Architectural Review Board - Regular Meeting

BECAUSE WE NEED TO ELECT A CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR BECAUSE WE HAVE A RELATIVELY NEW MAKEUP OF THE BOARD EXCEPT FOR A FEW OF YOU RETURNING. WELCOME BACK. BUT WE START WITH A PLEDGE OF All right, so if we jump right into it, take some nominations for the chair position.

So just quickly, you can nominate more than one person. We're going to vote on them in the order in which they're nominated. And so we'll do that first with chair, and then we'll move to vice chair.

I'd like to make a nomination. I'll nominate myself as chair.

So we have a nomination. Are there any other nominations?

Yeah, can I make a nomination in two parts?

Well, when we get to the vice mayor, I mean the vice chair. No, no.

OK. John for chair and Liz for vice chair.

OK. So we're only going to vote on chair right now. So we have a nomination of John and Liz as chair. Any other nominations? OK. We're going to vote on them. You're going to vote on them in the order in which they were nominated. So there is a nomination for Liz Mariaca to serve as chair. Is there a second? Hearing none, then we'll move on. There is a nomination for Mr. Bauer to serve as chair. Is there a second?

Second.

Okay. Now, all in favor of nominating Mr. Bauer as chair? Aye. Say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? He raised his hand. He voted yes. Any opposed?

Yes, I oppose.

Okay. Moving. Well, congratulations, Mr. Bauer. You are the new chair. Let's move on to vice chair. Are there any nominations?

Yeah, I'd like to make a nomination for Ryan Mishkin.

Okay. Any other nominations?

Yeah, I would like to nominate a nomination for Liz Mariaca to be.

Okay. Any other nominations? All right. We're going to vote on them in the order in which they were nominated. There's a nomination for Mr. Michigan. Is there a second?

I'll second.

Okay. All in favor, say aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Aye.

Aye. So Liz, did you vote in favor?

No, I did not. I was going to vote for me since he nominated me.

OK. So then you're opposed. So then the motion fails. So now we have a nomination for Liz. I'll second for Liz. All in favor? Aye. OK. Liz, congratulations. You're the vice chair.

Congratulations. Congratulations.

All right, great. Any remarks from the chairman?

Well, I just wanted to welcome any of the new members that we have on this group, and I look forward to working with you on this committee. And I will try to keep things orderly and moving along as best as I can. So to that end, I'll conclude my chairman remarks. We have approval of the minutes. They were included in the agenda package.

I recommend approval.

Thank you, Liz. We have a motion to recommend approval. I'll second. Thank you, Ms. Brody. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. It sounds like it carries unanimously. Staff, any additions, deletions, or reorderings to the agenda?

No, sir.

Okay.

Okay.

Let's see. We have a swearing-in mark. I don't know if we have. I think we do have.

We do, but we'll do the swearing-in when we get to that item.

Okay. Excellent. I'm not aware of any old business. Nothing? Okay. So that moves on to ordinance number 2026-11, the freestanding shade structure zoning text amendment.

Staff ready for that?

Okay.

Good evening, Kelly Ferriolo. Before you tonight is ordinance number 2026-11, a zoning text amendment related to pergola and shade structures, which I would like to enter all files into the record. The proposed zoning text amendment is a staff-initiated amendment, which was requested by the Architectural Review Board to amend section 642A and 644A of Wellington's land development regulations related to regulations for freestanding accessory pergola and shade structures within planned unit developments and residential zoning districts. For a little background, the building department has received an increased number of requests for detached pergolas and shade structures similar to those shown on this slide. The current code requires ARB approval for accessory structures greater than 120 square feet that are not constructed of the same material as the principal structure. And since 2023, the ARB has reviewed and approved 13 pergola requests. And earlier this year, ARB asked staff to look into changing the code to allow these structures to be approved by the building permit, as the added step of ARB approval costs the resident extra time and money. This slide provides a summary of the proposed modifications to the code. Section 64288, freestanding accessory shade structures, provides standards for accessory shade structures over 120 square feet, including setbacks, screening, location, and height. And section 644A4, roof standards, provides standards as to the maximum amount of flat roof structures that can be on a property. Minor updates and clarifications have also been included throughout the sections. And the ZTA was reviewed and approved by ARB at the April 20, 2026 meeting. The proposed language includes all the standards that have been applied to pergolas that have been approved by the ARB. And approval of the zoning text amendment will reduce the approval time for these structures by eliminating the need for ARB approval, which they only meet once a month. And this concludes my presentation.

You do need a public hearing on this item.

Thank you. I entertain that we might make any questions that we have prior to opening the public hearing. Is that acceptable? All right, great. So any questions?

I have questions, but do you want to go down the line, or how do you want to do it?

Why don't you just T.S. right off?

Okay. So I just want to clarify that regarding play equipment, it says that play equipment and playhouses exceeding 10 feet in height and 120 square feet match the colors and material of the principal structure. You know, my brother has a two-story stucco home, and he's got a play area that is definitely not made of stucco, and it's rather extensive. So I just thought maybe we could do a little bit better. It seems maybe we overlooked that. That's on page three of six, number five.

Well, the 120 square feet is enclosed area, and a lot of times these play structures are maybe 25 not even enclosed this doesn't really apply this input like applies to maybe sheds that were converted we've had that instances but not for freestanding freestanding play structures that you can buy at like Costco or shit I understand okay sheds converted to play equipment Yeah, we have had instances where like sheds or some other structure that you can get at Home Depot where they've converted it to some sort of living space or some play area for children. So that's really what number five is.

Like a kid's clubhouse kind of.

Okay. But the sizes of the ones, the wooden ones, don't really meet number five. Okay. But they are limited to the 10 feet.

Okay. All right. Well, thank you for that.

Any more questions, Ms. Mariako?

Let's see. Oh, yes. Regarding Section 2, 6.4.4, 8.1, so no two identical facades of single-family residential structures shall be permitted next to or across from each other in residential zoning districts. So I just wanted to verify, is this, like, within an HOA or without an HOA? And is that the standard already? that's the standard already um we were just cleaning up the language so you could read it a little bit better because i know that a neighbor diagonally across from me who is across from somebody else just recently painted their home not exactly white but a low like like off-white and all three homes around are off-white which is fine with me but i just wanted to understand

Yeah, the section says identical facades shall mean two or more of the same color. So they have to be, they either have to be the same color, material, or design, like two of those concepts.

Okay, thank you.

Generally, these are applied to the developments. When somebody comes in to change their color, we're not looking at the color of their neighbor's house, generally.

Thank you.

Any other questions? I just did have a question about the It's still, the idea is still that the freestanding accessory shade structures are permitted, correct? So there still is a building permit that would have to go along with the installation of those. So then you'd be determining at that time, you know, whether it needs to be secured or anchored into the ground and those kind of things, right?

So what happens is when, by the time they get to building permit, it gets returned from zoning and then they have to apply to the architecture review board. And those applications are due four weeks prior to the meeting. So then it stalls them four to six weeks.

Okay. So it's just skipping that process, but obviously they still have to comply with whatever the permit requirements would be. The secondary thing that I didn't notice here, and I don't know if it's that important because I know there is a governing factor on the percentage of square footage that could be detached. But does it, I noticed that one of the things on sheds limited it to one per property, which makes sense. You don't want a bunch of container storage, you know, for hoarders on property, right? But I didn't notice that there was a similar thing about the shade structure. So theoretically, they could apply for multiple properties. like two of them, right, or something like that, if they wanted to? Okay. All right. That's fine.

So are we limiting it to one? No. They can have as many shade structures?

Well, there are different standards that they meet, the overall property would meet. Accessory structures are limited to 30% of the size of the principal structure, so it really depends on how large the house is. And then there's another requirement where the property can't have a certain percentage of flat-roofed areas. So that's another.

Because I could see that being worthwhile to not necessarily limit it to one, because you could see somebody potentially having a dining area that's covered by a pergola structure, plus they want something by a pool-sitting area or something like that. I could see it. You don't want a million of them, but I think that probably the methods that are in place right now would still be sufficient to mitigate the risk of somebody over-covering their exterior.

For me, it's more, are they going to be required to match them, or they can... You can have a pergola in one spot that's one design and a pergola in another spot that's a completely different design?

It could be separate. It could be different designs. But if they're flat, they have to be directly behind the house. So you're not going to really be seeing it from the road.

If it's a flat roof, you're saying, correct? And I was curious, that was one question that I had as well, in terms of how are we measuring height? Is it to the highest pitch of the roof? So if somebody decides to pitch the roof, like they actually decided to, that that would- From the midpoint of the roof.

So for flat roofs, it would be from the actual height of the roof. Okay. But from- For a pitched roof, it's the midpoint.

The midpoint. So whatever crest, like in the middle of this. Okay. All right.

But a lot of these requests are for the flat ones.

I figured, yeah. OK. I just have a follow-up question to Ms. Brody's point. If there are two separate structures there, are there guidelines or criteria that suggest that the two structures should come close to matching, or they could be completely

They could be completely different. They'll just have to be required to be screened, to be directly behind the house. So it's the setbacks of the house, and they'd have to be screened from view from any of the right over people.

I mean, if it's screened from view, I guess that doesn't much matter. If they want to be tacky in their own domain, they can be tacky in their own domain.

Right? Right. Okay.

One thing, being part of the ARB board for the past year that had to review these numerous applications, a very good job is done as far as concealing it from neighbors, from plain view or anything else like that, that really, at least in the past year, there's never been any conflict where any of these have come into play where it was really an eyesore for anyone or anything else. but definitely needed to adjust the verbiage and the procedure with these structures.

Yeah, to that end, I would just commend staff and the ARB board. I greatly appreciate when we're trying to be proactive about reducing burdens on both the advisory boards and on staff for having to go through, and the homeowners for having to go through the extra effort and expense of this. So I appreciate the attempt to streamline it. Second that yeah anything else anything else further that before you open public comment Okay, I'll take a motion to open public comment recommend.

We open public comment.

I have a motion. Do I get a second second? Thank you public all those in favor aye Aye opposed public comment is now open Anyone that would like to speak can come up to the microphones. I don't see anybody moving right now.

Do we have any cards? I

I do not. I'm not in possession of any cards.

So I'll make a motion to close public comment.

I hear a motion. Do I have a second? Second. OK. All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? It is closed.

I'll make a motion to approve ordinance number 2026-11.

I have a motion to approve. Anyone? Do I have a second?

Second.

Thank you. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Carries unanimously. Thank you. And we'll move on to the next agenda item, which does require swearing in. So, Laura, you want to take it away on that?

Yes. If you intend to be heard on this item, would you raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Yes.

Okay. And before we begin, I believe Ms. Brody has an announcement.

Yes. Good evening, everybody. Unfortunately, I do have to recuse myself from this vote. The applicant has been a real estate client of mine for several years, so based on the ethics code that we're all bound to, I have no choice but to say goodnight. It was nice seeing you all.

Skating out early on the first one.

I will watch from home and take copious notes.

Oh, I know you're diligent.

That's fine. So I wish you all the best of luck in making a fair decision.

The next meeting is July 15th.

Thank you.

Okay.

And before staff begins, then go ahead. We're going to do ex parte disclosures. You're good.

But I'm good to go. You're good to go.

You're good to go. Thank you.

All righty. So we'll make ex-party disclosures, which means that because the matter is quasi-judicial, you're going to disclose anybody that you talk to about the matter, and you're going to say their name and then also give a summary of what the conversation consists of.

And just as a reminder, site views also are ex-party and must be disclosed.

I'm sorry?

Site views.

So if you drove past the property and looked at it.

If you specifically drove past it to look at the property in relation to this application.

Sal, Mr. VanCastren, I'll start with you.

I drove past the site, pulled into the parking lot, very familiar with that piece of property that's being proposed right now.

I spoke with staff just about it. Really, only they showed me the subject property, but we didn't really get into detail. It was because I was doing a one-on-one, so I can be fair and impartial. Thank you.

Thank you. I suppose I have driven across the property. I don't think it was in the context of this request, but I am familiar with it. I did not have any other conversations beyond that. Notwithstanding, I can be fair and impartial.

I'm definitely familiar with the property because I go to the dog park at least twice a week. And so we walk the dogs right up against that particular parcel. Aside from that, I had no ex parte communications or no other interactions with the parcel.

And you can be fair and impartial?

Yes.

Thank you.

I've had no ex parte communications.

Thank you.

I have spoken with Councilman Levin just about the general idea. I drive by there quite a lot, but it is interesting that I've sort of eyeballed it a little bit different this time. But I can be very fair and impartial. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. And I believe that, Ms. Ferriola, you're going to make comments first? Okay. Excellent. Take it away.

Before you tonight is the master plan amendment petition number 2025-00002 MPA to the landings at Wellington PUD for R&B tennis located at 2995 Greenbrier Boulevard. And I would like to officially enter all files into the record. The 4.0 acre property is located on the southwest corner of Owsley Farms Road and Greenbrier Boulevard. The property has a future land use map designation of community facilities and is within the landings at Wellington Planned Unit Development. The applicant is requesting a master plan amendment to change the use designation of the property on the landings at Wellington PUD master plan from daycare to assembly, and to illustrate the two existing access points on Greenbrier Boulevard on the master plan. The agent, John Schmidt, and their team will be making their presentation first on behalf of the applicant, and staff will follow up after.

Good evening, Mr. Chair and board members. John Schmidt, agent for the applicant. Thank you for the opportunity to present our project for you this evening. Before I get into the technical stuff, I do have just a little blurb to kind of give an overview of what the facility is. The R&B Sports Center is an inspiring new vision for sports, mentorship, and community. coming to the Village of Wellington. It was founded by renowned tennis professionals Betsy McCormick and Rodrigo Nesmento in a private invitation-only center built under a powerful belief that sports has the ability to change lives. Betsy brings a remarkable legacy to the sport, including two grand slams and a lifelong connection to the development of world-class players through those families' deep roots and connections in tennis. Rodrigo is widely respected for a transformational coach, having guided players to the WTA finals and wins over number one players under dramatic ranking climbs. Together, they're known not only for their credentials, but their relentless hands-on dedication for coaching elite professionals and young beginners with the same intensity. Thank you. What makes this vision a little more powerful is the personal journey behind it. Betsy's known Rodrigo for over 30 years, and has witnessed his profound transformation firsthand, his path of accountability, self-reflection, forgiveness, and ultimately redemption. That lived experience now defines Rodrigo's purpose. He heads with a servant mindset, driven by desire to give in guidance, belief in opportunity that may not be otherwise encountered. He's reaching out to athletics for a deeper level, offering not only technical expertise, but the path forward rooted in resilience and accountability. The campus brings together a range of athletic and wellness offerings in a dynamic environment where people can train, connect, and grow, and equity envisioned in a place that a broader community can recharge, find balance, and reconnect. They've been incredible to work with over the last year. We do have our whole team here. Steve Pollack, our civil engineer, Tammy, our architect, Craig Mason, our builder, Jordan Sperling, our project manager, and the hairy one over there is Gunnar. So he's the team mascot. So I'll go into the technicals beyond that. Of course, Betsy and Rodrigo are behind me. The proposed request tonight is for a master plan amendment. That's two parts. It's to amend the master plan for Pod A to replace the existing daycare entitlement with a membership-based assembly use. So we're changing just a map, the room on the map. We're also reconfiguring two existing access points on Greenbrier. So we're increasing the distance between those. They're really kind of close right now. So they're going from 116 feet to over 250 feet. We do have companion applications that staff is reviewing. It's a site plan application for the overall layout. And then we will also go to the architectural review board for architectural and aesthetics. And just a little point that I wanted to put on here, that assembly means an institutional or membership use as organized meetings or programs. And it includes recreational purposes. And an example would be botanical gardens, private clubs, lodges, religious institutions, and places of worship. So that's what we're asking for the change this evening. Again, the site is four acres located in the southwest intersection of Greenbrier Boulevard and Owsley Court. or Owsley Farm, I'm sorry. The existing future land use map is community facilities, all there in gray. To the east is Residential B, and to the north is Residential B, which you'll find are really larger state equestrian properties. The existing zoning on the property surrounding everybody is a PUD. And within the PUD are the lands of Wellington master plan highlighted in blue. So that goes all the way from State Road 80 all the way south to to the airport, the Aero Club. And then you'll see a master plan over on the right. That's the current master plan that guides all the uses within the master plan. And we'll blow up there in the bottom corner to our specific site in the next slide. So this is the master plan amendment that we're asking for. Currently, the slide to the left is the existing daycare center. You can't really see the two access points. But the slide to the right is the changes that we're asking for, which is changing it from, again, the daycare to assembly and the two access points. We meet land development tables 6.2.1 or permitted use in the community facilities category. We meet the comprehensive plan and we're consistent with the community facilities designation. We also meet the objectives of the land use and community design. We're a compatible infill development consisting with the surrounding uses. We meet the mobility objective of 1.2 that we're located on a collector roadway. And we also meet the Parks and Recreation Goal 1, which is the expansion of recreational opportunities within the Wellington residents. This is a chart So if we look at the chart starting on the left side here the type of uses we go all the way down our uses Assembly that we're asking for if we go to the right here We talked about our zoning is a plan development our designation for this property Let me back up on our designation is community facilities And if we all go all the way down the bottom we are a permitted use within that current land use designation We meet section 5.3.5, which is the compliance with the master plan amendment criteria A through G. all listed here, and as well as in your staff report. Village staff recommends approval for the request of master plan amendment, subject to 15 conditions of approval that we're in agreement with. The find of facts are also in your staff report. We respectfully request for your support this evening. And again, we have our team here to answer any questions you may have. And that concludes my presentation.

Thank you. Ms. Ferriola, do you want to give your presentation now? And then we'll save questions. We might call you back up, John.

OK. The property is located within the landings at Wellington PUD, which was approved in 1979. The existing site was utilized as a daycare facility since 1986. The current owners purchased the property in 2025 and are proposing to demolish the existing structure and develop a 26,000 square foot indoor tennis facility with outdoor courts and other recreational uses. This slide shows the existing landings at Wellington PUD master plan on the left, showing the property labeled as daycare center. And the proposed master plan on the right shows the property labeled as assembly and illustrates the two existing access points into the site. Part of staff's analysis is to determine if the request complies with Wellington's comprehensive plan, the land development regulations, and other requirements. A detailed analysis is included in the staff report. However, some key points are included in the next few slides. PUDs allow for non-residential uses to meet the daily needs of its residents. Modifying the master plan use designation to assembly will not increase the amount of non-residential uses within that PUD. Assembly is defined as an institutional or membership use that has organized meetings or programs for social, educational, or recreational purposes. The proposed private tennis facility is designed as a membership-based tennis and fitness facility centered on the organized instruction, training, and athletic development which meets the assembly definition of our code. The property is surrounded by other community facility uses, including Greenbrier Park to the west and water facilities to the south. Landscape buffers are required on all sides to limit any impact on the surrounding properties. The request does not add additional access points along Greenbrier. It only illustrates the existing driveways, which will meet all separation requirements. Assembly use is a permitted use per table six point due 2-1 of Wellington's land development regulations. And a site plan that meets the requirements of the LDR has been submitted and reviewed by all departments. The staff's analysis concludes that the proposed requests comply with the requirements for a master plan amendment subject to the proposed conditions listed in resolution R2026-25. And this concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you, staff. OK, we're going to open up for questions of either staff or the applicant. We can go in order. However, I know that it jumps around a decent amount. So anybody have a burning desire to kick things off first?

I'll ask a few questions. Go ahead. Kelly, what is the landscape buffer that's required for this particular?

So there's a landscape buffer. required along all sides. So they'll have a right of way buffer that's 20 feet wide along Greenbrier and then 10 feet along the rest of the sides 15 on the I'm sorry, 15 on the east side, and then 10 feet on the south and on the west.

What type of or size trees or bushes or?

So generally it's a continuous hedge. that is required, plus shade trees. And then on the right-of-way and then along the canal on the east, there's a little bit more shrubs that are required because it's a different type.

I'm sorry, and what was the height of?

Of the trees? Yeah. The trees' minimum height is 12 feet, and usually they're shade trees.

And that's true as it relates to the canal area as well?

Correct. Mm-hmm.

John, can I ask questions of the applicant?

No, you can ask questions of the applicant, too. It's fine.

Okay. Unless you wanted to... No, go ahead.

Go ahead. It's not a one and done. You can ask questions later, too, but please continue.

I'm a neophyte, so I'm just trying to figure this out.

It's all good.

So questions I have involve, to some degree, your business operations. The Village of Wellington just expanded their tennis facilities to a great degree. Do you intend on competing with the Village of Wellington and their membership and their facilities? And are you planning on, for lack of a better word, poaching some of their instructors for purposes of employing folks? How are you planning on finding your instructors for your particular facility?

My name is Rodrigo.

Yeah, if you don't mind, into the mic.

Sorry. Yeah, my name is Rodrigo Nascimento, and we're not going to compete against anyone. And our instructor, we're going to have a very boutique-ish program, so it's not going to be competition against anyone. We're going to have our own style of what we've been doing for the last 15 years since we know each other. So, and we're not going to take any instructions from anyone because We're going to be very private, very small, and we're not competing, and we're going to give away a lot. We're going to give away a lot. We're going to try to sponsor as many kids, and we're going to try to make champions out of Wellington.

How many tennis instructors do you plan on needing and hiring?

We're going to have six to eight courts, and then the two indoor courts is going to be more for probably maybe – I would say five instructors total, four instructors total, because I'm going to be working every single day, too, and stuff. And because we're not going to have a huge program, and we're not going to, again, compete against anyone. We had an academy at the Polo Club, and we always had it. We want to make it small. We want to give a lot of room for the adults from the area to be able to join, play. And then we'll have our small group of kids that one day if it turns into a really good system, then we'll grow something bigger than that.

What is your anticipated membership fee to join your organization?

We don't have an idea on that yet, but we want to make sure something where we want to help people that needs to be helped, and we're going to charge the people that And it's not going to be for everyone. For the community, yes, they'll have an opportunity to be able to come in. But we're going to try to make it as private as possible so we don't make a big... All right.

So you're looking to establish a price point to keep it more exclusive? Is that what you're saying? Yes. Yes. did have a representative of the applicant reached out to any of the neighboring residential communities like arrow club or the community directly across from greenbrier or directly across from the canal osley have you spoken with any representatives of those communities no sir we have not reached out to them okay do you have any letters of support or letters in opposition from those communities

I don't have any letters of support or opposition. Staff may.

Okay. I mean, PEDEL, there's a new PEDEL facility in Southern that I'm sure you're probably aware of, Excel. It's a very large facility. And I don't know how they're doing business-wise or if, you know, They're going to survive or not survive.

Just to be clear, we're not doing it for the business side of it. We're not doing it to try to be making money out of it. We want to make something small and great for the community. Where at the PADO, it's going to be not for competition, not for anything. We're just going to have a place where, since it's only four courts, people around that area can go and where it's not packed over there and they can be playing over here and we can...

You're a for-profit business, though. You're in it to make money, understandably so. You're not a not-for-profit. You're not a charitable organization. I just want to make sure that's the case. Okay.

Just a reminder, while those questions are certainly questions that should be asked at some point, we're here on the master plan amendment. I understand.

So last question. I was a little confused in terms of the ingress and egress. As far as like pulling out, and maybe this is more of a site plan type question, so if I'm out of bounds, Laurie, just tell me. But it seems relevant. If you're pulling out of your proposed parcel over there and you're making a left onto Greenbrier, Are you crossing over traffic? Is there a different type of configuration that you're intending to construct so you're not crossing over traffic? I'm not sure I understood how that was being configured.

So if you're making a left out of there, yes, you'd have to cross traffic, but it does require a restripe of some of the striping that's out there right now. Yes, sir. All right. Thanks.

I have a question on membership. How many members do you plan on having? And I say this for traffic reasons. How many members do you plan on opening this up to?

I believe it's 150 to 200.

It says 200.

Yes.

And the only other thing I have is indoor courts. Two indoor courts, yes. Okay. And how are you – the structure with them? Are they going to be permanent structures? Is it going to be indoor inflatable –

No, it's a permanent building with a 35-foot high clearance inside. So the primary building looks more of an office, but once you get behind that facade, there is a 35-foot height clearance in there. So the front building is a two-story structure with all the accessory uses, offices, workout areas, and then the back building is 35-foot clear and located in this area. Sorry about that. I'm not showing my screen.

No, it's fine.

So this is actually the landscape plan, and it's picking things up for me. But this is the 35-foot structure here. So the primary structure that you would be seeing from the road and the architecture is located here. And then the two-story volume for the two indoor courts is located there.

And the indoor courts, clay, hardtop?

That's a good question. It says hardtop.

Hardtop.

It says hardtop.

One of each.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

Are you done?

Yes, ma'am.

I have some questions. The construction you're expecting to be completed, I saw in 2028, is that right? That's correct, yes. So how many months of construction is that?

Well, we have to go through these approvals process, right? So we've got another couple months there, and then we've got to go through permitting, right? And then, you know, so it's anticipation.

Once approval, how long would you anticipate construction to last?

Probably nine months to a year. Craig?

Okay.

Yeah, 12 months.

Okay. So I have some questions about the keeping the dust down and the daily watering and this, you know, I just made note of it and I want to know. So I know that you have to make sure that there's no dust and it says daily watering will be monitored, but what's the actual process for documenting that monitoring?

Well, it's a means and methods, of course, by the contractor to make sure that that's not happening. So it's a water. It can be a daily water down. It can be three times a day wash down, just depending on the weather.

I've actually heard some people complain about it over the years. So I became curious about it. And then I also became curious about soil stabilizers. Then I also saw that you could also offer some sort of planting. And then instead of possibly a soil stabilizer to keep the dust down, I'm just concerned about what we're putting in the ground. And then I also noticed, and if you could let me know about section number 10 on page 4 of 7, it talks about you must make improvements or dedicate a canal maintenance easement. So I just wanted to hear about that and then also... what chemicals you're putting in the ground to keep the dust down, if any. I'm sure they're approved by the village, but if you know, I would just like to know.

I don't believe we're putting any chemicals on the ground to take care of dust. It's typically your water trucks.

A soil stabilizer?

So those are conditions that we've been adding to every project now that is constructing a new facility. And if you recall, we had some issues with the Lotus development and some dust control. So that's what's caused that. This is just during construction. And typically that is monitored by the inspectors who are out there on a regular basis. And so, as was mentioned, it just depends on, you know, if they're working in the winter, which tends to be dry, you're going to have more watering occur. And that is just water.

Well, it does say that there's soil stabilizers and approved dust suppressants. So I just wondered what those were. But it's okay. I'm still, I'm still.

Those are just means and methods. It's not anything that they've proposed. It's just how we've worded the condition in working with our engineering staff.

Okay.

Yeah. And then same with the canal improvements and dedicated easement. Through the permitting process, the engineering department will determine what modifications need to be done to the edge of the canal at their property line. Okay. And then what easement will be required to provide for the maintenance along that canal section.

Right. Well, I do remember that there were some complaints. I didn't remember which project over the years, but I've heard it a couple times. So it just brought it to my attention. So that's the reason for my question.

I understand. And I do have a slide up for you to kind of show what the canal item is. So when the village only rocked a portion of the canal that's adjacent to us. So if you can see those canal bases there. So although it went down along Owsley, and then wrapped around and then stopped here. So it's going to be our responsibility to wrap the rest of the canal bank along our frontage until we get to your facility.

Nice. Okay.

So it's about 500 feet and I think about a half million bucks.

Yeah, that's expensive. Yeah.

Thank you.

Can I ask a question? Just as maybe a comment or just to understand from staff. So some of the stuff that Ms. Mariaco was alluding to, is this not part of any construction? For instance, on Arrow Club Drive, there's two pretty good – there's one big, really huge farm there. And I would imagine that when they built all those structures and all that construction, are those dust controls not in the application or in their requirements anyway? Or what's the difference between these folks and a farm applying for building permit?

Well, farms are a different animal. It's still a building, right? It depends.

You're still moving dirt. You're still doing a lot of stuff.

Again, it depends on what it is that they're doing. Generally, there are requirements of pollution control, water discharge control. Yeah, those are in the permits. But at the direction of council, we've been adding these to any of the projects that come through for master plan approval or for effectively council approval. Just to be explicit.

As a newbie here, I'm just trying to understand more.

Those are then carried through into the permits themselves. Okay. But yeah, each individual permit has some of those same requirements. Thank you.

I have another question.

Go ahead. That's fine.

I noticed that there was a photometric plan, but what about sound, you know, at night? Was there, like, a sound study or whatever? Would it be possible that any of the houses across, I think, was it Greenbrier? I'm not sure.

So typically, not to interrupt, I'm sorry to interrupt you. So typically, you know, working on other projects, the paddle ball is where those complaints have come from. Yes. We're not proposing paddle ball in here, but we're proposing PEDEL. And the PEDEL courts are completely enclosed within kind of a plexiglass structure. So that's the sound of the situation. We have a buffer completely around our property. We're about 100 and I think I have an exhibit here. I have the distances. We're about to the north almost 100 feet from that property line. To the east we've got the canal road right away. We're 125 feet from that one. So we have considerable distances between us. But no, a sound study wasn't required.

Okay. I just know that there are certain standards based on distance, right? So obviously this wasn't a concern. Thank you.

John, do you mind going back to that last slide that you were showing there, the one that had the riprap on the canal? Yes, sir. So in that Is that the bridle trail that runs to the right? No.

No, this is the B adjacent to our property line on this edge. So that's where they kind of maintain, and that was really the issue, like how they couldn't get in there to maintain it once we put our buffer in. So we're addressing that canal bank to stabilize it.

And where is the, if I look at the overall site plan, does the bridal trail access?

I have a bridal. I'll show you. I have the bridal trail. So there's a bridal trail on the north side of Greenbrier, the red trail here. So it's across the street, right? And then we come in the other, the red trail, I guess. Yes, it's on the opposite side. Along the opposite side. Okay, that's what I thought. Yes, both trails are opposite, on the opposite sides of the streets.

Can you show me the – you had a picture here, and I know it's not necessarily finalized, but the – The vertical, the elevations that you showed of the front of the building?

I don't want you to step on A or B's toes.

No, I don't.

I'm not going.

So it was interesting, the setup, because I was curious about it when I saw the conceptual plan of the building. Because obviously you need a lot of space to be able to. So it is interesting that you're doing the two-story building in the front. And then the backside of the building, is it two structures that are basically going to abut? Is that the vision?

Yeah, so this top one is the elevation that you'd be seeing from Greenbrier Boulevard. And then so this is what you'd be seeing from Greenbrier. And then kind of a peak of the volume behind there for the tennis facility. So I think they've done a really good job.

And I know when they designed the daycare that exists right now, the ingress and the egress, that that parcel was actually – the parcel that's to the side of Owsley Farms was not actually a part they built on. So their ingress, egress is more compressed. You're planning to expand to take on –

Yes, sir. So right now they're about 115 feet between driveways, so now it's going to go to 250, which is a much better situation. And, again, we do have to do some restriping out there as part of these improvements.

Okay. And is there a – this is a staff question. In terms of – obviously it's a membership-based club. Is there consideration – do we have to be considerate at all of what the membership count is going to be in terms of our approvals, or does that not really matter at all? Is that a business plan decision for the applicant that we don't really get involved with? I mean, it would be difficult to necessarily check what their membership roster is, right? So I'm just curious as to how we look at those things.

Yeah, generally, we don't. I mean, it was a factor in their traffic analysis and in their water and wastewater demand statement that was submitted. But, yeah, in this case, we did not provide a condition. Okay.

And what about hours of operation?

We'll be using the standard code for hours of operation.

And I'm forgetting what that is.

7 to 10. It says 6 to 10. Yeah, I know the application does, but the code would overwrite that. So it's 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and it is 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. on Friday and Saturday.

Okay. And is there lights on the exterior, on the outside courts? I'm assuming they're lit. Yes. Okay. All right. Great.

But we're not allowed any – we're obviously not allowed any light spill. And with LEDs right now, you can really – you used to have these towers up there. Now you can really spot where this stuff goes.

And then are you proposing any – For your barrier, is it going to be solely landscape is what you're assuming? You're not going to be erecting like a higher fence or anything like that?

No, the tennis courts will have fences surrounding them on all four sides.

Regular chain link, like the standard that we would assume?

It's a little bit higher. I think it's 10 or 12 feet along there, yes.

Okay. But chain link, so visually you can see through the part that's not covered by landscape. That's correct. All right. Okay. Okay.

No, it does. Well, I mean, along our east property line, we do have a landscape buffer, a 15-foot buffer along the canal. So, I mean, they will be screened. It will be screened from landscape, yes, and also a 20-foot buffer along Greenbrier. Okay. Tens on the others.

And most of the tennis fencing has a windscreen on it. Windscreens? Okay. All right.

Can I ask a quick question, John?

Go ahead.

What's the – the court's going to be lined with Hartrue?

I think that – well, I don't – It's going to be Hartrue.

You have to come to the microphone We're gonna have hard courts and in the inside we'll have one red clay just for practice So there are hard courts on the exterior and in one inside it will be one hard cord and one red clay.

Okay Thank you Any other questions Okay. Then we need to open for public comment.

I'll make a motion to open public hearing.

Thank you. Do I have a second? Second. Thank you. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? We'll open for public comment. If you want to speak on the matter, I believe it's a three minute is your time would appear on there. You can come up to either of the podiums. Make sure you leave a comment card. It seems like we've got just the team here. So I'm guessing it's not going to be public comment. But seeing none, OK. Anyone's got a motion?

Is this public comment on the cards?

Yes. Should I read those in now, Laurie, or should we? We've obviously gotten the supplements.

You've got comments from, no, those are part of the record, but they don't get read into the record. Thank you.

So everybody can, yeah, we don't need to read them in, but they're here for your perusal.

Under our new rules, you actually need to be present in order to have your card read. Okay. All right.

So seeing nobody running to the microphones.

So I'll make a motion to close public comment.

Thank you, Ms. Mariaca. Second. Thank you, Mr. Michigan. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, public comment is now closed.

I'll make a motion to recommend approval for Resolution R2026-25.

Thank you, Ms. Mariaca. I second. I will second. Thank you, both of you. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Opposed.

Okay. The motion carries. What does that count? Five to one?

Five to one?

Six. Six to one. No.

No, because we missed Miss Brody. Five to one.

Four, five. There's six of us here. Brody is seven.

Damn it. We had one. Yeah, but we had a one. We had a dissenter.

Oh, duh. Sorry.

Okay.

Five to one. Never mind.

Thank you. Thank you for your consideration. I appreciate it. You bet.

Good luck.

Good luck. Okay. I think that concludes our agenda. Anything, any other comments from staff?

Nothing more than the next meeting is July 15th.

Okay. Excellent. Do we have items on that already? I'm not asking you for the items.

I don't think we do yet, so you might not have a meeting.

So watch your emails is what we should all do.

Yes.

All right. Hey, it was wonderful meeting the ones that I haven't met here and serving with you all today, and I look forward to continuing our service together for the betterment of our lovely hometown. All right. Thanks, staff. Good night, everyone. Thank you all. Good night. Meeting adjourned. Gavel it.