Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

good evening it is 6 o'clock and it is time for the beaver Greek City Planning Commission meeting um with that we'll call it to order and then take the roll call Mr Fountain here Mr Francis is absent Mr Jones here Mr self is absent Mr Meyer here and with that can I have a motion to excuse Mr Francis and Mr self motion to excuse Mr Francis and Mr self second it and we'll just do that by General consensus okay good and then approval of the agenda staff any corrections NOP we're good but I think we want to remove yeah um motion to remove the reorganization um and put that uh on the April Planning Commission meeting do I have a second and R to do that by General consensus as well agreed okay and then the approval of the J January 15 2025 M minute meetings motion to approve the meeting minutes from the uh 15 January Planning and Development commission meeting second and we'll do that by General consensus agree all right and with that we're at our P first public hearing um PUD 25-2 Valene sorry let me take a second and thank Drew m Drew SS for serving on the Planning Commission uh his term was up um thank you for his service and welcome our newest member Mr Fountain so thank you John thank you and with that we'll go to our first public hearing it's case number PUD 25-2 on an application filed by MCD McBride Dale Claren 5721 Dragon way sweet 300 Cincinnati Ohio 45227 the application request approval to rezone 0.65 Acres from B2 community business district to a cpud commercial planned unit development the property is located at 3913 Colonel Glenn Highway

further described is book one page N9 parcel 45 on the Green County property tax ad and our public hearings work is first we'll hear from the applicant and then we'll have a presentation from staff and then we'll hear from the public so with that the applicant good afternoon my name good evening my name is Jonathan woker 5721 Dragon Way Suite 300 Cincinnati Ohio 45227 I'm with McBride Clarion and I do have some slides don't think I did anything to okay U yes so I have a brief presentation I know that the uh request was read into the record um I'm here on behalf of commercial site Acquisitions which is also Casto development and they have a contract to purchase uh 0.5 Acres um at 3913 Colonel Glenn Highway um I have uh representatives from Casto as well as with valine instant oil change with me tonight if you have questions for them um we do have Frontage on both Colonel Glenn Highway and on Germany Lane uh this property is just west of zinc Lane uh the property as you see on the slide of Zone B2 we are requesting a zone change to commercial PUD cpud which would allow for the uh Valvoline Instant Oil Change which would also be a um minor automotive repair facility um this is the property you can see uh We've highlighted that uh Colonel Glenn Highway is to the north and and Germany Lane is to the South um this is an existing beverage drive-thru um and a vehicle storage lot um so that's the the current use um we're proposing to have a 2bay uh valve Instant Oil Change facility um you can see our concept plan

that we've submitted uh we'll have uh six stacking spaces we'll also have nine parking spaces we're proposing a driveway on on both of our street frontages um you can see from this plan and compared to the last plan that we are improving the Green Space um substantially on this project this is a building elevation I know we're at the preliminary stage but we think this is quality building we believe believe that it meets your architectural standards um for this uh we also submitted some pretty detailed analysis about stacking for this uh project and um provided detail information about um our user and from the valine team and so you know we look forward to working with the staff on that um but we're confident that we have a plan that that works um and so we're asking the Planning Commission to recommend approval for this um we believe this allows red velopment of uh underutilized property um we did submit detailed information about our our plans um we have reviewed the staff report um have no objection to the conditions uh recommended including the restrictions on future use um so we're in a position to uh support that staff recommendation um and so we would request your approval for this application um I look forward to answering questions and then working with staff on a final plan at some point thank you for your time with that we'll hear from staff good evening everyone uh once again we are here for the vavine uh rezoning here uh PUD 25-2 um just rehashing what what was

already previously said but uh it's the lot's 65 acres they're hoping to put a Valene Instant Oil Change on that um at its current state how it's Zone B2 um that would not be permitted uh which is why they are pursuing this uh this uh zoning change here we're kind of in the first prawn of this uh this lawn process here so this is this is the rezoning stage uh basic basically what we're going to go over tonight is just the specific uses and the conditions kind of the concept plan and and the architectural features while great to see early in this stage here are not applicable here this evening those can be subject to change um as we jump into that site plan stage uh in the phase two of this uh just giving your bearings here uh we are on that southern star uh to the South um and this is kind of in our Northwest pocket um of the city here um indicated by that star to the north there once again that's the visual of the lot uh we're we're confident that this valine site will be a significant upgrade to the area as far as uh visual visually um uh given what's what's currently there so this is just our zoning map indicating that it is zoned B2 um and and just going through this again um we're we're changing from a the the request is changing from B2 community business to a cpud um the reason why uh we didn't pursue just a strict B4 is it give staff a little more uh leverage as far as um making the site how how we want compared to um what the the standards in in the B4 zoning District uh and also this this site is is relatively unique um too and and

would create some um unneeded challenges uh with with a straight B4 zoning um with with the cud uh we are mirroring a lot of the uses in B4 zoning um we Randy and I did go through them and decide to exclude about 32 um various uses you can see that in in your uh attachments in the staff report um but those are indicated through a red strike through um just indicating that we we wish that those would not be uh permitted uses in the future uh if this veling site were not to go forward uh so using our our land use plan guiding future development uh what this falls under is a regional commercial office um some key characteristics of that land use plan uh include providing a full range and variety of all aspects of commercial activity um it's oriented around major department stores uh it's typically have a market area spanning multiple County Metropolitan regions and offers a broad spectrum of shopping goods and services uh staff believes that a vehicle repair station aligns well with the intended purposes of this area um it's located near the mall at Fairfield Commons and right Pat Uh Air Force Base uh to have kind of that um multi-spanning markets as well as orientation near some major um major areas to to get some use um and and it's required service for all vehicles so uh staff is confidence that' be a utiliz um a well utilized uh ability of the property once again this is just strictly conceptual but as Jonathan pointed out um this is this is the site plan um nothing's changed from from his to mind so um that's just a conceptual look of of what you might expect to see

um If This Were to move forward and then just a a reminder on City's role in development um we don't have the ability to stop development outright and we I guess for this project specifically we think this is a a much needed upgrade for the area and and is a welcome change um therefore we're recommending approval uh subject to the six conditions in in the resolution um happy to answer any questions and obviously the applicant has a full team here uh that can help answer questions as well thank you so much thank you and with that we'll turn to our public hearing um so we ask that when you come up please state your name and address for the record um you have 3 minutes and if you would like you can borrow up to an an additional six minutes from two people um they need to come up and state their address and name for the record so with that do we have anybody who would like to speak on this case no okay with that I'll close the public hearing Melissa did we have any written input no we did not okay with that turn to my fellow Commissioners Jacob question questions I have a couple uh Colin can you come back up and go back to the site plan that similar to you and what uh Mr Walker said so this is just for the zoning corre and they will come back for the site plan correct yes and that site plan could completely change um by the time the next meeting happen so so just given the traffic on Colonel Glenn I'm a I would think when they come back for the site plan that will be something normally looked at such as uh inass erass off a kernel gland traffic congestion access to all four sides of the building that would be normally in a site plan process exactly yeah we would we would determine uh

especially on that kernel Glenn if if it should if it is deserving a full access or or if it should be limited in any capacity that would be determined at the site plan stage and then the uh the usage of the product their waste disposal that's also a site plan issue as opposed to a zoning consideration for the land uh could you expand on that the the your the use of the property or no the use of the contents that will be dispersed at the property waste oil and others would that be handled separately as an impact on the site or as just an impact of disposal for the city something a site plan might want to note um I think that could be that could be considered the disposal could be considered in the overall approval since that's the intended use that's obviously a significant portion of of that so all right thank you thank you that's all I have Sir Colin I'll just jump in there so I think are you meaning about like what happens with used oil and stuff like that they would have to meet like all the you know reg just the review of can the volume of used oil and other waste storage be considered an impact on the land during resoning for a cpud or is it something that's totally set up for the site plan review and in traditional waste storage methods so that would be the site plan yep got it thank you I'm sure conditions will be will be set forth when the specific site plan rolls around for environmental considerations so a few questions for you so um typically when we see a lot like this where the RightWay extends into the road the city will normally take the RightWay back so at what point does that happen do we need a condition here um is the city looking to do that here Nick did you that would be site plan site plan okay all right um and then not to be too nitpicky but yeah so of the items that you excluded uh there was like two that stuck out to me like maybe we should

exclude them okay I don't know how important that is I mean okay so like bowling alleys was one like that doesn't seem to fit on the site like spacewise sure and then the other was uh Recreation facilities in a customary or customary accessory buildings and gymnasiums those both seemed to fit your definition of like too big right for site yeah so I don't think just curious what staff's opinion on excluding those was yes good evening yeah we look at and a lot of times we do look at if it's a extremely large use like um auditoriums or convention centers or something like that when it comes to size um with a bowling alley you know we want to we were thinking to keep that open in case the property to the east decides they want to rezone and join this PUD or the properties of the West does and um you know the same thing with the um phys physical fitness center um okay that's fair if they can't fit it they're not going to put one on there anyways okay that's fair and so um that's why we just kind of try to keep it open as much as possible okay all right thank you seconding questions all right with that I will need a motion uh motion to um recommend approval uh for uh this uh this PUD zoning change 22 25-2 for Val with the six with the six attached conditions good I second and with that Melissa can you take the RO Please Mr Jones approval Mr fountain yes Mr Meyer yes and with that the motion passes thank you our next case uh PC

25-2 um Melissa can you please read the case this is case number PC 25-2 conditional use on an application filed by Kevin Halton 3500 Salem Avenue Dayton Ohio 45406 the applicant requests conditional use approval to allow a vehicle sales and service new and used located at 4017 Colonel Glenn Highway the property is further described as book one page 2 parcel 52 on the Green County property tax outlas thank you do we have the applicant here okay good evening everyone uh Colin Carville city planner again once again we are asking for a conditional use uh the applicant is asking for conditional use um for kn& Motors uh for the purpose of selling uh you new and used vehicles um at the site at 47 Colonel Glenn Highway um the uh the part of their definition uh for vehicle sales and service also includes uh service um and and the applicant is won't be conducting any uh any body or repair work there so I wanted to kind of clear that up from the start um from the definition so this would strictly be limited to the sales and service of of vehicles or sorry just the sales of vehicles um get our bearings once again um we're still in that northwest corner of the city uh right off Colonel Glenn there uh it's it's at the busy intersection of Colonel Glenn and gr Hall um indicated by that North Star um once again we are on that Southern Star there on your screen the existing conditions of the property so this is a very unique and challenging property um like I said there's only one

Ingress egress um on this very busy colel Glenn Highway um the site itself is very small it's uh there's a building there it's 550 Square ft um the entire lot itself is42 Acres so relatively small um 8,350 Square ft of impervious surface um is is available for vehicle display and customer use um it was previously utilized as a vehicle sales uh place um it and the reason why we're here this evening uh is because they were dormant for for over a year of inactivity um so they were required to come back here if they wanted to operate again um how they plan to utilize the property it'll be between 20 and 25 cars um will be sale will be for sale at any given time um the business averages seven customers a day so very uh very low traffic volume there um and and hours will be Monday through Saturday 10: a.m. to 6: p.m. uh staff is recommending in our conditions that four spaces be clearly delineated for customers and employees um just to in the past when that space was utilized it was a little um chaotic there uh so we thought that clearly designating some spaces uh would give it a more professional and uh more orderly um look to the site um due to the low traffic numbers that's how we came up with that with that four uh for parking spaces um we are recommending approval on this uh I I've attached six conditions in the resolution um I think the main reason why we are recommending approval is uh staff can't really uh Envision that site being utilized really as anything else other than um a used car par site uh we worked for months on possibly developing that as a take five

oil change and just given the proximity um to the intersection only having one Ingress egress um I believe uh I believe the county or uh some other jurisdiction um has ownership of the uh gra Hall Road and they they would limit um a another access point on that so given the existing conditions we really only foresee this being utilized as a as a used uh Car Lot new car lot um and we thought that uh you know we we would rather have it being utilized than sitting vacant so that's why we're uh we're recommending approval here happy to answer any questions thank you once again we'll have a public hearing for this case if there's anyone here who would like to speak to this case and with that we'll close the public hearing Melissa was there any written input no okay with that yeah question for staff um was kn& Motors the the owner occupier uh prior to a year the year's pause no this is a this will be a new tenant okay yeah okay that was my only question thank you thank you I have a few things Colin yeah um the site have I drive by there a lot to and from the base and it seems like the site's already operating MH uh there's a half a dozen or so good vehicles there and and which makes me think this per the zoning code that asked for this certificate of use uh compliance well that in any way during the interim from should this be approved today to when it would be issued should something happen would that put the city in Jeopardy uh because it's already appearing to operate even though it hasn't been granted the conditional use

yet or are things happening pretty quick so or maybe explain does it not appear in use and I just misread having been there over the weekend to see you're totally fine um so the it once if approved this evening there the use would go into effect so uh there wouldn't be any kind of delay as far as exactly um I will say we were made aware um they were operating um I don't know when that started um there was a little confusion with last month um we were unable to meet um they were on the agenda for last month um so I think it might have been lost in in the shuffle there um but we we were made aware that we we reached out to them and caution them that operating would might affect their their status here this evening but um obviously we we couldn't shut that down so but there's nothing uh with this situation existing that puts us the city in any kind of Jeopardy should something have happened that we don't know of yet or could happen no the the conditional use that I can't imagine any sort of liability would fall to the city if they were operating without that there potential they could get violations of code violations for doing a conditional use that they didn't have permission to do at the time but sounds like that was a timing issue and I do recall that we had to cancel last month so that may be part of the reason this happened all right thank you that's all I have sir I don't have any questions thank thank you with that do we have a motion a motion to recommend approval for PC 25-2 with the how many six with the six conditions attached to the resolution second with that we'll take the the rle Mr Fountain yes Mr Jones yes Mr

Meyer yes and with that the motion passes see our next case is a DEC decision item so there will be no public hearing on this case as we held the public Hearing in January um you know yep say staff presentation please you know how to yeah absolutely absolutely so you just this is just go forward and then go back awesome good evening Planning Commission uh my name is Brian hosel and the land acquisition manager with Miranda Holmes um I'll apologize in advance to Mr jonen Meer a lot of this will be uh repeated but uh for Mr Fountain sake we'll kind of run through some of this again special I love it do right special treatment sucking up to the commission uh so for uh those not familiar mironda Holmes is a residential home builder we're based out of Pennsylvania uh we're a family-owned company with an office here in Westchester and that covers the Greater Cincinnati area so Northern Kentucky Cincinnati and Dayton um our current closest communities are Springboro that are currently active our Springboro Liberty Township in Lebanon and then coming the summer currently under development we have sites in Huber Heights and Troy um so definitely expanding into the Dayton region um all of these uh single family detached communities this is the site right here like our previous two agenda items in the northwest corner of the city there are two stub streets that feed into the site that we'll be connecting to um the one that will I think be the main access point is Graham Drive which connects to graall Road uh site itself is about 25

acres so this is the site plan here um a couple things to note um on the Northern boundary which boundaries the I'll go back real quick Northern boundary which boundary is a residential Community the eastern boundary um borders a residential Community we have a 50 foot buffer on the top where no lots are you know going to be in that area it's going to be open space maintained by the HOA the eastern boundary uh which really only one lot borders that's a 58 foot separation and then a large open space on the uh Southeast Corner um most of the site is wooded so we will leave trees in those areas as much as possible so they'll actually be a natural vegetation buffer between those existing homes and homes that will be constructed here another thing to note on the site is we're leaving connection points to the west and to the South um Colin will speak to it a bit more after me but the comprehensive plan does have residential for for this area finally a thing of note the blue areas are storm water management um it often comes up you know when you put pavement and houses on this what happens to the storm water all that has to be maintained on the site so any drainage conditions which might be on the site currently will only get better with this development because as opposed to the water just going where it wants to go it has to be managed in a way that doesn't affect the neighbors and also doesn't affect the houses that we are building um finally the kind of oddl looking lot there on the the bottom right is a existing cell tower I've been in touch with that company about providing better access to that cell tower um and on hly giving them better access and better visibility and also doing that in a way that doesn't affect the homes too much um so the due diligence process we go through just you know everybody understands what happens after this uh we will provide access to the cell phone

tower as I stated we've been in touch with both Green County about connecting to the gravity sew system um and connecting to the water system as well I touched on storm water management um the final thing of comes up is traffic impact so if it is required we will do a traffic impact study um I'm not sure if it'll be required in this site that is not something that's decided at the zoning phase um but one thing to note is we will be building both one and two story homes here um they generate they tend to generate traffic at different times two story often being families where they're leaving they're coming and going during school hours um and one story being often adults without kids they are likely avoiding those times so having two product types actually tends to spread that traffic out um and minimize the impact so the plans that we would plan to offer on the site so the top three AR ran plans uh starting at just under 1500 square feet and going up to over 2,000 square feet then on two story homes starting at basically 1900 square feet and going up to over 2,800 square feet for the carile which is actually the home shown in that picture um we would potentially add other plans to this site but it would all be in that that same square footage range uh and one thing to note architecturally in the outside of the homes all homes would have cement fiberboard siding no vinyl siding interior just to kind of give you a picture of the type of home we build since not everybody is familiar with us in this market we do 9 foot ceiling standard on the first floor on all of our homes that we'd be built here 42in tall C cabinets Granite quartz countertop along with the rest of the list right there basically what I'm getting at is these are not very these are not basic starter homes for most people these are uh first time move up second time move up homes for folks who maybe have a

growing family or a smaller home in Beaver Creek and want to move up or for the ranch buyer somebody who has a large twostory wants to downsize to one story living but still wants all those nice amenities that they're used to I did a quick price comparison so I grabbed all the sales in those neighboring communities to the north and to the east in the last two years so our site is in the teal and then site to the north in the red uh the community of the north the average sale price was 265 uh roughly in that community and to the east was 226 uh we would expect our average sale price to be between 450 and 500 so these would be nice homes uh but not priced to the point where they're not going to fit into the community these aren going to be you know super large estate Lots they'll they'll fit in with uh the price point to some degree in the area these are an example of some of the ranch homes that we'll build um again from roughly 1500 square feet to 2,000 square feet all our homes come Senter with a two-car garage um there's homes aren't custom but they're semic custom so there's different elevations people can choose they can choose where they want brick where they want Stone they can do a third car garage they can put a sun on the back um and then interior everything is um again not customizable but there's a lot of there's hundreds of options every home that they can choose from and these are the twostory homes that we would offer again from roughly 18800 square feet up to close to 3,000 square feet and these are the same homes that we're building in our communities in Liberty Township in um Springboro and then in Lebanon as well there any questions for me I think we'll have a staff and then we'll have questions for you probably so thank you

thanks good evening everyone uh Colin Carville city planner uh we are here for the thomman resoning um PUD 25-1 um once again the applicant is requesting approval to rezone 25.95 acres of land from A1 um and r1a to rpug to allow for the development of 55 uh single family homes um once again similar to our first case this evening um we are in the first stage of the uh I guess overall project um so we uh at the first guess reading here for the uh for the rezoning um a lot of what was um discussed uh takes place at at the at the site plan stage uh we're specifically talking about the specific uses that this property can be used for um as well as the densities uh required um as mentioned previously at the start of the meeting um this is not a a public hearing um so we won't have input here from from residents I do want to say uh for the residents here this evening um for this case um regardless of how this is voted on um we're targeting uh March 24th meeting um on Monday it'll be at the same uh same council chambers here at 6 PM um and you will be allowed to speak at that at that hearing um we going over the same material that we are uh here this evening nope that will be that so you're uh you'll be making a recommendation here this evening regarding the zoning um and then city council will have uh their opportunity to hear that to hear the zoning case which again will be on that uh March 24th tentatively um uh city council meeting once again uh this is a little bit Southwest of where we were working previously but um you can you can indicate uh by that star there um that

Northern Star uh is where we'll be uh here this evening and a lot of this we've we've worked through over um I do want to talk about the vpa number 19 once again um this this is from our this comes from our land use plan uh which indicates that uh less than three dwelling units per acre for a density um the the land use plan states that any large residential development must include and be contingent on improvements um on the uh Kemp road to the South there uh because we are working in that northeast corner of this vpa step didn't feel like that was necessary um it's it's 25.1 N5 Acres of the total 175 uh so we didn't think that that warranted improvements on uh Kemp Road at this time here's another look at the uh preliminary site plan here once again that can be subject to change um the one thing that did change uh from that January 15th meeting um to this meeting is the density did slightly increase now that the the applicant was not uh adding any more units um they were simply simply allocating um a little more acreage towards the uh the existing cell tower uh which is why um that that number jumped up from I believe 2.19 to 2.25 um so that's uh that's kind of why that density increased uh but once again that was not for the uh for I guess number of home sake that was just allocating uh potentially more land uh to that cell tower agreement uh that does fall well within uh the the R dwelling units acre maximum um and as I previously mentioned at the uh um at the meeting um that kind of Falls in line with a lot of the developments that we're doing these days um bridalwood um which was a new

development um kind of sat at 2.5 uh density um and then Turner um kind of to the South part of our city uh was sitting at 2.1 so this kind of Falls in between those two um and a happy Medan there uh this is a look at our Z in map so that blue indicates that this is a mixed mixed use zoning um essentially the entire parcel is agriculture in that northeast corner there um it called for residential r1a um but the vast majority of that mixed use was um was Agriculture and once again we are uh requesting the change um from the A1 agriculture to the r1a um to a rpu um um what realistically can be in those would be single family homes um places of a religious assembly uh nurseries day carees and Assistant Living obviously from our applicants presentation they seem uh intent on uh doing single family homes at this at this location uh so part of the uh the Lots here there's um breaking this down this is this is uh what is decided at at this stage um we requesting 60t lot width minimums um that's uh pretty standard with most of our modern puds here our residential puds um we are requiring that 50 foot buffer to the north that our applicant already uh spoke on um because it does uh border that r1a um you can see that's it's also 50 uh 50 to the east there as well um the setbacks for this PUD uh will be 30 foot minimum front yard 35 minimum rear yard and 5 foot minimum on each side um no principal structur shall be closer than 15 ft of each other um principal structures meaning the uh the homes themselves um once again that's all

pretty standard with most modern residential puds uh storm water uh will be calculated um at the site plan stage but I just wanted to do a slide here um and wanted to make the kind of General overarching comment that um storm water existing storm water um conditions will not and cannot be made worse uh with new developments um one we have a great engineering team that ensures that that doesn't happen um but it's also part of our code as well that um conditions cannot cannot be made be made worse um from new developments so um and that's indicated in in in that code snapshot there um I did want to add another slide uh regarding um the lift station I know that was brought up a couple times S at the previous um previous Planning Commission meeting um so there there was a new lift station that was uh put on this parcel um and paid for by the surrounding residents um once again this will be an issue that will be addressed at the site plan stage um but I did want to make clear that if the LI lift station were to be needed uh were needed to be moved um that that cost would be incurred by the developer that would not be imposed Ed on on the surrounding neighborhoods again as it previously would so um but that's that will be hashed out at the at the site plan stage uh with with conditions and and the like so um just wanted to make a quick slide on that um that it will be addressed we're not ignoring that issue it will just be addressed at a later time and once again um we've seen the slide before but I just want to remind um our audience that uh our role in development is to make sure that uh land develops orderly uh the only way we can stop development is if the city were to

purchase land um and that's utilizing taxpayer dollars so um when we're faced with projects like this um we're just trying our best to make sure that uh it's being developed in the best way possible and in the best interest of the city um we can't tell them not to develop anything on there so just wanted to make that clear uh because we are recommending once again approval of this um of this uh agenda item um subject to the nine conditions and the attached resolution that you all have thank you I'll start to my left this time with any questions um I do have some relative to Colin's special slide on lift station and Randy could you come up let me address this to you and I don't want to steal anything from uh my fellow commissioner on the vp19 but on the lift station so I'm looking at your condition seven which I totally agree with and it's this is going to be a a very small area of the vp19 that'll be developed the upper upper upper upper right hand corner and the concern since I was here on the 15th but in the audience and heard a number of people resolving around wave View and Graham access I'm thinking now for your condition seven which does talk about correctly uh that it's subject to our final review and approval at the site plan stage so this is definitely a site plan issue as column pointed out but since it's put in condition seven I'm thinking of a need to possibly tweak condition s and that goes to the fact that the lift station should we W view be or V view be subject to desirability for Ingress egress per the applicant and Graham is the only other way in and out of the site existing uh would we want to tweak uh

now as opposed to the site plan review tweak number seven to say uh and I would I'll read it out loud approval at the specific site plan stage including special attention to impacts of Ingress and egress to the site by the lift station possible relocation would that be something to go for the zoning of that small partial now without inhibiting anything to the applicant for how they would develop that land but it would show to the resid stud who were here on the 15th of January that were sensitive to V View and Graham and the impact of Ingress and egress that that lift station is going to really uh impact if not handled properly so would we put that in seven would that be appropriate that can certainly be added into the condition or or just even something simple like um you know the um any removal any requirements for moving of the lift station will be handled at the specific site plan stage or we can use it the same language I keep I was trying to use General language because as you correctly point out at the site plan stage they get into the specifics of Ingress and egress we know more kind of went ahead of the game now in the zoning uh application but the lift uh station is so significant of an impact on V View and Graham is the only other access road at the moment for that small parcel without being specific in boxing the applicant in I'm trying to find something that acknowledges the impact of the lift station without boxing in any potential ways of looking at Ingress and egress so that's why I came up with the phrase uh that you would say specific to the site plan stage including special attention to the impact of the lift station on Ingress and egress to the site that'll work as showing reflection uh that as best as we can do at this early stage to V VI and

Graham and the residence to live along it that would be certainly something you guys can addtion I would from a procedural standpoint you would um make a motion U to amend correct the resolution you guys would vote on that and then you would vote on the resolution correct correct but otherwise it's a tremendous uh opportunity uh for that little small small corner but uh I just feel that the lift station and the Ingress erress could be addressed there's no doubt that um when we get to the site plan stage we're going to require a secondary access point on Bay View so they're not going to have only one singular access on on Garden View because or not um V in and then Graham in the garden View um because those are two separate neighborhoods that aren't connected right now and this is our opportunity to connect them and give each of the neighborhoods additional way out of their neighborhood um and that's the intent so that's very imperative that we uh connect all that got it thank you Mr Jones uh yeah a few questions so it all ties back to is the thorough Fair adequate enough to support the existing neighborhood and the potential new development here um at what point I was looking at the land use plan for vpa 19 and it says should connect to cemp Road at what point if there's 55 homes going in here at what point would connection to Kemp Road be required well you see there's a large parcel to the West um and really it it it it's hard to say hypothetical too much um it would depend on what if and when something happens there what that would be what the what comes

forward um to get all the way down to Kemp is a is a big is a big task and and this is this small corner is geographically separated from Kent by a good distance um in the order of a th000 feet or more um and so it didn't make sense to require it at this time you know their um the impacts on Kemp would be um minimal um you know with this the two neighborhoods that that this neighborhood proposed to connect to are on graall Road um and just want to point out the the specific site plan stage is is where we would uh require a traffic study um and this project being located in the impact fee District any any um improvements that are required to the if the study says gr Hall needs to have this or that um any requirements would have to be paid for by the city using that impact fee fund um they have to pay into it but the city would be on on obligated to uh do the improvements using match with that fund that's how we set it up in 1993 when the uh impact fee District was set up okay um so tying back into the the traffic studying again I know this is this is a little bit down the road with the specific site plan but um the applicant mentioned one versus twostory homes when we when the city does traffic studies is that they're not they're not taking into account number of bedrooms number of levels in a house it's just looking at how many homes are in an area honestly we're going to have a we'll require them to use a third party to do the study itself and then we'll review it when it comes in um and I've seen studies that do account for especially multif family where they

account there's a big difference if you have 23 bedroom apartments versus 21 bedroom apartments the traffic would be different and so um you know they will um come up with a formula based on a projected number of single story versus um twostory homes but it's hard to really do too much on that because you don't know how many EX there's no requirement that 50% be one story and 50% be two story um that wouldn't wouldn't make sense to have that sort of requirement so um they'll probably show a range based on projected versus worst case scenario kind of thing so my my last question is a little bit more administrative but on the charts um and I guess on our packets too it says uh action requested approval and then on here it says action requested approval is there a way we can make it we can say recommending approval because I think that'll help people in in the audience with the understanding that we are recommending body to recommend approval disapproval to city council Council for them to make their decision sure no oh yeah and and that's a good point just a clarification and we kind of get over the years get comfortable just saying recommend approval what it is is we presented you with a draft resolution in your packet and the the the resolution says that you guys the Planning Commission recommends approval of this of the plans to city council and so what we're recommending approval is that you approve the rec the resolution um but the resolution ultimately is just a recommendation to city council so I I I know I kind of talked in circles there a minute but you're recommending approval of the recommendation resolution right I know that's kind of a funny way but we're just suggesting you guys recommend approval of the planning or to city

council yep thank you yeah those all my questions and I don't have any questions okay so I'd like to make a motion to amend resolution 7 um not what that I thought you wrote that down let me just give it to you as simple as I can so the existing resolution 7 would come to a period and then it would be a sentence added after that period of resolution saying also special attention will be given to resolving any possible impacts to Valley View Valley U vay View and gram Ingress and egress by the Green County lift station that exists at the end a v view period I'm trying to keep it General and at the same time show relevancy especially with what one of the residents brought up back at the January meeting yes that would be a new sentence at the end of the ex without Chang okay with that do we have a second I second that okay and we'll take a vote on that Mr Jones uh yes Mr Fountain yes Mr Meyer yes so with that the motion to approve or to modify the condition is approved yes okay thank you and then we need a motion to approve the uh the Pud 25-1 with the modified conditions eight conditions so I make a motion to approve uh PUD 25-1 with modified condition number seven second that I think it would be with all of the conditions not just the modified condition thank you Josh uh I make a motion to approve uh PUD 25-1 Tom and

resoning with all nine conditions with seven modification second that all right we'll take the role on that Mr yes Mr Jones yes Mr Meyer yes and with that the motion passes three to nothing and we are on to our next case uh [Music] p061 mod 25 225 do we have a applicant gr on this one we'll hear from staff all right good evening everyone uh PUD 061 uh is requesting a minor mod uh 2 225 we're indicating it as uh to the project project Kona um the request overview uh the adjustment uh they're requesting an adjustment to the site layout of a previously approved two-story office building um which totaled 44,000 Square fet um all the architectural features and dimensions of the building will remain the same um once again we were just kind of changing couple couple changes um to the overall layout here and we'll jump into that once again we're working here in the Northwest part of our city um and I wna just jumping back here for history so city council approved this at our November 25 25th uh meeting um they approved the overall project um at the uh the setbacks at the time um and uh everything involved in in that process um we're back here this evening because uh after I believe the future tenant um had some requested changes and uh we're here to kind of accommodate those uh accommodate that request so um what's changing here this

evening um the setbacks primarily um so for the the East setback uh we're changing it from 85 feet um and 85.43 feet um to 21 feet um to the east um to the West uh will be changing 75 ft uh 72 feet uh to it's basically getting 10 feet south from Colonel Glenn changing from 84 feet to 94 feet um and the South will still maintain over a 100 foot um uh setback there um staff has no concerns with those uh that those building placement the building placement that's proposed here um here's a look of how that s that um site will sit and you'll notice from this site plan a couple other changes that we'll jump into in the next slide um the we're just losing one parking space here um they required a minimum of 147 off street parking spaces uh so they're still above that which we're happy with um and uh they are losing kind of the the other major change um they are only having one access point now off of Eastside Drive um previous plans included access from Colonel Glenn Drive um those were eliminated um that was the applicant's request uh but after looking at it I think staff was in agreement that uh that would just with with the traffic off Colonel Glenn that might just create some some nightmares there so um we were happy with uh with just a primary access off easts Side Drive uh to to allow full access there um with with a stop light uh just to the north at that intersection there so we thought that was a a another positive change um in this proposal um storm water management um is relatively the same uh it's a little more to the Southwest um it'll still be

that wet retention Pond um we'll still require uh as you can see in our conditions we're we're mirroring a lot of uh basically everything that was previously approved at that council meeting on in November um but we'll we'll require kind of that air rtion system to prevent algae from accumulating um and once again our city engineering department uh must sign off on all those storm water cks prior to us uh issuing that zoning permit so we have full faith in them that uh that will um those calculations will will be uh uh up to standard for for this project development so um based on uh what was requested here this evening um staff is recommending approval um we just attached five uh five conditions um the main one being that it's mirroring mostly everything that was approved at that November council meeting so any questions yeah we'll just open it up okay um I've got a one question for you Colin and then I want Nick if you could come up because they're going to reflect the condition five which is the storm water but the first is since I wasn't here at the when it was approved by city council we're basically just approving a relocation to more the upper right hand corner of the site we're not really there's no more site plan review or anything like that correct that is correct it's just movement yep so if that's the case uh Nick can I ask you a couple questions the city engineer so recommendation number five talks about all storm water calculations and detention retention plans shall be approved by the engineering department prior to the release of the zoning permit so can I assume now in March 5th that these are to be approved or are we going with what was approved subject to the November council meeting there already a done deal sure yeah no these

will be to be approved they have um and I think U Mike had Anderson from uh their design consultant they had submitted them the recap the re doing or the re the redone calculations excuse me um with their submittal that they had in February so um those are being reviewed right now um that was one thing that was missing that we just got in the last couple weeks so we are reviewing those okay well so so since it's 2B uh you don't probably have this handy but they gave it to us this the engineering drawings and there's notes on the engineering drawings that have raised to me a storm water issue okay uh so it should be pretty simple to answer um one of the uh notes it's on plan C8 uh General note number 23 it says by whoever wrote The General notes there is a potential for high groundwater at this site the contractor is responsible for Designing and implementing a plan to control both surface and groundwater during the course of construction which as you know is already underway because they've already cleared all the trees in the area but since there's a potential for high water and we're moving The Hardscape to the upper right hand corner I'm assuming then part of this approval will be a relooking at the capacity of the storm drain in the lower leftand corner to see if it's adequate to handle the relocation of The Hardscape subject to wherever that high water table could be as opposed to just accepting because it was okay before and it it's going to be okay now because it was okay before which wouldn't fit to me if someone put a note on the the plan it should be something that should be relooked at the adequacy of that pond in the lower leftand corner is that the case or is that something that is something that we will look at with those CS that came in and

um sometimes when we do get in I will say too um so bottom line yes that will be looked at um when those Cals come in for that as part of the um drainage areas that drain to it and the type it's part of the soil the soil composition is part of that drainage calculation and detention calculation that we look at for for those um potential items that might happen you don't show it on the site but in the where the it's shown now in the lower left hand corner even more lower left than that is an existing retention area from another development that will be impacted should that be inadequate and I didn't want this site approval or whatever uh impacting the surrounding area unnecessarily because they just mve the building and move The Hardscape so I appreciate that kind of clarity there's one other note this on the uh C1 so it's the first page and it basically says the exterior construction activity shall be during the hours of 8 and 10 now that's there's no residential around it at all it's heavy commercial but given the base traffic in that area and as well as from north of Grumman right next door is 6:00 a.m. to 10: a.m. too much time for inhibiting the traffic from the base and and from to where we might want to comment on different at this stage of our the zoning process uh different ways of handling the construction to work around the base traffic uh not necessarily make the hours longer or shorter but just to be more accommodating to that heavy base traffic uh intersection at you know from 6:00 to 8: and 9: in the morning morning and from 3: to 5: in the afternoon sure yeah if that's a condition um that you feel that we need to add to that we can have a a note we could modify that note um to have something like all Lanes like in particular we have this a lot with

the road construction all Lanes on like on all Lanes on Colonel Glenn shall be open from this time to this time yeah it's I I don't want to burden it unnecessarily but with our familiarity with the impact of the base does because that allows so many hours for construction which would be great to get it done sooner but so many hours that it impacts too much of the base traffic and konel Glen is so heavily traveled sure yeah and I will say too their construction entrance that they're going to have is on East Side Drive so um with that being on East Side Drive I do feel that the construction traffic where it's actually holding up traffic will be a minimum on grach or on uh Colonel Glenn Highway so and I'm looking at their recommendation number four it says uh that we've already through yourselves approved a RightWay permit must be obtained from the engineering department prior to any work being done on the apron um that also would not or should it be something that I might want to make uh accommodating to the Colonel Glen traffic yes so when that would come in for a uh rightaway permit that would be a condition that I would add to it as no Lanes or all Lanes shall be open from like 6 to 8 and then in the evening or something like that during rush hour so that's a that's something I can add during that when we get that permit come in to the city engineer so being the first time on the committee instead of being in the audience I'm I do want to show some sensitivity to the massive amount of vehicles that travel kernel gland at those hours and at the same time not inhibit what was already put on the construction drawings for the 6:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. so I will need some help I want to propose a sixth recommendation similar to what you said Melissa could you have Nick tell you what he said that works around the kog gland impact so uh we could have it as all

Lanes shall be open between the hours of 6 a.m 6: a.m. to 6 p.m. well I don't know if I I do it during peak hour so I do 6:00 AM to n to 9:00 am and then 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. there you go thank you yeah that's yes don't that we actually have another um utility just so you're aware of it too we have a utility um permit that's up there that I just uh proved last week and that's the conditions we had on that that all Lan should be open at those times so yeah thank you Nick that's all I had okay Jacob anything yeah question for staff so is is when we if we were to approve this tonight this is going back to City counc Council no this will be approved here this evening this will be approved here this evening AB um do we do we have anybody here representing project Kona yes John's in the back good evening I'm John Cel at 3500 Pentagon Boulevard hi um so question about um the the seventh is it sth sixth um condition that that we uh we drafted is there have you at this point in time had to take up any of the um Lanes on Colonel Glenn for construction yeah we haven't um and and we've built quite a bit and in the area without any requirements I guess on blocking traffic I guess it's probably not an issue typically um as they noted uh we will be accessing the property off of Eastside Drive which is a a less heavily traveled road than Colonel Glenn and actually where will be accessing the site will be

south of north grumman's site as well so um you know probably don't have a huge issue as we talk about limiting the windows of of of when we might not be able to block although any restriction obviously who knows something might come up as we're working on utilities closer to the RightWay we're closing off the access on Colonel Glenn do we have to get into the the road at some point in time so there are some limiting things that that that are presented by um something that hasn't been an issue amongst our million plus square feet of development in the area over the past 10 years so that's that's my only comment on that okay um I was just going to say that's a good question but I'm thinking cranes even that once they're on the site obviously it's fine but getting them to and from the site at certain hours of the day for when they're going to be mobilized to get I'm thinking cranes access they long and knowing how the traffic is yeah oversiz you never know when a crane might want to show up for placement on the site yeah we do like to schedule that though but yeah understood okay thank you no pleas thank you anything else very good okay just one question for staff so what's your guys's preference would you prefer we just do a more General change if we're going to change it and just say like something along the lines of the city staff or you know the engineer or planning department you know to work on any traffic or mitigate any traffic issues if they arise something like that instead trying to like that would be put an hour condition on it okay I'd be good with that yep we'd be okay with that okay would would that be directed towards planning or city engineer or staff or okay City engineering yeah okay all right I would say like I don't know if we we've had we've reviewed valvin which will go in car Glen to and those will probably have the same sort

of limiting factors like if we were to put that condition on here would we have to would we have to look at that from a standard perspective and look at Colonel Glenn entirely are you saying if you're are you setting a precedent here yes I think you would be um but uh it's up to up to you I I I think if you keep it General enough I I don't think it would uh limit it limit development in any way so okay thank you MH yeah I'd be good with General yeah Josh just do you have any ideas on how to word that something this the city engineer probably has a better idea of how how it should be worded I just don't want to try to restrict anything to hours you know like just just to be cognizant about peak hour or some something generic there you go magic words Nick okay um so Josh correct me if I if I need it so um the way I'm thinking that might be worded is um the applicant will work with the city for any um potential um lane closures along Colonel Glenn Highway to minimize disrup to minimize yeah to minimize disruption to the uh traffic along Colonel Glen highway I'm good with that that the eff is applicant will work with you want to be city engineer city engineer yes on any potential lane closures on any potential lane closures to minimize disruption to minimize disruption and it's lane closures just of Colonel Glenn yeah Colonel Glenn yeah

to minimize disruption yeah disruption yeah on Colonel blun Highway well I think yeah okay that makes sense okay yep thank you did you write it all down Melissa before we have any motions on that is is the applicant okay with that always go with the attorney what's his name applicants John are you are you good with that those conditions okay just want to make sure okay yep all right with that would either of you like to make a motion uh I motion to um amend the resolutions or I'm sorry the uh the I'm I'm recommending to add a condition to the uh the resolution for PUD 6-1 minor modification to include addition number six addition number six um as stated okay with that do I have a second all right and we'll take the roll on that Mr Jones yes Mr Fountain yes Mr Meyer yes with that the motion passes and we'll need now a motion to approve the Pud with the modified conditions uh motion to approve PUD 061 minor modification project koono with the modified conditions conditions six conditions do have second second all right and we'll take the role for Mr Fountain yes Mr Jones yes Mr Meyer yes with that the motion passes we are on to our last case of the night or I guess it's a discussion item we'll just hear from staff

good evening again um I finally get a chance to get up and do a presentation so I'm happy about that um we had a a phone call came in from um there's about 50 or 60 acres of land vacant on Indian Ripple Road that's currently um classified in the land use plan as office um and an applicant called in um about doing a assisted living it's more independent living but 455 and up U people that doesn't fall uh so right now the property Zone r1a single family residential that doesn't really fit in with the the current zoning and in order to do that kind of a project they'd have to rezone now to rezone a property it needs to kind of align with the land use plan and so what they're requesting and and you've got the letter in in your packet is that um Planning Commission consider amending the land use plan to allow for um the um 55 and up apartments or an assisted living independent living facility to be constructed there um this is kind of of an aerial of where I'm talking about um is is more the outline in blue is is kind of the area that um in general discussion on the south side of it it it does front Indian Ripple and there is some Community commercial designation on that but you can see to the north side is all office you know we've seen in the last you know five or six years especially away from the base away from that cronel Glenn area the off the market in office is is is really limited um you might get a doctor's office or a dentist office you know two 3 4,000 foot building but to have a

50 acre Office Park um in this location you know for the foreseeable future um is going to be a challenge to get that to uh to develop um and the so in the looking okay what would fit there um you know single family obviously would fit there but um other than single family you know this would be opportune area for a transition from the single family to the north to the higher intense commercial along the corridor um and so what we're asking tonight you don't have to make a decision on the land use Amendment itself it's just we're looking for a direction from Planning Commission because there are expenses involved um you know we've done this in the past the procedure is if Planning Commission even wants to further discuss the issue or further look into the issue um and consider an amendment to the L use plan we have to advertise that as a public hearing send notifications anybody within 500 feet um and give them the opportunity to give their input as well um if Planning Commission considers this um we can do that at the next meeting um we just want to wanted to get your thoughts on it and to look at the overall process um what we be looking at here a land use plan Amendment would be is a c it's basically an ordinance at city council because to change the the ordinance approved land use plan you have to have an ordinance to amend it so there would be two public hearings one here at Planning Commission one at city council she'd be recommending to planning or city council if that were to occur then the applicant can come in to rezone the property again and you saw that with the last project where the resoning is Planning Commission making a recommendation city council um approv approving or disapproving that both

public hearings depending on what that zoning would be whether it be a straight straight zoning District r1a um well R2 R3 R4 or R o1 anything like that if it were straight zoning then they would still have to go through the azra where you look at the site the architecture the Landscaping the lighting things like that if it were a PUD very similar you would be looking at a site plan which would be architectural landscaping and lighting um storm water detention all that either of those two processes also is two public hearings so there before any construction would occur on this there would be opportunity to plenty at least six opportunities for public input um on the decision on the land use plan am the decision on zoning and the decision on the on any site plan um now again we can look for I'm just looking for your direction um we can give you options or whatever if if we move forward um and give you a more in-depth analysis on this but didn't want to go through that if if that was a no-go with Planning Commission at this point so really just looking for your feedback and and whether you want us to move forward next month with the land use plan Amendment does does staff have any initial I mean we don't we don't know how many how many different units would be in this but does staff have any initial hesitations like if we were at a rezoning meeting right now now uh again not knowing how many people would actually how many dwelling units there would actually be what what are some of the Inhibitors well we would probably look at well if this were rezoning for a assisted living or a 55 in up apartment would require a 50 foot buffer to the north um we would limit that we would probably limit the density um to similar to what you'd find

in low density or medium density just with the added caveat that you can go a little bit higher because senior 55 in AP Apartments have much less traffic than a traditional apartment would or and by far the most traffic impact is on a single family residential neighborhood they it's like eight times more traffic than an apartment does just because the families live there and they're doing all kinds of things where an apartment or multif family you have less trips um but we would look at that we would um really consider access points um now all these properties are under one ownership and they also own one of the single family lots that are to the east that but uh that stretches all the way out to graall Road um so that would be an opportunity for a secondary access point even if that were emergency access only um and then it obviously um touches Indian Ripple and it touches harbort drive to the West as well so there the access points are there um the density the it's a heavily wooded lot so there would be opportunity for um good screening um that would be a consideration as well um from the existing single family residential um 55 and up and apartments are not notorious for loud music or part you know loud operations that you might find at at a traditional apartment um and even those I mean they're all subject to nors ordinances with the city um but from a living standpoint um the 55 and up crowd is usually not the wildest crowd yeah is there should we be looking at the existing um senior living facilities in that area CU there's one right across the street there's one half a mile down the road with one also right across the street

from it that's probably not something we should be looking at with with this no yeah no I get what you're saying no we we really don't take the market into consideration I mean we're not here I mean the market that's a private private issue um but even even if we were down the street um at Woodcraft um it's the United Church homes uh Trinity I believe it's called that's that's got a a small component of Independent Living but it's mostly a nursing a Skilled Nursing Facility when you get down to the Patterson or formerly known as Harbor Chase that's more it is independent living with it's an assisted living it's it's you know a larger building with onsite nurse you know um assistant care whereas this would be more of a active living Active 55 and up Community where it's it's Apartments it's just and it has some a little bit more activities in uh oriented towards that age group but not a facility that you would find down the street in either direction this is more like the Lilian drive that we just riew yes it would be more like a Mota um or even if one of the Quad unit you know one of the other um condo units in the area were 55 and up only to like like Cottage is on um on on um County Line Road it's and up so cond sorry you guys probably have questions um if we were to like I'm looking at this might immediately right off the bat I was I was thinking like if we one of the Inhibitors would be remaining at the lowdensity residential three dwell dwelling units per acre like if we if we

come up with these inimers are you able to send those back to the potential applicant and see they're still even interested with continuing on in this process or does this need to go to a public hearing well I mean they would be part I mean they can at this point we're not setting anything I mean I would bring that that would be something to look at and at the next meeting that's where I'll do more analysis what would it take do we split this North Side do it low density and then get medium density in the south side or or residential office what does that entail what what are what are they looking for for um because I mean we're not going to if they want something that's totally out of character with the neighborhood then you know obviously that would have a an an effect on on your decision um or at least effect on their decision um whether or not they want to proceed anyways but really land use plan amendments are unique there's no real applicant um it's just what is the city's vision for this area so regardless of what another a third party would want it's really what do the city Envision for the area is what we're looking at and right now the market the the the the likelihood of a large scale office development going back there is is pretty low um whereas um residential in that area is more likely and and a transitional residential to the commercial is is would be a would be a decent fit in there so really we're talking more philosophical at this point rather than practical yep okay thank you um Randy do you have this slide I

don't know if I put it on the the zoning map I did not put it on okay then let me so I I'm just concerned um if you're looking to get our thought thoughts of making this into residentially zoned whatever that might be because that would be a future meeting correct if I remember your flow diagram yeah that would be quite so somebody would come to us to request that it be put into r1a or whatever might right might be so going with in our packet the zoning map and having been there like Jacob and and Jonathan probably been there's already the cpud there next store are we by favoring moving it to residential zoning putting Inhibitors or handcuffs on that plot already because of the cpud right next door which is storage areas and and what have you so we're in effect boxing them in to what they can do because of what's there already you said it's a common owner for all these uh have they given you any indications of well even though we're cpud right next door yeah residential would be fine but even though they could only do this and this because of the industrial storage that sits there already what I'm envisioning is there's a there's a mix it's called residential office is a land use and that where you can have medium density residential and I think it's medium density residential office where you can have either or so because the intent is for those to act as transition from residential to commercial but the existing cpud that's right next door would not inhibit or prevent well that would be up to the buyer um um and if somebody comes in to rezone it they are they know what's next door so

if they're requesting it that's I mean that's that's up to them um if we go from Office strictly to residential office it just opens more opportunities up for the land rather than um sing Singularity of an office at this point okay just just to jump in there correct me if I'm wrong Randy but only the property owner or the registered agent of the property right can request rezoning it's not like the cities would mandate it to be reson correct we would need I mean well we could but we won't we we well won't as a long time there hasn't been an instance since I've been here in 19 years that we have done a city initiated zoning okay um so it would be the property owner requesting it to be res or somebody representing the property owner can you go to if you don't have the zoning map go to one of the other Graphics there we go that that'll work so given the lower right hand corner of that plot um would would we be favoring a residential development for this the one that we're talking about now in blue would we in any way be inhibiting or preventing uh the owner of that lower rightand corner from doing anything beneficial productive with their property because they're basically now the depending on the the site plan of the of the um whatever would come forward with the resoning I mean if there would be potential requirements for buffers um if if there was some residential in the South but really if you're talking apartment style development the buffers are are quite less than if it were single family housing development when you're separating residential versus commercial we do require that 50-ft buffer if that were all single family residential

neighborhood um so I could see your point where yeah the person owns that vacant commercial land now limited by what they could do they could still do storm water detention on that area and they could still do landscaping on the area but they couldn't do parking lot or building um so a lot of times when we do have a 50-ft buffer that's where you is as long as the grading works that way that's where you find your storm water detentions thank you that's required anyway but really tonight I'm just seeing is Planning Commission interested in me moving forward with a and bringing forward an official land use plan Amendment next month got just a qu quick question so when was the last time we updated the land use plan I can't 2019 2020 is when it was approved and we're working on a uh this year we've hired a a a third party consultant to our landage plan our zoning code and our property maintenance code and and that's going to be a comprehensive PL um analysis um over the next 16 months or so okay so I guess my question along those lines would be is there an urgent need to do this separately or can it be part of that that compreh I mean that's up to you guys I mean we had the request and we said we bring the request forward um whether you think that it can wait 16 months or that we don't want to jump into anything that might counterman what the uh the review is doing is up to you and my thoughts are to support what Randy said at the beginning we're running out of developable land and anything we can do to entice or encourage might be helpful because they're looking at something usually a year or two into the future yeah yeah no I don't have any concerns I just was you know are we gonna need to hold a public hearing if we're GNA hold a public hearing two months later you know full I I think the I just didn't know the timing preliminary timeline for this land use plan um third party land use plan probably wouldn't be until November December of this year when you guys

would see a product okay okay so it'll be so it's going to be a year but a rezoning could be a year from now too true and then I guess just one point of clarification that building is not included right that you have highlighted in the South it's under the ownership I mean we would probably keep that commercial cons right along the road I just kind of circle the area in general but that would probably stay neighborhood community commercial just because it's a frontage okay and you did say your plan was to allow for both right if we were to change it landy's plan again I haven't I haven't overly strategized on it just because someone to get some direction before I spent too much time contemplating yeah but I would be thinking something along those lines yeah yeah I don't I don't have any concerns with that so so you're looking for a motion no I just see I don't need an official action or anything I just wanted to get your guys' opinion and I don't want to get I don't want to advertise and come back and stir up if you guys if it's already a nogo I'm supportive of it as long as it doesn't box in the surrounding area yeah and you're not voting right now to approve that I mean you obviously if you're supporting it now you can obviously say no when it comes forward if it comes forward next month it's you're not you're not boxing yourself or committing yourself in yeah sound good thanks for input yeah y good cool thank you thank you and with that we are out of cases do I have a motion to adjourn uh motion to adjourn the March Planning Commission meeting second second and we'll do that by General consistency I agree with that we are adjourned