Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon. It is 12.01, and this is the opening of the Athens City Planning Commission meeting of Wednesday, September 19th. I'll call the meeting to order. We have all members actually here today, so we have a full team and a quorum. And so that's really a positive thing. I would ask anybody in the audience who would plan to speak today to raise their right hand and confirm what I will say, which is that to the best of your knowledge, you will provide us accurate and true information today. Thank you. Okay. The... Really, the first order of business is the disposition of the minutes of September 2nd. All members, I believe, have those minutes and have had a chance maybe to take a look at it, I hope. Does anybody have any questions or concerns, additions that need to be made to the minutes? Hearing none, then, I would entertain a motion to approve those minutes. So moved. Moved by the mayor and a second. Second. Second by Ms. Rapp. So any other discussion whatsoever regarding the minutes? With hearing none, then all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye as well. Sounded like it was unanimous. Anybody opposed? No. Okay. Okay. We have really one significant item on the agenda case, which is 26-04, Title 21, Planned Unit Development for the Welcome Home Ohio Hudson Avenue site. So that was introduced at our September 2nd meeting. Today it's a case, and I think the intention is to vote on that today. Let's see. So Megan doesn't have a... Ms. Jennings' voice is not good, so I looked at Tom to open us, Mr. Pyle, to open us up.

Thank you, Chair. The case is coming before the commission this morning for final approval without final application. We heard from the developer earlier this week that there were some delays in design, I believe, from Unibuilt. Is that accurate? that had delayed the surveys and delayed the sight lines. I think we can overcome that and we can still move forward. If we decide to take a final vote today, we can phrase it properly to account for a final application being in hand and reviewed properly before council takes any action to approve, takes their final vote to approve the plan. We can have everything in place. fully reviewable by our staff and public and then whoever else needs to approve it, so If that's acceptable to the board, then I would recommend we can we can move forward I do have some information on rear variances rear setback variances that will be required in order to provide a No less than type of motion so Okay so essentially

There's no significant changes to what we visited on the second?

There will be changes. They're not significant. There's nothing, no changes in design, no changes in the side setbacks. Those are still varying between two and four feet, and there are no changes. And we do know that there will be required variances for three of the southern properties for rear setback on at least one leg of their driveways, and I believe those are going to be no less than 10 feet. I'd recommend approving variances of no less than, say, 8 feet to be on the safe side in case a survey requires movement. Is that fair? That would be fair. 8 feet would probably get the job done. But as it stands right now, we don't believe that there will be any rear setback on the southern properties less than

11 feet that correct 11 feet yeah do any board members have a question or a comment please I have a question for mr. Ritchie if you want to Come up to the dais. And when you come to the podium, name and address, please, as a part of that, too.

I'm Joe Ritchie with Community Building Partners. And my address, my work address, 1263 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio. Home address, 3758 Lancaster Road, Granville, Ohio. Thank you.

So I guess my question is kind of an obvious one. How long before we do get the floor plans to where we know in order to, because we can certainly vote on something with conditions attached to them. And in this case, since we don't have those final plans, no, for this particular, for the projects, that we could pass, like I said, or not, conditional approval. conditions surrounding that and therefore council So that we know how much time? Council would go through its normal introduction and then the three readings for final approval and is there enough time allotted to get The approved floor plans, so I think we'll have our floor plans within a week Yeah, we have the footprint.

We just got this morning So we're able to calculate pervious and impervious areas, but I think the final floor plan can be available within a week

I have a question about setbacks. When we're talking about the rear setback, the rear of the property, I'm trying to remember the illustrations from the last packet. Is that the alleyway side or the common area side?

The common area sides are all fronts because all the houses or buildings will face each other towards the green space. We're talking about the northern sections of the property and the southern section of the property for the setbacks. In R3, off the top of my head, the rear setback I believe is still 20 feet. Anything less than 20 feet would require a variance. The unique situation we're in with this design is that there are either a driveway to the north or a platted alleyway to the south. provides additional setback, but the southern portion we wouldn't allow that to be Calculated because it's right-of-way, but the northern section is not right-of-way it's just It's a part of the parcel with what the city of Athens used was basically a driveway But it wasn't an alleyway the alleyway right-of-way is actually to the left of the property or to the west of the property so that section that people colloquially call an alleyway is really just private property. That section, the right-of-ways meet all the standards and we'll just be dealing with access easements across those properties for all the other properties that have to, I think, I'm sorry, the westernmost property in that lot will have to have three access easements across the other three properties, but that's all standard stuff, so I'm not concerned with it. The right-of-ways, I'm sorry, the rear setbacks to the south, as of right now, we don't believe anything. The driveway will be any less than 11 feet. Because the alleyway is on a slant, The east side of all the driveways will be shorter than the west side of all the driveways if that makes sense so the apron isn't going to be perpendicular to the sides it'll be Going to look like a parallelogram. I think that's the right word.

Okay.

Or a rhombus.

And so a shorter setback would be that number of feet from the garage to- To the property line. To the property line.

And then I think what I was getting at, maybe I didn't make it clear, but what I was getting at with that alleyway specifically is that that alleyway is probably, that right of way is at least 20 feet, if not 30 feet. There's no fire hazard because there's nothing that can be built next to those houses, and that's part of the reason for a rear setback is a fire break and density and things like that. And so you have the 10 foot on the one side or the 11 feet on the one side as a rear setback to the property line, but then you have additional space that we wouldn't call rear setback, but it functionally serves as the same thing. Does that make sense?

That does make sense. And will there be a sidewalk?

Sidewalks are part of the project are Basically an extension extend from the end of Hudson down to that alleyway But then there's also common space sidewalk inside the project that kind of wraps around on a horseshoe. Is that a fair description? And so there are sidewalks.

Yes alongside Hudson, but not at the Where you would enter the driveways?

No, no sidewalks. They're currently in design

There is one, I'm sorry, I don't mean to follow on your question. There is one that goes all the way down through to access the open space at the south. So there's an opportunity for public, for ambulation down Hudson to the open space through this property.

That's correct, sir. On the east side of the entire property from Hudson Street to that alleyway. Then that alleyway is a natural entryway into the green space where the fire department is across the green space to the bike path. There's an ideal, in my opinion, ideal location for access to the bike path in all parts of the city. so is there a there is no sidewalks on the south end along what is the extension of Morris into the project that's correct by design right now there are no side okay what there will be are 20 foot wide for 20 foot wide paved driveways I believe yeah okay but if you were there and you wanted to go to the

bike path or something like that, you'd have to walk essentially in the road for part of it, I guess.

You'd just cross the alley and then you'd be in that green space. You'd be able to go right across. You'd be in the parking lots and whatnot and right into the green space.

Yeah, but if you wanted to get to the paved surface over there near the fire station, you'd probably have to walk down the road a bit to get there. You'd have to walk down the road. That's correct. But it's basically a cul-de-sac or a dead end, so it's not like you've got any through traffic or anything like that. That's correct. Yeah. Yes.

Three questions on design. And so it's still, there's some final design, and it has to do with the setbacks. Is that it at this point? I guess the reason I'm asking is I noticed from the minutes, I asked whether there could be universal design features incorporated into all eight homes. You said there could be.

I guess my question is, will there be?

And design-wise, and I will express myself Publicly, what I expressed as concern to council members, planning commission members this morning, my disappointment that the design of it, because I saw on the Columbus dispatch this morning on the front page of the paper, is land trust, affordable homes, under $200,000 in Columbus, and they've got porches on them. So they have porches on them. Now, I know that what you're saying is that the land has to be raised, and that would make the affordability of it, it would make it no longer available at the price listing that you're doing it at. So, I guess I'm putting in one last plea to make this somewhat in... unity with the rest of the neighborhood houses and I know they were built in a different era that's a perfectly understandable example but so it's just a question and how you might think about it creatively

Houses with front porches, we are in fact doing those houses in Columbus. None of them are in a flood fringe. They can all be built closer. So what happens is, in order to do a front porch, we'd be at the same height as that. We'd be at nine feet. So we're climbing to that porch. It doesn't get you what you had recommended previously, which is a front porch that's addressable and maybe socially connected to pedestrians on the street so this site does not permit that but other sites might and if we have the ability to do porches we would do porches what we are doing is a balcony so that you have an outdoor connection but it is at that nine-foot level which is the height the rise above the flood fringe to make sure that then the other the first question about universal design because and I'm also a

We want to let Davey know that it's going to be, and he probably already knows, that one of the places will be handicapped accessible with a ramp to it. But the other ones are the ones I'm asking if there's just a minimum of universal design.

So we can address some of the aspects of universal design in the plan. But again, because you're up nine feet, we can't accommodate all the universal design principles. But we can pay close attention to that in the final design. And we are doing that. Thanks.

I will follow on the porch thing. So, and I think this bears on the larger discussion with Welcome Home Ohio and what we want as a city versus what, and what the planning commission wants also, because, and like, should we Should we do this in order to achieve a goal of trying to create front porches or some semblance of a front porch at the expense of extending the Welcome Home Ohio money into lighter phases? Because we talked about this, right? We talked about we could build stairs, which would require a landing halfway up. to get up to each one of these balconies. So functionally, the balcony would be a front porch. They did some cost analysis on it. A lot of money. Not an insurmountable amount of money. But what it would do is it would make the unit cost for each unit What, $10,000 more? Yeah. $10,000 more than what we were anticipating paying with them. And that's doable if that's something that we want to do. And we can still sell them for the floor price. The floor price is $180,000, and that's what we have to meet the state grant, right? We've got to sell them for that. But instead of... you know, $250,000 or $260,000 that the grant would pay to these guys to deliver the product. It might be worth it, and then that's, you know, $80,000 less towards the next Welcome Home Ohio. And so we have to decide, I guess, as a commission, is it worth $80,000 extra taken away from a future Welcome Home Ohio incentive in order to have the porches or to have stairs that go up to that balcony and then provide some sort of function. And I think it's a discussion with us, and we could approve a contingent on that if you wanted to.

No, and I hear you, what you're saying. I didn't understand that the porches would only be able to be accessible to the balconies, because what I did see is two new homes going in on South Shannon, which I assume is in the flood fringe plane. I'm not getting that right. It's in the flood fringe plane. I'm assuming that's in the plane, and they've got stairs, and I don't think they've built up. But I guess I will express my disappointment with the aesthetics of it, but I would wholeheartedly concede, and I wouldn't hold up the vote today, just personally, because I think the affordability is what's important for the community.

I might hold it up because I really wanted the stairs to the porches. I don't know. I'm the one who's been working with them this whole time.

Okay. Well, I thank you for those efforts, so thanks for the explanation.

Well, and so my comment about that, and I'm sorry, Mayor, if you have, but so by putting a porch at nine feet off the ground, It would be still quite different. Like I think Mr. Stone said, it's a balcony. Even if you put a roof over the top of it so you could sit out there when it was dry or when it was wet and stay dry, it's still way up in the air. You know, the nice thing about the porches on the east side and porches wherever they are, is you can have a relationship with somebody who's walking their dog or people that are in the neighborhood walking from one place to another. And this relationship would be a tough one where you're looking up and trying to...

Communicate with people so I agree and I love porches. I really do I think they're a great aesthetic and it's it's great for social connection We do have a at the ground level, which is the pedestrian level Courtyard patios for each unit so there is outdoor living space where you would be if you were seated and somebody's walking their dog you would be able to communicate with them it's not the same as a porch and but it is a compromise that accommodates the social connection aspect of it, though not the aesthetic connection. The aesthetics of the porches are also really nice. We just can't accomplish it at this particular site. There are a number of trade-offs in this design. The state doesn't require the units to be three bedrooms and two baths. You could build a smaller, cheaper house. You can put it on a slab. you can use manufactured housing there are many variations of the state would accept but there is a conscious effort to on community building aspects of this and also the great need for family housing. You know the accommodations that were needed for that and we studied sites that were not in the flood fringe there were a couple properties they had their own challenges retaining walls excavation things that hillside that would be more difficult so those had other kinds of compromises so we really we had a whole checklist basically of things that cost money and things that save money and this turned out to be the best combination of all of it thanks I appreciate everybody's explanations and efforts

Is the 9-foot elevation above ground, I guess, is that one foot above the 100-year flood? No, it's actually about...

four and a half feet above. But as you get to the 100-year flood. Yeah, so the level at which you get above that reduces any kind of additional insurance cost. So you don't have flood insurance, but there is a premium. The further above that flood area, the more economical it is. And the nine feet gave us room to put that two-car garage, which actually affects appraised value significantly. That's what that podium is, is a two-car garage, and then we're able to put the mechanicals above the flood fringe.

So that's up above four and a half feet.

Yeah, so that's keeping all the living space, including utilities, above that level is the key to keeping the insurance cost low.

Mayor, did you have something? No, okay. I want to see my time, too. Mr. McMillan. Okay.

This is David McMillan with 102.2 Alderman Road in Millfield. Can everyone hear me okay? Yeah, I'm the one of the chairs of the Accessibility and Advocacy Committee for the Disability Commission here in Athens. And I know they I've been out for actually the last two months for travel and other things. But I think we had some questions about the accessible unit. There is an accessible unit. We really have been pushing for more. affordable, you know, family housing in Athens. I don't know that we've seen a full rendering yet from the notes that I'm looking at. Could you work us through what that accessible unit is like?

Yeah, so the... It's about 1,300 square feet. So everything's on one floor. It's fully ADA Accessible so the kitchen size has expanded the bathroom size has expanded the closets the doorways It will be you'll ramp up we'll have to build that site up so we can so we don't have a podium and we'll ramp up to the entryway it will have a front porch and The front will face the same as the other units, and at that heightened level, their living floor will be the same as the other units. So it'll read the same from the green space, but we get there by building that side up and then ramping up to it.

Great. And in terms of, I think one question some of the commission members had is about the parking there. Is the driveway widened as an ADA accessible spot or how does that work? Okay. Yeah. Do you know how, is it like a full 16 feet wide? Is it wider than the others then?

It's, well, the driveways are, the other driveways are two cars wide. So this driveway will be the same. So it'll be a 20 foot wide.

Okay, great. And then in terms of the kitchen, it's more of an open concept kitchen than the other. I think commission members saw the other drawings and just didn't see the ADA drawing. I think the city planner maybe came to a meeting and just didn't have it. What is that?

I show up at 880.

Oh, there's Megan. Hey. Okay. I don't... And I'm... Again, I haven't been there. I'm just going off of the notes that I see. So any clarification is great. I'm just here as an observer and also just to ask about it.

So in that accessibility... In that meeting, there was an asked question about can you build a garage? Yeah. Could you build a second bathroom or a half bath? So we are studying whether we could do the half bath. We can't make two... ADA except the bathrooms would be too large. There's not enough living space. But we are looking at the possibility of trying to do a half bath for that. But being on one floor, there is a large bathroom.

Okay, so these questions on the list have been asked. I just wanted to make sure. Okay, good.

Thank you. I have one more question. Do... So if we are to approve this condition, what are the variances that we're all agreeing to as a part of this?

So there will be side yard setbacks. of no less than two feet. I think there's only one residence that had a two-foot side setback. The others, I think, are somewhere up to four feet, which should provide you anywhere from four to eight feet between houses. And the manufacturer is using firebreak material to account for the variances for the side setbacks. And the rear setbacks for the southern properties only will be no less than, I think, The current design is we estimate the rear setback will be no less than 11 feet, but to allow for survey variances, I think we ought to probably stipulate rear setbacks no less than eight feet. That'll give us three feet of wiggle room.

And then also the two acre minimum for a PUD, correct?

And the variant, that's correct, a variance for the two acre minimum. And I believe we want to ask for a variance for not requiring the 20% green space, which is typical of a large apartment complex or town homes and things like that. But in this instance, this entire property is going to be divided into eight parcels and Remedy the issues of maintenance and things like that. I think the variance for the 20% of Public area can can be provided or should be provided as well. Would you agree with that? I

I mean, it's a point of discussion, right? So PUD code says 20% open space, right? There's going to be way more than 20% open space as part of this, and these are single-family homes, right? We're not doing multifamily development to where there's a... And so I think that do we even need a variance? Because there's definitely, based on everything we've seen, going to be way more than 20% open space.

So what's going on is that The actual parcel, you're saying that the actual parcel that one of the units sits on, whichever one of the eight, will have less than 20% open space?

No, sir. Okay. In an apartment complex, let's say we're designing apartments and we have an acre of space. You'd have to have point, I think the math would be 0.2 acres dedicated to a park, a playground, something like that for everyone who rents in that apartment complex to use or something along those lines. In this instance, this is cluster housing, which does set up nicely for PUD process, but the PUD is, I think, my reading of the language is it was designed for housing apartment complexes and whatnot. This is cluster housing, and so all of these parcels are going to, or the entire property is going to be broken up into eight full parcels. So the variance would be to waive the requirement to take 20% of the entire parcel and dedicate it to public space. Now, what is done in this design is though each property of the eight will have a section of that entire parcel, large portion of that is front lawn and all the front lawns connect and so way larger than 20% of that space is going to be green space but it will be owned by eight different owners that makes sense that and the owner will have more than 20% to the impermeable space on these lots is well within our requirements In fact, I think it's on the order of 34%. If I'm not mistaken, most parcels will have 34% of permeable where 50% is allowed. I'm sorry, 50% structure only, 70% of permeable. So they're going to have way more than 20% open space on their properties. In fact, they'll have almost 70% of open space on their properties.

I think the issue that we tried to address is the open space versus public space. We're achieving the open space and the green space, we're exceeding that. The issue would be like if we went in and said we'd like to make small lots, And in the center of it will be a strip of significant, more than 20% of the site would be green space, and we're going to dedicate it to the city, and the city has to take care of it. In this case, what we're doing is we're creating the open space, we're maintaining it with an HOA among the eight owners, and it's read as open space, including the accessibility of neighbors through the site to the... Park so it's just achieving an objective of meeting the planning requirements without creating an economic burden on the city from dedication there so Even though there will be an HOA

each of the eight homes will own that green space that is right in front of their house, you know, into... It's not a common space. It's an individual property. But it is part of an open green space.

And it will be deed restricted as such. So nobody, even though it's their home, they can't just build something there and have it read as other than open space.

And to that, you're saying you can't put a fence in, you know, around your area because it is part of the... open space of the PUD under the HOA.

Got it.

Okay.

But you could have a fence on part of it. What about if you have a dog? Pets. Is this going to be pet restricted? No, you can have pets.

You just have to keep them indoors or walk them on a leash. You walk them on a leash. You do have the exterior space out your front door is a courtyard area, so you do have some area under your control, but we wouldn't have fences.

What about play equipment for the families? Is the HOA going to make that judgment? they could make that judgment.

That would be who would decide that? In fact, the combination of green space and the park areas, that's a lot. There's not playground area, there's not playground budgeted for this, but it's something- Right, but I see many families will put those in their backyards.

We don't have backyards here.

Yeah, so if they make a decision, there could be a reservation for that, also a reservation for like, community gardening. So they could decide that, you know, so there could be some aspects of it that are optional into the future, but still reading the whole as an open area.

Yes? So I, this is a good, healthy conversation, but I mean, we're talking about, you know, Working through the process of this property and putting the homes in place, all the HOA stuff is going to happen with the people who end up buying those and they can figure out.

We have to draft it. You will draft it.

Okay. I'm just curious. I understand that. I just wanted to make sure, but I think if we're attracting families, we've got to make sure that they can have a typical family experience on their property.

I went last night at a birthday party and so I had four great-grandchildren and four of their friends and they were all on a huge trampoline. That kind of thing. They'll have to resolve.

Trampoline space. Can I make a recommendation? These are all valuable comments because the HOA would have to have some little flexibility for those. I don't know about the trampoline, but for play equipment or something. That's something to reserve and allow them to decide because they would be the ones having to pay for it and maintain it. That would be a shared decision.

Or with a birthday party, if somebody wanted to bring a bouncy house in, a bounce house in or something. I mean, there's a lot of different things that they'll, you know, with having to do this all in the front yard, they're going to have to think through or you're going to have to help them and then they'll have to adjust it and massage it as they move forward.

Even though it's set up as a detached single-family lot of record, it does have some compromises compared to a full lot with a house that has a front yard and a backyard and a separate garage. It's not that. It's better than attached dwellings that don't have that kind of green space. You could have a condominium plan that doesn't include any of this, but this has a compromise in that there is green space. There's the ability to share in the use of that green space, but the concept of keeping it open and red is open and shared rather than allow it to be enclosed into a series of effective what would become like backyards.

Mr. Chair. Yes. We talked a lot about this because again, this project is somewhat different. Developer in the city are working together as part of a grant for welcome home Ohio and and I was very insistent that that I wanted separate houses With the goal of somebody gaining ownership of their house versus an apartment field right that even a kind of medium I think would have been a way for someone to build wealth and build equity which is our major goal and having ownership But you still would have that You know, the common wall. And this is an R3, right? So R3 zone. It could have been an apartment building, basically, but as condominiums. And that ownership model versus these separate houses. But we were very insistent we wanted separate houses if we're going to do this. So people could have that opportunity to buy a house that's theirs. But we know that the layout is weird. And making it...

Perfect, you know is it was really hard and this was I think the best the best we could come up with Just still out for those separate houses Mr. Plan I have a suggestion and I'd be looking for the planner to to weigh in if she can Since the we know that an HOA is going to have to have some Restrictions built into it. What if we just make one of those restrictions that the The last 20% of everyone's front lawns have to remain open and cannot be fenced or used for playground equipment or things like that or whatever the appropriate thing is. You get to the 20% by requiring that last 20% of the lawn remain open to the space, but I don't know if that's a feasible solution or not.

I think for the site plan, we would be exceeding that. So I think the HOA would be beyond that courtyard space, which could be landscaped in a patio. That space is the open space. If you establish a baseline like the conservancy area is looking at the baseline then added to that could be at the option of the HOA play area, community gardening, something that would be probably at the western side of the site so it's less visible. We have to build a fence between the Red Cross and this. Maybe up against that portion of it might be an area that could be reserved. in the HOA at the election of the members of the HOA if they wanted to make a later improvement. But I think the idea of maximizing the read of open space is valuable to the neighbors. In the neighborhood meeting, they seemed pleased that the idea that though there are several homes, it's not as dense as it could be, obviously. If we went in with the condominium plan and if we were building to the minimum of the welcome home program, we would probably build more units on the site, smaller units, fewer bedrooms, We would lift a small dense building up out of the flood zone or flood fringe, but ultimately it would not be as acceptable to the neighbors and probably it wouldn't conform with the local initiative which is family housing that's affordable because that seems to be the thing that is most at risk right now.

I'll say the green space that comes with this PUD is extraordinary. I don't know of another property in the city that's quite like it. When I was a kid, green space like that was pretty valuable. The neighborhood kids got out in the yards and we played baseball and wiffle ball and things like that. And this space is prime for that. And so I think it's going to attract people for that very reason. That's my personal opinion.

Any other questions here at the commission level?

I don't have a question. I just have a comment. I want to kind of dovetail on what Commissioner Stone was saying. And I've said this in other settings. Show me where in Athens you're going to find a brand new home with this level of green space that is a three-bedroom, two-bath, or a purpose-built ADA-accessible dwelling that you can purchase for $180,000. Please show me. Brand new for a qualified purchaser in the city of Athens. Just have to say that out loud because that's what this is and this is what is going to be afforded to qualified purchasers here in the city of Athens. And again, keeping in mind that This is basically using the Welcome Home Ohio dollars. It is creating a revolving loan fund with diminishing returns to where there will be another round of homes at the same price point moving forward in time, and then possibly a third tranche until we get to the point where the subsidy runs out with what we're building here in the city of Athens, again, to qualified purchasers and so. To me, that's the beauty of the Welcome Home Ohio program, as well as what we're going to be able to experience here in the city of Athens.

Okay, so before I seek a motion from the board, is there anybody else who would like to say anything about this project, this case? I see nobody moving to the podium. So with that, I would... Did you have a comment?

I do have one comment. And maybe this is just because I'm newer on the Planning Commission. But I do want to say it does feel a little bit unusual to vote when the plan is not yet completed and presented. I know there's a precedent for that as we discussed. And I do think I understand the plan. and the variances were being asked, but it does just seem a little bit weird. I don't know if anybody else has that same reservation.

Right. And I can speak to it a little bit from my perspective in the administration is I ask that we move this forward anyway just because of us trying to get this delivered before the end of the calendar year since there's a period of time that City Council takes to get through for PUD development. I draw a contrast between a PUD and a Title 41 review because the Title 41 review, the Planning Commission is the last step. Whereas in this case, whether it be a major subdivision or a PUD, City Council is the last step. So there is another... series of weeks, and we're just functionally recommending to City Council. But I do agree with you. It would be better to have it. And I would have let these guys delay. They asked. They said, hey, we'd like to delay because we don't have the final set of plans. And I told them, no, I don't want you to delay because we've got to get this thing to City Council.

Could we possibly, I don't want to slow it down either, knowing that the route it takes to get through Council, but could we Condition on it and approve it today with condition that by the time it reaches City Council It has a final design and then that way your timing to get it By the time of that first meeting.

Yeah, absolutely there I would agree with that with Commissioner Knisely. We have done conditional approvals before with different items. Again, nothing like this, but we've done conditional and maybe that conditional, as Commissioner Knisely was saying, is that it's conditional upon Council receiving those plans by introduction and committee or by first reading, something along those lines, by first reading. It gives a little bit more time, but it's usually that first reading to where they've gone through and really understand what the plan is going to look like, which is very responsible. So I would suggest...

I'll make a motion. I've got it ready to go. You do? Yeah, I do. If you're ready. I don't want to preclude anybody else having comments. Okay, so here's the motion. I move that contingent upon final plan review by staff prior to the first reading by City Council that the Planning Commission approve the PUD with the four following variances. less than two acres site, side setbacks not less than two feet, rear setbacks not less than eight feet, and the 20% dedicated public open space being waived.

I'll second.

Second. So let me ask this question then. track history, I guess. If we approve this today, once I call for a vote, and if we approve it and forward it on to council, what's the timeframe before they would be able to move toward construction?

there how long will it take to go through counseling miss nicely maybe you have some sense since you are a long time committee first so in theory depending on when the next is a second or fourth Monday night for committee so they could this is the third the third Wednesday it could come up as the fourth it could come up Monday night for committee and then it could come up the first week of October for council first reading on count And then, so if it goes through three readings, it's every other first, third, first, third, Mondays. So that would put a November approval if it doesn't get suspended. Would that allow January construction?

Well, the plans would have to be approved by the state, and there's a lot of parallel work I think that would be going on, right? But so the goal is to try to break ground sometime in the spring, is that the plan? Okay.

Yeah.

The goal is to begin site work immediately after approval. I see. Okay. Because these are prefabricated units, they're capable of being built through the winter. I see. But we have to get the underground work done, the civil engineering, and the podiums built, which are masonry. Order to accept those units. So if we get in the ground in November December We can accept those units and build a winter. So that's what there is as Commissioner stone had pointed out There is a sense of urgency right with that. So trying to trying to fit that in it is we have built through the winter yeah, it's messy and and

And site work is tough if the ground is frozen or, you know, the weather conditions. So you either get it on before it really gets cold or you have to wait till after.

Yeah, the beauty of the prefabricating, we did take delivery all through December, January, and February last year. So it is possible to do that. You still have to watch the weather because it's... you know, you're using a crane and lifting a module. So, you know, wind conditions and weather conditions.

So there is value to try to get it out of here today as opposed to waiting until we have a chance to look at the plans because that would afford potentially some time on the front end to get some of that site work done so that we can receive those buildings sooner rather than later.

And I would add that the completion of the application, the primary issue is really the survey to verify and confirm the variances that are being sought. So it's more like a check set. This has been presented, this is the plan, but the survey will tell us exactly what those dimensions are, and that's part of the PUD application. So that's the trailing issue, but it's mostly verification of the of the plan as presented, with the variances as presented. Okay. Yes, Mayor.

So, again, just to kind of close the loop on all this, if, depending on what the decision is today, it, and then given that you're saying within, potentially within a week, you'll have those final design to where, you know, the next Committee meeting would be on the 28th of September, then followed with the, as I'm looking at the calendar, the 5th of October would be first reading, second reading would be the 19th of October, and then the final reading on this would be in November.

So it's... And that's the best case scenario. It is the best case scenario. Based on what we know. Okay. So, yeah. And, you know, if you were able to start, generally November and December are not bad months for doing site work and trying to do prep work on the ground. So that's not great. Okay. Yes, it is.

Hypothetically, what would happen if the survey is completed and then the, say, a rear setback is less than eight feet?

We'd have to come back to you. So a way to solve that would be to ask the surveyor to move the building to make sure that we don't have to come back. So there's some variability. I did say I thought the building plans could be completed in a week. I don't know the date of the survey to confirm that, but we'll get that as quickly as possible too. Okay. So the surveyor would be solving for the variance the way it's described.

Any other comments here or questions? Then I'll call to the question on the proposal here. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Good, passes.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. Okay, we have no communications. Are there any reports? No reports? No reports, sir. Okay. Is there anything that anybody here from the Citizens Group would want to speak about that wasn't covered by the agenda? Doesn't appear to be. Are there any announcements or other business? I see here none. Okay. Okay. I will say that I'm really excited about this Welcome Home project. I think it's kind of in some ways a little bit awkward because of the way the buildings are set up and on the street and things like that. But I'm kind of excited about the open space and what that all can mean to that small community or even the greater Lorraine or Hudson community portion of that. Anyway, I'm really excited about that. It hasn't been easy. Go ahead. It hasn't been easy. Okay.

Building eight houses. You know, we were just having this discussion the other day, Mr. Chair. Like, you drive to Columbus and you see hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of houses going up. And trying to build eight here has been, like... unbelievably difficult and and if we didn't have a partner in the Developers that has worked with us.

I think we would we'd still be done well and part of that though is just the the the Difficulty of this community you're either on the hillside you're in the you know, you're down in the riverbed, you know I mean, it's it's just whereas in Columbus, you know, you just buy a farm and you start to build a you know a development up there I mean it you know, it seems I don't know. Anyway, I just find it to be I interesting as I you know live in this community the difficulty to do things here because of because of how we're situated you know it's a challenge

If I may add to that, I belong to a group called the Mayor's Partnership for Progress, which is 28 Appalachian counties in southeast Ohio and beyond. And they're looking to us now and going, Athens is doing this. We would like to have access to this program and look at building homes too. So your whole comment about topography, welcome to southeast Ohio. But there's others that are watching and watching to see how this all plays out. are interested too.

Well, thank you so much for everybody who's had a hand in developing this and bringing this forward to the point where it looks like it could be a reality here in the not too distant future. So thank you. Well, so with that, we're adjourned.