Bza Meeting - Regular Meeting

Mr. Roberts? Here. Ms. Muskie? Here. Mr. Verhola? Here.

All right. First item is approval of the July 20th meeting minutes. I was not here for that. Does anybody have any comments?

I did not.

make a motion we approve the minutes as submitted i'll second all in favor all right all right abstain um i'd like to request that we i want to move something up from uh the miscellaneous uh items up to the front um does it require a motion to move that up yeah okay make a motion uh to approve or to to move It's under miscellaneous. Under other business. 316, is that it? Yeah. Move 316 Highland Road up to the first item or the next item. I'll make a motion to do that. All in favor? Aye. The first thing, to bring that up, we've got a representative here for the 316 East Highland Road project. I think they're here because we had continued it previously to this meeting, but I think they're getting close to being able to submit, but not quite there, and at their request, would like to continue this to the September meeting. So unless anybody has an issue with that, I'd like to continue to make a motion to continue this item to the September meeting.

That would be just the conditional zoning certificate, but the whole thing.

um i think it's just the conditional zoning certificate is that that's what's on the agenda so is there a second all right any more any discussion on that that's okay all right all in favor all right all right so we'll see you next month sounds good we'll coordinate further thank you guys thank you all right first new business item uh Portal Associates, this is the Fairfield Inn by Marriott.

I was thinking that was related to the first new business. They were not.

You already scribbled it out. I'm sorry. We have to cancel it.

Jason crossed it out. That's why I was thinking it was going to move over.

Representatives here from... Come on up.

everybody good for you so i guess yeah you guys made a pretty good submittal here a bunch of good information um now the easiest to go over maybe what's new we'll see what new comments we've got from the staff that's if that sounds acceptable to you all right so i guess did you want to go over your stuff or do you want to jump right into their comments?

We can go to the memorandum.

Is that the previous one or is that the current one?

If you want to do that. Let's just jump into the comments. Brian gets upset if we go through. We don't let him go first.

I get paid by the word, so I always pick up what it is in mine. If he has to cut stuff out, he gets upset.

Yeah, my memo is dated August 8th, if that's the one you're looking at. Correct. So from the last meeting, basically there were, the applicant has attempted to address the concern about the drive entrance, and I'll get into that in a minute. I think we all agreed, I'm on the second page, we all agreed at some point The lot split plat will be submitted. That's duly noted for the record. So I just keep carrying it over so we don't forget about it. And then we also agreed last meeting that the black red iron fence with the columns doesn't need to contain the lights because that more closely mirrors what's going on with Gitco and KFC as opposed to the other end at Route 882, which does have lights. So just the only comment I had on that is I just want to see, as previously mentioned, having that small piece extend to the west, maybe to the west side of that secondary entrance, which now is depicted as an in-only.

So I would love to do that. But you have a retaining wall? There's a big four-foot retaining wall in that way, in the way, completely in the way of where we would put that. It's right in line. If Matt could make the law go away, like I said to Matt tonight, then I'll do it. But I think we need the law. So that is my goal.

Say this again. Where is this?

This is just

Yeah, so there's not enough room on the front end of that. We're just going to respectfully request, hey, you know, we've got a big curve on the site.

We've got all the way over to our other neighbor. We think it's going to look great.

Well, yeah, I mean, all that's set all that aside how it's going to look or not. It just didn't seem symmetrical to not have it. But you're saying it's impossible to put it in there due to the. retaining wall, and it looked like he had some room to slide it in front of that retaining wall.

I think he just said, to me, it's an appearance. You've got a lot of iron fence, then right behind you, you're just going to have a retaining wall. If it's a matter of being symmetrical, we'd be willing to take the piece off of the eastern entrance, so then that way you've got fence only between the driveways, rather than a piece on one side. Just from an appearance standpoint, I think it would be symmetric and then it would just be the fence kind of in between the two driveways. That would be a thought.

I think the driveways are far enough apart it wouldn't look out of place if you had a fence on the east end and not on the west end.

That's fine.

If you can't get it in, I'd rather give you as much fence as I can within reach. That's what we're showing.

It would just be, I just don't think there's enough space to have a fence and then a wall right behind it.

I don't think it would look very good either. Okay. That's our only comment on it. Otherwise, we can do it.

Well, this is my... my compromising mood I'm in tonight. I mean, I'm fine with it. If you can't fit it in, I understand it'd be a little bit in front of a retaining wall. You can put it on top if you wanted to. All right, so that issue was my comment number three or comment number two uh comment three relates to the um now what's being proposed as an in loan in only and then use that entrance used only by emergency services they're proposing to utilize an electronic gate system that access controls would be provided to the fire department We've talked a lot about the entrance and the line of sight and I think this was essentially their compromise to not having it be a full access curb and just using the one to the east as their full access. We had talked about bringing access through the existing Knights Inn building that's not going to be demolished, but the applicant stated that that wasn't desirable from the standpoint of Marriott, I guess, that they have to be standalone projects. Although, I mean, I've seen plenty of Marriott projects with dual access, but maybe it's something different that the applicant can... provide further detail on, but that's why that piece was avoided and continued to look at. some access out onto Highland. So that's clearly gonna be a discussion point tonight as it relates to in only access. And I just said, provided police and fire concur with that comment. I don't know if fire has a report tonight. And because that's not being proposed to access out, they would have to accommodate some kind of a turnaround, and they're proposing a space at the end that's about 13 feet wide to the rear, 18 feet wide to the front, which seems adequate for a passenger vehicle. Certainly, they're going to get bigger vehicles turned around than that, I would think, unless you ran ran that through but certainly for a passenger vehicle as we talked about before parking is required to have one space per room one for two each two employees per shift the applicant has stated that beyond the 75 parking spaces the additional seven for staff is adequate based on the two per shift Um, you know, the one thing we've never have talked about, uh, maybe you can just shed some light on what's the parking demand expected for the conference piece.

Um, I don't have to defer to the owner. He's asking about the conference piece.

So that we designed it to, uh, what's that? What documents do you have?

The occupancy of the conference room? Well, it's table and chairs, so it's going to be 15 square feet per occupant. I'm not sure exactly where you're sitting here. Oh, that's fine. I just think... I'm here in the room. Yeah. I would guess 20, 25 could be in that room.

So if the hotel were full, which would be ideal, and that had an event going on, you're likely going to have some deficiency in parking.

So we look at that as a non-simultaneous use. Most of the time when you're in a hotel during the day is when your conferences are going on. Conferences aren't going on at night. Most people coming to the hotel are out doing their business during the day. They come back at night. So I just see that there's an overlap there, quite honestly. When the conference room gets used, I don't think there's as many people out in the parking lot. They're gone.

Maybe you could just submit some empirical data that supports that, that just shows, based on the applicant, he owns other hotels. that shows conferences generally are from 8 to 4. There's checkouts that occur. Check-ins don't occur until after 3. So maybe we can just show some data that supports that. Since we never talked about it, it seems fair. And we keep coming back to the parking issue. Not that one space is going to make it or break it, but it looks like that one space still remains in the setback.

That's on me.

Well, we assumed that the architect didn't make that mistake.

He had it on his plan. We just didn't catch it.

If you look at the architectural site plan, it's incorrect. It just didn't get picked up on silicon.

I had suggested, had previously had some comments about landscaping and felt that there's a tree at the end of one of the islands. I felt if you needed to make up space, you could probably make up the space. I guess that'd be further to the, I don't know what direction that is, but it's, it'd be to the south, I guess.

you had to remove one or make up one in that spot you probably could because it's just a little stripy now if i remember correctly i'll tell you what i'll meet you halfway if i can find another space on this lot i will definitely give it because you know the more spaces we can get yeah so we'll look to see if we can squeeze another one in but we've already resolved that

We've got the number on the architectural site. I think it's correct. Yeah. It's the correct number, yeah.

On this incorrect civil site plan.

Right. That's what we needed because I wanted to see it. I mean, you get paid to find mistakes.

So I was just like, here, you could make up one. Maybe you already did. I don't know. We already did. OK. and then um yeah just take a look at that that's not a significant issue but some of the landscaping i still just think you know maybe you could you could do a little bit along that eastern building facade um i'll tell you what we'll we'll do what we can where it's going to receive light and rain but under those large opening areas it's not a good idea Yeah, I guess what page is that on?

I think it's LS100, if I think my memory serves me right.

So is it not possible to get landscaping along this frontage behind the back of the sidewalk?

Not with the vertical columns that were added to that, right? Did you add that?

Yeah, we added columns and piers there. You see those little squares in there towards the second floor? You may recall we had the... Was that vertical break up or whatever? When we came in here at the first meeting, we had all of the second floors cantilevered. There were no columns, and the commission didn't like that there were no columns. So we added columns. Then as soon as we brought the columns in, Divided up the sidewalk area for, you know, wheelchairs and such, and made it more difficult to navigate. So, sort of catch the money, too. But again, I still wouldn't put landscaping under a four-foot-long attic, under a building, because it won't get any rain.

Well, I'm not suggesting to put it over there. Yeah. Okay, well, it still feels like you have some potential to do some .

I will look at that, I promise you, and see what we can do to squeeze something in there. Yeah. I just don't want to plan under those overhangs, if we can agree. Yeah, I don't think you .

which is, we happen to have one, so. Am I?

Yeah, no, I understand what you're asking, but I'm sort of agreeing with them that under an overhang on the northeast side of the building, it's just not going to get further, and it's sun or water, rain. But I wonder if maybe there's a little long area where . I wonder if they could put something low there to kind of like mirror what's going on in that little center between your island. Maybe that would just kind of reconnect those two and then help bring the building there and just make it .

Can you show me where you're? Sorry.

This area here, right?

Oh, sure.

We could just do some . Yeah, if we can. Yeah, I have no problem with that at all.

I'm just having a hard time up against the building for it. Yeah. Because we need circulation. Sure.

But I think if you do that, it will look like the effort was made.

Okay. I think it kind of frames it a little bit. And then it looks like on your lighting plan, you still have some, Minor exceedances at the primary driveway. I'm sorry. I was writing. The focal strength at the primary driveway.

I'll have to look at that. Yeah. I mean, we will correct that.

Yeah. I mean, it's probably likely that it can be maybe shielded differently here.

So the only other comment we had on the east entrance, not the east, the west entrance, that was the entrance of contention. We would like to keep that paved and not pavers. The main reason for that is we will have trash pickups and we will have other delivery trucks for food, that kind of thing. the restaurant so they're gonna they're gonna more than likely we'd like to have a manner that way anyway to keep them out of the main front entrance um so the trash truck of course is going to want to drive straight back and go right into the trash so being that as it may with with So we considered your suggestion, but we'd like to keep what we have, with all due respect. And so that's our request.

That's at the western . The western .

Correct. So how do they access the gate? They pull up in front of it, and then there's a remote. Those gates, the fire department will have their access control as well. I don't know how it all works, but the technology is there. The trash guys can open it. The delivery trucks will be able to open it. That's what I'm getting at too, Jason.

I just want to make sure that only the authorized vehicles can enter there and that others are not using it for an end and that nobody is using it as an exit i guess that's what i'm getting to have uh and i guess while we're chatting about it uh unfortunately fire is not here this evening but i think fire department absolutely has to approve the gate and the mechanism as to how it opens and allows them through because they're the ones that are going to need to operate it in an emergency did you receive any comments from them yet please mr chairman the police chief could not be here tonight but he told me to relay a message that he's not in favor of

And as he understood it would be an entrance only. Yes, it's .

If I may, when we're talking about delivery trucks coming in that entrance, what types of trucks? Are we talking like a semi-truck potentially? No.

A trash truck.

Okay, but you said delivery truck. Or a small delivery truck. Okay. You know, they're just provost trucks. Well, the reason why I ask is because the vehicle turning into that, having to wait for a gate to open, could potentially cause traffic back up out on that street.

Well, no, they won't be sticking out on the street. Yeah, you're correct. We have plenty of room between the gate and the road.

Do you know how much room you have?

I don't have that dimension.

Yeah, we need to determine what plenty is.

I think even a large box truck's going to be sticking out to some extent.

You don't have a scale, do you?

I forgot my scale.

So your plan that you submitted scales at about 44 feet from the gate to the white line on the pavement. But, you know, you need some space on either end.

Yeah, you're in that range. A 40-foot box truck would be probably the biggest box truck that would come in here.

Can that gate be moved in further? We can move it in for a minute.

Well, it's probably actually better if you move it in further because if this house shakes out at the end of the day, it would less encourage people in that last parking spot to have some wiggle room.

I think what I was trying to do, though, was give someone room to turn around. So if they pull in that space, they can back up with a little curve to it, not hit the gate yet. Yeah.

around to make that turn around well in theory that's a completely open slot where you're using it as the turnaround for cars that go down and say oh we're over over the park we can't get down here anyhow but that space is always open so the car across from it can just back into that nose out then yeah they wouldn't have to go

that way, they just hit the gate.

Yeah, they can just back straight up. For me, it was a happy medium. Giving them enough room to back up, not hit the gate. I'm not going to say anything about anyone's wife. I'm a certain fan.

So if the delivery truck comes in or the trash truck, then they have to exit out the other way.

That's correct. It really works well. It especially works well this entrance for a trash truck.

So if a customer, a patron, accidentally misses the drive and goes down to the next drive and pulls up to that, they're going to have to then back out of there and then go to the other truck. They're going to have to turn around and go the other way. Yeah, that's...

Weird about a scenario where somebody accidentally tries to pull into the westerly entrance, they're not an authorized user of that entrance, and they pull up to the gate, and they can't get through the gate. What does that person do? In reverse, out on the Highland Road, in the most dangerous location, probably in the city? How do we prevent that?

I guess, what's the signage look like out there? We have some signs proposed. I know we've got no exit signs on the inside. I wonder if there's some signs that could be put up to really deter people from using them.

Yeah, like no turn around or something like that.

Didn't we determine that a right-in turn is not impacted by sight distance on this? And a left-in. It's the owl. It's the owl that was of concern. So this thing, I remember saying, you know, without a gate here, take a gate off. Your situation, concern, someone coming, misses the east one.

You know, they just don't know. They just don't know.

They go, hey, look, I can turn left. It's still a safe turn. In, but now they're stuck. No, take the gateway. What I'm saying is, let's take the gateway. Just in this thought. Take the gateway. This is an in only. Right in and left in only. We can bullnose that. Right? We can put a bullnose on that. We can sign it. And you can make that a left in and right in only. Still meet requirements of safety and take away the gate which then has no issue with anybody making a mistake right i think after a while people are going to try to exit hold on let's have the gate always open

From the entrance side.

I think there's technology that the gate will only open from one side. So you can have it such that the gate will not open to go out of that driveway entrance. Correct. Looks like your client's pointing to me saying he agrees and they must know it. So I'm pretty sure that's the case. You can go through the gate, but you can't go back out. Correct, but it can't go back out the other way. But then you don't have to worry about, again, if this shakes out this way, then you wouldn't have to worry about safety forces having something on each of their trucks or whatever or waiting to put a code in or anything like that. in reverse. I'm just saying I think it's possible.

Right, and if somebody pulls in there accidentally, instead of them backing out into the road, they pull up, gate opens, they're like, oh, I think they're special. I don't think it's going to be, unless you come there all the time, you know, I'm going back. It's not like it's a crowded entrance. It's only if you missed the first one, it would open for them. That's not... i'm trying to figure there'd be any downside to that i mean get your trucks and your deliveries come in without hidden buttons emergency services and somebody doesn't have to back up but yeah it will not open from the other direction and that eliminates the concern of somebody trying to go out that direction i just think having a drive there period isn't horrible it's a bad idea we've had multiple discussions about this guys and

But Scott that was leaving. We were concerned mainly.

No, when you were here last time we talked about even just any form of the drive there and even the fire chief brought it up. We had asked again to have you guys go back to Marriott and ask him if the drive could be put through that other. Through the existing nights in parking lot and shared and see how that would shake out. And there were notes, and I know you had to leave unfortunately, but there were notes on the drawings that it said that there shouldn't be a, there's part of it blocked. It was on the same drawings.

Yeah, we don't care. That was from the Wonder Act, from, for a stop and say distance or something. But that goes away, again, that goes away with in only access. And I get that.

I just think driver period is a bad idea, especially if the police chief commented on that.

Did he give a reason why he did not like it? He said. No, no, I just don't like it.

What he said is look at all the curves in Macedonia. Is there any other driving in a curve anywhere in the city? And I couldn't think of anything. he said it just in distance it's people are coming to face it on the corner the visibility is not there and he's worried about it i mean it was bad did police or fire say anything about the now primary i mean the one at east yeah he didn't like that either So, and while we're talking, I know we kind of got out of order here, Brian, sorry, but I, when we first saw this project, I had a conversation with the fire chief and we talked a lot about the entrance that we'd been talking about. He also had a problem with that. And I remember saying something like, but you're fine with the other one up there. And he goes, no, they're both terrible. And because he was also concerned about two things, the main entrance that looking over your left and not be able to see far around the curb. And then also it like there's no way it looks like it can align with the driveway across the street. So now we've got a zigzag there, whatever, I don't know what your traffic, civil engineering term would be for that. Zigzag. There you go. But he also did not like that. And I think it's a bummer that we always come here every night and he's not here the one that you really would like to use the power of. I'd want to go back to the fire as well and see what they say about that. I don't think it's going to be in your favor, though. That's kind of my biggest hold up on this is those two things. I wish we had a different solution.

Yeah, I'll speak up for a moment. I agree with most of you guys here. It's a very difficult site and it's a big safety concern. We've been saying this is the third meeting in a row now that we've said that. i'm not trying to overly critique your design it's a challenging site it's a very concerning safety situation out here we've talked about having the additional uh access over to what i'll call the bob evans road for lack of a better word it used to be called the fort lumber road i wish we could explore that a little more to be honest

So if I can, I don't want to be, just like you don't want to be the guy, I don't want to be the guy if I'm going to ask a question, because you have to. So we've had the discussion here however many times. The words that keep coming up are, I don't like and I don't think. But yet, we do have some engineering responsibilities. And then I know the code will fall back on safety. Has anybody proposed the right use for the condition to, I mean, what do you guys want? I guess my question is what do you guys want?

At the end of the day though, this is a situation you guys have created by splitting this lot. It's currently one lot right now and it functions. You guys are taking this and making it two lots and therefore requesting two additional drives that do not exist.

But one drug does exist because there is a drug out there right now.

But it's not used and it's not functioning. but again you guys have created this site so this isn't something where and we understand it is a challenging site but there's safety concerns here from and we will be the ones that i think mr roberts brought up last meeting but we'll be the ones that are getting the phone calls and asking the questions why something like that was put there when you guys are long gone So those are the things we as community members have to be able to answer and stand behind. I can't stand behind this right now. I'm sorry, I can't. I don't think that drive is in the right location. I think it's a huge safety concern. We've asked multiple times for you guys to explore the Knights Inn, taking it through there. Brought it up the last time, saying that I think if you came back with something like that, helping us understand that and how it would work on the site would be a good idea. It didn't come back again. If that's not something that Marriott wants, then...

I can't speak to that. The owner can speak to that.

I've seen multiple sites where they've stayed in multiple hotels where they all share different drives and stuff like that. This is the first I've heard of where Marriott would want...

The hotel, the existing La Quinta, you know, next door or in front of them is a similar setup to Scott. We have one drive off of Highland, and then another drive is on to the 84 Lumber Road. Right.

I mean, I have two, but they're the same brand. So, you know. I mean, I've done them before, but it's the same brand, right? And Marriott has their, whatever, I might be getting them wrong, but their Fairfield, and then they have the, I don't know, there's the ones that have Marriott, they have the Tom Place, and then they have the whatever else, and it's two brands, so they don't care, because it's the same franchise, or...

whatever i just do the engineering part of it i don't know how we need to consider this a competing hotel though i mean for the night scene compared to a prayer field is well when they're competing when they're competing hotels they don't want to have i wouldn't consider well i wouldn't consider that a competing hotel though the night scene could end up in a marriott if it were a hilton sitting there in a marriott and they had to cross okay i i could potentially buy that.

I'm saying branding. I'm saying from a branding perspective. But again, I don't know. I'm just telling you that, you know, I have done them before where they are on the same parcels and I've also done where they split parcels too. I understand what you're saying. Your position or the board's position is by splitting this, we've created the hardship. You have. Despite, if we came up with a... Layout that utilized the entrance that's already there. I believe there is an entrance into that site. There would be nothing that, I mean, what do we do at that point?

Well, it's not an entrance into the site. It's an apron that goes to like a third spot. It doesn't connect to the...

It's not used.

Part of it is used.

So how did that get there? I mean it doesn't appear as though it connects. I just believe that it was an entrance that has been to that.

I guess I'll just say this for the record. I'm not buying that Marriott doesn't like that. I mean, well, I believe they don't like it, but I'm not buying that Marriott's saying absolutely under no way will this happen if we're sharing it. They may not like it, but they've also done, along with the owners, done a lot of research to figure out that this is a lucrative site to put 100 beds in there, and if they really want it there, this might be, probably is the only way it's going to happen. So they might not like it, but they might have to live with it. And these are public meetings. As soon as there's a bad accident there, someone's lawyer is going to get smart and they're going to come back to these discussions and say, why did you guys ever approve this when you had these concerns about it? And I don't want my name on that.

I think even with the gate there, people are going to even though it's not, they're going to try to turn around there, especially coming around that corner sometimes.

People are just going to use it as a turnaround even though the gate doesn't open up.

It's very, it's going to be probably. Yeah, it's going to.

Somebody's going to eventually just come around the corner, realize they're going the wrong way, turn in there real quick. That's my biggest concern with that.

I don't want to be misunderstood, but I'd love to have this property here. Yeah, I think the community needs it. I think it'd be a great building. It looks really good. The change you guys have made, I think all that looks really good. I'm just very concerned about this. That's kind of our job is to give you guys pushback on that.

Yeah, it's our job to keep that position.

And I'm not really an extra either, so that's why, like, as the non-credential person sitting at the table, I go and talk to, like, fire chief and that guy, and I'm going to go with what they say because that's their job. They see the terrible accidents that sometimes are created when we do things like this.

And there's terrible accidents that happen.

It's not going to be completely perfect. I got it. But someone is going to come back and say, why didn't you do it that way?

My challenge as a designer was I had to design on two separate cells. That's what I was given. So I don't know all of the logic behind that. I would have to defer to my client. But when he tells me I need two separate parcels, I move forward with two separate parcels. So you have the best I can give you. based on the information I have at this current time.

So, and I think it's been mentioned a couple times, is some sort of substantiate why it is that Marriott doesn't want that to go through there. That doesn't mean it'll change your mind. Or is it possible? Yeah. Yeah, I mean, just basically, and what you're saying in polite ways is, I think you might have said it more correctly, But I get it. We need to either substantiate the simple fact that this is why they won't do it, or absolutely push to the envelope the fact to get them to accept an access. Because you're more or less saying this isn't going to happen. We're going to continue back with the fourth or fifth tabling of this thing. If we're going to continue on with these entrances, is that correct? I mean, that's kind of where we're in.

Yeah. I feel like the reason we're not going out, the other thing is to reserve the space for whatever happens at the other building. Yeah, whatever happens at the other property. We're saving money.

I'd just like to ask my client if he has any.

Sure. Do you have any further thoughts? through entrances on its own parcel. It's a requirement they're requiring. That because the parcel's gonna be different, They don't want to give access. They said as long as we have two exits and entrances on our own driveways, on our own partial. We did put in the request. We're still waiting for a response back.

They didn't want the shared operations.

Because they said that in the future, that could cause problems between the two properties of who's going to handle the maintenance, things like that. And then there has to be an easement from the second partial to the first partial.

Which I understand that, but I would rather them deal with that than us deal with the safety.

We definitely want to go and open up that route if we can. Given once they give us a green flag, we absolutely have no problem putting that at risk. It's not like this first building is going to exist for more than, hopefully, we're hoping four to five years at the max. We should be able to tear that down and then obviously construct something else.

What's planning on going there?

Hopefully, another one comes out if we can. If not, then give us whatever you guys will allow at that point on that footnote. Well, we're hoping that's what they want to do. We can build an adjacent property. That would be ideal.

So why can't you start with that one, then, I guess?

The first partial?

Yeah, why wouldn't you start with that one? And it would alleviate all these issues. If you're planning on putting another hotel there of a similar brand, and I get that this specific footprint and brand won't fit on there, but why would you not explore a brand right now that would fit on the site?

Because then we would have to move a lot of stuff like lobbies and stuff. And Knights is not giving us permission because they also came through. And this was the partial that they said existed the way their lobby requirements . We don't have enough space to build on that.

Our current franchise still has . So we didn't get the permission to build on it.

When did your franchise expire? Two years.

Two years. Two years.

In two years, so in 2028. And then at that point then you have the ability to, once the franchise is decommissioned, you can tear it down.

So we're hoping by the time this opens and we're operational we should be able to handle the process.

Because you currently have a franchise agreement with them. And the only way they're going to let you out currently is by taking this back piece is what I'm understanding.

We got the permission from the bank and from the franchise to release the second building.

That's how we .

Yeah.

So we already hit it, so we're hoping that if we get approval, that we can start the knock-down process.

So, I mean, that's good, useful information. We probably should have talked about that a while ago. I mean, I'm familiar with those, having done some other hotel site planning. You'd be able to submit that type of documentation. You could redact out pieces that the city couldn't see, but you could submit some of that as documentation. I'm assuming. Because it's going to continue to be, well, you know, you can tell us one thing, but until you show us something.

Yeah. Yeah. But we still requested it for one more time.

But we'll definitely try. We're agreeing with what you guys are saying, safety-wise. And I don't think we want to use the second entrance or the primary entrance anyway.

But that's the reason. As soon as you made that comment about those gates, that somebody pulls it up, there are technologies who sees the vehicles, who puts it up, that's your priority. Yeah. That would be ideal in this case.

I just think there's been a lot of discussion about this particular issue that it would be helpful for you to provide some, as I had said earlier, some empirical data that supports what you're saying. You can deck out sensitive issues, but to see something from, as it relates to your

your agreement with that would be helpful i would hope that marriott understands the two-year i'm not going to rehash what you said the two years that this potential could change that it's a short period of time that they would not likely run into easement issues and all that for this short two-year period of time and then that would resolve that problem as opposed to marriott being named in a lawsuit for a fatal accident that happened because this project went forward like that I don't know.

We'll definitely try. We're just waiting. Hopefully we should hear something back.

Our meetings are recorded. They're online. Mary, I would love to watch the three months' worth of discussion on this. I feel like you're getting someone who's just writing a letter back and they don't really understand that this has been hotly contested.

They may have never been to the site or stood there.

And maybe the right attorney at Marriott would look at it and say, wow, yeah, that is a concern. That's a bigger concern than our other concern, so let's deal with it. Because I'd love to see this property built there.

one of the other things i just happened to catch too was that the dumpster enclosure is sitting in the 25-foot yard setback sorry building setback did you guys catch that um which is that the dumpster enclosure sitting in a 25-foot building setback Yeah. It's like 100% in there. It's not even like a sliver. The whole dumpster enclosure sits in the setback.

Yeah, the question was, did you catch it? Apparently you did.

I did. Yeah, that's in the building setback. But it's not a building.

It's a structure. It's not a foundation. You don't want that construction.

I know the country is sitting in the 25th place.

We would request it. Okay. I think I think we would.

And the retaining wall now that that's none of those foundations or anything like that, I know it's one of those self-supporting retainables that's not in the foundations or anything like that are going to have to go past the property lines right because they're right up against it just forgot to ask that question now and then bring it up later trade one problem for another and i forget the eastern driver was always where it's at now is that where it's always shown

that spot yeah i mean as far more or less i just work you know i mean as francis suggested you know provide some documentation that would be towards the reason to keep something on the highland road itself uh some other folks are saying any any driveway over there is is not going to work um i'm wondering if something had to come out how is is that is that the best spot for it, or could the danger of the safety of it be decreased or safety improved by rotating it around a little bit? Yeah, I mean, like, if you're pulling up in this as it is right now, you are really looking back to your left to see something. If this was more, if you made this the main aisle as you go across the front of the building and it was more in that middle of this curve, would your visibility be a lot better without having to go way past 90? I feel like here, it's really tough to see that car. It's way back here. Yeah, you have to look so far behind you. Put it in the middle, put it 45 degrees, you know, whatever. Are you looking just a little bit past middle, a little bit past, you know, in each direction. You might get a little bit better visibility.

And Kevin, we did look at that, honestly. Yeah. But we lost parking spaces in the process. We did not. That layout gives us the maximum parking panel we could achieve on this site. And I'm not going to say we didn't look at it. We did. As soon as we did it, as soon as you rotate around that obscure corner now, you can't get parking in it. So you lose a ton of parking doing that, okay? So again, it's the catch 22. We're trying to get enough parking to meet the zoning code. We're trying to get those extra spaces for employees. So that's, that's how it goes. Okay. I'm just telling you how it goes. How close was it? How many spaces? I don't remember, but you lose at least four spaces unless we put something.

Well, that sounds like, um, underground parking. Yeah. It sounds like maybe there'd be support to have something in a setback if it meant it could be safer. It's a tight setback. We talked about the moving net, but I thought the other issue was primarily you were pretty dug in on keeping two entrances.

Again, I think there's a number of moving parts in all of this. If Mariette comes back and says, hey, we can work with one or some sort of joint access, then maybe it makes sense to rotate this around. Maybe all of a sudden, I think we're sort of back to the drawing a little bit.

But I can tell you, you only fit that hotel on that site the way we have it, Jim, in order to maximize parking behind the building and on the north east side. We have achieved the absolute maximum best layout for that site as it is situated. We could rotate the, as Kevin suggested, we could rotate that entrance, but it comes in across the park. We're between a rock and a hard place in a number of areas. We're trying to come up with the best solution. given the site that we have and the acres that we have?

If I had a say in any variances or anything, if it was up to me, I'd say, yeah, I'd trade some parking spaces for a better access location. But unfortunately, I don't have any say in that. But I keep driving past here. I go to the get-go all the time. I go by that way. I'm like, am I crazy that this really isn't that bad? And every time I drive by, I'm like, no. I feel like it is, especially the western one. I'm like, is it nuts?

And here's the thing, guys. Right now, it's fully vegetated. There's trees in the way. that all goes away. The whole site gets wiped away.

It's what you guys have control of. I don't disagree with you. It is very fully vegetated right now, but it's all stuff that's underneath the bridge that ODOT controls and other areas that you guys don't have control of. And that's where I think still it's... The way people go down that road, I saw somebody just a few weeks ago almost get clip pulling out of the restaurant across the street because somebody was flying around that corner. And that has more visibility to that corner than what this would.

You got a guy pulling out, and he wants to take a right.

He's probably tipping more right than I'm even showing the car there. And you got this guy is who he's got to worry about flying at him. This is the angle he's looking back at that red line. It's like that. And the farther you start to go forward to get a spot, he's almost looking behind him. That's what scares me over there. This one, if he's sitting here and he's looking at this guy or a little bit farther down, to me it seems like a lesser of an angle.

Although I would think on an arc like that, no matter where you go, you're rotating. It's going to be very similar. I get what you're saying.

Yeah, it may not be any better if you actually look at it.

then it doesn't matter.

It's kind of the same wherever you're at.

This is almost to the flat spot.

It may flat house under there. That's where the disadvantage is. We work on these are what the numbers say and this is what it shows. I'm sensing that we're not going to I feel as though we've done this before. And we're getting kind of to that same spot where it's, I think we have to satisfy, we have to continue to push the Marriott, what they can accept. If they won't accept that, you need to understand why they won't accept that. And that still doesn't necessarily mean that anybody's going to,

And I would say Marriott needs to understand that currently, with all of this being one parcel, there is no problem. There is access to the entire site. When the lot split occurs, that's when the problem occurs. So I would ask that Marriott is fully aware of that.

Let me ask this. If this state has one entire parcel, not at all suggesting that it would, but if it did, and... would you allow an access point to highlight?

I don't know that that changes anything.

So I guess my point is it doesn't matter would have to go to the B for lumber. It would have to go up whatever that road is out there.

Because I think as a single parcel right now, it has provided access. It has access to a public system. As soon as we split that and we make that a single parcel, we have to let it have access somewhere, which at that point is that. So I mean, until we get that totally resolved, thankfully we haven't done any lot splits from our side.

As a single parcel, though, you're indicating that you could restrict all flow to the 84 Lumber. So really, basically what we're saying is, and I'm not putting, I'm just, what I'm interpreting is, really under no circumstances is there gonna be an entrance onto Highland Road unless we can really validate. That's our hurdle, is getting an access to Highland Road.

But let me add onto that.

but more centralized on that curve. I don't know that it's any better. It was an idea I was looking at here, but I don't know that it's necessarily a better option. If this is a consistent curve and you're on it anywhere, you're probably still looking back.

As you get closer to the tangent, then it does. I'm just wanting to make sure I understand because as much as I like seeing you guys on every fourth of Monday night or whatever. I don't think you like guys not seeing me necessarily. But my point is I just want to make sure we understand what hurdle we have to get over. And it's this entrance. And the idea of a split is creating the hardship for forcing an entrance on the island. And if it stayed one parcel, necessarily support an entrance onto Highlander. It may be a very restricted entrance or something, but you want all traffic to go to whatever that road is. I just want to understand it so we know.

Yeah, no, I follow what you're saying. It does. I mean, that road's there for a reason, and that's what everything right now, except for La Quinta's one access point that's on the straightaway, everything pushes that direction.

Yeah, La Quinta Drive is the best place of it all. I mean, it's no picnic over there by Bob Evans either to turn left out of there. If it's busy at all, it stinks. But at least you have visibility of what you're looking at without craning your knee back.

It's difficult to make a left, but it's not over the razor. It's for different reasons.

And the basis for everything that I'm saying is it's the safety side of the code Because engineering-wise, we can check the boxes, but it becomes, there's always that part of the code that says that's great that these engineers know what they're doing, but safety has to, there's a safety element to it. Am I right?

Yeah, like we mentioned at the last meeting, I think there's the letter of the law and the spirit of the law.

It seems to me that traffic is probably not going to be turning left really all that much out of this site. Yeah, so with so the panel comes back with other shakes out with Marriott could there be a scenario where it'll it's a right out of the eastern entrance to give some additional way out of there besides Not necessarily prohibiting but restricting and if

If there is access to this site from 84 Lumber Road and then the exit, then the restricted connection to Highland would be basically right out. Because we know that that's the majority of traffic. Yeah.

And if that were to be the case, I think it would have to be only right out. Well, no, I, I, yeah. No, really, it's because I see people all the time.

And you can, you can design. Yeah, no, I know.

Here's the concern with that, though, that we should all keep in mind. If that entrance becomes right out only, then as the vehicle is directed to the right, now he has to look even further behind him. He already has to look 125 degrees. Now he's going to be looking. my gosh it's close to 180 degrees behind them what if on the restaurant across the street i was more i was more thinking that it was a relocated easterly

right out that aligns more with the one across the street. I know you're going to lose parking, but that's where I was. I think if it was a radar. Oh, yeah. Right now makes it safer as a right out.

Rotate it around some to maximize the visibility. Yeah, it seems like that could be possible. That's something that, yeah, first of all, it sounds well with the commission except that on the parcel we have

without going through the next set.

As only a write-out, not having any left?

Chairman, could I ask a question? Yeah. Maybe something we should consider. We're talking about safety here for the last half an hour, which I'm all for it. We have neither of our safety forces represented here tonight. Should we have some... some additional input memo and Nino spoke to police chief it sounds like and so that's good but anything we do I think we need some input from both police and fire chief right it would be nice to have you ask something formal from them or then someone in person or something yeah representative memo something a little uneasy given any kind of direction without some input from both police and fire. All we know is they're not in favor of it.

They're trying to move it along a little bit. I guess there's probably a little bit of other issues to talk about. I know we kind of got stopped on this and there was other things that were being brought up we should probably talk about. But I think at least kind of what you summarized, some things that we would like to see you guys do more things as related to the access and a little more investigation um but should we talk about some of these other things just to get it clicked off so we know you know is this the only remaining issue really out there besides a couple of small things mr fran said i think he asked for a little bit of landscaping stuff as documentation if i could speak to the engineering i mean i i didn't see anything in here that wasn't

the rest of my memo.

Yeah, yeah.

There are 19 other comments on here.

But those were actually water connections, yes.

Do you want to go over those, Joe?

I'm sorry, say that again, Chairman?

Just, do you want to go over yours, anything that's, yeah.

Alright, I'll try to do it in two minutes here. Stormwater management, you show underground retention, so when we get to that point, we'll give that detailed review, make sure it meets the code. We talked in the past about the FEMA flood zone. The parcel is in the flood zone, so before any approval can be given, we need the floodplain study, and there's an additional fee and deposit that goes along with that. It's all in the code. But that's a substantial item that needs to be taken care of, certainly. We already talked about number four, future intent for the remaining Water main extension and water connection, that's all in here in writing. You know what to do. We don't need to talk about that in any further detail. Yard hydrants, again, that would have to be something that fire would approve of those locations. Sanitary needs to be approved by the county. We've talked about the 24 inch, the existing 24 inch storm sewer that your underground detention empty into. I believe that needs to be inspected for condition and clogging and structural integrity prior to any construction beginning, quite honestly prior to us issuing a permit because it could wind up in a situation where all of a sudden now you need to perform work on somebody else's property because your underground attention won't drain properly. So I think that's got to be video inspected before we give an approval, to be honest with you. We've got a low point there up at the northeasterly corner. I'll let you work through the grading on that. Curving is required. We did get curbland, but it's on both sides. We want to stay away from those center pitch driveways with the center located catch basin. It's always bad for the pavement. Retaining walls will need the structural engineer stamped counts on that. That needs to be submitted to the city. We haven't even talked about sidewalk. We've been talking about the safety of the drive access. I guess we should consider sidewalk across the frontage. Other places haven't. I don't know what the commission's appetite for that is and maybe that's a Planning Commission meeting. And we talked about the driveways in depth. And then the last thing is ODOT. Some of the proposed work, I believe, falls within their LA, even though they have an airfield bridge. I don't know what the rules are on that. I don't know, ODOT's gotta be at least notified, I would think, beyond that. What other permissions do you need from ODOT or requirements would ODOT have on the site? I don't know. I don't even know the exact limits of ODOT's limited access on here. We just showed the bridge limits.

It's like the western corner of the western entrance is under the limited access.

Well, yes, and I guess the question is, book the dashed line that's on there that yet look at the edge of the bridge that also limited access or is the limited access a wider slot well and then they don't know that will require a little survey research I guess this has been surveyed and that's

But we'll verify that, and it'll go to open up to a permit.

That'd be great. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, I think we all agree it's all aerial. But I had asked that question in, I think, the first plan review about limited access as it relates to the driveway. Again, there's no way they're going to need it, but is it within it that's impacted that they could say no? Yeah. I don't know. So you control the limited access, right?

Yeah. before you can do that you have to get a permit from them so you just kind of go through the process i think many of these things just like you haven't reviewed some of the stuff in in great detail we haven't although we haven't fully designed we haven't gone through the full detail because we don't even know if we have i don't know how the project's going to lay out i don't know

And these are just things I want you to be aware of. Absolutely. I have a question about the 16th sidewalk. Say that again? You were at number 16. Oh, 16. So let's say we get to that point, and it's decided there's a sidewalk. La Quinta did continue that sidewalk.

They have sidewalk across two-thirds of the frontage. Yeah, it's weird.

Which that kind of is not ideal having a sidewalk with it.

There's a gap. That's why they throw it out there. I don't know how you do that.

Or that goes to the bridge.

and realistically going to the other side of the highway where there's a another hotel i see people crossing that highway all the time to go to get go essentially to do like light grocery shopping and i anticipate you would see some of that from this property as well too so that's why i like the sidewalk well maybe we can get lakenta to extended down maybe they didn't know what maybe they were supposed to but they didn't imagine that yeah we'll see all right anyways i'll be quiet for a bit so you know you got anything else

yeah and i again i wasn't here last meeting um i assume there was some discussion on the architecture uh looking at the current plan appears to be a lot more brick than it was uh yeah the main entry tower was my whole comment there were a few other things but i didn't dive into that too too much yeah they took care of the front front entry okay

We also made the main elements. Yeah, that's right. The main element in the back . OK. So that's probably 80% . Yeah. Yeah, it looks good.

So I guess, I don't know.

I did bring all the samples, but I don't think we need to go through this tonight. Yeah. They're over here if you want to see them. We brought stock . That was a joke.

I guess at this point, I would make a recommendation to continue this to the next meeting to investigate, further investigate the access. I guess it may be a brief way to summarize it as we discussed. Is there any other, is there a second to that motion to discuss that? Second. Francis, do you think there's anything else that specifically needs to be mentioned?

Well, I think I heard you say that you also wanted some memos from the safety forces, something in writing.

Yeah, if we could get some kind of information, either in person or written, it would be beneficial.

You said you had done a layout moving that driveway. Could you provide that so the commission could just see it? We had talked about that early on. You've done some site planning on this, obviously. See what that looks like. It'd be a little different because it'd be reduced in width as a right out only. You looked at it as a full entrance, but it still gives a general idea. That's up to the commission.

I feel like anything you got that, you know, might be useful would be would be helpful.

Well, I think I'm hearing that East Everest was swung around a little more. Right. So it's a little more aligned with what's across the street. I think you would feel a little better about it, right? Is that what I'm hearing?

Well, what I'm saying that for is, I had asked about that early on, but primarily for, it gives the safety forces something to look at, gives them another option to look at. You know, if you give them nothing, you've already heard, I mean, it's your application, but I have to keep myself looking. Well, we haven't heard why. I understand, but you're going to hear the same thing. So I'm just suggesting if you have something, you could share it. And maybe, I'm not going to speak for them, but maybe they would say, well, we might be more receptive. With it here, based on it being more in the middle and a right out, I'm just talking out loud. They may flat out say, no, I don't know. But it's better than not giving them something, I think.

And even if it's, you know, you've got things marked up on the site plan itself that shows, okay, here's like kind of like I was starting to scribble up here that. you know, we've improved it to this, you know, the visibility or the person's view is not quite this anymore, it's just a little past, instead of a hundred, yeah. You know, is there anything you could do with the driveway to tip it even, right at the roadway to get them to look? Yeah, something like that to try and improve that. All right, so that's the discussion. Anything else in advance? All right.

You're going to go to Marriott and try to get that.

Or at least ask them their why.

Something to substantiate why.

Just put it forward to them that we're just trying to protect them from getting sued because mitigating accidents, if you put it in their perspective of for their benefit to do it, think about it differently, maybe they'll want to work with us a little bit more.

And Mr. Chair, and any document that you want to submit, if you submit it to Susan and I, we'll share it with the fire and the police department so that we have their feedback.

I think anything you get back from Marriott should probably be in writing, so it's probably the whole record. Yeah. I feel like having to put it in writing might help them decide to come in.

I would agree. I would agree.

all right all right on that subject issue you can just move it

It may not be ideal, but you can keep it on the side there. Flip in those two spaces. I mean, you don't even have to worry about it.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right.

Next up is Alvin Capital, Citizens Bank.

Thank you.

You guys weren't last month's right because I don't care because it's the first time okay Why don't you go ahead and give us a just to kind of an overview because I know they're across the street Located in the Walgreens Center They have Determined they want to move out of there a new branch Really the only location there is left in Macedonia is this, that we're proposing today. If this doesn't work, I think they'll move it out of the community and reset it, because they want a full service billboard branch. So what we're proposing is lot splitting, a new parcel, and constructing their branch on that parcel. that parcel would be subject to an ecr it's all traffic utilities parking operated as one basically to development and recorded properties so if the properties are sold one or the other those rights will continue to place So jumping into the elevations, I thought this was their elevations from citizens, so I thought they did a pretty good job for a first cut of meeting the Western Reserve parents. We will get your consultant in touch here every time . Site plan, it's basically a 3,000 square foot building with an ATM. I know there was a question about the Tesla stations. They'll remain open and operational, same with the Flagstar ATM. So we designed this so that it worked on the driveway here. In the current ECR, this needs to remain open to great traffic to be able to fit the branch in without impacting that ECR. Here's a sanitary line we need to redirect slightly around the building. We've talked to the sanitary, well, James and I do these days talk to Southern County Sanitary That's a different story for a different day, but they give us an indication that's not an issue. Landscape plan. So get some citizens. we also had a photometric plan so what we did is we had our lighting company go out and take the existing conditions and then we gave citizens the existing conditions so i know there's comments on that but we did take the counts in the field so that's that's it we're happy to jump into the

details of the review question i guess before we get into the comments the looking at that you've got the site plan one sure i wanted to search the whole thing and you know is there a plan for this is this just it's just green space just green space okay i wasn't sure if that was like setting it up for another building to pop in there later okay yeah we have the sanitary he's been in that area there's really no area okay so it's just instead of putting putting more part of me just let's make it green just block out that area okay and i guess we'll get into those comments but did you ever look at flipping the building to put the drive through on the other side because now this is yes what we talked about was seven blue and i'm real concerned about Cars coming in.

Yeah. So they want so they're even as particular as wanting that sight line. The whole deal is contingent on these three trees to see the visibility. Yeah. That's why I don't know. It's literally like the oddest. I don't know how I mean, fortunately, it's just an ATM lane with maybe, I guess, a better line. I mean, cars are going to turn left in there.

And there's not a way to make that work on the other elevations? Like, you know, to have that look of the building and have an ATM.

Yeah, I don't think it lays out for the floor plan. The footprint is pretty much prototypical. Or the new branch.

Because I was just at Hobby Lobby the other day. And there must have been 15 cars piled up. There was enough there that they got their green light, they all went, and there were still five of them left. It's so much demand that that inbound is just blocked down past here. You're talking inbound, not outbound? Outbound, I'm sorry. Outbound, which blocking the inbound, which is the concern we had about the 7 Brew is, These guys hanging out here and blocking this up and so much inbound traffic that they, yeah. Granted, it's only an ATM, it's not a coffee shop. but this just gets so backed up all the time that you know friday you know uh for example yeah it's really backed up in there The stop bar to keep the cars from blocking that driveway?

They're not supposed to stop here, but they do anyways. Because I'm always trying to make a left here, and I can't because they're blocking it.

So you should be able to drive straight. This is marked as do not block this intersection. And it's just, it's all the way through here. Solid, even though they've got that marked up.

Is that their floor plan will relate on that? underlaid on the sleep plan. I was going with that.

Which one is that?

Just as a landscape plan. I appreciate that what I'm about to say changes a lot of things on 82, but could the timing of this light be adjusted to at certain times or with sensors to allow more out? Probably not.

I doubt it. Oh, sorry. Go ahead. Go ahead. Yeah, I was going to say the answer likely is no. They're all interconnected. Yeah, I appreciate that.

It just felt like there is room for cars to queue up on 82 heading especially to the east if there was a little bit more time with that light. This didn't change, I think, where we went with the coffee shop because of the volume there would have been ridiculous.

Is that ATM remote? Because when I... I'm zooming into the drawings a little bit. It doesn't look like it's actually connected to the building, at least from this standpoint.

No, to my knowledge, it's integrated into the building.

Oh, it is, because it looks like it's freestanding. Because I was going to say, if it is, they could kick it down further. It looks like it's...

I don't know how they'd service it.

No, I think it's actually a front. I think they serviced it from the front. That's what it looks like. It looks like that's the door that opens. If it does, if they kicked it... Sorry. That looks like they serviced it from the front. If they do and it's not connected, they could move it down. They have four cars stacking right now. They could probably get a fifth. But I think if they were to pull it down here further, even closer to where that curb ends, that would be another... They'd probably get another...

The only thing I worry about is I'm not necessarily worried about four, five, six cars queued up at the ATM that's going to bleed out into the lane. It's cars who just want to get to it. Those guys blocking up the inbound traffic and sitting there. There could be nobody at the ATM. Well, if it truly is... It's an attraction you've got to get to at that spot compared to like right now cars might want to go park in that aisle to get to Hobby Lobby, but cars are backed up. I'm going to go one or two more aisles down and it makes no difference. If you're going to that ATM, you want to get to that spot, whereas if it was over on the other side of the building, you can go down any aisle, swing around, and come up to it on that side.

If it truly is remote, though, I think they can put it somewhere else and still make it work.

Yeah, well, I'll ask.

I don't know. That's my real big handle.

I appreciate they want this frontage here, but what about if the ATM was here and it came in this way?

It would be on the wrong. I don't know. If it is remote, you could do that, too.

If there's just a... Yeah, or if there's some way to direct them... I hate to screw up the whole parking field, but yeah, if it was on the... this side of the building you know could you bring them in directly then you're going to screw up you're going to screw up all this other parking you know it really was just on somewhere on this side you could go parking somewhere else you know so you you know you can go down any i wanted to get past that queue of traffic to come in it's making a left turn

And you might be able to do that because this might have been like a grocery pickup at one point when this was a grocery store.

Yeah, could you do something like that to give them a place to sit? Because I just don't want that one car to block up this thing after the 82.

yeah so the concern and we went through this is southern group i took a video of the traffic what happens is you know and you're right there's three lanes here it is um so there's There is an out left and an out right, and then of course this is in. The problem is that the cars, when this light is red, will stack like this. And I'm not really exaggerating. Like that. Then somebody enters from 82 and they want to make a left here or a left here to get to what was 7 Brewer and now is the bank. They can't. They're blocked. This is their destination. They're not going anywhere else, so they're just going to wait, whether it's here or here, and then stack, stack, stack, and then we're on to 82. We can't have that. Then we have gridlock. That's the concern. Is that inaccurate?

Here's one thing, though. If you strike it this way. We're eliminating that. No. What I'm saying is there's more people turned left on this that would turn in the ATM on an hourly basis, without a doubt.

Because you're putting a bill in there or just blocking it. I see what you're getting at. Yeah.

Turning into this?

Yeah.

The people that are turning onto that lane right there today. Where are we at?

Which is which is great. Yeah one place less to turn I wish this wasn't yes right now because that's probably where you want to go to go to the to the Tesla chargers and people probably sit there although they might go around here, you know Yeah, I was gonna say that when this is stacked

somebody wants to get to the Tesla charger I think there's a little ATM over here they get to here and if it's stacked and they can't make a left to get over to where they want to go it's not a big deal those drive all as far as they got to go and then they pull in here but with the bank and the ATM my concern is and you mentioned we can't impact this people are gonna get to here, they have to make a left, and they're blocked, so then they have to wait, and then we get stacked back on.

You keep going. If you could figure out a left only, then these people shouldn't be here.

If you've got the space, if you could do something like that, that would help a lot, I think. you know it could be a couple cars that would be even better but i know i mean up here goes around like this i mean they'll they double stack for a little ways yeah and then these people they're making it right so they just slip out but it's the people waiting to make the left unfortunately the guys we get lots of left because we're going to route eight you can go around and do the tesla you can't go around to do the atm because now you're facing the wrong You can't overshoot the line and come, unless you overshoot it, come turn around, then make it a right. I mean, that's about the only way to get to that spot.

What if they were to do this even? I think if they were to have, sorry, if this truly is remote, if they were to somehow put that where it were to come in here, or have it sit on an island like right here almost, cars come in this way, and then they pull out and they can get out that way. If this was to be some form of an island. If it's a detached, yeah, I know we're making a lot of speculations here. And they could come in this way. I mean, put it... I guess I know you're going to be kind of limited to how far you can push it this way because obviously then you're going to be right up against the building. Well, I guess, no, I guess you can almost like flip it.

You've got to go out, physically serve, put the cash in it.

It does, but from what I can tell, like based on this, it looks like it's a front loaded, because that's the door that opens and that looks like it's the piece that comes out to service it. Okay. So if it's remote, I think it helps. Okay.

See if you can check on that. That's my biggest concern. I'm sorry, I kind of jumped our usual pattern. Mr. Frantz didn't let you. Well, I'm enjoying your conversation.

At the end of the day, it's all a little bit for not. I didn't review this as a lot split. And so you have the exact same problems we had the last time we talked about Sevenbrook. We got to traffic conversations, but at the end of the day, to create a lot here is very difficult. And your project engineer doesn't call it a lot split. They call it a .41 acre lease area that's going to occur within the 19.80 acre parent parcel. It is a lot split. Yeah, that's not what they're calling it. They're calling it a lease. Yeah, they're wrong. Yeah. So I didn't review it that way. So just, I mean, you know, it is what it is. But that does create the same problems that we had with 7Brew.

We came up with a solution. Pac-Man lot. Pac-Man lot was brilliant. James came up with that. Pac-Man lot meets code, right?

Pac-Man lot meets code. Pac-Man lot is a thing of beauty. Can I ask that question? it says brunch the code what is wrong with the spot in front of office i was going to say that why does anyone want to be there they're going to move if they can't get a spot but it's wide open there's no traffic it's not lancet i can't answer that oh my lord they can't answer it's just asking for someone to drop something you're doing right

Steven, it's excluded.

PNC's got an exclusion on it.

Oh, yeah.

I mean, I'm guessing.

I don't know that one. No, you're probably right. Yeah. Oh, meaning a bank couldn't know something else. Exclusive use. We have the same thing at our site. I got it. Okay. Exclusive.

Obviously Generally doing something on the properties. I think fine you work through traffic issues and We need to talk about like the total overall parking and I think you had started working on that last time with with seven brew but just need to identify because division of couple spaces when I thought this was a lease. So you need to take from the other somehow or get a variance. Yeah, I know, but our code requires it to be on the property. It has to be on the site that you're creating. So, and there's just some comments about landscaping, all pretty minor. We talked about the traffic.

Is there any concern that the overall site would be not meeting code any longer if... I'm talking about the shopping center as a whole.

I don't know, yeah. It could be. I don't know how close they were.

It's likely that it's not, but you just need to document that. Yeah, it's likely you're way over.

From a needs standpoint, you're definitely over. I didn't know when this was originally approved, we barely hit the parking code and now taking away half a dozen of them.

I think with your parking, when we create this lot, we include, in that lot, we include some of these parking spaces that's west of the Tesla transformer box, you know, that's fenced in there. So those, in theory, would be on that parcel. So you'd have, I think, the 12 in front of the building, and you'd have a couple opposite that one, too, on that parcel. We can all show that.

Yeah, I mean, you've got barrier-free parking spaces up near the drive entrance, the ingress and egress. So they're going to be basically, I don't know what they're for. You just eliminate them. I challenge somebody of handicapped needs to use those spaces. Navigate that area. So yeah, and that just gets to the overall what's your total parking and all that. But we'll take a look at the Pac-Man. I don't remember it, but... You're going to have to create a site that looks like now you have some kind of wolf eating Route 82.

So is that the preference? To have, what is it, 100 feet in front of the cone?

Yeah, whatever. Can you get a variance and have like a 24 flag? Yeah, you can request a variance. Again, I didn't really go back and look at that issue. I was sort of happy. I'm like, okay, well, we're only down to like traffic now, so this is going to be fine, but apparently you do want to lot split it. So just clean up your project imperative.

That's 0.46 acres. Is that what it's at? Well, I think that's their impact. A lot will be bigger. Yeah, a lot is different. Yeah, so whatever.

We'll look it over when that time comes. It's a retail commercial development. You're going to have these things. It's just how you create a lot that conforms with the code and the parking and all that. So at a high level, I mean, I don't see a problem with selling off a piece to the bank. You just got to figure out how you do it.

We haven't figured it out. I mean, it's overly lawyered as it is right now.

I thought when we talked, didn't we talk about with Seven Brew pushing it out, the traffic out toward the east?

We did, but Seven Brew couldn't do that.

And there were a lot of different things, I think, with Seven Brew. They needed a smaller component when it came to the lot, I think, too. And I think that's where some of those components came in. These guys are taking a whole...

like almost three rows of parking away yeah three lanes yeah i think it's yes yeah yeah that was the other thing too yeah yeah so i mean really for me the traffic is the main thing the other items on my my memo i'll let you read through them later they can all be addressed and uh chairman and you know i'm sitting here thinking about our traffic conversation from 10 minutes ago yeah um is this a scenario and i don't know if that drawing is still on the table yeah there it is where they've shown creating a little left-hand turn lane if that's something we're at all interested in do we need a traffic study some traffic counts to know How long would it be easier if I came down?

There was traffic.

Because we need to know, if I could please, correct me if I'm wrong, I don't want to step on your toes here, but we need to know how long... this left turn out queue needs to be because if it stacks too much, then it starts going over here and then the people coming out to make a right are blocked and they're stuck back there and the queue gets longer. So I would think we need some traffic counts and analysis, turn lane length analysis.

Yeah, I guess the existing driveway up here right now, has kind of a, it's kind of a left through right. It's not real well defined. It's kind of a, you skirt it all over, it's like a skirt a little bit more. It's just kind of two lanes to here, and it just kind of disappears. And that's how, people actually seem to do it right. They do a single lane. Once you get up here, then they start doubling up as they get up there, and it lets some guards take a right, because that's, you know, no one's really going hardly ever going through. It all funnels down. By the time it gets here, it's already a single length. You think so? I think so. At least what I've watched, I feel like they don't double back. very much farther than what's actually striped. They seem to take a single lane. And if you had sized this to what was appropriate, it would probably be down at five below or something.

Here's the thing, though, because right now this is all, it's just all asphalt. There's no islands, there's no curb, there's no restrictions. So to the chairman's point, These two lanes, they kind of become one as you go further south. But if you have a vehicle that wants to make a right out, he just bumps around a little bit and he can get by and he makes his right. You know what I'm saying? It's not like a road situation where you can't leave the pavement. You can't leave your lane.

And I'm not so... I think that helps clean it up a little bit, honestly.

It actually might, yeah. Keep people from doing goofy stuff. I don't care if this thing does back up to five below. I don't care. I'm worried about the main road and it being safe. And I don't want this to back up. I really think it's probably not more than one or two cars. You know, if you could squeeze one or two cars in there, I would feel comfortable that that's probably enough. And if you saw two cars sitting there, geez, would you just go past and like, okay, I'm figuring something else out. But I don't know if a study is going to, a study is going to, I mean. I don't think, we're not looking at doing any major improvements up to the intersection or anything like that. We're not going to change the timing on 82 because it's all tied together. One bank movement is not going to change that. I think people seem to handle this as a single lane and this would be a double. I don't think, you know, to stripe this properly yet. If we did a study, it's not going to.

They're not going to be able to provide it. There's no way to get the required storage without, yeah.

I think actually this improvement would help this area, because one, it'll put a curb here, and then two, if you guys do stripe this, in terms of if there's a curb line there, I think it helps. I think it'll help some of that, honestly.

Yeah, keep somebody from zipping around here, zipping around here, to get around somebody who's sitting in the queue in line. I mean... It's just paint. They could still go around as they wanted to and use this going the wrong way.

Sure, this thing is going to have to be a way to enforce this because here come a bunch of cars. The signal is red. Here come a bunch of cars that want to go left and they're just going to overrun this striping would be a concern too. We've got to get everybody to behave correctly. That's going to be a trick. Yeah.

Just see if you can help something out that they kind of, you know, meet some kind of standards. I feel if the ATM could move and make the whole issue go away by putting it somewhere else, that would be the first choice.

I went to their elevations, too, and it's attached. So I think that helps. I think this helps the situation for you guys, really.

I think they like the culture of going to security.

Yeah, I don't blame them there at all with that. attached to the back side of the .

Island ATMs are all in a rage at that shopping plaza, so.

Well, this is purely anecdotal, but I bank at Citizens, and obviously, it doesn't sit there a lot. And I've never seen more than one car in that ATM. I rarely have to wait. I don't know all that stacking. I feel fairly confident it's not going to stack.

Out into the lake. From the ATM. I think you're right. Yeah, I don't think.

That's why they want to move. They want to grow and have a bunch of cars.

But they have a pedestal in Northfield, and this will be the second time they've moved since I've lived here.

Yeah, that's just keeping the one up, as far as you guys know, the one up in Northfield standing.

Did it?

They closed it. They moved it. They wanted the smaller sleeker. Got rid of Menchies. Yeah, the old Menchies. And they seem to think that that was, I mean, I remember getting a letter or something that they were moving and that was.

So the one up in Northfield is not open currently?

No. I'm sorry, the one in Sagamore. Oh, in Sagamore.

Okay, I was talking across the class. No, that was still there. Scourge. enormous. Gotcha. That one did close a while ago. Is there anything we need to discuss? You're going to connect your architect with Pam to work through some of this stuff.

Yeah, I think it looks, I mean, that's a prototype building. I think it looks We appreciate it.

I would tell him, because I know Pam will probably be big on this too, and it's something that I would look for, is just Edson.

like detailing on those like longer facades that have nothing like that.

Yeah, the building we talked about in the back where they did it with the brick. Yes.

That's I think what's going to be a key thing right there.

The building we proposed in front of the .

Oh yeah, okay. I think that was a comment.

I think it was.

Yeah, she put it in there.

It's become a big deal. Do you know anything you've got? I don't know if she's right about that. I don't know what's wrong with her. I don't see it up here.

I don't get it. Do you have a question? There was some kind of about a 20 percent. Oh, redevelopment is so cheap when you get to an analog. If that's a RASO, does that suffice for that? I'm sorry. That area next to the building is all grass.

It likely will. I would just rely on whoever your civil design engineer is.

20% of the building?

Yeah.

Yeah, so I'd rely on your civil site designer. When you develop a site, you have to have stormwater management consist of both quality and quantity. There's two components. Here, the site is already completely a paved parking lot, so quantity doesn't matter. You're not increasing stormwater runoff. Decrease. Correct. But you still have the quantity component, and on a redevelopment site, you have to provide 20 of what the water quality volume would normally be if this was a brand new development building something from scratch on a virgin lot or you can reduce the impervious area by 20% which you probably are by creating that green space so the site engineer needs to show that and they'll know exactly what to do they need to show that you meet the 20% criteria then there needs to be a way to ensure that that grass remains grass, it doesn't become paved for more parking spaces or another building or anything else that would be impervious. So there'd have to be some sort of guarantee of that.

Brian, is there much concern with the lighting? I saw the number on that.

I mean, probably not.

I mean, it's all pretty bright over there. That's my sense. I just wanted to make sure.

Depends on how you carve Pac-Man. Not sure. All right.

I guess, does anyone want to turn a motion? the other I think we just say we'll come back yeah I think

All right.

Just continue.

Okay. I'll make a motion that we just come on the month after October. Yeah.

Within the next two months. Yeah. We'll make the next. I don't know if the next is Friday. Is it Friday?

Okay. I'll make it Friday. I'll make a motion that we continue the Citizens Bank application to the October meeting for the applicant's request.

Or discussion.

Oh, oh, you're incorporating the comments from your consultants into that motion. Of course. The only reason I say is that we want more detail, right? So we're not backs and wheels. Same comment. We want to know about the parking and how you can achieve all those things. Maybe you can reduce some parking to meet your 20%. Might have too much.

All right. All in favor? Aye. Thank you. Thanks, guys.

Thank you.

Thank you. Good night.

I motion to adjourn. Second.