Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Keep control of this meeting tonight? We've had meetings this size before.

This June 24th, 2026 meeting of the Union Township Zoning Commission is now called to order. Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Everyone may be seated. First item is roll call for a quorum. Mr. Flaude, would you call roll?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Campbell? Yes. Mr. Lewis? Yes. Mr. Wing? Yes. Mr. Beckman? Yes. Mr. Onderlauch?

Yes.

We have a quorum. next item on the agenda is approval of the minutes for our may 27th 2026 meeting the chair will entertain a motion don't everybody jump at once i'll take a motion we accept them i'll second i've regularly made and seconded motion that was mr beckman's motion with mr wings second mr flautie if you'd call the question

Mr. Beckman? Yes. Mr. Wing?

Yes.

Mr. Lewis?

Abstain.

Mr. Honorlo?

Yes.

And Mr. Campbell? Yes.

Minutes are approved. So I know from the agenda there's no old business come before the commission. Is that correct, Mr. Fleming? That is correct. Okay, we have one item of new business, case number 3-26-Z. But before I do that, Mr. Lewis, would you read our opening statement?

Prior to hearing the cases this evening, I want to provide a brief overview about the process. When a case is called, we will hear from the applicant or their representative first. The Commission reserves the right to question the applicant at any time. After the applicant's presentation, we will open the floor to anyone else who wishes to speak in support of the proposal. Then we will open the floor to those wishing to speak against the proposal. Those wishing to speak must fill out and provide us with a speaker registration form. All speakers must speak at the podium and into the microphone for recording purposes. Each speaker must identify themselves for the record. The Commission reserves the right to ask questions of persons speaking against the proposal. The expectation is for speakers and observers to maintain the professional decorum of this meeting at all times. We understand that individuals are often passionate regarding their positions and preferences. However, this meeting cannot properly function if it becomes unruly. We ask that all speakers be conscious of the time and that speakers be concise and avoid making repetitive statements. Once those in opposition to the proposal have spoken, the case will be closed for public comment. Discussion at that time is limited to the Commission, although the Commission may ask questions of zoning staff, the applicant, or those in opposition. After discussion, We will call for a motion from the Commission. This motion requires a second after which the motion itself is opened to discussion. A vote will be called and action taken on the motion. When a motion receives a majority vote, the Commission issues its recommendation to the Board of Trustees in accordance with the wording of the motion. Our options are to recommend approval of the requested change, approval of the requested change with some modifications, or denial of the requested change. The purpose of the motion is to make a recommendation to the Board of Trustees regarding the case. The authority to grant an applicant zoning request or to deny an applicant zoning request rests with the Board of Trustees. These cases, this case, will be heard at the next meeting of the trustees, which is scheduled for, I believe, July 14, 2026. Thank you. That concludes my statement.

Thank you, Mr. Lewis. Again, this case is number 3-26-Z. Applicant is requesting that three parcels located at 1054 Clough Pike, 1062 Clough Pike, and a parcel without an address numbered That's parcel number 413102D032 totaling approximately 23.63 acres be rezoned from R1 single family detached residential to R4 single family variable residential to allow for a proposed concept plan subdivision. The applicant is Chris Henninger, property owner. Mr. Flaude, do we have a staff report on this case?

Yes, sir. So as stated before, the applicant has submitted this request for three parcels totaling the $2,000. 23.63 acres be rezoned from R1 single-family detached residential to R4 single-family variable residential district in order to allow for 60 lots for single-family dwelling units, landscaping elements, entry monument, and open space areas. the subject properties are located directly southeast of the intersection at shaler road and clough pike northwest of the existing whitmore woods subdivision three ponds exist on the property and shaler run creek runs through the north northernmost corner of the site land use is general generally in the vicinity consistent of residential uses with exception to institutional uses such as Club Pike Baptist Church to the north and the West Claremont High School to the south. All adjacent parcels consist of R1 single family, R2 single family detached residential, R3 planned multifamily residential, and R4 single family variable residential. The 2030 Union Township Comprehensive Land Use Plan indicates that the proposed development is not located within a designated corridor. However, the use itself is instrumental and supportive to the underlying single family residential character of this area of the township. Moreover, the use of the R4 district allows for enhanced design flexibility and allows for the land to be more creatively integrated and supportive of the surrounding community. and has been an effective tool for facilitating the redevelopment of home sites already situated in existing neighborhoods. Furthermore, adjacent land use characteristics nearby mirror the proposed development plan. Single family residential development goals state that the plan documents call for a targeted single family dwelling densities up to four units per acre which the proposal readily achieves with the gross density of 2.54 units an acre. The adopted land use plan also references the need to accommodate pedestrian access and future connectivity through creative site design techniques. The relationship to the R4 single family variable structure did want to point out that this proposed development is for single family detached units. Some background information, the area has been located within the R1 single-family district since the institution of zoning in 59. Since then, the properties have been used for agricultural and or residential uses. The Claremont County Auditor Land Use Code lists the property under agricultural, which is a whole separate classification from the Union Township Zoning Map, which has it zoned as R1 single-family residential. A review of the applicant's proposal yields the proposed zone change and conceptual development plans are consistent with both the R4 district regulations and the adopted single family land use recommendations of the 2030 Horizon Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The proposed R4 single family variable concept plan proposes 60 lots with moderate density subdivision with an average lot width of 60 feet at the building setback line and an average lot depth of 150. This development approach results in a gross density of 2.54 units an acre across the 23.63 acre site submitted plans indicate that three additional lots will be dedicated for open space, totaling approximately 4.79 acres or 20.3% of the total acreage to be maimed by the HOA. The northernmost attention pond or lot A is in the close proximity to the three existing ponds on lot A. The walking paths have been proposed to surround the Retention pond. The southernmost detention pond on lot B has no existing water features recorded nearby. A third lot C appears to remain undisturbed by development. If the applicant attends to preserve forested areas, the applicant will need to label this on the plans. Proposed street trees throughout the subdivision and additional planning along entryway have been proposed. Staff has noted the proposed landscaping buffering screening along the main subdivision entry onto Ridge Point Drive from Clough Pike. The buffering screening should be extended northward and southward to provide full screening for the benefit OF THE PROPOSED LOTS 1, 12, AND 58 THROUGH 60, PROVIDING PRIVACY FOR THE PRE-EXISTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ACCESS THE LONG CLUFF PIKE. The plan indicates installation of street and sidewalks along with a safety gate proposed where a connection would be made to the public Stub Street along the existing portion of Ridge Point Drive. The safety gate would impede for the future connection with the existing street network and directly go against the Horizon 2030 plan along with the Claremont County subdivision review guidelines. A through connection would allow for completed streets with additional access for emergency services. Street lighting has been proposed. Lighting shall be downward directed in accordance with regulations of the newly adopted Article 14 lighting standards. An entry monument sign is proposed for the development. Consideration should be taken for the site distances for clearance for pulling onto Clough Pike along with the visibilities for the existing residential homes along Clough. The applicant should contact the Claremont County engineer to determine if a traffic study shall be required for this subdivision. some recommended modifications tonight if the board should choose to vote favorably on this proposal one the applicant shall comply with the requirements of all federal state and local regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over the proposed development as part of the final development and permitting process additional landscaping screening inner buffering shall be implemented in close proximity to the ridge point drive entry around boundaries of the proposed development where vegetation is limited. Special consideration will need to be taken into effect for lots 112 58 through 60 with either vegetation in our privacy fencing tree canopy shall be labeled preserved when applicable. Three, provide detail for monument sign location with appropriate setbacks. This shall take into consideration sight line distances from the new entrance and existing homes surrounding the proposed development. Lastly, number four, the safety gate located at the stub connection of Ridge Street shall be eliminated. This will allow for the connection to the existing street network as intended and will align with the 2030 horizon plan and the regulation set forth by the Claremont County subdivision review. With that, Mr. Campbell, that concludes the staff report.

Thank you, Mr. Flowdy. Regarding that fourth point, that's Ridge Point Drive, right?

Yes. Sorry if I said that wrong. Ridge Point Drive. Thank you. Yes.

Please don't go anywhere. We're going to be relying on you to... answer some questions that we have, but I think with that we'll move on. Is the applicant and their representative present to speak to the Commission tonight?

Hi, good evening. My name is Doug Smith. I'm with Abercrombie & Associates, civil site engineer for the project. Also here tonight is a representative from the development team of Peter Creek Site Management as well as the builder Arbor Homes. We'd like to thank staff for their report and their thoroughness on this. I can tell you Probably end of last year, the property owner and I met with Mr. Wright and at that time the staff, Mark McCormack, and the property owner was interested in developing the property as apartments and townhomes, and it was a more dense development. We came in, we spoke with Mr. McCormack and Mr. Wright. They encouraged us to rethink the development, come back with a different layout, a layout more conducive to the surrounding residential zoning. We did that. The owner was fortunate to find a developer that was willing to do single-family residential development. So we're pleased to be here in front of you tonight. The plan, in our opinion, is a good plan. It offers similar residential housing that's to the north and to the south and to the east, I guess. The plan takes into account the natural features. It preserves the existing pond on site. It provides a buffer along the northern property line as well as the northeast property as well. as well as the south property line. It preserves the natural streams. It still allows for a density. It's a low density that's considerable to an R1 zone, not much more different, and yet still preserves the natural features. It allows a walking trail and, in our opinion, really provides for a nice development. The development, you know, it's It's a mirror image or reflection of the Magnolia Trace development, successful new development in Union Township. We feel this will be just as successful and good in this area as well. Basically, we concur with the staff comments. We would like you to consider removing Modification number four, with regards to the connection to existing Ridge Point Drive, we do want to make that connection, but we want to put a safety gate up with a knock box for the fire department. We want to deter any kind of cut-through traffic. We think it's created a safer, better environment for not only this proposed subdivision, but the existing subdivision as well. you know, cut through traffic. You know, it can be non-resonance. They could come down, cloth, turn and cut through and go all the way over to back Buxton. And, you know, I do know back Buxton's and Shaler is looking to get a new intersection, roundabout improvements and things of that nature. But that could, you know, entice people to come down, cloth and cut through this subdivision and the Ridgepoint Drive subdivision to get to the the quicker, more efficient roundabout, and then out to Back Buxton, out to State Route 32. So for those reasons, we ask that you consider removing that fourth item. Joe, would you like to add any comments at this time?

Excuse me, I have a question.

Sure.

In your discussions with the engineer's office, did the engineer indicate that that would be permitted to gate that opening off if the subdivision regulations would allow that to be gated?

They informed us it would be up to the township's decision because ultimately it's going to be a township road.

All right, thank you.

Any additional questions for Mr. Smith? Mr. Smith would call on your colleague.

Hi.

My name's Joe Perugia, and just a little bit of information about what we propose. This would be comparable to the subdivision that is in Abutz. The quality of the homes, the materials for the exterior of the homes would be a mix of brick, stone, hardy plank, Any vinyl that would be used would be of a high quality vinyl. Nowadays, they make a nice looking vinyl. These homes will probably be in that 600 plus range, if that helps. And we are going to do, once we get further into this, if we do get approved, we will get into the details for the entry monument. landscaping we do have a landscape plan but we would enhance that plan based on the township's comments and if um there we haven't uh on the traffic study we haven't gotten deep into the traffic study but if we do connect and we are we'd like to connect i think the county and the township want us to connect to the stuff street and we if we don't do a gate maybe even if we do a gate, we might have to do a turn lane on Clough. And that's going to be, I believe, the county's call on that. So that's all I have. If there's, I'll answer any questions that you might have for me.

Has the county expressed interest to you in doing a traffic study?

Well, they will, every project we do in the county requires us to do a traffic study. So we'll pretty sure we're going to do a traffic study.

So any other questions?

Yes, Mr. Did you have any, uh, any graphics of the proposed, uh, houses of what they would look like? Is there so many styles that would be repeated? Are they all going to be unique? Or do you have any graphics?

MR. Oh, yeah, they'll be unique. We'll have architectural approval. We'll pre-approve. Typically, we pre-approve the plans. and then there's restrictions you can't build the same house next to one another across the street the elevations you know might have the same floor plan but the elevation of the exterior of the house will be a little different um but yes it won't look like uh an army barracks you know it's gonna it's gonna be attractive do you know how many variations there will be uh i don't um i can call on the builder representative to maybe help me with that.

That was going to be my question too, but do you have anything with you that we can see? No.

Good evening, everyone. Hi, I'm from Arbor homes. Um, yeah, I do questions about how many variations there are. I believe there are five floor plans, um, within this series that we are doing, which is our patio series. Um, which is more of an age out community that we would like to see. We know that as a market that is missing out in the area. Um, and to go off of what Joe had said, we are, we have an anti-monotony standard that we hold to ourselves. Um, if you have a dwelling across from the street and next to you, you cannot have the same elevation or the colors. We hold that as a standard. We do not want it to look like you're driving into a neighborhood and you can't figure out your own house. Um, any other questions I can address for you at this moment?

These are going to be patio homes. I take it. Correct.

You can, you can add a second floor or you can add a basement. You can't have both just based off the floor plans and the stairs, but we do have the option for you to take to do a second floor or basement as well.

Also, the lots will be purchased, and then the purchaser will determine which model and which specifications. Correct.

But we have our sales associates are aware with each purchase what elevation, what colors there are. And whenever they go out to pick a lot with the customer, they tell them what they cannot have.

Oh, I see.

So that they know that they cannot sell this elevation, these colors on this lot. These are what is available. this is what's available. That way, nobody's going in blind and saying, oh, well, I didn't know I couldn't have this color. Now I don't want to have the house. Our sales associates are very well trained in making sure that people are not blindsided about our requirements. We, you know, make sure to know what building materials and everything we need to apply and adhere to.

Thank you. MR. Thank you. Any additional questions at this time? MR.

I'd like to get clarification on the concept versus concept formal.

MR. Yes, please.

Your staff report indicates that this is a concept plan submission, but the applicant's report indicated it was a combined formal and concept. Which is it?

So it would be both the combined conceptual and formal. And formal. So you'll make the recommendation, and then ultimately you'll head to the trustees who will Sorry, I forgot strong so there won't be a following formal plan submitted this this plan is considered the combination and if it were to be approved then it would move on to the county where they would do the subdivision review process of the stormwater and sewage and everything so basically right now With this zoning commission meeting, we're seeing whether or not the proposed zoning classification is appropriate in this area.

Okay. So we can request in our motion, if we move to recommend approval, we could request that for the trustees meeting that some graphics be provided for what the... home layouts and facial will look like.

Correct. You can add additional requirements to the proposal. That way, the more information will be available for the trustees to make that final decision.

All right. Thank you.

I would like to add a detail. I'm sorry. Yes. Square footage is anywhere from over 1500 square feet to over 3300 square feet. So it gives the option for people who want to get into the homes or somebody who has the money in order to buy a bigger floor plan. But that's just one more detail I wanted to get in there. So if you have any other questions, please feel free.

No, I appreciate it because I had that question to make sure that that tends to be a question. So I knew it was probably going to be something to bring up just to make sure that it was consistent with the R4 and the size that we're if that's appropriate for that. Any additional questions?

No.

All right, none at this time, but please stay. I'm sure we will have additional questions. Thank you. Thank you very much. At this point, any additional speakers in favor of this project? Okay, hearing none, we're opening up to members of the public who wish to speak against or just in general comments. Again, to echo our prefatory statement, if we can, we have a lot of people here tonight, and we appreciate everyone being out at this public meeting. But if we could confine our discussion to this project in particular. and if we can try to avoid making repetitive statements. Just remember, we have a lot of people that likely want to speak this evening, and I want everyone to have the ability to do that. I was given some sign-in sheets before the meeting started, so I'm going to start with these, and then as we have additional speakers, please remember to bring these up. The first one that I recall getting is Mr. Scott Sheeman. Uh, if you just, when you come to the podium, introduce yourself again and give your address for the record, please. If you direct your comments to the commission and we can pass the ball as needed. Thank you. Good evening.

Good evening. I'm Scott Sheeman. I live at 1069 Ridge Point, which is adjacent to lot 34 that's proposed. And I think my biggest concern is that lot 34 has an elevation that slopes down towards my house at the same time as it slopes down towards that retaining pond that you show up here on the bottom right. I wish I had brought my pointer. Anyways, the concern is pushing water toward my basement and foundation as opposed to managing it in its natural flow, which is not causing a problem right now. There's also, and I think there was a picture that I had attached to a note. Did you distribute that, Craig? Yes. All right. And that picture shows how the water flows down from where the rig point extension would be. The sewer connection is also right there on the edge of my property. uh... if you have a case uh... this and that was something i didn't know really realized when i wrote my note township. The gate, if it opens up toward my house, I can't get in my driveway. So there needs to be some consideration given to how the gate opens and otherwise you'll lock me out of being able to get into my house. Those are the prime concerns I have. Any questions?

No, thank you for bringing this to our attention. Sure, sure. I'd like to direct some questions towards the applicant regarding this. So if there were to be a safety gate placed on Ridgepoint Drive to answer the question that's been brought up, in what direction would that be opening, and how do we keep that from blocking drives? Either one of you, if you wouldn't mind, this is uncomfortable, but if you could share, if you could kind of pivot and share that. This is going out on YouTube. It's part of our records.

So on the gate issue, we can design the gate to where we don't want to block this driveway, obviously. Or we could use the knockdown bollards that they're yellow in color. They're mounted on the pavement. And they're either keyed for the fire, EMS people, police, or they can be hit with the bumper of the truck and it snaps a pin on the bottom and folds over so they can drive in for emergency purposes. But we can design the gate to where it either, you know, it might go straight up, it might slide in. But there's a way that we can design the gate to where it's not blocking your driveway or anybody else's driveway.

Am I allowed to give him a copy of this? Yeah.

I can't make him take it, but you can offer it. There's the end of the road. I want it. So you can see that if it opened, it could be pretty ugly. No, I get it. I get it. So we would design. Now, that lot, lot 34, is a fairly large lot. So, you know, if it is a gate, we can design the placement of that house so that the gate swings into our development and not into your development. On the stormwater, you can see it flows both that way and down.

The creek is here.

So on the stormwater, we cannot discharge water onto your property. We have to take it into our detention ponds, retention ponds. And it's a controlled release. And that is and that is approved. We have to do a stormwater calculation and submit that to the county and then they approve it or make changes to it to where we're not affecting neighbors with additional storm water there is also a fire hydrant right there okay so that we're going to tie into the water main here and on also on cloth and the county and we don't know this yet because we haven't gotten that far into the detail but that fire hydrant would we would connect to the water main either the fire hydrant would stay there or the county might ask that we place it somewhere else if it's too close to another fire hydrant down here. Gotcha. All right. Okay. In the sanitary, we tie into the sanitary. We do all the restoration. We'll do that right away. It's not we don't do it at the end of the project. We do it.

You're doing that here and it busts things up.

What is your responsible for your driveway? Yeah. Sidewalk. We'll connect our sidewalk to here. But this is all, I can't tell you, we're doing this in other developments where we've got to sign on to and our restoration is popping up.

six line items listed. They're all standard things that are normally taken care of.

Okay. Thank you. We appreciate it. Thank you both. Um, and that is just a general comment is when, when, if you live in an older neighborhood in the township, like I do, um, In 1957 they weren't really concerned about stormwater drainage and so they just threw up a bunch of houses and now the water goes wherever it goes. With modern developments we see and we have standards, there are standards I should say, for stormwater retention and detention. So when newer developments come in usually that helps relieve even older neighborhood problems.

john f and or rosemary hunt please good evening she's rosemary i'm john thank you just to cover the area we both live at 1070 ridge point so we're two houses in And I think my biggest question at the moment, for my lack of knowledge, is what does variable really mean as far as single residence variable? Housing.

The lots don't have to be cookie-cutter. A traditional R1 subdivision, the lots are cookie-cuttered, and variable means the lots can fluctuate in size. In some cases, the houses can be landominiums or even condos if there's a large recreational space set aside, adjoining walls. In this case, it's all single-family, separate.

It's all single-family, separate. Separate, correct. But they can be variable in design or land. Correct. Very good.

All single families.

I'm sorry?

Single families.

Yes.

The other concern we also have, as Scott has, is we live at the dead end of Ridge Point Drive, and this hasn't been approved, and there's a lot of discussions about this gate. Obviously, we at that end would prefer that that end be closed instead of open. I understand. there should be an emergency deal to be able to go through that. Yes. But how that's going to be developed, I guess that remains to be seen. But we do not want it opened up through the public because we have enough cars that come down our dead end that just kind of look around and back into our driveways and leave again. And especially since all this has been coming up, we have a lot more cars coming down our end of the street. So I guess those are the two biggest things to be sure what kind of houses and no one is talked about. of the water situation we were told when we moved in 23 years ago that lucky homes they would not buy that land because of the water and the sewage and it all had to be developed so no one has talked about that how is that going to be a factor for us

Well, well, the plan that is being called for is that there is going to be stormwater retention, which is something that would be required anyway. And there they are going to tie in to water and sewer that already exists. So this is something that comes up when there are newer residents and when uh newer projects and residents will cite back to something a real estate agent told them or a developer told them regarding adjoining wooded areas or undeveloped areas and the truth is it's like those people do not own that property and properties can be developed by property owners it may have been at the time possibly and this is mere speculation that it wouldn't have been cost effective at that time to develop but times do develop and we hear this all the time regarding sort of new developments in places where people didn't expect that there could ever be a development if that answers your question okay just one other quick thought and i appreciate your time

Somehow it went from agricultural to R1. And R1 has quickly snowbound to R4. I don't understand the difference, but I appreciate your time. Thank you.

Well, we can answer that question. So it's been zoned, these parcels, all three have been zoned R1 under the Union Township zoning resolution since zoning was first instituted in the township in 1959, if I'm quoting that correctly. So the agricultural designation is a county designation, right? So it's a difference between a county label and a union township zoning resolution label.

The agricultural, if I may, the agricultural is how the auditor taxes the land.

Okay, but how have we gone with R1?

So it's two separate things. There's the underlying zoning, which is R1. That's the township. And then you have the tax map, the auditor. They classify and tax as agricultural. So it's two separate designations. So it's always been R1. Um, and how it's taxed does not pertain to, to this case. It's just, it's how the county has accessed the property through, through the past years.

I think maybe what they're looking for are one is, is con is a lot size or one specifies the minimum lot size, close to a half acre, a little less than a half, 20,000, 20,000 square feet. This is listed as R1, meaning that typically the houses would be on cookie-cutter half-acre lots. But with R4, we're allowed to vary the size and shape of those lots. Some can be smaller, some can be larger. There can be a fluctuation. There can be a diversification rather than just this cut out subdivision that we used to see all the time. And so we're trying to encourage our forest to see more aesthetic placement, more green space set aside rather than just everything clear cut and then turned into so many half acre clear cut ponds.

Single families.

If I may make a comment, too. Some of the vehicles that come up here and stopped, they were, well, some of them were me. And almost all of us do our homework before we get in here, so we see physically what the place looks like. I spent quite a bit of time up here at the corner.

Thank you both. I have one more that was turned in before we started. And I apologize if I mispronounced, but Alan Young or Jung? You've heard it all by now.

Just not Jung.

I got that for you.

Thank you. I'm Alan Young, 4101 Woodmont Drive. The concerns that I have is along the south edge of the property. There is a large culvert that drains off of Cleft Pike as well as some neighborhood drainage. It runs all the way along the south edge of this property. My concern is when we go in and grade these grade, the slope will have increased drainage, increased water in that stream. Uh, we've already seen some, uh, erosion on some of the neighboring properties from that culvert. What's going to happen when we go in and regrade all that land. and drain into that existing drainage. That is not on the plans anywhere addressed as current, nor is it addressed in the future plan. Another concern is that we have is the traffic on Cleft Pike and turning in and out. I know there was some mention about traffic study, but that's definitely there are times during the day that is standstill traffic on Cleft between McMahon and Shaler or from the morning in the afternoon. and adding another 120 cars because you have 60 home sites, was it going to do the traffic there? Another concern is along the easement on that south edge. That is not to be used for construction traffic, and then also as access to lots 55 and lot 56. That easement is not used as a back going into some of those lots. Also, I'd like some clarification, or I think should be clarified, what's going to happen to the vegetation and trees that are marked on the plan, and what's going to prevent future homeowners from going through and tearing all of that, which provides some shielding or blockage of views of those home sites. And really, and then the... ofc what are the plans for that uh it says that you know vegetation and trees are being left as is is it going to be maintained by the homeowners association what's going to happen with that area those are my concerns okay thank you i'm going to call on the developer to to address what can be addressed

Thank you, sir.

With regards to the swale on the south end, we are leaving that in its natural state. We're not going to disturb that swale. It's going to continue to run as course it is today. The street there that's serving lots 59 through half the houses, the street, all will go to stormwater infrastructure that will then drain to the detention basins shown on the open space area to the, I guess it's to the northeast. And then the only thing that would remain that could drain towards that existing channel would be half of the rear of the lots and the lawns, which would be maintained. And quite frankly, we would be reducing the amount of volume of runoff to that channel because we're diverting with the street in the front part of those houses we'll be diverting storm water to the detention basin if that makes sense to you so we would actually be reducing the amount of volume of runoff to that stream by just simply collecting it and taking it to the detention basin With regards to traffic, the county will require a traffic impact study. We'll do that study. We'll submit that to the county and go through that process as is warranted. I wasn't sure about the easement. I'm not aware of an easement that he was referencing. I don't know what that... I can tell you that the OSC is an open space area that currently is going to remain natural and, if needed, will be maintained by the Homeowners Association.

I think that's an important point for everybody to understand is that all of that, all this, Mr. Flaherty, could you bring up the picture that shows the actual green space? All the green space is not anybody's property. It all belongs to the homeowners association, and it cannot be cut down by any of the property owners. And this is what you can have when you have an R4. With an R1, the whole place would be clear cut. Everything would be gone, and you'd have cookie cutter houses. But with R4, we've got what appears to be a fairly creative design and preserving a lot of the wooded area that's back there. And that's what the R4 allows. brings to the table is the ability to maintain these important wooded areas and then make use and allow for some walking trails and make it a much more aesthetic environment rather than a traditional subdivision cut.

And in addition, staff report is if adopted, if this modification were to be adopted, it would require additional landscape screening and So that would address some of those concerns. Thank you, Mr. Smith. I appreciate that. I think that covered many of those. So I am now out of public speaking form. So it's first come first. Yes, sir.

my name is andrew galloway i live at 4103 woodmont we're next to allen and actually some of the questions that he had are the same things that i have first of all the easement there we were told when we bought the house 25 years ago was actually an easement for duke and there's actually a creek there i've actually lost about this much of my backyard to that creek so that's kind of my same question that he had about the water runoff Because obviously those houses are going to sit higher. They're not going to sit them lower to where they're going to, you know, the water is going to run to the house. It's going to run from the house. So that's where my backyard is. Like I say, I've already lost 10 feet in 25 years. So now you add 60 homes and say, I don't know, looks like 10 or 15 of them are going to be on that side. So I'm adding that much more water runoff to what it already can handle. So I mean, that's that's my biggest thing is who's going to do the water study of that creek? You know, he doesn't even know that there's an easement for Duke there. Which to me, if you're building a subdivision, that would be something you should know. I don't understand how that could be missed.

It's important to realize they're not allowed to divert water from their construction. Well, they're not diverting it. They're not allowed to send water. They have to control the water to the, what we've already discussed, to the retention zone. So anything going to the retention, it's now a waterway, a creek, we're not allowed, nobody's allowed to change your waterway.

The water will run wherever it's going to run. If that home sits higher, then the water's obviously going to find the lowest point.

Then they have to control it and have it either go to one of their tension ponds or into the creek, but then the creek, the county has a standard for how much water can flow in that creek, and it can't surpass that amount. So they have to, any water that's gonna flow from construction they do or hard pavement surfaces has to be captured. Water that's it's on the land right now and running on grassy areas that will continue to run down but anything that's that's causing Additional flow from impervious surfaces driveways and streets has to be routed into the retention pond So nothing you won't get more than what you're getting now.

You know, they're going to change the elevation, correct?

I

I don't believe so. The elevation is primarily staying intact. They will be cutting and digging, creating foundations, but they're not moving houses up or down.

So you don't think the elevation is going to change on that south side where the properties are going to be built? So if it's low, which it is low now, it's going to stay low. It's not going to be built up. If it stays low, then that means their house is going to be in a flood zone. from that creek so they have to build it up and then you're going to have water runoff just like are you planning on raising any any levels i guess

We will be doing some grading. At this time, I don't have the details to say whether we're raising or lowering, but we will be grading along the streets and the house paths along that. Now, I'd like to make references. You know, there's not 60 homes draining to that swell. This has a defined draining pattern where The good half of the property goes to the north and to the east, and the other half goes to the south. And quite frankly, the half that goes to the south, there's only those eight or nine lots that are on the south side of the street where half of those lots are going to drain to the street. So, you know, we're going to pick like you said, we're going to be picking up all the impervious areas, taking them to the detention base and releasing the slow rate. The county, the county has stormwater management requirements that we have to follow.

Who's going to do the study for that?

I will do the study. It'll be reviewed and approved by the by the county engineer. stormwater management and it'll be reviewed and approved by them they have strict guidelines and as mr campbell stated you know these guidelines are getting more and more strict over time and so our development is going to have more restrict reduce the flow have some more volume probably than the development of woodmont and or adjacent development

it's just getting more and more complicated more and more restringent as this time goes on well too i mean you're tying into existing sewer and everything that's there from you know because you're saying everything's so much better now but you're going to tie into something that's been there for since the 59 i guess maybe well i don't know when when was the last upgrade done on the sewers and you know i mean well again that's that's a county level and it wouldn't

The surrounding environs weren't built in 1959.

Yeah, but that's what I'm saying. He's saying things are so much better now. But everything isn't being done now. He's tying into something that's existing that's 25, 30, 40 years old. And now we're going to dump another 60 homes into this. Something that was made probably for less than what's there now. And now we're adding another 60 homes to it. That's what I'm trying to say.

No, and I understand that. But... If it doesn't get rezoned R4 and it stays R1, that doesn't mean that no houses can be built on that property. Mr. Flaude, if it stayed and a developer develops it as R1, how many single-family homes?

I have roughly, because you've got to take the streets and calculations out of it. I have...

close to 46 would be allowed outright and that would be without the 20 open spaces proposed that we have right because that's not a requirement in r1 so this has already been a done deal then with the county township no it's just zone residential that they can be built on that's what i mean well yeah since 1959 it's been zoned residential right so they can still build so regardless of whether uh it's approved as an r4 plan it could still be developed changes the sizes of lots it goes back to what mr lewis was saying the lots would be the same size they'd be cookie cutter and there would be that we wouldn't have the green spaces that are the trees maintained because you don't have to and r1 all right all right thank you thank you Anyone else like to speak, please? Yes, ma'am.

Good evening, I'm Susan Dudak. I live on Valleywood Drive, 1087 Valleywood Drive, so I am about four houses off of Bach Buxton. Ridge Point, to get out of Ridge Point, you have to come to Valleywood Drive, and then you can either go to Bach Buxton or you can go the opposite way to Clough. I can tell you that there are certain times of the day that I cannot get out onto Bach-Buxton. I cannot. And if school is in session, there are certain times when it is backed all the way down. Even without school, it is not unusual to see Bach-Buxton backed from Klepper all the way down to Shaler. Traffic is horrendous. And so that's my concern, first of all. So let's say a traffic study is done and it shows that this is going to overwhelm our already overwhelmed roads. So what? What happens?

Well, that's not a township-level decision, so we'd be talking county, and they would mandate traffic. whatever changes were to be borne out by that traffic study. So there was talk of a potential turn lane as being from Clough into the neighborhood as being a potential modification that the town that not the township, the county would institute and require.

Okay. I can tell you if that turn lane is not there, traffic is going to be so backlogged. Now, my concern also is that safety gate that you recommended be taken away. So if that traffic from that neighborhood is allowed to come through our neighborhood and out to Buck Buxton, I won't be able to get out of my driveway, let alone get out onto Buck Buxton. So that, in my mind, is an absolute necessity if you're going to allow this to happen.

One of the things I used to do before I got here was not traffic studies per se, although I've done some, but I worked with the county, Hamilton County and the state of Ohio in decisions on widening roads, et cetera, et cetera. And that was one of the questions I asked them over Montgomery Road. And I said, why do we wait until we're absolutely in a bind before we do these things? And both the county and the state told me, and it makes sense, they have to wait until the need is absolutely there or they end up widening a street into four lanes and nobody ever lives there. it becomes a waste. So they all do it the same way. They wait until we really, really, really need it, then they know what they supposedly need, and then they go fix it, which always runs behind the need. And I hope that helps you, but it does make sense to me as a professional in the business, but it doesn't make sense as a resident, so.

Well, we're already really, really, really in need, and that hasn't triggered anybody to do anything. So that doesn't mean a whole lot.

Well, money is an issue, too. Once they find the need, they can then get the money, and it takes time. I hope that helps. Thank you.

Next speaker, please, ma'am.

Hi. My name is Teresa Reese. I live at 1106 Ridgepoint Drive. My husband and I did just send an email this afternoon. I wasn't prepared to speak this evening, but as the evening went on, I just felt like I just wanted to... stress how we feel at the other end of Bridgepoint. I think we've been there 22 plus years. I've lived in Union Township probably 60 years. I went to Willowville Elementary. I went to Glen Esty High School that's no longer there. I've written the engineer's office about the proposed. Well, no, it's moving forward. The roundabouts, the construction at box. So what's alarming for me a month ago, I didn't know about the 60 homes that are going to be added to the end of our street. Um, a dead end street. We live at the other end in the cul-de-sac. Uh, we're already stressed and unsettled enough, uh, as some of our neighbors have stated about, the additional traffic that is in our area. You know, Buck Buxton used to be a quiet treeline area. Now it's a major artery to get from 125 to 32. I think some of the homeowners don't have the same concerns we have that maybe live on Woodmont, that live on other end of Bridge Point, maybe on Clough. But I think we all have the same problem. worries concerns about 60 homes and as somebody had mentioned that doesn't mean just 60 drivers that means 120 maybe more i mean we have neighbors that have four or five drivers per household um as an older neighborhood i think the woodmont area is even older than ours you know it's it's established We've we've retired there. We've invested there. And it was just shocking that we're already concerned about the the growth that we've lived through for decades with Union Township. I understand. I mean, Eastgate Mall was was so busy back in the 80s and 90s. And when I was a child, Eastgate Mall wasn't even there. So I understand the growth. I understand what is happening. I appreciate what you said about the roads because I wondered that, too. Why weren't the roads established better before the high school was put there? But I do want to say I agree with the builder regarding the gate at the end of Bridgepoint. For anybody, traffic studies aren't going to look at our neighborhood, I don't think. They're not going to see the amount of traffic where people cut through from Clough to Ridge Point or Ridge Point to Clough because they're trying to avoid traffic. They're trying to avoid the traffic jams, especially when school is in, there's football games, the weekend functions that they have there. Um, some people make a wrong turn to end up on Ridge point, which is a, um, dead end street. But the, the times have changed, you know, now you have Amazon drivers, landscapers, all the things we didn't have 20, you know, much more than what we used to have 20 years ago that cut through. I'm so worried if that gate, if there is not a gate there, not only do you have more people coming in off a club, which we already have at Woodmont. We're going to have additional people plus those homes. And it's just so unsettling to think that the that the street, this dead end street that we wanted to live in the rest of our lives is now once again become a little artery through the neighborhood, not only for us, but maybe for others. So I do agree with some sort of gate there. to prevent that and let those new homeowners exit out onto club. My second concern is I can't tell by the map exactly where the exits are going to be. Woodmont Drive is there. And as somebody had stated, Woodmont Drive is hazardous at times, making a right or left hand turn there for numerous reasons. We've contacted the engineer's office. We just received a reply back this week. And to be honest, their plans to move forward with roundabouts, the widening, and everything that they're going to do, they're not really addressing any of our concerns. So I'm hoping Union Township will because not only do we have this increased traffic, you have all those apartments that are down at Klepper and Buck Buxton. You can't tell me they're not going to be going up and down Buck Buxton. Not only do we have the increased traffic, the school and all the other new homes that are being built. Now we're going to have a new subdivision. Are we going to still be trying to squeeze out on Woodmont drive on the club and then have the new housing development exit out onto club. You know, I, I would like to see their exit to be down further at Clough and Shaler and away from Woodmont drive. I agree with the traffic study. If there's a traffic study, I welcome that to no end because I really think our area needs one. But Buxton, Shaler and Clough for us that live there, then the noise, the traffic, the congestion. So it was just alarming for us to already to already address with the engineer's office about these upcoming changes that are going to start taking place next year the summer of next year and a month later to find out about a new subdivision that is going to be moving right down the street so um I just wanted the township to know that we want to be here. We've been here for decades. We love Union Township. We just really need for somebody to help us navigate all these changes and help us to safely get in and out of our neighborhood safely and maybe cut down some of the congestion on some of our neighborhood streets. Any questions?

May I ask the developer a question? I'm a former first responder, chief of police in the city of Hammond County. Now, I've got concerns about the gate both ways. One, I know exactly what she's talking about, the cut through. And the citizens don't want the cut through, and I totally understand that. Everybody keeps talking about the gate and stop it. As a law enforcement officer, I don't want a gate. How do we get, you mentioned something about there's some ways allowing the law enforcement or ambulance to get through fairly quickly. That would be my concern. And I think the residents would have the same concern, especially if you need a police officer, if you need a fire department, if they got to go all the way around to come in. Can we get some more information on the bollards?

We've done this in Warren County just recently. So it's a it's a metal post. It's mounted to the it's mounted to a like a frame box onto the pavement. That's that's one piece. And then the post gets mounted with a pin. It's actually some sort of a metal pin. But if the car or truck hits it, If they don't have a key, it also has a key, so you can take them out if you want, take the whole post out if you want, or you can lay it down so the car can drive over. But if a truck taps that pole, it's designed to snap that pin, and that allows the police emergency vehicles to go through.

See, I'm a little bit more concerned, not so much about a fire truck. They can knock a lot of things down. it would be the young policemen's going through and doesn't know that because that information will get lost somewhere along three years from after those ballots go in, um, how their breakaway, how are we going to get the information to law enforcement?

So, um, I know that in Warren County, we submitted it to the, uh, township and, and not in that case, we had, um, a city and a township meeting together. And basically, they want the connection for safety purposes, but they didn't want the traffic. And we didn't want it either. We prefer not to have all that traffic coming through our development. So we put in these bollards. We gave the police department the keys and all the information. And I have seen them out. messing with them, showing each other how to use them. I don't know how they relay that information to a young police officer. I don't have that information.

Now, is your portion of the roadway on that ridge point going to be dedicated roadway eventually? Yes.

It's public right of way. Yes, it will be public right of way.

I've seen problems with separations from dedicated roadway to dedicated roadway where a lot of courts hold up they won't allow it because it's still public property at that point.

This will be public right of way. Right. I was looking at when you were talking about the traffic pattern. I know Boxman is a busy road, but the people that live in this newer development, I think They're going to want to go out the clock to get the shower, to get the bus in if they have to. They're not going to go through the subdivision with all the driveways and cars.

Is that an exit there next to Woodmont, though, where that red line is?

There's a number two. That's our access to club.

So down further?

And that's just he's just showing the intersection. So one is the intersection.

Yes, she's referring to the long, narrow stretch near the bottom of the impact.

That's that's it. That's part of the open space. See, that's that. We're not doing anything. It's just it's just it has it has no driveway. It might even be somebody mentioned that Duke Energy might even be part of the easement. We're not doing anything for you. It's open space C, and that's part of it, and we're not disturbing that at all. That's going to stay natural.

Mr. Flaube, can you switch to a slide that shows the open space designation, please?

so back up the one that was in color so see where it says open space c yes that is the back of the lots we're not disturbing anything in that area and we'll we'll even on the back of these lots we'll put some sort of conservation And the HOA controls, like somebody mentioned, you can't just go in and clear it all the way to the back of the property. The HOA controls that. And we have an easement that makes it legally responsible for the HOA control.

Again, I'm sorry, it's just as a reminder that it is so congested in this area already and that cruft point woodmark the cruft it is sometimes it's near impossible to make a left-hand turn much a right-hand turn and then ballywood as it was shared here to turn left on the valleywood right now is just horrendous so you know i i'm hoping somebody can hear us that we're trying to adapt to all this growth but i think we just need some provisions for this neighborhood as we move forward Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else like to speak?

Hi. Hi. My name is Darlene . Give a sign and shoot. Oh, yes.

I get in trouble if I don't get in. Thank you.

I don't want you getting in trouble. My name is Darlene Hilbin. I live at 10 66 Clough pipe. So the house that's going to be torn down to put the road in is two doors down for me. So I've been living there. I'm the new beyond the block. I've been there 21 years. So I just did a little kind of study about the rounding bout of the area. with, with west Claremont middle school, just being 1.8 miles and the west Claremont high school, just being 0.08 miles away. Just remember the high school has no busing. So we get all those kids come they, and they continuously go around from cloth to where McMahon sits. It's a con just a continuance. row of cars and it starts at 2 30 and it doesn't end until about six o'clock and another thing is there's natural springs back in the area that we live in so i'm just worried about the infrastructure of our backyard because I have noticed some erosion. So I'm worried about the building of them coming in and more erosion happening to our backyard. Plus, it looks like I'm going to have three backyards button up against my 100 foot backyard. So if anything should happen, I don't know who to turn to if anything should happen to say something gets thrown in our yard i don't know who's it belongs to because there's three there would be three people button up against our backyard i don't have any privacy from the backyard there's no extra trees so i would just see all these houses the roadway and then when you say that you're not going to open up that back area then people are just going to keep turning around, go back right onto Clough Pike, and Clough Pike's not wide enough to put a turn lane in unless you take people's properties. And I don't think people want to give up their properties because of this. So I would like, if they're going to put something in, not have 60 houses back there. I feel like it's a sardine subdivision. And so we sit in our driveway trying to get out constantly, like everybody else has said, too. I, I just don't think it's feasible with us having the, um, the business district over by our area too. So we got tons of not just schools, middle school, high school, but we've got all those other businesses and factories letting out too. so they can only go right or left so that little area where the high school is clough pike on to mcmahon onto it it just wouldn't be feasible to have an outlet coming out of clough pike when woodmont is only 0.2 miles from where you were put so what it would just bog up traffic And that drive is only less than 30 seconds between where you're going to put a new driveway to where, uh, Woodmont drive would be. Um, plus I don't know about the development, um, of who they chose to come into our neighborhood. and develop. I've done some research online. You know, the Internet's a good thing. It could be a bad thing sometimes. But I have noticed that there's at least 31 businesses just in that little one area. And some of them are large businesses. So I don't know why 60 homes is just an absurd amount of houses back there so i would like to see at least half or at least 40 of those homes back there other than 60 because i will not have any privacy i will have to get a tree abutment i will have to spend extra money for my backyard just to have my privacy that's going to be taken away So I don't know.

To be clear, your preference would be to have the whole area just clear cut and then have the cookie cutter 42? No. That's the only option.

I understand that. And I think R4 would... would not allow them to like build the cookie cutter homes.

And therefore this is the R4. If it doesn't go with this R4, then it goes with clearcutting the whole 26 acres and just cookie cutter in the subdivision.

So would you like to have no privacy in your backyard? And then you go to my backyard. Oh, what?

I'd rather have this in my backyard.

than a than all the new housings that they put up. I mean, over on our side of town from 32 is nothing just hustle and bustle. So to put extra houses over there is it just takes our privacy away or we came to Union Township 20 years ago from Norwood. Norwood was just crazy busy. I went to come to Union Township because it was a nice community, nice quiet. I understand that growth is, you know, how it is today. Growth is essential for the township, and I understand that. But I wish you would listen to the people here to know that you're with us on this because I risk I risk flooding, erosion, structural failure. You know, it's just going to be a strain on all of us.

And your risks will all be much greater with the other type of development than it would be with this.

I understand. So it just stopped. It's I know. I know. We can't stop. The property owner has the right to develop their. I agree.

And under current zoning, they could develop it as our one. And your problems would be much greater than they are with our four. We have a much greater level.

I agree. If there's more restrictions on the growth and what's being back there that I'm not, I'm for it if there's more restrictions. but to have the constant flow of traffic, there's got to be a study done. And that, that's all I have to say.

I don't think anyone here would disagree with the traffic issues, but if it were, if it were within our power to, to conduct it and to solve that issue at this level, we would, we all live here. We would absolutely want to do that. We would have done it already. I know. Right. It's part of that. What, uh, Ms. If you could pull up, I'd like to see Ms. Hilden's house is two down.

I would have 59 behind me. 58, 59, and then 60 would butt up against my property.

That's exactly what I wanted to see. One day we'll switch without all this paper, but right now we're drowning in it up here. I understand. So you are abutted by... 58, 59 is directly centered. Yeah, right. 59 and 58 and a little bit of a little bit of 6060. So part of staff's recommendations, if we were to move forward with this approval, is specifically, and I'll read it, additional landscaping, screening and or buffering shall be implemented in close proximity to the ridge point drive entry around boundaries of the proposed development where vegetation is limited. Special consideration will need to be taken into effect for lots number 1, 12, 58 through 60 with either vegetation and or privacy fencing. Tree canopies shall be labeled as preserved when applicable, and a final landscaping plan shall be submitted with the final plans. So your house qualifies for what we would recommend to basically have more stringent requirements when it comes to buffering, including additional vegetation and a privacy fence.

Okay. I appreciate that.

That's why I wanted to get that map up to make sure that you were.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, sir.

My name is Alex Lambros, and I live at 1069 Clark Pike. I'm here today mainly about this development. Everybody's keep promoting the R4 button. I have not received an answer. Why should we switch from R1? R1 guarantees us like you said, close to 20,000 square foot per lot. They're going down to nine. And they turn around, and like the young lady said, that they're gonna put three, 4,000 square foot homes in there. That leaves a lot of backyard about 50 feet. You know, why should we give up that? Yeah, they're gonna strip it at R1 and the people gonna come right behind it and plant their own trees, their own landscaping, five years from now, we're still gonna have an R1 in the neighborhood that represent McDermott. I see no reason for us to give it up. Two, emergency exit. People complain they don't want it to go through their subdivision. The developer is using that one to bypass a secondary exit, which is required in a subdivision that big. He should go back and use a real exit. The exit they're proposing on Clough Pike It's less than 200 yards from the traffic light. Yeah, they're going to put the turn around, but it's an accident waiting to happen. A car's going to jump out. It's a single lane and a turning lane right there, right next to it. What is it going to do? Cars are coming both ways. The road is not wide enough. Definitely is going to need an egress. now comes to the storm sewers. I've been living in my house for the better part of 35 years. I watched a clock pipe getting built. You know, the first time around, they raised it six inches. The second time they came around, they raised it 11 inches. None of the storm sewers work. I have run dye tests in six different sewers. Not a one of the storm sewers work on Cluck Pike. Now, the regular sewers. Anybody that lives between Saylor and McMahon can testify about every two years we have to call the plumbing department to unclog our sewers because it's overloading every time it storms and we have to call to clean it up. The county comes back and says, no, there's nothing wrong with our sewers. We keep camera in our sewers. There's nothing wrong with it. It's just shit overload.

Sir, if we can keep the cursing out of this, please. Thank you.

You know, it's no way possible. They're proposing everything, $600,000 homes on the postage stamp lot. Don't think so, they have to show me those homes at 600,000. Ain't no way. What I'm saying is, unless they can come back and tell us why the one in R4 is no. They don't want the traffic at McDermott. And I don't blame them. But what they're gonna do when the kids start walking on their lots because there ain't no sidewalks on Shaler. There is no sidewalks on Cluck. Those are issues that you need to address before you even allow them to go to the county. You should never leave this area right here, right now, until all those questions are answered. and the people that have vested interests in this community get served. That's all I have to say. The answer is no. No changes to our one. Thank you. Thank you.

Would anyone else like to speak? Ma'am. Oh, that's fine. Thank you.

My name is Tracy Shorten. I live at 1105 Ridgepoint Drive. I've been there almost 20 years with my husband. I love my home, I love my neighbors, and I love my neighborhood. You answered a lot of my questions, so I don't really have a lot of questions. I have more just an FYI. And one of it is, why can't an entrance to this new neighborhood come off of Shayla Road? That would solve a few things, I would think.

Okay. Has the developer looked into ingress and egress off of Shaler?

Yeah, the topography is too severe. As you go from this site down to Shaler Road, there's a large drop-off down there. And secondly, there's a large water main along the south side of... But the main reason is the topography. It's just too steep. Thank you, Mr.

So that would mean that if you did change that, more trees would come out. That's true. Tree preservation. is very important i'm not a tree hugger but one of the reasons we bought where we bought was because you could drive down buck buxton road and there was just trees everywhere and then it just kind of opened up and you could see the subdivisions and the township the county whoever has decimated buck buxton road it looks hideous and i'm i'm ashamed And finally, I'm sure that this is probably going to go through no matter what. So if it does, Ridge Point is one word, not two. Thank you.

Would anyone else like to speak?

I'm going to be very brief. I have a 1072 Clough Pike. My name is Steve McClanahan. I'm really directing this toward the developers, just as a thought. My house on Clough is at the south side, and there's a narrow piece of strip of land that runs back to your open space. I've been mowing that for 26 years. Christopher's, we'll call her his stepmother, and I had an agreement, we'll mow that strip of property as long as I can walk my dogs back there, back towards the barn. I'm just throwing it out. If at some point you all would like to get rid of that little narrow strip of land, I'm your guy.

I'm hoping that

When I first heard about this, I said, okay, I need to put a fence all along there because I can see construction equipment trying to land in my side yard.

And to reiterate, that strip of land is part of your open space. And so that's going to be HOA owned and maintained. And really, you're going to leave as much of the natural layout and greenery that's already there. That's not the first time at a zoning meeting where a member of the public has offered to purchase part of the developed land. That has happened. This was politer, I will note for our record. Would anyone else like to speak this evening? Okay. At this point, we've got no more comments from the public, so the public contribution to this meeting is now closed, and so discussion is going to be confined to... Sir. If you could come to the mic, I will let you briefly come back to the microphone if you have a comment.

Scott Schumann, I did see some of the paperwork and plans. Just for clarification, Ridgepoint is all one word. So you can get all messed up if you continue on with it having two words.

Yes. You guys have it? Ridgepoint is one word? Okay, thank you. Okay, so the public contribution, The public opportunity to comment this evening is now closed. You are all more than welcome to stay and watch the deliberation and discussion among the Commission. We may very well call on members of the public or the developer to answer questions we have before we take an action. I will just say that regardless of the action taken by this Commission this evening, this case will be heard and presented before the Board of Trustees at the July 14th meeting, which will be in this room, but they start earlier than we do. That starts at 6 p.m. So all of you will have another opportunity to come out, to comment on this project, to ask questions, and to tell the Board of Trustees how you would like them to act because they control the actual change to the zoning map. We just make a recommendation. Okay. Thank you all very much for attending this evening.

uh okay so we're opening up among the commission regarding this plan from r1 to r4 who would like to kick off i don't mean starting i think the r4 designation works better than r1 the same obvious reasons we've been discussing in the long run it's going to be much nicer it's going to be developed my the only thing that is my concern at this point is whether ridge point should be through road or non-through road But I don't think that's going to be our option. And so I understand why the people do not want it to be a through road. I'm not sure I'd want it either. I'm not sure if it's even legal not to make it a through road.

Ladies and gentlemen, if you would like to speak with one another, I think that's great. But if you could do so outside of this room, it's a public meeting. We have a record to maintain. I appreciate it if you're quiet on your way out. Thank you. Mr. Brackman, please continue.

Okay. I'm not sure it even is legal to divide a public roadway once tax money is used to maintain it. I've seen that happen before.

We've done it.

Have you? Yeah, we have. It doesn't mean it's legal. No, it's legal. Yeah. Okay. But that, again, that's not going to influence my vote one way or another. It's just something that bothers me.

Okay. Mr. Flaude, you look like you had something you were going to say.

Yes. If I may add where the township was coming from with their stance on the elimination of the emergency gate. The main reason, of course, is with the Horizon 2030 Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the connected street is one of the pros to that plan there. Additionally, I heard a variety of different things, like it was stated by you gentlemen, there's always basically you know, a blade to each side of the sword there. So we heard, you know, it was... the cars backing up into residents' driveways. This has the potential, if there is an emergency access, to get worse. They're both public roads. Whether GPS picks that up, Waze, Apple Maps, it might not pick that up, and it might send people through. Additionally, the stub was never meant to be a dead-end street. It was stubbed for the purpose of the continuation of the street. If it was a cul-de-sac, we could see where it not going through the street not going through would be ultimately the best option but with it being a stub it has always been meant to extend through that property there and if it was developed up to the r1 standards that street could continue just just as it is now so just from you know the reasoning and sampling completely understand but with a public street i would think the turnaround into the different neighborhoods driveways would increase with the maps and whatnot but you know there's there's two sides to each story so i just wanted to add that in there thank you mr honor law

I have no questions. I think I like the proposal that's here. I think it can work. It needs a little polishing, but it's good for the community. It's good for everybody around, basically.

Thank you. Me? Mr. Lewis, if you'd like. Whichever one of you blinked first.

I think this, between developed as an R1, clear-cutting the entire area and cookie-cutting, erosion is worse, traffic is worse, the aesthetics is worse. it's just just to me the r4 is a much better way we're maintaining a whole lot more uh green space is being maintained people choose to live on a small lot that's that's their choice i i don't have a problem with that people want less and less yard to maintain and so r4s work for those people where There's a homeowners association taking care of all this green space. There's trails. It's aesthetically more pleasing. It would take, if you clear cut that, it would take over 50 years for, if everybody wanted to plant, and they don't in subdivisions, they don't plant to that level of density. cleared in an r1 uh so in an r4 that that's 50 maybe even 100 years it would take to get some of that back uh i i understand the traffic situation but the traffic situation would be just as bad with an r1 as it's going to be we're not talking that many different homes between what's being proposed we're just talking about smaller lots and and maybe smaller houses and a lot of green space and and trails and i think it's it's been all the way around i personally am in favor of At this point, keeping that area, keeping that road closed off. I think keeping that blockade in there, we've done it in other areas. I don't see why it would be an issue. If down the road it's determined that we need to for some reason legally we have to open it up, then maybe take a look at that. But my recommendation would be to remove that recommended modification from the staff report and actually modify it to state that that should stay in place.

plan uh and all the provisions i think it's a it's a well done plan uh i give the architect credit i think it's very well done yeah it's it's over 20 which is just over 20 which is the requirement in r4 for the the maintained green space um and so well seemingly well composed plan uh mr wing

I agree with most everything else. If I was living in that neighborhood, I would rather see this plan than an R1 push and shove put in where everybody's going to have backyards against them. The other thing is with, and this is just a thought, if we keep the gate, does that road coming in have to be Let me get it right, Ridge Point at one word. Could that not be Ridge Point Spur or something different which would allow 911 communications potentially to avoid some of the issues you were talking about earlier?

The name changed completely.

Or changed it totally, yeah. I mean, my street, you come back Rumpke Road and you keep going straight, now you're on Jackson. You know, I mean, I know that that happens. Um, and I'm, I used to be first responder as well. So at least with that, it would give them some idea which way to come in off of.

I think it'd have to be a different name.

It could be a different thing. Yeah.

I don't think a different name would make that much different. The policeman farmer, they're going to go to the show shortage.

Yeah, no, I get that. That's just me.

That doesn't mean I would close my mind to this project.

The thing I looked at is if I lived on the existing ridge point, I'd be more likely to go out through the new because it's a shorter distance than wiggling out the way they're wiggling out right now. So I would see it probably as being an advantage to be able to go out to Clough. I do too. Okay.

I mean, the the the end of the. The long and the short of it is there's going to be a residential development that goes. Oh, yeah, it's it's owned residential. Our four gives us more control and mandates this green space be used or be available. And that is generally preferred. This fits. We're not in a specific corridor for the purposes of the land use plan. Um, and this meets the residential density that the land use plan expects and wants from new residential developments. Um, so I, I think from what I'm hearing among the commission is general approval of the, of the change in general approval of the plan, but where there may be disagreement is what are we going to do with Ridge point? All one word. in terms of are we going to do what our staff report recommends and indeed is very close to saying we must do, it's mandated by the land use plan, or are we going to recommend that the trustees approve a safety gate that's keyed and so the road would only be used for emergency services only?

I vote for the gate.

Could we do this when the motion's made to change the zoning, leave out that provision and make that a separate motion or a separate recommendation?

No, you modify that.

Yeah, that way we may all be for the R4, but not necessarily the closing of the road. It's still going to go whatever way it goes, but...

I don't see, we can't, what you're describing, we can't separate that.

That was my question. You can't still in the... We can't create a new case.

Okay, can't do it. All right. In the end, won't this, ultimately it's the trustee's decision what they're going to do with it. So do we...

If I may, I know the board has already entertained the thought of adding additional information with the type of homes and maybe some floor plans. So maybe within the modification of... of the motion you could also include you know the applicant bringing additional studies they brought up the warren county property they could provide us with additional studies pictures of how these bollards work and then we could also gather the information of why you know the connected streets and we could come back together so it wouldn't necessarily be a vote it would just be a continuance of the discussion since it's ultimately up to the board of trustees to

approve or deny that that safety safety box there or safety gate and just to revisit this um it's one of the two of you had indicated that you spoke with the county about this issue and the county essentially indicated it was in the township's purview to render an opinion on this is that correct we did we did not read it directly Thank you. So what I'm hearing from Mr. Flaude is there's a possibility of making essentially a recommendation requiring more information for consideration by the township trustees regarding this particular sub-issue when it comes to this plan. But I would still like to hear members of the commission out regarding this particular issue. Mr. Lewis has been clear on where he stands on the issue. So I'd like to hear from other commissioners where they stand regarding a safety gate or opening it up. Whoever would like to speak.

I'm for the safety gate, I think. I understand the residents there. Everybody right now is working fine off of Ridgepoint down Fallcrest Drive. I think that's worked fine for years. And it can continue that way. I do believe it has to have some kind of a gate for the police and fire to get through for everybody's protection. But I think it does need something there to clarify that to keep people from going through that subdivision. I understand that. Mr. Wing?

I understand what the neighborhood is saying, the existing neighborhood. Um, I think the safety gate adds an extra level of complication though, to a lot of things. Um, so I, I, I could, it's not an important issue to me because I don't live there, but I understand what they're saying. And, uh, If I lived in that subdivision, though, the way it is, like I said before, I would probably be utilizing the new road to get down to Clough Pike instead of what they do right now, winding down and around and through. So to me, the safety gate, I just don't see it being that big of an issue.

and if you know if we're going against our own the 2030 plan you know are we doing the right thing thank you mr beckman i i have the same feeling it's not that terribly important because i think what's going to happen they can build it with the gate but eventually it's probably going to come down you know because they're going to find out it's easier to do things a different way It's not a major issue with me.

So I am really sympathetic to the neighborhood on this issue because I do think that there will be an enticement to cut through the neighborhood. And that's wrong. But as a commissioner, I'm bound by the comprehensive land use plan, the 2030 plan. which says that we have a stub street, it's now connecting street, it should be opened. And if the township trustees want to reverse that position in this particular case, then that's something that they can do and that's something that they can calculate. But I don't think that I can go against the land use plan in that way. And I also would have concerns to Mr. Flaude's suggestion that we essentially make an approval of the plan with recommended modifications, but we're really leaving an issue related to the plan very much open without us weighing in on it. And I would have concerns about whether that's something we can do because we're essentially not

We can make any recommendation we want, even if it's contrary to the 2030 plan. I mean, we had a case with Honda in Beechmont Avenue where the 2030 plan had to be modified, the focus area had to be modified to allow that development to proceed. And so we couldn't, we recommended against it, but the trustees made the modification to the focus plan to the 2030 plan that allowed it. So the trustees can move forward with it, with a change. If the wording were that further study needs to be done and consideration to the privacy issues raised by the existing community, if we can change the wording to require further additional information then i think that would be okay with that we also need to add to the modifications the requirement for the layout some some rec you know some sample uh facades uh building facades and then the landscape plan on those cleft pipe properties the 50 set i think that's already it's there but it'd be nice to see a little bit more potential well and that's

and that's part of what would be required. So essentially what I'm hearing is that we would like specifically a requirement that neighboring privacy concerns be addressed. We would like to see further study on the issue of the feasibility of a safety gate Is there any further discussion?

So further discussion. So currently item number four states the safety gate located at the stub connection Ridge Point Drive shall be eliminated. We're going to change that. And so this will allow for connections using street network. We're just going to change that to be we recommend further study be considered due to the privacy concerns of the existing neighborhood.

Chair will now solicit a motion regarding this plan. Does anyone? So give me a little bit of time to formulate it.

I can just reference modifications one, two and three and then four and five.

Okay. I hereby make this motion in case number three dash 26 dash Z applicant Chris Henninger. The zoning commission finds that the submitted R4 plan application zone change request is consistent with the Horizon 2030 land use plan. does not meet all of the plan development application requirements of an R4 plan. Therefore, this Commission recommends the submitted Plan B approved contingent upon adherence to the noted modifications as specified in this motion. All required supplemental information and plan modifications must be completed and submitted to the Planning Director no later than one week prior to the Trustee's hearing of this case. We make the following finding of facts. Per the Horizon 2030 Land Use Plan, the proposed development is not located within a designated corridor. The proposed development is consistent with adjacent land use characteristics. All adjacent partials are zoned residential. Single-family residential development goals call for targeted single-family densities up to four units per acre, and this proposal achieves a gross density of 2.54 units per acre. r4 district allows for enhanced design flexibility to integrate into the surrounding community this proposal calls for 20.3 percent of the total acreage to be open space maintained by a homeowners association which is consistent with the requirements of an r4 plan and the plan calls for proposed walking path this is subject to the following modifications uh see page five of the staff report items numbered one through three the commission is rewriting recommendation number four the safety gate located at the stub connection of ridge point drive in regards to this it is the commission's recommendation that additional study and research be conducted in order to address the privacy concerns of the existing neighborhood and the feasibility of a safety gate in this location. The fifth modification would be that sample facades and proposed layouts for the homes to be constructed be presented at the trustees meeting. Well, I actually submitted earlier. That concludes my motion.

I'll second that motion.

I've regularly made and seconded motion. Any discussion about the motion itself? Hearing no further discussion, Mr. Flatty, would you call the question?

Yes, sir. Mr. Campbell? Yes. Mr. Lewis? Yes. Mr. Wing? Yes. Mr. Beckman? Yes. Mr. Honorlaw?

Yes.

Motion carried.

Thank you, everyone. Please make sure to turn out for the trustees' hearing of this case July the 14th. 14th at 6 o'clock. Oh, thank you. You distracted me by putting up 6, and I'm like, wait, I got the date in that room?

uh so any further business come before this commission before we proceed to close i have none mr chairman okay then has anybody been over the new vibe of the new uh yes bridge yeah oh yeah it seems like there's more lanes heading north than there are going south and they don't line up they don't we have like this weird misalignment that we have at buck brookston right over pass even the the old the first one they put in over

I like lean and whatever it is. That's confusing too. It is.

You get in the wrong lane, you've got to turn. Right. The box box should overpass. Why they saw the need to... When you're coming up it, you can't see that those two lanes are for left turn. And so people are constantly... Gentlemen, I hate to... We've got to go.

But this commission is hereby adjourned at 8.55 p.m. All right.

Mic's off. Mic's off.