARE LISTED HERE, WHICH WOULD BE THE THREE PRESERVATION ZONE MINIMUM BRI SETBACK TO PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES FOR LOT ONE AND TWO AS WELL AS FOR LOT FIVE TO LOT 10 AND MINOR TEXT REVISIONS WHICH ARE SHOWN IN THE RED LINE VERSION, WHICH IS, UM, PROVIDED IN THE PACKET.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH FOLLOWING CONDITIONS THAT THE APPLICANT COORDINATE WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE OF THE CITY TRAIL PAN AND INSTALL THAT PEDESTRIAN CROSSING.
IN THE FUTURE, THE APPLICANT WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH ENGINEERING TO ENSURE THAT THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT IS IN COMPLIANCE AND THE APPLICANT CORRECT ANY WATERWAY DEFICIENCY WITH WITHIN THE RESERVE BE WHATEVER IS IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY ENGINEER AND RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT WITH ONE CONDITION THAT APPLICANT MAKES ANY MINOR TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS BEFORE CITY COUNCIL PRESENTATION.
WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
WE DID RECEIVE ONE PUBLIC COMMENT, WHICH IS, UM, WHICH HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSION.
MR. ALEXANDER? NO QUESTIONS MR. DESLER.
I I DIDN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I, I WANNA MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR ON SOMETHING.
THE, THE RESERVE B THE ONE THAT BACKS UP TO BILLINGSLEY, THE CITY'S GONNA OWN IT
[02:40:01]
AND THEY'RE GONNA MAINTAIN THE WATERWAY, BUT THE HOA IS GONNA MAINTAIN EVERYTHING ELSE.I I SWEAR ON YOUR PRESENTATION IT DIDN'T SAY THAT SPECIFICALLY, BUT I GUESS IT DOESN'T MATTER AS LONG AS YOUR UNDERSTANDING.
MR. GARVIN, UM, UH, WHEN YOU WERE HERE THE LAST TIME, I THINK WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT, UH, RETENTION OR DETENTION AREA, UM, AND THERE'LL BE THE MAINTENANCE PATH GOING THERE.
AND I THINK AT THE TIME WE HAD TALKED ABOUT IS THERE A POSSIBILITY TO HAVE A VERY, EVEN THOUGH IT'S A RETENTION AREA, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY TO HAVE A NATURAL PATH THAT WOULD CONNECT TO THE, I THINK IT'S THE REFERRED TO AS THE ALLEY IN THE PLAN.
UM, SO I GUESS FIRST FROM, DO YOU HAVE ANY REACTION TO THAT? AND THEN I'LL, I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY WITH THE CITY ABOUT THE DUAL USE OF A MAINTENANCE PATH LIKE THAT.
MAYBE I SHOULD DO THAT IN THE OTHER ORDER.
SO THIS WILL BE A COMPACTED AGGREGATE PATH AND THIS WOULD BE BUILT OR CONSTRUCTED AS PER WHATEVER IS REQUIRED BY THE CITY ENGINEER.
AND, UM, WE WILL ENSURE THAT THIS IS, COMES INTO COMPLIANCE WHERE THE CITY VEHICLES OR THE LOAD OF THE CITY VEHICLES IS TAKEN BY THAT COMPACT AGGREGATE PATH.
I GUESS I'M WONDERING IF RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO REAL CONNECTION TO IT.
AND THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER QUESTION I'D HAVE, BUT IS DOES THE CITY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH A MAINTENANCE ROAD KIND OF BEING LEADING TO A POTENTIAL WALKING PATH? THAT'S SO DUAL USE IS A MAINTENANCE ROAD, BUT ALSO MORE PRACTICAL USE AS A WALKING PATH.
SO, UM, RIGHT NOW THE PATH IS GOING TO TERMINATE AT THE STORM WATER BASIN AND THE PATH IS NOT CONNECTED WITH THAT.
OTHER PATH, WHICH IS COMING FROM THE SUBDIVISION TO THE STORMWATER BASIN.
AND THEN, UM, I KNOW WE'RE NOT ON THE PUBLIC COMMENT YET, BUT I HAD A QUESTION ON THE PUBLIC COMMENT.
IF YOU COULD ADDRESS, DO YOU KNOW, UH, WHAT THE COMMENTS ADDRESSING IN, IN TERMS OF A PROPOSED TRAIL THROUGH THEIR PROPERTY? I'M UNSURE AT THIS POINT BECAUSE CITY DOES HAVE A PLAN ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE TRAIL ROAD, BUT OF COURSE THERE'LL BE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER IN THE FUTURE WHEN THAT PLAN COMES TO THE EXECUTION.
MR. WAY, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT SIDEWALKS
THE COMMISSION DISCUSSION WAS ABOUT PROVIDING A SIX FOOT SIDEWALK, WHICH WOULD BE THE NEW STANDARD FOR A SIDEWALK IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND I THINK COMMISSION, WELL I'M SURE COMMISSION APPROVED FIVE FOOT SIDEWALK ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET.
UM, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION AND A LOT OF NEGOTIATION.
UM, THE TEXT SHOWED FIVE FOOT SIDEWALK AND COMMISSION AGREED TO FIVE FOOT SIDEWALK.
UM, CITY COUNCIL, UM, SUPPORTED THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, WHICH CURRENTLY STATE FOUR FOOT SIDEWALK AND SUPPORTED FOREFOOT ON BOTH SIDES.
YOU STATED, UM, PART OF IT THAT I
SO IT, IT, I GUESS I WASN'T QUITE SURE OR I DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND THAT IT HAD CHANGED THAT LIKE, WE'RE GOING FROM SIX NOW TO FOUR, WE WERE COMPROMISING AT FIVE AND I GUESS NOW COUNCIL, IT'S A COUNCIL RESOLUTION, SO IT'S, IT'S NOT NO LONGER IN OUR OUR PURVIEW TO DISCUSS.
SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT FOR MY OWN IFICATION
AND JUST TO PROVIDE YOU A LITTLE MORE, UM, SO AT COUNCIL THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION AND COUNCIL DECIDED, UM, TO APPROVE IT WITH SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES.
UM, WITH THE APPROVED PDP AND AT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE WIDTH AND THAT'S WHERE THE FOUR FOOT SIDEWALK WAS APPROVED.
I I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE SO THE COMMISSION UNDERSTOOD THAT BECAUSE IT WAS, IT IS A CHANGE AND IT'S A, IT'S AN INTERESTING CHANGE.
MS. HARDER, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
UM, I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION IS HAVE YOU HAD, UM, ANY RECENT MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORS? I KNOW YOU'VE DONE A GOOD JOB MEETING WITH THEM THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS AND HERE WE ARE.
I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU HAD A UPDATE ON THAT.
NO, I DON'T THINK THEY'VE HAD ANY, UH, RECENT MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
AND THEN YOU ALSO MENTIONED LOT
[02:45:01]
FOUR AND FIVE IN THE CHANGES AND SO FORTH, BUT CAN YOU HELP ME WITH HOW, UH, ARE THOSE GARAGE SIZES THREE CAR GARAGES OR WHAT WOULD YOU UH, WE DON'T KNOW.I MEAN THESE, THESE ARE ALL GONNA BE CUSTOM HOMES, BUT THEY COULD BE, I GUESS THAT'S THE IT COULD BE, YEAH.
THERE'S THE POTENTIAL OF A THREE.
AND THEN, UM, MY LAST QUESTION JUST, WILL YOU BE ASKING CITY COUNCIL FOR A TREE WAIVER? I APPRECIATE LOOKING AT ALL THE TREES YOU ARE PUTTING IN.
NO, WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR A WAIVER.
CAN CAN YOU PULL UP THE, UM, OUR QUESTIONS OR OUR TEXT MODIFICATIONS? 'CAUSE AREN'T IS THE LIKE, I GUESS THIS IS A QUESTION THE MAXIMUM, AREN'T WE CHANGING THE BUILDABLE AREA, REDUCING THE BUILDABLE AREA? IS THAT, SHOULD THAT BE PART OF OUR, SORRY, THE LIST OF CONSIDERATIONS? CAN YOU PULL THAT? THAT WASN'T ON THAT LIST, SHOULD THAT, IT'S JUST A GENERAL QUESTION.
BECAUSE AREN'T WE APPROVING IT DOWN FROM 9,900 DOWN TO 98? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE ADDED TO THAT? I'M JUST, WE, WE, WE DIDN'T PURPOSELY CHANGE THAT.
THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS UNDER THE GUIDELINES OF UM, CLEANING UP THE TEXT TO ALIGN WITH THE PDP.
UM, THAT LOT DID CHANGE WHEN WE WERE, UM, 'CAUSE I THINK YOU GUYS SAID THAT WE HAD TO HAVE 40 FOOT MINIMUM FRONTAGE ON ALL LOTS.
SO SOME OF THOSE LOTS DID CHANGE AND THAT DID NOT GET UPDATED IN THE TEXT.
IT'S JUST THIS IS TWO LOTS THAT WERE, YOU'RE PROPOSING TO REDUCE THE MAXIMUM, RIGHT? THE MAXIMUM LOT WE'RE, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING OR NO, WE'RE NOT, WE, WE JUST UPDATED THE TEXT TO WHAT THE ACTUAL LOT SQUARE FOOTAGE IS BASED ON THE, THE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS WE HAD TO DO TO MAKE SURE EVERY LOT HAD 40 FOOT FROM, BUT IT'S, BUT IT'S LESS THAN THE CURRENT TEXT.
IT'S LESS THAN WHAT THE PDP TEXT WAS.
I GUESS THAT WAS MY QUESTIONS.
DOES THAT NEED TO BE ON THIS? SO THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE MINOR TEXT REVISION.
AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION WAS, UM, ABOUT, UH, WE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST TIME TOO, THE BRIGHT ROAD, UM, SHARED USE PATH.
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT TIMING OF THAT? 'CAUSE WE HAVE, I THINK WE POTENTIALLY HAVE ANOTHER SITUATION WHERE WE'VE GOT A LOT OF, UH, RESIDENTS THAT ARE ON A PATH TO NOWHERE
SO WHAT'S THE, UH, WHAT'S THE GAME PLAN FOR THE SHARED USE PATH AND I GUESS HOW FAR DOES IT EXTEND DOWN BRIGHT ROAD AND UH, SO, UH, AGAIN, JOSH REKEY DIVISION OF ENGINEERING, UM, THE SHARED USE PATH PLAN RIGHT NOW IS AN EXTENSION FROM THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE SHARED USE PATH AT THE SCHOOL.
AND THE PATH WILL BE EXTENDED AGAIN TO THE WEST.
THE BRIGHT ROAD BRIDGE OVER BILLINGSLEY CREEK IS GOING TO BE SLIGHTLY WIDENED TO ACCOUNT FOR THE, UH, SHARED USE PATH TO GO ACROSS THE SOUTH SIDE OF THAT BRIDGE AND THEN BE ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF BRIGHT ROAD.
UH, RIGHT NOW THE PLANS ARE NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT COMPLETE, BUT THEY WILL BRING THE TRAIL TO GRANDE CLIFFS AND THAT IS WHERE THE CITY IS INTENDING TO END THE PATH AT THIS POINT IN TIME IS AT GRANDE CLIFFS.
SO IT'LL BE THE EAST SIDE OF GRANDE CLIFFS IS WHERE THE CITY BUILT PATH WILL END.
THE EXACT TIMING ON THAT BECAUSE OF NEGOTIATIONS FOR BUDGET AND CIP PROGRAMMING HAS PUSHED THAT OFF, I BELIEVE UNTIL 27, UH, FOR WHEN THAT CONSTRUCTION WOULD OCCUR.
UM, AND THEN WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS VERY KINDLY BEEN WORKING WITH US ON IS THEN BUILDING BASICALLY THE LANDING ON THE WEST SIDE OF GRANDE CLIFFS TO THEN CROSS BRIGHT ROAD TO GET INTO THEIR DEVELOPMENT.
AND THAT WAS AT OUR REQUEST TO PUT THE CROSSWALK ON THE WEST SIDE OF GRANDE CLIFFS.
IT'LL CONNECT OVER THE CLIFFS AND THEN AT SOME POINT IN THE DISTANT, MAYBE NOT DISTANT FUTURE, BUT AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, THE CITY'S INTENT IS TO EXTEND THAT SHARED USE PATH ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BRIGHT ROAD OVER TO THE FERRIS PARK.
BUT AGAIN, THAT TIMING IS AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.
SO I GUESS THAT WAS MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION.
SO THE RESIDENTS NOW WOULD HAVE TO WALK ESSENTIALLY ON BRIGHT ROAD TO GET TO THE PARK? CORRECT? THERE IS A CONSIDERATION AT THE MOMENT.
UM, WE'VE DISCUSSED WITH THE APPLICANT PUTTING A CROSSWALK IN WHERE THERE THE PATH COMES OUT OF RESERVE A COMES DOWN TO BRIGHT ROAD THAT THERE MAY BE A CONSIDERATION FOR A CROSSWALK FROM THAT FINGER OF PROPERTY STRAIGHT ACROSS BRIGHT ROAD INTO THE PARK.
BUT WE JUST DIDN'T WE JUST ESTABLISH THAT RESERVE A THOUGH YOU CAN'T GET FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THROUGH RESERVE A TO THAT MAINTENANCE PATH OR YOU CAN'T YOU CAN ON FOOT.
THERE, THERE IS NO DEFINED FORMAL PATH BETWEEN THE NORTH SOUTH MAINTENANCE PATH AND THE PATH IN FROM THE ALLEY, BUT IT WOULD STILL BE VERY MUCH WALKABLE.
[02:50:01]
THANK YOU FOR EXPLAINING THAT.
ARE THERE ANY FINAL QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION THAT DID KIND OF BRING BACK UP? I THINK MY POINT FROM BEFORE ABOUT A NATURAL PATHWAY, UM, CONNECTING THE MAINTENANCE PATH TO THE ALLEY, IS THAT, JUST SO I'M CLEAR, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS WOULD CONSIDER OR VERY NATURAL, SOMETHING THAT COULD OBVIOUSLY DEAL WITH THE WEATHER BUT NOT BE A PAVED PATH? YEAH, I, I THINK THE INTENT WAS NOT TO CONNECT THOSE TWO BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT TO INTRODUCE PEOPLE TO BE TRAVELING THROUGH THAT NATURAL AREA IN A CONSISTENT MANNER JUST TO TRAVERSE THROUGH.
UM, WE, WE WANTED THAT TO BE NATURAL AND AND FOR THE RESIDENTS REALLY TO ENJOY.
AND THAT IS, THAT'S LAND THAT WOULD BE DEEDED TO DUBLIN AND THEN MAINTAINED BY THE HOA? YES.
SORRY, I HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION THAT WHAT, WHAT'S THE SPEED, I GUESS WE'RE BRINGING UP AN ISSUE 'CAUSE I THINK THERE'S A SAFETY CONCERN 'CAUSE RESIDENTS ARE GONNA GO TO THAT PARK, THEY'RE GONNA BE ON BRIGHT ROAD.
THERE'S A, THERE'S THAT TURN THERE.
WHAT'S THE, I MEAN WHAT'S THE, I GUESS WHAT'S THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE ON THE SAFETY OF THAT? BECAUSE THEY'RE OBVIOUSLY, IF THEY'RE ON A BIKE, THEY'RE NOT GONNA, YOU'RE A SKATEBOARD, WHATEVER.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA USE THAT MAINTENANCE PATH.
THEY'RE GONNA WANT TO GO DOWN BRIGHT ROAD TO GET TO THAT PARK.
COULD I SAY JAMIE THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT PARK? IT'S NOT PAVED ANYWAY.
YEAH, IT'S A, AND AND MAYBE THAT CHANGES IN THE FUTURE, BUT IT'S ORIENTED TOWARDS EMERALD PARKWAY AND IT JUST TURNS INTO GRAVEL.
SO THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING BECAUSE THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL, UM, AT THE PDP REQUIRED THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE A CONNECTED SHARED USE PATH WITHIN THAT RESERVE.
A AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
CITY COUNCIL PREFERRED TO BE LEFT IN A VERY NATURALIZED STATE AND THUS EVEN THE UM, ACCESS PATH IS VERY COMPACTED AGGREGATE AND IS NOT AN ASPHALT CITY REQUIRED AN ASPHALT PATH TO BE THERE FOR THE CITY MAINTENANCE VEHICLES.
UM, IT WAS COUNCIL PREFERENCE TO KEEP IT AS NATURALIZED AS POSSIBLE AND NOT PROVIDE A CONNECTED SHARED USE SPOT WITHIN THAT RESERVE.
ANY FINAL, FINAL QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? OKAY.
UH, WE DID RECEIVE AT LEAST ONE PUBLIC COMMENT I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.
HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY ADDITIONAL, IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION? WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT.
THIS IS, UH, A SET OF TWO ITEMS. AND SO WE WILL HANDLE THESE, UH, TOGETHER FOR DISCUSSION, BUT SEPARATE MOTIONS AND WHY CHANGE? GOOD THING MR. ALEXANDER.
THIS IS AN OUTSTANDING PROJECT, SO I I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE.
I THINK THIS IS REALLY, REALLY A GREAT, GREAT PROJECT AND I THANK YOU FOR BRINGING A PROJECT OF THIS QUALITY TO US.
MR. GARVIN ALSO SUPPORTIVE MR. WAY SUPPORTIVE.
I AM ALSO AND I LOVE THAT THERE ARE SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES.
SO THANKS TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THAT PARTICULAR ONE.
ALRIGHT, UH, THEN WE HAVE THE, UH, UH, RECOMMENDATION, THE APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING TEXT MODIFICATIONS THAT ARE LISTED ON THE SCREEN.
THAT'S ONE THROUGH FOUR AND I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
IS THAT MR. ALEXANDER? MM-HMM
THANK YOU MS. MAXWELL AND I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION, UH, FOR APPROVAL OF THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH THE FOLLOWING THREE CONDITIONS AS LISTED ON THE SCREEN.
MR. WE, MS. MAXWELL, MS. HARDER? YES.
AND FINALLY, UH, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL OF APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT WITH THE FOLLOWING SINGLE CONDITION AS LISTED ON THE SCREEN.
[02:55:01]
THANK YOU.WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME THIS EVENING AND TRAVEL SAFELY.
ALRIGHT, WELL LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE MADE IT, UH, DO
[COMMUNICATIONS]
WE HAVE ANY COMMUNICATIONS FOR THIS EVENING? UH, JUST A COUPLE DATE RELATED THINGS.UM, SO NEXT WEDNESDAY ON THE 29TH IS THE EVENING OF GRATITUDE.
SO THAT IS THAT EVENT AT THE EXCHANGE THAT IS INTENDED TO RECOGNIZE ALL OF YOU AND ALL YOUR OTHER FELLOW VOLUNTEERS, UM, ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR ALL YOUR SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY.
UM, SO THAT'S FROM SIX TO EIGHT ON THE 29TH AT THE EXCHANGE.
SO HOPE YOU ALL CAN MAKE THAT.
UM, AND THEN WE HAVE OUR NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING FOR NOVEMBER THE SIXTH.
UM, AND WE DO HAVE A COUPLE HEFTY AGENDAS COMING UP HERE TOWARDS THE END OF THE YEAR.
SO WE ARE LOOKING AT SOME, AN ADDITIONAL DATE POTENTIALLY IN DECEMBER.
UH, JAMIE AND I ARE TRYING TO COORDINATE THAT WITH, WITH OUR AGENDAS, UM, TO FIGURE OUT WHAT MAY OR MAY NOT WORK TO IF IN CASE WE NEED THAT.
UH, WE WERE JUST, UH, WONDERING WHEN WE'LL GET DATES FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR JUST TO LOOK AT.
SO COUNCIL JUST APPROVED GREAT QUESTION.
COUNCIL JUST APPROVED THEIR DATES, UM, AT THE LAST MEETING OR THE ONE RIGHT BEFORE.
UM, SO WE THEN WAIT FOR THAT TO HAPPEN AND THEN GENERATE OURS.
THANKFULLY WE TYPICALLY APPROVE JANUARY AND FEBRUARY OF THE NEXT YEAR.
SO WE'RE DEFINITELY COVERED FOR THE FIRST COUPLE MONTHS OF THE YEAR.
BUT YEAH, THAT SHOULD BE COMING HERE PRETTY SHORTLY SO WE CAN GET YOU ALL TO WEIGH IN ON WHAT WORKS AND DOESN'T FOR YOUR CALENDARS AND PLAN AHEAD.
ANYONE ELSE FOR COMMUNICATIONS? I HAVE ONE.
UH, THIS WILL BE MY LAST MEETING ON PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, UH, WITH MY CHANGE IN POSITION AT WORK.
WE ARE RELOCATING TO MICHIGAN, SO WE WILL BE NON DUBLIN RESIDENTS BY THE TIME OF OUR NEXT MEETING.
MR. WAY IS AWARE OF THIS AS HIS STAFF AND CITY COUNCIL, BUT THANKS FOR A LIVELY ONE.
THIS WAS LIKE THE, THIS WAS A GREAT MEETING TO GO OUT ON.
SO, UH, I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU.
YOU GUYS ARE AN AMAZING COMMISSION.
UH, I'VE BEEN HERE QUITE A WHILE ON THE BEST COMMISSION I'VE BEEN ON, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I JUST, I JUST WANNA SAY I'VE BEEN ON A LOT OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
YOU'RE THE BEST CHAIR I'VE EVER HAD ON A BOARD OF COMMISSION.
SO MAYBE WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT WHO THE NEXT CHAIR IS OR, AND VICE CHAIR
BUT REBECCA, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, CERTAINLY TO DUBLIN IN EIGHT YEARS AND WE THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
UH, ACTUALLY IT'S ONLY LIKE A SIZE SEVEN, SO
MR. WAY, LAST TIME FOR ME, THE SIX O'CLOCK.
OH, OH, UM, YES, THERE'S ONE ITEM.
OH, I WAS, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, UM, UH, AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE CHAIR, UH, LEAVING HER POSITION, THERE WILL NEED TO BE, UH, NEW ELECTIONS FOR CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.
AND SO WE WERE GOING TO PROPOSE A SPECIAL MEETING AT 6:00 PM ON, IS THAT NO, NOVEMBER 6TH, UH, TO HAVE EXECUTIVE DIS EXECUTIVE SESSION AND, UM, HAVE THAT ELECTION BECAUSE WE THEN HAVE A VERY FULL AGENDA FOR THE SIX 30 MEETING ON NOVEMBER 6TH.
SO IS THAT AGREEABLE TO EVERYONE WHO WILL BE ON THE COMMISSION NEXT TIME?
YOU, YOU CAN DO IT WITHOUT ME.
AS LONG AS YOU DON'T NOMINATE ME FOR ANY POSITION
SO YOU WON'T BE HERE SO WE CAN NOMINATE, YOU CAN, CAN WE DO IT TONIGHT? AM I NOMINATING
YEAH, SO THAT, I ASSUME THAT'S FINE.
SO YEAH, WE, WE WILL THEN HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING AT SIX FOR PURPOSES OF, UH, ELECTING OFFICERS AND THEN THE REGULAR MEETING WOULD CONVENE AT SIX 30.
WE CAN MAKE, WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT'S CALENDARED AND REMINDED.
[03:00:01]
THAT'D BE APPRECIATED.SO DO WE NEED TO HAVE GARY HERE FOR THAT VOTE? IT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO, YOU'LL STILL HAVE A QUORUM.
IS IT JUST, BUT IN TERMS OF VOTING IN OFFICERS, YOU, IT'S, IT'S NOT LIKE YOU NEED EVERYBODY HERE TO DO.
I HAVE, I HAVE DONE IT JUST OUT OF MY OWN PREFERENCE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD CONS CONSENSUS AROUND THE ENTIRE BODY.
BUT AS FAR AS NEED, YOU JUST NEED COR DO YOU WANNA GIVE YOUR SPEECH NOW SO YOU WON'T BE HERE OR THERE ARE FIVE OTHER HIGHLY QUALIFIED PEOPLE.
IS THERE AN OPTION FOR HIM TO CALL IN OR, UH, TO BE ON? IS THERE, IS THERE ANY, IS THAT PROHIBIT OR IS THAT A POSSIBILITY? SO HE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO VOTE, UH, OR COUNT AS A MEMBER OF THE QUORUM.
AND, BUT WHAT I'M HEARING IS, AND I ALSO KNOW IF HE BE ABLE TO ACCEPT RECOMMENDATION IS WHAT I'M HEARING.
HE JUST WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO VOTE ON IT.
I'M BEING CHEEKY, BUT CORRECT.
YEAH, I, I DON'T KNOW IF MR. ALEXANDER IS, UH,
ALRIGHT, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THE BODY HAS CONSENSUS.
NEXT MEETING, 6:00 PM UH, CALENDAR REMINDERS FROM STAFF ARE APPRECIATED.
AND WITH THAT, ANY FINAL COMMUNICATIONS MR. WAY LAST TIME FOR ME? REBECCA, THIS IS FOR YOU.