Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I would call this meeting to order. This is the Industrial Design Subcommittee, and it is Monday, August 24th, 6.45 p.m. Mr. Sugar, would you like to do the roll call?

Yes, thank you.

Mr. Workley? Here. Ms. Marzullo? Here. Mr. Inamato?

Here. Okay, then, Nick, can you present the first applicant?

Yes. We have one case tonight for the Industrial Design Subcommittee. it's a proposed daycare and it would be located at the corner of west reedsboro street and terex this was before the planning commission for for concept site plan review back in march and april but obviously first time the design was before this subcommittee we had issued some a staff memo last week and if you receive that email the applicant has revised the design we'll happy to turn over the applicant though I just wanted to note a few of the of the changes relative to the staff comments there is a now there now is a revised hip roof they removed the stucco exterior building materials and it's gone to predominantly brick and Hardy now The signage has been reduced, though that would be a separate application, though it is appropriate to review the sign banding on the, where it's gonna be located on the building right now. And the trash enclosures have been revised to brick. And I have the updates, and there's a hard copy in front of you. And I can turn it over to the applicant for some background, an intro. So you have about five minutes.

I WANTED TO SAY OVERVIEW, EVERYTHING THAT NICK SAID, WE DID MORE OF A TRADITIONAL INSPIRED AFTER THE STAFF COMMENTS. Multiple gabled roofs, varied roof lines, horizontal siding, brick masonry at the base. We did remove the columns that was in the comment, which was an important item. And we have accent awnings. And one of the questions particularly to answer on that was they are not glossy. They're more of a satin finish on the orange awnings. to answer that question. We do understand the importance of this location as a gateway to the city and as part of District 6. We are continuing efforts to incorporate comments that we receive and look forward to your feedback on our latest drawing. And you're here to answer questions.

Thank you. Ms. Marzullo, would you like to have any questions?

I just say I certainly appreciate the dramatic renovation, which definitely is more in keeping. I did have a couple of questions with smaller. I think that since you changed the columns, is the width of those, what are they wrapped?

The entryway columns here?

Yeah, not the brick ones on the east. Oh, I see. Under the awnings. They just look a little... Have it on the screen here, Kim, if you want.

Oh, okay. He did not call those... Are they metal or are they wood? I don't know.

And on the cupola, over the front entrance, which you can see, is there any punched opening? Is it any clear glass on that or skyline top? Or is it just a solid?

Solid.

And then?

And I apologize. If you go back to the column, I'll get more detail on the column. OK. The width. The width. I don't. The detail is not on here.

I know that's a separate application on the signage, but great job on changing the building part. And I know this is your logo, but do you have a... Is there any more sophisticated or toned down version of your... They do not.

Because that's the... columns and the elephant are part of their national brand. So that's not the answer that you want to hear. We did remove the columns. I mean, it's a happy elephant. It's a happy... Bubbles is the elephant's name.

Yes. It's a separate application, but I still... It's just...

You don't like it, which is fair.

It's shocking compared to what...

Okay, okay.

And I just thought maybe you'd have like a black and white version or something.

More subdued. I can ask. I think the answer is no, but I will ask if we have it.

Otherwise, I think... On the doors, they look like... Are they metal doors? I'm sorry, I didn't check on the keys.

Let's see if we... He did... Resident he wrote out residential of Anderson like Anderson brand.

I don't know if you put the type Measure the columns at six inches It's on the morning, so I.

Thank you, Nick. That's okay.

Okay, Mr. Workley.

Yeah, I'm fine with the awning columns. I think those look proportionate to the structure it's holding up. I'm actually okay with the signage, you know, now that it's just text and the image. I don't think that's a huge issue. Do you know if it's, there were, it looks like there's corner boards in some areas but not in others, or maybe that's a downspout, but will there be corner boards on all the corners?

I had that in my notes, too. The projections do not show the quarter.

We will call that out, what the answer is.

Even if it's, you know, a color change in the same facade, if you still have a corner board on like in this elevation, the brown elements, yeah, like as if they did come out, I think they're flush. Yeah, I think they're flush. But if you have corner boards on the brown elements and then the white is regular and has corner boards on this when it returns, I think would make it stand out a little bit better.

Okay. WE CAN CALL THAT OUT TOO ON OUR UPDATED.

I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM ON THE TWO FRONT ENTRANCE COLUMNS OF HAVING SIDING ON THE TOP OF THAT SO IT'S JUST CONSISTENT BRICK AROUND THE BOTTOM. THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE WHERE THE BRICK GOES UP. YOU'RE OKAY WITH IT BEING CONSISTENT. AS LONG AS IT'S THE DARK NOT THE LIGHT COLOR. I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT COLOR. WITH THE BLACK BACKGROUND AND MATCH THE DARKER VERSUS BEING WHITE WHERE IT WOULD STAND OUT MORE WOULD BE BETTER. I'M OKAY WITH IT BEING CONSISTENT BASELINE OF THE BRICK AROUND.

THAT'S THE BASE BORDER. OKAY.

OKAY. IT LOOKS FINE TO ME. AGAIN, CORNER BOARD IS ON IT TOO. I THINK THAT'S ALL I GOT.

JOHN, SHOULD WE ASK THAT THESE extend out like six inches, those, to give it a little depth and align with our other.

I think if the corner boards happen, that will give it enough, it'll look like it's, you know, an element versus trying to make a depth to it that's just gonna cause more potential water problems.

And I apologize, I did ask, currently, He has four, which may not be in the detail, four inches. Okay, perfect, so it does come out, okay. That was his answer, but do you prefer six?

The corner board width? Or this, those come out four inches? Okay.

Again, sorry for the quick turnaround, some of the details, yeah.

No, four inches is fine. Four inches probably works better with the brick versus six, so.

Okay, four inches, okay, perfect. WHAT WOULD YOU PREFER IF IT'S NOT?

I'M FINE WITH THAT BRICK IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT IT TO BE. BUT I'M JUST SAYING IF YOU NEED TO CHANGE IT TO SIDING IT CAN BE THE SIDING AND MATCHES THE REST OF THE BUILDING IS ALL I'M SAYING. I JUST WASN'T SURE IF IT WAS STRUCTURAL AND NEEDED TO BE THE MAZONRY.

OKAY. AS FAR AS I KNOW, NO. BUT I WILL ASK. OKAY.

Okay, thank you. I also am glad that you did change the design somewhat and lost the stucco. I am also would like to see the sign, the logo be a little more subdued just to fit in with the character of the surrounding buildings and character of Hudson. I appreciate it's your logo, but it's pretty bright. If you could consider toning that down, that would be good. Was there any consideration to letting the brick just do the two elevations of brick along 303 and Terex? It wouldn't be a great amount of brick, but was that something you would ever consider?

I think he was trying to make it fit in more with, have both have the bricks be like the base, so the base of the, I know what he was thinking when he was trying to do this, versus all siding or all brick to make it more, I can't think of another word other than a little more interesting to break it up. On the brick, are you thinking which sides?

Oh, I would say the long 303 and Terex. You're an architect. I mean, what do you think?

Well, I don't know how he would turn the corner. I think it would look, and plus the way he's got it detailed for the pop-outs now, it kind of doesn't make sense if the brick isn't there. So I think having the brick be consistent all the way around kind of makes more sense for for adaptability, because you are gonna see the third side as you're approaching as well. Okay.

I don't know what the cost is for that, but I know that would be greatly, I would imagine everyone would prefer that if that's a possibility.

Well, there was a lot more brick on the last one, so.

Yes, okay.

All facade of one area was brick before. So the brick size is down a lot. But yeah, we definitely appreciate this design much better.

Yes, this is much improved. I guess if the committee seems to be fine with the orange awnings, I'll...

I'm not, but I can't really... What is your opinion on that?

I would prefer to see those a little more subdued, but... I don't know how everyone else feels about it.

I guess to ask on the signage, are you concerned because there's a bunch of different colors in the letters? Yes. If the lettering was all consistent one color, would that be better?

That would help. Okay. I don't know if there needs to be a sign on every side, every elevation. I think you have two on the building. It's just two.

Two, just two.

You're allowed to, because it's a corner on two main roads, so they are allowed to, but one of them has to be a little smaller than the other.

And have, we've reduced, correct, Nick, on, have we reduced the one on the front of the building?

Yeah, I didn't measure. It looks like they were reduced, but I didn't.

Okay.

the measurement.

It's not by much if I'm looking at it. You can't visually tell. Okay. Currently.

Okay. That's all I have.

Were those fabric awnings?

They're vinyl, they're a satin. I've seen them in person and they're not. One of the questions was if they're... Like if they're glossy? Yeah, they're not glossy. They're like a subdued satin. I saw them at the new school that we have in Colorado Springs. So they're not shiny. They look like a woven fabric? Yeah, and I can bring, if you would like a sample or have a sample brought so you could see it.

THAT COULD BE A CONDITION IF YOU WANT TO VERIFY THAT THEY HAVE US VERIFY THE FABRIC AWNINGS. IT WILL BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF AND WE COULD PROVIDE THAT.

COULD THAT BE DONE IN BETWEEN MEETINGS?

IF THEY'RE OKAY WITH IT, THAT COULD BE A CONDITION OF THEIR RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. YOU WOULD SUBMIT THAT TO ME AND I WOULD VERIFY THAT MATERIAL. THAT'S FINE.

And that's all I have. I don't know if there's anything else.

I did want to just call out on that. In the gable, it's like those are probably hardy shingle rather than... Oh, yes.

Oh, here? It's like a shake. Oh, here?

Right up. I mean, yeah, shingle shake. And the other two, I think, have the same.

It's hardy.

Okay. Okay. As an accent, I think I'm okay with that.

That would normally be like a vent. That makes sense.

I just wanted to note that. Okay.

Is there anything else you had to offer? No. Okay. Any discussion or motion?

I'm good, I'll make a motion.

Okay. Sure. I'll make a motion to approve with requesting that staff confirm and coordinate the corner boards, the satin finish or flat finish of the awnings, the size of the columns, and material of the columns, and then the front elevation size of the sign, and then coordinate if the sign can be monotone color. Subdued? Yeah. Is that everything?

You read that one more time, I'm sorry.

Confirm the- Confirm with staff the corner boards, the satin finish or flat finish on the awnings, the size of the awnings, the material of the awning, columns themselves, and the size of the signage as well as the, if it can be a monotone color of text.

Can I add, can we add confirm fabric awnings? And confirm the fabric of the awning.

And finish. And I think in the detail it says vinyl. It has the actual product somewhere on here, but I'll get a sample.

Just double checking my notes.

502 vinyl.

Okay, that's all I had.

Is there any consideration for going all brick?

I think it should be consistent. I think it should be consistent.

Okay. Could we also add, sorry, for the corner boards, applicants to verify the four-inch projection?

It's shown in the plan.

Is it on the floor plan? Yeah, it's on the floor. All right, sorry, okay.

Do we want to say anything about the columns option, the two front columns, brick versus siding, just to be in the motion so you can approve it if they come back?

You were talking about these columns in the front here? You would do siding or like a wood ramp?

Like the rest of the siding, yeah.

these columns yes this would be brick or like a big theater all right well let's leave it out then okay yeah it becomes we could look at both we we try both and see what all right that's that's the end of the motion then a second what are you doing second okay then uh

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion is passed. Thank you. Thank you.

See how this has like an end stop corner board to the siding? There aren't any on the rest of these. So they've got one there and one there and then we don't show anywhere else. All the corners have them. I think they just missed it. if I wanted to make sure it was noted. So that would be what material then?

It would be the same as the siding, just a vertical wrap corner. And it would be the same color. OK.

Drawing it in. Yeah. Thanks for help, Nick. Yep, thank you. OK.

Have fun in your next one.

I'll reconvene at 7.30.

Much crazy color.

Good evening. It's now 7.30. We're going to call to order the meeting for planning commission. And everybody's going to be nice to me because I have never led a meeting, but I have a gavel. So we do have quorum. So city staff, we have Chris Thomas. Greg Cannon is not present, but we do have Nick Sugar.

Mr. Hannon will be joining us. Okay, great.

Will you please go ahead and take roll?

Yes. Mr. Inamorato? Here. Ms. McCoy?

Here.

Mr. Nystrom? Here. Ms. Hilbert?

Here. All right. At this point, we're going to swear in anybody who would like to deliver a comment or testimony to Planning Commission tonight. So please stand and raise your right hand. And do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give tonight will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth under the penalties of perjury? If so, please say I do. I do. Thank you. Please be sure to write your name on the sign-in sheet there for our notes so that we have your name spelled correctly. And when you come to the stand, you'll identify yourself and your address, please. All right. We're going to start with the approval of our previous meeting minutes from July 13th, 2026. Do any commissioners have any reviews to make a comment on? Mm-hmm.

Just grammar error on page five. Should be to approve, not to approved.

Okay. Do we have to make a motion to approve those then? Yes. Okay.

Yep. Motion to approve with the one change. I'll second.

All in favor? End of discussion. Anything else? No.

I'll take a roll.

Thank you.

Ms. McCoy?

Yes.

Mr. Inamorato? Yes. Mr. Nystrom? Yes. Ms. Obert?

Yes. Next up is the minutes from our previous joint council session and workshop that was on August 10th of 2026. Any discussion or corrections to be made there?

I had one comment in the section for the request for qualifications. We did have a discussion about submitting a conceptual design as part of the qualification. IN THE MINUTES? IN THE DISCUSSION. YES. CAN YOU SAY THAT AGAIN? THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT WITH THE INCLUDING IN THE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS THAT WE ASK THEM TO SUBMIT A CONCEPTUAL DESIGN. OK. WE CAN PUT THAT IN. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

ON PAGE 2. OK. Any further comments?

I'll make a motion to approve with that single change.

I'll second.

OK.

I can take roll. Ms. McCoy?

Yes.

Ms. Obert?

Yes.

Mr. Inamorato? Yes. Mr. Nystrom? Yes.

Okay, great. At this time, it's time for public discussion. So we have two public hearings this evening on our agenda, one for application for the daycare and a townhome review. But if you have comments on any other items not on our agenda this evening, this is the time for your public speaking. Does anybody have comments? Please come forward. She has five minutes, correct? Thank you. Hi.

My name is Melissa Jones. I reside at 2233 Ravenna Street here in Hudson, and I will be far less than five minutes. I am just taking this opportunity to address an issue that involves planning commission. It is the proposed settlement agreement between the city and and the various parties involved in the Canterbury Crossings proposed development on Ravenna Street to which I am a adjacent property owner to the northwest side. So, you know, my very initial comments are, There is a plan, which it appears to be substantially identical to the plan that Prestige submitted to this planning commission back in September, to which both the planning commission and the city raised various issues. However, from what I can see, it appears that this plan just takes those proposed plans and says this is what the project is going to be. The proposed settlement also eliminates the Planning Commission entirely and essentially gives the City Manager full authority and discretion to make all decisions regarding the development. There is no opportunity for public comment or input. It completely circumvents the LDC and it begs the question why do we even have a Planning Commission if An unhappy party can simply raise a litigation issue and then create the settlement that they want with the city under the pretense of avoiding legal fees. Either way, there's going to be legal fees, so I just want it to be known that there are various issues and concerns raised by many neighbors to this proposed settlement agreement. Thank you. Thank you.

Anyone else have public comment for any items not on our agenda this evening? Okay, seeing none, we're going to move on to correspondence. Do any members of the commission have any comments or public correspondence to share? Okay, the only thing that I wanted to talk about publicly was our joint meeting with city council, and that was to ask a couple questions of staff. During that meeting, we had talked about there's a traffic survey, I think that was done in the last six months in regards to Clinton Street Crossing, and I think we talked about that being made available. Do we know when we will have a copy of that?

No, but we can make that available. Yeah, that was a, it was a TMS engineers has run numbers for the proposed uses and given us traffic data on that.

Okay, and then secondly was the pattern book potential. I know we were gonna have some examples. Do we have those made available for the commission?

We just put those together and we'll be sending those out.

Okay, great. And then last for public record, do we know when the final plan will be available for the public to view and planning commission can put their eyes on that? Do we know when that final plan will be selected yet?

We had that on the website. I'll just double check that it's there. We had the public meeting on Saturday. It was outdoors. The rain out? Yes, the rain out. And it was available then. I'll just make sure it's still up.

Okay, great. And then last but not least, this planning commission approved and saw the application process for the all-inclusive playground, which had recently had their ribbon cutting. And I just, as a commission, wanted to congratulate them on their successful completion of that project. I know it's a meaningful one for our community, so... Good job everybody up here that that that was one of those projects that got done and they are all happy and playing on it I got several text messages over the last few days of friends that were there and said it's a great playground Okay, excellent All right, we're going to move on to old business, which I don't think we have any I Okay, so moving on to new business and our first public hearing, PC2026-916, the site plan and conditional use request for the daycare. Nick, I'll go ahead and let you start. Yes, thank you.

I can provide orientation. So this is an application from Crosslands Companies. proposing a 10,000 square foot daycare center building. It's called the Learning Experience. It's located at the southwest corner of Terex Road and West Streetsboro Street. And here's a overhead map views to get your bearings. It's located in District 6, which is the Western Hudson Gateway. And the property is approximately 2.7 acres in size. This request would require a conditional use review, which is a public hearing, just of note, and a major site plan review. Of note, the major site plan review is not technically a public hearing, though this is a combined application, so we're having a public hearing for the project. The Planning Commission held the concept site plan review for this proposal at the regular meetings of March 9th and April 13th. So this is the formal submittal. And there were 13 items from the PC, from the concept review, and I can just very quickly, those are on pages two and three. We had some responses to those, the applicant had some responses. And the first was related to the conditional use application, the Planning Commission requested that we include both the requirements for the daycare center use and the preschool use. And we have done so. Of note, Playground has been expanded to 6,000 square feet to meet those requirements. That was in, I believe, the preschool requirement, but not the daycare. That was flagged during the initial review. So that item had been resolved. Planning Commission had asked the applicant to further Reduce wetland and tree impacts. We do have notes from the city arborist in the staff report, and the wetland impacts have been reduced to the southern boundary wetland, which is called Wetland A on the plans. I mentioned the arborist. I have some recommendations there. That's item three. Item 4 is updated approvals from the Army Corps of Engineers. There are updated letters from the applicant and their wetland consultants. The wetlands have been confirmed to be Category 1 on-site, and they are still under their previous Army Corps of Engineers nationwide permit for the fill of those Category 1 wetlands. Stormwater. designed to be finalized with the assistant city engineer. He has reviewed and has provided a review letter. He is present if there are any questions related to stormwater. Site plan to include additional parking spaces to meet the minimum number. Those have been revised and expanded to the required 45 feet, 45 spaces, excuse me. We talked about traffic, the final traffic impact study to be reviewed further by the assistant city engineer and to make recommendation on the modifying that existing turn lane south. The assistant city engineer has reviewed that and accepted the study and the proposal does include restriping the southbound lane to include a turn lane into the property. The assistant city engineer recommends this IN PLACE OF THE ADDITIONAL ROADWAY. WE TALKED ABOUT COULD YOU EXPAND THE ROADWAY TO THE SOUTH, BUT HE HAS RECOMMENDED WHAT'S PROPOSED. WE HAVE MINOR ITEMS FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL IN A LETTER DATED APRIL 7TH. THERE ARE FIXTURES THAT DO NEED TO BE REDUCED FOR THEIR LIGHTING LEVELS ON THE BUILDING, WHICH IS A MINOR ITEM THAT CAN BE CORRECTED. One of the items was for the building to be reviewed by the Industrial Design Subcommittee. They have reviewed prior, or just prior to this meeting, you have an update in front of you to the design that the applicant submitted in response to the staff comments. So the Industrial Design Subcommittee is recommending approval with minor comments to ONE, ADD CORNER BOARDS TO THE PROJECTIONS.

WHICH PAGE IS THAT ON THE NEW DRAWINGS?

I'M SORRY. LET ME PULL THOSE UP. THIS IS MORE HELPFUL. ONE WOULD BE TO ADD CORNER BOARDS TO THESE 4-INCH PROJECTIONS TO MATCH THE REST OF THE BUILDING. REVISE THE SIGN TO HAVE A MONOTONE SIGN COLOR. THERE ARE MANY COLORS AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SIGN CURRENTLY. THREE WOULD BE TO REGARDING THESE FABRIC AWNINGS TO SUBMIT TO STAFF THE SPECS FOR THE AWNINGS TO CONFIRM THAT THEY ARE FABRIC AND NOT GLOSSY. That's all I had. If Mr. Inamorato, if you had anything else, please feel free to jump in.

That was it.

This would be with also accepting the new revised design, obviously, that is in front of you.

And number 11, is the next one on the list?

Yes, thank you. Parking to be located the side or rear, we're still requesting additional landscaping that would be along Terex to meet this requirement. Sidewalk extensions have been depicted. That was number 12 along West 303 and Terex along the property frontage. And provide specs for the playground equipment. Those have been submitted as well. So we are recommending approval with comments on page 15 with a couple corrections or additions. One would be under 4B, that would be to relocate, we originally had relocate the proposed street trees to be within the city right of way. The applicant has responded with difficulty doing such and the arborist has reviewed since the staff report went out and is in favor of moving the trees to within the right of way. They would still be along the street in frontage but they would be located on private property. that in the past when there are things like stormwater ponds and that in the front yard. So he is okay with that.

For clarification, is that on Terex or on 303?

That would be on 303, 303, excuse me. Okay. And then the second was regarding, there's a large 48-inch oak. It should be in the staff report here. That picture, it's figure three. That's on page 11. The arborist had reviewed further, and he's recommending that the applicant hire a consulting arborist to develop a specific tree preservation plan for that tree, because it's very significant. and follow those recommendations to ensure that that tree has a chance of survival. One other update I have is number six. WE WERE REQUESTING CERTIFICATION LICENSING FROM THE STATE OF OHIO TO BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE ISSUES OF A ZONING CERTIFICATE. THE APPLICANT CAN SPEAK FURTHER TO THIS BUT THEY HAVE RESPONDED THAT HOW THE STATE WORKS IS THAT THEY NEED A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY BEFORE THAT IS GIVEN TO THEM. SO THEY NEED THE ZONING PERMIT BEFORE THE STATE APPROVES. The Planning Commission could revise that to just state certification licensing from the state of Ohio shall be submitted, and we would track that as staff. That's all I have for my update. I can turn it over to the applicant for their introduction.

Good evening. Welcome back. Please state your name and address, and we have 30 minutes for your presentation.

Perfect. Kim Tatch, Crossland Companies, 9635 Maroon Circle, Suite 125, Englewood, Colorado, 80112. And I'm co-presenting with Jeff Jardine.

Jeff Jardine, the Riverstone Company, 3800 Lakeside Avenue, Suite 100, Cleveland, Ohio, 44114. Thank you.

Perfect, we understand that you have a time constraint and a hard stop for the meeting this evening, and so I told Nick we would just jump into answering questions. Thank you for all your comments from the last two concept review. We've tried to incorporate everything, as Nick pointed out, and make changes. and are looking forward to any other further recommendations or comments. We are in favor of the recommendations on page 15, and to Nick's point, with further clarification from the commissioners on particularly number two, number four, which Nick started to answer, and then six we can further clarify. and then the others I think are pretty self-explanatory, and we're here to answer questions that the commissioners have.

Okay, just to clarify, you're asking for further revision or further explanation for four, six, and which number?

Two. Two, four, and six. Okay. And I think six, Nick, covered just the... Certification. Yeah, certification that we've... I think there's... Uh, we definitely have the land use approval with the conditional use, and then the state does the licensing, which, which TLE and the canes would be a part of after, and they can't start that until we have a certificate of occupancy. So it's too, I just wanted to clarify that there's two different certifications, um, which may not be totally clear in number six. And I think most of the questions as far as clarifications that we maybe need are with landscaping and screening. Just more clarification on that to get your feedback on that. And then Nick was going to pull up. Nick, if you could see 3.01. Maybe that's the, is that the one? Yes. Okay.

And it's hard, it's a little bit hard to see on this. We have been seeing.

Oh, if you need a microphone.

Sorry, okay.

And I can stay, I can, Nick, I can stay right here. You can start there. Okay, on the north,

Okay, Vanna is coming up, gonna help you out here.

Yes, okay, there we go. Okay, we have fencing going all the way down, and so to get your feedback on that, which is needed for TLE, it's a six foot vinyl fence for the children if needed to exit along the sidewalk and then into the parking lot and or playground. At the top we have the railing. We only need it to go to the second classroom. We can shorten the fence as it continues out or we don't have to have the fence as farther down. Or we can change it to wrought iron. I just wasn't clear on if you need the fence as for barrier or if It's okay. Yeah, we just want your feedback on that. It's in our drawing, but I know we've talked about fence and barriers.

So you're asking if... Are you asking that you want to step down the fence? Yes.

We're asking that we don't need all of the fence unless...

We do not require the fence along the building.

Okay. We only needed about after the second entrance door.

Where the door is, what you're saying?

Yeah.

Okay.

So you're creating a hallway of fence, basically.

Exactly. Thank you. Well said. Okay.

I'm trying to get this to pull up so I can see it closer and it's not loading.

Because we also have, and that kind of ties into the comment on with the landscape, additional landscaping. So maybe with additional landscaping, we don't need the additional fence, that could be. And that was it, and we can open it up to questions.

I can clarify the second item, which is to revise the landscaping plan to screen the parking area to permit parking in the front yard. So on page 9, that code section is 1205.09E9, and it states off-street parking should be located at the rear side of the buildings. Parking may be located in the building's front yard if limited to 25% of the off-street parking. There is no maximum amount of parking in the building front yard if the parking is screened. with trees and are mounding in addition to parking lot perimeter landscaping. So we have the majority of the parking located along Tarex, which would be the front yard. So we do need to see some substantial landscaping for that to occur based on that requirement.

Just one quick note on that. So because of the changes to the site to save some more of the trees along Terex and give them the tree preservation, we obviously we shifted the parking over away from the roadway. What I actually did is it allows us to get down to match more of the existing grades. We're saving some more of the wetlands and preserving a little bit more of the existing grade out there. But what that does is on the southern end, that existing parking lot is going to be about three or four feet lower than the road already. As you go to the north, it gets closer to being even with the road, but it's still going to be about a foot below the road at that point in time. So, you know, I know the code says and or mounding. Mounding does not seem to make sense at that point in time. So, you know, we would anticipate probably just doing some extra landscaping because if we're already below grade, to get something up higher above the road grade would actually impact more land than if we were just doing some landscaping along the parking over there.

Is that all for your comments?

Yes. Okay.

All right. And any initial comments or questions from the commission then regarding the application? I'll start with you. You're the first victim.

All right. I remember the last time around we we mentioned the potential pre-existing 12-inch HDP storm crisscrossing the site. And we asked for some investigation into that and confirmation whether or not that was live. What did you find out?

So at this point in time, there's actually no record other than the GIS that shows that it's there. So we do have notes when they're actually doing excavation out there. to locate it, if it's where it's supposed to be, it'll be going through the building, so they'll find it one way or another. We do have a plan where we would be able to relocate it, but we want to find it first and actually get some good elevations on it if it is there. I know I talked with the city engineer on that one, He didn't find anything in the records, so.

You think it was worth going to take a backhoe and just do a couple of test holes to find out?

I'd love to do that, but it's kind of a protected site, obviously with the wetlands and everything. So, you know, we don't want to disturb too much before we actually you know, get to go ahead and move out there.

There was a house there before that was demolished, so I don't think you're going to worry about disturbing anything. The wetlands don't encompass the entire site, so you could have found a spot. My question then, if we don't know whether it's live, we don't know if there's flowing water, we don't have a clue. Did you size the basins to accommodate the maximum flow that could occur from that line?

No, because we would bypass the basins. We would pick that up with an independent storm sewer and take it back out towards Streetsboro where it currently goes. It would not pass through our basin as stormwater would be going through our site that is confined. So we would have the ability to bypass our system. So it's not actually going into our detention system. If it went into our detention system, It requires us then to start sizing for that, not only for detention, but also for water quality. And that would actually probably exponentially grow the size of that detention basin. So we have the ability to bypass that.

So you said you have a plan for it. Where's the plan?

I say that it's in our back pocket because if we put it on the plan for sure, everybody is looking to do that. If we don't have to do that, if it's not located, then we have to make those adjustments. But right now, we have a plan that if it is located, we are able to bypass our system with that.

But if it's located and you need to bypass it, we need to know where it's running. We've got a site plan here to approve. We've got landscaping plan here to approve. We've got existing trees to be protected to approve. I'd like to know what the plan and location layout would be.

Okay, we can provide that to the city as our backup plan. But right now it would be intended to continue to go. We would actually cap it just before it goes underneath the building and then run it north along the building directly out to the drainage ditch along Streetsboro, if it is found. Again, we did do a survey out there, and we didn't locate.

So you run a 90 from when it crosses the Terex up towards 303?

No, we would capture it just before it goes underneath the building. We would leave it underneath the parking lot. We would capture it. At that point, we would run north towards the drainage ditch along Streetsboro Road.

Again, we don't know what the invert elevation is of the existing 12-inch.

No, but based off of our survey locating things out along Streetsboro Road there, we did not find that. So if it is below ground, it's not going into anything because the only storm sewer along Streetsboro along our property is the headwall on the western end. So we did not find that invert in the ditch. So... If it is draining and it's not draining into the ditch, then it's going to a storm sewer that we don't know about either. So we would have to do some additional investigation once it is exposed.

I just really wish we would have had that like we'd previously asked. Another question, did you perform any soil borings?

Do you not have the geotech, I apologize, do you not have the geotech report?

You don't have it yet. You don't have it performed. You don't, you didn't bring it with you. What do you mean?

Can you speak real quick?

Yeah. You know what? There was solar borings done, because our survey did pick up the boring locations. Yeah. That's the second project. So I don't know, maybe it did not get uploaded, but there were solar borings done, so we can provide that information to the city.

I'm pretty sure we requested a copy of those last time you were here.

I didn't see it in the conditions of approval, and it I don't believe it is a requirement under the submittal requirements.

Because I remember comments that we asked that it was discussed before, but I don't remember seeing a report.

Okay. I will check on that. Okay.

Thank you. Did you do an earthwork cut and fill? Does this site balance?

It is not balanced. The way we currently have it graded is actually, I believe, is a fill site because we want to get the building up so we're not so low below Streetsboro. But we did do that and I don't have the numbers off the top of my head. It is not a balanced site. I believe it is a fill site. So we will have to bring some stuff in to bring up the grade.

The reason why I ask is because it's nice to know what's the quantity of fill, how does that affect traffic, how does that affect... you know, neighbors, you know, how many truckloads are we taking in, how many pulling back in? No, I don't remember.

Nick, can you provide that when you get a chance? Nick, can you do me a quick, can you bring up the cost estimate? Because I think I actually might have a number in there for Phil bringing in. Bring it with me, so I apologize for that.

But you've got it as an export.

I apologize, it is an export. I am mixing my projects up. We're exporting about 576 yards. That's not much.

Can you pull up C4.01?

I'm glad your internet looks as snow as ours on this side. I thought it was just me.

A couple questions about utilities. First, the sanitary force main, the two-inch, how do you plan on having that installed?

So it'll be a two-inch HDP pipe that's pretty flexible. If they have to dig a trench, they will dig a trench that's probably about a foot wide and put it in. In some cases, they do have the ability to pull it, so you're not actually disturbing it very much like when they're replacing gas lines throughout the neighborhood. You'll see some machines like that, so minimal disturbance for that.

One of my questions and concerns would be, the blow-up of close to where we're tying it in, where the power line, power pole is?

The close proximity to the power pole, they would be able to circumnavigate that, either go around it, or they would pull, you know, start to veer off of it as they would go back, but they would still all... Why didn't we show that? I will update the plans to show it's... Going a little bit further away from the utility pole.

It looks like we're 12 inches from the center line of the pole. I'm staying along that same page. Let me see. Another similar question. How do you plan the installation of the water line, that six-inch main after the tie-in across Terex, with that being such a busy roadway?

I don't believe there was any comments from the city engineer about About it, so we would probably do it in two two sections You know obviously we would do the one well I guess it would actually probably staged as you go across so that you at least have one lane In each way going at the same time so they would have to install the line Open up part of the road and saw the line Played it open up the other part of the road extend it We may be able to bore it. We'll have to discuss that later

That's going to be one of my questions. That would be boards so you wouldn't disturb maintenance. You wouldn't disturb the roadway traffic at all. Looks like you have enough room to do it.

There would be a discussion that we would have with the city engineer about that.

Another question on utilities. I didn't see it on the drawings. I see you've got a fire backflow preventer vault. Where's the water meter going to be installed? Is that inside the building?

It would be inside the building, yeah.

Can you confirm your intentions to install rock channel protection at all the headwalls?

Yeah, we will. Our detail usually shows it. I think they may just show the headwalls on the utility plan or on the grading plan, but we generally have rock channel at the headwall so you'll reduce erosion.

I don't see a detail for it on the drawings.

That will be in the permit set then.

Another question. You have a detail on the drawings. It is C6.01 for the Type VI vertical curb and then also on C6.02, shows the curb with an under drain. Can you confirm you intend to have under drains at all site curbs?

Yes, and when we provide the permit set, the curb cuts that we have along the parking, we actually have a separate detail for that that kind of shows the under drain and a place for that to drain as well into certain ditches. So we will provide an additional plan showing where the under drain is.

I wish we would have had that on this set of drawings. My concern is right along that line of surface water runoff and how you're capturing that. If I look at the storm sewer, drawing, we don't show a single basin inside the pavement areas. You show these curb openings, which based on the drawing looks like it just sort of, it'll pond between the parking lot and Terex.

If you could go to the, actually the grading plan is fine.

Can you scroll down on the grading plan here? It's a large file.

So as we're discussing about saving wetlands and preserving some of those areas, where the driveway comes in and turns and goes into the parking area, that's actually one of the lower areas on the site. So we're using that natural topography to collect that. So the runoff is going to come off the parking lot into that grassed area and slowly make its way down to that low area where we have a headwall with an inlet that'll actually take that over toward detention basin on the other side of the, on the other side. If the internet wants to work.

But what you're saying though is your intentions are to add a drain along the... There will be an under drain? East curb line of the parking lot.

Yeah, there will be an under drain along that curb line so that we don't have water sitting in the ground underneath the pavement that could cause some heave or some damage to the parking lot itself.

I'm sorry. It's going to run from north to south along the curb line. Where is it going to tie in?

It'll tie into... Grading plan? Yeah, grading plan is fine. Do you have a microphone? Yeah. So the under drain will be along this curb line here. Everything kind of comes down this way. So we're actually built up over here and we come down. The low spot's actually over here where we're going to put a headwall So that storm water that comes down here will get collected in that head wall, and that'll actually be taken over to our basin over here. That storm sewer runs right through there, so we'll actually tie that under drain into that pipe, because at that point, you can see we're about three or four feet below grade, so our under drain's gonna be about 18 inches below grade, so we would actually come along there, and then we would dive down into that storm sewer.

Again, I wish we would've had all storm drainage shown on the drawing that you intended. One more second. And just a confirmation, your dumpster location is that south west corner. And that'll be, can you remind me what the screening will entail?

That was going to be brick, brick enclosure. It's a brick enclosure? Yeah. It's on the architectural, the new architectural plans in front of you.

It wasn't in the middle?

IT WAS UPDATED FOR THE ARCHITECTURAL. IT WAS UPDATED THURSDAY.

THE MATERIAL CHANGED. IT WAS STUCK OUT BEFORE, BUT NOW IT'S BRICK HERE. OKAY.

AND, NICK, IF YOU HAVE ACCESS TO YOUR E-MAIL, THE GEO TECH SHOULD BE IN YOUR E-MAIL.

OKAY. BUT IT WASN'T UPLOADED. I DIDN'T SEE IT.

AND IF IT WASN'T ON THE CHECKLIST, I APOLOGIZE IF IT WAS MISSED.

So next to the playground. Yeah, OK.

I thank you. That's all I have.

Chelsea.

A couple questions. It might have, it probably was in the report that you sent. I just could not find it. The height of the lighting in the parking lot, how, my question is because I'm concerned about there's homes that are around the area. So do you know when the lights will turn on and off and then also how high they are and did you do any studies to make sure that it's not shining into neighbors' homes?

The photo, okay, it's on the photometric and let me see. We're trying to see which one of us printed it.

I think you did. Those are my plans. That could be, okay. Let me move my stuff.

Oh, please. Okay, let me see if we can get to the photometric plan.

I have it up here.

Okay. The detail... You know the comment, back to the comment on the, from the staff report on the wall mount lighting, we just, we'll make the change, we just have to get it approved by TLE, because it's probably gonna be a fixture, we'll have to change the fixture, so we can do that.

Detail on the... I'm assuming there's some in the parking lot?

Like a pole light? Like a pole light, yes. And it should have a detail pop out. If you go up, if you go up a little, yeah, on the... 20 feet.

To 20 feet?

Yes.

Okay. And do we know when those will shut on and off?

So we have a question into TLE if it's site-specific for security, like what time and then what remaining lights have to be on. I don't have an answer for this area, but I do have that as a question that we have to TLE operations.

I have one more question, more about safety for children, but also creating some space for emergency vehicles. So during drop off and pick up, Have you thought about ways that how children will be kept separate from moving vehicles during drop-off and pickup but still maintaining emergency exits? Because of the parking, there's some of that just with kids going back and forth and people coming through that relatively quickly, but I understand you need to have space for emergency vehicles.

No, great question. How the school currently operates is any of the parents or whoever's dropping off the child parks, walks the child in, just as far as the process goes, and then has either access code, access fob to get into the first barrier of doors, then they walk the child back to the classroom, drop the child off, and then come out, get back in their car and leave. So it's not, there's no, you have to take a parking space. There's not a drop off line like you would have for a regular elementary school. So everybody who is at the site is parked. If that helps answer that question.

Adult, we'll walk them in. Yes. Okay, that helps. So I have a question again, so I'm kind of jumping all over the place. Stormwater. The stormwater ponds, how will they work during a major storm? And I only ask this because in the recent years, Hudson has seen a lot more flooding. And so I'm worried that if you plan for one every year or so, but we've recently been having lots more flooding than we're used to. So has that been looked at? And how will that work? And also with neighboring properties, I want to make sure that those neighbors aren't being flooded as well.

So first of all, we're the lowest. So if anyone's going to get flooded, it's us. But our detention basin is designed to meet the city requirements up to the 100-year storm. We figured the critical storm was a 10-year. City engineers requested us to detain up to the 25-year storm. So they're still going to require us to do that. But our detention basin is sized to handle the flow from the 100-year storm as well. So we're designed to meet the city requirements, which is a standard throughout North Utah up to the 100-year storm. Plus, I believe there's freeboard in there. Basically, we have an emergency spillway set at the 100-year elevation. Once it hits that, it'll start spilling over more than what is coming through the outlet structure, but we actually have, I believe, another foot of extra space in there to hold extra stormwater. If it's more than what can go out of the emergency spillway, we are still holding and detaining. I believe it is all below the finished floor of the building, so we don't flood out the building.

Yeah, hopefully. It's a plan. And then, sorry, just a couple more questions. You were speaking about in the beginning, the fence. Could you repeat what, just so I can follow along, because I had a question. If you were talking about removing the fence from the perimeter of the building, is that what you were saying? And then having it be landscape barriers? I just want to make sure I'm understanding it correctly, because I might have a question, but...

So right now we have a fence running along the back of this sidewalk and across the front, and then we have a fence that continues along here. This was kind of left over as part of the screening. It's not needed for TLE, and if the city's not requiring it, what we're going to plan to do is truncate it here. So our fence will actually go just past this doorway, up and around and down like that, and then this would just be landscape screening across there. So it kind of creates that safe channel for kids to get back to the playground.

Okay, perfect. That was a question. Okay, thank you. And then one of my last questions, and I believe I asked this last time, and I forget the answer, so please forgive me. When I'm not looking at the road, at Terex Road, when you're leaving and turning left, we're going to do the curb cut in the median, questions on that do we know the width of that will a car be able to fit there or will the car have to clear three or four lanes to be able to turn left do you know what i mean like is there a spot where if like if they're looking left and it's clear coming towards them on tariffs can they go and wait and see 303 might be the easiest one to look at

You're talking... This curb cut here? Yes. Okay, so you're... Ask the question again? I apologize.

I know, I know. So if you're trying to turn left, is there space in that median curb cut to have a... Even just say a regular car, like a sedan or even a SUV, stop there and wait for... Is there a spot for them to stop and wait, or will they have to clear three or four lanes of traffic to turn left?

So there's actually only one lane of traffic here that they would actually have to clear. There is enough room that they can kind of pull into that and start the turn and wait for a car to go before it goes. It will not be a 90 degree. It's not 20 feet. I want to say it's probably around 12 feet. So your car would actually be able to start to make that turn, allowing other cars to go around it if need be. But they would only be clearing this one lane of traffic that comes through because this is a turn lane over here.

Right. But I also live by an area where there's a turn only lane and people... cut people off all the time. That doesn't mean everybody's going to... Do you guys have any other properties that have left out like this? Are there any issues? I just see a lot of issues trying to turn left with kids in the car. There's a church across the street which is very busy and people coming in and out of that. I just have a real hesitation with. People fly around that corner. I'm just curious to see if you've had this and if it's been successful in the past.

So I can't comment on a specific school because TLE also looks at this obviously. They have over 475 schools across the United States with all different kind of different scenarios. So Because, and if traffic, if the city engineer has any comment, we've done road simulation, or traffic simulations with different queues. One of the comments is with the timing of the light to help with, so there's no stacking. I feel like with the traffic study and the traffic engineer and the additional simulation work that we did coming out of one of the concept meetings, Not that it's not that I think there could be, you know, that could happen one day where it. Might possibly be a problem for one of the drivers. But it's not currently a concern.

Those are my questions for now.

OK, thank you. Mr Anna Murano.

Yes, so there were. I think Mr Nystrom had a lot of pertinent questions on the underground. Anne. Clearly you need to add do a little more engineering analysis and and get that information onto the drawings. But Michael, my question is the estimate the cost that you are providing. I only it's $612,000. Is that the only estimate that's included in this package is earned? I'm not sure what, does that include everything we just discussed?

That's just the site work. That doesn't include the building or anything. That's just the site work.

But does it include the underground?

It does not because it is not planned at this time. There is money in there for the excavation to locate it underneath.

I think that's just the general conditions that's included in there.

But there is no engineered number for that at this time in this, in this cost estimate.

We have, we've had two different GCs in addition to our estimator. Look at this. Um, we're at, uh, hold please. 1.0 I keep looking at, keep looking at the wrong notes. Okay. We have on our project, One, on site work on general, and this is across the board because we've built at least 12 schools that we can take from, 800 up to 1 million just for the site portion. We have... Everything that we bid for this with the building and the site falls within our budget currently. So we've included, and the good news about this school, we don't have to have a tornado storm shelter, which we do like in the Oklahoma schools, which I think Jeff Durbin commented one time, which they're extremely expensive.

So we're with your budget, your overall budget. Are you expecting this?

So we, two, hold on one second. We have, hold on. Hold on one second.

Okay, let me put.

I APOLOGIZE.

OKAY.

FOR THIS BUDGET, WE HAVE 4.1 MILLION. SO WE'VE INCREASED THE SITE WORST CASE SCENARIO. SO, TO BE CONSERVATIVE. Okay. We're comfortable with that. The other GCs that have looked at it.

I'm just concerned on your behalf of what, you know, I think more analysis on the cost of total construction may need to be done. A fair amount of money is, you know, going to be spent Not on the building, but on the site. I agree. We agree completely. The site costs. I'm just concerned that you have all that addressed, especially with the questions that we still have to get on the drawings and all that it gets accounted for. The retention ponds, there was some discussion of is there no possibility of eliminating those and just having it drained through piping and not any physical. Are you referring to look into that that we could eliminate the retention ponds and just have drains In lieu of that. And like do no detention? Correct. Is that not an option? I don't know if you looked at that.

If the city would be more than happy to allow us to do it, we'd be more than happy to do no detention. But we do have to do water quality for the EPA, so there will have to be something. But, you know, if the city would allow us to do that, we certainly would.

Well, you still have to account for water runoff.

So you're saying underground detention? Yes, that would be more expensive at this point in time just because of the work involved with that as well. And depth would also be kind of an issue just because underground systems, they come in a range of sizes. Obviously, the shallower the system, the larger area you need. which is not always our friend in this case, and the deeper systems would actually end up being lower than the culvert that goes underneath Streetsboro, so that wouldn't be possible.

Okay. I'd just say I'd probably need to do some more engineering and get us some additional information on the drawing so we could better understand what you're doing out there and what we need to...

It would certainly be on the permit plans that go under the city engineer for review.

We do have the assistant city engineer here, David Rapp, if you have any questions from the cities on the review.

I would like to see them on the drawings. I don't have any further questions.

Okay, my turn. So I apologize. You had given us updated plans today. We just got this afternoon. I did not look at them until getting here. So I want to go back to the fence and your question about the changes for the fencing because what I'm seeing that we're looking on the screen doesn't match the drawings that we got today. So the previous one that we were talking about, the applicant wishing to change the fencing for the north side of the parking lot and that north side of the building. You're referring to like... That's the new drawing, right. So we were talking about that...

The fence area, yep.

Correct, on the north end going across the parking lot. That's, yeah, that side. Okay. So on the previous drawings, we had two doors kind of going into a vestibule, the vestibule in like that northeast corner. And it looks like we're maybe no longer doing that, which is fine. So you want to take the fence... from that northeast corner, that would be northwest, right?

That's northwest.

That's northwest. So the opposite corner at the bottom, you're going to take the fence and you're going to move it further west to across the building to where your other exterior door is. Is that what you're suggesting? Okay, so the drawings that we have show the fence that goes all the way across Streetsboro and covers the parking lot. And I believe the whole purpose that we discussed about that initially, and I understand that that's probably a huge cost savings to you, was about preventing children from walking from the parking lot and getting to the potential water that would be on that side. Your thoughts are we're going to eliminate some of that fencing, but it's still going to be on that front facing side. We're just going to do some landscaping instead so that children don't have access to the potential water that could be there or the major road. Can we move to the detention pond? Yeah.

Yeah.

So since that vaccination detention pond did shift a little bit, so it does not extend as far over. Right. I saw that. And the other key thing is after reviewing the permit from the Army Corps of Engineers to It does not have to be a wet basin. Okay. So this is a dry basin. So after about 48 hours, because that's what you need for your water quality drawdown, it should be dry. It might be a little mucky down there, but you're not going to be holding water. If you're holding water for 72 hours after a rain event, something's probably blocking the outlet structure, in which case then just knead it in and clean that out. But in theory, 48 hours after it's done raining, there should be no water in there.

Okay, so my question is that kind of changes what that fence line looks like then from 303 if we have a fence to the middle of the building, right? I couldn't find in our land development code about any sort of rules or restrictions we have about that, about fencing across that side or that front since we basically have two fronts here. Do you know where that is in our code? What I don't want to do is set you all up for something that then we say, oh wait, sorry, we forgot there's a problem here.

And the other thing, we thought maybe it looked better with less fence if we just had the landscaping.

Can't disagree. Landscape would be better, sure. I want to make sure that we're meeting your all safety requirements and the safety of the children and that, again, we're... We're not making it harder on you that you have to then make another change later. That's fine. So I just would like staff to verify that that's permittable to have that fence coming just halfway across the building.

It's different for non-residential. Right.

And that's where I got lost in my searches today. While he's looking for that.

It says commercial fences and walls may in any required rear or side yard exceed four feet but shall not exceed eight feet in height.

Okay, but are we considering this side a front since it's facing 303? Because I know we don't typically.

On a corner lot of budding the rear and side lot of another lot, no fence shall be located forward of the adjacent lots minimum front yard setback. So if there were, if there was a, no, I don't think there's an issue on Terex based on the lot alignment with an eight foot fence.

I'd say it's six foot though.

I'm just saying, yeah, the code would allow, yeah, with the six foot fence, correct.

Okay. Another question that's come up from our discussions today was the potential boring for water lines, sewer lines going under the road and all of that. I believe there is some legislation happening and restrictions on doing that right now. Do we know, will that impact these folks moving forward?

There is legislation on borings that we would have to see how that aligns. I know there are some changes recommended.

Yeah, I can only speak that that my understand is that's in process and they would just need to comply with the code.

Whatever those changes are prior to authorization is it city staffs practice then to these folks that are mid application to update them on these legislative changes that may affect what they're doing. I wouldn't want them. There's something to change and then have to come back to us.

Ed, if you'd like to speak to Dave Rapp, our assistant city engineer, he could probably speak to that.

You just really want to put him on the hot seat, don't you? You've offered him up several times.

Many of these questions are well-reviewed and regulated in the engineering standards, not the land development code.

Sure.

So he will be reviewing these in detail and is the expert and is here if he can assist.

Again, my point on this was making sure that we were not setting up the application to come back for us.

Yes, understood.

And I would just love for their point of view that staff were doing our due diligence. When that legislation comes available, it's made available to them so that they don't have another hurdle to come across. Okay, we answered, I think you've said you've accounted for the 100-year flood, although the requirement is a minimum of 25 years. Is that I'm understanding that correctly?

No, sorry. I threw engineering terms out there. All detention basins are designed to do 100-year floods. our allowable outlet from our basin, we can discharge, we calculated the 10 year critical storm, the city's asking for 25. So at the 25 year storm, we're discharging what would be coming off the site at the one year storm as it sits right now. Okay. Sorry.

Nope, that's fine. I just wanted to make sure I understood that. Like Ms. McCoy said that we do tend to have a lot of flooding more recently than we would all hope, and you're sitting low, so that's only going to be more enjoyable for you during this process. My next question then is about, I think it's number two. One second.

The landscaping question.

Our city arborist has suggested that you engage with a separate arborist for a plan in regards to the oak tree, that significant oak tree at Terex. That's something you're willing to do, you're considered that, we have somebody in place to do that.

That was just brought up recently by our arborist. I did mention that as an update after these landscaping plans were reviewed further.

Just a clarification on that too. That was a result of one of the comments about removing the landscape timber wall, which is right next to that large 48-inch tree. We pulled our parking away to avoid that tree and minimize any disturbance over there. Taking out that wall might cause damage just because you're making up You know, the wall's, I think, three or four feet tall at that point in time. So you might be taking down the wall, but the grading you have to do to make it stable over there, you might be disturbing the roots. So that was the question I asked for clarification on that, and that was the comment that just came back today was, work with someone to put together a plan for that. Whether it's...

I understand, so that has yet to be addressed. That is new information for you all. I got it. Okay, so I just want to go make sure that we understand the questions that you had for us and clarification. So question two was the landscape screening and we'll lump that oak tree into that. Item number four was revising the landscape plan to include the following. And it lists additional arborvitae, relocating street trees, and I think city staff has already addressed that, correct? Yes. Additional plantings along Terex Road, you're good with that too? Yep. Established a fine lawn and bed areas to enhance the frontage and preserved trees, we're good there, or that we're still chewing on that?

I think it's just... Clarification, I'm assuming that means that they just want some landscape bedding around the existing trees.

To give it a more finished look, add landscape beds between those trees.

Is the plan that we're looking at in front of us, this is the final landscape plan or the only landscape plan that we have that's been submitted? Correct. Okay, so we're going to be looking for an updated landscape plan from you. Based on your comments on that, yes, thank you. Okay, the removal of the timber wall, we covered that. Okay, and then item six was the certification licensing from the state of Ohio. Can I get clarification on what it is that we're supposed to be doing in helping these folks so that this can be possible? Explain that process to me.

That's in the conditional use requirements. It's a general requirement that these types of facilities submit their licensing to the city.

Maybe that's the wording we use. Okay. That you're not approving the daycare license.

Right, right. Okay, because I heard you say that you need certificate of occupancy. Yes. but we don't have a building yet, right? So I'm going, what are we asking for and how does this process work? How do we?

This is confirmation that they were receiving the state licenses.

Got it, thank you, okay. Yeah, okay. If we could change the wording around that. Change the verbiage, okay.

Okay. Okay, any additional questions from the commission? Okay. We're going to move on then to comments from individuals withstanding. If anybody would like to come forward and make any comments or questions. Now is that time? It is not. Again, this is for folks withstanding to this application. You would have received a notice. Seeing none. Any public comments not to exceed five minutes? This is somebody with outstanding. And also seeing none. Um, so final questions for the, for the applicant from the commission.

Um, you know, with, with security being such a big issue at schools now, um, what type of, um, extra precautionary security, um, actors have you taken into account architecturally on this project?

The fact that there's alarms on, the doors are alarmed, there's controlled access. As I pointed out, when you enter, you have to have either your fob or code to get into the building, and you walk the child back to the classroom.

Into that vestibule?

Mm-hmm.

And that is that for just clarification is that for all the exit doors they're alarmed so each classroom it has their own access doors there's alarms on each of those?

Each classroom has the exit and I don't know the timing on the like the exact operation on the sure yeah on the alarms. But as you can see with the six foot fencing, the children can go out and down and around and exit the building. That's the other reason for the side fence.

I apologize.

No, it's okay. I apologize for not getting you the geotech. It's in Nick's email right now.

That's okay. Just to clarify, you're deleting one of the exterior doors up along 303? No, we're just. I see one there.

Yeah, go ahead.

Can you scroll back up, Nick, the layout plan?

Okay, so that's a problem with our, that's a correction our architect needs to make. I apologize.

I'm sorry, so there's supposed to be two or one?

Each classroom has a door. One there.

On the new side. It's on the north side, not there.

So my same plan shows two doors here. Because it was going... The floor plan shows a door here and a door here.

Okay, we'll coordinate, and I'm going to guess it's what the architect has drawn for final, yeah, with the updated, yeah.

That's the correct door placement for that.

I'm going to, I'll... get the door coordinated on that classroom.

Any final questions? Okay, at this time, it's final application comments before we have our discussion. And you have 15 minutes if you'd like it.

The only thing I'll say is thank you. It's been April since we were here, but as you can see, the site plan went through several changes and everything. I appreciate your comments on the stormwater. We'll make sure that those get addressed on the permit set that is submitted to the city engineer for his review.

Yeah, I appreciate the comments on the cost. We look at the cost constantly. We've had our estimator look at the cost. We've had two GCs look at all the costs. We hope that our budget is worst case scenario and it's below what we've budgeted. But we appreciate your concern about that. We appreciate everybody's time and comments on this. And we're very excited about this project. The Keynes are very excited about this project and we would love for it to go forward and if all goes well we could have a building permit possibly knock on wood if everything was approved by March 1st and then start construction and I put that in the comments and then we would be done December and then the school the school takes 60 days to do all their FF&E finalize the licensing with the school operators and then The goal would be opening in February of 2028. And we appreciate all your time. Thank you. Thank you.

Mr. Chair, would it be okay to ask one more question? Sure.

Sure. There's one more question for you.

Can the operators stop up for a second? Oh, yes. Potential operators. I think we need your name and address too. Yes, please.

Ryan Kane, 1689 East Sapphire Drive, Hudson.

Appreciate it. If you can just take a minute and just give us a background of your experience running a project like this before, you know, a company like this. Sure. What's your background look like?

I'm a VP of sales for a company that provides tech in senior living communities, actually. I've been doing that for about 20 years. So I oversee large projects from start to finish. I've been doing that for a long time. my sister oversees a lot of the finance aspects of everything so together we make jokes that i'd kind of be the front of the house she'd be the back of the house so to speak and we have an awesome support system around us that all want to help us make sure this is success we have quite a few family members that are wanting to get involved if they can ever been involved in a child care facility before i'm not i have two kids my sister is a foster care parent. So we do have a pretty extensive history with children and it's a passion for both of us. This is something we've wanted to do for a long time. It's a weird thing to say. This has been my sister's dream since she was like 10 years old. Absolutely. Thanks for your time.

I feel embarrassed to say I thought you were a couple. I'm sorry.

This whole time. He said sister and turned around and I was like, wait, what?

We are siblings. Okay. Yeah, but I was gonna say too, it has been a dream of mine. I'm CFO for a behavioral health tech company actually, so not in childcare, but know how to run a business and to manage finances. But the reason that we pursued this actually is because if you research the learning experience, they are the top childcare franchise in the country. And they will be with us every step of the way. So they will support us throughout our entire journey from launching, making sure we have the right plans. We'll have a director that will actually be on site running the operations. So that's where the childcare experience actually comes from.

That's one of my questions is going to be what kind of oversight are you getting from the franchisor and how long does that last?

They have, it's forever. Yeah. They have regional directors I think is, is the level. And so they actually will visit the site regularly. They, they participate in the hiring, in the budgeting, in the training of both Ryan and I, as well as everybody that will be on site. So they are heavily involved, which is one of the perks for us.

It matters to what we're doing here, but is there a long vetting process before they approved you?

Yeah. I mean, we had an application process. They do, you know, background checks and all the things. So, yeah.

Okay. Thank you.

Yep.

Any additional questions for potential owners or applicants? Okay. We'll move on to discussion and action by the commission. Anybody want to go first?

i feel like we need more information on the drawings adequately uh or or what do you think not it'll come with the permit see quite a bit more storm water information uh

I only request the geotech report from before because you need a geotech report in order to design the structural footings, so it's not an additional cost. It's something that's signed anyway. I'd like to have confirmation of what exactly is going on with that storm, 12-inch storm line, potentially, and if it is live, show it on the drawings where that's gonna be rerouted.

I mean, should that affect? Our decision tonight not having that or we just that comes to us. In a later time. Yeah. I'm concerned what that does to their cost. If the engineering is not.

All in their estimate specifically for that the lines that could be there. We don't know where they are.

There could be significant. That's not that's costly work to do. That's my concern, maybe.

Well, it matters to our decision, but I think the applicant mentioned that site costs could vary between $800 to $1 million. However, the budget estimate presented was only $514.

The cost of the sheet that we received, right.

I personally feel it's a project that we're probably going to end up approving, whether it's now or it's the next meeting so we can get the rest of the information. That would be my preference.

You know, I'm happy that you redesigned things. To save as many trees as you could and and the look of the building is. Is it much better? And so in that regard, you've been a very proactive applicant that we want to support.

I can offer again our assistant city engineer. Would you like to hear Mr Rap comments on the stormwater?

He's smiling.

Why doesn't he come up and? He put his coat on.

So how may I help you? Stormwater? Yes, how do you, I mean, just can you explain how the stormwater that you envision is gonna work in this project?

It's a standard stormwater pond. We've changed a few of our requirements. So Jeff is gonna make a modification to his calculations. There's plenty of room for a little bit more storage at that point. ONCE THE WATER DOES LEAVE THE SITE, IT CROSSES 303, GOES TO A SWAMP AND THEN FLOWS TO ANOTHER SWAMP. SO THERE'S NOT ANY WORRY ABOUT DOWNSTREAM FLOODING. AS FAR AS THE PIPE, THAT 12-INCH PIPE, WE'VE HAD THAT DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE A COUPLE OF TIMES. WE HAVE NO IDEA WHY IT'S THERE, IF IT EVEN EXISTS. WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON IT. Everything for the church goes to their ponds. So even if there was a pipe that went under the road, there shouldn't be any flow or minimal flow. There are catch basins right at 303. The water from this site, actually, some of it goes east across Terex to the other side and drains in that direction into their pond at the southeast corner of that intersection.

Can you give your thoughts on the reroute of that line if it is encountered?

The 12-inch line?

Yeah.

The potential? Okay.

Yeah, depending on the invert. It could be ran down to the corner that crosses the road. Our regulations allow water, even if it didn't go into the pond, this could be taken through a swale past the pond to where it crosses 303. It should be able to flow gravity. It's doing that now if it exists. but offsite water is allowed to pass through without being detained.

Can you give your thoughts about that, the sanitary up against the power pole?

That's no issue.

Yeah, if that just bends around it or if they're directional drilling, yeah, they'll keep clearance.

Hudson Public Power will be out there while they're doing it and ensure that there's clearance because we don't need a new pole drilled through it either.

So that is Hudson Public Power on this location.

You know, yes, the polls in the median are Hudson public power. There is some first energy, but that's further down the road.

Did you think it might be better to have? Basins inside the asphalt pavement parking lot in lieu of. The curb cuts in a drain tile along that edge.

IT'S PROS AND CONS EITHER WAY. SHEET FLOW IT ACROSS AND OFF THE SITE IS FINE UNDER NORMAL CONDITIONS. IN WINTERTIME EITHER ONE IS GOING TO POTENTIALLY HAVE A LITTLE GLASSY SHEEN BUT I'M SURE THEY WILL KEEP IT SALTED AND SAFE FOR THE CHILDREN. THE FEWER THE PIPES THE BETTER. THE WHOLE PARKING LOT SO IT'S NOT A LONG DISTANCE FOR IT TO GO. TYPICALLY YOU HAVE 20-FOOT PARKING SPACES AND THEY HAVE 26-FOOT AISLE WHICH IS GOOD. GIVES A LITTLE MORE ROOM TO BACK OUT AND TURN AROUND.

I APOLOGIZE. DID YOU REVIEW WHERE THE snow would be stockpiled on the site? Because I'm just thinking about when this parking lot is plowed and I'm assuming you're gonna, where are you gonna put the snow? Where was the intention of where you would stockpile that?

That's their design. I mean, they could push it through or they can push it.

If it's pushed, it's not gonna be pushed to the north. YOU ARE PROBABLY GOING TO PUSH IT TOWARDS TERRAX. HOW IS THAT GOING TO AFFECT WHEN SNOW MELTS TRYING TO DRAIN THAT PARKING LOT?

I THINK THAT IS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. I'll add that to my checklist because I did not have that on there.

You forgot you lived in Northeast Ohio.

I forgot about winter. It's been so nice. They may haul it off.

Could the applicant address that real quickly?

I didn't have anything also to do with it.

Obviously, we can't go to the north and we can't go to the west, so they would be pushed to the east and it would be pushed to the south. We do have landscaping along those areas, but the landscaping is not right up against the building or right up against the pavement, so it would be pushed into those areas. Obviously, at that point in time, it would melt. Water that would come across the parking lot would get to that point and Going back to the low spot being down on the south there, stormwater and runoff would make its way down through the grade to that point, and at least the stuff that's pushed to the east, the stuff that's pushed to the south, that is, again, kind of that wetland area down there, so it would just replenish the, any snow that's pushed down that way would replenish the wetlands in that area right now.

We're going to push the snow off to the east, you said, because the landscape is not up against that curb.

Yeah, you want some space between your landscaping and you're not hitting it with your car, and so that you do have the ability to plow it in there, plow snow into there. I imagine a good portion of it probably would end up going to the south. There's no... There are parking spots there. Those are mostly probably going to be employee parking, you know, on the south. So they'll probably more than likely push most of that over there so that it's up against for the owner or for the employees, not necessarily the parents.

My only concern is if we're pushing all the snow up against, up off the curb, creating almost like a bathtub when we have a snow pile up along that east edge.

That would have to be something that they'd have to work with their snow plow drivers to ensure that they don't block the drainage areas for any melt or runoff to get blocked up.

We're going to continue conversation and discussion. That brings up a valid concern in my opinion when we talk about the amount of parking that they have here if they have to lose two spots for snow piles.

Well, and I was just looking that up. It looks like, based on the new drawings, that there's a number of teachers that are supposed to be 21. So if we lose two spaces.

They have 45 on their, 45 spaces is a requirement, right? The minimum required is 45.

Correct. Our land development code, yes.

Yeah.

That's fully staffed is mostly 21.

Well, how do we feel about some sort of resolution for this or do we need them to come back with the final plans with the additional information? Like you said, it's not a matter of like, it's not going to be approved, but do we have all the pieces to make that decision?

I don't want to, I guess they could address it in the room for the next time we meet with them.

Let them come back with updated information.

What information would you like them to come back with?

I'm just concerned about all the engineering analysis that we've discussed is incorporated into the project.

Can we have the site plan updated with the information we requested?

It's all there or approve it with the conditions that You know, we see all that.

Can I ask the applicant one more question?

Again?

Yeah, do, one more. if we did ask you to come back with just some greater clarification and updates on the site plans and you had to come back to the next meeting, would you be able to have your information ready to be on next month's agenda? And if so- For September? Yes.

Yes. And we were under the impression that we wouldn't be able to do that because of the timeline. But I think, Jeff, do you think we can do that?

My question is, what is the deadline to submit for?

We're really tight because this is a special meeting. September 8th is our, I'm sorry, the 14th.

And, you know, it also includes, you know, like you said, we're going to have to get an excavator out there. So, you know, it's going to take some time to line someone up who can get out there right away to do some of that work and Are there any permits from the city that we're gonna have to do to do any excavation out there before any? Actual permit, right.

So I have just a follow-up question on the excavating, which I completely understand and your concern is valid. Is it for engineering, because what the engineering will review during part of the construction, or is it for cost? Or is it all of the above? I think it's all above.

And if you did get pushed to the next meeting to finalize everything, because I think we're, like I said, I think there's a project. You love us. Yes, exactly. How does that affect you and your schedule and finances and everything else? Does that have a material impact on you?

It's the, so the two resources, time and money, the time, we would have to see on the time if we could make that happen. The next meeting is September 14th.

The next meeting is September 14th. Our deadline had passed August 17th because this is a special meeting.

Do we have a special extension to submit the answers to your questions so that maybe we don't get them, obviously we've missed the deadline.

Are we allowed to do that?

I don't know. We would need time to analyze everything and review it and prepare updates for you all.

Yeah, I mean, I think that's kind of our general concern here is what we were... The new drawings today don't match what we had previously, right? So when I walked the site most recently, we didn't have these new sketches. We didn't know about the fences. So I think there's a few things hanging out there. But I certainly don't want to delay them, but we're kind of in a... A TIGHT SPOT HERE.

I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. IS IT POSSIBLE FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE TO BE APPROVED AND PENDING SITE PLAN? BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY HAVE THREE APPROVALS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET. ARCHITECTURE, WHICH WE'RE MAKING ADJUSTMENTS. BUT OVERALL, I THINK THE COMMITTEE THOUGHT WE IMPROVED.

then we have conditional use and then we have site plan overall just site plan so the site plan that we have the most concerns with and issues outstanding the conditional use i don't have any problems with that i don't either okay so staff can we give a conditional use approval but the site plan and architecture with their combined application yes um you could accept the

You could accept the recommendations of the industrial design subcommittee so they don't have to meet again as well.

Okay, can we review?

And approve the conditional use.

Okay. So we could get two out of the three, possibly?

Yes, and sorry, you could formally close that public hearing because the site plan review is not a public hearing.

Got it.

Then we would just be in a meeting.

So, Commission, can we discuss, I'm sorry, you can have a seat. I understood your question for a definite piece. In the review meeting that you did earlier, the three pieces are the only changes that they're making to those architectural, right, is adding the corner boards on those bump outs. changing the sign to being monocolored instead of multicolored, and then the type of fabric on the awnings. That it was not a high sheen or something?

Correct, they were gonna submit a sample.

Those awnings, again, I just wanna make sure that the drawings that we were presented with this afternoon, the new ones, is that towards the playground? That's over the playground? They're not doorway awnings for the entrance of the building. They're within the fenced playground area, correct?

I believe that's true.

That's what I'm seeing. They have the doors changed. I just want to make sure that I'm understanding that correctly.

Yes, that's correct.

Okay. So then...

Yes, they're here. inside the fence to the south of the building.

Okay, thank you for confirming. I just wanted just to verify because we have different angles on these and we had some changes. So then if the commission allows what the applicant is saying or we've discussing is conditional use and that architecture review with the site plan review at a future date pending the changes that we've requested.

I'M OKAY WITH THAT. I GUESS THAT WORKS FOR THEM, RIGHT?

WE CAN SEE WHAT WE CAN DO ON THE TIMING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION. AS JEFF POINTED OUT, WE'LL HAVE TO START MAKING CALLS TOMORROW WHICH IS FINE SO WE CAN BE READY BY THE SEPTEMBER 14th MEETING BUT WE WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND CONDITIONAL USE AT THIS MEETING IF THAT'S POSSIBLE.

Understood, so we'll need somebody to make a motion.

What does the motion need to be?

We need to identify the pieces that we still need them to correct, I suppose, for the site plan. Staff, are you tracking what those items are that we're asking for them to?

Yes. So then the motion we need would be to approve the conditional use application and close the public hearing and accept the recommendations of the industrial design subcommittee as mentioned in the meeting we can with the three items we can include those.

Motion so made. Second.

Can you take roll, please? Yes.

Mr. Nomorano? Yes. Ms. McCoy? Yes. Mr. Nystrom? Yes. Ms. Obert?

Yes. Yes. We need to do a restroom break, so we're going to take a five-minute break here. I'm dying. I'm sorry.

Yes. Yeah.

Thank you. All right, we're going to resume here in just a moment as Mr. Thomas has his seat. All right, we do have a hard stop at 10 p.m. this evening, so we're going to, since we have the staff report, we're going to have staff do a brief introduction to allow the applicant their time to give their introduction and hope for public comment this evening before our clock turns us all into pumpkins. Nick, go right ahead.

Yes, I'll be very brief. This is a proposed 18-unit townhome development. The address is 86 Owen Brown Street, but it's on the corners of Owen Brown, Morse Road, and Clinton. Proposed improvements would include 18 units dedicating right-of-way to accommodate the extension of on-street parking and storm basins. This was seen as a concept site plan review on September 8th. And we have prepared the staff report and staff recommendations on page 11 for the Planning Commission to consider. Thank you.

I'm sorry, excuse me. So at this time, we're going to have the applicant... Give their presentation. You have 30 minutes. Please give your name and address. And were you sworn in?

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chairman. My name is Adam Fishman from Fairmount Properties, 200 Park Avenue, Orange Village, Ohio. I am going to run through this as quickly as I possibly can.

You have all the time that you need. Thank you.

Well, we're hoping to get this rep moved forward. So, Nick, are you driving this? Yeah. Just click along. Thank you. As you know, we are the developers of the first and main district. We've been doing business in Hudson since 2002. Delighted to be with you. This is our third time before this planning commission. We've been before BZA now twice and before AHRB on a preliminary basis. So we've been engaged in the process and we appreciate the iterative nature of this process with you and the other body politics here in Hudson.

Thank you.

The site area, I think, as you know, is immediately west of the creek and the existing townhome development that we did develop as part of the first and main development in the early 2000s on a border by Clinton, Morse, and Owen Brown. Thank you. The current site condition, of course, is the old music store and pizza place, a lot of asphalt and buildings that are both inconsistent with the general flavor and neighborhood and probably not a use that the Hudson mothers and fathers would wish to have today. I don't want to say we're removing blight because these are existing properties. But certainly anything we do is going to be a major improvement, both from the stormwater pervious surface standpoint and from a quality of life and consistent use, particularly as you all evaluate what you're trying to do with Clinton Crossings. This is a natural bridge property between the downtown district and the Clinton Crossings neighborhood to come. Thank you. more show this current site. Okay, so we're going to spend a lot of time talking about the site plan, which is on the far right, but I just want to make sure you understand the iterative nature of what we've accomplished. We first came before this body with a 21 or 22 unit plan. It was deemed significantly too dense. We got a lot of feedback from this committee. We came back with an 18 unit plan with some specific feedback from this committee. board about how to break up some of the massing and those units were Those buildings were pods of three and six we've now broken that in feedback from this committee from this committee Which was very well taken actually into pods of three the benefit there is Again, just three units per pod for six total pods and but but no No, no building has more than two typologies facing any particular street clinton morse or or owen brown we think it really is a significant improvement from a design and massing standpoint and i'm grateful to you uh and this committee for that feedback uh thank you um so again um the um This is a fascinating screen, because it's just at the edge of my eyesight, even with my glasses. So I think it's designed to make the applicant really, oh, well, who knew that was possible? So staff noted the design should break down the long expanse of the building, fronting Owen Brown and Clinton Street, a mix of porch designs, which we've done. Six interior courtyard parking stalls have been removed since you've seen this plan last. to allow for turning radiuses into each of the garages, and we have 12 street parking spaces, seven more than previously planned, and 12 more than is actually required by code. So the interior courtyards have been split, two buildings to north and south to better allow for pedestrian access, and it also creates a fire life safety corridor for the fire department of firefight. So a lot of improvements to what we thought was actually already a really good plan. Thank you, Nick. And thank you for making this bigger. We've been to BZA. We've been approved for two curb cuts, one on Owen Brown and one on Clinton, and a request to exceed the maximum driveway curb cut to 30 feet. We've got BZA approval for a variance of 5 feet from the required stream corridor to 75 feet and a variance for the prohibited activity of stream corridors, wetlands, and a variance of 5 feet from the required rear yard setback. That's all been accomplished between the last time we were in front of you and now. Thank you. Um, Uh, based on the water calculation provided by David Rapp, um, and the assistant city engineer, who I believe is still with us, um, uh, DSS will consider the development, uh, net trade-offs or capacity between the credits of the existing buildings and the proposed townhomes. So, such trade-off of capacity. So, we're actually lowering the, uh, usage, um, the, the stipulated usage, uh, based on calculations. Uh, that's been confirmed through our civil engineers and DSSS, uh, confirming that this has been provided. So, we can keep going. Um... The ordinance requires 12 new on-street parking, two spaces for each unit, which shows you all 18 units, each with its own two parking spaces and a mail and parcel box location, one serving the north pod and one serving the south pod. Thank you. You have encouraged us to support innovative design notions. The code gets a little cumbersome here, but we've really tried by mixing two-story and three-story units and by moving facades up and forward and backward and by creating a central courtyard. with a walking trail to connect to what we hope will be a future trail along the creek. Updated site plan minimizes the view of contiguous townhomes, as I mentioned, and allows the presence of single two-story units, unit number four being adjacent to the historic Owen Brown street. So the development includes eight units with first floor primary masters. That's three more than the initial plan and feedback from this committee and the community and ten townhomes that will include options for residential elevators. We simply, we would love to do more single first floor masters. The site just doesn't lend itself to it. We just can't get the site to work with any more first floor masters. The staff report on 9-3 noted, and for this planning commission meeting, I don't know why it says 98. The exceptional plan was approved. The previous plan showed the Veterans Trail extension could be constructed by the applicant on the adjacent city property owned by the east to fulfill the required open space dedication. Unfortunately, we weren't successful at BZA making that motion because we're not the property owner. And BZA, as a matter of form, didn't think we had the standing to allow that to take place. So per staff's calculation of required open space per the code, This is a strange thing the code the code is set up. We think to support this kind of development This is the kind of development you want in the downtown district But the code itself actually the way it could be read is we would we require to give one acre of land back Of open space. Well, our whole site's only 1.32 acres. So obviously that doesn't just doesn't make any sense, right? It's basically impossible So we read the code differently. Our legal counsel has read it extensively and sees it differently. If you go to the next page, we'll talk a little bit about the differences we see on the open space requirement. And sorry, there's a lot of words here. But the following residential subdivisions of development shall be exempt from the public open space dedication and private open space requirements set forth in the zoning code. So these are the exemptions. Residential development or subdivisions in District 5, the village core, consisting of 10 or less dwelling units, we're more than 10, or lots. We are actually going to be a single lot because when this project was originally conceived, we wanted it to be 18 separate fee simple lots. We were advised that that was not going to work given the current zoning. and that this should be a condominium project, not a zero lot line fee simple project. So it will actually be a single lot. So we believe that that creates an exemption for this requirement. Now that said, in the past we talked to the city about participating and happily providing that trail and paying for the trail to meet this requirement, we'd still be delighted to participate in that process. We're not trying to sort of get away from this, but we certainly can't donate an acre on a 1.3-acre site, so that doesn't really work. And obviously, economics on this project, on this site, with construction costs and interest rates are very difficult. And we don't want to give up quality. No matter what we do, to be a Fairmount Properties project, we will not sacrifice quality. We just won't build the project if we can't build it to the quality level that we think is commensurate with what Hudson deserves. So we're feeling a little pressure on this point. So I know Mr. Hannan probably has a report on this as well. But we definitely have sort of a differing view. The code also requires that the following minimum standards shall apply unless the applicant demonstrates that the demand created by the development is less than such requirement due to unique factors such as the age of the occupants of the development or uses proposed. So that's your code. I'm not going to suggest to you that the target market, which is me, 63-year-old Adam and his wife, need necessarily less open space plan, less open plan. But that is what the code requires. So I think this is trying to address the fact that if you build in the downtown, you have people who want to live in a more urban environment. They want to take advantage of maybe parks and trails maybe outside the downtown, but they're not looking for a giant ball field to throw a Frisbee around if they're choosing to live in a downtown environment. That's part of the choice of having that urban lifestyle. I think that's what the code was leaning towards here. I don't know because the drafting is sort of not quite clear. But this development has been discussed as appealing to empty nesters and residents of a certain age demographic. And I would submit to you, we're the kind of folks that would be very delighted to have a walking trail in our backyard, a walking trail, but be able to walk around downtown and don't quite need so much open space as the code requires. So we'll let you all opine on that as you wish. We can keep going. Preserve and protect the scenic and natural landscape qualities. You could see the existing site doesn't really do that. We hope to do that with a very extensive landscape plan. I've been told that staff may think our landscape plan maybe needs to be trimmed back a little bit. We may have gotten a little... exuberant, but more on that to follow. Thank you. And here you begin to see some of the arbor choices. I'm not an arborist. I'm joined today by my director of design, vice president of design, Bryce Hamill, Suzanne Meltzer, a broken arm, and the client didn't do that. And the Riverstone team is here as well. Thank you. Drainage and flood control, the project will include wet detention and water quality treatment, reduced peak discharge rates, reduced downstream erosion, reduced flooding, both locally and downstream. This will improve drainage sediment and therefore the function of Brandywine Creek. We can talk more about that as you wish. I'm going to try and move through these quickly. The proposed stormwater management system will provide detention and treatment of the water quality volume, remove suspended sediment from entering Bandarong Creek, reduces nitrogen and phosphorus entering the creek downstream via vegetation utilization and decomposition. This is an improvement to the current existing conditions. Significant improvement. Thank you. That's literally as fast as I can do that. I feel like I'm the guy in the FedEx commercial. So I'm sorry I blew through that so fast. I'm happy to take my time and answer questions. I want to be respectful of your time, though.

13 minutes, not bad. So procedurally, I think we're going to jump and allow some public comments so that those can take place while we do have limited time this evening. So we're going to allow people withstanding, any individuals that have standing, you have been given notice about this hearing this evening. If you'd like to come forward and speak, please, now is your time. You have 15 minutes. Anyone withstanding like to speak? Please. Please state your name.

Ron Strobel, 24 Owen Brown Street. Unfortunately, unlike phase two, Owen Brown Street did not know what was going on in this section. And as a matter of fact, we really didn't know until maybe a month or six weeks ago what this thing looked like. We hadn't been involved. And with phase two, we've been involved since 2013. So the one thing, well, there's two things. Number one, I don't think it fits in Owen Brown Street. Everything on there almost is in the 1800s. And you're putting a three-story building in there. But the main thing is, if we got to put up with all of this, like it is next to Heinen's, that should be coming in off of a road that was meant for that, not to have nine new homes taking up and coming in a street that already has more traffic than it can hold. And I guess I would be not happy but accepting if they were coming in off of Morse because it's a decent sized road and the other thing is that means people can come in off of whatever up there and come through that way or they can come through this way and they won't have to come through on Brown Street. I'm not going to be happy with the looks and everything else but if we'd been involved in this thing back before they started using pencils

um we certainly would have pushed for no entrance off of owen brown street there's just too much there now mr strobel i'm sorry i miss over if i can just clarify i can't remember where you're at in the public hearing but if you could just verify do you live within 300 feet and did you get a letter My apologies, Ms. Ober. Were you still on residence withstanding?

Yes. I know he lives on the street, but I don't know if he's in with that 300 feet.

Never got a letter.

I never got anything until we found out. For the public's reference, any property owner within 300 feet has legal standing. The commission's interested in receiving... Technically, he's still within his five minutes without standing, but I appreciate what you're trying to say. I want to let the full audience understand who gets noticed. It's those people within 300 feet. Is required per codes. OK, so the public understand, but phase two you were way away from that was sniffing more because it was a city owned property.

Thank you for your comments. Any other members with standing wish to speak this evening? Seeing none, then we would go to public comments from anybody regarding the development. Notwithstanding, does anybody else wish to have five minutes of public comment? Okay, seeing none, we're going to work slightly backwards then to allow initial questions of the... Initial questions from the commission towards the applicant. So applicant, you may want to stand at this time. I'm going to start on the opposite side. Mr. Namurado, do you have any initial questions for the applicant?

Yeah. I appreciate the enhancements to the design with every Every attempt at redesigning it, you've done a good job. Question on how you're building this. You're building it in phases. So when you do phase one, phase two, do you imagine the underground utilities need to be – can they be done in half sections, or do you need to do the entire – one and two phases as it relates to underground.

So, Madam Chairman, to the Commissioner, your comments regarding phasing and lay down and site planning that you made last time were actually really well heard and well taken, because you offered a lot of thoughts about that last time, which we really appreciated. The current plan is to probably, depending on presale activity and demand in the market, to probably build either six or nine in the first pod, if you will. But we're going to do a significant amount of the overall site work at once. So most of the undergrounds will be done sort of in one fell swoop. Kick me if I'm saying something wrong. And we've spent a lot of time thinking about planning and lay down and how to get in and out of the site. You actually raised some really good points last time on this topic.

Okay. Then would you imagining anyone having beneficial occupancy before the second phase is completed? Yes. Okay. When you do the second phase, That's when the, how do you imagine you'll handle equipment and stored material when you get to the second phase? Very carefully.

It's going to be, listen, it's a tight site. There's no question it's a tight site. So you want to talk a little bit about lay down area for phase two? Price Hamill, Fairmont Properties.

Bryce Hamel, Fairmount Properties, 200 Park Avenue, Suite 220, Orange Village, Ohio. So Adam did a great job of sort of preempting this. I think what we intend to do is essentially build, like you've seen here, is to start with the product to the south, the nine. build from the east out. I think that actually works with staff's report that there was comments about us needing to sort of protect against the wetlands and the stream area. But essentially, we're still looking at exactly how we might phase that overall construction. One of our opportunities is maybe we shell out all 18 instead of build nine. come back later as they're sold and do the interiors, since most of these will be balloon framed, very similar to historic architecture. So that might be an opportunity for us to reduce some of the complication there. But in general, yes, it will be a sequencing issue. We're going to have to make sure that we do as little disruption as possible. As Adam mentioned, a lot of what we want to do, a lot of the disruption is foundations and undergrounds. So we'd like to come in and do all of that in one foul swoop and be done and move on. And that way we sort of like get that commotion, that confusion, those rigs off the site.

Okay. I think that's all the questions I have for now. Thank you, sir.