Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

ition is now called to order. Please rise for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Please be seated. Mr. McCormack, could you please call roll? Yes. Mr. Smith, here. Mr. Outrage here. Mr. Campbell here. Mr. Wing here. Mr. Lewis here. Everyone's here. Before we move on to the minutes, I'd like to uh mention that we we've lost one of our almost 25 year members since our last meeting. Bill Shannon passed away and it's uh was a devastating loss. I've known Bill for I've been on the commission for almost 25 and Bill started shortly after I did. uh he was very uh always involved with his community and he was a uh a great person to have on the on the commission and I'll I'll certainly personally miss him and I I think most of the rest of us will as well. He'd uh he had lost his wife a couple months prior to his passing and I think that was that was very devastating and I can understand that. They'd been married I believe almost 70 years. Is that right Mr. McCormack? I think so. Yeah, it was. And uh I think Bill had had lost a lot of his spunk after after that happened. But I'll I'll miss Bill and I I just really want to thank him and his family for all the service and the and the commitment that he gave to this community and and his support. Yeah. Well said. All right. We'll uh move on for um action on minutes. Does anybody have a a change to the minutes? I believe we have a a minor adjustment

to make. Uh we need to change on the second nine. Uh the meeting was uh called to order by myself and not Mr. Campbell. I believe that's the only change I saw. Mr. Campbell, do you see anything else? Uh no, Mr. Chairman, I believe that's the uh only change. And if that change is being made, I I I would move to uh approve the minutes contingent on that change. I'll second. Mr. McCar, please call roll on the minutes. Mr. Smith, abstain. Mr. Outrich, yes. Mr. Campbell, yes. Mr. Wayne, yes. Mr. Lewis, yes. Motion passes. [Applause] I don't believe we have any old business to uh to open tonight. So, we'll move on to the new business. uh case 1-25t, a uh text amendment uh specifically dealing with the uh overlaid uh plan expirations uh and article 13 uh and section 1311. Mr. McCormack, could you please uh provide us a synopsis on that? Yes. So, we talked about this um I think at our meeting that we had in February drafting up some changes. One of the changes we wanted to make was to have an acknowledge expiration on an approved overlay plan. And we put a couple different options in here. And really, one of the main things is we want to determine when the expiration point

should be. Um, we could set it up to where the plan is good for one year, like a permit, and expires in the second year if the work is not completed with the ability for the applicant to ask for additional time if there's a good reason to do so and apply for that. or we can make the plan 3 years and I think it would go um as far as to start to finish up to five in a similar fashion that we do with PDS. I can tell you from the staff perspective, we were thinking the one, two, three was better than the 3, four, five. And I think that's what I heard the board say last time, but we did draft up both um because those are the two most rational ways to deal with it. Either treat it similar to a permit and the proc time period for a permit or a plan development, which is the 345. So option one is the three four five essentially and option two is the you know you've got one year to start two years to substantially do the work and um you can ask for a potentially a one-year extension. Actually I do there was one thing that needed to be changed on uh option number 21311. The intention was to say the overlay plan may be granted upon the request to the zoning director or his or her design. I do remember that we were trying to that was the intent and in my prior job I did this quite a bit and as long as you feel comfortable with the staff I mean we we have a situation like this that happened here with the trustee case not long I mean a couple years ago Panda Express and you know they came in I don't think they really understood what was going to

happen there Glenn SDville 32 to they got the overlay approved. Then they found out all that construction work was going to be right there in front of them and they were like, "We don't know if we want to open with that right there in front of us." And so they have been pushing it back and we've worked with them on it, but we've kind of reached a point where they wanted to push it in the next year in the summer and we were like, you know, no. I called ODOT. ODOT says that's going to be open around somewhere between July and October. So, we want you to be working in that time period and be done, you know, prior to the end of the year instead of push it all the way to next year again. And so, they have started to work there. Um, and there's really not going to be a reason for them not to be open at that point because the work will be done and in the end it might end up saving them money because everything's going to cost more in six more months, right? Mhm. So, um, and I generally when we have those kind of situations pop up, I'm not unilaterally always going to make that decision. I will consult with our administrator who's been in my job in the past or I'm going to consult maybe our our other staff or or inspector, you know, make sure we're kind of treading the same kind of line with people. Um, being consistent. Um the language really otherwise for these two like one is very much set up in the pattern of the overlay or the uh PD which is the option one for section 1311 through five which I provided packets up there for people to to take a look at but you know that's essentially what we're trying to do and acknowledge they basically the plan remains in unless it's otherwise changed. Right? That's another important part. Um whatever is not whatever's been in

compliance will be in compliance in the future. If it's um you know potentially we would have an enforcement process if the the plan was not fully realized or achieved the work had started or the use changed or what have you. Yeah. Planning zoning director his or her design is what we using on the other one too. Option two, other than making that change under number one, uh we did note on this one, uh overlay plan must be completed within 6 months of building occupancy unless there's an extension granted. And again, we reference the zoning director or his or her design to be consistent. Um, yeah. What confuses me a little bit is that option one reads completely different than option two. I mean, it there's a complete change and not just the the timing. It's I I found that option two was just very much more readable for me. Yeah. So, option one is modeled after the plan development text that's in the code now. and kind of borrows a lot of the same type of language from there. Option two is take it from a totally different model and in my opinion is probably the cleaner and better model. But if you were comfortable and you like the language that's in the PD, we were trying to even if you don't like the time frame, we were trying to give you like we can set it up similar to the PD, which in a lot of ways they are similar and the way that they're looked at, or we can look at them this other way, which is the way that I'm used to looking at them in my prior job. And that was what I modeled after the second one, okay? was where I had pieced together and done work in in my

other work, not using the UT example. Yep. Now, did you say there was something in option two that didn't end up being written as you intended it? Uh, it was just under number one where it says the under the last line, a single one-year extension of an approved overlay plan may be granted upon request to the plan commission. That was supposed to say zoning director or his or her designate. Oh, in in 1311. Yes. Yeah. And the rest of that section that we caught it, we just didn't catch that one. Oh, okay. I see what you're saying. Yeah, we would want to change that if if we move forward. And then the only other thing on that one is if you get the number three changes or amendments, that one also acknowledges what we what you would do in a situation where there's significant changes. Um it acknowledges that there the drawings be need to be submitted. Um if there's been any violations of the permit um test to material adversely affect the health welfare safety of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood or development site and to be detrimental to public welfare injuries to property or improvements in the neighborhood. the zoning director designate may suspend or revoke the improvement plan permit and may we would probably need to change that too to say zoning permit. Okay, that particular terminologies from is not Ohio terminology. That's why I say that it's a minor thing, but it it's probably necessary. Mhm. Are we looking on these text amendments we're reviewing tonight? Are we looking to make motions on these to approve? If you're comfortable with them, we will forward the ones that are ready to go. So, we would have to all

agree on which option is preferred and within that option that the changes just make sure that the changes we've discussed are recorded and you've made note note notes on it. Yep. Okay. Yeah. I'm in favor of option two. I am. I like the one, two, three. And I like the easier read. I do too. I'm in favor of option two. Just it seems concise and it's it's in agreement with uh the zoning permit uh timeline. So I think it keeps things seems consistent in my opinion. What about you, Daniel? No, I would agree with that. I I like the the tighter deadlines because again and this was referred to previously uh at an earlier meeting on the record when we were discussing these cases and believe we were talking about maybe a handful two or three every year that kind of are getting carried over and that's enough over the course of time become substantial issue and a and a problem for zoning staff that has to be addressed. So I think option two properly addresses that. Uh I do like the text in that it is easier to read. I do have a question for Mr. McCormack in terms of zoning director or his or her design which is used in in both proposed options. How often Mr. McCormack um does the zoning director select a designate and what does that look like? Because I don't recall. So, in the case of something like this, it could end up being the other planner in the office. Um, it could also be the zoning inspector. It really depends on a number of things. One, what is the director's um what what are the other people's knowledge and experience be able to handle those things and whether or not that that duty needs to be delegated. I mean, sometimes the director is busy to the point where it's

like, you know, if we have confidence to have someone else can do the work, we might do that. I can tell you I have delegated things like that before. Um, if I have someone who I consider relatively kind of new to planning or to enforcement, I probably am not going to hand that off, whether that's an inspector or the planner. So, but if I do have a very capable inspector and it's an enforcement related issue, I can, you know, count on in this case Scott to do that kind of work to help me with it. Anyways, um at some point, you know, maybe let's say Blake's been here as a planner for like, you know, another six months to a year. We we're at a point where we feel capable of having him do that and he's dealt with some some similar issues, then yeah, I might have him do that as well. Um, I would say I have done at least half of the ones where I could designate to somebody else historically. Um, it all depends on who you have with your staff. If you have staff turnover or you have um inexperienced people, you're not you don't want to hand it off to somebody that doesn't isn't going to be able to do it. Okay. Uh, thank you for addressing that and um, prior to us moving forward. I know there was an edit you wish to make to the uh proposed language specifically the third paragraph. Yeah. So 1311 change plan commission on the last line of zoning director his or her designate on 13 11 number three the second to last line regarding the suspension or revoking an approved instead of improvement plan. I would put zoning permit.

Uh improvement plan can still be used in Ohio, but it usually refers to a subdivision improvement plan where we would want this to be more kind of broad and include um commercial zoning permits, right? Other zoning permits. Yep. In my previous job, improvement was zoning permits in the state of Indiana were called improvement location permits. And so you would see that term used a lot more. And it's not that way in Ohio. And interestingly enough, if you really want to know the background of that code, this the or origination of what we're looking at was a Boone County code that Dearborn County used that I modified and now I'm modifying it for an Ohio purpose. So, it's like truly tri-state now. We use it. Mr. Chairman, I think I derailed you when I interrogated Mr. McCormack. I think you were going to ask Mr. outrich his opinion on and that's fine. It was it was additional information we needed to get to hear and and I'm not adverse to that. Mr. Outrich, what are your thoughts? Yeah, I'm in favor of it. It is definitely cleaner um and uh just with those minor language changes. Yeah, I'm in favor of it. I have a question on light of uh some new information just came about. That was a great question regarding the zoning director and or and or his or her design or design design. Yes. Um what are your thoughts on just eliminating it to the zoning director? That could be done too. And the only reason I say is it's an overlay case. You know there there has to be some I think some history with the case and some involvement that I think the the zoning director in place would have that history and knowledge. Yeah. It it all

would depend on this the the text. I mean what it what it was that we were addressing that you know whether it was something very complicated or something very simple. If it was just a minor modification then I would think a design would be appropriate for that. That's why I think design I don't believe Mr. McCormack would would designate it out if it was a significant component of the of the plan that was being uh modified. I think if it was a a simple uh placement of uh some type of landscaping or or the size of something landscaping that it was not as uh critical as as moving a a structure uh would be. I I think that's that's why it's in there. Okay, good point. There would be communication between the staff still. Just because there would be a designation doesn't mean there wouldn't be communication between or any involvement by the director or the other person too. is normally, you know, like for example, I mean, I do have other people review plans and it's the same process. I'm like, have a look at these, then we'll meet. Sometimes I'll sit down with them. We'll review them together. Sometimes I'll be like, "All right, tell me what you see. I'm going to look at that and then give you my feedback." It it's kind of treated the same way. I wouldn't just blindly give somebody something that had nothing, no knowledge of it without like being part of the process. It would just be, you know, maybe to give them experience and to also save time while I'm trying to do something that might require a lot more time and attention um for both purposes maybe. So, it really could go either way. I mean, it sounds like on the process then. Okay. Yeah, it it does require a considerable degree of of trust in in our zoning director and our zoning staff. And in truth, we have a small zoning staff here that does tremendous amount of work. Um, I think under either scheme, uh, we would be asked to be designating

that authority, but right now there there is no such procedure in place. Um, it's, you know, potentially limiting it to the zoning director could be hamstringing a department that's already being asked to do a tremendous amount. We've not seen anything any particular reason for caution. So I I think the language as is with the uh two proposed edits makes sense. The the other thing I would note is if someone were not happy with the way that process transpired, they could always um the the the procedure to appeal that would be to go through the board of zoning appeals to say, "Hey, we don't like how this is happening." then it could get appealed to the zoning appeals. I've only had that happen I think one time and when I went to the board of zoning officials for that particular case the board members after the meeting told me they thought that I did the right thing and the and they ended up voting for the applicant to basically kind of get a variance and then they told me what needs to happen is we needed to change the code not for what I did but for what the person was trying to get done. Um, I forget exactly what he was trying to do. I remember where it was at and I remember who it was. But it it was not a problem of what I was doing. It was a problem with the way the code was written in the application of what he wanted to do. If that if that makes sense. So it wasn't like I the procedure was wrong. It was more that the code that addressed his use was an issue. So we ended up fixing that. All right. Thank you. Before we move to a motion, is there anyone uh here tonight that would like to speak uh about this text amendment before we make a

motion? All right. With uh no no further uh any discussion? Any further discussion? All right. I'll I'll make a uh a motion on this this particular amendment. Uh case 1-25t, zoning resolution text amendment. The zoning commission finds that the proposed text amendment to the Union Township zoning resolution is consistent with the intent of the zoning resolution and comprehensive land use plan 2030. The text amendments being considered address overlay plan expirations and apply to article 13 section 1311 of our zoning resolution. The commission recommends the text amendment be adopted with the following recommendation. Modifications to the proposed text amendment were agreed upon by this commission. Those modifications as recorded during our discussion of this case are included in this motion. That concludes my motion. Do we have a uh a second? Now I guess before a second, is there any additional discussion? Mr. Chairman, uh in regards to your motion, you may want to specify that you were specifically referring to option two that's been proposed, but that's part of the discussion. And that's why I'm I'm I'm keeping the text amendment simple. The the in the in the discussion, Mr. McCormack recorded option two as as one of the recorded modifications. So we we option two is a modification and modifications to option two were were recorded. That's that's why I wrote I wrote it that way. If you like it, we to read withdraw it and and indicate option two and then the separate modifications. But in our discussion, we all agreed that option two was uh was the choice. And Mr. McCormack, you recorded that. Is that correct? Yes. No, that's sufficient then. Okay. All right. Do we have a second? I'll second. All right. Mr. McCormack, please call roll. Mr. Smith, yes. Mr. Outrich?

Yes. Mr. Campbell? Yes. Mr. Wing? Yes. Mr. Lewis? Yes. Okay. Motion passes. [Applause] We have case 225T which is the proposed table figure for accessory structures and there was some discussion about this individually before the the meeting. So we have two versions of this. One would be to add a whole another table figure two section article 6 section 602 uh specifically for accessory structures and uses including uh compost beekeeping and chicken coops. And option that's version one or option one and version two is to take all of that information and consolidate within our existing figure one article I'm sorry article six that's a typo um section 602 and include those towards the bottom and just add the footnotes that you see there. Um the main thing is that the staff has had a lot of questions regarding the the changes of sections section article se uh section 711 and um you know in terms of like the minimum acreage size and the amount of square feet that one is allowed for for that and the applicable setbacks and the um applicable setbacks for things like uh chickens, beekeeping and so forth. Um, I mean, that's kind of it in a nutshell. I I like the second one. I mean, I I like the version one. Uh, version two to me just seems like Let's see. Is that on the second page? Yeah, version two is on

the second page. There's just a lot a lot in that table to me. It just seems crowded and there's a lot of NAS in there because there are columns that apply to the uh upper section uh dealing with the uh zone the the zoning that do not apply to accessory structures. And so when you have this accessory structure table separated to me it just looks a lot cleaner and a lot easier to read. And these aren't new numbers. It's just the numbers that we adopted a year or so ago or, you know, a lot of people are looking for those. Um, yeah, I think it's a great idea. I think it it it makes for for lots an acre or less, which is probably the majority of requests that it simplifies the process of figuring out what you can do. I I agree. I I'd like to state I'm in favor of uh version two in the fact that um I deal with a lot of zoning codes. I deal with it every day in my profession and I love to be able to go to one page and find all the information on one page and uh instead of having to research and go through a zoning code. Uh so I'm for that reason I'm in favor of version two. Well, they they would be right next to each other. It would just be that and and the the one the the table for the actual zones the R3s the R1s that stays the same. Uh that we have an additional table following it that deals with accessory structures. Currently accessory structures do not have a table in the in the in the uh in this section section six. Yeah, I understand. I'm just again I'm in favor of one one table saves paper can't be missed. Mr. Campbell, what are your thoughts? I

don't have a particular opinion on either. I enjoy both I enjoy, you know, both of them potentially existing. I do like that the first figure version one is cleaner, which is nice. And this is something that um was brought up when uh Mr. Wing and Mr. Outrich and myself uh were fortunate enough to attend a a a seminar that was put on u for the purpose of zoning over in Anderson Township. And uh one of the presenters talked uh at length about revising zoning resolutions which his company and he does across the country. And one of the uh one of the major points of his talk was you should have images, you should have tables, you should have visual conceptions of what the measurements look like in your zoning resolutions uh for a number of reasons. ones. It's just principally it's easier for members of the public to pick up, look at, and understand, which all which cuts back on a lot of staff time because staff doesn't have to walk people through every specific iteration of questions that they have. So, I'm in favor of either version, whatever the the bulk of the uh commission believes is appropriate. I just I enjoy I enjoy the concept of having this in there and I I'd love for staff at their uh convenience to look for other opportunities to implement something like this which is sort of a one-stop shop or or at least a couple page stop to get very basic information uh as opposed to sorting through what is uh not unlike many others a complicated word salad uh of what appears just to be bure bureaucratic gobbledygook, which it isn't, of course. But, uh, this this is helpful. And I I I

enjoy I didn't just reveal something about myself there, did I? No. I like the fact that, you know, deck, fence, pool, compost, beekeeping, chicken coops are all worked into this table where with the combined table, none of that is is able to fit in. It's a footnote at the bottom. Yeah, there's a footnote at the bottom. Exactly. But this I think it brings to light all the different things that are accessory structures. With a with a glance you see, wow, this is an accessory structure. I really hadn't thought about that. Uh and and as we're getting, you know, we've got a whole section now on chicken coops uh and zing code. So I I that's that's my uh opinion. Mr. Wing, what are your thoughts? I like both of them. Um, table two was the one I was leaning towards first because it's just it's pretty comprehensive all in one thing. But again, it's a lot of information. I do like the fact that the zone districts are listed as well though because that's a lot of when you're talking to people in general when you say we start talking about R1 or R2 or they have no clue what you're talking about half the time. So, this would be something like I said before the meeting to a couple of these guys, if this gets pushed, you know, if we this is approved by the trustees, this will go on my phone. Yeah. So, as something I can just shoot to people instead. Well, the table the upper part of this table is already in the code as a table. Yes. Yeah. Version two, the upper part is already in the code. So that's true, but it's we the other thing we did add was the minimum square footages associated with the structures which is not currently in um figure one. So that second option adds the minimum square footages for ER, R1, R2. Um those are not currently in that table, but we could modify that t that existing table to include that column.

Correct. We Yeah, we could. But um on the first yes we could modify the existing table to include that and option version one would be the second page and it wouldn't affect the that version right I think that may be a an optimal solution to do that. So you would you would update the first one and then you would include a essentially what is substantially figure uh version one of figure two on the next page and that gives you the best of both worlds. They're right together. You've updated the first figure to include that information and then you've kept accessory structures because if I'm looking for accessory structures, I'm flipping right to that. Y and then this has enough room to to actually visualize information. I think that's probably the best solution to this and of course anywhere we can put more tables. Yeah. Ju just so I understand though the current table that's uh article 6 section 602 figure one would be modified to include uh minimum square footage correct okay and that that column doesn't apply to accessory structure so it it's it's just I mean I look at version two and there's a lot of NAS and they're because they're columns that don't apply with the separate because accessory structure is really kind of different column data than than the zoning district. So that's that's my thought. Mr. Outrich, what what are your thoughts? I'm in agreement with what was stated. Um I do have preferences for uh updating the version two table in there uh to include the minimum square footage and then including um figure two under it or like on the next page. I I like that idea. Now, M. McCormack, from a staff

preference, would it be preferable for us to table this issue until they can be revised or I can take the minimum square footage from option two and put it in the existing figure one and then figure two we don't have to really change on option one. Correct. Correct. Correct. Yeah. I mean that's not a big change. I mean unless unless Doug is counter to that. I mean, Doug, you mentioned that you wanted to No, I'm fine with uh I'm fine with what we just discussed. Okay. Yep. And assuming it's going to be one right after the other, correct? Yeah. And they can get they can get the job done. And to your point, Doug, we can make them front and back. So, it can still be one. There you go. There you go. There you go. One sheet. That's right. So, in this case that we've recorded, you recorded these these changes. I I can simply reference them the same way in the motion as I I did the previous motion. Yes. Does anyone from the audience have any comments on this? Oh, could you uh do you have a form that you filled out to discuss this? No, sir. I I I'm I don't mean to throw a wrench in anything, but um Well, I I need I'm sorry. I need you to come up to the podium and and tell us at least who you are. Seriously? Yes. I'm sorry. That's the only way it works. I just got finished tearing up a hot tub. I'm dirty. hopefully being replaced by another hope. No. Question. First question for you. Are you Daniel Campbell that went to school with Alex Padet? Yes. I'm his mother. And there's his father. Very nice to see you. It's good to see you. You guys look familiar. Um I'm Joanne Padet. I live in Shannlair Woods. And that's what we thought was going to happen today was because the the flyer that we got said zoning meeting was tonight. And so, you know, we were Oh, we're not we're not

addressing a specific case tonight. It's all text amendments. So, how when when will you do that? I mean, how will we know? So, um that development group that met with you, right? They I think are walking away from that whole thing. Now, having said that, I have had a number of people call me and, you know, with the people who own it being interested in potentially selling it, the L's, they're likely to sell it. It's just a matter to who and now it could be part of the people that live around there. I don't know. Sure. And everybody could, you know, buy it, divvy up their parts and do that. But, um, I believe that the the option has lapsed because I have had other companies call me and ask about it. So I did hear that the meeting didn't go well. We did have someone in the room and and he was just kind of observing and and we were there really for to observe and to also just be there for technical support to make sure that the meeting went okay with that part of it. But um yeah, they never presented anything to us as far as an application. So we don't we don't have anything in hand to review um for that property. Um I don't know. I mean, if we get something, it's probably going to be in a month or two, but when we do, we'll notify everybody that it touches and then everybody within 200 feet of that. Okay. And we'll put up signs and it'll be in the newspaper and it'll be on the website. Okay. That's all I ask is so that we're informed and know when to show up. Yeah. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Good to see you. It was good to see you. Yes. And if if you don't want to stay for the rest of the meeting, you don't have to. That's what I was just gonna ask you. Yeah. No, you're welcome to to leave. That would be no problem. Thank you very much. It might be very boring. Good evening. Thank you. All right. I'll I'll uh make a motion on this this uh case in

similar fashion to the other one. Case 2-25-T, zoning resolution text amendment. The zoning commission finds that the proposed text amendment to the Union Township zoning resolution is consistent with the intent of the zoning resolution and the comprehensive land use plan 2030. The text amendments being considered address accessory structures and apply to article 6 section 602 of our zoning resolution. This commission recommends the text amendments be adopted uh with the following recommendation. Modifications to the proposed text amendment were agreed upon by this commission. Those modifications as recorded during our discussion of this case are included in this motion. That completes my motion. Any other discussion? That's because you made the important that was an important point that you made on the first one. I just wanted to be sure that we were coverations. I I didn't interpret what had happened earlier in the meeting as a modification, but it was it was clarified both with staff and with yourself. So, I don't have an issue. All right. All right. Mr. Wing, did you want to make a second? Uh, Mr. McCormack, please call roll. Mr. Smith, yes. Mr. Outrich, yes. Mr. Campbell, yes. Mr. Wing, yes. Mr. Lewis, yes. Motion passes. I'm confused on what you chose. Um we chose the option one to be added as a second table and the existing table we are going to add for the um zoning districts that are listed er through PD we're going to add for the first three districts this minimum square footage of the structures that's not in there now so there will be two tables instead of one version one will be will not have the part at the very bottom of them, but it will add this minimum square footage

side on the column. And then the version two will be the page after that. Okay. And then now we're on to case 325T, which is regarding additional lighting standards. Currently, we have uh very relaxed lighting requirements. We have a requirement for one to submit a phototric or lighting plan, but then we don't actually have the numbers that we tell people we want to use at all. Um, our administrator who uh was in this position previously had worked on a lighting code when he was in Lovelin and I had some lighting code stuff that I had dealt with my prior job and what we kind of did is melded them. So, the Lovelin code was quite long. Um, we did try to pair that down a little bit because it seemed a bit more than what we really needed. So, I think we ended up with like maybe fiveish pages and it was more than that. And then what I had used was like a page, but we kind of married them together. Um, and so I'll just go over that kind of quickly. So, section 540, usually when we're adding a new section of code, you acknowledge what the purpose is, right? And that's what this is for. [Music] Um, and it's the purpose of this section and up to 548. And so from 540 to 548 would be related to lighting. Okay. And we put it in that section of code because we thought that that was more appropriate because it dealt with things like nuisances and this is really more of a nuisance related item in my opinion. It could have also been dropped in article 7. Um we chose five article five and um you

know we're looking at public health welfare safety uh intended to preserve privacy protect private property from light trespass improve safety enhance and protect the physical appearance of the community preserve scenic and natural beauty by reducing light u pollution reducing cost distraction and so forth. Um and then 541 we acknowledge lighting that would be excluded with no permit necessary. Uh that would be things like governmental function items like street lamps lights, stop lights. Uh prohibited lights are things in 542 such as off-remise lighting, search lights, LED strip lighting, sag lens lighting, laser source, or other highintensity lighting prohibit is prohibited. Uh general requirements for all zoning districts and lighting is in 543. Um these apply to all districts. And then we noted for additional rules regarding signage, refer to article 9 because there are some things in article 9 for signage that does touch on lighting a little bit. And instead of re-referencing those, we just said please refer to article 9. Article 9 is not that long. Um so general requirements uh the any lighting shall employee only light emitting a light of constant intensity. So they're not blinking, flashing, rotating, intermittent moving lights lights. Um source has to be directed and beamed. Um let's see. No. So, they can't be beamed on the public throw for a highway highway sidewalk or cause glare that may constitute a traffic nuisance or or hazard. Um, other than, you know, like if it's like a street light, it's allowed to be there, but they're the idea is to not project from the property. Like for example, a gas station or car wash a lot of times have a lot of lighting and we do not want the

light leaving the property in such a manner that it's like clearly leaving the property and getting into those areas and causing like a you know people to shield their eyes or turn away. [Music] Um number two is basically just saying we're going to follow building codes for all lighting. Number threes uh design all lighting shall be designed supported to carry the weight of itself and built with local code in effect. Four, lighting should be secured in the manner to present significant movement due to wind. Five, light trespasses prohibited and in no instance shall any ground mounted flood or spotlight directing direct light onto adjacent street or rideway, walkway, etc. adjacent property be used. No wall mounted six. No wall-mounted projection lighting will shall be erected from the front or face of a building more than two feet away of any including any theater, hotel or marquee. No, I have a question on on that and I'm anybody that as we get to it there's a lot in in this section and so we get to section if anybody has a question on it feel this is open discussion so feel free to to make a a and there is a provision in here later that allows for variances and I'll come to that because there are parts in here where people might in certain instances say well you know what like for this example one here we're not really admitting pro um we're not causing a problem but we might need a little more than two feet or whatever, you know. Yeah. My specifically, this this section 543 says it's for all zoning districts, which means residential as well. And what I've seen a lot in in some residential streets, and mine included, is people putting these flood lights up on telephone poles. I mean, they're way up on the pole. I guess they have something the electric company puts a feed to it. They pay for the electric to it, but they're on the they're on a utility pole and they when they when they go on, they flood the street, they flood the yard, they flood adjacent

yards. So there's there's overlap there and then here it specifically, you know, talks about it not shining on on streets. What's what's been the stance in the township? Um, so the township has lighting districts, but we also have instances, I think, where people have gotten with the utility provider like Duke to have a light installed. Um, we have one instance where someone's been complaining that the light was too bright um, after one neighbor was saying it wasn't bright enough. And if it's it depends on where it's where it's located at and who put it there. If it's a Duke pole, we may or may not have the ability to influence what they've done. It depends on the location of it and who's maintaining and paying for it. Um so that it depends. it. Usually, if we contact Duke and we have a problem, they'll, you know, address the problem if it's like a lighting issue, it's too bright or whatever. Um, we've only had one of those that I can remember in the time that I've been dealing with this with this kind of thing. Um, in my previous experience, I have had lighting complaints, but they were never about what we're talking about. They were more like the cell tower. When the light goes out at the top, it turns into that bright flashing light. And that is a problem. And that's the reason why they do that is because that red light or whatever at the top is out. And that white beacon is telling them they need to replace it. And that can go on for a while. And if you're the unlucky person that lives on the hill that used to have a great view and stars at night and all of a sudden you got this bright beacon light going off, like it's a real pain. You know, you got to close your windows. It's like I have had to go out and check stuff like that. And then the

flood lights that people put out on their own property. We get complaints about that quite often if but and people can put lighting that has a similar effect but they need to make sure it's facing down and not towards the neighbor. So it's really not that hard. They just need to learn to like not have it facing outward. It needs to be down. and they can even if it faced outward in its shield a little bit as long as it's not leaving the property you know in a substantial manner that's kind of the key. So there's when it's 30 feet up on a pole down. Yeah, that's a covers. That's a different animal, but they could still shield it pretty well at a at a higher elevation, but you know, yeah, if you're 30t up in the air, it's quite different. Well, wouldn't that be in violation of exceeding the height requirement for a pole? If it's on a utility pole, maybe not. If it's Yeah, it depends. if it's on a utility pole. So, a lot of those poles are probably in the neighborhood of that height, unless they're the ones over Ivy Point or whatever. Um, all right. I just that that I don't want to slow this process down. I just wanted to verify that this section does apply to residential and as well as to to uh business. And this is one out of all the ones we've worked on that I thought if if it's not ready, we can work on it because it is a little more involved. We are going to be working on the landscaping one. I just did. That one's going to be a bigger one and it is going to have diagram. It is going to have a diagram in there of the visual of what the buffer yards are going to look like. But that one's probably going to take a little time to get through, too. Um, but I I put a whole lot of work into the one that I did previously and I think that's a good one. Um, we might have to tweak it a little bit, but that'll be probably one of the next sets that we give you. [Music] Um, number eight, no temporary or portable lighting device should be placed on any building or any premise without with exception to properties of residential

use. But even if it's a residential use, if it's very temporary, we're probably not going to go out there and site something that's only going to be out there a couple days. You know what I mean, right? No lighting should be attached any to or supported by a tree, utility pole, public shelter with exception to properties within residential districts. Not really sure. Well, there's utility pool, right? Yeah. Might if we're if we end up tableing out with exception of property and residential districts, right? Yeah. For lighting devices found to be cause of issue, not specifically listed above, the zoning director, his or her design may grant reasonable accommodation. That's for minor things, not for you know, things that might be a bigger deal that need to be brought to a board. Requirements for lighting in residential districts and subdivisions specifically. Now, these would be above and beyond your general requirements that we just went through. Can we let's step back to number nine in the previous section. Uh, no lighting shall be attached to or supported by a tree, utility pole, or public shelter. Again, not residential, but for instance, like at at the nature center or a park, uh there's lighting. I I know we've got nighting up on poles and and attached to shelters. And how would this would that make all of these in violation? No, they would be pre-existing non-conformity if they were already in existence. Well, then there are section two that states that uh uh that uh public entity is uh exempt from this, right? Oh, yeah. There are exceptions, you know. I mean, the Cincinnati Nature Center is kind of an odd They're not public. Yeah, they're not public, but at the same time, they're not a normal entity. I'm not saying I I disagree with the lighting that they put up. I I

understand that. I'm just I'm a little surprised that that is in there because parks, again, parks are public. But, uh, yeah, I I I'm good. We can move on to 544. 544 residential lighting and subdivisions including subdivisions. All lighting devices within the subdivision shall be in accordance with all the building codes basically and electrical codes. All lighting shall be downward directed and shielded. So all light is downward directed. Lighting devices shall be dark sky compliant and in accordance with international dark sky association standards. Temporary lighting, lawn or yard lights, landscape lights, lamp posts, other similar items in nature shall be classified as lawn ornaments and regulated as such in article as in accordance with um article 7 section 712 of this order. Now what does order mean? That's another term for like the code. Oh, the zoning code. Zoning resolution. Yep. I could put resolution. Yeah, I would. I question I circled that as well. Yeah, let's change that. Lawyers like to use that term. So, I was trying not I don't try to be repetitive with the same word like I don't want to end always with resolution. So, I've used the other things I've seen people use like order or I'll just say in accordance with this article, right? That would be another thing to shift to. Um, all other lighting not specifically provided for here and is prohibited. And then 545 requirements for lighting in commercial industrial districts. Um, any exterior pole lighting, canopy lighting um shall be flat lens designed and shielded so it's downward directed. Sag lens lighting is prohibited where property of commercial use of joins or

is within 150 ft of residential zone. Lighting shall be directed away from the residential property. Any building mounting lighting shall contain shields directed lighting downward preventing spillover on the adjoining property. If within 50 ft of the residential zone, building mounted lighting facing the residential property shall be installed no higher than four feet from grade. And again, we make people do lighting and phototric plans in those scenarios. So, it's not like there isn't a way that they like this is what we want people to do, but if they really need to do something else, as long as we're able to look at that plan and see that those numbers that I'm going to show you here in a minute are being met, that's really what we're after. Okay? And I don't really know how of how how we how much we really need this particular part of this code because really the table on the next page kind of does the job in my opinion. Well, I I was going to state that in general I I think this this language here is just too wordy. It's it's just too much and that it can be regulated with intensity and foot candles. That's what I that's what I'm used to and that's what I use in that table. the next page. Yeah. Yeah. And I I can go on and but that's fine. I I've got in general I just I I agree with Mr. Campbell. I think photographs or pictures uh and foot candles and limited language could really do a lot for this section. There's there so there's a couple different measurements. Foot candles are one of them. There's another one that's like a bug measurement, right? And I think that has to do with like not only the lighting intensity, but the color of it or whatever, which I'm less familiar with. I I learned a little bit about that um from Corey, our administrator. But basically, I mean, if you kind of want to skip ahead to the next page, that table here, we could use, we could modify this table and

essentially make people present us plans that are in line with this table. And you would just have to add for residential areas, this is what it needs to be for active, you know, road rideways or whatever, this is what it needs to be. I usually say on the table that for um residential uses you have to be at, you know, one foot candle at the roadway or less. And the only stipulation I will make to that is when I'm talking to people now is if you cannot meet that condition because there's an existing light that you have no control over, I will let that slide. But if that light's ever replaced, it needs to be lower than what it is now because some sometimes the lighting is not their problem, right? Um kind of like a storm water issue, like you don't want to take care of what's on your property, you know, with what what's within your control. But we could make it so that the table really kind of does the job. And by by making them submitting lighting plans, that would take care of a lot of it. It will not necessarily take care of the issue of the subdivisions or residential lighting because we don't get lighting plans from them, right? And we can ask for the lighting um detail, but at the same time, it also has to deal with do with how they install the light. So there I do feel like for commercial, industrial, institutional plans where we can ask for the lighting plan, this kind of thing could do it without having all that extra text. But for the residential improvements, we need something right that doesn't have this because we don't have the ability to send somebody out there. First of all, it's at night, so you're going to send somebody out there beyond reasonable hours to work. And then you have to give them something to measure that. We don't have I don't think we have that. Yeah. So I can say other some other municipalities uh I mean I've seen zero uh foot candles at

the property line you know so um you know that would uh eliminate a lot of this if if and in a residential district that that could be applied you know that if you if you get zero foot candles at the the property line you're really not affecting anybody your neighbors or anybody. So yeah I mean 0.5 and 08 are pretty small. I mean, you get a lot of neighborhoods where they put those little between your light up by the house and your um solar lights and your houses are close together. You're probably hitting that on your lots where the houses are close to each other. So, somewhere between 0.5ish, yep, is maybe more reasonable for the houses. But again, you got to have the ability to track that. And on an individual plan for a house, you're not going to ask them to do a photometric for the house. And even if you did, when they install the lights a year or two later, they're probably not going to come in for a plan, right? Um, true. We just But if they're in violation, then you would have some teeth to to at least govern or control that if it did become an issue. Yeah. I mean, the biggest problem with the residential lights is that they're not downward directed and shielded, and they are facing outward, and that's pretty easy to determine. So, I'm happy to sit on this one for a while and have you guys tell me what to mark up because I mean, I know when I initially started looking at this, I was like, man, you know, we we were able to do this pretty much with one page and it it got the job done, but at the same time, I could see why we might need a couple old pages to do it. Yeah, I can tell you I just recently worked in in Delhigh Township and they have a consolidated section for lighting that um two pages. Is it good? It's good. We can check it out. I'll send it to you cuz there's many different ways to do it. Yeah, there are. There are it has is

has diagrams and and things of that nature. A table similar to this. And another thing I I guess I have in here is is, you know, I circled, you know, who's going to be the one to determine whether an entrance is active or inactive. You know, who's going to determine if something's what's a vital location? You know, those are ambiguous words that are hard to to define or or even create. You know, you know, put you know, yeah, that's a that's an active entrance when that's not that's an inactive entrance. So, I think that wording and and that's got to in my opinion that's just too ambiguous. Um, and and then two, I wouldn't use average foot candles. That's a hard number. You know, you know, you got the heat of the light, you got high intense numbers here, large numbers out there, and if they meet 0.5 and they're still, you know, affecting a property line or something, you know, I just don't think the word average is good. Do you want to say maximum foot candles? I would. Okay. All right. But I'm I'm not comfortable losing the the text on the requirements for lighting residential districts and subdivisions. We're only talking about a couple paragraphs. Uh and the and then with regards to subdivisions, I mean there are commercial subdivisions. They're just not residential subdivision. So uh you know what's define a commercial subdivision please? uh IvyTech or uh like the Commerce Park. We don't consider that a subdivision. I mean, that's that's an office park. It's a subdivision. You go to the sub you go to the uh recorder's office, it's a subdivision plat. Yeah, it's a public street with a subdivision. But is there a difference between residential subdivision? Well, I know. I'm just saying though this this says subdivision. So, be clear about it. Yeah. Yeah. Um really other than that table the only

thing we had left is maintenance which is not probably bad it's not a bad idea to have that in there all lighting to be maintained safe and sound structural condition at all times be presentable uh zoning director designate shall cause to be removed any lighting found to be unsafe or structurally unsound after giving notification if it's highly unsafe I don't even know if we want to give them 30 days I know that the 30-day rule probably has to do with the second notice that we sent out for enforcement. But if it's inherently unsafe that we would probably do something quicker. Non-conformities and violations. Uh 547 lighting an existence priority the effective date of this resolution which violates or otherwise is not that needs to be changed in conformity with the provisions of this article shall be deemed to be non-conforming. Any such non-conforming using lighting shall be maintained in accordance to the provisions of article 10 of this resolution. That doesn't seem right. Oh yes, article 10 for non-conforming. Burden of establishing legal non-forming status shall be upon the owner of the lighting. Replacement of non-functioning light bulbs shall not constitute the loss of a legal non-conforming status. Um, last for variances, the board of zoning appeals may grant a variance for any requirement of this article if it determines that such action is warranted given the nature of the individual project and that such action will serve to preserve the purpose and intent of these regulations. So I we're you're going to help me find Delh High. I'll send it to you. And then I think we probably still need the general purpose and intent section. Yeah, probably still need lighting excluded. No permit required of some

sort. Prohibited lighting. General requirements. We may have to kind of retool some of those is what it sounds like. Requirements for residential lighting is a particular concern and maybe some tweaks to that. Yeah, I don't know what would you tweak in in 540. It's clearly residential districts and subdivisions and and it's not it's it's three four four line items. I mean, it's Yeah. The one modification we made to remove order and change of the zoning uh resolution was Yeah. number nine. I'm still kind of wrestling with number nine on the previous section in 543. Um I I do know other lighting districts or lighting regulations address cutoff lights and non-utoff lights. I don't know if you want to look at that as well. Uh they give definition of bow or picture of both and then they have certain require height requirements for non- cututoff versus cut off. So what's that does that mean? Uh a cut a cut off means it's a it's got a hood on it. It directs straight down. Non- cut off is a big globe. Oh, where it just goes straight out. Yeah, that's where that height height there's height variations for both. They're coming. Yeah, that's where you get the downward direct and and I must say with LED lighting today. Um, you know, it's it's very easy to control lighting. It a lot easier than it was back 10 years ago to control lighting. So, um, it's nothing that can't be done in my opinion. I mean, you guys given me enough feedback that we might be able to throw even more than one option together with some of these things to and bring them back to you guys next month and then um or next meeting. And then um you know, if I get them out early

enough, you guys can hit me up before the meeting and and say what your comments are. We might be able to head off some of the stuff ahead of time. This was the one I figured we were going to talk the most about anyways, which was the reason I didn't throw anything heavier after this. Yeah, let's uh we won't move on this one tonight and we'll uh let you work on what we've discussed and then we'll take another and if you think of something after this and looking this over, please send it to me. And in the meantime, uh we'll we'll look around a little more. I I I would like to see something ideally like three pages or less. I think it just would make it easier. Does this uh address residential motion lights? Because I know I hear a lot of complaints when the neighbor puts up motion lights and is there they're not bad if they're not directed where they're outside the property because we have one where I'm at. Do we I mean do we we don't have any ordinance right now. It's a nuisance but if you have a problem you call the police. Yeah, it well we get calls about it, but we don't really have a code that says it's a problem. I mean, it would have to be pretty egregious. Oh, I had one that was just shining it straight into my house. Yeah, I fixed it though. Yeah, usually those end up getting taken care of one way or the other. Yeah. Uh, Mr. McCormack, I have a question. is is why wouldn't you just create a whole new article called lighting? Um I have not seen someone go to the length of put together a whole new article on lighting. Um it's usually considered a component of one of the other things in the code could be related to parking and transport and or transportation or or land or even landscaping. Yeah. I I my opinion I I would either think it'd be a whole new article or

fall under article seven. I think that was the other one we looked at. Yep. I'm not I mean there I just thought like Yeah. Honestly, I don't care how it's in there as long as we get it in there. Yeah. Needs to be something that makes people aware that we don't like that. So So we'll just table that one. And I don't think we necessarily need a motion on that one since it's not necessarily going to move forward, but we'll keep working on it. All right. I just had one small thing and probably not necessary if we're regulating foot candles at the property line. Um, this just came up briefly with a case earlier regarding timing of lights. Is that anything we need to consider? I mean, normally you don't see people turning them on unless it's night, like dark outside or the only reason why they'll otherwise come on is if they're motion sensitive and you got like a dark storm front coming in or the eclipse, right? Because that did happen when the eclipse happened for a minute, but that's pretty much it. They're usually on when it's dark, which is night. If they're on during the day, it's really not a problem. Yeah, usually. I mean, it would have to be something really obnoxious. I mean, yeah, it'd have to be really obnoxious. Yeah, considering people don't even see traffic lights. Yeah, we make rules for as much stuff as we can, but I mean, and we're never going to cover things 100%. I mean, I would say our rules probably address about 98%. I would say higher, but I don't think it's quite that high. Okay. Yes. I was just going to say before moving forward with the next case, just as a point of order, uh, Mr. Chairman, do we need a formal motion to table

this? No, this was slated as a discussion only. We we've just bumped in that once we our discussions determined that we were confident and and comfortable with the with the text being presented, we made motions. But otherwise they this was listed as a discussion session. Thank you. Okay, last one we have drafted and this is really a band-aid because we probably need some major work on this one too. We're just trying to address the biggest things that we have a problem with right now with signage in article nine for those that are following at home. Case 425T. We have discrepancies in the zoning code in article 9 for height of signs versus particularly in commercial industrial areas. And that's pretty much all the overlay districts versus what's in the zoning code. So the overlay districts in general, you're not going to see signage allowed to be higher than 12 feet, but in the zoning code, it allows for signage to be up to 30 feet. So we have tremendous differences, right? So the first thing we want to change is in section 907 for signs permitted in commercial and industrial districts. We want number two to say freestanding signs on on premise. Pre-standing on-remise signs not over 12 feet in height may be erected to serve business establishments unless otherwise authorized by the Union Township of Borders trustees as part of the authorization of an overlay plan or the Union Township Board of Zoning Appeals as part of the authorization of a variance in accordance with the with the overlay district in which it is located and the policies and requirements set forth in the Union Township Comprehensive Plan. More than likely, this is going to be a overlay plan that someone's going to

come in and ask for this, but we did allow for it to be taken care of as a BZA item. I suppose if the only issue were the sign, they might just go to the board of zoning appeals. We It depends. They could realistically make the case to either board. We were just acknowledging that they could. Um, but the biggest problem that we have is that we have a 30-foot reference in the current code. We don't we aren't wanting 30 foot signs. And the only one that I'm aware of that is has been that big since I started here is to we allowed the if it ever gets built, the new Kroger to have a 30 foot sign out there by Eastgate Mall. [Music] Um, everything else I've seen come in here has probably been under 12 feet and everybody's been and been been okay to deal with it. The the only other one that might I don't think they have a freestanding sign that high. There might be one over at Ivy Point now or in the future between um TQL or Children's, but that was I think built into a development agreement that was done when they attracted them to that area in the first place. So, it's more the exception than the rule for sure. Um, the other one that we were looking at are off- premise signs. Right now, off- premise signs can be placed very easily in the township, and I don't think people realize how easily they can be placed in the in the township. So, we're trying to make it not so easy. Um, number three, off-remise signs shall not exceed 12 feet in height. So, we're keeping the height consistent unless they want to come in and ask for a full-fledged billboard, in which case they need to come in and go through board of zoning appeals process, which is the next part

of that. Um outdoor advertising off-remise signs classified are classified as a business use and may be authorized by either board of trustees or part as part of the authorization of an overlay plan or the board of zoning appeals as part of the authorization of a variance in all commercial or industrial zoning districts. Um, and really in my opinion, probably what they should be is in a is a conditional use and we need to change all the parts of the zoning code that might allow an off- premise sign like and the for example, they would probably show up in your commercial and industrial areas, but they would probably also be included in your state residential in certain areas, right? And perhaps even a PD in certain areas. So, in the absence of fixing the entire zoning code, the main issue we're trying to get fixed for now with the band-aid, so we're not having major flare-ups, is the height of the sign to be consistent and off- premise signs. We're trying to tamp them down from being like these things that could pop up everywhere because they they literally can. Um, it would be I mean, even our sign allowances are pretty high. I think I mean that's another thing we needed to address but instead of tackling that whole coat because that's going to be another big apple to take some bites out of like this was the more immediate thing to address. So, we were trying to at least stop the worst things that we're dealing with for the moment. Uh, Doug, your thoughts on this? I'm in favor of it. I I think it's it's reasonable. Good. I have no comments. Kind of like

like the thought. Okay, Mr. Outrich. I'm in agreement. uh consistency. Mr. Wing. Yep. I'm good. Mr. Campbell. Yeah, it makes sense to do this right now. I I I agree. You can make a motion on this one. We can move forward with this. Okay. This is a simple one. Yep. Uh case 4-25t zoning resolution text amendment. Zoning commission finds that the proposed text amendment of the Union Township zoning resolution is consistent with the intent of the zoning resolution and the comprehensive land use plan. The text amendment being considered address signage height and apply to article 9 section 907 of our zoning resolution. This commission recommends the text amendments be adopted. That concludes my motion. Discussion. I'll second. I We're supposed to have a discussion I before a second comes and I can I and we already had the discussion, right? And typically though with with cases there's more involved in the motion. This was a very simple motion. So, I think we're fine moving forward with the second. So, uh, Mr. McCormack, please call roll. Sure. Mr. Smith, yes. Mr. Outrage, yes. Mr. Campbell, yes. Mr. Wing, yes. Mr. Lewis, yes. Motion passes. That concludes what we had on the agenda for tonight. As I said, um, we are going to be working on landscaping. some of that even though it may be a longer read and I would argue that definitely could have its own portion of the code. Um, what you're going to find is I I would advocate we should add a list of unacceptable plants like I think I told you in the past and I spent a lot of time looking at a lot of different resources and identified fruit and nutaring trees um that you can buy the fruit and nut bearing trees and and they don't have the fruit and nuts they drop or whatever

their particular cultivar or whatever. And then there are just your weak wooded ones. And then you have the ones that are like the ash where they just can't be until they get rid of the bore, you know, you can't really plant them. So there's a reason for them and people could still put them on their property if they want. They just don't we don't want them near rideways or drainage areas that are being maintained, that kind of stuff. Um so that takes up a good portion towards the back part of it. And then we would define buffer yards in certain scenarios. So if you know your higher density intensity versus like your low to medium moderate density residential or ER like it's you know if you put industrial or intensive or commercial intensive next to an ER area you obviously need to have a different buffer yard and usually what we're doing is trying to define two or more options for you to know what to do if you're the one coming in and also gives the people that are reviewing it on the other side options of what they feel more comfortable with. And it's written in such a way that there's always another option that we can consider to be equal to those other options if if we're presented with them. And we can credit existing landscaping if you know as long as it's not junk. Will we give them a a list of these these are what we consider appropriate appropriate plantings? That would be a whole other task that we could undertake. I think we could do that. We would probably want to work with like the um agricultural extension type people around here. Um well, like I like I'd said before, Rich Rich Glisten on the parks and rec uh committee I believe is an arborist and he expressed a desire to help with something like that. So it just it makes it easier for somebody coming in to say, "Well, they allow this, so let's just use that."

Yeah, that's the guy. That's the guy. There's so many plants out there now. That's the guy in the park committee, right? Yeah. I also have um at work I have a copy of the city of Cresview Hills. They have tree plantings for street trees and they have different guidance on the side on the size of trees. Um the spacing needed for everything to grow effectively. I can put that in also. Sure. Interesting. Yeah. Or um shoot me a reference for that. I I can say um that's probably the in some municipalities and I know there's a fine line there. You want to create enough plant material that you have a substantial buffer, but I've gone across some municipalities where that the density of trees and plants is so significant it's physically it's hard to even plant them and do. So there has to be some practical sense in that too. and and I I'd be happy to, you know, a landscape architect we work with quite frank quite a lot. You know, I could he could help in any way with the relationship of plant sizing or densities that yet still give you a nice buffer but yet can be achieved. you know, uh I know there's some municipalities, Sycamore Township comes to mind that it's it's it's really uh impractical to to plant that many trees in such a small area. Yeah. That was the reason why we changed our code uh where I worked previously because whoever came up with the code obviously wasn't a landscape person. Yeah. And so they were trying to put too many plants in there. You couldn't really make it happen. We were always giving people reductions. And so I worked with the I don't know if it was the state arborist, one of the main people in the state on on putting that together. And I also use someone relatively local to look at it too. And

I think that's a good thing to do, you know. So, if you know someone and Rob knows someone, um, it's not a bad thing to do that because you don't want to make it, you know, like we had something we received by email today where they the guy was being told by one of the county reps on a project to potentially plant three feet apart, all these different trees and bushes and and to have three rows of them. And it's like, oh gosh, I don't really think that's possible. And I'm not even an expert on that, but like you know, everything trying to grow that close together and have water, like it just seems like it's not really feasible. Um, and that's not our intent. Right. Right. It's a waste of money. We don't want everything to die. Right. So, that is definitely going to be part of it. But if we're going to list plants that we that we would recommend, the other thing to keep in mind is we have to pick something that's probably more recommended to be native, too, which is a whole different discussion. I have a great website for you for that. Yeah, but we we we have a kind of a good starting point, but I realize we may have to make some changes to it. But I mean, I spent a tremendous amount of time working on the one that I did in the few years ago, and it's it's at least a pretty good starting point. We might be able to melt it with some other ones, but like to your point, I don't want to like overdo it. So, and then I know there's some other things we had on our list and I did mark those other ones. I just didn't want to overload us on on the meeting. So, there are a couple other ones that we marked that I was going to bring in. Um, depending on how hard it is to do the landscaping one, we may bring those other ones in and just bring the landscaping in separately because that's probably going to be a bigger one. And I know Corey's got comments about the lighting. So, and and he spent a lot of time

on he and he agrees that we need a standalone chapter. So, he's watching and okay, letting us letting me know. M. McCormack, do we anticipate that we will have a meeting next month? Um, so I was looking at the calendar today because a lot of times our deadlines are the same day as the meeting. Apparently, it's not the same day today. I don't really know why I did that, but I did. So, or I won't know till Monday if we have any cases. Um, if we don't have any cases, our meeting would be the 28th. Yeah, that's what I've got. And I if we had to have a meeting, we could have a meeting. Um, and if we and if we don't have any cases, it probably be just like tonight and it probably wouldn't be a lengthy one. Yeah. Because I'm going to be out of town the next day. Um, actually the next two days after that, so I'd be a huge fan if of not being here late that night. We'll try to accommodate that. Yeah. I don't think we're going to get anything. We have some stuff that's kind of floating out there, but most of what I'm thinking of that's coming in is more likely to come in later. Um, we do have some potential reszones that are coming in. We have some other stuff that may go to the trustees. Um, the timing of that is in somewhat dependent upon what's going on with getting projects together um to on the submittal side. And then part of that is the um you know sometimes people are kind of

littery with market conditions a little bit. So we'll see. I mean we have a number of projects people have talked to us about. We may yet see that renew project come back. That guy emailed me today and I haven't responded to him yet. I traded phone calls with him and he never called me back and then he finally emailed me. So that site on 125 that multif family expansion. Yeah. So I got to get back with him and that one could still come back and there might be a chance and I'm going to talk to him there. I had heard that there might be a chance that the property to the east could be maybe in play to be bought and that that was that would make that property way easier to do something there anyways because it's so long and narrow. Um, and if not them, then I had other people that I was going to send to them for the same thing, you know, taking a look at it for not exactly the same purpose, but still like living units. Um, so yeah, I should know more about that in the next day or two when I when I hopefully I can connect with him. So they're still they're still around. I initially thought when I saw his email that he was that project might be gone. And they moved on. But then I saw a little bit more of it and I was like, okay, he's wanting me to write him rather than call him. And I had called him, but he wasn't. We were missing each other. So So the state didn't give him a favorable answer on that access like they wanted is what it came down to. So he's looking for guidance on what to do. I don't know how much I can really help him with that, but Well, that's right. There was access from 125 that Yeah, but if they were able to talk to the people on the east about acquiring some more

land, that might take care of some of that problem. I don't know if there's another parcel that's in the way before. I think if he's trying to go east to connect to the one that goes to WT Park or whatever it is back then there there you can't go all the way to WT but you can go I think there's just someone that owns two pieces there, right? Okay. And I that might be an option. Okay. So fair to say next month is a uh solid maybe. Yes. That's right. Yeah. And then if if for some reason we don't have it in um May, we I would say we're going to have one the next two months. The other one would be the 25th and I don't have any conflict around that one. So I can do the one in May as far as that goes. But it's just a matter of getting everything together and if we have any cases come in between now and Monday because I had it on my calendar to let you know on Monday if we have anything. And then of course if you guys think of anything between now and the next few days or even between now and the next meeting, feel free to let me know. I I just keep a running list and we have no shortage of things I'm sure we could add or talk about. So there's a chance I could be out of town for the May meeting. I I'll be able to let you know if we do not have a meeting. I'll I'll know. But I'm I I might be out of town. Okay. I'm coming back from Michigan earlier in that day, so shouldn't be here. I'm here. Were there any other uh things that you want to talk about in the administrative section as far as upcoming uh landscaping? I uh I think that we will have some things that we're working on

that you might be interested in that might we'll have a lot more information about probably by May. Okay. Um I sure hope we we've got at least one of the two things I'm thinking of more underway by then, but we'll see where we're at. Did you say earlier in the meeting that the uh Glenny Wthersville overpass could be finished by somewhere between July and October of this year? It it won't be completely finished, but I think they'll have it open um by part of it will be open by June July. And I think the majority of it it'll be like October. Okay. At the I think more at the latest Thanksgiving and then after that it's really more like the cleanup stuff that they have to do that'll spill over into the spring. Kind of like what they did on Old 74. You know how it took them a while? That's what they're That's what they're saying, which are the schedule got pushed back anyway. So, um I haven't looked at it for a week or two, but it looked like they were doing making pretty good progress on it. Moving an awful lot of earth. Yeah, those ramps, man. Building. All righty, that's it. Then, uh I have a quick comment. I just uh I did attend the uh Allore Planning Workshop over at Anderson Township. We were Yeah. Okay. I was going to say it was great workshop and uh I enjoyed it and u just throwing it out there. If uh for next year if you guys you didn't attend strongly recommend it. Was it was definitely worth it. Yeah. Yeah. Good program. It was excellent programming. So it was very nice of the township to make us aware of that and to accommodate us. It it really was eye opening that I was um we did split up and saw different speakers and I was very impressed by the quality of speakers that were uh that

were there. Um and we got to nerd out with some fellow zoning enthusiasts. That's right. Uh all very friendly people. So we we had quite a good time and I think we've uh carried with us some good information to bring back to the township including uh Mr. outreach is uh OKI uh endeavors uh that that website is such a resource for everyone and it's terrific in that it's free and available to everybody which is quite something and not something you necessarily see in my professional field. So so that's quite it's quite a resource for us. So it was it was fantastic. Thank you. Yeah, there's a lot of neat apps or resources on OKI's website. I mean, even when I was on the board, it was hard for me to keep up with them, but um yeah, there's definitely some cool resources there. So, I will share that that did receive a federal accommodation so that was pretty nice honor. I need to play around with what you were talking about because I haven't looked at that one yet, but I was one of the people that helped set up the fiscal impact analysis model when it first got started. Nice. And then um I've used a couple other things. That environmental viewer is pretty useful. I still use it from time to time. Um you know, if you want to check in general if there's a an endangered species or something else that that's a quick reference for you to use. Um, there's all kinds of like little neat apps and things there. Cool. All right. Before I close the meeting, I I do just want to one more time reference. I miss Bill Shannon. Uh, I wish him well on his adventure that he's embarked on. And I don't know what that

adventure is and where we all go, but I wish him and his family well. But I do miss Bill and I am grateful for the time we had to that we were able to spend with him. Yeah. If if it if the gratitude of this commission could be made clear in the the minutes of this meeting to Mr. Shannon, he dedicated a considerable amount of time to this commission over the course of multiple decades and he will be sorely missed and we are deeply grateful for that. Yeah, I know he um his daughter called me and told me and um I know she talked to Scott because she said he'd dealt with Scott for a long time and so I know Scott talked to him but um if there's a way for us maybe to get in touch with his family, we can maybe, you know, send something in the way of appreciation for them. I know the township had a presence at his funeral and so forth. I was out of town in Florida. Um so I couldn't go, right? But um you know, yeah, we could still do something. I left a message for his family at the at the funeral from from us from the zoning commission and was grateful for all his time and community service. Mr. Wright attended the visitation. Mr. Lewis, myself were there. The township was certainly represented. Briefly spoke with his with his daughter. Yeah, Bill will be greatly missed. And uh I know wherever he is now, he's got a snap rim hat on, if not a Red's cap. Yeah, it's probably it is baseball season and he's got an atache case with him. So he's got that grin on his Oh, yeah. He's Yeah, but we he will be sorely missed and we are forever indebted to his service and the township should recognize that. I agree. Thank you, Daniel. Thank you,

Mr. Chair. All right. This meeting is adjourned at 8:33 p.m. All right.