Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Alright. So let's we have the when does when does the announcement come on? Is that is that right away when I start? Yeah. Okay. Alright. Okay. Alright. The West Lake Planning Commission will come to order. I guess we start with the recording.

The West Lake Planning Commission complies with Ohio Sunshine Law. The procedure. The meeting will be called to order, and the clerk will take the roll call. The commission will then approve the minutes of the previous meeting. The council representative will then present the council report. Commission business. When your project is called, please come to the podium. Place your drawings on the document table, and they will then be projected on the screen for all to see. The applicant or representative making the request will print their name and address on the attendance sheet and state their name and address for the record. Please make a short presentation speaking into the microphone.

Everyone making comments or presentation to the commission must speak into the microphone. City staff will give a staff report on the project. We will then hear from the audience. Any member of the audience that wishes to speak will have to speak into the microphone after printing their name and address on the attendance sheet and stating their name and address for the record. We ask that audience members speak one at a time after giving their name and address. This is for the purpose of the minutes for the meeting. Please speak clearly. The applicant will respond to public comments. Again, we ask that people speak one at a time. The Planning Commission members will have an opportunity to make comments and ask any questions that they may have. The commission will then take action.

Okay. Can we have the roll call, please?

Doregno? Here. Smith? Here. Apple? Here. Jones? Here.

Falcone will not be present, but we do have a quorum.

Alright. And move on to approval of minutes from the March meeting. Is there a motion to approve?

So moved.

Second.

Any discussion? Hearing none, please call the roll.

Smith? Yes. Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes. Dallregno?

Yes. Motion carries. Great. Council representatives report. Mister Del Reigno?

Nothing to report.

Okay. Then we will move on to the first item of business, which is ordinance twenty twenty six dash 19, a conditional use permit for a senior service use, Westbrook Nursing LLC. Can I have the can you please state your name and address for the record?

Mark Cohen,

president North Coast Architects 23215 Commerce Park Suite 316 Beechwood Ohio here on behalf of Westbrook Nursing LLC

great okay so we'll have Mr. Vidal give his report and then we'll call on you

yes so this is a conditional use permit to convert existing skilled nursing facility at 27601 West Chester Parkway to an assisted living facility. This is RMF 24 zoning. There were some changes in the code back in 2020 relative to this zone. But they are able to actually make this change with a new conditional use permit. The facility that is currently there, the nursing the skilled nursing that was there before, the former owner actually did lose their license.

And so you could say it's grandfathered as this type of use. And as long as they're back up and running within three years' time, that's fine. They can continue here with the conditional use permit. So it's somewhat time sensitive but this is something that they should be able to achieve. And it does not mean the project has to be completed in three years it just means that they're back in business. And let's see, they lost their license 11/11/2023. So it gives them till November. Current owner has owned this property since February 2025. So it's 4.2 acres. Nothing's really changing on the outside.

It's got about 81 parking spaces. It abuts Huntington Woods rehab and skilled nursing. So what they will do with this is convert the inside for assisted living with 100 suites. And we probably won't see a future development plan, as we don't think there's really anything planned, at least at the PZL meeting, it it didn't seem like there was much of anything planned for the exterior. If that changes, of course, you'll see it.

Here's another view just showing how this dovetails. It's a very unique site, having these different buildings all in different parcels the way that they are. It's not anything that you would see happen today. And just while this property was for sale, we had a number of other requests efficiency apartments, a substance abuse treatment facility, an orphanage. So this use more closely aligns with history of this property.

And it's not expected to compete with the Huntington Woods. And assisted living is certainly more it's almost like a multi family use for this site. And as you can see, there's multi family across the street. Future land use plan does identify this area as multi family medium density as well. So standards for evaluating the conditional use permits.

There are four that apply. And I think tonight your response will answer these four. So, you know, how do they relate to the guide plan, thoroughfare plan, do they traffic you know is there what's the effect on traffic? And of course this is a little bit different because you're actually I think going for from a more intensive use commercial use to a less intensive one. Does it serve the surrounding areas?

And how does it affect neighboring properties as well? You are able to recommend safeguards and conditions. Planning Commission is a recommending body in terms of conditional use permits, so it actually will be counsel making the final decision. At the PZL meeting back on January 20, council members same as the owner parking, floor plans, exterior upgrades, and landscaping. They did suggest that the two parcels be consolidated, and there's a condition relative to that.

And with that said that is the only condition that the parcels are consolidated. Thank you.

Great. Thanks. Do you have anything to add to Mr. Bell's report?

He did

a very fine job of giving all the information. I just would add that the owners did agree that they would consolidate the properties after approval of the CUP.

Okay. Great. Is there anyone from the audience that wishes to comment on this item? Seeing none, we'll start with councilman Doregno.

No. I think is it's a best use for it at this point. And as long as the consolidation goes through, that's my only sticking point.

Sounds good. Miss Smith?

It it's gonna generate I agree with the councilman. It's it's also it's gonna generate apparently less traffic. It's a very similar use to what was historically there. And, no, I I don't see any problem with it at this point. Great. Miss Abel?

I concur. No further comments.

Okay. I have nothing either. I'm I'm in support of this. So, can I get a motion?

Based on the finding facts, I have moved recommend approval of ordinance twenty twenty six dash 19 with the following condition that the parcels are consolidated.

Second. Any discussion? Hearing none, clerk please call the roll.

Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes. Del Reigno? Yes. Smith? Yes. Motion carries.

Okay. Next item is the Thank Farage

I'm sorry. Go ahead. Oh, no. Was just nodding.

Oh, okay. Gotcha. Next item is the Farage Plaza, which, my understanding is they needed some more time, and they've asked to be, tabled. Yes, sir. So, can I get a motion to table at the request of the applicant?

Make a motion to table Farage Plaza for the 05/1126 meeting. Second.

Any discussion? Hearing none, clerk, please call the roll.

Jones? Yes. Del Regino?

Yes.

Smith? Yes. Apple? Yes. Motion carries.

Okay. Next item is the American Greetings monument sign multi tenant. Mr. Bedell? Yes.

This is 1 American Boulevard. So the purpose is to construct two identical monument signs. This to identify this complex of office buildings and its 10 tenants. 1 sign will guide drivers and pedestrians near the street. The other is really more to assist pedestrians with an essential plaza and provide much needed way finding.

And they do differ from the advertising kiosks. The You Are Here maps you see in Crocker Park, they're regulated as freestanding signs. There's some little some things happen a little bit different with the motion that you'll see in a minute. So they're aluminum cabinet signs in gray finish, 52 and a half inches wide, 96 inches high. What we like to see, clear acrylic push through letters overlaid with red vinyl for the American Greetings branded red to identify the 1 American Boulevard as you can see.

And then the tenants will be white as you can see, eliminated from the interior as well. The size of the panels are not at all excessive. They're about three ten and a half square feet for the larger ones. And about 1.3 square feet for the smaller ones as well. So if you count up all the graphic portions, it's only about 15 square feet. So really not an issue with any of that. Side you'll see it. There's a drawing a little further along. One side is a red color. And it's so it's a acrylic panel.

So it's the same way that the push through letters are illuminated. That totals eight square feet. So when you total everything together, it comes to almost 26 square feet. 30 square feet is allowed, so no issues with that. Master sign criteria for Crocker Park.

It has some requirements that will require some waivers. The first signs are they're not on frontages parallel to Crocker Road. They're greater than two seventy feet from Crocker Road. That's a waiver believe it or not. Master sign criteria for these types of signs were really meant to direct drivers into Crocker Park from Crocker Road.

So that's really what all of these are pointing to. And the next one that you see the proposed signs are in locations that are not at an entrance. And they're more than two seventy feet. And I'm not going to read all these. Those signs are not located at an entrance so there's multiple places as you can see on the screen where the waivers are required.

The size no issues with that. Height is fine as well. The one sign is too close to the curb that's an easy thing just to move it back so that it's no closer than 10 feet to the curb. So that will need to be fixed. And the waivers I've just gone through all those. I won't go through them again. This is the sign that's a little bit too close to the curb. Fire Department. Okay. Our Fire Department, they've noted that the monument sign shown at the circle cannot obstruct the fire apparatus access in this location.

This fire apparatus road starts at the removable bollards, includes the grass section, grass creek, and ends at the steps to the elevated level. I think really the solution to that is to meet out there with the client, with our assistant fire chief. And I'll meet out with them and we'll take some marking paint and we'll just mark right on the pavement where these signs can be if everyone agrees to that. Really was trying to figure out another solution to make it work and I don't see another way. I mean I think that's the best way.

Yeah. Think there's room. I think there's room enough in that plaza to locate the sign. And at the edge of the plaza, at the circle, to provide what they're looking for. So that's what I'm going to suggest. This right here is showing that illuminated side that I mentioned. Fortunately they do have enough square footage left over for signage or else that might be something that you may object to. But it is within the square footage allotment. So it does comply. And so with that said, just the waivers I've mentioned.

Have number two is the modification. I think that with repositioning the sign or both signs anyways we'll just make sure that two is not necessary. And then three is what I just mentioned. And four is a standard condition that the LEDs are dimmable so they can be adjusted in case they're too bright. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Name and address for the record?

Susan Frankel. Susan Frankel and Associates. 25300 Cedar Road, Beechwood, representing American Greetings Headquarters LLC, the owners of the building.

Great. Thank you. Do have anything to add to mister Bill's report?

Thank you. That was perfect. The only thing I would like to add is that we initially did want the sign on the corner of the that Crocker Road. There's just no physical way to put one there. So that's why we kind of said, okay.

We need to put something farther back so when people are driving down one American Boulevard, they can see the sign. And we're fully agreeable to relocating these to where they need to belong. They there really was no rhyme or reason for the exact locations other than the one sign in that picture needs to be somewhere near the entrance because the issue was the tenants' visitors needed to know where to go because it gets confusing. The other one just needed to be somewhere seen on American Boulevard. K.

Great. Thank you. Anyone from the audience wish to comment on this item? Hearing none, let's go to miss Apple.

Great. Thank you. Yeah. I don't have any problem with these signs, and I appreciate your willingness and as well as, director Bedell's willingness to meet, on-site to discuss with fire for of that. That was my only concern, and it sounds like you've already figured out a way to resolve that issue. So thank you. I have nothing further.

Great. Thanks. Ms. Smith?

Agreed. The the only comment I have is positive. I think they really help with the wayfinding. Other than that, I'm in complete agreement with miss Apple.

Okay. Thank you. Councilman?

No. I think we're good other than is that are both the signs the assistant chief talking about both signs being in the way?

Well, he mentioned at the circle. But as long as we're there, we'll note the one in the plaza.

I didn't know if he passed

through or if that

was an actual pass through through the plaza for

As I recall, I don't think the vehicles drive all the way into it. I think they only drive the length of a fire truck. I'm going back quite a few years to try to remember that.

All right. No problem.

I think it's something like that.

Other than that, I'm Okay.

Alright. Thank you. Then in the absence of our board's wayfinding guru, miss Valcone, I will state that I strongly support the concept of wayfinding and I'm I'm sure that she's also happy to see this. So I don't have anything else. Can I get a motion on this?

Based on the findings of fact, I moved to approve the American Greeting Monument sign plan with the following. One waiver from Crocker Park master sign criteria section 1.35 to allow freestanding signs for tenant frontage that is not parallel to Crocker Road and greater than two hundred two hundred and seventy distance feet distance from Crocker Road. Signs are approximately 190 feet from Crocker Road. And section 1.3 subsection three to allow monument signs at locations that are not at a driveway slash entrance into the development from Crocker Road. Two modification for zoning code section twelve twenty three point zero six for one sign to be less than 10 feet from the curb.

Three, condition that the monument signs are positioned to not interfere with fire apparatus access as approved by the Westlake Fire Department. And four, condition that the LEDs are dimmable.

They wrote a number three.

Yeah. Okay. Is there a second?

Second.

Okay. Is it for discussion, is it number two or number three that we need to hear? It's number two. Right?

I'm sorry. Number number two.

Yeah. So is it okay if we strike number 2 because they're gonna the sign so that it's not doesn't need to be

that less than two Whatever you want with my motion, sir.

Alright. Well, then we'll agree to strike number two. Any other discussion? Hearing none, clerk, please call the roll.

Del Reigno? Yes. Smith? Yes. Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes. Motion carries. Alright. Thanks.

K. Next item is ordinance twenty twenty six dash 25, conditional use permit for a preschool at RISE School.

Yes. 1299 Columbia Road. This is the former Citizens Bank. It's about 2,300 square feet. And the purpose of the conditional use permit is to convert it to a preschool facility. Eventually their hope is that this could be expanded as the kids age. Then they'll add a grade and keep adding grades until they go through middle school. And at some point we'll also do an addition to the building. But for now, which by the way a school middle or elementary schools do not require a conditional use permit. Preschools do.

Daycares do. But schools don't. So that's just more for your information to let you know what their future plans are. So as part of this, they will consolidate the existing parcel. It's about 25,000 square feet with the rest of the campus making it about 3.2 acres when completed with it.

And so preschool facilities, it's a conditional use pursuant to 1,116.03 gs 16. And there are standards first that go along with the preschool facility if approved. But really at this point we're only talking about conditional use permit. There's a development plan that is to come in the future and a site improvement plan. So what you're seeing here is really schematic at this point.

And it's good enough that I could take a look at it. You'll see a box score in a minute. And we could start to talk about things like parking and circulation with EZL, which we did. And unified architecture for the campus, for example. And those types things. But at this point, it's very schematic. They're still developing their program for it. So these are those regulations again. And then there's some additional regulations that are specific to shopping centers as well. And I will come back to this in a different way in a minute.

Our guide plan, the future land use map does identify this as retail commercial. General business and shopping centers are associated with that. And this is a permitted use in those zones as a conditional use permit. Standards for evaluating conditional use permits. Is it objectionable to nearby dwellings? Does it form a harmonious part of the business community? Are there any issues with hours of operation, concentration of vehicles? Those are the ones. And then of course you can recommend any safeguards and conditions. The box score as I mentioned it's schematic.

But most things are working out pretty good with it already. We're not exactly sure what the percentage of landscaping will be with this. That'll have to be tallied for this and the rest of the site. Total parking spaces, we don't we won't know that until the inside is actually designed. They with the schematic though, they they've got 20 new that they were showing. A 113 for the total site. Some of the 20 don't really work out right on the way it's designed currently. But again you'll see that in the future. And then just to show the zoning. So it's general businesses to the north.

That darker color. And then the sort of pinkish color that you see is a shopping center. Hold on one second. I think I've got a better view. Yeah.

So at PCL, one of the things that was discussed was circulation and stacking vehicles, especially if this does become an elementary school at some point. And they have a unique situation because you can see how this lines up with that parking lot that's behind it. They actually own that parking lot as well. So they will be able to bring vehicles all the way around the building. And they'll be able to bring them all the way down through that parking and then back up.

They have to train their parents how to do that at some point. But they're actually in a good location for that. It's not something that we often see, especially with conversions like this. So again this is schematic at this time. With that, the couple of conditions.

First is a condition that the parcels would be consolidated, which they are willing and happy to do. And the second one is a condition that the preschool facility is not required to be the single use within the building or the sole use on the parcel. Now why is that? Because in the code it says if you're a preschool and shopping center it's supposed to be the single use within the building or the sole use on the parcel. It's assuming you're going to do a standalone preschool which is what they normally are.

This is part of a campus. So this takes away that requirement that would make absolutely no sense. Otherwise, don't consolidate the two properties. But we want them to consolidate the Right. No.

Mhmm. Makes sense.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Great.

Thank you. Name and address for the record? Omar Salama. And and the address?

22882 1st Lake, West Lake.

Okay. Do you have anything to add to mister Bidelski's

report? It's all great. Okay.

Okay. Anyone from the audience wish to speak on this? K. Hearing none, let's go to miss Smith.

Looking at it, it it seems like it's too close to the road for the use. And then also, was concerned about the parking to the north side. But seeing as how it's a single owner for the entire parcel, those seem like issues that could be overcome during the development plan. Yes. You know, the parking on the north side doesn't isn't really is basically a driveway. So those were my concerns.

K. Councilman Doregno?

Yeah. So the last thing we talked there's a a drive that comes in off of the mall side, the shopping center side. We got to the bottom of that. Whose is that?

It's actually ours because we actually the one who paved it back in, I think, 2021. So when I went back, we actually were at exit toward the street that goes to the, do you have Yeah, drawing, you can kind of see it on the screen.

Yeah, it's coming out the bottom right there. Yeah,

it's not the greatest. I don't know if

I have There is one that right there. I mean, in the you could see it right behind Taco Bell, actually.

Mhmm. So that's that's you say it's yours.

When I went back and checked, actually, it it says I had to double check. But when we went back because last time we had that conversation, and nobody been actually claiming it. But we actually, the one who did pave it, it was completely, like, rundown. And so we did actually the payment. We paid for that and all that. But need to double check 100. But we are currently using that at this point.

Right. And so it's it's whose parcel is that? Whose land is it on? Is it on is that Energizer's? Is that the malls? Do we have any idea who owns the

I don't have that. Land that that's sitting on? So you go back to the drawing. So we have half almost, if you look at the back no. The so we are almost, like, half that half of it because it starts between the parking. But the whole thing, I don't know, 100%.

Okay.

Yeah. I think that's, you know, I think that needs to be looked at to try and figure out whose that is. I hate to see it be used to pave it. You put money into it.

We did already that.

Right. And then the rightful owner comes back that it's on their property and says So it's that's a concern for me. Other than that, I think if we're just doing conditional use, I'm okay.

Okay. Miss Apple?

I'm okay with the conditional use too. I'm just curious how many students preschool students do you anticipate initially?

So we're thinking of 18 kids.

18. And then

We have already, like, an educational program in the building. It's already starting, like, at 80 10 kids so far. Okay. And we're going, like, you know but this is more of education, but we're converting it to be a pre preschool. Okay. And the build out will will fit 18 kids. That's

that's So expect the school will be a pre k through elementary school? So you'll always still have that pre k?

Yes.

Great. Yeah. I don't have any concerns about the conditional use permit. I did have concerns about the queuing and or stacking, but it sounds like that was discussed at PZL and I'm I appreciate the ability to use that back parking. I'm okay with the seat the conditional use.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

Thank

you. I would agree on strictly the conditional use aspect of this. I I don't have a problem with them taking this over and utilizing it for that purpose. Since we're going to be seeing a development plan for this at some point, I do have some concerns about the schematic layout, some things I think we'll probably wanna tweak. But and and I do have a also just want to make sure that that ingress egress easement is if there is one, you know, if there's one established or

Yeah. Yeah. That's something that that they will need to determine. It is on the property that is owned by Taco Bell or whoever this Terrazza eight LLC is the owner of. Yeah.

It seems likely that there's an ingress egress easement there for the driveway to have been built like that. But you know that's just something we'll have to make sure is worked out when the, you know, when the when the development plans are put together for this. Other than that, I don't have any issues. I I think it's I'm glad to see the that your facility is, you know, doing well and glad to see that that particular building is gonna get an adaptive reuse. It's good all all good things. Do I hear a motion on this? That

Terraza eight looks like they're out of Vancouver, Washington. So perhaps that's Taco Bell then. Oops. Sorry. Could be. Went too far.

Based on the finding of facts, I move to recommend approval of ordinance twenty twenty six dash 25 with the following condition that the parcels are consolidated into condition that preschool facility is not required to be the single use within the building or the sole use on the parcel.

Second. Any discussion? Hearing none. Clerk please call the

roll.

Smith? Yes. Del Reigno?

Yes.

Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes. Motion carries.

Okay. Great.

Thank you,

Your Honors.

Have a good

Thank you. Sure.

Next item is ordinance twenty twenty six dash 26 a conditional use permit for a training school at 26945 Westwood.

Yes so this is this will be a certified provider agency serving individuals with developmental disabilities and they're currently at 159 Crocker Park Boulevard Suite 436 And this does require conditional use permit. Training school is what we would identify this as in our code. In the office building zone this does require conditional use permit pursuant to twelve sixteen point three gs-nine. And so they'll be leasing a vacant 1,800 square foot office space Suite B. And proposed uses are structured day programming and skill building services.

And I probably won't read most of this. Life skills training, social interaction, communication. They're going to do all the activities will be inside the leased space. So they won't be doing things on the outside. Community integration, recreational and structured group activities, and personal development and independence training. They anticipate approximately four to six staff members at any time. And any staffing ratio will comply with the DODD requirements. And they're thinking the maximum plan participants probably is fifteen to twenty hours seven a. M. To five p.

M. Ample parking. So there's 36 spaces on the east Side of the building. 21 on the West Side. 57. Code requires 45 for the entire building. And they have clients that will be either will have transportation to get there. Pick up and drop off. So they'll have approved transportation providers, family members, or agency arranged transportation. So we don't think that there's going to be an issue with them using up all the parking.

And they will stagger their arrival and departure times to minimize traffic concentration. And I did do some research with the state. And they are current with them. At the 02/2006 PCL meeting council members asked they wanted to know why the building spans two parcels. Well that really has nothing to do with this request. And we just saw that earlier with building spanning more than one parcel. So it's something we hope will get addressed at some point in the future. Certainly if there's ever an addition or anything like that it'll have to be corrected. And let me see. I think that was it really.

They talked about other things we learned about how drop off and pick up would work and things of that nature. So we do have a schematic floor plan. I was able to overlay it on this aerial photo so that you can see. And you see where the cars are parked just to the right well just above where that first dark car is you see a couple of handicapped spaces. And that's where their clients will be able to enter the building.

There's an entrance right there. There's a common hallway that they'll be able to access from as well. They have another couple of actual exits going over to Westwood Road. But that's really not for their client use. And they did provide some brochures and some information that better summarizes than I do.

Guide plan, it does identify this for office. So that's the appropriate designation for this use. And standards for evaluating conditional use permits. I think most of the same ones you've heard me mention tonight as well. It's unusual to have this many conditional use permits at one meeting I by the don't ever remember this happening before.

So with that said, there's actually no no recommended conditions for this one. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. Can you state your name and address for the

record?

My name is Ayo, Missouri. Address 36550 Chester Road, Apartment 3604, Avon, Ohio 44011.

K. Do you have anything to add to mister Bedell's report?

No. He covered everything. Thank you so much.

Great. Thanks. Anyone from the audience wish to comment on this? Hearing none. Sorry. Excuse me. Hearing none, councilman D'Arregno?

No. I have nothing. I think it'll be good for use of the space and gentlemen, I was at PZL so I heard his explanation on the queuing which was my concern. But if we're gonna stagger them, I think we're okay. Other than that, I'm okay.

Alright. Great. Miss Apple?

Yeah. I have no issues with this. That sounds like a terrific use of this space.

Miss Smith?

I would agree. It sounds like a terrific use of the space. No issues.

I will echo what everyone else has said. No issues. Do I have a motion on this?

Based on the findings and facts, I move to recommend approval of ordinance twenty twenty six dash 26.

Second.

Any discussion? Hearing none. Clerk, please call the roll.

Smith? Yes. Apple? Jones? Yes. Del Ragneaux?

Yes.

Motion carries. Great. Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Use permit. Ordinance twenty twenty six dash twenty seven conditional use permit for a fitness center at 27100 Detroit.

Yes. So this is for forward fitness. It's a conditional use permit as mentioned. And the General Business District one is required per twelve sixteen point zero three f nine. He will be leasing a vacant 1,600 square foot storefront formerly Alterations Pro. All activities will be within the building. Weight training, just a couple of employees. And clients in the group building could be as few as one, groups of up to 10. It just depends. Their hours of operation are not out of line with the rest of that center.

There is ample parking. Don't think I noticed there were 44 rear parking space before this conditional use permit.

I was gonna say the same thing. Had no idea there was that much parking back

there. Yeah learn something new every day right? So by code even with this use they'll still have 14 surplus parking spaces. Know the only potential issue I thought well if you know if they play loud music or they're dropping weights on the floor or something like that really. Can't really see anything that would be bothersome to the neighboring tenants.

Council members they did ask about the rear access. It is Detroit's on a ridge so it does have steps leading down to that rear parking lot. They did were hopeful that they would be conscious of the weights in the floor distributing weight so that you're not piling everything in one area as that was probably not designed with a fitness use like this in mind. And we talked about the rear entrance a little bit. And I think that's about it really.

So again the guide plan it does identify this for retail commercial. This is the right zone for it. And we've gone through all those again same safeguards and conditions that you can impose. I couldn't think of any. Thank you.

Great. Thanks. Name and address for that?

My name is Kevin Johnson. Address is 38456 Foxglen Avon.

Okay. Do you have anything to add to mister Badilgema? No. That's really good. Great. Thank you. Anyone from the audience wish to speak on this? Hearing none, miss Apple?

No. I have no issue. I I there used to be back in the day, there was a jazzercise studio.

That's what I heard.

Yeah. So I knew there was that rear parking and it I mean, that was a bunch of women jumping all over the place. So I think you're fine. Nobody ever complained. I lived down in that area. We're good here.

Great. Thanks. Ms. Smith?

No issues.

Okay. Councilman?

No issues.

Great. Yeah. I think, yeah. My only concern I had was the parking until I looked closer at the site and realized, yeah, when when you're Parking there. Embarrassingly standing in line at Mitchell's across the street from there, you don't notice how much parking there's in the back. So, yeah. So I have no issues with it. I'm sure he'll they will take your, concerns, though, into account about, dropping weights on the floor. And, other than that, I think we're good to go. So, do I have a motion?

Based on the fact that we move to recommend approval of ordinance twenty twenty six dash 27.

Second. Any discussion? Hearing none. Clerk, please call the roll.

Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes. Del Rego? Yes. Smith?

Yes. Motion carries.

Great. Thanks. Alright. Thank you for your time. Mhmm. Okay. Next Next item is ordinance twenty twenty six dash 31. This is to rezone two sixty eight fourteen Center Ridge from GB and OB to R 1 F 80.

Yes. So the the rear, as you can see, that does not have really color on it where you can just see the trees. That is already zoned single family.

So Mhmm.

That portion if if no nothing changes, the portion that you see in the back could be subdivided just as as the way it is so if it doesn't get rezoned that could happen and then just just to remind everyone you're seeing a subdivision you're gonna see a subdivision it's schematic. The only thing that's being considered tonight is whether or not the front area there, the pink and the red, should be rezoned. The actual subdivision is not something that can even be approved at this point without that first question being answered. But it is important because it does show that it's feasible to have a subdivision in this location. So having a schematic plan like this is a good idea.

It's a good thing to show. It gives you an idea too of how many lots could be permitted with this. And that goes into this next thing. It's a 19 lot residential subdivision. It's split zoned. So you've got about 0.8 acres general business. That's that little red sliver up front. You've got about a quarter of an acre that's office building. That's in pink. The roadway is going through that.

And then the rear, the whole rear area is about 11.57 acres. And that's already zoned for single family residential like this. So total subdivision or total area 12.61 acres. Undeveloped property. And the lots in the schematic plan, they range from one lot at 18,000 square feet, which their code allows one to go down to 18,000, but no less than 18,000.

So they've got that. And then as high as 39, almost 40,000 square feet. So at the PZL meeting, council members discussed the slope issues. Center Ridge Road is on a ridge. Sanitary sewer lines, buffering, retention, the angle of the proposed subdivision entrance, the length of the street, and proximity of a couple of the lots to restaurants in the budding plaza.

The guide plan, the city's comprehensive guide plan, has for decades has shown a planned residential street generally in this area. You can see it right there. Sort of a different design with a couple of cul de sacs going in two different directions. Not really drawn to scale. There's no way that that could have actually worked realistically. And this layout did actually continue to show the front zoning the way it currently is. Let's see. Is there anything else there? I think that's about it. Oh, just housekeeping.

If this does get rezoned, this future land use map will be changed, will be amended so that it matches. That's just something that always happens. Zoning. If you take a look at the twelve eleven point zero one that's just here the intent. The statement that residential districts are intended to ensure orderly well planned neighborhoods by regulating building placement, lot size, and population density.

Protecting infrastructure and school service capacity. Minimizing nuances such as noise traffic and fumes. Preserving the character and stability of residential areas. And guiding development towards the most appropriate use of land consistent with the community's guide plan. That's the only reading I'm going to do tonight I promise.

And that'll apply to the next one too after this. So current zoning does permit a wide range of office building and general business uses including office institutional retail service recreational and other business uses. So the proposed zoning does limit that to mainly one family dwellings, park, institutional uses, and agricultural uses. You're never going to see agricultural uses. Some of those other uses could be possible.

They're actually possible today in the residential portion. So because the proposed subdivision is a permitted use under the new residential zoning, the rezoning, it just narrows that down. And essentially, you only then would only see the residential homes. There would be a couple with this schematic subdivision the way it's laid out right now. There would be a couple things that would require zoning modifications.

Those are exceptions the city grants. There's a couple of outlines that are a little bit less than 170 feet in-depth. That's not unusual with infill subdivisions like this. And in order to make sure that the street did not was not more than 1,000 feet in length, the cul de sac is actually pulled away. It's a little farther to the east than it would be otherwise.

And that just changes the setback for sub lots, what, seven, eight, and nine. So that normally those setbacks would be at 50 feet. And they would need to be at 60 feet in order to have 100 feet of width at the setback. And there's plenty of room on the site on those lots in order to do that. Again, this is all schematic. I think some of this may change when they actually get to the more engineered survey drawings. And then I won't go through all this. But this just kind of shows you with the office building in general business. There's a lot of different uses that can occur in those in those existing zones. Mhmm.

And then r one f 80, fewer. Let's see. I think we've talked about that. I think I've talked about most of this stuff here. Yeah.

A thousand feet to the end of the cul de sac. Their Planning Commission approval is also required because the actual cul de sac street will exceed 500 feet in length. But the code specifically says the commission may permit a length that doesn't exceed a 100 a thousand feet if the parcel cannot be subdivided otherwise. There's really not a way to subdivide it otherwise. Just the there's just not other property where they could punch a street out to another street out to Center Ridge Road.

So that's why that's being done that way. As far as buffer goes, there's really not a lot of buffer that shows up at all in the Planning and Planting Code Chapter 11. This is one of those rare times where we see it for subdivisions. And it says a planting screen of at least 10 feet in width with no right of access may required along the lots abutting such a major street or non residential land uses. And they've actually provided that, pulling in off of Center Ridge Road.

And then means of access, they do meet that requirement. And that's another if they weren't able to meet that requirement then they couldn't go forward with it. And other considerations for rezoning. There's a lot on the page here. But I hope that you have this in your report. So hopefully you've had a chance to look these over. Again, this is a concept plan. It's schematic in nature. And with that said, I thank you.

Okay. Great. Thanks. Do you name and address for the record?

Hi. I'm Edward Pavasek. I live at 1779 Craniot Court here in Westlake.

Kevin Hoffman, Polaris Engineering and Surveying. 34600 Chardon Road, Willoughby Hills, Ohio. Great. Thanks. Do either of you have anything to add to mister Beadell's report?

Yes. I do. Jim, mister Beadell, are you able to put the projector down or

no?

Oh, yes. Sorry.

Okay. Jim's report or miss Burdell's report was well done and pretty accurate on the reason and the request for us to rezone. But I do wanna bring this into highlight. We did explore the fact of possibly doing a commercial parcel there. And so this is what we're here today for to talk about is the rezoning of these of the red area, so to speak, with the street coming through.

I did look at this, when I was putting the parcels together. There's five parcels that we currently have, in our contracts. We did look at putting an office here as well, and I did the due diligence to see if if it's feasible to to make an economic benefit and a benefit for the area. And with Crocker Park and Detroit Road, it it doesn't make sense to have a office complex or a fitness center or a convenience store or anything like that there. So that's the reason why we we're going through this process to rezone it, the front to reach the what the city planning guide had in it to do to allow a residential subdivision involved in it.

So I just wanted to to show that and to show the public what we're here today to talk about. Now, the concept, like Mr. Bedell mentioned, this is a concept. I'm in talks with additional land that's currently around the parcel as well too that could eliminate, that could add walkways to plazas, additional buffering to the plaza center and to some of the residences that have access to the plaza over on Dover Center. So I have been in good contact with the property owners on there and some several other property owners to expand this a little bit as well too.

So I just wanted to make make sure that so when we do come back here for planning next month regardless of the rezoning because it would be this concept or it would be the the lots coming through here. I just want everybody to understand that that I've been working on that. I was asked by the committee prior to this to look into those type of things in which I have on it. But ultimately, if the rezoning goes through, it looks something something similar to this that this presented in your packets. And again, this is not to what we would actually present to planning at that time.

But as I mentioned, it it it will give a good idea of what is transpiring and what we're trying to do. My engineer, do you have any comments you wanna

No. No other comments at this time.

Okay.

Thank you. So before we move into public comment on this, it's just important to note. And I know mister Bedell stated this previously, but what's currently before this board, isn't this layout. What's before this board is rezoning the portion of the property in the front that's currently zoned either office or general business. So as and it is office and general business, so the two zoning districts correct.

Yeah. So so as we that's what we're considering tonight. We're we're not considering this layout. We're not going to be approving this layout. We're only considering whether or not it makes sense to have the front portion of this property zoned to match what the rear portion of the property already is zoned, which is r one f 80, which is for single family homes.

So, with that, when I, call for public comment, we'll ask that, when you come up and comment that you keep your comments, to what we're considering tonight, which is the rezoning of this property. There will be future opportunities to comment on the actual layout and development of this plan. I'd ask that you keep your comments again to about five minutes.

We're doing usually, do two or three.

Two or three minutes? Okay. I'm sorry. Apologize.

Then we

Lost Lane 2.

Okay. He's saying to apologize for that. So that is so we'll ask you to keep your comments to about two minutes. And again, we'd also ask that we not get repetitive. If someone before you says one thing, then there's really no need to come up. We hear you. We understand. So Chair? Yes.

Just also wanted to note for the record that I did receive two emails, one from a Sam Collier who lives on I forget what his address is. I don't have it in front of me. Questions was more regarding subdivision. And mister Ochos, who also lives over on Forest Parkway, had comments as well. And so those were both sent to you guys. You had

Yes. Yeah. And we and we did receive those and we reviewed those as well. So thank thank you for pointing that out. So with that, I'll open the floor for comments. So if anybody has any comments on the rezoning of this property, feel free to come forward. We'll ask you to state your name and address for the record. And so anyone wants to speak, you can come forward. No. Okay. Then hearing nothing, then I guess we'll go on to comments from the board on this. So let's start. Who did I start with last time? Was it I don't remember. Well, we'll start with councilman Del Reigno then.

Thank you. Okay. So I've looked at this now from with PZL and myself. And we've heard either being on BBZA and all that, there's we have an issue with buffering between residential and, what I'll say, is commercial or business districts. The current layout and the current plan assists us with that.

Right? I mean, with the breakout of separation where the zones are at right now assist us. We're now going to my concern is bringing in a residential area to the backside of an existing strip mall. And in a year or two, we're going to have individuals that are in those houses saying that the residential or the strip mall is now garbage, lights, noise, all of that when they moved into it. And we're going say, well, they knew what they were getting into, which is not always the case because we have that with another one that came before us with Hail Marys.

Had been there for a long period of time, resident moved in, and they changed their use. And it turned into a neighborhood fight, for lack of better terms. So this current, leaving it as is with office and with general business, allows to have that buffering from existing and recognizing that someone can come in and put in single family residence in the back if they find another way of getting into it. But it definitely does assist with the buffering between the businesses on Center Ridge Road and the individuals that are north of Center Ridge Road. Other concern I have is and, you know, by doing this, what are we changing as far as and mister Pavczyk, you and I spoke about this with sanitary going out to Center Ridge, storm going over to the creek, I'm assuming, and we're you know, we've heard letters and we've received comments that, you know, worried about flooding.

We have issues over there, and I get all that. But from a zoning aspect, I am not a huge fan of taking away office zoning and general business zoning in Westlake at this time for residential. Simply on the grounds of, yes, we have Detroit Road. We have Crocker Park. We but we also could benefit from having these zoned properly and allow businesses to move in.

It's a substantial piece of land. And while Mr. Pavazzek is going say that it doesn't really fit or it's not going to make money or whatever it is, it's still an opportunity for the city of Westlake to keep businesses and invite businesses into the city of Westlake. So, I have concerns with with removing existing general business and office, zones at this point. So that's kind of where I'm

at with it.

Okay. Thank you. Ms. Smith?

I guess not having been part of those discussions for the slopes, the drainage and all that, I assume that that would be addressed in a future development plan. I too have mixed feelings about taking away commercial area from the City Of Westlake without rehashing all of mister Del Reigno's comments. I I just have concerns about changing the zoning of that that land. Thank you.

Thank you. Miss Apple?

Okay. Well, I like the idea of changing the zoning of the land to have the front of the zoning match what is behind it. My concern, even though I think buffering is not required, but I believe you were going to do some buffering, there is always that concern as councilman Del Rigno said that then people buy homes and then the commercial part builds up and then you've got people not happy with where the lights are, I would say some of that would be on us to help protect that from happening when we were talking about the specifics of the development plan and if we were able to add some buffering being it, hills, trees, whatever we do. But I I am in favor of the rezoning. I I like it.

I think it makes sense. I I know that there were neighbors who raised concerns about drainage and, such. But again, in my experience, when we develop the property, all of that drainage is analyzed and looked at, and it's the engineers do a fabulous job of making sure that water is routed appropriately and it usually ends up benefiting everyone who is in the area. That's where I am.

Okay. Thank you. Yeah. We appear to have a pretty interesting split on this one. I'm also in favor of rezoning this property.

And I think that the biggest reason I am is that I think that it will result in a more cohesive development. And I also think that it would it has less of a potential to be problematic for the existing residences that are surrounding it. I think that you know, a potential small office or something else that would fit in the office zoning, would be a little bit more problematic for the residents to the east. And I think it also has the potential to become a little bit of an issue going forward with proximity to the residences in this subdivision which is something that you kind of alluded to a little bit earlier. Maybe not so much in that context but that but but for those same reasons, thinking about, well, what are you know, what happens to this development, you know, in the next generation?

You know, thirty years later when these homes are older, when the businesses that are there have turned over and there's other things in there that may that still meet the zoning, but maybe are not as, cohesive with what's happening here. So I think by having this development, go purely residential, I think that it it protects that area to the north and east. I I think that it can be made it it sounds like you've had an interest in maybe creating some buffering or some, you know, something along that along the border of the existing commercial use. So we'll see how that all turns out. But I think, you know, I I think you we'll up with a better product in the long term in this particular case if we allow that front piece to be rezoned.

And while I do have some I'll say, I don't know if concerns is the right word. I I hear what you're saying about not wanting to lose property that's zoned for that use now, but I also feel like we've got a lot of areas in town right now where maybe that's being underutilized currently. So I feel like if somebody wanted to come in and put in a development that would fit office wise in that spot, I think there are other places they could do that right now. I don't think there's a massive shortage of that type of space currently today. If there were, might feel differently about this.

Can I make a comment on that? That actually, on the same side of the road to the east, there's a parcel that I think flipped about three times in the last twenty five years for the same value. That demonstrates that there's not a big use for office on that on that in that area. It's it's actually currently for sale right now. It's probably about 300 feet down to the east. That's one of the things. And there's a lot of vacancies for that. You can go down to King James and see that as well. So when Crocker Park came in and everything, it just kind of took this area. Now I understand your concern.

Look for the future, you don't know what two hundred years is going be at, but I can tell you for the next fifty years, the best utilization is residential, in my opinion, in the finance on that aspect of it and also for that area.

Okay.

And also the drainage absolutely we've done many subdivisions and projects here in Westlake and I live in my current one of my current projects and we always make sure when we do the final engineering everything applies to federal state and local laws as well as the drainages we make sure that everything's above and beyond So we haven't finished all our feasibilities yet, but I'm confident that everything's going to work out at this point or I wouldn't be here in that aspect of it. Also might, being a resident here, I definitely want to work with my fellow residents on buffering and other things like that that goes above and beyond what we're required to by our code. And just want to reiterate one last thing. Is in our master plan, our general plan for something like this as well too, if I haven't mentioned that already.

Yeah. Thank you. And yeah, I didn't mention anything about really the drainage or the slopes or anything like that because again, you know, right now as I mentioned earlier, we're we're strictly considering rezoning. I know you've got the a team on here as far as as far as engineering goes. So I I have no concerns that that'll that you'll have something ultimately that meets code and and works for everybody.

So that part of it, I'm, you know, I'm I'm certain I'll have comments and questions about when we get to that point. But, you know, again, at this point, just it again, it sounds like, you know, it it definitely appears that you would be able to develop this property regardless of whether or not this is rezoned. So really I think at this point we're just thinking about what makes the most sense and I you know that's that's kind of where I'm at. Alright. So anybody else on the board have anything else to say before we take put this forward to a vote? Should we yeah. Yeah.

There's only four votes. What is if it's a tie what happens and it fails?

Fails. You need three out of four.

Yeah so we do have a member who's absent who we would expect to be at the next meeting

Yes.

When you'll have a full board.

Yes.

Okay. Well, we got we got a table.

You you do have the right to request a table with the CFO board.

Yeah. Think I can table with them if anybody has other additional questions or anything like that, a councilman, I'm just gonna be more than happy to give you my 2¢ on it then. So I guess we'll table it.

Okay. Then so I look for a motion to table this item with the request of the applicant.

Look to make a motion to table ordinance twenty twenty six dash 31 to the May 11 planning meeting. Second?

It should be noted I will not be at that meeting. I

I we have another plan coming through that meeting too. So that's boy.

Do you have

a work session? Thought I maybe I can

We can't vote at work sessions.

I know we can't vote, but we can explore this more.

Or Does no. If it if it fails, does it it doesn't get recommended to counsel at all then? Or if it's does it No.

It's still no. The the it's just not recommended favorably, I guess. So counsel Counsel has the final say on it. Yeah. Counsel has the final say on it Being recommended. Either way

Are you there? Are you gonna change or not?

Sorry. I re answer anything else? That's the thing is

what You should just table it for two

I I think I think either way, I think your best move at this point is to is to is to ahead and table The

next meeting after May would be June 1.

Yeah. I'm sorry. The only thing I have to check on that is we have contract provisions that are coming up at that time. But we'll figure it out between here and the next meeting. Okay. We'll some there. Thank you for your time.

Sure. So we have a motion and a second to table. Any further discussion? Hearing none, could you please call the roll?

Jones?

Yes. Del Reigno? Yes. Smith? Yes. Apple? Yes.

And this is also the public notification that this is being tabled till May 11. There are not there's not another mailing that goes out.

Wait. One second. No.

They said they're gonna go to mail.

That was being tabled till June.

No. May 11. We because then he said they'll figure it out between now and next month.

Yeah. He said okay.

Yeah. Alright. That's

right. Okay.

Moving on to the next item. I am going to have to recuse myself on this item, so I will pass it over to miss Smith.

Alright. The the next item on our agenda is the rezoning of 29707 Center Ridge Road. That would be ordinance two zero two six three two from OB office building to District R1 F80 single family district.

Yes. So this purpose of this, much like the last one this also has a schematic conceptual subdivision plan. This one indicates an 11 lot single family residential subdivision at this vacant parcel. It's currently split zoned. So about 3.02 acres is office building and about 4.61 acres is R1F80 property behind as you can see.

And I tried to overlay Kevin's design there with the zoning so you can sort of see how you know some of some of those lots could be built kind of similar to the last one and could be developed as single family lots. And then you can see the lots up front one, two, three, four, about five lots up front that are in that office building zone. So when completed the total subdivision will be 7.63 acres and lots range from 20,135 square feet to 39,438 square feet. Again it's schematic. Know you're not approving the subdivision tonight.

So let's see. At the PZL meeting council members did discuss tree preservation. I forgot to mention this at the last one. The city does have a tree preservation plan that does require a certain number of trees remain or be replaced with the development. So that was discussed at the PCL meeting.

Landscaping buffering really is not a requirement. They did it was part of the schematic plan they did actually flip flop the design at one point they had the street so that it was on the other end of the of the property but that would have put a roadway right next to those existing homes on Palomar. So they they changed it where the street would be next to the office building property. And that was discussed at PCL. Detention Basin location, possible easements, donation to the city.

There's a triangular piece of this parcel that has actually found itself on the other side of Crocker Road which is quite odd. But it still goes with this and the city would gladly accept that. Guide plan, the city's comprehensive plan does indicate in the future land use map that it is single family in the rear and actually designates multifamily residential in the front. Which is kind of interesting since its office in the front right now. And so the guide plan actually does support this because you can have a single family subdivision in the multifamily zone.

I won't go through that intent statement again but keep that in mind with your decision making. And as mentioned before, current zoning office building permits a wide range of institutional, office, recreational, and other business uses. And the proposed zoning limits the site to one family dwellings, park, institutional uses, and agricultural uses. But the request is really for a single family subdivision. So this kind of illustrates that change.

Here you can see that that's odd triangular shaped piece of the parcel that when Crocker Road went through became severed from the parent parcel. So the concept plan again it's conceptual, it's schematic, but it still is realistic enough that I can tell you that you know it's not more than a thousand feet in length. That's really great. It is more than 500 feet. So that's something that you are able to approve.

There's not really another way the only other way to really fix that and have a cul de sac or have the cul de sac go away would be to make it a through street to Crocker Road which no one wants. The next one has to do with you know when we lay out a subdivision ideally you're going to put a street in and you're going to have lots on both sides of the street. And in this case this simply is not possible to do that. So it's one tier of lots. And it's acceptable really because the way that they've laid this out.

They did separate the subdivision from the adjoining non residential land uses with the way they have it laid out. And again that means of access. They don't have to have two ways in and out of the subdivision because the street is less than a thousand feet. These are the other considerations that are in the report. And the schematic layout again.

And some of the examples of different housing types that may be constructed there. So with that said, again this is rezoning tonight as mentioned for the previous one. And it's not any sort of approval of the subdivision that comes later. Thank you.

So do you gentlemen have anything to add? If so, state your name and address for the record.

Yeah. George Davis. I'm the developer. 9134 Tyler Boulevard, Mentor, Ohio.

Kevin Hoffman once again with Polaris Engineering Survey.

Any any further

comments? Did a great job of explaining that. I just want to add one thing. I have two companies. One, when I do my developing, it's under GD3 Ventures. And then we do our home building under pro built homes. So my company will also be building all the houses. You know, my team will be in charge from project beginning to project end.

Okay. I'd like to ask for public comment at this time.

Madam Chairman? Oh. Just wanted to let you know, for the record, I did receive an email from the Pollock family, which was sent to everybody regarding this case.

Oh, I'm sorry. Yes.

And then two minutes or four for comment.

Okay. And then two minutes, guys can decide what order to come up in. Please try to be sure that your comments are not repetitive, and we're deciding on the rezoning of the parcel at this time. So sir, please state your name.

My name my name is John Gajeski. 29793 Lobello Drive. I'd like to just speak in favor of the proposal with the understanding that the developer, when he does his detailed plans, would do his best effort to maintain the mature trees, provide privacy, and maintain the the appearance of the Brentwood Estates. Thank you.

Thank you. Would any others like to come forward?

Dolores Bilecki. Address, 29077 La Bella. As you can imagine my property will be alongside the proposed housing and first I want my clarity on the fact that when I first moved in 2024 there was a house on that property that was commercial and the city took it out. So if it was on commercial why was there a house on there or office?

I can't answer that.

The house predated zoning by probably eighty years before zoning existed that house was there.

Okay. I'll say the other point is that when I built, I had the understanding that it was office owned and had the understanding pretty much green space would be preserved as best as possible. I can see pictures of very sizable homes being put up on those lots and that tells me a lot of the green space will be gone.

Would any others like to come forward?

Hello, my name is Jim Pollock. My wife and I were the ones that submitted the opposition letter via email to all the appropriate folks here.

State your address for the record, please.

Oh, I'm sorry. 4405 Palomar Lane.

Thank you.

So we haven't yet moved into our home and stuff, and I know that this is only about the zoning there and stuff. But when we purchased our home from Petros and the associated property, we also looked at that commercial zoning, and it made a big impact in how we purchased our home. This will dramatically change our lives significantly. The noise level is already very high from Stearns Road and will be much louder if there are no trees there at all. Again, I understand it's someone else's property, but just as a note.

Also, we're concerned about the traffic flow onto Center Ridge Road there from this proposed development. It's already a very tight space there. There's already a fair amount of traffic coming off of Stearns Road. And now you'll have additional folks that will be coming off of their off their main street there into that traffic. So it'll increase the traffic flow and also probably increase other, you know, other issues, risks associated with that property and stuff. I guess I I'm also concerned about the green space that would be maintained. There's a buffer zone there. I believe I saw something in there. I couldn't really tell from the schematic that was zoned or that was proposed to the planning commission and stuff. But I would love to hear more about that.

What is the plan for that if there is one? Would there be a fence along that space when they do convert that to, commercial to residential? Also, how would that decision be made? When is it made? Do we have additional time to, prepare additional information in in opposition to that? Or is that is that proposal made tonight as far as converting it from commercial to residential?

Okay. We'll answer the we'll ask for responses at the end. Do we have other folks who want to come and comment on this?

Mitch Menadio, 29778 La Bella Drive, Westlake. I guess, really, the only comment that I wanna submit is that when I bought my townhouse, I was told definitively that Drees owned that property and it was not going to be developed. So I bought my place under the pretense that that was not going to happen. So

thank you.

Thank you. Would anyone else care to come and comment? Okay. Would you respond

to

the comments that were made? I

mean, think so probably from in PZL, had discussed you know, traffic and this was basically the least intensive traffic generation. You know, if you had office in there, you're gonna get a lot more cars coming in and out of there. So, you know, we just felt that there is a lot going on. There's a lot lot of lanes there. We know with the turn lanes, but we felt just with 11 lots that that would be the the least intensive from a traffic impact, you know, because something something's gonna go in there.

And I I know for the buffering and everything being single family that there there there is no requirement for buffering and George maybe you can

Yeah you know honestly we're gonna be a good partner. Like our whole goal here is not to come in and you know create a bunch of problems. So you know this is just the first step where we're you know moving through the rezone but when we come back with our plan if there's residents there that we can meet with and come to some mutual understanding to help them out, we always do that. So it's just the first step in the process, but we look forward to addressing those concerns when we get to that point, next step.

Okay, thank you. All right, well let's hear from our commissioners now. Mr. Del Reigno?

I think the only, you know, as again, heard it in PZL, I don't think, I think we talked in during the Agesirative Region where we did talk about the road in being on the East versus the West and moving it to the East side was probably our best option as we laid it out through there with the turn lane and the widening of that. So there was a concern there. Fencing wise, I know we have a fence going along, or at least in the design, this has nothing to do with the zoning, I guess. But just because I know someone brought up the fence. We had one going across the east side of the road going to the medical office building that's at the corner there.

And

I think you're still Okay with the sliver of land on the other side of Crocker coming back to the city. Is that still your plans for strength? Yes.

For

sure. We're happy to do that. Yeah. Other than that, I'm I'm okay. Think when we get into future design plans buffering and all of the likes of that, we'll rear its ugly head at that point, And we can have some deeper discussions. But zoning wise, I like this zoning. And I know I'm contradicting myself. But I like this simply on the grounds of this one has residential, the residential, the residential. The other one's commercial all the way across, and then we're going to kind of throw in a residential there. So as you go west on Center Ridge, it continues to be residential going out to the North Ridgeville line.

Just so we can because I have a feeling I'm going to get a conversation after this meeting. After that, I'm done.

Miss

miss Apple? Yes.

Yes. I'm okay with the rezoning. And it was so we're going from office. So there was never when that gentleman came up and said that Drees guaranteed, they they wouldn't develop. There there was never really any guarantee. It was always zoned office, so anything could have been developed office wise. Yes.

Right.

So that should never yeah. Sorry that they misstated that to you. But this zoning, yeah, it's going to be less traffic than if an office went in there and you had people coming and going. People come in and leave and go to work and come in in the evening. Sounds great. Makes sense. But I agree. There will be more to be discussed when we get into the development plan. Right.

I'm going to agree with my fellow commissioners on this one. I know it's different from the other parcel. I think that residential in this area makes sense, and this is a fairly low impact use. It's all single family homes. You're not looking to re zone it to cluster homes or anything like that. I think it's the best plan, the least impact on that corner, and the land will be developed. So I'm in agreement on this one. So anyway, are we ready for a motion?

I think so. Public comment's been closer.

You guys on the mic and state your name and address for the record.

Edward Pavasek at 1779 Granite Court here in Westlake. I actually looked at this parcel. I had conversations with mister Bedell about it back in September. I understand there was a death or something involved with one of the brothers, Phoenix management, that owned it. I had lined up for this parcel.

I also built the homes for Ray and and Greg Polonia, who owned the general center next to them. I'm surprised they're not here today because they didn't like it. Again, I told them it was good, but it should have been the way I had it for planning recommendations. I do have a background of a master's in finance and accounting. Do everything from an economic standpoint as well as from a business perspective for the city as well as for myself and for my investors.

So I had a daycare center lined up for this property, but I lost it and he won it. So I had no idea. I actually was planning on buying it for a million dollars. And then somehow I just no one returned my phone calls anymore. My original plan was to keep it zoned the way it was from a business perspective, and then to have the residential structure in the back with the street going down the same side same side of the actually, a different side of the road.

It was going to the east then going to the back. I disagree, again, respectfully. I understand it's a different location and stuff like that. But if we're talking about economics, we're talking about how the city could benefit from forty years or fifty years, that's the third busiest corner in the entire city of Westlake. That is.

Mean, from a business perspective, it would be like taking my project down the street and saying, that's a worse situation. Let's put an office there versus this office. Again, I I I don't wanna take away from his, but I just wanna demonstrate that there there's there's feasibilities. And also too, talking to the Polonians who own those properties next to it, they asked me if what would I want there? I'm like, well, I I I'm kind of in a Kevin's one of my friends, and he's one of my engineers as well. But at the same time, I'm like, boy, I I go I I could have put something there if I just demonstrate it. So again, not to rain showers or anything. I hope he gets his zoning, but

I just wanted to state that

on the record.

Thank you. Lost my train of thought there a little bit. Are we ready for a motion?

Sure. Based on the findings and facts, I move to recommend approval of ordinance twenty twenty six dash 32.

Yes.

Second.

Second. Say second. Sorry. Second.

Call for a vote.

Female Del Reigno? Yes. Female Smith?

Yes.

Female Apple? Yes. Female Motion carries.

Thank you. Right. Shall I take back over?

Female We'll

take back over, yes. Back to the okay so next item is the Westlake flex condos development plan

yes so 28820 Rainey Parkway This is a light industrial flex condominium development. It's zoned exclusive industrial. So there are no conditional use permits required at this time. It can be developed as a main use. Depending on what goes in there in the future you may see some CUPs but right now not necessary.

It's about 4.6 acres of vacant property on the North Side of Rainy Parkway. Eventually it'll be four buildings each about 13,000 square feet so 53,112 square feet total for this master planned flex condominium campus where individuals will actually own their unit. 184 surface parking spaces proposed that could potentially be less if they need less. So potential uses, professional office, contractor showroom, light assembly and warehouse storage. So the units intended for individual ownership by small and mid sized businesses.

So Phase one is a single building at the Southwest corner with parking, landscaping and utilities. Then the remaining three buildings to be constructed in later phases based on market demand. So all infrastructure would be sized up front for full build out. Access drives utilities and storm water. Fire Department would like to show the turns at 25 by 50. No auto turn drawings. It's a big piece of property. I'm sure they'll be able to make it work out. Again this is a this is the concept plan. This is the first step in the process.

We really don't want a fully engineered site plan at this time or or architecture at this time as well. So the guide plan, the future land use plan does identify this for industrial. So it's the appropriate designation. Everything around it is owned industrial and is industrial in nature, except for Roman Park, of course. And performance regulations, the proposal is expected to demonstrate full compliance with 1,118.06 by ensuring all operations meet city's performance standards for enclosure, environmental controls, noise, vibration, lighting, waste management, and related industrial regulations.

It's kind of nice when you're starting from scratch like this where you can make sure you're going to design things appropriately. So as a conceptual plan, I did do a box score for it. And as you can see, things are looking pretty good. We've got some sidewalks where some of the parking spaces are going to overhang. So that can be dealt with either with parking blocks, which we do not recommend, or by just simply adding a couple of feet to the width of the sidewalk which we do recommend.

Parking blocks are a nightmare when it comes to plowing snow. They're also dangerous for people. Sometimes we'll trip on them. And so we prefer not to have them. Loading spaces. The code does not allow roll up doors in the front yard or in the front face of the building. The two buildings closest to Rainy Parkway do show roll up doors in the south facade. So if they are going to be used that way, they don't have to be redesigned. So they're on the north facade of the two buildings closest to Rainy Parkway. Or you will have to grant an exception or zoning modification.

Retention, we'll take a look at that in the future. Trash enclosure, one for each building. They appear to be by like a fence material, so they'll have to be masonry enclosure. And as far as the design review requirements, that's something that we'll see in the future as well. So green building would be the first building to be constructed.

And it's really a good zone for this. It's a zone that does not require a certain percentage of landscaping or open space or lot coverage. So if it looks like there's not enough green space, I can tell you there's more a lot more green space than what is even needed by code. So fairly standard looking industrial units that we would expect to see. And with that, if you are able to move forward, it's a quirky thing in the code.

This was a change in the code not too many years ago to do this conceptual step. This is something that you actually give approval to and then the applicant realizes they can then go on to the next stage of the development plan process. Thank you.

K. Thank you. Name and address for

the record? Greg Ernst with Found Design. Excuse me. 27101 East Oviatt, Suite 23 Bay Village, Ohio.

I'm Tom Lawrence, owner of l seven. I live at 2946 Forest Lake Drive in Westlake.

K. Thank you. Do you have anything to add to mister Bill's report?

I have a couple quick comments, and then we'll have a little discussion about the roll up doors. But in the report, it mentioned 11 units per building. The plan shows 10. It's just a minor comment, but also the fact that you're thinking of potentially combining if a if a tenant comes in and wants to take multiple spaces. This is just conceptual at this point. Understood. And then the other one was a question for the fire department. Do they require 360 degree around all the buildings for driving, or is that something I would need to talk to them about?

We'll have you talk to them

Okay.

About it. And, yeah, I don't know where I got 11 from.

That that's fine.

I have no idea.

No problem. Alright. The twenty five fifty won't be a problem. You're right. We have we have plenty of space here. Noted on the the sidewalks, the seven foot wide, that's not a problem. We will accommodate that in the design. No parking blocks understood. And then the comments about the roll up doors facing rainy. One of the things about that was just the, you know, it's kind of funny, the front of the building versus the back of the building, what is the front of the building and what is the back in this this scenario.

When we started thinking about how to orient the the buildings themselves, the reason why we came up with putting them on the front was just because the fenestration brought a lot more visual interest than the backside, which would essentially have nothing on it. And so that's why we started with that direction.

Well, I brought some exhibits too. I'm I'm not sure how this works, but I was pretty impressed with that. I'd love to. Can we zoom in on this? Mean, so these are some really initial renderings. And Mr. Bedell had mentioned that this is kind of standard industrial space. I would argue that that's not what we're really trying to do here as far as the industrial space. Mean, certainly it's mixed use and what's called small bay. So what we're trying to target is a market that's severely under saturated here in Westlake and honestly throughout the Midwest.

These are units that can be as small as 1,000 square feet. So they favor the small business owner that needs maybe a showroom and some light manufacturing. It serves kind of the creative industry as well which is my business originally but so yeah. So here this is a look at the rendering that I got today. So we wanted to try to get it for you.

But it you know it shows higher bay doors here. This is actually not what this portion of the building will represent. They're smaller glass doors and glass entrances. And I would say what we're trying to reach is higher end market. And so of course it is industrial.

But what we're selling here are full wood cedar columns, mezzanine, heavier doors. We're using heavier gauge steel, more higher value, r value and insulation. Everything from the concrete base that we're gonna have that's just heavier because what we're trying to do is is sell these units. Isn't a lease arrangement so we know that we're gonna be reaching out to folks that are making an investment like you did in your house. Know, it's well built.

I know I can live here, build my business here and and then sell it. So some of what we want to try to provide is is more of that community feel and upscale building. So I I thought maybe this would help just to if you haven't heard of Small Bay industrial flex warehouses, This is what it is. It's suited to the trade and services industry, e commerce. It's different than industrial.

And if you don't know, own two buildings that you can almost see the back of off of Bassett. And I'd invite you to come by our campus now. We have no 53 foot trailer tractors in there anymore. It's very safe. We did have a couple approved CUPs that are there. It's a really well kept, well landscaped. It's a it's a different looking industrial complex. So if that helps you as we move forward, that's that's what we aim to try to bring to that space.

Okay. Thank you for that. Appreciate it. Any additional anything else you wanna add to the report? And hearing nothing else, is there anybody from the audience that wishes to speak on this? No? Okay.

Can I

ask one more question? And then maybe this isn't the time, but and I'm sure we'll learn how we would go about honestly, both Greg and I are not sure if we want to have the front of these buildings face one another and as you pull in, which I think would be the ordinance now and we'd be abiding. How how does one go about changing that? Is it is it an ordinance change that that would allow us if we presented modification these here.

Yeah. That would be a zoning modification that this board would grant. You would bring that to us and say that you want to do something different than what the zoning calls for and we would consider it. I see. And there's I don't if maybe you could speak more on like what we have to take into consideration in order to allow for a modification.

Yeah. And I'm just trying to think if there's you know, every property is looked at uniquely. You know? I do know of one property over on Viking Parkway that you did grant a modification for where they did it was industrial property that actually did have to have base. So if Planning Commission is able to and it's actually counsel doing it, but granting modifications or exceptions, zoning modifications.

And usually, you're granting an exception one place in the code and then you're requiring more in another part of the code. So maybe in this case you're going to require that green space. Maybe it's mounted up in the middle or something. If you're driving down the street you're maybe you're gonna see that landscaping or you're gonna see the buildings behind. Maybe that's the the compromise that Yeah. In order to make something like that happen.

Mhmm. Yeah. I I have some thoughts on that which I'll bring up when

Okay.

My turn comes around. So thank you for that. Appreciate it. Alright. So let's let's start with miss Smith.

The renderings that you brought forward today are are intriguing. They do spark my imagination. I've been I realized it was a very schematic elevation that you just offered for the zoning modification. But I think you're definitely going in the right direction there. So I think it's got real possibilities here in Westlake. It may be an, as you said, an underserved need. It could be exciting. So, anyway, thank you.

Thanks. Miss Apple? Yes.

I would agree with missus Smith. I'm glad you showed those renderings because I I looked at her. I said, what a cool vibe. Like, it

Mhmm. Thanks.

Yeah. Really cool. And I don't have a problem with the bays. But I think that's part of the the look of the industrial high end, let your imagination go with what you can use that space for. I I like that. So, yeah, welcome to Westlake. I think this is really cool.

Thank you. Thanks. Councilman? Councilman?

No. I think I'm okay.

Yeah. So, know, typically I would not want to see a bunch of garage door bays facing the main road. But, you know, I I it's hard to speculate exactly why that provisions in the code. But to me, it seems like it's probably to limit, you know, loading docks being in the front, you know, so we're not looking at semis being backed up to the building, you know, at all hours, you know, and, you know, the noise that that comes with semi, you know, with loading docks. Mhmm.

And and also there's aesthetic concerns because, know, your typical sort of industrial building, you know, that maybe doesn't have the same level of, architectural enhancements that we would see maybe in our in our general business or other commercial districts. You know, the big heavy metal doors, you know, we don't wanna look at that either. That's not at all what you're proposing. These doors aren't loading docks. These are access doors for for your units, basically.

And, you know, I think when we get into the details of the development plan, if we're seeing something similar to what you're showing us now, I I can't see there being a whole lot of opposition to it from this board. So, one other question I do have is about the way you're planning to phase this. I you've mentioned that you're gonna build a single building. Is your thought to install the infrastructure for the whole site at that time as far as, like, the storm water? And are you gonna put both driveways in at that point? Or what what's the plan on that? Yeah. Is that the thought?

So we are gonna put the infrastructure in for utilities detention base, and we were only really thinking about putting in one of the drives

Okay.

And the pavement that goes around the single building itself

Okay.

As opposed to really paving the whole rest of the site. Because depending upon how the model plays out, you know, we would just wanna leave it as flexible as possible.

I would say then, you know, right now, it looks like you're planning green space in between the two buildings to the front. Is that what I'm seeing there?

Or is that Yeah.

There's a little buffer zone between the two.

Yes. Yeah. So you may end up needing to have sort of a temporary driveway kinda cutting across your future Southeast Building just so you can have a

loop Right.

Correct. In your parking. You know? And I and I would recommend that regardless of whether or not the fire department requires it. I think it'll work better for your operations internally just to be able to make a full loop in there, not have people have to back out, you know, if they get down to the end and realize they're in the wrong spot and, you know, it's Exactly. So I I think that's something I would wanna see. But again, that's when you get into the development plans for the individual buildings, we can talk more about that. So Okay. That's all I have. I guess we're ready for a motion.

Based on the findings and facts, I move to approve the Westlake Flex condo development plan, conceptual plan with any conditions discussed at the meeting, which are none.

Second.

Great. Any discussion? Just there were no conditions. Correct? No conditions. Great. Clerk, please call the roll.

Del Reigno?

Yes.

Smith? Yes. Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes. Motion carries.

Great. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, guys.

Right. Next item is the Cleveland Water Tower site improvements, temporary cell tower.

Yes. This is 1820 Bassett Road. I think that's address we have. We all know where it is anyways. It's kind of hard to miss. And so Cleveland Water is performing maintenance and recoating on the water tower this year. So they are requiring the removal of all T Mobile, Verizon and AT and T equipment. And so carriers, the workaround for this is a temporary ballasted monopole to maintain service. So this would be installed before work begins. Removed once maintenance is completed.

And this I learned a lot through this. So this is not unique. This is a so freestanding weight stabilized cell towers for wireless antennas. When permanent equipment must be removed they're designed to be installed quickly and operate for a limited period. They avoid crown penetration. So they're ideal for sites like this where digging or foundations are not possible. The tank work it's expected to be about a month and a half. So the temporary monopole likely in place for less than three months we'll say. Weather permitting, obviously. So start date is not yet confirmed.

Early spring weather permitting who knows what's going to happen this year. Seems to be all over the place so far. There were many alternatives that were evaluated. Higher amounts on the tower, temporary amounts on the tower, things of that nature. Cleveland Water wanted no part of it. There's a cell on wheels COW unit. Something else, like I said, I learned a lot through this. Not feasible. That requires a lot of space for guy wiring. And it's a very limited sized compound.

So really this temporary ballasted monopole, it's the only workable solution. And what they'll do is they'll have it basically ready to go. And then they'll before the cutover happens, so there will be no service interruptions and all equipment to match the existing installations as well. So when done, the equipment will return to the same general locations on the water tower. Then this goes away.

Let's see, what did I say? Structural analysis is to be updated if any equipment changes. Do by the way have equipment changeover that happens all the time. You just don't know about it. But it comes through. I take a look at it. Building takes a look at it. If there's anything ground wise engineering takes a look at it as well. It's the new stuff that we're more concerned about. They're also working on a temporary lease between the applicant, the city and Cleveland Water.

So hopefully that's in the works because that's going to take some time for us to take a look at as well. Guide plan, it really doesn't quite pertain to this one way or another. I think the guide plan is pretty silent on water towers. We have a separate chapter just for wireless telecommunications. And that's what this 1,124.26 F is speaking to.

And I won't read don't worry I'm not going to read it. I'll just say this section authorizes such temporary facilities. And this has been vetted with our law department as well. The only thing that I wish it was a bigger compound. I wish there was a way that we could meet the setback requirements.

But I can tell you that neither the existing equipment on the 127 foot water tower nor the proposed temporary 125 foot tall ballasted monopole can meet the required setbacks. It's just not designed according to our code to meet that one to one setback. So the water tower and this is all in the report. The long and the short of it is, is there's been a lot of thought given to where this could be located in the compound so that they can properly support this temporary pull. And if it should fail for some reason, site was selected with the fall zone in mind.

So in the unlikely event of a failure no structures would be impacted. And these things are really the way that they fail. They're meant to they crumble they crumble under themselves. So it bends or buckles at a weak point rather than remaining rigid. So the upper section may fall in a limited arc rather than a full length fall, for example.

And hopefully that would never happen anyways. So this does require modification for the setback even though it's temporary. These are the perform the performance standards. And I've kind of gone through these in the report as well. But really we're talking about you know it's temporary.

It's not permanent. It's only going to be there for about ninety days. There's nothing that you can do to change the size of the compound. There's it's again, it's located in such a place where thought was given to if it should collapse that it's not going to, land on any, any, adjacent, buildings. And it's being done in such a way that the compound tower will remain accessible.

Obviously, Cleveland Water is going to make that a requirement. So with that said, the only thing that would be required is the modification to be closer to the property line than required by section twelve twenty four point eleven. Thank you.

Great. Thanks. Name and address for the record?

My name is Sean O'Rourke. I'm with SmartLink. We're representing T Mobile, AT and T, Verizon. My address is 10 Church Circle, Annapolis, Maryland.

K. Do you have anything to add to mister Biddell's report?

Mister Biddell did a great job. I just wanted to let you know we actually call that tower a weeble because it wobbles, it doesn't fall down.

And it's it's nice to meet you. We've had a lot of a lot of phone conversations leading up to this. And

and yes. The towers are designed with a break point Mhmm. So they don't fall like a tree. They'll fall in the middle and collapse. They fall within themselves.

Okay. Great. Thank you.

And I just want to say, so Cleveland Water, the water department, they they reached out to us. And so far, we've asked them to continue painting it. Do I have a picture of this? I don't know if I do. Yeah, the tower. So it's green and white right now. So we've we've told them, keep it the same. We want it to be the same.

I hope

I have another view of it. I have a close-up somewhere.

It's pretty tall.

Darn it. I have another view of it. It's not here. But it has Westlake painted on it. We want it to continue to say Westlake. And we want it to remain these colors. So I did reach out to them. They want to put their Cleveland logo on there. I told them that if they do that, it's considered signage and they need to run it through the Planning Commission. Okay. And so far I've not heard anything. Okay. So if you can convey that back to Cleveland, we wanna we need to hear from them on those two issues. And, that's all I have. Thank you.

Great. Thanks. Anyone from the audience wish to speak on this? Okay.

Well, yes. Know. Know. Lewis and Edel here today. I don't like to be an obstructionist or anything like that. But I apologize. Can you

go back to

I'm sorry. Can you state your name and address?

Yeah. It's Ed Pavisek. 1779 Granite Court. You see where that arrow's at?

Yep.

Okay. I'm the big parcel of the big house right there.

Okay.

So and again, things have collapsed. When I put that subdivision in, the water tower collapsed probably thirty, forty some years ago. Don't know if you guys know the story about that. So it did happen that way. Again, I'm not a big fan of logos. I'm not a big fan of clean water as a developer. Absolutely not. I'll tell you that, and I'll get everybody in my subdivision to put a letter on for that one. But my question is this, is how long is temporary? I have we have, like, four I'm not exaggerating.

We have 40 little kids in that neighborhood, and we actually use my pond, the pond's zeta to me, that runs right where your tower, so if it falls in, it falls into the pond. And I just don't want, hey, we had a tornado last year, that's why, you know, and we had some crazy weather here last week. Right. So I just don't want that thing all the way up. Now, will it hit my house? No. I know that. But we we do canoeing in there. There's a lot of activities that go on there in the summertime.

That's fine.

So I just wanna make sure that does not collapse. And the second proposal know you're probably subcontracted with Cleveland Water. At the very top, there's an access drive that I own on it. And you mentioned something, possibility of using a temporary wheels on it. There's a wheels, a tow on wheels or something.

It's called a cow, a sell on wheels.

Sell on wheels. Well, have ODOT Standard Road right there that could accommodate that with about 175 feet of cabling, and you could just wheel one in and wheel it out. I mean, I I just coincidental, Jim. I'm not trying to make anybody's life difficult here. I just happen to be here, and I that's solid on the on the agenda, and and it kinda affects me the most, on anybody. I'm And just looking out for the kids in our neighborhood because we have a lot of them in our area and I know them all because I built all their homes. Just going back and my wife's the president of our association so something that she'll know about and she'll ask me these questions when I get home. Those So are the things that I'm just those are things I want to throw out right now to everybody on it. Do I want a good looking tower? Absolutely.

I think everybody back there would want a beautiful looking painted tower. I'm on a page in that. No logos except our city, which I think would all be acceptances. And then if we could do a temporary one and I could give you an access easement and temporary easement, I have no problems. I draft those things up all day. So but that's the only thing I have to say.

Great. Thank you. Can I ask, do you know where we're at with this easement, this temporary, this or not it's not an easement? It's the contract?

The temporary agreement?

Yeah. Yeah.

It's actually being reviewed by T Mobile Legal right now so that I can get it presented to the city.

And what about Cleveland Water? They they have to sign off on

it too. Right?

Yes. Both Westlake and Cleveland Water lessors to to the all three carriers on that property.

Okay.

We have not

received anything.

Right. Yeah we have not received it,

yeah. Okay.

So in regards to your concern with the tower falling, so we run structural analyses on all these. Rev G, Rev H, we're looking at

I I build normally, I do some commercial projects, highest I ever got was maybe 35 feet in the air, so I don't go that So

under the revs, we're looking at approximately I think all the towers are run at at 90 degree winds and then up to a 150 mile an hour winds in gusts. So they'll handle up to 90 miles an hour. Did that collapse?

So I hate to say this, but I just did a solar study at my house. I have solar on my house, and I just did the sustainable wind calculations for our panels on a we have a couple different pitches. And we have got we have sustained winds of over a 110 miles an hour in our area. It's pretty, pretty, pretty up. So and it's sustained. So I just wanna make sure, like I said, is anything, hopefully, the kids aren't running around at that time.

But I

was gonna say, I'm just saying it's a

110 mile an hour winds.

Yeah. We

can't control it. We have a swimming pool now and everything like that, and they use the pond for some of this. So we have teenage kids, six year olds, seven eight year olds. We got them all, you know, on that aspect. So that's just again, not to be an over thinking that would happen, but we had a tornado last year. I've lived lived here my whole life, you know, so that's kind of the thing. So I just again, on it. So we do have sustained gusts. I did that calculation, so I know what you're talking about. Not gusts, sustained winds in that avenue. So that would definitely have to

be accounted for. All Alright. I can take a look at that and make sure that that structural covers it.

I'll give you my structural. I have mine too. I have no problems giving it to you. So

Okay. Alright. Thank you. Nobody else in the audience, so we'll move on to the board's comments. Miss let's start with Ms.

Apple. Sure. Wow. I I thought I was fine until mister Pavasek spoke up. Because he's right. We do have those strong gusts. So, yeah, we need to make sure because yeah. And then there was I had something else and it just flew out of my head. Oh, the the the timing of it all because it it's I don't want it it goes up and then the work is delayed and the work is delayed. And so this tower has been up for a month and we thought the work was gonna start a week late.

You know, it went up. We thought the work would start a week later. The work doesn't start till a month later. Now that work gets delayed. Like, is there a like, can we hold them to three months? Or it's weather dependent and

It's yeah. I mean, that's I I guess that's gonna be something council and the the mayor and the law department will have to determine. But I don't because You know, it's sort of it's an the weather's an act of God. If they all of a sudden, if you get, like, thirty days of rain or something like that, you know, they can't paint in the rain.

So Right. Yeah. Yeah. The goal would be how long does it take to put up this tower?

So we're gonna work with, the water authority once they give us a a solid date to where they wanna start construction. We're estimating two to three weeks for the construction and relocation of the antennas.

Oh, wow.

Okay. And then they'll be able to immediately start their tank rehab.

Okay.

And soon as they give us the authorization that we can move back onto the water tank, we'll start the deconstruction process.

Oh. Oh, okay. Okay. So from your perspective, it depends on Cleveland Water saying this is the date we wanna start, and then hopefully the weather upholds. And then once they say they're done, you start your

your stuff. We have the tower in in in our yard just waiting to ship for delivery when they give us the go ahead.

Alright. And then taking it down happens Okay. Okay.

And then likewise, as we had mentioned, the lease agreement that we wanna draft or that we're drafting to put in place for this, it will pertain to those timelines as well.

Okay. Alright. Okay. Alright. I guess that's

what it is.

Okay. Thanks. Ms. Smith.

Well, construction aspect of it seems like something that can be controlled other than the weather. It's the lease agreements and all the approvals. So I guess our first step is to give you our vote and then we can move forward. I have no issues other than the ones that have been already well stated here. Thank you.

Understood. And councilman? We're reliant on the city of Cleveland Water Department for the painting, is that correct?

Yes. So that's the They're doing all the maintenances

on them.

I have full faith and confidence in this gentleman to put up the tower in a timely manner and to get it down in a timely manner and give us the best tower for the situation. But to Ms. Apple's point, the timing of it, we're reliant on Cleveland Water. Fifty two years of Cleveland Water scares me. I guess, is there so it's a temporary How long can you leave engineered wise? How long can this thing it's not a permanent, it's temporary. So if how long can you leave this up?

That I don't know.

Is this a structure

that could