Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening everyone. It's uh six o'clock, so time for our August meeting of the city of Beaver Creek Planning Commission. Uh if you would be so good as to read the role, Miss please. Ma'am. Mr. Fountain here. Mr. Jones is absent. Mr. Meyer here. Mr. Self here. Uh, I need a motion to excuse our missing member tonight. Mr. Tad, move to excuse Mr. Jones. I second that. And we'll do that by general consensus. Thank you very much. Um, agenda. Uh, any additions, corrections, changes, etc.,

gentlemen. Uh the third uh agenda item for the I believe the Bridalwood subdivision that is being tabled uh they were not ready to proceed tonight. So um that just ask for when that agenda item comes up in in the evening uh just to please table that. Okay. So if you're here for Bridalwood uh you can go home. Not here for Bridalwood. Okay. Um minutes from last month gentlemen any corrections changes pay complaints? Yeah, we can do that too. Uh, Mr. Chair, I move to approve the agenda. I second. And we'll do that by consensus. Okay. Now, minutes. Any additions, corrections, changes to the minutes? Done.

Then guess what I want. Mr. Chair, I move to approve the July 2nd, 2025 planning commission meeting minutes. I second.

And we'll do that by consensus. Thank you very much. Okay. This evening, we have three public hearings. Uh the first two are related to each other. Um but since they are public hearings, uh that means y'all get uh input. Uh we do have a a few rules and guidelines if you would. Um first of all uh when we have the uh the uh applicant will will give their presentation. Then staff will give their report and at that point we'll open the floor to public input. Uh if you would please limit yourself to three minutes. Uh so we won't aren't here until the wee hours of the morning. Uh that would be most appreciated. Uh I hope we won't have to time you, but we will if we have to. Um once uh everybody has had a chance to uh speak their piece, we will um ask for any written input that our uh uh clerk has. Uh that'll be read. Uh at that point, we close the public hearing. uh we discussed it among ourselves and um we hopefully will come to a conclusion. So uh with that read away.

This is case number PUD25-4 and case number PUD2-4 specific site plan number one. It's on an application filed by Rockford Holmes 999 Polaris Parkway sweet 200 Columbus Ohio 43240. The application requests approval to reszone 54.2852 acres from R1A1 family residential district and A1 agricultural district to an RPUD residential planned unit development. The applicant request approval of a specific site plan to allow development of 121 single family residential homes. The property is located at 816 Graange Hall Road, further described as book three, page 13, parcels 29 and 30 on the Green County Property Tax Atlas.

Thank you. Uh I presume we have someone here representing Rockford Homes.

Yes, thank you. Jim Lipnos, uh Rockford Homes, 999 Polaris Parkway, uh Columbus, Ohio. Uh appreciate your time this evening. I want to do just a brief introduction if you don't mind of who Rockford Homes is. We're a single family home primarily a single family home developer um that does a number of different things. We build single family homes. We built some multifamily homes. Uh we do general contracting. We do land development. Um but we are primarily a single family home developer. Um as you see on the the screen, we've been in business for 40 years. This is our 40th year anniversary. We are a family-owned business, third generation. Bob Yokum is the current president and CEO. He is the third Bob Yokum to run the company. So, we have a lot of consistency and a lot of um history behind us. Um I am the director of land and I'll be doing the presentation and your point of contact for this. As I mentioned, we are a multiaceted uh land developer and home builder that does multif family single family land and development and we are expanding in out of Columbus into the Dayton market. Um and we're we're pleased to be working with the city of Beaver Creek. Uh this is what we're proposing. This is on about 54 55 acres on Graange Hall Road. Um it's property that we've been discussing with the city for for quite some time. You may be aware of the existing storm water project on the site that handled some storm water issues in the adjacent communities. Um we are proposing 121 homes home sites on the 55 acres. That equates to about 2 I think it's 2.6 um uh 2.23 units per acre as far as density. It's approximately a little over 11 acres of open space on it. Um, at the request of the city, we have a varying degree of lot sizes. Does this have a little laser

on it? Yeah.

Oh, okay. Um, I'll explain it verbally. As we are, but any adjacent existing subdivisions primarily? Yep. That area up along the north and on the east side, we have larger lots that are equal in size to the existing lots uh on on the other side of the property line. Then within the subdivision in the in the in the heart of it, we reduce uh to some 60- foot wide lots. We are proposing five- foot sideyard setbacks with a minimum of 15 ft between actual structures. Um the northern section again on the northern part of the ponds. Um, in addition to the larger lots that we are required to do, we increase the size of the rest of those up to 80 foot to accommodate some of our our large larger kind of estate homes. Our average sales price um is projected to be start at about 550,000 and fully optioned out closing price is probably going to average about 650,000. uh it's 121 uh home sites. We plan on starting phase one as quickly as possible and then we've made an agreement with the when we met with the city and the fire department engineering to revise our phasing. So by the time we hit phase two, we are going to make that through connection uh to the east to South Brook Drive. I believe that's saying, South Brook Drive. Uh so we'll make that connection in phase two. Um, and then that will probably be slated for late 2026 and then phases three and four to follow as as the market dictates. So, we do anticipate moving through this development rather quickly um with a sales rate of maybe about 32 to 36 per year. So, we would be here for

approximately four years. Um, again, happy to answer any questions and uh respond to any comments that the public may have. Thank you. Staff's turn. I forgot to run through a couple more slides, but they're just pretty pictures of the elevations. I've got I've got some elevations on there for you.

Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of planning commission. Um, as the clerk alluded to, this is a uh this is two cases. She read the the legal description for both cases. It's a resoning and a specific site plan. Um we're going to do it in one combined presentation, but then there'll be two public hearings and two votes at the end. Um so this is the reasoning and the specific site plan for Wrightwood Springs PUB25-4. Um as the applicant stated, they're looking to reszone about 54.3 acres from partially A1, partially R1A to a new RPUD and approval of a site plan for the 121 homes on site. Um, this is the overall PUB process. Um, normally if we do it in separate phases, we'd just be on the top row, but because we're doing it concurrently, we're running both phase one and phase two at the same time. And so, both the planning commission uh meetings are taking place uh this evening. Um just to orient us on location, uh the propertyy's located on the west, well west of 35 and east of 675. Um about 1,400 ft north of the intersection of Shakertown Road and Graange Hall Road. Um the P uh the proposed boundaries include about 640 ft of frontage on Graange Hall Road. It's about 2350 feet deep and at its widest it's about 128 1280 feet wide. This is just kind of a closer aerial as the of the of the site as it is. Um this was taken actually this year. So you can see there are two ponds um that were constructed as part of the city's um Springhouse I'm sorry the

Willowest storm water project. Springhouse Park is the park that's on the other side of the street, but as part of the Willow Crest storm water project that constructed these two ponds, and you can't see it on this aerial, but there's another pond on the other side in in Springhouse Park that all connects as a system. Um, for the reasonzoning, we generally look at the land use plan and what it states. Um when it comes to recommending reszonings, um this area is confined within a low density residential um designation on the land use plan. And what that basically states is you can have residential up to three dwelling units an acre is what they look at. It's also within vacant planned area um 64 which has some specific language about um having some concentrated growth in the center and then having connections to the um adjoining neighborhoods. Um so what they're proposing the reszoning portion is compatible with the land use plan. In terms of zoning you can see the the PUD it's got the front half is zoned A1 and the back half is zoned R1A. Um they have R1A to the north and an RPUD to the east and to the southeast. Um and as uh the applicant alluded to, the any of the parcels that are along the R1A parcels will be 20,000 square feet and then any of the residential parcels that bought the RPU to the east will be 18,000 square feet to match the 18,000 square foot requirement that RPU 967 Autumn Springs has. Over overall, the proposed change is to go to an RPU and allow single family residential. All the permitted uses within uh R1A districts would be allowed. So single family houses, places of religious assembly, assisted living

and and nursery daycarees, those are all allowed in in the front half or the back half of the property as it is. Um but um we're just continuing that in stating this PED is for single family residential but does offer the other um minor um uses that could be in a single family neighborhood. In the proposed resolution for the resoning, there is a maximum density established at 2.3 dwelling units an acre. And um as you'll see on their site plan, they're they're below that at 2.23 dwelling units an acre. Again, the land use plan allows up to three. So, they're they're well below what the LAN use plan states. As seen here is the site plan, and the numbers and the the thicker black lines represent phase lines. So, phase one would be the westernmost um portion of the site. And then as you move down road B, you could see phase two is to the north and to the east. And then phase three is the center south. And then phase four is the the far southeastern corner. Um, and this is kind of a colorized version. You can see where the the single family homes are. Um, their lots are highlighted in yellow. And then you got the rightways highlighted in gray. And then the green areas are the um the communal area, the common space, and the ponds are in blue. Um, this is I just wanted to kind of zoom in. This is a typical road. You could see that there's 4ft sidewalks on both sections. And then um in between the sidewalk and the curb, there'll be a we used to call them tree lawns, but we don't allow trees in there anymore because they tear up the sidewalks. So now it's the the um I guess the

road lawn, green space, vacant um area uh between the sidewalk and the street. And then of course you behind that then you've got the um the single family lots. Again, this is just another colorized version of the the phasing plan that's it's happening. Um included in your packet in in in a proposed condition. We are showing grading limits 25 foot grading limit on the north all along the north property line and the eastern property line and a portion of the southern property line. But then when you and actually The orange should say 20 20 foot grading limit, not 25 on this. But uh when you get to that southwest corner, the the uh the grading gets really really steep. So they needed some space to be able to make the area usable. So we're proposing a 20 foot grading limit on that area. And and when you look at the aerial photo, um you can see that within those areas is a lot of existing old growth trees. Um there's some areas that are not, but a majority of it is old growth trees that that would be um remain in place to help um separate this neighborhood with the existing neighborhoods. Back to where I was. Um there was a traffic study um included in your packet and I believe at the end of the staff report I included a overview memo that the uh the city engineer did and and the traffic study came to conclusion that there'd be no significant impacts on the the intersections and no no change in service levels for the intersections in in the near area. and their only recommendation was one of the was a I believe it was a left turn lane into the site. Uh but the applicant is showing actually both a left turn lane in and a right turn lane in uh del lane so that

you'll have a continuous flow of traffic be able to go past the site for any uh when anyone tries to uh go into this neighborhood and keep the flow of traffic moving along Graange Hall Road. Uh, I believe the applicant showed this, but it's more of just a colorized version showing the landscaping. There's a requirement that each individual lot shall have at least one 2 and 1/2 inch caliber tree planted. And that's kind of what this shows. Um, I know that density is always a concern and always a hot topic and just there's a very simple definition in Arizona how we calculate density. is the number of dwelling units per acre of land. Um, this project being 54.285 acres um with 121 units has an overall density of 2.23. If they wanted to go to the full buildout and were able to make it work, the maximum number of units that could be on this site and still fit within the three dwellings and anchor be 162. So, they're they're more they're 41 short of the uh the max possible units that could be allowed. based on the land use plan. Uh here are a few examples of the architectural elevations. They're showing both twotory houses and singlestory houses. Um and that those will be spread out throughout the de the development. Um we've got a full list of the uh proposed architecturals in in the packet and a condition that um if they and we see this a lot on developments is a new model will come in and so there's a condition that it needs to be if they have a new model it'll be architecturally consistent compatible with with the uh existing um and it gives the option if we can't agree between the developer and staff that it's consistent we can bring it back to planning commission to have them make the ruling on that.

Um just a few conditions that found in your resolution. One um hours of construction for this site and that includes any outdoor activity whether it be grading um birth work, framing construction, anything on the exterior shall be limited to Monday through Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 700 p.m. Once you get a house under roof and if there's plumbers doing stuff on the inside, then that's fine. But um in order to make sure that we don't have the external effects to the neighbors to the north, south and on all directions, the uh hours of operation are limited 7 to 7 Monday through Saturday. Also, we want to ensure that construction traffic doesn't try to use the existing neighborhood. So there is a requirement that all construction traffic has to enter the site through an access point on Grangeaw Road. Um, and the condition further states if if the city engineer um determines that a flagger is warranted, if they're bringing in big machinery or something like that, then the applicant needs to provide that as well. Um, the applicant alluded to a connection to Southbrook. Um, we we're always trying to connect interconnect existing neighborhoods with uh new neighborhoods. It it's a good planning practice and it um promotes um the interconnect interconnectivity promotes uh fewer trips being necessary on the um the the main roads which see the most traffic. Um and they're going to be connecting to Southbrook Drive as part of phase two. Um and we have a a limit that they can't build more than 10 houses in phase two until that road is actually um open to the public and able to be used. Um the minimum square footage for residential and we based this looked at single family store single family or I'm sorry single story houses within a mile and twotory houses within a mile and and found the average of that. And so we stated that the the minimum square

footage of a single story needs to be at least the the minimum single story within a mile. And that's 1,400 square feet, but that excludes garages and porches. A typical garage is about 530 feet. So you would be around 1,900 square feet for a single story and about um 2,300 square feet for a two-story would be the minimums that you can put on the the lots within this subdivision. Other plans didn't include an entry sign and we see that in most neighborhoods and so we added a boilerplate condition that the final design needs to be reviewed by staff. um that it can't be higher than eight feet and it has to be set off so that there's no line of sight issues with people coming in and out of the neighborhood. Of course, with with any project um any pro all projects are subject to our uh storm water runoff ordinance. And so, um, we will not, the the city engineer will not be given final approval of any construction drawings unless they can show that it meets all the requirements within the storm water runoff ordinance, which says that you can't have a flow rate off the site any higher than the flow rate that's on the site prior to development. Now, the ponds that were constructed as part of the Willowrest were designed to to account for a single family neighborhood at up to three dwelling units per acre. So, the amount of work that they're going to need is is not huge in terms of creating new ponds. They'll have to create um some culverts and some pipes to get to the ponds, but um the creation of new ponds is is minimal for this site, but they are still they still will be subject to the storm water runoff ordinance within the city. Now, there are nine conditions in the resolution for the resoning request and there are 34 conditions in the the resolution for the site plan request.

staff is recommending approval of both the resoning and the site plan. I'm happy to answer any questions following the public hearings. Um I just kind of gave a reminder procedurally public hearing for the zoning and then a vote on the zoning and then a public hearing for the site plan and a vote on the site plan. So again, staff recommends approval of the request um and I'll be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Our usual very comprehensive staff report. Okay, public hearing time. Uh, if you would please, uh, if you if you would like to speak about the reszoning, uh, come on up and speak your piece within three minutes. Um, if what you want to address is the actual specific site plan, let's wait till we get to the specific site plan. All we're looking at now is reszoning the the parcel which is partly A1 agricultural and partly R1A and you're going to correct me.

No, no, no. I'm not correcting. I'm I'm adding on. Okay. Thank you. Reszoning deals with um allowable density setbacks and uses. That's what the reasoning deals with, right? and then design or water or roads or anything like that is cycling. I just wanted to clarify what which is which.

That's why we have a professional staff. Okay. Anyone who wishes to speak about the reasonzoning, please step forward. Uh state your name and address and have at it for three minutes. Don't be shy. Always has to be somebody has to be first. Uh my name is Brian Wilhelm. I live at 3991 Willowrest Road. Uh I have been there for the better part of 55 plus years. We enjoy a very quiet uh nature kind of setting. Even with the farmland, we still have uh a great number of wild animals. Uh you know, you guys are really taking away our enjoyment of our property sitting around watching these things. Uh I'd also like to know uh where they're getting their water from. Will they be drilling into our aquafers? Are they going to get city water? Uh are they have any responsibility to pay for our schools which are barging at the at the seams that we can't even get the uh high school funded. Um you know, I just really think that this is going to be a detriment to our way of living in the neighborhood. Thank you.

Hi. Hello. My name is Cindy Fischer. I live at 3646 Southbrook Drive. I'm actually in the Shaker Hearts Shaker Heights division of Southbrook. Um and I'm I've been there since 1973. My grandparents raised me there and I live in that home now. Um, you know, I remember just a few years ago, we visited this when when uh I believe it was Redwood

Redwood Development came through and we, you know, we had plenty of room then for Redwood wasn't going to cause a problem, but we, you know, we could we couldn't at that time that property couldn't be used the way that it was supposed to be, um, which was agriculture because that money came and that property came from research um, from Min Valley research and so it had to be used in a certain way. Oddly enough, last year we saw ponds going in um finally some of the drainage issues that have been caused there for probably 40 plus years that I can remember um are now being resolved, but they're being resolved for the wrong reasons. They're being resolved not for those people's benefit, which the city should have done many years ago, but now to bring somebody else in. U the people that were working there were very clear of the fact that the money that it took to fix those two ponds came from COVID money and that money had to be used up and so therefore now that the city could use it on that in order to bring a developer in. So I mean I kind of feel like I'm here talking but I feel like this deal is already done. Um I believe that Beaver Creek was founded on a lot of principles and I don't believe that we believe in those principles anymore. I've been told here many of times this is not old Beaver Creek. This is New Beaver Creek and I kind of need to get over it, but I'm not going to. We moved here because of the community and because of of the down to earth it was and that's not what Beaver Creek is anymore. You know, I see the building going on everywhere. And I just don't know that we need more building. And I and I find it very hard to believe that any traffic study can tell me that five just a few years ago when Red Webb was born in, we were told that, you know, the average household goes in and out five times a day, but that those people wouldn't because they were going to be 55 and up. We're talking about family homes here, soccer practice, kids going to school, various things in and out for parents and um and

adults going to work. So you can't tell me that out of a hundred people, let's just say there's a hundred to homes and five times a day average that 500 trips out up and down Grange Hall, up and down Southbrook, Autumn Springs, and through the park that that's not going to tax that area. It is absolutely going to be a problem. So I think that it needs to stay the way that it is. If somebody can come in and fit it in within their agriculture and their residential, that's fine. We've made we've made plenty of concessions for that assisted living to be there. I think that the building has to stop at some point. We're going to be Centerville. We're going to be Oakwood. We're going to be landlocked. There's going to be nothing left.

Thank you. Thank you.

Let's My name is Steve Fischer. I live at 3646 Southbrook Drive. This is my wife just speaking. We remodeled the house, moved in '09, but she's raised since 73 there. You talk about traffic studies. Go out there at North Fairfield and Shaker Town during busy time and everybody's going to the neighborhood and tell me that they did a traffic study there. Graange Hall. You're going to be doing down there that development. You're putting new park in. And Brian Jar sat here one time and said, "Nobody cuts neighborhoods." I said, "Brian, that's funny. I cut by your house every time going to North Fairfield to go to work." I have a question. Does the city own the property now? Or is it who owns that property? The development wants to go on because when Redwood wanted to go in,

the city owns it. The city owns it now. Correct. So, was it gifted to the city? Cuz when Redwood wanted to go in, we said, "Let all the neighbors buy a few acres, leave a green space, leave it going." And they're like, "No, it needs to be development. Why can't it stay green space? you sell it off. So when the city redid the ponds, did they know the developer wanted to do it? So you do something the developer had to do and put the ponds there anyway. So was the land gifted to the city? And if it was, if this goes through, what you could do with all the money the developers could give you for the land?

When we get to our part of of the discussion, we'll ask that question. just for procedural purposes. And I think this is confusing a lot of times for people who have not attended. You guys can bring up issues, but you actually, you know, we can't answer your questions, but everyone's paying attention to what you're what you're talking about, and they will ask questions afterwards.

So, can the neighbors still buy the land off, you know, put a development in and leave a green space? Sell it off to the neighbors, leave a green space like everybody wants. Sell it per acre. That's what everybody in this area wants that left alone. It don't need to go to a new development because I told my wife before I showed up, I said Southbrook's be cut through. She said, "No, no, no, no." Yeah, I live right behind Valley Elementary. Fortunately, I got a school there. It will never be a cut through hopefully, but you're going to be cutting into those people's backyards. And that ain't why they moved here and built that neighborhood. Thank you.

Hi, Debbie Bryant, 3999 Willow Crest Road. Um, resident since 1978. Um, my issue is with the school system and the overcrowding. How are all these houses going to impact our schools? there's already um I would call it an emergency um of overcrowding and you know these type of subdivisions bring in more students. Yes, they will get property tax funds eventually, but what's the short-term plan to deal with this issue? Was the city given any incentive from the builder? If so, what portion of that should go to the schools? And did the city or county give any credits or abatements to the builder? If so, that if so, does that make sense when we will need to increase expenditures in roads, utilities, schools, and police?

Thank you. My name is Larry Bryant. I live at 399 Willow Crest Road. What I'm wanting to know when the other builders want to put a h houses back in there behind my house, they said they couldn't put a road back there because of the hill right there. Well, why why is it now they're going to put a road in there? Who's paying who's paying to knock that hill down that they were talking about knocking down? Is that is that going to be our tax money or what's going to happen there? Then another thing is, you know, I lived there almost 48 years in August here. I got a ditch out there that I can't even get cut. I've been cutting it for 48 years. Getting too old to cut it. Can't get the city out there to cut it. I asked when they did the ditch, when they did all that digging for the pond and everything, if they would take that dirt and put it in my ditch, they said, "No, what? You know, I don't understand this." We lived there, like I said, almost 48 years. I have no city lights. I have I have no city trash. What What am I getting for my city taxes that I'm paying here? Nothing. I don't understand that. I mean, what what what have we got in our whole city? Nothing. Our schools are going to hell, I think, fast. We don't We're overcrowded. Our roads can't handle the traffic they have now. It's stupid. Thank you.

Thank you. [Applause]

Hi, Clint Heiser. 1016 Wood Haven Place. I'm actually the five acres north of this. So, what I really want to know is I'm residential. I know it's zoned agriculture, but it's land use residential. Why do I get to have seven houses behind me and everybody else only has one? It's just it's not really the density I was told. Similar to what he said, I called when the land came available and said, "Hey, I've got five acres. I want to quadruple that because it's a farm, right? So, I wanted to purchase and extend southern words down towards uh where those ponds are now. And I was told, don't worry about it. We're going to go through, we're going to grade everything. We're going to put in drainage project. And after that's done, then we're going to go through and put in houses on quarter acre lots or larger because it has to match the existing plot plan. So, right now, the way it's zoned, it's not going to match what I was told. I'm a little concerned about that. Thank you. [Applause]

I'm Gary Johnson. I live at 3981 Willowrest. Um my first thought was is why are they having us up here as the community when decisions are probably already made? It's nice for you to ask us to come up here. But anyway, so no matter what we say, is it going to make a difference on this new zoning? Who makes those decisions? Us or government employees? Good question. Nobody's answer anyway. We'll get into later, right?

Thank you. Yes, there'll be a second public hearing for the specific site plan. This is for the zoning. Yes. Yes, there'll be a second public hearing. We'll discuss that. Thank you. [Applause]

Hi, my name is Glenn Fischer. I live at 3646 Southbrook Drive. I uh my grandparents as my parents mentioned built their house back in 1973. So it was my great-grandma. So I real I've seen Beaver Creek through the years. I've heard about it. I've seen different communities grow up there several over by Costco. How it's changed there. I do have a unique perspective as I worked on a many farm while I was back in high school. So over in New Jasper Township. So I've kind of seen how when you take away the deer and their land, it really affects it. Although we have creek side trail, I think it's very detrimental to take away this land. Like my dad said, I think that we should have some way for the neighbors to go and do it so that we can own it locally. I do have a unique perspective as well because I did study accounting at University of Dayan. So I understand how governments work and how the accounting where you have to sell more stuff or raise revenue in different ways. So that is why I think that you guys should leave it there so that we can get continue on the community that my grandparents moved here for. We have a garden. We do that. I understand you don't want chickens. That's not part of the thing. But we need to understand that Beaver Creek is res that it what's it found on. We need because we do have the park across the street, but I think that's only a a partial problem that would help with uh animal life, but I think we should keep it as uh agriculture. Thank you.

Thank you.

Others. Good evening. I'm Ross Huluer. I live at uh 3781 Southbrook. So, I'm the first house there by the the building. Um first of all, I have a question. I feel like uh your calculation on density is off. you use 54 acres as your calculation, but also then you say 11 of those acres are actually ponds. And so I believe your calculation should be something less than 54. It should be about 43 um to do your calculation density. The other thing I'm concerned about is not so much the lots that are closest to to my house or to that part of South Brook, but as you can see um as it gets closer to the larger lake there, those lot sizes get considerably smaller. Um, I like the idea of having an option for some of the neighbors to purchase a land, but if we were to go forward with this, I would rather see those lot sizes being the same size as the lots that are there on South Brook and and Autumn Leaf. Um, just to be lowers the population density, lessens the amount of traffic that would be coming through, specifically Southbrook. um going to the specifically going to the school which would be probably one of the main traffic areas for for residents there. Um I also think some of my neighbors there brought up some interesting points regarding infrastructure specifically around the schools and addressing that before we throw in a bunch of more residential uh houses that will require schools and other infrastructure from the city of

Thank you sir.

Thank you. [Applause] Aha. Figured I'd get somebody else. Um, I have uh Tammy Curtis uh 3202 Meadowark Place. Um I am on the other side of Beaver Creek. Um I have lived in my house for 25 years. We were overseas for seven years. We were here before that and I am astonished as to how much Beaver Creek has grown and I am very disheartened. Uh Beaver Creek needs to have green spaces for beavers to live and all of our other wildlife. Um I am a wildlife person. I live off of North Fairfield and I've seen the wildlife in my neighborhood decrease dramatically. Now you want to take more as far as the density. How close is this to any of your homes? Are you going to be dealing with the traffic area with the traffic problems? And you as well, sir, we don't need anymore. I also work for the school system. Our school systems are way too full. Where are you going to put all of these people and all of these children? And with this many more homes coming, that means more grocery stores. That means more um pizza places. That means more gas stations. That means more banks and more hospitals. We don't need that. We do not need any more cement or black top or buildings in this area. We need green for our beavers to grow, for our wildlife to grow, and for us to be able to breathe. We when we were gone, we knew that we wanted to come back to Beaver Creek for the school system and for the city. We love Beaver Creek. We didn't want to go

to Oakwood. We didn't want to go to Ketering. We didn't want to go to any place else that's overcrowded. You have no green spaces in those cities. We do here. My children have been to all of those parts and now you're going to take 52 more acres. I say no. No. Thank you.

Hello. Hi.

My name is Elizabeth Allen. I live at 3987 Willowcrest Road. We are new to the area. We've been here five years and I feel like we have a a very strong community and we moved here specifically for the school district. My daughter goes to Valley Elementary. She'll be in fifth grade this year. You know where she sat last year in fourth grade? On the floor because there were no desks for her. She sat on the floor in a Beaver Creek City school. What? Where are all these kids going to sit? Where do you think all of these kids are going to sit? They're going to sit on the floor. [Applause] Anybody else? I I was always taught never to say, "Does anyone else have any thing to say because it scares them off." So, further comments. Okay, I'll close the public hearing and ask if we had any written input.

Uh, we did receive seven letters. Uh, commissioners did receive a copy of each. Thank you. Okay, it's our turn and I'll start to my right. So, Josh, I'm gonna put you on the spot to start. So, are we legally allowed to consider schools when looking at approving this or denying this?

No. There's the guidance. You can't use it's a skep se separate government entity. Plus, if schools were used as a zoning consideration, every zoning change has an impact on schools and therefore it would be arbitrary and capricious to deny one when you've approved other. So, schools are not supposed to be considered in a zoning case. Sure. The So that helps when I'm closer, right? So schools are a separate government entity. We are planning commission in the city is not supposed to consider the impact on schools in a zoning case. um reviewing zoning decisions based upon school impact tends to be an arbitrary and capricious decision which would be overturned by the court if that's what your reliance is on. So there isn't there's case law that's similar to that issue that addresses that issue that basically makes it so that you shouldn't consider the school impact.

Thank you. And that just to be clear that's Ohio not the city saying that. Right. Correct. That's Ohio. Randy question.

So just just to be clear, so this is low density, right? It meets the definition of low density. Yes. Anything under uh three dwelling units or an acre or lower is considered low density residential. And can you just go over how that density is calculated because we're at what 2.3 and I know there was talk about excluding some parts of the land, including parts, you know, all the land. Um, can you just tell everybody how that the city does that?

The city just looks at the overall property and whatever the acreage that is. Um, you divide the total number of units by the overall acreage and that's how you get dwelling units per acre. That's the density. That's how we've been calculating it. Um, in a typical neighborhood setting, you wouldn't in a typical farm, if you were reszoning a raw piece of land, you wouldn't have those ponds already to begin with. Um, but regardless, it's it's the total acreage. It's the total number of units divided by the total acreage. Um, we don't exclude land. Um, there exceptions for that if it's up in the impact fee district, but not down in in the area not in the impact fee district. And then uh I know there was a question on um water where they're getting water from. I believe I read that they're connecting to county water.

Yes. Uh using Green County Sanitary Engineering for their water and sanitary sewer. No, there's not going to be any wells out here. Okay. And then I did have one question for the city engineer if he Yes. And good evening. So, I know we received a copy of your uh memo uh about the traffic study. Could you just give the highlight of that for everybody?

Sure. Uh generally what the the way the study came together was they took actual traffic counts at multiple existing intersections along Grandchild Road. I think there was five intersections. They took actual traffic counts and and having those counts, they they took the projected traffic from the proposed subdivision. Uh they had not only the uh traffic from the subdivision going to Grand Road, they also estimated additional traffic cutting through from the existing Autumn Spring subdivision to get out to Granchchaw Road. uh knowing those uh existing counts, they took the the projected trips from the proposed development, added those additional trips to what they actually counted at those intersections. And there's a methodology that you can use to estimate the overall delay on the intersection. Uh and the delay, for what it's worth, is equated back to to a level of service. It goes from A to to F, where A being the best and F being the worst. And the the bottom line result was when they took those those trips and added them to the existing traffic, they found that delay changed very very little um everything was at a level of service C, I believe, or or better. So the the bottom line result was the additional trips added to the existing volumes at the intersections didn't really um increase delay for for traffic,

which then means that it it's the the roads are adequate for this development. That's correct. There were no improvements that were identified that were necessary based on the additional trips. Okay. Thank you. Questions I have.

I since it comes up in every meeting, I thought I'd mention this as well. I can quote the Supreme Court on the traffic rules. While traffic is a b byproduct of zoning activities, quote, "Increased traffic flow is not a sufficient reason to strike down a zoning ordinance." That's from a case in 1942 that has been cited dozens, if not a hundred times. So, you can't consider traffic, especially when there's a traffic study that says that it's sufficient. With that, let's uh go to the traffic study. Mr. Moran, can you come back up? I think this is more you than I was going to wait till the site plan, but this be premature. Let's do it now. So, reviewing the traffic study, which I did do, I I found no estimates given for a possible future Southbrook connection, even though people could leave should all this go through approvals. Uh, leave to the east.

They're not heading to the base. They're not heading to the major shopping areas. All that's west, which is where Green Hall Road comes in. But there was nothing at all anticipating the only other way out, which is Southbrook. Can you explain why the traffic study did not have any estimates even for exiting through South Brook?

Sure. Um the major focus of the traffic study was was the major intersections where you know the majority of the trips the majority of the traffic volumes are all directed towards the major routes in the city. So that that's kind of the focus where you know obviously common sense would tell you there'll be some additional trips where people will choose to go from this neighborhood and we'll travel east through the existing Autumn Springs neighborhood. However, those trips would be very very low and you wouldn't anticipate uh like a a traffic jam on on those streets in that existing plat where the again the focus of the study is where all all the the major amount of vehicles are and the the function of the intersections. Well, I'm just looking at it myself and I don't share uh living there already as Mr. Uler did, but he brought up the same point I had, which is in the second phase apparently in 2026, a full year away, uh should that go forward, uh he is going to be the initial bearer of any traffic and even in a low count going by his home every day, which could inhibit his use. So my concern is since we can't talk about it per 1942 Supreme Court decision at the same time uh from a livability standpoint zoning is going to if it goes ahead allow this property to have more than one egress and ingress and the only way is going right by his house in Southbrook. So what are we building into this zoning decision knowing what's going to happen to Southbrook if we have no estimates for a traffic study?

Uh again I wouldn't anticipate a huge number. the the count now I would say is pretty close to zero. So, you know, because it's it's a dead end stub street into a farm field. So, I guess you have to to ask yourself when Autumn Springs was built, why was it that street was was made to dead end into that farm field where the logical conclusion would be

Yeah, I agree with you. I was just saying should this go forward, uh, someone living in phase two and wants to get on the Indian Ripple Road, they're going to cut right by Southbrook to go down. They're not going to go all the way back to Graange Hall and come back. They're just going to go to the right and go down. So that should be to me a part of the traffic study is the estimate possible future uses if the zoning goes through. That's why I was citing so much with Mr. Huler. Sure. So, is there anything we can do before 2026, should that phase two go through, if this is approved, that would allow some kind of uh understanding of what we can do with that second egress.

Um, yeah, we could we could project some some trips, but again, I wouldn't anticipate like like a like like a log jam or, you know, or traffic uh snarls um going through by Mr. Guler's house. There will obviously be more additional cars. I don't think anybody can really dispute that. But um but I I wouldn't think it would be um an extremely high number where it would be probably nothing until phase two. But well, it's it's zero now. Yeah. Because it's dead industry, right?

I'm where I'm going with this is even though we're looking at the site plan tonight as well. Um when this phase two goes through, they will have to I'm assuming they will have to come back for a final approval of the phase two. Even though we might We might not be approving the zoning and the site plan tonight. Should it all go forward, they would be coming back. That would give us time to really understand traffic impacts. Sure. They would have to come back here for approval. Sure. And Randy, please correct me, but I think tonight the the site plan will be approved by by um planning commission this evening where in the future you'll see the the record plan, the actual plat, but you're not going to see the the site plan again. This is the one time

for my own education. Andy, uh, even though we don't have Bridalwood tonight, which was removed, that was going for the final review of the subdivision, which is where I thought of in the same instance. Thank you, Jeff. The same instance on this when they go to a phase two, they're going to be coming back to us, planning commission anyway, which will give people more opportunity to understand the traffic count on South Brook.

They they will be coming back. It wouldn't be it would be in an open public meeting but there wouldn't be public input but it would be as a decision item to approve the record plan which is the legal document that uh the applicant would record with the county to actually create those buildable lots. Um but yeah I I the staff doesn't have the authority to create buildable lots. So we'd have to come back to planning commission to so there would be another opportunity to look at additional traffic data should that there could be found. Okay. All right. Then my other areas on the reservoirs. Uh would that be you or Mr. Mormon up again to ask questions terms of

well in the nine conditions for the zoning since that's all we're focusing on now. There's no conditions relating to the reservoirs. And even though the reservoirs would apparently come back uh significantly impact if any to phase two should that come through. Um in phase one they still are going to be constructing. And I I find either in the 34 conditions for the site plan which is the latter part of this meeting and the nine conditions for now nothing talks about the maintaining of the operations of the reservoirs during the entire process. And these reservoirs have solar panels, they have piping, they have fountains for recirculation. They have a lot of things going on right now that over the next year to two should this go forward would be impacted whether construction's on the west side or the east side in phase two and would we not have a condition either in the zoning or in the site plan that focuses on who is taking care of maintaining and paying the cost of keeping these reservoirs going

is I don't see anything in either either part now right um the whoever whomever owns the prop the land underneath the ponds is responsible for maintaining the ponds. Um, and so should this move forward while they're under construction, it'll be up to them to maintain them. We do have a easement over top of them, a storm water easement. So if they're they were not doing it for whatever reason and it was causing uh impact offsite, we have the authority to go in and make the whatever repairs or cleans necessary and then bill it back to the property owner um whatever the cost is to repair that. But really, it's up to the property owner um to maintain the ponds. Is that not the applicant that's before us tonight?

They do not own the property yet. Okay. So, who is the In fact, that was one of the questions we were going to bring. Who is the property owner now? Um the Beaver Creek Development Corporation, which is the economic development arm of the city. So, the city

because one of the things that caused me in the zoning for my question is do we a need for a condition to put what you just said in either the zoning or the site plan or both to say should it move forward the owner of the property will maintain not only the condition of the reservoirs but the operations of the reservoirs with the piping the recirculation the solar panel powering all that's currently there now what I'm I think if it's already required I don't think we need to add it as an additional

it's statutoily required in our in our general code of ordinances. Um, if planning commission were wanted to do that, I mean, I wouldn't hurt anything, but I would recommend you do that in the site plan, not not the legislation. Okay, I agree.

Okay, thank you. Thank you for the clarity. Um, I only have one last question, which goes to the turning lanes. Again, in the traffic study, it was recommended for the deceleration lane going north of Reall and a possible left turn going south. Given all the stuff from the public hearing yesterday, which I was not at, for the green range hall widening and the notion of walkways on the west side for the new park, how much of the lane modification of Graange Hall would we be taking into account now for the reasonzoning approval when it's a whole separate situation that was talked about yesterday?

That's a separate meeting for the res. No, I'll defer that to Jeff. And once again, for zoning, you're not supposed to consider the traffic. Well, I brought it up because the traffic study brought up the recommendations for the deceleration going north and for the left turn going south. It's more of a site plan. Okay. It's a site plan issue. Okay. I'll bring it back up later. Okay. Thank you, Randy. But that will be a question. Don't run off um or Randy. Um I'm it it's difficult for us to try to keep the zoning part separate from the specific site plan question. So if I stray into the wrong area, please stop me.

I need a button. Um the uh one point that I that has been it's difficult to to to figure out even when you've been doing this for a while is the role of the planning commission and the role of city council. Uh in 99% of what we do we are advisory to the city council. And our lawyer here is going to correct me if I'm wrong. Um, we are advisory. What we vote on goes to city council as either a recommendation to approve or a recommendation to deny it. It it behooves then city council to make the decision the final decision to make an ordinance out of this. Uh there are a very few instance instances where things do not go forward to city council. they they live or die with us. This is not one of them. So, we are advisory. Uh and city council usually upholds us, but not always. So, we are constrained by what our zoning code says. Uh we cannot go against what the zoning code says or we will open ourselves as city up to an expensive lawsuit. So, we have to look at what the law says and act accordingly. Uh, city council has a little more wiggle room. Um, they could be sued too, but uh the that that's where we stand and I want you all to understand that um we take into consideration what you say. Uh we are interested in what you say. uh we may be sympathetic to what you say, but we have to look at the law and what the law says

and make our decisions based on that. So, after I've after I've flogged that to death, I've got a couple of questions. Um I'm going to put you on the spot, Randy, just a little bit. What's the size of of um uh Springhouse Park? How many acres? 148. 148 acres. So, we've got 148 acres of green space. It's going to stay green space forever. Forever. Yes. Yeah. Well, pretty much, let's put it, let's say, in in our lifetimes anyway. For a very long time.

Okay. Um, so we do have plenty of green space nearby. Um, help me out here, but I I remember when we originally approved the um uh the research park that was that property at the time designated as research park or as single family? I don't remember. It was owned by this property. These 54 acres was were owned by Miami Valley Research Park, but it's it wasn't part of their I guess for lack of better term their homeowner their owners association that guided uses and architectural for their business businesses. So, it was owned by them but not part of the the Miami Valley Research Association.

Okay. So, uh, it would have still been up to to the city to determine what would be put there. Zoning and Yes. Okay. Um, just wanted wanted to clear that up because I honest I I honestly don't remember that was a long time ago. Um, now one of the things that was brought up uh and this may go to specific site plan, but I'm going to say it anyway. Um, this always surprised me. Uh, when you're talking about, uh, trips per dwelling unit, uh, characterize multif family versus single family.

Single family does have the highest number of trips per day per unit comparative to multif family. Multif family is 40% fewer, I believe, around there. Mhm. Um and then it's even fewer if you're 55 and up. Um multif family, but yeah, single family is the highest trips per day. So if we put a couple hundred apartments on this property, there would there' be less traffic. Not that we're going to do it, but in theory. Yes. In theory. Yeah. That the way the math says that. Yes.

Okay. Okay. Um I think that's all I've got. Uh second helpings, gentlemen. Okay. Um we are then looking for I am looking for a motion uh and this is on the reszoning uh for the uh for the three parcels and I'm looking for a motion. Mr. Chair, I'd move to approve PUOD 25-4 with the attached nine conditions. Second. I have a motion and a second. Any last statements here? Okay. I'll ask for a roll call, please. Mr. Meer yes Mr. Fountain yes Mr. S

yes motion carries 300 and now we will move into the second part of this which is the specific site plan and this gets into a lot more detail so you're not going to No, I already read it. You already read it. Okay, it's up to our U developer to come up and uh tell us about your specific site plan, please.

Thank you again. Jim Lipnos, the Rockford Homes, 999 Players Parkway, Columbus, Ohio. Um I just take I want to take a like a like a half a step back talk about the zoning and the um the sight specific site plan itself. Uh we we are meeting your comp plan standards and and the future land use and just for the record we have agreed to the was it nine conditions on the on the zoning and the 34 conditions on the specific site plan. Uh additionally to answer Mr. Fountain's question. The HOA will own and maintain all the open space on the property, including the ponds. So, they will be part of the home. Thank you. I was more focused on construction period, but Yeah.

Oh, well, during the construction period, as soon as we take ownership of it, um Rockford would be responsible. Um then, uh uh last and foremost, I just want to touch on the traffic. The traffic study did not require both turn lanes. We are voluntarily doing that. understanding that the improvement is going across the street with the park and we want to be good stewards of that. So again, here to answer any questions uh if you got specific questions regarding the site plan. Thank you. Thank you staff.

Um from a specific site plan standpoint, I really don't have much to add. Um but again I'll be we still recommend approval and happy to answer any questions.

Okay, thank you very much. Okay, we go back again. We we we backtrack. We're starting now. We're looking at the specific site plan, the way the streets are laid out, the way the lots are laid out. Uh anything having to do with that. Uh if you'd like to come forward and make comments, uh please do so. And uh y'all did real good on the on the first public hearing. We didn't have to gave anybody down, so step on up and speak your peace. Brand new three minutes this time.

Hello again, Ross Uler, uh 3781 Southbrook. Um so one thing that I'm concerned about regarding these site plans is removal of about a 20 yard uh green space between the existing neighborhood and the new neighborhood that's being proposed. Um, not only is it a privacy uh concern for those existing houses there along Autumn Leaf, but I will attest having pretty much 80% of the trees that were along that side of my lot removed for the um addition of those ponds there. that it does do a sign it does have a significant impact on noise levels in our yard as well as weather uh impacts. So the first year we've been there for two years. So I guess I'm the newest person that stood to this podium to speak my concerns. Um but the first winter we were there, we had no issues with the wind coming across because we had those trees there. Um but last winter once those trees were removed, we had significant damage being done to our property there. Not only did we have new trees that were blown sideways, uh, but I had my grill was blown over by the wind coming across because that barrier was no longer there as a buffer against the wind. And so you're going to have weather impacts for all those houses down there once you remove those trees, as well as noise impact. We can certainly hear Graange Hall a lot clearer, and we can hear noise off of 675 a lot clearer since they removed those trees there as well. Um, so I would request that we keep that buffer about a 20 20 yard buffer or so um of the trees that are existing there between this proposed neighborhood and the existing neighborhoods surrounding it. Thank you.

Thank Cindy Fischer, 3646 Southbrook Drive, Beaver Creek 45430. Um, again, I'm down next to I'm in Shaker Heights portion of South Brook Drive. So, I my house backs up to Valley School, and I'm gonna just go with the traffic study that we talked about. Um, a C is average um until we build something else up and down through there. And I know this all can't be part of what your choices are, but I would challenge your engineer to the fact that that isn't going to impact um Southbrook Drive because I'm going to tell you that when Autumn Springs goes in there, you can come at my house any day. a half an hour before to an hour after school lets out every day and I cannot get in and out of my driveway because nobody rides their bike anymore. Nobody walks to school and all that property is not going to be school bus. So I'm the one that's going to feel the impact of it. Myself and the gentleman here, there's about eight to 10 houses along South Brook there that's going to feel the impact of that. And I can tell you right now that the people from Autumn Springs quite often come up South Brook come up Southbrook to Bridlewood because it's a straight shot versus the crooked road through Autumn Springs. So the impact is actually going to be very real and I would challenge them to come out and and do that. Um I also feel that the grading now that we've just fixed that the site plan with the large amount of homes in the back there and along that pond are also going to create a problem again for these people in Willowrest. So, you know, Beaver Creek giveth Beaver Creek taketh away again. They're going to be back in the same situation that they're in with the grading and and you put more you're going to put more concrete back here. That's exactly what they said took years and years of of issue with the grading was the water pounding it down and down. All that concrete's going to go back right back into these people's property again. I mean, I think we can do better. I think if we're going to do

it, and you're going to do it um because you own it, it needs to be better. it needs to be planned so that it accommodates those people who have been there. And then I'm going to also disagree with that traffic study. Um that it needs to change. Thank you. Thank you.

Mike Canestaro, 897 Autumn Leaf Drive. I have concerns about the Southbrook connection. I wonder why it's necessary. Ry's presentation said it was to limit the traffic on the main roads. The traffic study was focused on the main roads. What about Autumn Leaf Drive? There's about 45 houses in the.3 miles to get to Southbrook from the entrance. We have one entrance basically we but up against the uh Valley Elementary there. So what happens when you add 121 houses, half of which are in the two phases adjacent to our neighborhood? Let's call it 60. You go from 45 to 60 houses. So, uh, what's the necessity of the Southbrook connection? It's to limit on the main roads. What about our traffic? Why can't there be one entrance to and from Graange Hall Road? If you visit residential areas which are gated communities, there's one way in and one way out. It's been shown to prevent crime. Think like a burglar. What do you want? Right? So, um, in addition, has anybody ever gone south on Graange Hall Road to get to 675 and had your GPS navigate where you're going? It wants me to go through Danhur. You know, I I don't go through there because that's a residential neighborhood. So, when you have non-native traffic, I don't know about the five exits per unit. I'm talking delivery vehicles, people delivering a washing machine, uh, somebody wants to pour a swimming pool. I don't know what the HOA is going to, you know, all sorts of that kind of traffic is going to come through our street. And, uh, none of the traffic study has even addressed a baseline of

that. So, I can tell you this more numbers to the south of me, my nine neighbors to the south on that straight bend, the straight thing with a little curve, uh there are six households with small children. And so when you have local traffic like myself, I know which houses might have a ball spill out of the driveway with a kid running after it or somebody on their bike, but nobody following their GPS who's non-native or cutting through the neighborhood has that kind of empathy. So I'm concerned about the cut through opportunities. Make them impossible. Let their traffic be their traffic and our traffic be our traffic. I don't see the necessity except The only concern is on the main roads and I'm concerned about the kiddos, the next generation of kiddos in our neighborhood. I raised two kids for 22 years in that neighborhood. It was peaceful. It was safe. I want to keep that going. So, please consider a modification to the site plan with one entrance in and out of Graange Hall. You're going to expand it anyway. Thank you. [Applause] Your timing was perfect. You were right at three minutes. Good for you.

I'm Jackie Frederick. I live at 1012 Stanwick Drive and um I'm not totally affected by all of this other than back if anybody remembers years ago when Ober was doing a development and they were going to cut through on Riverh Hill into my neighborhood and I knew everybody was probably going to try, oh you're going to go out Grainchaw. No, I can just zip through River Hill Stanwick and get the same way. So I knew right away that Southbrook was going to be a concern. Not the number of cars, which now I realize that's more of a concern, too. But I think of people zipping through the neighborhood. And that was my concern back then in my neighborhood. And now it's even though it's not right cutting into my neighborhood, I want to say yes, I agree with everybody about the South Brook issue because I wouldn't want all this traffic just people flying through my neighborhood. That's it.

Thank you. [Applause] My name is Scott Perry. I live at 3998 Willowrest Road, right on the corner of Graange Hall and Willow Crest. So yeah, I understand people's issues with traffic. I'm not real happy if everybody want to dump it all on me. They're on Graange Road though either because I'm right on the very corner and you're talking about putting in turn lanes over there. I don't know where the turn lanes are going to start, where they're going to stop, and you want to run all the construction in to that development off of Graange Hall Road. Well, I live, like I say, right on the corner of Grangeaw and Willrest. What am I supposed to do? Maybe they want to buy my house.

Thank you. [Applause] Hey everybody, Tom Clark, 3995 Willow Crest Road on the yellow patches at the upper left. I'd be one, two, three in. So, uh, we're going to have a real good view of all the construction that's going to go on for four years. Did you say four yearsish? Okay. So, uh, having gone through the dust and noise of, uh, the Willow Crest improvement last year, uh, I would like to ask the builder, uh, if or for you folks to ask them if, uh, there'll be something to abate the dust and noise of four years of construction. Uh, I see in the plan that it can only go on Willow uh, Gra, I'm sorry, from Graange Hall. That's right. All construction vehicles must go in and out for four years from Graange Hall Road. Correct.

Correct.

Yes. So, uh, anything you can do to abate that would be great. Uh, I would like to know if all the land will again be stripped as it was last summer. I still haven't powerwashed all the back of my house. Uh, because it is filthy and I knew that more construction was coming. So, if the if the land will be stripped again in order to put down sod, there'll be more dust. I would like to know at what point the uh road will be paved that comes off of Graange Hall for phase one. That way there'll be less dust with the construction vehicles going in and out. Uh if there's a way I can get that information, I'd appreciate it. And uh will there be pedestrian access from River Hill? I'd like to be a good neighbor to the new people in the nice expensive homes that are coming in next to me. And uh if there'll be pedestrian, that means we can walk our dog. but also the folks in the new area that'll have no trees, love to come into our beautiful Wood Haven neighborhood and enjoy the shade of uh Willow Crest and River Hill and all of our other streets. Uh I know that many of these things are foregone conclusions when they come before this board. And uh the uh original vote today was that you recommend to city council, correct? That uh this go forward. And uh I think most of us knew that coming here or suspected that that would happen. And thank you for listening. But uh I think we knew which direction it was going to go. Um the uh um the fact that we're uh going to have new neighbors. I knew this. We were lucky enough to live for 35 years at our current home and look at an open field and uh we pretty much knew that something was going to be developed someday. So I'm hoping that for the best for this and uh I thank you all by the way for your service and my neighbors. It's good to see some of you here. Uh but uh I think we know which way it's going to go and so for us to make the best of it is probably a good idea. I think I'm under three minutes.

Thank you. [Applause]

Plenty of mic time for everybody.

Hello sir. Uh Dave Nunley coming off 3990 Rexford Road. Uh straight at my driveway. If you look large piece of concrete right there, that's mine. Um just one question. Coming into the schools, we're already taxed to the gills with our property taxes. You're coming in with 121 family members. The schools are already running out. Is there any kind of concessions for the school systems? Luckily, I do not have a dog in the hunt as far as my daughter's out of school now. However, I do have grandb babies. So, with that said, is there you as a lawyer said schools don't matter a rat's tail. So, is that a fact

for a zoning decision? For zoning decision for specific site plan, I think they're really irrelevant. That's the layout of buildings within in a in a plan. I mean, schools are a separate political entity. If you want to support them, you can support them through your the levies that they bring before the citizens. And that's correct. And we've been voting down school levies because they keep going up. $100 per 10,000 or even better. So, what about the school systems is my question and the taxes. So, kind of hand in hand. Thank you.

Thank you. My name is Emily Uler. I am at 3781 South Brook Drive. Um the one right next to the retention pond. Um, and I guess I was curious and a little bit, this may be backtracking a little bit, when they said that the density level was still under the three units per acre for R1A, then why did we need to change it to RPU? Because I'm concerned that that means that they can just get smaller and smaller with these lots. And these are really small lots and really tight housing. And um so I don't know why we had to change R18 RPU in order to approve this plan. Um and I'm also curious it River Hills. Is that River Hills Road? Is that what that is? Um so they're not feeling the necessity to connect that to the neighborhood. So, I'm curious if the builder could find another way to loop the road around so that it has two entry and and exit points within their own space without connecting to Southbrook since they're not needing to connect to River Hills either.

Thank you.

Thank you. [Applause] Glenn Fischer, 3646 Southbrook Drive, Beaver Creek, Ohio 45430. I am uh opposed to it as it currently sits. Uh living on Southbrook, so where that would most uh connect would be Am Springs and South Brook. And then ours would be the next one over, which would be Briwood and Southbrook. Uh I'm concerned about the delivery trucks coming down there. and and as these people get to know the neighborhood, if this does go through as planned, there would be a bunch of people uh according to GPS's or things that would map them down there. And being a dead-end street, we would have tons of people turning around there. As we mentioned during the school time of year that we probably fit 20 cars down there and it becomes a parking lot. So, as this currently sits, we're going to have a bunch of cars down there, turn around hours of the day, it's going to be impossible driveway. So, I'm asking that you not connect to Southbrook and like stay on their land as it is. Thank you.

Thank you.

Brian Wilhelm, 3991 Willowrest Road. Again, I've been in my house about 55 years. I'm very disappointed to see what the city is doing, especially since the city owns it. Uh, I'd like to know, uh, we're sure that we're not going to connect to River Hill at any time. I'd like to know what the, uh, easement is that's going to be behind my house. Uh, dimension wise, uh, I've, if I haven't misunderstood, I've heard, uh, HOA thrown around. Do they have any say so about my property? And uh after this meeting, do we as residents have any course to try to stop this development? Thank you.

Thank you.

Take your time. We won't shut you down. We might Yep, that's true. Go over three minutes.

Okay, three minutes. I got you. So, I'm Jeff Cruzberry, live at 887 Autumn Reef Drive, next door neighbor to Mike. And um I know it's kind of selfish that just worried about our little section right there. But like with Mike said, the kids, we've kind of flipped over now to where we got younger couples in there with a lot of kids that are moved in there. And um we do have a a ho hoa, but it's really not policed. Never really has been and we never had any problems. But people are allowed to park in the street. So if we have just not a party, but just regular time, people will park on the street and it actually turns it to a one lane road. And then if you've got four or five houses on each side of the street, people are parking in the street. Um it might be a lot of congestion building up there. And then like with Mike said with younger families in the neighborhood, young kids, we know what to look for and keep our speed limit accordingly, 25 or at least less. And um but it it I think it will create problems because people are still allowed to park in the street because they can. And um I think that's about all I got. So just worried about safety for the kids and the families in the neighborhood.

All righty. Yep. Thank you. and you waving that gavl to get somebody up. James Curry, 843 Autumn Leaf Drive. Uh my biggest concern as well is as most of the folks here have said, have been that Southbrook connection. I've got two small kids worry about traffic in the area. Um I understand that it's a fire department regulation, safety mandatory thing to do. Are there any options we can pursue that does not directly connect it? Um maybe get it close and don't pave it all the way. Um put a gate there, put some rocks in the way. Something that allows it to be used in an emergency to meet the fire department regulations while not making it a permanent go back and forth for everybody to use every day. Thank you.

Thank you. [Applause] I'll wave it one more time. Okay, I will close the public hearing and ask if we had any written input on this. We did. We received seven letters and the commissioners received a copy of each. Great. Thank you very much. And I'm going to start on my left this time. Okay,

Randy, can you come back up? So going back to the traffic and the study on the Graange Hall Road given what happened yesterday as a sign the fire of what's coming possibly for Graange Hall Road widening um what assurances will we have as a condition in the 34 we already have or not that the deceleration lane and the left turn all those kind of things will still be taken in consideration if Graange Road widening does not go through or if it does go through will impact and change the entrance off of Greenaw Road for this development. What how are the two linked together in one dictating the other if at all?

Well, as part of this project, they'll need to build the diesel lanes and the the right turn lane. Um and any future project on Graange Hall Road would take the exist whatever is existing at the time which would include those del lanes as part of their design within their design guidelines whether that be um expanding upon them or shifting them but um we wouldn't I couldn't envision a standpoint where they would remove them as part of an upgrade to Granch Hall Road. So, what um excuse me for not remembering the title of yesterday's public gathering for Green Hall, but would the widening project in any way control or or have authority legally to change what the developer would end up doing for the entrance. So, what we see in a site plan may or may not eventually happen in two, three years.

Our engineers speak more on that than I do. So, I'll bring them up. And again to the residents, there was an open house for the Greens Hall widening project which was held yesterday for an eventual lane widening and sidewalk edition of Greenaw Road. Good evening, Mr. Fountain. Uh uh just to correct you with what was yesterday. Yesterday was the public involvement meeting for the side path project. Just that. Yeah. Yes. Okay.

There's no widening that's going on with Graange Hall right now that's funded. Um the side I'll just kind of briefly briefly go over what that project was since you brought it up. Um that project will um take place starting at Lefino Park. We will add which you can't see it here but I mean well I guess you can. So basically Lefino Park is down south of this area um south of uh Shakertown Road. What we will be doing is adding sidewalk along the west side of Shakertown or excuse me the west side of Graange Hall Road from Lfino Park up to Shakertown Road. From Shakertown Road then through P up to Patterson we will actually be constructing a 12- foot wide path within the park itself and that meanders off the roadway back in through the park and is part of that east side of that trail that was shown in the master park plan. um when you get back out of Thank you, uh Randy for that. But yeah, so basically what Randy has uh put up there is roughly the path. It looks a little different. We actually will have the displays up on our website for that project uh tomorrow. Hopefully, when I get those in

from Patterson Road, that will connect back into a sidewalk that will run along Patterson Road up to uh uh 835. So, that's and that'll be on the west side of the road there, too. So, that's what that project will entail. that sidewalk and side path or the sidewalk um in the park area through there is roughly the closest it gets is about 75 ft from the existing roadway. So no matter what we do with that that path will not be impacted by any future widings that would happen when they would be funded if and when they would be funded. So yeah, thank you Mr. Smith.

You're welcome. Um Randy, going back to you on the reservoir, you said it might be a sight plan issue. So I'm still concerned over the two to threeyear time frame knowing how well the reservoir is operating now with all its piping and ariations uh spouts and solar panels and everything that as we go from the Beaver Creek Development Corporation through the developer and on eventually to the HOA that nothing is dropped on the operation not just the maintenance during construction but the operation of the reservoirs because they're so uh required not only for the minimization of dust and construction debris, but because they're so mechanically driven right now just to be operating for filtration. So is a condition the way that this would be done or statutoily you're saying go excuse me go through the owners. Is there a need for a condition or will the legal aspect of ownership automatically include operation as well as maintenance?

Yeah, I mean the statutoily I mean would be covered that the owner will be in charge of maintaining the pond. Um now one of the conditions of approval stated that an HOA documents need to be re reviewed be presented before I record the the first section. Uh they have to submit a copy of the HOA docs um that are going to be recorded with the county and have the engine our our legal team review the documentation and we'll ensure that there's specific language in there for the the the storm water detention ponds as is. Yeah. because they're they're not static ponds. They're fully operational, solar powered.

Make sure that there's in there so you don't get and everything. I just want to make sure it doesn't get as it goes owner owner, it's not dropped. And they say, "Well, it looks fine, but it's not operating." No. And like I said, uh we have a an easement, a storm water detention easement over it that gives the city the authority to go in and inspect it as needed and if needed, we can repair it and then bill it back to the property owner. Okay. Condition 28 also talks about maintenance of the pond as well. Well, I was separating maintenance and operation because of the the active filtration that goes on shall be maintained in perpetuity.

Okay, I have one one more, Mr. Chairman. Um, going back to the again with Southbrook because I know that's such a concern for the resident Senate. It was for me as well. Uh again, would that be a condition that we would look at formally uh any egress, ingress, egress, traffic counts or something to modify uh the traffic information we already have to ensure that as phase two goes in, even though we're just talking now for the initial site plan, but as phase two goes in that it becomes something that a future planning commission or whatever takes an um inclusion of the review for the entrance and egress in South really the the intent I I know I'd mentioned previously about one of the major reasons is to keep road keep traffic off of the main roads, but it also in our subdivision regulation state that you you can't have a subdivision. I think it's like 36 homes without a secondary exit point. I mean know I know Mr. Self's old neighborhood um he fought for years to get a secondary access point and finally got it. But at the point at the time there was 240 plus homes that 309 homes that had only one access point onto Jonathan Drive and and that that is a that's a fire hazard. It's a safety hazard because if something happens at that intersection and the EMS can't get by it, then you've got all these homes that uh that have cannot get the help that they need. Um and these all the roads that they're going to be constructing inside the inside the development are public streets. They'll be public streets maintained by the city. They'll be constructed to public standards. Um and so to we don't have any instance where we cut off a public street with a gate that only allows.

So what you're what you're saying is just without a special condition needing to be added to the 34 we already have, it's automatically going to be taken care of because of it. nature fire requirements nature ingress egress nature that southbrook will be established as an adequate connection for the counts of the homes in there and the vehicle counts correct and and also I mean I know we're thinking one way direction that everyone from this neighborhood will be coming only be benefiting of the multiple connections but I've I've gone through a lot of neighborhoods in the past with this kind of interconnection that the neighbor the existing residents don't like and I found that the existing neighbors also use the new roads to get out to Graange Hall. So

if somebody that lives in Autumn Springs now wants to go north on Graange Hall, they'll have the option of bypassing the intersection at at Shaker Town and Graange Hall that light there and go through this new neighborhood and turn right onto Graange Hall. So no electronic tollway would be added. No, but it it does go both ways on that. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. That's all I have, Mr. Chairman. Uh the no grade zone, I I believe I read this correct, but that prohibits cutting trees or not.

What? No. Um we've run into these problems in the past where you start prohibiting the cutting of trees, then it comes back to the the private property owner takes over that spot. they've got uh scrub trees or fallen or half dead trees and they've got a law that says they can't remove them. Um and we don't want to create that situation. What what we're proposing and what the staff or what the condition states is that as they're grading the site, as they're making it ready for construction, they're to put flags out 25 feet from the property line where you see in red and and 20 feet from the property line where you see in orange. And they're not allowed to touch that during the grading process. So, it's a grading limit.

And not touch that during the process would include them cutting trees. Correct. Okay. Okay. Just making sure. And let's see. You touched on the roads a little bit, but I know somebody asked the question of who pays for the roads. That's going to be paid for by the developer, right? Developers paying for the roads, and they'll be built to city standards, correct? And then um the width of the roads. I know sometimes people have concerns about the parking on the roads,

right? I mean, other than the front road, uh, if it's hard to see on this, I I can't use a laser pointer, but the first seven lots, um, before you make that first curve, um, on the west side of the property, that's 36 foot wide lanes, uh, or pavement. Um, just because that's kind of the the pinch point for the whole neighborhood. That's where everybody's going to be coming in that way. Um, but then once you get past that, it's the typical neighborhood road width that we have in almost every other neighborhood in the city, which is the 26 foot or 26 foot um backtoback curb.

Okay. The timing of the turn lanes on Green. Did you touch on that? If I'm if you did, I'm sorry if I missed it. They're going to have to be um and the engineers could might be able to answer better than I can, but from my understanding that I mean they're going to have to be building those before they start opening up homes for phase one. Now they could do grading, but just right um before they start selling homes for the uh I mean they might build one home. I mean every neighborhood when we do a new neighborhood we we can release a model home permit fairly quickly. Um but then when they start grading or start building more homes, you know, we we're going to see that improvement done.

And so you basically just wouldn't release the permits until that was done. I'd have to uh double check with engineering, but that's the intent. Okay. Or at least at the bare minimum, we would hold on to a bond in the amount it cost to do that so that they in case the city had to do it. Uh, somebody asked why we had to reszone. Could you touch on that a little bit?

Yeah. Um, a the front portion of the property is zone agricultural. So, the minimum lot size is 5 acres on an agriculturally zoned property. um now and so I mean there's just not there's not a market um or interest in doing five acre lots um especially with the cost of um infrastructure as it is the R1A um that has a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet um and but you lose it's a give and take okay so you if they uh developed it as an R1A, we wouldn't be able to enforce any kind of of the 25 foot grade limits that could grade right up to the property line. We wouldn't be able to enforce any kind of house size limitations other than nothing less than 1,200 square feet. we wouldn't be able to enforce any architectural ele architectural elements such as with this proposal they have to do everything in Hardy plank or stone or brick where on an R1A they could do all vinyl sighting houses um we wouldn't be able to control or or have input on um it's kind of mood at this point but like the storm water detention pond it can be just a a depression in the ground that fills in with dirt and mud and and not water with fountains and air. We wouldn't have control over requirements for photo cell light on each property or um trees in every lot. I mean, there's a lot you would lose and a lot that we gain by doing a PUB. Um and that's part of the the trade-off of a PUD is, you know, there are going to be some smaller lot sizes in the center. You got your cluster development center, but we can we can add on conditions about um

extra turn lane on Graange Hall. Um no cut or no grade limits on the property lines, extra upgraded architectural materials, um landscaping out on on Graange Hall to help, you know, soften the neighborhood from the public point of view on Graange Hall. um just a lot of give and take on that and that's why we do PUBS. So overall a net positive as a PUB versus just the straight depending on your point of view, but yes. Um let's see.

And I know you touched on it a little bit in your presentation, but the storm water runoff, um it can be no worse than it is today, right after they construct this. And if it was, they would have to come back then and build bigger ponds.

And the ponds, I mean, the ponds were built to handle the development. What they're going to have to do is make sure the grading on the lots and the grading on the street causes the water to go into the the um culverts that are on the road or in in between the lot so that the water gets into that and ultimately to the pond. That's so that's part of a whole storm water management plan. Um in addition to building a pond, but we've got that that step has already been taken, but they got to make sure the water gets to it. And if something went wrong and they made it worse, they would have to come and fix it. Correct. Correct. Yeah.

Okay. I don't know if this is a question more for the applicant or you, but the half circle that's off road B. Yeah, that was a unique thing. Um, we that's going to be a private driveway.

Okay. Um, but we are requiring a public access easement to be constructed because you can't build a lot with no access to a road. Um, and so it's it's going to be a a landscape feature so that when you're coming in a neighborhood, you kind of dead end into that. Um, but it does offer three houses access onto that private road. But that's not a public street. That's going to be a private driveway that allows three houses to connect to it. Um, and Um, one of the conditions requires that the maintenance and access of that has to be spelled out in the HOA doc. So, we ensure that there's not any problems in the future with that.

And then, uh, let's see. I know they didn't have a monument sign, but do we know the location of where they're proposing to put it? Most likely it'll be out, um, along where Road C meets with Graange Hall in that in the open space area on the southern side, I think. Yeah. um most likely in that corner area. Um but again, the condition says that it can't in no way can it create a line of sight hazard. And then uh the connection to River Hills, I don't know, maybe this is better for the engineer to talk about, but I assume that's not feasible to build a road around the pond and connect there.

Correct. And then last is just a comment to the applicant. Um I I don't think I'm going to, you know, condition it, but if you could put some landscaping along uh the first lot along Green Shaw, you know, there's great landscaping on the southern side, but just there's really nothing on the northern end. So just Yeah. Yeah. So there's lots of landscaping on the southern portion, but not much on the that lot one. So,

thank you. It's nice to be the last guy because someone else may have asked a lot of my questions. But, uh, Randy, for you, um, the rear yard setback, the minimum setback on the rear yards for the lots that abut existing single family, is that 50 feet or 60? Pull up the conditions. It'll be a 50- foot rear yard setback.

Okay. Would it be feasible to widen that no zone from 25 ft, not to 50, but from like 25 ft to 35? Uh it's fairly flat back in there where it where it abuts the uh existing. I'm just I'm trying to preserve as many of those trees. I I know you all want to keep those trees if possible. Let me pull up an area. Is that actually feasible? Let me pull up an aerial. Um, there's a storm water detention easement back there anyways. And I I mean I'll that's more of an applicant question.

Um, so the ability to build in that area is limited. Sure. Understood. because the when they constructed these ponds, there's a pipe that connects the pipe or the pond in the park to these pipes. And so there's a pipe that goes in that area and that's why those lots have a 25 foot front building set back instead of the 30 foot front building setback. Yeah, I remember reading that, but but I I would defer to that specific one to the applicant.

Okay. Well, I'll I'll catch you in a minute because I got a couple other things, Randy. Um the uh look at my notes here. Uh I know there is a point at least with a condominium there's a point where the HOA takes over from the builder uh during construction uh before everything is built out. Is that is that true with with single family development like this? Well, it really depends. It's it's on a case by case basis. It's how the HOA docs are set up usually. Um, you know, I would defer to the builder on how they plan on setting that one up.

But, but the point the point I'm making is that there's not going to be uh a a time when nobody takes responsibility between the time the um uh the builder starts building and the time that the HOA the owner HOA takes over. There will be no lag time or or there will overlap. You know, I I know everyone is concerned with with the operation of the ponds because they not only affect this plat, but they affect the the plats that they were built to to help very important ponds to the city. Absolutely. Um, do those two ponds connect? Are there uh pipe pipes that connect the two ponds? I believe so. Yeah. Okay.

There's a bridge. There was a bridge built during the construction. Okay. See the the guard rails on most for lack of a better term.

Um, and just as an aside, uh, I was smiling when Randy was talking about cutting through, uh, I live in the in Apple Valley East and Newton Drive was stubbed out from 1954 until 2021. And we have at the time had over 300 houses in our plat with one outlet. And it made me nervous the whole time because all it took was a storm dropping a tree at Newton and North Fairfield and we were trapped. Uh and when uh when my neighbors were all augured about uh the new uh um uh what's the plat?

Cedar.

Cedarbrook. Yes. Cedarbrook Farms. when that was built. Oh, they're going to be shortcutting through our plat. Uh-uh. We're shortcutting through the new plat so we can get out on Shakertown Road and turn left on North Fairfield at a traffic light. My u my record so far is waiting for 46 cars to go by before I could turn out onto North Fairfield. So, uh I understand you're going to get more some more traffic through your plat, but it's going to work. It's going to work out. Uh we did a traffic study uh in our plat and um there were street I live on actually had more traffic on it than Newton. Um gentlemen, there are a couple of things that that I would kind of like to see on this. Um well, first of all, let me ask the the the developer. I asked him a question. Didn't give didn't give him a chance to answer it. Would would that give you a lot of heartburn to move that that norade zone uh particularly where the trees are now?

Yeah. And I understand the intent and respectfully I'll I'll add this. We we want a buffer zone as much as the other the adjacent neighborhoods do. Um we also need to address catching storm water before it leaves the site. So, we want to get that those catch basins relatively close to the property line. Understood.

And with a no-grade zone, it's tough to get water out of that grade zone to the catch basins. So, I'm going to say we would like to keep it at 25 ft, but I can I can make this commitment is where there is a because we'll take down any dead dying or diseased trees, but we will embellish that buffer because we do want that buffer as well. Those trees will be on a homeowner's lot. Um, so they will own and maintain those trees where it's on common area open space. It will be owned and maintained by the homeowners association. and reading through the conditions there is a condition I think it's within 90 days if one dies or something like that so uh the the buffer will be there the intent of the no grade zone really is to kind of maintain that that buffer and we will respect that we will probably end up embellishing a lot of areas where they're thinner trees

that that's why I wanted your input on that because I don't want to stick you with something that would make things essentially impossible right or extremely difficult Understood. And we we do big for first and foremost we want to make sure we get the water to our ponds. Um understanding that it's pretty sensitive area with regards to to to flooding and storm water. Got it.

And then Mr. Meer to address your um comment on the landscaping for lot the side of lot number one. 100% absolutely that most likely will be our model home. Um so yes, we're going to take care of that. And I I did ask and I forgot to introduce our engineer is also here, but I asked Rich, our engineer from MSP, um to really kind of hit the backs of that culde-sac with landscaping oversight that I didn't hit that that side of it. And if we did an entry sign, which we most likely will, it would be on the south side of that entrance. Thank you.

Yeah. Thanks a lot. Uh gentlemen, a couple of things um that since since I can't add them out, I will ask you to. And one of them is uh and one of the one of the folks here alluded to this and he must have been reading my mind because uh I would like to see a bike path uh or andor sidewalk connecting uh the stub end of River Hill uh around the end of the pond and through the there seem to be several easements between that row of lots that that uh front the pond or that back up to the pond. Um if you put the the drawing up. Uh yeah, th those those green stripes. Go back a bit there. Uh, I would like to see a a a bike path to go around the end of um Riverh Hill to connect the two um so that that plat connects to the new plat and the kids in one plat don't have to go out on the Graange Hall Road to visit their friends. Uh it just it makes sense uh to do that. Uh and I' I'd kind of like to see that as a as a another condition. Uh my other uh concern here is uh the lots 7 through 23, which are the ones that that abut the um uh the larger of the two ponds. And a couple of the lots uh further east, lots 90 through 92 and 105 to 109, they all seem to have a 60 foot width, and that seems narrow to me. Uh I would kind of like to see that up to maybe 70 or 75 ft. Given the size of the of the particularly the one-story

houses, uh they're going to be awfully crowded in a 60 foot wide lot. Just wanted to point out that in just a point of order is that uh in our PUB regulations, there is a prescription for a minimum lot width of 60 feet. So, okay, it it the 60 wasn't based on just Right. I understand. I understand. I just like the idea of something a little bit wider. Um, but that's that's up to planning commission to do that. But I would like to see Would that not affect the count?

Yes, it would. They would probably lose a couple of lots. Uh, widening those to get up 10 feet. Uh, that would mean every there that would mean every six lot would along that stretch would be um would be eliminated to take it up to 70 ft. But I I'll leave that up to y'all if you want to put that in. But I really would like to see um either a sidewalk or a bike path uh go around the north side of that pond and um maybe connect uh down to the street at that first uh easement between I can't read the lot numbers between the the Yeah,

Mr. Chairman, can y'all do that? Uh yes. First of all, those green stripes, most of them, those are storm water easements. That's for the storm water to be out there. But that the one between I think it's lots seven and eight, I think. Um the ones on the the the left hand side of the pond, uh we can accommodate um as long as we're allowed to put a a path over the storm sewer easement uh to make that connection, we can accommodate. Okay. We've done that. We've done that in other plats before. So I I don't think staff or engineers will have any problem with that. Yeah. And it's it's amenity. We would we would be in fact you could probably put a walkway all the way around the pond. Let me let me let me address that one first.

U but but if I may address the the lot size that you brought up. So okay u on the the the north section which is section two where the um where we are required to do the larger lots where we abut adjacent ones and one of the gentlemen from the audience that owns that five acre was wondering why there there are seven lots on um his we we're allowed to do 60 foot wide lots up there. We chose to do 80 foot wides up up there because we think that section is kind of a little bit special and so we do offer varying varying lot sizes. Um, number one, it allows us to do different products. It allows us to add, you know, third car garages on some of our product and also keeps an affordability factor. As we all know, housing's insane as far as pricing goes. And so, we're just we're we're just like everybody else. We we just want to provide a good place for people to live. And so, while I have this opportunity, I did want to encourage the the residents uh nearby. I'm going to rattle off my email address and my phone number. Uh they are more than happy or I'm more than happy to speak with them after or outside this meeting as we go through this process. But the email address is my first initial last name jip posrockfordhomes.com. And so I just didn't bring enough business cards with me. So

thank you. Thank you. Okay, gentlemen. Any second helpings here?

I have one if I could. Um, okay. Just a a quick comment uh just to reinforce the importance of the input that we get from all of you and yet the the sometimes legal input from our city attorney, Mr. Lounsberry here, the school issue and the school crowding and where people have their kids in the schools and that's a very serious issue. It's an issue that was involved in the voting we had for the new high school back in November. It's going on now with the property tax discussions in Columbus. Uh it's something we're all part of and aware of. And when I listen to Miss Allen and Miss Curtis and others, uh you very real points, but that's not here at the planning commission. The planning commission is on development and property, and it's a lane that the city of Beaver Creek, the city of Beaver Creek Planning Commission can advise the council on. That's a school issue with Beaver Creek School District, as you know, includes Beaver Creek Township and other areas. It's not a a lane that we can legally travel in. As much as we are empathetic and concerned, uh it's just not something that we have any purview here. So, thank you for all your justified comments on the school crowding that this development, all of the developments prior that we've approved, all the developments that would come after this and come before this planning commission. But c uh school crowding is a very real but not an issue in this lane of the planning commission city of Bu Creek. It's a school district issue and that's as Mr. Lansbury said earlier that's where you look at your levies and your voting as we did last November and we'll possibly in future elections that's where you take that up with the school district not here in the planning commission as important as it is. So thank you for for giving that input even if we could not act on it. Thank you. Second helpings. Okay, gentlemen. Um, first of all, uh, I would

like to add a 35th condition about that bike path. Yeah. So, I was working on some wording. This works. Uh, a walking path shall be constructed from River Hills to Road B, uh, connecting between lots eight and nine. Probably better question. Does that work for the city city practically? Not a legal question, but fair enough. Design one. It sounded good to me. Yeah. I mean, if we could keep it a little more vague, just say a walking path uh shall be constructed between the residential property to the you could say the stub of hills to the new neighborhood. That way

that gives them some wiggle room if we need. Yeah. Because if you make it too specific and we can't accommodate, then it's just they may want to take it all the way around the pond. That would be problematic. Okay. Okay. I have a uh and I second that. Have a second. And let's be let's read the role on that. This is the 35th condition. Mr. Fountain. Yes. Mr. Meyer. Yes. Mr. Yes. Okay. Does anybody want to change the uh lot.

Okay, Mr. Chair, I would move to approve PUD 25-4 SSP number one with the 35 conditions as amended. Okay, I second that. Have a motion and a second. Shall we read the role on that, please? Ma'am, Mr. Meyer. Yes, Mr. Fountain. Yes, Mr. S. Yes. Motion carries. 30. It will go on to uh city council, both the zoning and the SSP. Uh so you will have you'll have a second helping with city council on this.

And just to point out, um those being public hearings, uh whoever got a a letter in the mail for this meeting, they'll also get another uh letter in the mail for when city council will hear the is resoning and site plan. I anticipate it to be that second meeting in August as of now. Okay. As of August 25th, I believe is the my anticipated date for this to be held at council.

Okay. So, watch your mailbox, folks. Uh and thank you so much for your input. I really we appreciate it and I hope you understand what how we have to function. But you get a second helping on this with city council. So, thanks for coming. And we're going to take a we're going to take a break for just a moment.

Hey folks, we'd like to

we'd like to get our meeting started back again. Please, if y'all would uh take your conversations outside, please. Thank you. We still have another case to consider tonight.

Okay, we are back. We are back in session and uh we have uh one more item to look at tonight uh and that is uh it's a public hearing uh for AutoZone.

This is case number PC25-6. It's an Azra detailed site plan on an application filed by AutoZone Development LLC 123 South Front Street, Memphis, Tennessee 38103. The applicant requests an administrative site plan in approval in ASRA for 0.825 acres of land to construct a 6,816 square foot AutoZone retail store. This project would result in the demolition of existing building on the property. The property is located at 3198 Dayton Xior Road, further described as book five, page six, parcel 186 on the Green County Property Tax Atlas.

Thank you. I presume there's someone here from Yeah. So, we do have a representative from AutoZone here. They're foregoing that uh Okay. presentation. I'll just kind of take So, yeah, absolutely. So, yeah, shifting gears here. Uh obviously, we went through a a residential um case previously. So, we're shifting gears to commercial here. Um as Melissa outlined, um we're looking at uh 3198 Dayton Xenior Road um for the construction of a 6,816 square foot auto zone um located on 8 uh.825 825 acres. Gain our Arbarians here. We're on the left star uh to the left there. Um and then the uh Dayton lots on the right star there. Dayton Xia Road. Um as well as kind of the date corner of Dayton Xenia and Road and Beck Drive. I believe that's just a current aerial of of what was previously there. Um which was a uh I believe it was a tire See, Tire Choice was the previous uh previous uh tenant resident there. So, um those existing conditions, uh that building was 4,355 square feet. Um they are out of business. They also had an existing parking area. Um that building will be demolished in entirety. Uh and the uh what they're proposing um the is a retail retail vehicle parts store, which we would categorize as uh the tire choice as well. Also, the auto zone um falls under the same kind of use category uh which is a premiered use within the zoning district. Um the request is compatible with the existing zoning. Um just getting our bearings of the surroundings. Uh to the east we have the Donado's Pizza, to the south is the Kroger uh development. Um to the directly to the west is the American Legion Post. Um and to the north is the Four Oaks uh early inter intervention as well as the Daypring Ministries.

That is our first look at the uh site plan. Uh really is similar to similar location uh to where the previously uh previous um building existed. It's just obviously a slightly slightly larger um with uh with two access points on onto Roaden Beck Drive there. There's no uh no access on Dayton Xenia. Here's our first look at the architecturals. Um the it's a singlestory building. uh stands 21 feet 4 in tall uh as a modern aesthetic. Uh we kind of implemented a little more stricter uh uh brick facade and surrounding buildings than what was originally proposed. So we're happy with what they've uh what they proposed here. Um it's a com combination of sand dune thin brick and brick veneer as well as mountain ledge stone uh stone veneer. Um the uh primary entrance will be from the east uh from Roen Beck Drive. Um it's a glass storefront. Um all four elevations will be of the same kind of brick veneer material. Um and there'll be limited windows and doors on the uh on the side and rear facades. That's a look at all of the facades. Uh once again um that uh that top left uh is the um the the front elevation there uh from from the east. Um and then to the working your way to the right um that's the uh the rear facade. That's kind of what American Legion would be looking into. Um and then uh bottom right uh is to the north and bottom uh southwest corner there um would be what you'd see from Dayton Zena. Once again uh the building is 6,816 square feet. Uh zoning code requirement is one space per 250 square feet. Uh they have provided uh 31 spaces when the minimum required 28. So they exceed that

requirement. We're comfortable with that proposal. Um as well as they are uh uh implementing a loading space um for their inventory uh coming off the north side. Uh and the dimensions that they're proposing for this uh meet our zoning standards. So we're we're definitely okay with that. Uh landscape um meet all of our minimum standards. Uh we're happy with what's being proposed. Um and uh they're they were uh amendable to having some uh small bushes around kind of the uh the base of the uh of the structure. So we were we were happy with that as well as utilizing some existing trees and implementing some others as well. Signage will mirror uh what we'll find in a B3 zoning district. Um the wall signage that's outlined in that is 1.5 square feet per linear foot of building frontage. Um and the ground sign they plan on exist uh utilizing the existing uh ground sign uh but that ground sign will be refaced and and match the uh the building materials used uh there. So uh for this case we are recommending approval uh subject to the 13 conditions I've outlined in your resolution. Um obviously the applicant and myself can answer any questions that the board has. Uh Mike I did look it up. That store that closed on South Fairfield or North Fairfield was an Advanced Auto Parts. So that was the uh the story.

Thank you. Our once again our usual excellent staff report. Um as this is a public hearing um I would uh look at the empty the empty audience and say everybody has left. So uh did we get any written input? No we did not.

No written input. No public to hear. So if you would like to Just briefly, uh, good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. My name is Chris Peters. I'm with MDM Surveyors and Engineers here on behalf of the applicant Autozone. Uh, your staff's been fantastic through this whole process. We've been working with them for a couple of months now to get the store presentation where the city wants it to be. U, we think it fits very well on the lot. We're going to keep the existing driveways. Seems like a pretty straightforward development. uh from my position as the engineer of record. I'm here for any questions that you may have, but less is more. So, I'll stop there.

Excellent. Thank you. So, I will officially close the public hearing and uh I'll turn to my right. Any questions? No questions. I have a a couple for uh Mr. Peters. the uh roof of the So, I've been to the existing building, but uh I'm assuming there will or will not be roof mounted equipment. Yeah. Yes, sir. There will be rooftop units and the wall. It is our intent that the uh walls mask those so they are appropriately. My Paul just missed it. That was talking about parapit walls.

There we go. Okay. Thank you. That was and then I have one question for Colin if I could. Thank you, Mr. Peters. So on the condition 13 in the ground sign. Yeah. Uh since the building is not directly accessible from the street as many of the businesses are, um is the ground sign that's going to be allowed per condition 13 something that will be placed significantly close to Dayton Zena or will it be back closer to the building?

So there is an existing ground sign there. Uh so at uh a pre a previous location I it's hard to see on kind of the maybe can show in one of these overlooks here. So, if you see uh that southwest corner of the lot next to that those parking spaces uh a little to the I can see I can see your arrow. Yeah, a little to the left, Randy. Uh south the south southwest corner. Okay. Yes, exactly right there. All right.

Um, that is an existing round sign and they plan on utilizing that same same area. So, they'll be refaced. That was my question. As opposed to, as Jonathan pointed out, the southeast corner, right, where it could be a new ground sign. Sure. Thus obstructing blockage to traffic going in and out of that street. Yeah. And that's exactly I just want to make sure we're not giving him permission to go in that other corner. Exactly. We wouldn't if they were to propose that um we would get with our engineering team and do a line of sight analysis on that. Exactly. You said it better than I did. Okay. That was my only question, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. When when that was built, that's why we put the sign in that corner.

Um yeah, something like that. Uh, I will really have no no questions, but uh I presume the square footage of the of both wall signs meets the requirements. Yes, sir. Okay. And I will say for the both for staff and for the uh the developer, that's the nicest looking auto zone I've seen. It really looks good. Um, and I don't have any other questions. So, I want a motion. Gentlemen, I would like a motion, please. Mr. Mr. Chairman, I propose that uh we approve the uh PC25-6 ASR for Autozone site plan review

with the attached 13 with the attached 13 conditions. Thank you, Mr. Chad. Second. Okay, I have a motion and a second. Would you be so good as to read the uh Mr. Fountain? Yes. Mr. Meyer? Yes. Mr. Self? Yes. Motion carries 30. And we are looking forward to welcome you. welcoming you all to Beaver Creek. Thank you, Mr. Peter. Thank you. Uh, now we still have to officially um table uh the subdivision item six on our on our agenda. So, gentlemen, I need a U. Are we tableabling indefinitely or till next month? So, just do it indefinitely.

Must be indefinite because in the past we were tableabling one month at a time. Yeah. Okay. Mr. Sure. I'd move to table indefinitely case S25-5. Okay. Second. I have a motion and a second. And just for the record, let's read the role. Mr. Meyer. Yes. Mr. Fountain. Yes. Mr. Self. Yes. Motion carries 300. And gentlemen, we are fresh out of agenda items. So, I'd like a motion to adjurnn. Mr. Churn. I second that. And we'll do that by general consensus. And we are at 8:21. Thank you very much, gentlemen. See you next month.