Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, I'd like to call the June 8th, 2026 Peachtree City Planning Commission meeting to order. If all in attendance are citizens of the United States, please stand and join me in pledging allegiance to the flag of our country. 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. Great. I'd like to welcome everyone both in attendance this evening as well as online. WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND KEEP THINGS MOVING. ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS, STAFF, FOR THIS EVENING? OKAY. ANY PRESENTATIONS? ANY AGENDA CHANGES?

NO, SIR. THERE WE GO.

Next, we have the minutes from the May 11th, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. They've been distributed. Hopefully, everyone's had an opportunity to take a look. Any issues or items related to the minutes?

I did not notice any. Okay.

That being said, do we have a motion to accept the minutes as submitted?

Yeah, I'd like to make a motion that we accept the May 11th, 2026 Petrie City Planning Commission minutes as written.

Okay, so we have a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Do we have a second? Second. A motion to approve and a second. Any other discussion? No? Okay. With that said, all those in favor of approving the May 11th, 2026 Planning Commission meeting minutes as submitted signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Okay, minutes approved. Okay, next, old agenda items. The text amendment to sign ordinance, specifically chapter 66, to allow reverse channel, the halo lit or backlit wall signs. I'm going to turn that over to staff.

OKAY. SO AS MENTIONED, THIS IS A PREVIOUS ITEM THAT HAS HAD DISCUSSION. WE'RE REVISITING IT BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT YOU HAVE ASKED THAT WE CONSIDER WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE PROVIDE TO YOU. AND SO WE HAVE DONE THAT. SO JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE HISTORY ON WHERE WE ARE WITH THIS ITEM, IT FIRST ORIGINATED IN FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR, AND THEN IT WAS BROUGHT OVER TO YOU on April 27th deferred until today. And so once a decision or if a decision is made today to recommend, it will be recommended over to the June 18th council meeting if it does move forward. So, as previously mentioned, in the discussion previously, we're speaking of halo lit reverse channel letter backlit signs. This name is really lengthy, because it depends on who uses it and how they wish to use it, we decided to use the full language just to ensure because some individuals come in are asking for backlit, some are asking for halo lit, reverse, whatever it may be. So we're inclusive of the full title, just to ensure that we're capturing that when it comes into the door. OUR SIGNS ARE FOUND IN CHAPTER 66. 66-5 WILL IDENTIFY TO WHAT IS PROHIBITED. RIGHT NOW, INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED SIGNS ARE PROHIBITED AS SHOWN IN 66-5. Number 16, which is internally illuminated signs, are listed as prohibited signs. And so as we know, halo and backlit are considered to be internally lit or could be described as internally lit. When we had an opportunity to translate that, it showed that it was identified as a potential internally lit sign. So with it being prohibited, we wanted to be very clear in our text to ensure that staff, these applications come before us, we're receiving the direction as to whether to permit and move it forth. Currently the city does have halo backlit signs that have been permitted and that wasn't done by mistake. So the city has what is called a master sign plan program. What that is is that each commercial development or industrial development has what is identified as a sign program that allows for each of those developments to spell out the specific signs that they wish to use. They submit it to the city, the city agrees to it. SO THE ONES THAT CURRENTLY HAVE THE HALO BACKLIT SIGNS TODAY, WE'RE FINDING THAT THOSE WERE PERMITTED INSIDE OF THE MASTER SIGN PLANS THAT WERE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL OR PLANNING COMMISSION SOMETIME BACK IN THE 70s AND 80s. So what is the Master Sign Plan? So as mentioned, it's identified inside of Chapter 66. It spells out that a Master Sign Plan is allowed for any multi-occupancy development complex, such as shopping centers or industrial parks. and it spells out exactly how those particular plans will align as to which plan has precedent. From my translation, these sign programs, they actually make the final decision. So any text amendment we make to the sign ordinance doesn't apply to those who have the sign programs. Now what's interesting about that is majority of the city, a very vast majority of the city has these plans. So any changes we make to the sign ordinance wouldn't necessarily apply if it contradicts inside of the sign programs. So what we found in my research is that the sign programs do not mention the restrictions or regulations for halo backlit signs. They may mention that they're allowed, but it doesn't say to what detriment, to what level does it have the, I guess, rules. So here, if we place these rules inside of our code, that then means when it comes before your staff with THE PARTICULAR RULES FOR HALO BACKLIP, THAT MEANS THE RULES ARE IN YOUR SIGN ORDINANCE, BUT IT'S ALLOWED THROUGH YOUR SIGN PROGRAM. AND I CAN COME BACK TO THAT IF I NEED TO. Here you'll see these are the various different sign programs that are listed inside of the city. This is found on your website. So you'll find that in the website, it gives more detail because if you click on those links, you can open each of those plans and it spells out each of the individual styles of signage for each of the developments. As you can see, these are all of your commercial areas. They all have different sign programs. Okay, so what are we doing today? So today we found that there isn't a definition for halo backlit or reverse channeled signs. Our code does not speak on that. Although your sign programs or sign plans do allow for it, it doesn't give the regulations. So it has allowed it to be open with whatever the choice of the business has wanted to have. So to make it more uniform tonight, we're discussing what that language could look like so that we can all see that maybe after the signs are coming in for renewals, if they have not met the previous, um, well, there wasn't a previous goal, but they haven't had a chance to be regulated after tonight or after council's decision to finalize this language. they will then have a more uniformed regulation to follow. So this is a suggestive language that we found based on halo lit signs. We did research other cities to see how their language was aligned for halo backlit so that it could make sense. We shopped around and found this to be one of the best ones for halo lit. So that was a suggestive language there. We currently give a definition for internally illuminated signs But again, we wanted to continue to allow those to be prohibited, but allow for the halo and backlit to be continued or allowed. So you'll see internally illuminated signs to be continued to be prohibited because they currently are today, but allowing halo and backlit to be allowed. And then lastly, so you'll see that in your packet, I gave a new packet of information because that was an error that I did find on my side. So I placed it originally inside of the area, still 6615. Oh, goodness, what happened? Okay, still within 6615.

What is going on? I'll put it down. I don't know if it's me or not.

Okay, so the language is still within 6-6-15, but we dropped it down from 6-6-15-1 to now 6-6-15-6. So what that does is it places it within the wall sign section that is more general instead of just making a restriction within retail. We're placing it within retail, commercial, office, and industrial as a whole, but further down in the language. So for there, that concludes my report.

Thank you, staff. Excuse me. I think we'll go ahead and start with any questions to staff. I'm going to go with Commissioner Allen.

Any questions to staff? Just to educate me a little bit more on this, for anybody that has the right answer. One, you talk about the programs that different shopping plazas have. So if anybody does it, they all have to do the same. Is it the same luminosity, if that's the right word, or is it the same style?

Are you speaking of the plan, or are you speaking of this language?

If they have a plan, like at the avenue, if the first one comes in and says, we want to do it this way, later on another come in, they all have to meet that same.

So every business within that particular location that has a plan, that development has defined how they want to see signs. And that's the wall signs, that's the, what am I trying to say, directional signs, that's lighting, that's everything that they want to see within their development.

It would be universal.

Universal, so that way that development looks like one development versus several.

And when we're talking about prohibited lighting, internally lit lighting, that's basically neon, right? We're just talking about we don't want bright neon lights out of it, is that what we're saying?

Well, the internally lit could be lights that are flashing directly at you. You know how you see a sign where the lights are flashing towards you? That's because the signs are internally lit amongst the, I'll just say the lettering. However, this is going to be external somewhat, but still sometimes because... Let's use the alphabet A. Sometimes the direction of the light could be facing outward towards the front of the sign, or it could be turned reverse towards the wall of the sign.

Right, this is backlit.

Correct. But sometimes they don't put a wall on the back of that alphabet. Sometimes they allow the internal to still have the inside of it to still allow the sign to go into it and just turn it opposite. So it's just different ways that they may do it. They may put a back on the alphabet and allow the lighting to be attached to the back, or they may leave the actual alphabet to have like a halo look where it's actually internal to the actual alphabet. So it just depends.

Commissioner Chris, any questions?

Yeah, how are the Lumens and Kelvin decided upon?

Yes, sir. So I'm happy you asked that. So we did a little shopping around. Sometimes you have to wait until nighttime to see some things. So we shopped around and saw a few signs that we liked. One sign in particular that we did enjoy that we thought was a lot more pleasing than others, we took the opportunity to call that sign company to say, hey, this particular sign was done to what level of Lumen or Kelvin or whatever it may be. We had a conversation with them. We found that this particular number is more pleasing and less distractive. It's not bright in the eyes. It's not unattractive. And I also researched that just to make sure that was correct. So that was the recommendation that came from that particular company. And I mean, if you wish to know the actual sign, I can tell you that as well. But it was, you don't, okay, that's fine.

I mean, as long as you found it pleasing. Were there a lot in the city that were above what the recommendation was from the sign company?

I would have to call each of those companies to see what those actual elements were. And I will tell you, we have not done that. I haven't called every company to see. There may be some, but the way I see that is because there was no calls at the time, they were grandfathered, they're going to necessarily probably just allow to have it. But if they have to come in and have a new sign, they won't be able to come in and have those lighting anymore. They would have to be required to have this.

So, yeah, just a point of clarification. Anytime... any commercial property in the city gets a new sign, they have to come in and have it approved?

Well, if it's a new company coming in with a new sign, yes.

Okay. But what if you're an existing company?

Existing companies, if it has to be replaced, let's just say there's an act of God and there's a storm, they would have to come in to have it be replaced, and yes, they'll have to meet those particular provisions. I would need to look to see how our code spells out...

What if it's not an act of God? What if they just want to make their sign rebrand?

I would need to look to see that, but I think if it's changing ownership, if one company leaves and another comes back, I know for a fact they would have to come in to get into a new sign with the new sign regulations. I don't know what that means if it's the same exact company just wishing to do a different brand and change their signage and You know, because, for example, there's a number of restaurants, they change their branding often.

Yeah, yeah.

And so I don't know that, but I can definitely look into that to see what that looks like for us.

Yeah, because city council is going to be the final decision maker here. So I would imagine they may want to know that. Okay. Okay, yeah, no further questions from me. Sure.

Commissioner Halverson?

I was just reading 6-6-15-6. three times it's a little confusing to me partially because well the first sentence makes sense if it's not eliminated from behind theoretically right because 15 minutes 15 inches off the wall service seems a little far But it says signs attached to the building wall may be lit from behind. So it's attached to the building wall that can't be lit from behind, but the next paragraph, the Halo Lit definition clarifies that up. In other words, I'm conflicted because I don't know how to resolve the text.

Okay. Where is the challenge that you may see? Is it in the definition or here?

So this one's a little bit different than that. Okay, that last sentence was added.

Yes, all of the forms, yes, that was added. Is that not in your attachment?

No, and that's not here.

Okay.

Okay, that's fine. That clarifies it up, because... It's basically comparing a non-illuminated flat sign versus a backlit illuminated sign, but using the same context by which it's attached.

Okay.

And then the second paragraph for the revision, this page, you give the definition of every part is open in that piece. Okay. Wall signs may... Reverse-channel or backlit wall signs means a type of aluminum. It gives you the definition of what that is. That helps define what that is versus is this comes after that. So what you have here is fine.

Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Sorry.

No, no, no. Thank you for clarifying that for me. I appreciate that.

I don't have any other questions. Okay.

I don't have any specific other questions. Commissioner Hobson, I'll stay with you. Comments?

So I think we talked about the color and temperature and those kind of things. I mean, ultimately it's going to come down to branding, which they're going to have a specific type of shape, color, illumination, which as long as it is within the criteria, then it's fine. Just so I understand one more time, just to clarify Commissioner Allen's comment. This is going forward, correct? This isn't going backwards. So if we have a new tenant that's coming in and they fulfill the criteria and it's approved, it's fine, but not all of the other signs need to then update to that criteria.

Correct. That was what we concluded. Now, the only thing that's kind of pending that I'm working on before it goes before council is if it's the same company that wishes to change their marketing as we're using that language, what the steps would be for that. I would personally believe that they're required to go by the rules of today because that's the practice that we use in zoning, what today's laws are and what today's laws are. But I want to clarify that and confirm that. But that's what I would say the rules are.

Yeah, that would make complete sense to me. If you want to change it and it doesn't meet the rules and you like what you had before, then you're going to have to keep what you had before.

And I was thinking about the Chick-fil-A at 74 down south. Right. And they changed the paint scheme. What if they also wanted to change the lighting scheme? They're the same proprietors, but would they have to come back to us and say we're...

So that's different. That would be something that, if it's something that was approved in the elevation drawings and things of that nature, they will still have to come back to you because they've changed the elevations, if that's the case. That's different than the actual.

Well, I'm strictly talking about the lighting. Same sign, but they wanted to change, make it brighter.

Well, they'll be stuck to these rules.

Okay, thank you.

But I will confirm that Chick-fil-A uses these same rules.

Okay. Okay, I'll give you an example, and I'm curious what you would say, if that's fair. So if we're looking at Braylon Village, for example, and they're going to refresh the entire facade of the entire project, and they want to change seven out of ten signs but leave three in place, would that trigger a you need to change them all?

No, these are signs that are looked at as one application. So if there are seven different businesses, there's usually seven different applications. There's not being seen as just because one changes doesn't mean across the board everybody has to change. I will say that those individual seven companies, they come in with seven separate applications.

Gotcha.

Yeah.

Great. Thanks for the clarification.

Yes, sir.

Commissioner Kriz?

Yeah, no, I think this is a nice effort here. Yeah, like you said, I mean, I think the preference from what I hear from my fellow commissioners is that we do agree with you that if someone wants to change a sign, that it should be the new, comply with the new regulation here, the new ordinance. If that's not possible, maybe see if the city attorney can draft some language, help you draft some language to present to city council in that regard, because I think that's, that's a good effort to have that in the language. But other than that, I think this is fine. Yeah. Good.

And I actually did find the section that I was looking for. That was back in January, January 26, Planning Commission meeting, where we actually did discuss the exterior lighting, the ordinance 731.2. And one of the things that I had kind of taken a look at is I remember having discussions with the commissioners concerning the 6500 Kelvin with more of the bluish white type light and exactly what that looked like and how that may be viewed in comparison to the 60 or the 6,000 Kelvin, which is more of the daylight. And of course the warm white, more of a 3,000. And we did conclude coming out of that, that, you know, some of the older technologies was, had a much more bluish tint to it or color to it. And current LED technology did not have that as much. So, One of the things that I looked at was your example of the Chick-fil-A sign with more of that bluish-white kind of color to it, and I wanted to make sure that we were consistent with what we had discussed with the exterior lighting. and that we made sure we went forward with the same thing. While I may not be preferential to the 6500 for signs, it's one of those things that we already set the precedent with the exterior lighting of keeping the 60, not to exceed the 6500. So I think my view is that let's keep that going forward with that. So any other comments or questions from the commissioners?

No?

Okay. So do we have a motion from the dais to, would we recommend this to council that we would recommend via text amendment?

Yep.

For the text amendment for the sign ordinance, specifically chapter 66 to allow reverse channel halo slash backlit wall signs.

Motion to approve the text amendment to the sign ordinance, specifically chapter 66 to allow reverse channel, halo lit, backs lit, wall signs.

Okay, so that'd be a recommendation for approval to council. Correct, as written. As written, correct.

Second.

Okay, so we have a motion to approve for submittal to council for their review. We have a second. Any other questions, comments? Okay, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Okay, the text amendment to the wall sign ordinance specifically chapter 66 to allow reverse channel halo backlit wall signs has been approved for recommendation to city council. Okay, new agenda items. The first elevations request for waiver altitude 400 Crosstown Drive and turn it back over to staff.

Okay, so section, in case you weren't aware, Section 724, the Land Development Ordinance, gives the Planning Commission authority to waive an architectural review if the following requirement is met, and that is that it will not be visible from the road once the project is completed. So on behalf of the Altitude Trampoline Park, which is currently going into the old Kmart space, but the half that is farthest on the end of the shopping center, next door to the pickleball place, their architect has requested a waiver from a building elevation review for the outdoor covered area, which was the former Kmart Garden Center. They plan to make that an outdoor entertainment area, and they would like to install a new roof structure over the entire area so that it'll be protected for the outdoor recreation. The zoning of the shopping center is GC, General Commercial, with a special use condition, I'm sorry, zoning condition, a special use permit for the Kroger expansion. That goes back to 2013. So just for reference, here's the Ace Pickleball, here's the trampoline park, this is the former outdoor garden center for Kmart, which is where they want to place that new roof structure. These are two views from the Crosstown Drive. As you move down the road, this one, completely not visible. This one, that area of the shopping center, the building is way back here, barely visible. So staff is the opinion, the requested waiver meets the ordinance requirement of not being visible from the street. Now I'll turn it over to y'all.

Okay, thank you. So we have the applicant or applicant's representative. If you'd please, if you'd like to, come to the microphone, state your name and who you represent.

Good evening, Charles Killebrew with Onyx Creative. We are the architects.

Okay, great. Do you have anything else to add to staff's presentation?

No, thank you very much for it.

Okay, great. Okay, with that, we're going to go ahead and start with questions of the applicant or staff. Commissioner Kriz, any questions?

Yeah, just a clarifying question. You know, what's the main motivation for seeking the waiver? Is it cost? Is it administrative delay? What is the main motivation there for seeking the waiver?

Okay. From our perspective, the work that we're doing is within the bounds of the original garden center space. And the space already has a lean-to structure in it. So we feel that we're coming in with a similar construction, a similar essence of the use, if you will, an outdoor accessory to the indoor main activity.

What is there, is there a roof currently over this portion of that property?

A portion of it.

Okay. So you're just extending the, the roof area.

Correct. So the garden center area has, um, as I say, a, a light framed, uh, steel lean to structure, uh, that covers, if I was guessing about a third, uh, of the area. We're looking to cover the remainder of that. It'll be a new structure and a heavier steel structure than what's there.

Okay. Just out of curiosity, question for staff. When these kinds of applications come through, is there a cost and how long does it usually take if they do not receive a waiver?

well they'll have to come back to you with renderings or you know plans to show you so there could be additional cost in those preparing that those documents but there's no cost to the city there's no fees no there's actually no fee for a building elevation review okay okay yeah that's all the questions thank you Commissioner Halverson questions

So the construction is Azurite. And it's open on three sides?

Correct.

And it matches the existing color, finish, fit finish, all that kind of good stuff?

Similar, yes. I'd say it would be an improvement. The existing lane two is a white prefabricated metal panel.

And what's considered then? for the what's the existing some of the existing is what's the considered material?

The considered is largely open. But we're using a an architectural box panel at the upper portion as a skirting just to level out the slope of the roof. And we do intend to install a clear vinyl roll down screens for inclement weather. So it gives us a place to hide those. Got it.

No other questions.

Okay.

Commissioner Allen?

No questions. Okay.

I don't have any specific questions. I have some comments, but Commissioner Allen? No. Comments? Commissioner Chris, comments?

Yeah, you know, I don't necessarily have an issue with this. I think what I'm concerned about, and I don't necessarily see that concern after speaking with the applicant, is even though what's being proposed isn't visible from any of the streets because this property sits so far back into that shopping center, that is a pretty... well-traveled shopping center and if something were to go there that wasn't very appealing I think we'd hear about it if we allowed the rate waiver and didn't review it and approve it it doesn't sound like that's the case from from our conversation today but I'm not a hundred percent comfortable you know with what we do you know providing this service that we provide as volunteers to the city with just granting the waiver and not putting eyes on this. But that being said, it does sound like an improvement. I have been over there. I've seen this area. And so, you know, garden centers usually aren't very attractive. So anything that you're planning to do I'm sure will be an improvement. So I'm not overly concerned. But if anyone else on the commission shares my concern, I would like to hear it. But I could be swayed either way.

Sure.

Yeah.

Okay, thank you. Commissioner Halverson.

I have one question to staff. If the exterior area is roofed and enclosed, does it change the use or FAR?

So this is the first I've heard about the walls, the temporary walls. I would actually have to research that a little bit.

Yeah.

Okay.

I think it's still not a permanently enclosed space. So my, my thought is that it's not going to increase the the building square footage.

Because those because that heated or cooled, pardon, it's not heated or cooled. Theoretically, right, right. Okay.

Will it be heated or cooled?

No, not to a building standard. We would have some radiant heat out there just to temper the space.

Commissioner Hubbardson, any other comments?

No, sir.

You know, I kind of looked at this initially and said we've just, Well, we've had several things happen in Braylon recently. Of course, we just reviewed and approved kind of a major revitalization of the entire shopping structure just last meeting or the meeting before. And, you know, there are. Several, if not numerous, businesses as part of that that you cannot see from the street. However, we looked at it as an entire complex and not just one unit or two units or three that you could see from Crosstown. And we did have come in front of us, and please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe we did. elevations for the pickleball. I think when they first started theirs, and if I'm speaking incorrectly, then I apologize, but I thought we did. And it's probably been a while since that happened.

I'm not sure we did, but I would have to double check that.

Right. And like I said, if I'm speaking out, then I apologize, but I thought we had at one point in time. my view of this is that even though it seems to be a minor change it looks like there's a little bit possibly more than a minor change and since we just did go in and approve like I said the major revitalization of the entire complex I myself would like to see this come in front of the Planning Commission I hope it would be a very, very short and straightforward review and hopefully a very short and straightforward approval of that. But I think it would be best, as Commissioner Kriz said, since we have done a lot in this area, and as I said, we've done a lot in this area, to actually bring this in front of the Planning Commission to review it. I think that would really be the best thing to do. So do you want a rendering? Yeah, I'd like to see what they're doing. I'd like to see if they're actually putting up a different type of structure, quite frankly, what colors they're going to be using, what materials they're going to be using. We kind of look at that when we looked at... even though when we were doing the, like the 74 or the 54 West, you know, canopies and what materials were permitted and not permitted and things such as that. So it'd be nice to see the same thing with this as to what those materials, what the structure looks like, things such as that.

And don't install it and then ask us for permission afterwards.

Correct. Correct. Especially that. Yes. Yes. So I don't know if there's, I mean, is that kind of what?

Yeah, I mean, you know, that's kind of the concern I expressed somewhere. You know, I do want to mention that I think the investment in the community is fantastic, right? I mean, this space has been empty for some time. Absolutely, almost decades. Yeah, so to see someone interested in getting in there is fantastic, really great to see, and I hate to slow it down, but I just agree.

I think we just really need to do our due diligence on this and make sure everything is as it should be and meets the character of the rest of the complex, especially with what's going on with the rest of the complex. I think that's even more important at this juncture.

I mean, I think I would clarify to the applicant that this is more for confirmation of what we believe is your intentionality than anything else. So rather than a penalty to request a rendering, it's more of a... Well, it does end up being effectively a penalty to the delay of the project.

It's how many more weeks before we can come back with that information. I mean, we're feeling like we're, if you're going to allow for the waiver opportunity, that's why we're here.

I guess with that, my expectation would have been that if you were coming to request the waiver, you would have had at least some type of rendering, even if it was a basic one.

I was sent one, but we don't typically use those in these. I mean, I looked back at when we've done these before, and it wasn't provided.

Yeah, I understand, but it's difficult.

You do have a rendering?

Not of this.

I have it.

I've got products sitting in there. Once it gets hot outside, my products will go bad.

I think that's great. I'm okay with seeing it. Sure. Okay.

I'm going to go get my laptop. Sure. Okay.

Thank you. Thank you. For the record, Ben Thomas is the developer for the Altitude. Sure.

Yeah, and it's not – As Commissioner Chris said, we don't mean to do extra red tape and put you in a tight spot, however, You know, we've been in situations like this before where things have come forward and they're not quite the way they're supposed to be. So it's always the best that, you know, if there are going to be some changes. If you're going in with the same exact structure, the same exact material, then that would be really straightforward and easy to take care of. But since you are changing, you're doing different materials and things such as that, it's not the same. Yeah.

So if I can give a quick introduction as he's bringing that in. As you recall, there is an entry tower at that corner of the building that is part of the garden center approved area. That remains. There is currently a masonry, a combination of masonry and metal fencing around the front corner. and then it transitions into a chain link that runs the remainder of the distance back toward the service lane. We are going to retain the masonry wall. However, it will be a reconstructed version of the masonry wall. This is because we have to tear out portions of the slab to put in foundations for the roof structure. Because we have no idea if we can get a good match on the existing brick, The thought is that we'll come in with a split-face CMU that's a neutral color similar to what's there. But we will reuse the metal fence panels, the picket panels. That low wall will continue toward the back. It's partially shielding the attractions. But we will use a black vinyl-coated chain link for the remainder of the distance.

And I think you just mentioned there's just with the tear out of the existing pillars and going in with foundation changes to go ahead and support. I mean, that's an additional change to just going in and keeping what's there. So again, I think that's probably good to see what's being proposed from that standpoint. Are we able to, staff, are we able to add this to the? That's what we're working on. Okay. Apologize for throwing a curveball, but. I'll tell you what, if we're able to do that, if that's okay, we can go ahead and move on to the next and we'll be able to do it. Oh, he's got it. Yeah, because we need to get it over and get it added to the system. Okay. Just go ahead and wait then? Okay.

We'll just go ahead and wait then.

Yeah, that's it.

You know, one thing we can do when we approve this waiver potentially is we could, if we like the rendering, we can say, we can request that the applicant return to us if there's any substantial or material changes to the rendering, right? If we like it. There's no issues that we have with it.

Just wanting to re-authenticate my...

It's like 1,000 square feet.

Is that all it is? It looks bigger than that, though. It's like 50 by 20. Really? No, it's way bigger. Charles, how big is it?

Like 1,000 square feet? Like a little more than that? It's pretty big. 4,000?

Yeah, because it goes all the way back. All the way back to the service company right there? Yeah.

How wide is it?

Charles, what's it gonna be used for?

Speak into the mic. If you could come back up, because we need to make sure everyone's, sorry about that.

I'll be receiving a text momentarily, I'm sure, saying that, so.

There we are. So the use in that area is primarily to make sure miniature golf so a portion of it would be think of it as a links course so it's a undulating surface that replicates a as I say a links course the other portion is more of an attraction based also miniature golf but thematic stations that you travel between There's also a little bit of F&B attached to the main F&B inside that doubles as checking, greeting, because as you recall, the main entrance to the trampoline park is at the back of this garden center area. So we're using this as a way to draw people into the property, way find, get into the trampoline park. Okay. Okay.

Is this similar to other altitude? Okay. I was just curious if this is similar to the others.

Okay.

Okay.

I have not. I have not. That's what I was asking.

Yeah, it's a significantly upgraded FMB offering. And as far as I know, this is the first one that includes the miniature golf attraction. Okay.

Thank you for bearing with us. Sure. Thanks for entertaining the request.

Yes.

Excellent. Excited to have you here.

They probably messed that up when they were doing the ceiling stuff.

Can't get that same monitor system.

That's too much.

I hope we aren't building too much anticipation.

I went to Scotland two weeks ago to play the Lynx course. Did you really?

That's way different than anything we have here. For sure, yeah. It was a nice day to play. It was Scotland. Perfect.

There we go.

That

Really, really makes a difference. That's beautiful. Yeah, great. That's great to see it, isn't it? Yeah. Thank you for doing that.

You pandered to me. You just won all this over. We want to go see it right away.

No, we were really trying to keep the essence of the previously approved Kmart design and enhance it as best we could. That's really nice.

Now this, like I said, this makes a huge difference. You know, not being able to, just what you were explaining is definitely not how I envisioned what I'm seeing, quite frankly. So I'm glad, you know, you had the renderings. Thank you very much. Pictures, yeah.

Pictures worth a thousand words.

It is, it is, absolutely. So any other comments or questions? No. No, okay. So do we have a motion from the dais for a request for waiver, Altitude 400 Crosstown Drive?

I'll move to approve the elevations request for waiver at altitude 400 Crosstown Drive as presented.

Okay, so we have a motion to approve the request for waiver. Second. We have a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Request for waiver for the elevations of altitude 400 Crosstown Drive has been approved. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you very much.

Thanks for your patience. Yes.

That's sharp. There's one other picture.

I do appreciate everyone just a little bit of time to get that up. So thank you very much.

Thank you for the lighting.

Are we going to discuss the luminosity underneath that? I can tell you what it is. I already know what it is. It's good.

Okay, so our last new agenda item is the conceptual site plan building expansion 240 Parkade Court. And back to staff.

Did neither one of these work? I don't understand. There we go. It must be this one.

Okay, just did that.

All right, conceptual site plan. we have for you tonight Rochester and associates the engineer for this project at 240 Parkade Court has submitted a conceptual site plan for an expansion of the industrial building located there the property is look here's 74 now I forget what that is but Parkade Court and at the end of the cul-de-sac here is 240 ZONE GI GENERAL INDUSTRIAL. HERE IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN. SO THIS BUILDING IS EXISTING. THE BLUE AREA IS THE PROPOSED EXPANSION AREA. IT WILL BE 16,628 SQUARE FEET. THE PROPOSAL WILL BE FOR A TOTAL OF 59 PARKING SPACES They currently have 50, and they are proposing nine new parking spaces right here, which exceeds the requirement by 11 spaces. And this will be a little paved area to connect the existing parking and the new space. Let's see. So the new total will be 96,628 square feet for the total building. Again, 59 parking spaces being proposed. Since Parkgate Court is not a major thoroughfare, no architectural review is required for this expansion.

Thank you. We have a representative.

Bill Foley.

Please come to the microphone and state your name again and who you represent.

I'm Bill Foley. FORMER PLANNING COMMISSIONER FOR FIVE YEARS HERE. WELCOME BACK. YES, WELCOME BACK. APPRECIATE WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING. RANDY IS HERE. RANDY WILLIAMS HAS BEEN WORKING HERE IN THE CITY AND THE WHOLE IDEA HERE. THIS IS THE THIRD EXPANSION. RANDY, HOW MANY EMPLOYEES NOW? 48. 48.

EXCELLENT.

HE'S GOT COMPUTERIZED EQUIPMENT AND MAKES PARTS FOR CHICK FILET FOR a dozen different groups here in the city uh computerized uh specialty and this is the last we've we did an expansion several years ago but this is the last of the area And it actually sits down about 12 feet into the ground and we're just basically expanding out the main area. It'd be amazing for you to go see a lot of the robotics that Randy's using for making all that go in. And this keeps from having to go over to Newnan or somewhere else to build. Moved here from Fayetteville how many years ago, Randy? Yeah, so long term and new employer in a great place to go. Nothing changes. There's a wetland area and the golf cart path system back behind it. None of that gets affected by it. The new expansion just goes in. Basically, we're building a new retaining wall up against the addition property. You can't see it from anywhere and it'll be back. back down in the hole and just an expansion to the rest of the space. So that's simple. Just want to get it going. It'll have new landscape to the new ordinances and actually moving some of the current landscaping back out to take use of it, but bringing it up to new standards. The back of it really does go back through the car pass system back behind. And then there is a wetland area that we've maintained that doesn't get affected at all. So other than if you drive down to the end of the court and drive down there, you might see it. But we just want to get that going as quickly as we can. He's got a new piece of equipment coming in robotic to install. and we're trying to get it up in place so he can install that as quick as it comes in.

Excellent. Just one quick question. This is right across the court from Midwest Food Bank? Yes. Is that correct?

Yeah, downhill from it.

It is downhill.

Yeah, you can't see it.

I'm very familiar with that. Okay.

I just wanted to make sure. I thought it was. No, you've got the right place. Perfect.

Okay. So I'm going to go ahead and open it up for questions from the commissioners. Commissioner Halverson, any questions to the staff or the applicant?

no you couldn't fit it anywhere else on that site could you oh no that's the last that's the only place you could put it yes now it looks great it's as of right i don't have any questions at all commissioner chris yeah no questions okay mr allen so i have one for the commissioners because of where it's located and it's not really a thorough paranoid recent discussions we've had with buildings and expansions and stuff has been adding golf cart spots and all that we just don't really care about this one right

Is there even golf cart access to this area? Yeah, it runs right by it.

There is, and there's parking requirements and the new parking requirements that meet it. This exceeds cart parking plus employee parking in the lot. It already exceeds it? It already exceeds it. It does.

No questions, no comments.

Yeah. Okay. Commissioner Chris, comments?

I'd just love to see the expansion in the city. Yeah, it looks great.

Absolutely. Commissioner Halverson?

I'm good.

All right.

And the only comments I have is we definitely welcome as a city the continued employment and the continued business you have here, and it's great to see expansions adding additional capabilities as well as additional employees. So thank you for that. Okay. With that, do we have a motion from the dais?

I'll move to approve the conceptual site plan for the building expansion at 240 Parquet Court.

Okay, so we have a motion to approve the building expansion 240 Parkade Court. Do we have a second?

Second.

We have a motion and a second. Any other discussion? No? Okay, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Okay, the conceptual site plan building expansion 240 Parquet Court is approved. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much. I know you're highly paid. And thank you for your time and patience in waiting for the previous applicant to get through that. So I really appreciate that.

Would any of you like to volunteer to be the representative for the final site plan?

I'll do it. Okay. Perfect. Okay.

Okay. So on to member and staff topics. So I see we have two. The first one is roof signs. And that was a very deep breath. Yes.

My goodness. So, okay, we did a great job with roof signs. We reviewed the code. We drafted the code. You all gave your input. You gave your feedback. You're all. So as I've mentioned to you all, there's a such thing called a master-assigned program or plan. And where those rules lie, here's where the roof signs kind of become a little tricky. So what you just discussed, we didn't have any rules for halo backlit, so those new rules apply to that. Regardless if they have a sign program, halo, you have to meet those rules placed inside because they're sign programs unless they're mentioning the voltage or the color, the brightness, whatever it may be. Unless it mentions that, it goes back to the sign ordinance. The challenge we're having with roof signs is that a lot of the developments, particularly the avenue, inside of these sign plans, they identify exactly where they want the signs to go. Most of them are above the roof, as far as they're on the long parapet wall, where the roof line is actually here, the actual base of the roof is here, the actual long parapet walls, you're seeing where the signage is going there. the plans are programmed to say that this is exactly where those signs are going. And so there's been a lot of objection from these particular companies or communities that are saying, hey, we've already had previously approved plans that says that we can place these along this location, even if it's above the roofline. With that being said, we will be bringing it back to you to see how we can adjust a bit in our code for that. We may have to figure that out because they're existing that way, and I'm not certain as to how they are.

Guys, don't touch a picture. I got a question. I'm going to use the one you got right here, okay?

Got it.

So using this picture that's up here right now, in my understanding that what we were talking about was where it says tenant on the front there, That's what they want to do, and our current opinion is to not allow that?

So that's actually not a parapet wall. It has to be on the top top. That's a tower. Yeah, that's a tower. That's going to be something different. So where we're seeing, and I wish I had an actual photo to show you, but you're seeing an avenue that's going to be perfect for this difference. I guess he's probably drawing it for you.

We said it couldn't be above the roof line, so it can't be in that area.

So it's going to be where you're seeing that extra panel of a wall that, again, the purpose of a parapet is to ensure that you're not falling off of the roof, not for the purpose of allowing for a sign to go there. But that's what they've been very creative. That's the word I use, creative in placing the signs there to allow for the signs or the name of the business to be seen from a far distance because if it's on a long, the below the roof line, you're not seeing it from a distance. So they're finding a way to place it above that space to allow you to see from a distance as to who they are and where they are. And so with that, the sign program has made it so that we have to accept where most of them are located. 25 different commercial complexes in the city have a sign program. I'm not sure if everyone's familiar with the sign program.

If you all knew we had it.

Okay, so back in the 70s and 80s, a lot of these go back to the 70s and 80s when a lot of our commercial developments were starting to formulate. We were allowing for companies to tell us before the development takes place what they wish the design of their communities to look like for the commercial complexes. That would include lighting. I'm just gonna use this photo. It would include to what voltage of the lighting, whether it be street lights, it could be the signage, it could be, gosh, I'm trying to think of everything. They even mentioned special event programs inside of one, which I thought was interesting to go to that detail. They mentioned several different things in these things that the city council would approve or the planning commission would approve. And it seems like there's been a gap or a stop, mainly probably since development has stopped for us for commercial. We haven't seen these come before us again. So I will tell you staff was not fully aware of how to operate with these because they've kind of sit dormant for a while. Now that we're seeing signage come before us now, we've found these sign programs and we're at a space where we need to inform council even more about them, because I'm not certain if council's aware of them, but just inform them that these are previously approved plans, that it mentions your signs, and it also identifies inside of the sign ordinance that they basically supersede the sign ordinance. So I need to bring back to you a full, authentic research on this plan, see what it does for us and how do we move it forward. And I just want to let you know it's coming your way.

Okay, and why don't we, now I totally get not having a sign on top of the roof, on top of the parapet, however you want it, but why don't we want it on the parapet above the roof that's hidden?

This is just a discussion about the language, not necessarily the aesthetic. So if we're going to clarify the language, which is fine.

Sorry.

I was getting too comfortable. I think the issue is more about the language of where the roof line is relative to where the signage is located, not necessarily the intent. So if we come back and say, that looks fine, then we can, then the slab behind it is irrelevant. We just have to clarify what the text language.

We had quite a bit of discussion on what the roof line was and parapet and what that entailed, so. Right.

Yeah. I remember, I just wonder why we care if a sign's there.

Well, the... It'll be a longer conversation, I think, but ultimately what happens is if we limit the height of the parapet to not exceed eight feet or whatever we want to say above the slab, the roofline, then you can put your sign wherever you want. What we don't want is someone to create. a parapet wall that's 25 feet tall.

And that's where we were trying to correct that. Because if you go back to the original language in the code, it said that you can place a sign on the parapet And it had no rules to it. It could be to whatever height, to whatever location. As long as it's above the roof, it didn't have an issue.

Just make it a billboard. Right.

So we tried to address that. And so I've been instructed to bring back research as to how we can be a little bit more creative in our codes.

Absolutely. Yeah.

I totally understand that. Yeah. Okay. Great example.

Okay. June 22nd, we also have that.

Yes. So your council is using that date for another item that could be possibly lingering into 630. So they've asked, could they have that date? I said yes. But I wanted to talk to you all because it technically has to vote to let that date go. And it allows for you to have that last June date off. And then we'll pick back up again July 1st. Okay, sorry.

Sometime in July. Yeah. And it's actually fortuitous for me because I was not able to make the June 22nd. So that kind of works out perfect on my personal standpoint.

Do we have a lot coming up just out of curiosity?

so we have one item that council decided upon at their last council meeting they want us to look at push carts because push carts are prohibited in the city right now um we do not allow for push carts to be within the community a push cart of course is where you're seeing um if you go back to where before there was a food truck that was motorized you saw someone pushing around the cars with the wheels and yeah so it's prohibited and so we're bringing that before you to see how we can bring that here so that is coming before you in July July 13th so the question would be are you interested in in counseling the June 22nd and allowing the July 13 to be your next meeting

Everybody good with that? Yes, ma'am.

I will be out. I'm traveling a lot of July, but I'm sure you'll have a quorum otherwise. But yeah, so motion? Yep, we need a motion. Move to cancel the June 22, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. Second.

We have a motion and a second to cancel the June 22, 2026 meeting. Any other discussion?

No. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye.

The June 22, 2026 meeting has been canceled.

Thank you.

I do have one question just to inform it. We had a discussion recently about short-term rentals for the soccer tournaments.

Yes.

Where did that land?

So that landed with a yes, that it was allowed to move forward. I can tell you that the way that it was brought to you in that exact language is how it was voted upon. There were no changes made to that language. Okay. Yep.

Thank you.

Yes, sir. Good. And if I can ask one more time, just to make sure we're clarifying, the training pieces, if you haven't had an opportunity to go to training, please take advantage of that opportunity. I think, Mr. Havelstein, I think you've gone, if I'm correct. Okay, you've gone.

That's reminding me. Okay. I have the dates, I was looking at the email there today, but if I want to go, Do I tell you? Do I just show up?

You just send us an email. We'll register you. We'll give you the details to let you know that you've been confirmed as registered. Here's the information, location, and things of that nature. We take care of all that for you. Okay.

I've done the 101 course. It was great. If the 102 course is virtual, I'd love to go, but I don't really have it.

I think the next one isn't until, why am I thinking it's December? I think the next 102 is December. Oh, for 102. 102, yeah, because that's what I'm looking to do also. Yeah, the 102.

I might, yeah. I mean, there's a drive. You can skip some.

Sometimes you can go to 103 and 104. You don't have to go in order.

I think 104 was, 104's planning?

There's one that's really cool about text amendments and rules for language of such. I think that's 103. Okay, maybe I'll take a look at 103 then.

Because I think 104 was more of true planning. It almost sounds like a... more from the planning department than something that might help us. Take a look at the 103. Oh, yeah, absolutely. They do a great job.

Take a look at it. I think you all will find that very interesting to go through pretty much all of them because if you can, it gives you a full idea as to what we're doing on this side of the table to help you understand it even more. So I suggest any of them that you find interesting.

Okay. That sounds good. Okay. Staff, anything else?

No, sir.

commissioners anything else no okay so do we have a motion to adjourn so we have a motion to adjourn and a second all those in favor of adjourning the meeting signify by saying