Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, good morning or good afternoon everyone. I'm Michael D, director of public works for Kyhoga County and welcome to today's uh Kyhoga County Planning Commission meeting. If we could call the RO please. Mayor Burke here. Laura Black here. Mayor Don Jones here. Director De here. Mayor Gallo. Mark Fields here. Mayor Curts here. Or Joseph Nani here. Mayor Weiss Mayor Wea have a quum. Okay. Outstanding. Thank you. Um, next item on the agenda are comments from the public. Anybody signed in to speak today? Yes. Do you want to go in order of the I think that's best. if you don't mind. There's a contingency of us here and if you don't mind, I think we'll do it associated with myself first and next. We're all on the list. Can you tell me your name? My name is George Pap. By the way, I know that we only have three minutes here, so I'll try to Yeah. No, I haven't started yet. I just want to make sure I knew who was speaking. Yeah. My name is George Papreas. I'm with Carnegie Management Development Corporation. We are the applicant in connection with the Mstead Town Center project which is item number six on your agenda. Uh we are a full service real estate development uh company that has headquarters in Westlake, Ohio. Uh we've been in business for over 35 years. We uh have uh over 7 million square feet of space in our our portfolio which consists of office, retail, institutional

um government, leisure and in addition to that we have um as part of our objective and part of our our mission always is to obtain or to seek projects that we develop and keep them in our portfolio for the useful of a project and I think that's important to note here because that's what we're going to do here with the town center project. We stick with these projects that allows us to get accountability and most importantly a relationship with the with the jurisdictions and the cities and townships that we do business with. And that's one thing that uh I want to emphasize here. So, we've been working on the Mstead Town Center project for almost two years now. And in so doing, we've met with all the stakeholders. And I think that's important, too, because we've met with the residents, we've met with the businesses, we've met with the board of zoning off, we've met with the zoning commission, we've met with the board of trustees, and all of them have unanimously supported wholeheartedly this project, and we've gotten complete unanimous approval for it. And so we are here tonight to try and seek your approval in keeping with that site plan and that project that everybody has seen. And I think it's important to note that we've been navigating this path very long for a very long time and it's been very very difficult obviously trying to balance the market realities the fiscal viability of the project trying to work with the desires of the community and yet comply with the zoning codes of the township and the county which unfortunately aren't necessarily consistent. And that has posed some challenges uh to us. But in reliance on what we felt was unanimous approval, we

now have fully executed leases with national credit tenants, long-term leases that are ready to move forward, bring stability, economic vitality that I know the township is relying upon. And it's based on the site plan that's before you here today naturally because of the inconsistencies associated with the zoning codes between the various the two jurisdictions got some conflicts and there are three concerns that are most problematic for us and frankly uh Morgan France my colleague is going to discuss what those are next in detail for you as part of this presentation but what I want to leave you with here is I'm not going to take too much more time I need to implore you to approve this project in order allow it to move forward. The conditions that have been placed in the staff report recognize or try to identify concerns that the county has raised, which we understand completely and we want to work with that, but for them to be absolute in their application is detrimental and will not allow the project to move forward. I think we need I need to underscore that. And so I would implore this commission to evaluate those conditions and at the very least rather than draw a line in the sand, allow us to work and address the concerns because there's so many other ways that we can approach and deal with them in a manner that doesn't necessarily eliminate the probability or the possibility of the project. And I think that's really important to note here. So I want you to keep that in mind when Morgan sits and talks about each of these things. And we've discussed even offered as a suggestion that we enter into a development agreement that allows us to work together and address those issues in a manner that doesn't set that

line in the sand that ultimately will, you know, kill the project. So that's it. Thank you very much. I'd like to turn it over to Morgan. You were actually at 428. I just want to know that that is an incredibly short amount of time. Well, good afternoon everyone. My name is Morgan France. I'm the pre-construction coordinator with Carnegie Management Development Corporation. Uh thank you all for your time today and I I really wanted to hit on those three items of concern that George mentioned uh in his in his public comment. Um, principally the wetlands to be considered a part of open space is crucially important for this development as we have relied upon that in our designs in obtaining our approvals with the uhstead township board of trustees. And if the I if the subdivision regulations were to be uh followed specifically, we would have to eliminate the phase 2 residential component of the development because there's 3.7 acre requirement for open space for this 18.5 acre development. Uh and if we were to lose the phase 2 residential, we would no longer have a project that's financially viable. uh we would no longer have a mixeduse development that would be in conflict with the township's town center plan development district zoning regulations and the township will lose a critical uh uh tax income base associated with this development and so we're requesting that the commission uh consider that and consider the township's recommendation for approval of using the wells for the open space. Uh the second item of concern is the Sterns Road curb cut and we are requesting a minimum right in right out left in traffic movement. And as the highway design comment number four highlighted, um our our traffic impact analysis did not determine that there was any need to restrict access,

especially considering all of the other properties at the intersection of Cerns and Bagley have full access curb cuts and and our traffic consultant believes that this is the least problematic and we agree with that that analysis that this is the least problematic traffic access in terms of uh stacking, queuing, left turn movements, pedestrian crossing, etc. Um, additionally, the third item of concern is sidewalks for the development. We have a mixeduse development which is uh anchored by commercial in the frontage and the residential in the rear. And we have been intentional in our design to specifically emphasize a separation of vehicular pedestrian traffic and keeping pedestrians towards the residential where it's safer for them to walk around and to funnel pedestrian traffic in the commercial zone. um so that we can minimize the crosswalks with heavier commercial traffic. Um and on page four, I brought a hand out with us. Uh page four shows crossing network and you can see that the access from Sterns Road, if the subdivision regulations were to be followed to a T, we would be required to introduce an additional seven crosswalks where the commercial components lie. And and we believe that that is a a life safety issue and would pose a serious concern for safety for residents traversing this site. Um so in conclusion, I specifically and Carnegie Management Development Corporation is requesting approval for the wetland be considered and counted towards the open space requirement that we obtain a minimum right in right out left in traffic movement on Sterns Road and that we uh receive an approved sidewalk design as it's been provided in our application. Thank you very much for your time. And I am the third member of the Carnegie team today. My name is Rustin Corey. I'm the president of Carnegie. And I just wanted to briefly underscore what what George and Morgan said. You

know, we haven't had the benefit of doing a major project in Kyhoga County in a long time. Um we have completed more than $750 million in uh class A commercial projects for institutions as well as for the Department of Veteran Affairs uh primarily along the eastern seabboard. We viewed this project as somewhat of a homecoming for ourselves, an opportunity to kind of reinvent ourselves in Kyhoga County and do it in a community that we care deeply about. Uh we first got engaged with Mstead Township many many years ago and then again in 2019 when we pursued the Southwest General Medical Building that exists on the eastern boundary of the site today. And we really were sold on the vision uh of the trustees in Homestead Township to bring this corner to life and to recreate a retail corridor that could be a town center mixeduse development to anchor their community. And we took a lot of time and were very thoughtful and engaged with experts in their field to ensure that they followed everything to a te. The Ohio design guides, highway design requirements to ensure that we're creating something that is both safe and can be enjoyed by the residents and allow our tenants and businesses to prosper. This project is critical for a number of reasons. A major one is the vision of the Mstead Township trustees and their community. They've been going through a very long stakeholder process of streetscape improvements. Those improvements rely upon having a commercial anchor to drive it and to more importantly fuel it. We didn't come into this project saying we need a tip. We need all the extra money we can get. We came into it saying we want to create something that can be collaborative and the community can rally around. And we believe what's presented to you is an 18month evolution of that idea on paper that we want to bring to life. The

project in and of itself is projected to create more than 85 potentially 90 full-time equivalents which represents more than 300,000 in potential income taxes which we hope to be monetized through a joint economic development district with the city of Northolmstead in addition to the potential real estate taxes which we believe to be in excess of $300,000. Again, an economic engine to help the township achieve their goals. This project is critical not just for us but for the township and for its residents. And we've worked handin glove for the better part of a year and a half to ensure that we're creating a product that will be enjoyable and will provide safety above all. So when we talk about those conditions, I just want you all to know that we recognize there may be a desire to have sidewalks on both sides of the street and we can appreciate that. But when you have conflict between vehicular movements and pedestrian movements, we want to minimize those to the maximum extent possible. So that way there's clear sight visuals and there's no potential for conflict that a pedestrian crossing at multiple locations could create a vehicular backup. It's the same thing when we talk about the open space requirements and we've had these conversations with the county already. We could impact those wetlands. We could destroy those wetlands and build ourselves a nice soccer field and that would comply with the open space requirement. Nobody wants that. And so all we're asking for is a little bit of reasonleness from this commission to understand the challenges that we've been faced. Recognize how we've tried to solve them in a thoughtful manner that delivers a quality project and ultimately I know I'm wrapping up right now and ultimately allow the township to realize their visions with this project. Thank you. Thanks. else. Not. Oh, I didn't see you signed in for public.

If you could come forward and just state your name. Okay. My name is Lee Beckman. I'm with Beck Suppliers. Um, we're uh I'm the vice president. We're one of the owners of the of the corners at the at the Mstead project, town center project, and we just wanted to make sure that uh uh you know, we have a couple things that we have some concerns with with the with the road designs and things like that. Um so, uh thank you for the opportunity for speaking this afternoon. Proposed development looks fantastic, and it does. We're we're on board with it. will really be beneficial for the township and the community. The development will not only provide more offerings for the community, but will trigger improvements to utility infrastructure, roadways, and traffic flow. Getting these improvements designed correctly is crucial to having a successful town center. I'd like to begin by acknowledging the important work of the Kyoga County Department of Public Works. The recent recommendations reflect a strong commitment to improving our region's infrastructure and addressing the needs of our growing and evolving communities. The proposal put forth covers a wide range of critical areas from roadway maintenance and traffic flow to storm water management and utility infrastructure. These are not just technical issues. They directly affect the quality of life, safety, and long-term sustainability of our township. Today, I will be sharing a few comments, considerations uh in response to the department's recommendations. These observations are grounded in both stakeholders. My intent is to support in constructive dialogue that ensures any future improvements are not only technically sound but also aligned with the values and priorities of of our residents. With that, I'd like to turn to a specific recommendation and comments on the proposed development by the Kyog County Department of Public Works regarding resolution number 2550710-C and offer my additional feedback.

I'm going to reference some of the comments and give some feedback on it. Can I do that now or there's somewhat of a time limit to this? Okay. So, I'm not sure where that is on it. So, one minute 30 seconds. Okay. Um, so I'm what I'm going to I'll brief I'll make this brief then. So, one of the things that we looked at is we went back and looked at the history of development of that intersection. And based on the development of the intersection, we've seen improvements to that intersection and the the traffic flow every time there's been a construction uh on one of those corners. Um there was a drugstore, they added a lane onto the uh north on Sterns, and then when there was convenience store and some residential, uh they added two lanes on the south side of Sterns. Um, and so they've added seven lanes, uh, or they have a total of seven lanes, added four lanes over 14 years. We're looking at adding a project that is more than double of what has been added already. And there's no there's no changes being offered to the intersection to account for that additional traffic. And that's one of the big concerns we have. Um, one of the other concerns we have is the uh, Sterns Road access. um uh being a full access uh in the fact that the way the ODOT rules read is that it's with 250 within 250 foot there shouldn't be any crossing uh allowed going across that left turn lane. And I think that the county's got it right is that if that is allowed, there's going to be issues with that with that intersection. One of the things I'm always concerned about is if the intersection does not work well, it's not going to do anybody any good. It's just going to cause issues and with those issues, people are going to try to

avoid it. And that's what I'm concerned about. So, um, uh, in general, I I like I said, we really do support the project. I think it's going to be great for the community, but we really need to look at how that traffic flow works and and reassess that and make sure they're using correct numbers and we're we're really handling those roads the way they need to be. Thank you. I don't I don't ask anyone to speak. That's up to them. But you're not here. I understand I'm not there, but I assume that you guys would want the trustes to behalf of I I think when um trustee uh when we get to the item specifically we'll talk about it. The intent was for public comment from others right now on the project but we'll hear from the trustees as we get into that that item specifically. Great. Thank you. Is there anyone else? No. Okay. All right. I appreciate it. Thank you. Next item on our agenda is the approval of June 12th, 2025 meeting. I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. Second. Is there motion made by the chair, seconded by Mayor F. Is there any questions or comments or changes to the minutes? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. Those opposed. Next item on the is resolution 25710A. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So this is resolution number 25710- A. This is uh requesting approval of the amended bylaws. We have had four in total conversations of various revisions to the bylaws. I want to thank law department Wesley Crutch. I know there's a committee we had Sunny and Mayor Willow. Sorry, Councilman Simon and

Mayor Willow worked it through it. Um and so what we've done at this point in your packet was all the track changes have been accepted and all the have been made to the bylaws in your electronic packet that you received. The full appendices was in there, but given the length of that and given the size of the packet already, we did not print out um that is part of the appendices as part of this packet, but they are been sent to you electronically. Um so at this point, we are asking for an approval of the to adopt the amended bylaws as we're sending your email and your board. Okay. Anybody have questions in regards to all we've heard about this over the last few meetings. So, all right. I am going to make a motion then to approve the changes to the bylaws. So, approval of resolution 25710A. Can I have a second? Second. Second from Mayor Curts. Any other further comments or questions on that item? All right. See none. That's great. All right. All those in favor say I. Those opposed. That motion carries. Thank you. I think you heard a lot from me the last meeting, but today we have a very full agenda and a lot of our team members here will be presenting. So our first item is resolution number sorry second uh resolution number 25710-B. This is for the Lakewood Public Arts Master Plan. So the four projects you will about today are all um going to be projects with the communities that were awarded through the uh community services program applications. Good afternoon everyone. Uh county planning is uh seeking uh authorization to enter into a planning services agreement with the city of Lakewood for

a public art master plan. Um I'll be working at Megan Cheney um along with my fellow senior planner Nicole Leard um under the management of Jim Saler. So just to provide a little snapshot uh into the public art landscape in Lakewood um Lakewood began a public art campaign in uh 2014. Um it was uh formalized in 2021 with the creation of the public art advisory board um whose mission was to advance uh the city's public art initiative, support local artists and educate residents about the importance of public art. Um the city uh dedicates $50,000 annually uh to public art and that's uh distributed through processes um of the public art advisory board. Currently, the city has 67 uh items of public art throughout the city, and you'll see them sprinkled in. I probably included more slides than I should have just as an excuse to include all the beautiful pieces of public art throughout the city. Um so, this plan will identify the processes used by the public arts advisory boards as well as detail their successes so far. Um it will document the placement, uh themes, accessibility, diversity of themes of existing public art. um identify past challenges um to the installation and maintenance of public art and uh also research different initiatives and to perform case studies um that have been employed uh throughout uh the country and the world. We're looking to cities in Europe that have had a strong public arts campaign as well. So recommendations will identify uh location uh geographically where the public art um can go um what it could be um the the character and form the different types of uh innovative uh forms that it can that can be used including uh natural

forms of art uh uh temporary artworks um and interactive uh pieces of art. um DEI there's a strong focus um the city wanted to make sure that uh public art processes um the artists that are engaged um the different kinds of themes uh that are represented um have a lens of uh diversity, equity, inclusion um and finally we will be making recommendations uh directly on the processes employed by the public arts advisory board um in order to improve efficiency um those CI initiatives um as well as identify new uh funding sources. So, uh we will be um a lot of input will be um a part and public engagement will be part of this plan. Um the the project committee is uh for that will help guide this plan is made up of very knowledgeable city staff, members of the public art advisory board as well as uh citywide institutions. Um a previous plan um that we did a few years ago, the medicine Madison Park master plan featured some really in innovative public engagement. We did a process in the schools um that we engaged a bunch of different classrooms. Um they wanted to replicate that um that level of um very uh intentional public engagement. So we'll be working with the schools again um as well as doing stakeholder interviews uh community engagements public meetings. So the plan will include five project phases. One project initiation um is getting all of our decks in a row. Um like like uh getting approval. Um current conditions that's details the where the the uh the challenges and opportunities are. Um visions and recommendations both in terms of different locations around the city as well as the types of art the city is interested in pursuing. Uh implementation um identifying funding

timeline priority um and then final plan uh and conclusion. So, the estimated project budget is roughly $97,000. Um, the city of Lakewood will contribute $14,550 and work is estimated to be completed uh in June of next year. That's great. Does anyone have any questions or comments for I'm going to make a motion to approve the contract city of Lakewood master plan resolution. I have a second second from Mayor Jones. Any other further comments or questions? Seeing none. All those in favor say I. I. Those opposed that motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Next item is resolution number 25710-C Homestead Township Homestead Town Center Development Project and Angle will be presenting today. All right. Good afternoon everyone. Um as we've heard uh already from developers here, this is for approval of the Mstead center developments. Uh the preliminary preliminary master plan phases both phases one and two uh which is a mixeduse development. Uh indicated the location there. We're looking at the corner of Sterns and Badley Road, both county roads. Um I believe seven parcels are included in that uh which will be undergoing a consolidation. Um and so the zoning on that is the town center plan developments overlay and then again just location. Just orient everyone here. It is the norththeast corner of Bagley and Sterns.

So you have the overpass just to the left there and then to the south Bley road. Uh some uses around that indicates um more so commercial uh along the lines of your typical kind of suburban development. Um to the north there being railroad and single family residential. Um to the south again the commercial retail plaza. Swings and things is located there and then uh to the east uh single family residential west and southwest at the corner is commercial. Um so looking at the CVS right adjacent to that and the caddy corner is the French kitchen gas station. All right. So just some uh history and background here. Um the site is currently vacant. Um the site features wooded areas and recently constructed medical or recently constructed medical office on the eastern side of that as the map. Uh the initial application was submitted in May 2025. Uh the applicant withdrew to address concerns and questions about the useful open space um and the overall roadway design both on and off site. Um and that also includes the sidewalks as as has been previously mentioned. Um so since then they've been working with um not only us but our other internal partners better align the homestead with the township or homestead town center preliminary plans with those regulations um and the other applicable engineering uh standards with public works and so they resubmitted ultimately resubmitted their now application they report you um on June 10th 2025 um and so just to reiterate this will be split into two phases uh the first involving development of the retail buildings to the south and that includes commercial space uh for a new gas station to fast food restaurants and a grocery store and an existing medical office to remain again on the eastern side of that site. Uh several retention

ponds are included um as part of the storm water mitigation. Um and the existing wetlands to the north will remain uh as mentioned activated by uh multi-use trail on the southern border of that green space connecting to public gazebo amenity space. And then phase two will ultimately include 27 residential rental units and then behind that another uh wet pond for storm water controls. So the proposal calls for private roads with two with one two way entrance at the overpass should just go through um actually um one two-way entrance along Badley uh with the public's water and sanitary lines to be constructed during those plan phasing of the project. The plan itself calls for at least parcels. Uh so again, the combination of those existing parcels will need to take place before any preliminary um plan approval. Um ultimately, we're waving that since we know that uh the owner is the applicant. So there should not be any turnable with that. Um so the uh applicant has included um a breakdown of the open space in in the packet. Um they site that 3.84 acres of open space is provided. 3.69 is technically required based on lot. Um but the land indicated does not meet certain criteria outlined in the land development regulations. Um for instance some of the open spaces that they do denote there's a minimum of 70 ft um in width for some of that um as well as being contiguous. So um there's certain areas where it just quite doesn't quite meet that. Um so they have included a formal letter requesting those two onetime modifications to include wetlands in the overall 20% calculations and that's set in section 1068 of our land regulations. land use regulations. Um, and that is an order to make up for those shortfalls. Uh, they're also requesting again that mod modification from the requirement set in 10 1066 requiring sidewalks uh be located on both sides of the streets. Our code is

very explicit in in that requirement. Um, I'm not going to go through their um their overall reasoning. I think I think they kind of outlined that already. Um, we can always readress that. Um so moving forward into the comments um so pursuant to our regulations we have distributed all this to our agencies and received comments back um and so we've reviewed the preliminary plans for the Mstead Tom Center uh subdivision. Um and with that uh we kind of split it up in the S report into two kind of uh recommendations. So overall, we're recommending disapproval of the requested modifications in favor of the conditional approval um in order to address the land development shortfalls um what they proposed. The reasoning for the recommendation uh being that they failed to meet unusual and topographical or exceptional environmental circumstances as outlined in not only our regulations but also RC that is direct language from the RC there. Um they are not in the best interest of the public as it impairs desirable development for the neighborhood especially given the pedestrian connectivity and potential significant increases in traffic. We're looking at proximity to the school around.3 miles. We deem it there could be potential foot traffic with that um and proximity to other kind of amenities with folks walking um especially the swings and things right there as well. Um so the intent of the 2020 land development regulations would not be met um in regards to pedestrian flow and traffic movement. uh nor does it mean elements of the complete street designs uh referenced in section 102 1012 in our regulations as well. Um but with that um in in the spirit of working with the developer um we are recommending conditional approval and this is across the board for all entities. I'm not going to go through everyone's comments on this but I do want to read off just to get into the record the planning conditions that all provisions and this

is approval based on these conditions. All approvals of all provisions of section 1066 uh sidewalks and walkways shall be met. All private roads shall have sidewalks running adjacent on both sides of the street where any vehicular ingress egress access points are proposed. First one to that section 1066. Um and again especially given to the campus the school campus there as well as other uses around there commercial uses. Further attention should also be given to incorporating other crosswalk potentially. This is a bit out of scope, but it kind of falls into play, I think, with um regards to how the overall street will be designed. Bagley uh Bedwin Street or Sterns intersection, how that pans out. Um eliminate the overflow parking area. You can see kind of on the north end there um in this concept map here that the uh parking area adjacent to the proposed wetlands um that could be eliminated. strictly overflow um to achieve more of that open space um number. We're not necessarily saying they need to meet the full-blown 20%, but certain things can be eliminated to get closer to that. Um and then again, just to make up for that 70 ft requirement as well and and lacking other places and then eliminate or reduce the size of some of the residential units in phase two. Again, this was just a recommendation to look into that if that's a feasible action. staff felt that some of these are are definitely um accomplishable. Um so further activate the proposed open spaces along the streets. Um installing street furniture, benches, lounge chairs, shade devices, and play equipment to further enhance the quality of life and also further meet the requirements for our open space. Um so they might not meet necessarily the 70 ft requirement, but if it's activated in some way, we staff is under the impression that that would that would count and that could be a workaround. And then also as mentioned, we're recommending a conditional approval pursuant to uh developer proposing and creating and entering into development agreement uh with Homestead Township and

Kyhoga County stipulating funding to aid in paying for alignment streetscape enhancements with the proposed development along those portions of Bagley and Sterns roads that front the development. So that concludes my staff reporting on this lot of information. I will open it up to you all for any questions. We do have the trustees here. Um, so I just would like to make just one comment. In your packet, you do have all of the comments from all the other departments that provided feedback. Yes. And as well at the request of the developer, they asked for a draft copy of staff report for this topic. So, it was given in advance and their um response to that those comments is also included in the packet starting at page 118. So, you've got that in your packet. It's a response to in advance of this meeting today. Yes. Thanks. Thanks. I know we have a few of the trustees here. At first, I just uh we'll get to the trustees in a moment. I'd first like to hear if there's any comments or questions specifically from members of the board. Yes. The second response was Their response was sent to us. It's in the packet starting at page 118. It was dated July 3rd. Sorry. Next day. Next day. Yeah. Because there is an there was an original letter that was I think based on the preliminary submission with the response and then this page 118 starts the response to this current staff report. You're welcome. Anything else? Thank you. So, um the recommendation to not have left turn access into

this development from Badley. I think it is. Is it Sterns or Badley? Which I think. Okay. Is that because of the proximity to the intersection numbers? Yeah, I think um Eric is here to speak on it, but at the same time there's some personnel from my department. Tom is here. So Tom or Chris George on either of you want to just speak about just Go ahead, Eric. Do you have something to add? No, I'm sorry. I just want to get the map up and my apologies. I have a different copy than you guys. So it's actually on page 73 is that letter in response to the staff report. Our traffic consultants here as well. Yeah. Which is which is great. And I think, you know, If we if we had an opportunity to look through the responses, whatnot, understanding what came out of the Department of Public Works, it was specific that we were looking for additional traffic information and but I'll let Tom actually come up. Tom, can you just come up and speak about what additional information needs to that term there? Thanks, Blake. Um Tom Sotac, Department of Public Works. Welcome everybody. Um I guess our our main concern um and these these I don't think we've been I don't think our concerns have been fully saved by the report that was done by the consultant here. There's a lot of numbers in there, a lot of traffic, a lot of it's all good. We have concerns about sight distance. There's already a significant queue in in a PM rush for people making a left turn on Bagley. How's that affect the intersection? There's a lot of there's a lot of decisions people have to make when they're going to be turning out. It looks good on paper, but you're going to

have a right turn, exclusive right turn in only in there. So, you got to be looking out for that. Then you got to be looking for through traffic. Then you got to be looking to see if someone's not coming out across the street at CVS. You got to look to your right to make sure someone's not coming down the hill. My concern and our concern here is that first of all, there's an area there's a lot of elderly people out there. There's also a lot of inexperienced drivers with a high school down the street. So, I'm not saying this can't be worked out. I'm not saying this can't be worked out, but we have concerns about the operation of that intersection specifically. In our opinion, should be right in, right out. Tom, if I if I could, there was some additional information you were requesting for in regards to a traffic analysis. Um, if I'm not mistaken, there was information provided about uh Lindberg and and Bagley Road was a reference point. Yeah, that wasn't specifically about this issue. Uh I think that issue lends itself to overall the overall level of of uh the number of intersections at the intersection of Bagley and Sterns itself uh future growth in the area which we were concerned about that number. Um again that was in the report and I I think the engineer can speak to that. Uh but that's kind of a little bit different topic than the operation of this drive. It is it is connected because obviously the the uh uh level of service or the the the number traffic volume going through the main intersection there in Bagley Sterns obviously is going to have an effect on this driveway because it's it's just right up the street from that. So I I I don't know if that sufficiently answers your question I guess from our standpoint of why we're concerned about that. Um thank you Mr. Chair. Um the I guess I guess when I look at the map, the

overall map and I'm looking at uh the the specific area that you're talking about just across the street uh just south of Bagley is the that shopping center and then swings and things and there are curb cuts uh all throughout that area that allow for left turn driveways. Yes, the drive was the numbers in the volume, too. And don't forget, you have don't forget you have a a horizontal curve. So, someone someone pulling out of that intersection, you have to look greater than you're going to have to look greater than 90 degrees. And don't forget the way it's set up now with that cutout, you're going to the stop bar is back behind that intersection. So, you have to look up that road. Again, not saying it can't be done. The engineering hasn't be been done to convince us that that's a good option. convince us. That's all. That's all I'm saying. Because because there's a lot of there's going to be a lot of inexperienced drivers. You have a high school right down the street. So, I know that I guess none of the none of the none of the traffic signals met the first three warrants for traffic volumes, so on and so forth. But I guarantee you down the road, one of these is going to meet warrant seven. Thanks, Tom. Anything further? Um, is there any other questions from the the group at first? If not, I'd like at least uh the trustees to be able to step forward if they have any general comments. Will we have an opportunity to respond to that that commentary or we should? No, the opportunity. Um, I I'd like to hear from the trustees first before we'll come forward. I need to sit. Sorry. You're fine. You're fine. First of all, I'd like to say that I do

apologize that I've not been able to attend these meetings. Um I have been extraordinarily ill as some of you have known. Um I was in and out of the hospital most of 2024. I am getting on back on my feet here in 2025. Normally I'm very engaged um with this board. I have been previous years. So I do apologize that I have not been here. So I wanted to set the record straight first on that. The second thing that I'd like to to interject here is a number of things. I want to take you back. I have been on this board since 2016. Um I worked with the trustees prior for 10 years. I volunteered in many dis uh many capacities and on many committees. So I'm very familiar. So, it's a 20 year commitment I have made to Mstead Township. In 1995, we drafted a master plan. And in that master plan, now this is 30 years ago, the trustees laid out that this town center was critical to our move ahead. 30 years has passed and the trustees from Sherry Lipus, which I know many of you know, Sherry Lipus, Janine Press, Tiffany Fishbach, Scott Ross, myself, um, numerous other trustees. We have all worked together towards the same common goal. We have put zoning in place. We have created subdivision regulations. We are a limited home rule township. So we do enact quite a bit of power with a few exceptions and so we're different than most other townships. There are there some home other home rural townships. The other thing that I'd like to point out is that we function like a city. We are an anomaly here instead in in Kyhoga County because we're the only

functioning township. The only other township has 100 residents. We have about 17 teetering on 18,000 residents. Big difference. So we function just like a town, just like a city except we don't collect an income tax. It is critical. In 2014, we put together zoning that was passed with a lot of community engagement. In 2019, we created a comprehensive plan with a lot of community engagement over a year and solidified our position with these 18,000 residents that this is what we needed to have to move our township forward. We're very heavily residential. We desperately need economic development. This is our driver moving forward. It must happen. If it does not happen, are in serious trouble. This must happen. I can't express to you how much it can't happen. Now, as far as left hand left out on I wanted to say a couple more things. I'm not going to belabor the point. Um, we have worked with Guide Studio at a tune of about $100,000. We have worked with OM. It's probably going to cost us more than $200,000. And we've also engaged with a bond counselor and a municipal finance person to drive this project forward. We have had many opportunities to develop many. Carnegie management is the only one since we've been working with them since 2019 and they have bought into the vision. They have attended every Guideststone meeting, every OM meeting, heavily engaged with the community, heavily

engaged with us. This development meets all of our subdivision regulations, all of them. We also, I need to tell you is unlike any other township in the state, we hold our MS4 permit, which means we had to create our own storm water regulations that are reported to the EPA. That speaks volumes to the to the type of township we are very, very, very different. So I would say our regulations that have been in place and that we have used for these many years trumps any regulations created any place else because if and the higher advisor code is does not speak one way the other. Does the subdivision regulations for the county or does the subdivision regulations for the township for a township which one trumps which? Well, according to high revised codes it's silent, have had our regulations in place for many, many years. I would think that the strength of our commitment and our community and what we have put into our community all these years should take precedent. As far as the the traffic flow in and out, I want to bring up Mr. Beck though I am very very grateful that he has um invested in our community about five years ago. That is the only game in town in 10 square miles which is what Mstead Township is. There was only one one gas station and he's it. And so now here comes a gas station, a pretty well-known franchise gas station. Do you see where

I'm going here? And so there are though he may have concerns, I would give you I can give you information on feet that are close to that are both in and out off of Sterns Road right there. They use the same traffic company that Carnegie management used. The exact same traffic company. There is no but this is competition. So I wanted to address that. Tom, I love your passion. You're as passionate as I am. You know what I mean? We're both fiery. We're both very passionate about how we feel. I am going to propose to you that and I know that that the left now we're talking about Sterns coming down off of Sterns. Cargi has agreed that they will do a curb cut right out only. Correct. But coming down Sterns we will allow a lefthand turn. That is extraordinarily reasonable. There's no reason in the world why that can't happen. As far as open space is concerned, those 10 parking lots are adjacent to guess what a gazebo that they are that Carnegi has committed to erecting. They have put in they are putting in and it's part of our plan putting in um benches and lights. All of that is part of our streetscaping that we have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars already to put in place. So those need to stay. As far as open space is concerned, our regulations, our subdivision regulations state very clearly that they can use wetlands as open space. There is no reason not to

allow that to happen. I see no justification for it. It there there's a a sidewalk that goes over half of it that people can traverse through. As far as the sidewalk going in, if you look at the sidewalk going in, you'll see that it's going to it's going to create a conflict with the with with pedestrians. You don't want that sidewalk bent in like that. It's dangerous. I can I can um give you more specifics with our our township administrator who also happens to be an engineer um and they can tell you that it's dangerous as far as the township is concerned to force them to put this additional sidewalk in. What car what what Carnegie management has put in place is everything that we have worked for for the past two years with guide studio and with um with OM. We have had numerous community engagements, numerous um meetings with all stakeholders in all areas. This has been a comprehensive approach that we have looked to this. So, I'm asking you to please after 30 years of blood, sweat, and tears that every single trustee has has done to make this development a reality. I'm asking you to please grant what needs to happen, approve the plan as designed, and let's put this to bed and move forward so the township can begin their economic renaissance. This is the only way that it can happen. And that's all I have to say.

I'm Riley Alton. I'm one of the trustees. Um, thank you all for your service on the planning commission. Um, I will add just a little bit to what my colleague very clearly articulated. Um, but first I want to thank in addition to our township administrator Jerry Elnowski. Um, our other staff person who's been taking the lead on a lot of this, Justin Reed is our building commissioner. Um, has been working really hard on this. Trustee Tom Cole is also here in the back. I want to acknowledge him. Uh, I agree that this project serves as an exciting catalyst and opportunity for future growth, not just in this area, um, but also in the other undeveloped areas uh, near the town center. Um, I'm confident that uh between the developer's willingness to work with uh the county on the development plan with the township um and with the conditions that have been uh expressed within reason um that this will be a great project to move the township forward. Um I also just want to note in terms of the discussion of open space, we've had numerous discussions not only with the developer but with the county um about you know utilizing those wetlands, not just keeping them there as you know counted towards open space uh but having kind of paths and walking trails and making it um truly an amenity for the public and making it publicly accessible. Um so I do think it is reasonable to count those towards the open space. Um, my only concern, and I think this will be addressed in the remainder of the process, is I would really like to see a right turn lane on Bagley Road. I think that requires collaboration between uh the township, the county, and the developer. And I think we can we can get there. Um, and we are also going through the process right now of updating, uh, we actually just, uh, passed an agreement in our last board meeting to update our overall township zoning code. I'm hopeful that there will be uh more alignment in the future between uh county subdivision

regulations and the township's regulations so that we can uh avoid any uh kind of confusion or miscommunication to developers or to the county um moving forward. So that is uh that's all I have. Thank you all very much trustee. Appreciate it. Uh board members, do we have any further comments or questions? Just a question. the uh I noticed that uh the road narrows going uh westbound on Bagley one lane and is there a reason why you don't have a right turn lane there at the intersection well I'm Google short so we're talking about west of the intersection now west but is that water retention in the corner sorry H2 actually shows like the slides they provided So that's that's not as far as I know it's not exist. Yeah. Center left turn right. Okay. We have on its is that the detention in the corner water on the east side? Yes. And is that there's a platform is that

to get back into it? There's a curb cut. That's to get into the development. Right. That would go away unless the county needs it for maintenance. There was a there was a map at one point that had a 2026 build and that was outlined I believe in the turning lanes on we tried to strip down our package to make it shorter for you all but we have that material and mayor I just want to note that we have proposed this development agreement approach where we would put the money associated with the proposed improvements in escrow for the benefit of the township and the county to utilize at their discretion to execute these improvements. That's our way of trying to show our willingness to collaborate to arrive at the best possible product in lane widenings, lane widening, realignments, signal adjustments. Any concerns that Mr. Sotch may have we can try to address when that comes around. And one last one more question if I may. Uh you mentioned you had long-term leases from from substantial users. You define long terms. 15 years. 20 years. 20 years. 15 years. Three. 15 years. How do you know if there were fives or tens? No. No. For commercial. That's very stability. We're looking for stability. And just for the record, of the more than 215 properties that we've developed in our 45 year history, we've sold less than five. Okay. Well, that's stability. Yes, we do too. for the purps what's open still or what's not I heard

some combinations but I'm not sure if that's formal acceptance and we will we will do that I'm fine with doing that can you provide Do you have that to put on the screen here as as far as like the the open items? Yeah. So shortly short. Yeah, it was a little complicated with some of that just the way their numbers were broken down. I don't know if Morgan um would car more to this. I would say they put together an an exhibit and try to find it here. We can speak to it very clearly. I'm here as land use council. We've been working on this for a period of time. There are three really three open issues and I've already talked to Greg Cruz and I've talked to the legal counsel for the township about a development agreement. Your name is Anthony Coin Council. So, if we could uh maybe put up a site plan so you can see the three open issues. Uh we've already agreed to work with the county and the town to put a development agreement in place. So, if there are reasonable conditions that need to be addressed, we'll integrate them into the development agreement. Mr. France already pointed out, we've done an initial initial cost estimate for the streetscape improvements. It's well over half million dollars. willing to deposit that in escrow to address those issues as they have to be developed. But I do believe that the the site plan itself could probably walk you through it pretty easily so that you'd understand particularly the sidewalks open space and the left turn right turn issuance. It's actually pretty straightforward if you have the site helpful to the board members. So we're just walking through the

outstanding issues. Correct. So, um, number one is the open space requirement. You'll see the upper left hand corner of the screen, the northwest wetland, that's approximately 3.11. Thank you. [Music] It won't work on the TV. I think it might not work on the TV on the screen behind you. Perfect. [Music] side. There we go. Okay. So, the first issue that we want to highlight is this wetland. This is the open space that we want to allocate for each of the wetland. The wetland parameters or sorry, the open space boundaries are approximately defined by my my trace here. So we don't have any point in which our open space is less than 70 ft and the the bulk of the open space is occupied by this wetland but it's only utilized for passive recreation and we additionally have provided areas of of meadow like buffering between the commercial and the residential users to show an attempt to create a uh areas of opportunity for active recreation to be in keeping with the spirit of the county code and subdivision. But the only way which we can strictly conform to the contiguous nature of open space regulations is to utilize that weapon. Um so that's that's the first item. The second item is this curve cut on the sterns and I would like for Andy to talk about our traffic consultant at TMS data to why we believe that this this curb cut is more appropriate to be a full access curve cut. But at a

minimum we need a right in a right in cover sorry left in coming off of Sterns into the development right out coming out of the development on Sterns and a right in coming north into the development as well. That's critical for our development to move forward. Um and the sheets gas station actually has a termination right that if we do not achieve this minimum of a right in right out left in then we lose this tenant and they are required tenant for the rest of center to move forward. So this is this is the cornerstone this is the anchor in addition to our as well. So that is that is a primary concern to us and can speak to the specific engineering that we've done to that this shouldn't be a concern. We have done engineering. We performed I think now four revisions to our traffic impact analysis utilizing Andy was it three three different site visits to collect data uh two two site visits. So we collect a lot of a lot of data site to influence analysis. And uh the third item is the sidewalks. So you'll notice that on the phase two portion, the residential, we have sidewalks on both sides of the street, which would be in conformance with the county subdivision regulations. And once we get down into the commercial component, we have chosen to biferate and keep the pedestrian traffic on one side of the street where there is no conflict of movement between pedestrians and vehicles. If you introduce sidewalk on the south side of the street conformance with the county subdivision regulations, you now cross one commercial one commercial access drive, two commercial access drives, three. You move on down the list and we have to get technical with it. Now comes four, five and six missing one

entry. Yes. Thank you. Yes. And not only do we believe that that a significant safety risk for pedestrians and and Eric and his reports physically call proximity to the school and our concern is that we are very close to the middle school and now we're introducing extra patterns of conflict between pedestrians and vehicles for users who might be under 12. That's that's a concern to us as well. Um, additionally, we just don't have the space to put in a sidewalk on both sides. So, this the central drive. It's our primary access to the site that facilitates movement for offsite visitors uh into the residential into the pavilion area center parking area that serves the uh passive amenity recreation facility. If we were to put a sidewalk on this side, we lose the boulevard like aesthetic, the environment, the the continuation of the township streetscape into the center of the development and it now becomes just concrete on either side of the primary. Those are the I know I was a little longwinded there, but I think on the second issue relative to the traffic, assuming you've accommodated the traffic teams have coordinated the ability to manage tanker trucks, truck traffic for the different softening it. It's you should make sure it's very generous in terms of softening the radiuses because you don't want pedestrians on that side of the road and a tanker truck trying to accommodate to get to the gas station. And so I think that's really important. The other thing is I'm not sure if there's a traffic study or there's signalization study that's planned for the for the intersection of Sterns and Pleasant Valley or Bagley, but I would definitely want some type of uh pulsing

of that for the future. We did. Yeah, that was part of our traffic. And just for clarification, Sheets is I think one of the best operators in the country and they they've already gotten site plan approval, but they did all of that when they presented it to to the township. So, they used all those traffic studies and all the GIS stuff to show that was very very effectively and one thing just a reminder there only two new curb cuts that are on on back road for that length because the ones that existing curb cuts for the medical office so that's it two added two two curve cuts that's it I could add something specifically your concerns is that not only did we and our engineers provide a truck maneuvering exhibit and provide these analyses to determine what are our radiuses what's safe for truck maneuvering so did all of our tents so We've now had four five truck maneuvering analyses done individual sites and the site as a whole to determine that there won't just want to make sure safety is safety across the How much of the wetland? We won't lose. There's a certain percentage of the wetlands that we're going to have to improve acres. The the wetland stays wet a form of conservation for the dual purpose of having passive recreation for residents and preserving the natural natural and in doing so somewhat of a hardship

for us because it has compressed the available land that could have otherwise been income producing or otherwise allowed us the flexibility to plan it accordingly. So, we really, you know, and it's been a double-edged sword where we tried to be good stewards of the of the land and and the conservation approach, and yet we're being penalized for it because we've done so. And and I just wanted to add, Mr. Engel made the comment about that extra overflow parking field and how the county feels like that can go away. That wasn't originally in the plan. We added that at the request of the township because if somebody were to say want to have a birthday cake at the gazebo and people are going to be coming in by vehicular access, where are they going to park? How are they going to be able to utilize this beautiful green space that we're creating if we don't have a way for them to get there other than by foot or by bike, which we hope most people take the shoelace express, but we can't plan that way. We need to plan so that way it can be actively utilized by the majority of the township. I'd like to add with regard to movements and what Tom had mentioned uh at the intersection. You know, it's one thing to feel that it's maybe not appropriate or we don't like it or it's not necessarily doesn't pass the smell test. Well, unfortunately for us, we deal in facts and we've had serious studies based on industry guidelines, guidelines set by the county, guidelines set by the Ohio Department of Transportation. We've had our expert qualified in evaluating it and making recommendations. based on all of that data and we're prepared to back it up and that's how we arrive at the movements that we've established here for this project and we and how we've relied upon it and the representations that we've made to our tenants part of that just no it would be if there were conditions

proposed that are acceptable to the applicant by the commission include them. The meantime, the development agreement will include a deposit in escrow of funds to cover streetscape improvements as they get installed. Originally, we're talking about a development which would be just with the township and the applicant, but we talked to Greg Luth about it as well and it will likely be a threearty development agreement. probably have to discuss where the funds would be deposited, but to make sure that the streetscape is going to recover when it goes out. Um, I just want can I reiterate one more time? They meet our subdivision regulations that we've had in place. They do not they're in conflict with the county, but in their higher revised code, it's silent as to who trumps who. So, I would request that you take our subdivision regulations that we have invested blood, sweat, and tears and lots of time and lots of community input over county regulations which have changed and ours are what they are. Um if I could then I'm just going to turn to West briefly and I don't know if our county law department has um I've not been presented with this issue for today but I had the chance to meet with my colleague in the law department just outside briefly he pointed me to Ohio advice code section 504.13 which discusses building and standard codes the effect of county adoption of building and standard codes and specifically paragraph B D1 which states, "No township that adopts the limited home rule form of government shall adopt a code described in division A of the section in any county that has adopted a code dealing with the same

matter to be regulated. I will point out division A is quite long but it includes codes regarding machinery, piping, boiler, heating, air conditioning, any code pertaining to fire haz fire hazards, fire prevention. Uh and it's it's qualified by this including but not limited to language. Um, so if if you're asking me off the rip to make an opinion at this moment, I would say that the county code would prevail based on section 504.13 B1 of the revised code. So I respectfully uh would disagree with the trust view at this time. I'd also like to further add I think when the trustee speaks of subdivision regulations she's speaking to the township's zoning resolution which they handle zoning ultimately as said in ORC 7-Eleven the subdivision regulations fall on the county regardless right so like the limited home rule allows for them to adopt their own zoning resolution however we are still we has to still adhere to the subdivision regulations which falls under our perview so I think just to clarify that for everyone when she speaks to sub their subdivision regulations. I think she's speaking to the zoning resow modification to a it's a gray area on this particular issue because it's not specifically enumerated. Right. Appreciate that input. Tom, I'm just going to go back to the traffic analysis. You asked for additional information in regards to that uh that turn on Sterns Road. Can you elaborate a little bit on what type of additional information you're looking for? Um, well, first of all, I I don't want to get in a arguing match with fellow engineers or people here because we all have our opinions, but the numbers will

bear out what they are at the end of the day. So, I'm I'm as far as the four driveway locations, I think we're probably fine with that. We don't have a big disagreement with that. the final operation of that. Maybe that's maybe that's something we're going to have to discuss. Okay. So, I overall I think where where else you going to put the driveways? It makes sense to me. Right. Right. And first of all and another thing too personally from us I have nothing against your development at all. Absolutely not. So, I hope you agree. You know, looks good. Looks good to me. But, you know, the operation of our roadways is very important. We are responsible for that. The OC is crystal clear. the county is responsible for county highways and townships. So there there is a discrepancy and again I don't want to get into those numbers right now. I you know you said this we said who there is so our concerns are I think it was in the document in the paper there we have concerns about the latest traffic count that was done not and I don't know why it just seems it concerned us why there was a deviation in in the numbers between what we counted and actually what was counted by your engineer back in 18 there is a discrepancy that we don't know and it concerns us a little bit because we want to know how is the how is the intersection going to operate going forward Are those numbers real? Those are something we just want to find out. We want to get to the bottom of I don't know if the township's 10% growth or 5% growth, but I don't think it's 0.25 or whatever it is. It's not what's the right number there. And again, I just want to have a baseline so everybody has a development they're happy with and they can live with in the future. That's the only thing here. not not against anybody or whatever. We just want to make sure it's done right. That's critical to us. So, I think we're just missing some data there or, you know, maybe it can be rectified. We're

not not saying we can't come to some agreement. I I don't think we're insinuating that. You know, we just want to make sure we have the right numbers to go forward with a project that's in everybody's best interest. Makes the developers look good, makes the township looks good, and hopefully makes us look good or decent at the end of the day. I don't know about good, but I don't know if we can look good, but I agree with I'm not arguing because and I respect that, but again, there's an old saying about we're all entitled to our own opinion or we're not entitled to our own facts. We presented the data. We've done extensive studies, very And I think that's really important to know and I know you have some concerns about growth in the future. That's always a concern in every community. We've got to work with the data that we have and this community's master planning and zoning process. I I don't want to bring this up, but your data is from four and a half miles away. I don't want to bring that up. I mean that that and that's why I don't want to bring because I think we can fix that. But that's that is important, isn't it? the data the data point that showed that they used was from an OD O10. I got so it was from Lindberg and Bagley which is in the city of Berea and it showed very little grow. Okay. My concern was it's not kind of you know and and and to to the engineers's point that there was a data set missing. So they according to ODOT there's a a cookbook formula that they use to you have to have five data points right so they didn't use it but I'm not saying you're wrong, but how do we get to that point if we do everything per the standards and the requirements and you're telling us that it doesn't feel right? Well, does it? All right, gentlemen. Speak to this. I I think ahead has offered his his thoughts on additional analysis that he was

requesting. I'll let the engineer close out your comments. Thanks. As far as the data goes from the growth rate perspective, um we can only use the historical data that's available to us. We we take the data from the ODOT website. The location at Sterns had four data points. One of the data points, this location was on Bagley just west of Sterns. One of the data points was collected during the detour showed almost a doubling of increase. H&TB's data at that location and our data at that location both had returned to a level closer to what it had been preconstruction. Our previous count 2018 is seven years old. Nobody it's not applicable to use traffic data seven years old except for looking at historical data. I think a lot has occurred in the last seven years in the country to affect traffic. Um we took the closest location with available data. I think we're looking for And if that's not acceptable, what should we be using? Because because the other data points aren't there. And when we're trying to do historical data, obviously the more data, the more reliable data you have provides a better analysis. We just take two random points. It's not as reliable as five data points or three data points. So that's why that section was was chosen. Can you state your name? Sorry, just I'm sorry. My name is Andy Comr with TMS Engineers. And I'd just like to clarify, we want to con confirm we can get the left in which is the safest movement and I think Mr. Sotch would agree the left out is the more problematic one which we are okay with not having so long as we have the right in right out and left in. Just left. Yes. Yes. Which we feel is a very reasonable compromise. Yes. All right board members. heard a lot of information here to hear your thoughts on it. Obviously, the planning uh the planning commission

has pulled together their their recommendations and many of those recommendations. Well, a few of those recommendations are being disputed and basically the development and township is asking for us to overturn some of those So to hear more information from the board members on on our approach forward with this I have a question question about the parking the overflow parking. I know the county has recommended removing it and using it for green space. Um if there's is there on street parking in the residential area? No, there is not. There's not. Okay. Um my second question then is there a possibility of doing any shared parking with like the other retail establishments around not in a formal on our site or on adjacent sites that well you have like the grocery store fast food restaurants they have plenty of parking typically in develop developments like this there's always plenty of parking like there's you know a lot of spaces that are vacant so or empty so is there a possibility that they some of those formally no practically I would say yes but we can't have our all of our tenants required to have protected areas associated with their respective parking so that way they can ensure their customers have spaces and we would prefer to segregate that if at all possible could our building commissioner speak to us I'm Justin building commissioner township so From my understanding, they do have shared parking throughout the uh site between their uh retail tenants already. Um I believe the township's understanding about having this parking

out here is to provide a more accessible location for members of the community to drive to park to utilize this passive uh open space. Um so that's the idea behind it. If you look at the site plan, you'll see that um the parking is pretty far away for the retail units to to that that point and so that's to help provide an area that residents can use uh furthermore with the residential aspect I believe um for parking of guests of those residential units as well um because it is located directly adjacent to that residential area. So I do feel that that's an important component um to be able to justify and utilize that wetland as a passive uh open space and I also feel it's a key component to the resurre Understand just from my perspective here seems to be adequate. put in more in my opinion is a lot more concrete components to that traffic situation as the question not to have that

I don't understand what's This map shows future that makes sense. Thank you. I was going to make a motion, not a just a just a couple questions. I mean, your success is going to be predicated on traffic management. No question. You can't get people in and If I lived back in the residential portion, I wouldn't want to be log jammed to get out in and out of my residential structure in terms of I agree with my colleague in terms of the uh softening of the side sidewalk recommendation and and need. But I but I really think traffic is going to be the challenge for the future. If this this is going to be as dynamic as the township and everyone suggests and you need, you need traffic. And so if you don't get that intersection right and upset everybody in the township and everybody that gets through that intersection, it's going to just reflect on the success of the of this uh development. The other question I had last is is the escrow of the of the Money. Is the township responsible for releasing that money? We we still are going to work that out with Mr. probably Mr. H. I don't know if he's talked to you about it, but uh we don't need too many people in hands on the tail. Somebody township our business people just work it out. No, it probably go with the township because there's three respon ultimately they're going to just consult with us and the county just needed clarification. And mayor, I would just add on the traffic. We agree with you and that's why we have been so diligent in our analysis of this intersection. Thank you. development agreement will allow that to be furthered

just to motion. I don't have an issue. So, the motion, just to be clear, what are we what are we what are you asking? [Laughter] It seems like there is uh there's some conditional approvals on a number of these items. I would just I mean we might want to break this into two Wesley since there is one that's recommending disapproval of those three criteria which it sounds like board sounds like they might want some flexibility in that and then the second one being conditional approval with the other pieces with all the staff reports on all other areas. I'm not sure Eric your thoughts or Tom can I say something again about the driveways? Like I said we're we're okay with the locations of the driveways. I don't know that this today what you're doing approval disapproval they will will have to get approval from the county for rightway prevent operating. So, we have I think we have some details to to flesh out here which I I was pretty confident we'll be able to do that. Y So, I just so you know that it's not like if if this is approved today, it's it's done. But we still have a long road. This is a preliminary plan. So any conditions that are outlined in here as conditional approval, they must be met before we can approve it. Right. So it's a directional appro I was going to say just just to also reiterate this I mean reading off the planning stipulations that's directly tied to our subdivision regulations. So, we're just focusing on that particular document. This what they're asking for

modifications for there's two things, right? It's the 20% open space and the sidewalks on both sides. So, we're just limiting it to that. I do agree with Mary. I think if you all okay with that, providing just um a motion for the modification piece and then we'll move into the the conditional. Mr. Chairman, could that could that particular motion include to keep the overflow parking? I don't see why could that be wrapped into that? If I may, maybe this will clarify according to 104.5 part B of our subdivision regulations and this is with respect to preliminary plan application. Just want to make clear um the board can approve the application as submitted, approve the application with specific conditions or modifications, disapprove the application, and a fourth option which I don't believe is being considered today is to table the application at the request of the applicant. I don't think that last one is on the table, pun intended, but I just want to give the board an outline of what the rule provides for and what its options are when presented with this kind of application. So, Mayor Jones, if you want to wrap all that into the motion, I don't see why that couldn't take place. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. But there's still So, in addition to um sort of onsite those amendments that might considered. Um would then a separate uh motion be made to allow for left turn access off of Sterns ultimately motion on that. Sounds like there's still conversation to be had on that you can approve that as part of the preliminary plat approval. We we still

we ultimately have to give them a permit to operate in our rightway and cut into our rightway. So that that's a whole separate procedure. And don't forget they have to get an easement for the driveway. So there's a whole uh Mr. Chairman I move to uh disapprove the conditions of the following conditions. So it is These were modifications were the first piece and so the other piece is all the conditional approval based on all the feedback on plan. I think maybe point to legal like is it a resolution number 2571 C A and then B. Is it does there need to be two separate motions or can they all be wrapped into one? I I my impression is I think it can be wrapped into one because the application itself is being considered right now. And so the board with respect to that preliminary plan application may approve it as submitted. That's option one. Option two is you can approve it with specific conditions or modifications which I believe the mayor. So I think we're clear on the preliminary plan was listed as a conditional approval. Right. However, the modification is where those three items come up. And so staff report and position was that it was disapproval. But It's the board's decision if there's a way to make those somehow conditional approval as well and work through those issues or then it's all one motion. Do we need to work through the language and maybe another item or just hammer this out? Um, Mr. Chairman, I'm I am willing to move on uh with the rest of the items and then come back to the direct language that we

would need. Um I am not in favor of tableabling. Yeah, I I'm in full agreement on that also. And I'm wondering if both Eric and Wesley can get together and incorporate those items within the motion so that we can take that item back up. Um so I'm just suggesting table the item for the moment so we can go through the remainder items and then they'll come back with the appropriate language. There's a question if I could maybe around this black a little bit. Uh motion to be made subject to the following three modifications. Open space, sidewalk removal, left turns. I think there's a little bit more detail. I appreciate it and I know you're an expert. We still have to do the development agreement on all the other, you know, the escrow curve cut. I I since I'm not the subject matter expert. So, um and I don't know m if yet if Mr. Angel is willing to sign off on sign off on the proposed modifications by Mr. Coin. just if I could like to just chat with him about what's being discussed to see if that is what in fact through you may like to present to the board for it. I think the board is in agreement that we'd like to get this packaged up here together. I'm suggesting table it for a moment. You guys go outside there, talk it through quickly and bring the information back to us so I can get through the remainder of board agenda items. Is that fair enough? Perhaps available to move it from the spot on its agenda right now and move it to the end of the

resolution. I'll second that. Okay. So, it's being moved to the last item on the agenda. So, with that being said, all those in favor? We can you guys work on that. Come. You got 15 minutes. I like your style. All right, we're gonna move on to the next item. Okay. View master plan 25. Uh Rachel Novak will be presenting this. She will be the lead planner on this project. I do know that we had anformational presentation by Kevin Tom. Give them the comments in our office or they can go to ours. So, we may not have time to have that, but we'll proceed with the action item. Turn it over to Rachel. Thank you. All right. I am going to keep this short and sweet. Um, so this is exciting. Hopefully, Mayor Burke, you should be excited as well. There's going to be a lot of collaboration, I think. Um, so we're requesting approval of the resolution authorizing us to enter in a professional planning service agreement with the village of Valley for a comprehensive master plan going. There we go. So sticky. It is. Oh no, Kevin. There we go. Okay. Uh, so bad's current master plan was adopted in 2000. So we're looking at a plan that's you know 25 years old basically um which is well beyond the normal lifespan of a typical master plan. Um so the document's outdated and thinking back to their application just some of the points that they had on it's outdated really no uh no longer reflects the religious strength because it's opportunities and their overall vision for the future. So that's really why they came to us and our agency hasn't had the opportunity to actually work with them um really in the past. So we're excited to get this opportunity to to work with the village value. uh one

of the things that was highlighted in their application was a really really collaborative engagement process is really going to be the core foundation of our efforts there in the village. So um some of the things that they talked about in their application as well um and ensure that uh the process is inclusive and equitable um throughout the entire project really making sure that there's a strong community vision established there and what's really great is that the village is offering to do kind of these community-led efforts. So essentially, in addition to some of the meetings that we already have planned and outlined within our own scope, they're going to be conducting their own efforts as well. We're really going to kind of piggyback off each other's um engagement efforts, going to different events. They're going to be hosting roundts, which we'll be in attendance for, and really making it as collaborative as possible, if it'll go right. So, some of the critical topics that they included in their application that we will definitely be diving into more deeply and we're going to be meeting with the project team here um hopefully by the end of the month to really flush out these uh kind of core topic areas in addition to others that will be included in kind of our current conditions analysis of the community. So, some of the things that they highlight of being a significant issues right now population shift so really the pop aging population um residents are getting older what does that look like multimodal transportation connectivity to local business and regional recreation parks. Those kind of go together. Obviously, they have great access to the Top Path Trail right there in Valley View and then also the National Park. And then also great connectivity hopefully in the future connecting folks from Valley View to Garfield Heights and some other communities um kind of surrounding Valley View and getting them to those regional assets. Um Valley View is such an interesting kind of dichotomy between residential and industrial um type uses. So land use regarding housing and industrial expansion, what does that look like? So I think it's going to be really interesting to take a deep dive into land use in particular. And then lastly, community infrastructure. So what we are uh we're requesting approval of that professional planning services agreement with the village of

Valley. Total contract costs we're estimating to be about $120,000. 96,000 of that will be in kind village contribution not to exceed $24,000. We estimate work to be completed by the end of October of next year. Thanks Rachel. Any questions for Rachel? Seeing none, I'm going to make a motion to approve uh the village of Valley View's master plan. Second, second by Mayor Kurts. Any other further comments, questions? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. Opposed, that motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Orange Village way finding and trails planing. Uh Paul Triolo would be the project lead, but he is out of the office today. So, thank you for stepping up. Yes, thank you. So here to um request approval for resolution number 25507-e for the county planning commission to special planning service agreement with Orange Village for the planning and trails. Um so over the past few years of Orange has developed a recreational trail network to connect their neighborhood residential area with community assets such as Pine Crest. Um and then throughout through this project they're looking to improve that connectivity with those assets um just by enhancing their way finding system. So what that we would do would include inventorying what exists now trails signs destinations what are the best practices going forward developing sign topologies for them and then recommending where significations could go and where trail connectivity improvements could happen in the village. Um so along with this uh be very heavy on engagement. So we're looking to build off of the Orange Village community survey that was completed last year. Um in that survey 70% of residents or respondents noted that having um trails was very important to them. And then also with this engagement

talking with adjacent communities such as Pepper Pike, Warrenville Heights, Solen, Mullen Hills, High Hills, Woodmir about trail development in their communities as well. They're doing Orange Village community committees informed as a result of the community survey. So like a parks recreation committee that we would be interested speaking with um and holding open houses with the public and other community events. So once again requesting approval for professional planning services with the village. Uh total cost of 75,000 60 of that is in kind 15,000 um contributed by the village and work is anticipated to wrap up next. Thank you. Thanks Luke. Appreciate it. Any comments or questions from the group? Seeing none, I'll make a motion to approve this planning and service agreement with with village of Orange. Is there a second? Second, Mayor Burke. Further comments, questions. Seeing none, all those in favor say I. Thank you. Bedford master plan. Thank you. Patrick is stepping in for Alex Long who will be managing this project. Thank you for stepping up. Absolutely. I look forward to seeing these slides. Um my name is Patrick Hen. I'm a planning manager with the county planning commission. Today we're requesting approval for the resolution 2550710F entering into a professional planning services agreement with the city of Bedford uh for a master plan. Uh Bedford's current master plan was completed in 2007. It's one of the few communities for whom we have not done uh any work through our community planning services program recently. Although the city has accomplished many of its goals outlined in the existing plan, there are others uh that are outdated uh or that need to be reworked. The new master plan will have a heavy focus on land use and redevelopment. There's a significant amount of land that the city of Bedford

owns and that is available for strategic redevelopment. Uh this plan will incorporate extensive community engagement and that will help inform the plan strategy and the desired outcomes as well. Uh we are requesting approval of a professional planning services agreement with the city of Bedford. The total contract for this master plan will be $150,000. That'll be $135,000 in kind and we're requesting a contribution of $15,000 for the village. We estimate that this work will be completed by December 31st, 2026. Thank you. Any questions? I'll make a motion to approve the uh the planning and services agreement with the city of Bford. Second by Mayor Any other further comments, questions? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. Those opposed. That motion carries. Move into the next item. Information on presentation. I think we're going to hold off. That's okay, Kevin. Uh, we did have a presentation on the data book um that we talked about the last meeting. Um, maybe if you want to can we get to your last slide just on the the viewer. I do have two copies too in the office if anybody wants one. But one of the pieces that the team's been working on since we talked about was building an online portal. Oh, thank you. Uh an online portal for the same data so that if you didn't want to have to run through a report or look at something online, they've been working hard on that. So, um that will be coming to you and we'll make sure once it's live, we'll send you a link for that. So, um data book viewer so you can pick want to explain quickly. So, in addition to our print data book, do you want to pass this around? Yep. Um This year we have an interactive version of the data book there. It has all the same maps that are in the document in an online interactive clickable way. The layer up there shows the number of

commuters example. If you click on any one of those, you also get all of the details for each of the fact and also create a printable export on our website. Our print document, the graph data book and then a few other products more data in more depth. spreadsheet available services. Thank you, Kevin. Sorry for the very abbreviated presentation. Any questions on I know it's good stuff too. Yeah. So, and you know, part of the strategy for putting the township in the middle of the agenda was so that we didn't lose quorum to have a vote on it. And unfortunately, we're still talking eight hours. So, my apologies for a long agenda and a long longer meeting than usual. But, I'll be very brief and then I think maybe we take a bio break and let them come back and that way everyone has a little stretch. Um, but just a few updates. So, we are currently starting the 2026 2027 bianial budget planning uh with OBM. So, we've received some initial numbers and we have a meeting later this month with OBM to talk through what um where we are currently and what our needs are for the future banual budget. So, um that is underway. And then in addition to kind of we've turned over if you remember our conversation with the healthy urban tree canopy program administration that that is now with soil and water um and department of sustainability but we are helping with the application review uh that came in all the proc all the applications were due I think last week but so we're helping them with the

review just because we've been working on it for so many years to lend our insights on that. Um again coming forward to you hopefully in the future months uh can continue to work on updates of our policies and procedures. Uh we kind of got behind on that last year just given all the different um activity that was happening, but we want to pick that back up. And then recently we had some of our team members volunteer at the Cleveland Food Bank. We're trying to do more things of team building and getting out in the community. And so that's just a picture of us recently going there and um it's always great to give back and so it was a really good experience and we hope to do more things like that. Um, August as of now is a regular meeting, but we've had multiple meetings back to back going for, you know, since the last several months. So, thank you for that. Uh, if we don't have any action items, we may not need to meet in August. And so, if anything comes up, I'll let you know. But at this time, I I don't have anything uh immediate, but we'll see and I'll be in touch with you about that one. Okay. Thanks, Mary. Appreciate it. Um, I don't know if somebody go want to get a quick break and we'll check on maybe somebody check them. I don't even know if I'm on a break. Okay, I I have to take a break personally. I'll be back. Thanks, guys. Yeah, we'll try to That's why I didn't want to Skip. They got 30 seconds. Are you

Do you know? Do you know for a while? because there's people Oh, yeah. or Why would you know? That's where

I think based on the conversation that took place, I think Eric's gonna recommend language and then someone Yeah, absolutely. Um, okay. So, based on our conversation, I I do believe that we are looking for a motion to approve the requested modifications as well as the site plan as presented subject to all agency conditions except for planning conditions lettered A, B, and C. So moved. I'll second over here for Mayor Gallow. Any other further comment or question from members? All right. See none. All those in favor say I. I. That motion carries. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Do we have any old business? I'm going to make a motion to meeting. All those in. Thank you everybody. Have a great day.