Planning Commission - Regular Meeting
About this meeting
- Government Body
- Planning Commission
- Meeting Type
- Planning Commission
- Location
- Westlake, OH
- Meeting Date
- December 1, 2025
Transcript
1060 sections (from 1,158 segments)
I'd like to call this 12/01/2025 planning commission meeting to order. Roll call, please. Cal Ragneaux? Here.
Smith? Here. Van Dyke? Here. Calcom? Here. Mister Jones is not here,
but he will be here soon.
Thank you. Next item on the agenda is approval of the minutes from 11:10 twenty five. Can I have a motion, please?
Make a motion to approve.
Thank you. Second. Thank you. Roll call, please. Smith?
Yes. Van Dyke?
Yes.
Jones? Oops. Sorry. Bell Cone? Yes. Del Ragneaux? Yes. Motion carries.
Thank you. Council report? Councilman Van Dyke?
Nothing to report.
Great thank you very much. I guess we'll move right into business. The first item on the agenda is JD Sports Sign Plan. Will the applicant come forward please?
Yeah so this is 267 Crocker Park Boulevard a new tenant it's in the former Apple store. Maximum allowable signage is 67 and a half square feet and the total sign area is 28 square feet so there's no issues with that at all. There is of course master sign criteria that applies. There are no waivers that are required for the two signs that are proposed. Facial wall sign 24 square feet. It's face lit interior illuminated channel letters. Corporate branded font and colors. And I won't go through all the details but no issue with the construction. Very simple. Just two letters.
And they are adding a projecting blade sign. There was never one at this location. Push through letters. Again corporate branded font and colors. And typical construction it's an aluminum face. So you only have the letters that are illuminated. And of course the height is eight feet above grade. So no one will be hurt by it. And with that said there are no waivers as I mentioned. It does meet the design and location standards of the Crocker Park master sign criteria. So no conditions are necessary.
Great. Thank you very much. Welcome.
Hey there. McFarr, Stark Enterprises. 629 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland.
Great. Do you have anything to add to Mr. Bedell's report?
All good.
Okay. Thank you. I'll ask my fellow commissioners to start. Mister Dahlbregno?
I think I'm good other than Mick, you're here early. I didn't think we were getting out this early. You usually last. Thank you.
Thank you, missus Smith. I have no comments on it. It looks fine. Councilman Van Dyke?
No comment.
Great. I do not either. So can I get a motion public? I forgot about the public. Would anyone from the public like to comment on this? Seeing none, can I get a motion?
Based on the findings of facts,
I move to approve the JD Sports sign plan. Second.
Roll call, please. Van Dyke?
Yes.
Jones? Oops. I keep doing that. Sorry. Falcone? Yes. Del yes Smith yes motion carries
great thank you very much
thank you
next item on the agenda is exclusive men's salon sign plan
yes this is 25075 Center Ridge Road Stein Mart Plaza. I apologize Center Ridge Plaza that the new name. So this is a new wall sign to the former Lords and Ladies space tenant space. A tenant did purchase this sign prior to receiving formal approval from either the landlord or the city. We were unaware of the purchase unfortunately because it is larger than what the master sign criteria does allow.
It does actually complies with many of the requirements of chapter twelve twenty three for wall signage. It's under 100 square feet. Letter logo height is less than four feet. But there are some master sign criteria provisions that it does not meet. So the previous sign for Lords and Ladies measured 21 square feet. It was 12 and a half feet long with 18 inches letters. Maximum sign area for this tenant is actually 25 square feet. The proposed sign is 57.1 square feet. So it requires a waiver for an additional 32.1 square feet. So it does exceed the individual tenant allowance.
I just would like to point out there is an there is a 123.7 square feet of unused signage for this shopping center. So it's you know it's really not a question of running out of square footage. It's just that it's divvied up among all the different tenants. But right now, there's not much signage there, really, as much as there could be. So the maximum sign length is this is master sign criteria is 12 and a half feet.
That's the frontage times 0.5. And it's 22 the proposed sign exceeds the permitted length by 10.2 feet does require a waiver. Letter logo height is limited 24 inches. And so actually that works out well. The logo is for lettering. Logo is 36 inches. So there's a 12 inches waiver that's required for it. And there was a similar waiver for welcome house. Their logo is 32 inches high. So you know that that was something where with them they could not shrink their logo down and have it still be legible.
This would be a just a little bit larger than that. As far as the colors are concerned, they are using gold and that's just not one of the colors. There's a lot of different colors that are allowed at that shopping center. And gold just doesn't happen to be one of them. So that would be a waiver as well. I won't go through all the details as far as the design and fabrication goes. That's all what we would expect to have at that shopping center. It is just to help you decide. It is about two twenty feet from the curb to where the actual storefront is. So it is quite a distance.
I mean all of those are are quite a distance from Center Ridge Road. So as I mentioned for the findings of fact, it was purchased before obtaining the required approvals. It does comply with chapter twelve twenty three. If there were no master sign criteria for this shopping center there really wouldn't be any issues with them doing the sign at this location. You would just be simply being asked to approve a new sign for this location.
So if you you do wish to approve this tonight it does require a waiver from the master sign criteria for the maximum sign area to exceed 25 square feet, maximum sign length to exceed 12.5 feet, and maximum logo height to exceed 24 inches, and to allow the gold colored sign returns and logo. Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Welcome. Thank you.
Can you state your name and address for
the record please?
Yes. Murad Do want to slide over to the microphone? Sorry. They can hear you at home.
Murad Hassan. 25075 Center Ridge Road, Westlake, Ohio.
Great. Thank you. Would you like to add anything to mister Biddell's report?
Okay any reasoning about going ahead you just didn't know that you need to contact the landlord or don't tell us about It how that
was just a misconception.
Okay. Anything else?
Okay. So I'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say. I'll start with, missus Smith.
It's a a nice looking sign, and I do see that there's a hundred twenty three seven point seven square feet left. It would be up up well, I I guess it's water over the bridge would be would have been better if you would have come to see us before this.
Right.
It's a very big sign, but it does the colors kinda blend with the background. I guess I don't other than kinda being backed into it, I don't have a problem
with it.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you. Councilman Bandai?
Yes. So, mister Bedell, could you can you go to, like, Google Earth or something or to the you know, put the put the whole plaza up there. Which is that something you can do pretty easily?
Yeah. I'll have to do it from that computer over there.
And and the only reason I'd like to do that is because there's two questions I guess I have is one is we have this master sign criteria for the plaza and the idea is to have some consistency across the signs and also to correct me if I'm wrong it's also so that you can so they can get them approved without having to come to us if they meet the criteria of the master sign. Is that correct Mr. Biddell?
Yes. Those are the two reasons. So you have a cohesive design for the entire center. And then it also expedites approval so that we can actually approve things at the counter instead of at a Planning Commission meeting.
And so the second item is not relevant here for that. But the first is the consistency with the other signs on that plaza. And are all of them more of this excuse me. Are they all pretty consistent across all of them in terms of the colors and stuff like that?
No. There's a variety of different colors. And I should be able to actually, if you give me a minute, I'll pull it up here. Google Street View, I think, would probably be best for that.
In other words, what so the commission, what I'd like to kinda see is how does it fit into the whole Yeah.
Yeah. It makes sense.
Picture.
Makes
sense. You know? Because we're just looking at this little part. Totality
I was just in there this weekend. The Realty World or whatever that is. They have a big globe or something. It's it's that looks a little inconsistent. So
I would like to add mister Van Dyke that the color of this sign was just so that it would blend in to the building and the size was so that people can see it from the street. So we tried to make it blend as best as possible. Yep. We didn't want any outstanding colors.
Cooperating with you for you Jim or oh there we go alright
yeah unfortunately this does not have some of the newer signage added that does include other colors So you're just seeing red right now. Unfortunately, REMAX, of course, has some color. Stein Mart, when it was there, was green. Then This
is an old view.
Yeah. So there are other colors. As far as the size goes, because that's one thing I was thinking about, like how does this actually fit in this band that you have right here? So Thai spice, it's kind of similar to Thai spice. It's going pretty much the entire height of it. The current lords and ladies is he's more centered, a little bit smaller.
Yeah. But so those those signs are they take up most of the height of this. And even though, you know, your square footage is calculated a little, you know well, first of if you took the emblem away, you'd be pretty close.
Yeah.
But the other thing is it's a much lighter font. And so I think it's not gonna be a big deal. So I don't have any big issue with it.
Okay. Thank you. Mister Jones?
The only concern I really had with it, aside from the timing of it, is just the fact that it blend it does blend pretty well with the building, almost too well. It's it's I I think I'd struggle I I think it's not gonna be super legible. But I guess that's really more their issue than ours. I don't think it's a problem to have it there as far as aesthetics. I think it'll work fine. I think that they might find that it doesn't stand out very well and might not serve its intended purpose. But that might also be a function of how this rendered out, too. Maybe it'll look a little more obvious when it's actually constructed.
So Right.
That's my only concern.
May I? Mhmm. I would like to add, that we do have LED backlights. So it it kinda does match the main sign, the Center Ridge Plaza sign right next door to us. So it it is visible.
Okay. Madam chair, may
I Sure.
Step ask one question. So can you go back to what what does the actual sign look like that's been constructed? Is it it's yep. It's Okay. So you already have the white face and everything in there. Yep.
Alright. Okay.
Thank you. Okay. Sure.
Anything else, mister Jones?
No. That's all.
Okay. Mister DelBregno?
Jim, what was the allowable signage that there for that addition? How much are we under right now? And then
It's yes. 50 it's a 57.1 square feet. The total allowable is 25 square feet. So it's an additional 32.1 square feet assigned area.
On the plaza itself though? Oh, 120,
almost 124 square feet of unused signage.
And then occupancy wise for that, is that
It's full, I think it's fully occupied with this. So there would be no need for more signage, I sent. Not.
So the Y 23 is still.
Oh. I don't think this is going to harm anyone from from needing that 32 square feet with theirs being this much.
That's all I have.
Okay. Anything else mister DeWagner? Nope. Okay. Thank you And I don't have any comments. I wish you would have obviously come to us beforehand Right. Because we could have helped you with some of the criteria, obviously. But I'm fine with it at this point. So I guess, does anyone from the public like to talk on this one or speak on this one? Seeing none, can I have a motion, please?
Yes. Based upon the findings of fact, I move to approve the exclusive men's salon sign plan with the following. One waiver from the master sign criteria for maximum sign area to exceed 25 square feet, maximum sign length to exceed 12.5 square feet, maximum logo height to exceed 24 inches, and to allow the gold colored sign returns and logo.
Thank you. Second. Roll call, please. Jones? Yes. Falcone? Yes. Del Reigno?
Yes.
Smith? Yes. Van Dyke? Yes. Motion carries. Great. Thank you.
Thank you all so much.
Good luck. Next item on the agenda is ordinance twenty twenty five one one seven conditional use permit for biohacking.
Yes. Nine seventy seven b Bassett. And this is for elemental performance center to be located in the Exclusive Industrial District. As you recall, you recommended approval of ordinance twenty twenty five fifty seven to add biohacking as a conditional use in 12/2003 for this very individual who's here tonight. And so this was the reason that you made that recommendation. And now this is the next step in the process. The code has changed. And now she's coming for the actual conditional use permit. So it's evidence based non invasive modalities to optimize physical, cognitive, and emotional health. She has more to add to this.
And I won't go through all of these things. But you know some of the things that I did take a look at. Hours of operation. Number of clients. You know basically parking. How much parking? Is there going to be enough? Is there any outdoor equipment such as liquid nitrogen tanks or similar things like that? Know how is is there anything that's going to occur outdoors? And I did learn that they will be able to use the stamped concrete patio.
It's fenced. It's reserved exclusively for their use. Other than that, things that we might be concerned about like liquid nitrogen tanks outdoors. Things like that they're not doing. And as far as the number of clients will have and parking with the clients and with their staff there should be no issues with that property to be able to absorb that many people. So with that said if you choose to make a recommendation I this time I don't have any recommendations. Great for conditions.
Conditions. Thank you very much. Would the applicant come forward please. Welcome.
Hello. Thank you. Elise Free, 23200 Lake Road, Bay Village. Thank you for letting me have this opportunity to speak to you all today. I've been in front of a couple of you before.
A human performance center facility that uses science backed protocols such as sauna, cold water immersion, breath work, red light therapy, and recovery modalities to support metabolic health, stress reduction, circulation, and nervous system regulation. These centers are already well established across Ohio and across our country. In our region alone, there are facilities such as Root Cause in Berea, Sacred Hour in Lakewood, Soul Space in Gordon Square, Sweathouse in Strongsville, and Drip in Avon. Nationally, the model is thriving in places like Toronto, New York City, Tampa, and Chicago. What I'm building here or wanting to build here in Westlake follows that same model but with a stronger emphasis on community education and safety.
The new 5,000 square foot human performance center will be an open concept facility which is important for both health and safety. The places I mentioned here in our region, none of which have an open concept. All of these are private rooms, and I'll get why that's important, especially when we're dealing with cold immersion. Our staff will always have a clear line of sight of people in the cold water. No private rooms where guests will be unobserved.
An immediate access if someone needs assistance. And a community environment that supports accountability and proper use of the equipment. In addition, every staff member at Elemental has already been certified through the Soberg Institute in the Thermalist Method, which is the leading global certification for cold and heat protocols. This means we follow internationally recognized evidence based standards for how to safely guide the public through contrast therapy. On top of that, our staff is trained in first aid, CPR, and AED use.
And we will have a defibrillator on-site. Safety is not an afterthought. It is built into the entire design and operation of this facility. Human performance of biohacking centers are not a trend. They are part of a rapidly growing global movement.
According to multiple market anal analysis, the human performance and recovery sector is one of the fastest growing categories in wellness, projected to grow significantly over the next decade. People are seeking natural science supported methods to improve their health, reduce stress, and build resilience. And Westlake has the opportunity to be on the forefront of that. This facility will not only bring high level wellness education to the community, but also a safe, regulated, and professionally staffed environment for residents seeking healthier lifestyles. I want the city to feel confident that when Elemental opens its doors as a human performance center, it will be operated as an expert level with science based protocols, trained staff, proper oversight, and a commitment to enhancing the well-being of the Westlake community.
I thank you so much for your time, and I'm happy to answer any questions.
Great. Thank you very much. I'll ask my fellow commissioners if they have any questions. We'll start with Councilman Van Dyke.
So, yes, thank you for coming here again today.
Yeah.
So I guess, licensing. Is there any licensing that's involved with this from the state?
There is not. I'm actually in talks with other people who are doing this in other states around country because with we are trying to get some sort of global standard, especially even for maintaining the proper equipment and for how to guide people. Florida, for instance, just initiated a five minute max on doing a cold a cold bath. And facilities around the nation, I visited over, accounted over 52 that I've been to throughout the nation. There is these two ways of doing it.
These private rooms with sawn and cold plunge in the private room, and then an open concept. And to me, I mean it's especially when we were with Doctor. Susanna Soberg who is the global expert, we actually flew to Sweden for three days to visit with her and her medical team. The first thing she said is, you should not do this with people being alone. You never know, you know, if something's going to come up.
And to make it to be this best protocol and the safety measures, you have to have your eyes on people. And every place here in this region that I mentioned, these are private rooms. And two of these five places got mad at me because I would not close and lock the door before I went in the cold bath. And I just wanted to make sure that you all knew that this, I believe, is going to be an issue moving forward. And I'm not bringing that to Westlake.
I am bringing open concept, the cleanest, most I mean, these the filter systems on the plunges, everything I'm bringing in is state of the art, And it's going to be an open concept based on community. We'll have classes that lead people through. The whole idea is to get people, safely in the water so that they can build up that resilience and do all the beautiful beautiful metabolic and chemistry and hormone balancing that it provides.
So when you but you did mention the word regulated. So what do you mean by that? Is how you know, since it's not licensed with the state, what would regulated be from your
For me, it would be the correct pro the protocols that we're bringing people through. The education and the certifications that the team has.
So as as part of our approval of this or review if we decide to, you know, do we, you know, you know, where does the where does the zoning code start and stop on some of this, you know, the idea of the open concept versus rooms, is that something that should be included as part of this if this is, you know, something so we can debate that a little bit here in a minute. Then the the other thing is so so, you know, our friends from Scandinavian countries, you know, have been doing saunas and then cold plunges. I mean, this sort of the same kind generally the same concept that has been done for
Thousands
years.
Yes. Okay.
Yeah. And a lot of that is coming to the forefront now because of the research that's been done, the scientific studies that have been done. One of the most famous studies recently was over 20 with 2,000 participants that proved at the end that sauna three times or more a week, and we're talking a session being seventeen to nineteen minutes, reduced cardiovascular issues by sixty seven percent. I was listening to the Ohio State game this weekend and obviously a lot of the commercials are pharmaceutical based. And I saw one was the little heart sitting on the couch with the therapist and saying, He's not taking good care of me.
And they're like, Oh, if you take this, pill, we it can reduce your cardiovascular issues by 23. And I'm like, twenty three percent? With all these side effects, you can sauna to sit in a hot room for three times a week for fifteen or twenty minutes and reduce it by sixty seven percent.
So just since you have this open concept, are tell me how many saunas and how many plunge pools
There'll you have. One traditional sauna. There'll be four plunges that can take four people each. And then I do have an infrared sauna that is smaller for 12 people. And the main reason I actually included the infrared, because you could easily do this with just a traditional sauna, which is also called a finished sauna, was because of firefighters. There's so many studies that have come out that if I can get firefighters from their smoke inhalation to the station, undress, shower, come right into me, We'll set them in the infrared. In one hour in the infrared, reduces all of their toxins by 62%.
A lot of fire stations are including
exactly what you have. But they're not using it. I talked to the North Olmstead guys.
I think it depends on which
Exactly. And that's a education too. So I actually talked to North Olmstead about just educating their firefighters on why this is so important for them to get in after a sauna. I mean after a fire.
And the, I'm calling it the plunge pool, how do you make it cold?
Oh Doug might be able to answer more of that. I'm actually working with the, honestly that's a really good question because a lot there's if you go online tonight, any of you could buy 2,000 different companies plunges. This is not what I'm talking about. This is not a personal plunge that is going to clean and cold the water. These are based with hydraulics and do you want to come up and talk about it?
So it's not just ice sitting in a bathtub?
No. It's actually no ice. It's just water. And we've visited the facility in Florida quite a few times. And the reason I decided to go with this particular company and this individual is because he's the one teaching me the most on what's going on throughout the nation as far as what different health inspectors are wanting. And his plunges can be custom designed for whatever Ohio needs. Even if today the standard is one thing, and then in a year from now they're like, you know what, we're gonna add you have to have this filter. You have to
have this
contraption. These are so custom that we can handle anything.
The way that they're gonna
be Can state your name real quick?
Can I address things? Don't Ford. 872 Woodside Drive, Westlake, Ohio.
Great. Thank you.
The way these plunges are constructed, each one is going to have, its own filtration and sanitation, in a maintenance room. So it's kind of like your commercial pools are where they have the pumps and filters and everything in a pool house, we're gonna have a room that has four pumps, four different filters, four different chillers, four different ozone sanitation stations for each plunge. So each plunge will have its own I mean, are they are the size of a regular pool pump. The supply lines are inch and a half supply lines that take the water in and out. We can drain and fill a plunge in about four minutes.
Eight minutes.
Eight minutes.
Because it's using hydraulic even, not just gravity to drain it.
Then what we got they're chillers that you know, it's like a one horsepower, one and a half horsepower chiller. These tanks are actually pretty small. They're only about a 165 gallons a piece. So they're they're not real big, the the thing. So they the the requirements to keep them clean aren't as much as if was a, like the liquid lifestyles pool with like 20,000 gallons.
And is all the equipment inside or some of it got end up outside?
All of it's inside.
All of it's going to be inside, yeah.
And then what's the temperature of the water? It
varies. Deliberate cold exposure is anything under 60. So normally with obviously four different plunges, I can have four different temperatures. The more you get cold adapted, sometimes the colder you want to do. If you want to meet us Saturday, we're going to be plunging outside at Bradstreet Landing. Last we did it last the first Saturday in November, the water was 56. And this Saturday, it'll probably be about fifty fifty two. And then in January, we're going to do it in January too, it'll be 38. But I'll probably keep them between forty and fifty nine.
So the general question is, is there any other things if we move forward with this then is there anything else that we should as a Planning Commission put in here as requirements or guidelines or however you want to or is it do we keep it broad and so I'll let everybody else debate that one.
that's all I have. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Mr. Jones, your comments?
Yeah. So to answer that question, my opinion is we keep it broad and largely because of the fact that they are still kind of developing their standards. So right now, we have it in our code as a conditional use, which we already debated and supported previously. And I think that, you know, she's made a case for this particular one. I would certainly support moving forward with it. But I wouldn't support making any changes to to the ordinance that put make that a conditional use. Not yet. You know, at some point, if the standards ever change and it's brought to our attention that the standards have changed, well, then at that point, maybe we revisit it. But I'm fine with it the way it's been submitted.
Okay. Thank you very much. Mister Dobregno?
May I echo mister Jones? I agree. I think we leave it open for now, and allow it to vet itself, since it's so new. And I also am supporting it the way it is.
Thank you. Mrs. Smith?
I agree with Councilman Van Dyke that it's good to be cautious. However, we it's not regulated by the state yet. So and we've already, Commissioner Jones said, debated this and supported it once before. So I would support moving forward with it.
Great. Thank you. Yes, I would agree with my fellow commissioners. I think it's a great concept, and I'm very interested to see it come to fruition. Do I have any comments from the public on this one? Seeing none, can I get a motion?
Yes. Based upon the findings of fact, I move to recommend approval of ordinance twenty twenty five dash one one seven.
Second. Roll call, please. Belcone? Yes. Del Rechno?
Yes.
Smith? Yes. Van Dyke? Yes. Jones?
Yes. Motion carries. Great. Thank you. Thank you for your presentation.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next item on the agenda is chancellate sign plan.
Oh, yes. 24650 Center Ridge Road. Two facial wall signs, 18.6 square feet each. They're non illuminated letters. They're in the corporate branded font and colors. It's three eights inch thick laser cut black acrylic with digital blue colored vinyl overlay to them for the chance that you can see there as well. Mounted to aluminum c channels affixed to the exterior wall. I have a condition that they're painted to match the wall. It's a standard condition of ours. Unless there's some design thing that I'm not seeing there that they that it would look better not painted, but that's typically what you require.
They're on the north elevation of the building. It's near their two entrances. So they identify the business. They should assist with way finding as well. There's no master sign criteria for this building. So only the chapter twelve twenty three regulations apply. This does allow up to a 160 square feet of signage and the signs could be a 100 square feet apiece. So know what their size there's no issue with that. Maximum letter logo height 48 inches. They're at 28 inches.
So that's fine. It's about 10 feet or it's no more than 10 feet above grade. So no issue with the height on the building as well. So this is another one that meets the code and really just with that one condition unless there's, as I mentioned, a reason to not paint them to match the building.
Great. Thank you, mister Riddell. Welcome.
Hi. Paul Lang with Sina Raman North Olmsted, 26747 Brook Park Road extension. Our intent was to match the color of the building on the rails in the first place so that's that's not an issue on our end at all. Beyond that you pretty much stated everything I would have stated.
Okay. Thank you. Mister Jones, do have any comments on this one?
No. I do not. I think it looks fine.
Mister Del Ragneaux?
I'm good.
Missus Smith? No comment.
I agree. Nice looking sign. Councilman Van Dyke?
No comment.
Great. Alright. Anything anyone from the audience would wanna comment on this one? Seeing none, can we get a motion?
Yes. Based upon the findings of fact, I move to approve the chancellate sign plan with the following. One, condition that mounting rails are painted to match the building. Second.
Roll call please. Del Reigno? Yes. Smith? Yes. Van Dyke? Yes. Jones?
Yes.
Del Cone? Yes. Motion carries. Great. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Next item on the agenda is the chancellate site improvements. I believe we're gonna table that to the 01/05/2026 meeting.
Uh-huh. Yes.
Can I get a motion for that?
Sure. Move to table chancellate site improvements to the 01/05/2026 meeting.
Roll call, please. Smith? Yes. Van Dyke? Yes. Jones? Yes. Bellcombe? Yes. Del Rechno?
Yes.
Motion carries.
Thank you. Next item is the La Center development plan for the pavilion, and that also will be tabled to the 01/05/2026 meeting. Can I get a motion, so
moved
second roll call please Van Dyke yes Jones yes Del Cone yes Del Reigno
Smith yes motion carries
great thank you and we're gonna since we're still pretty early in the meeting, we're gonna bump Viola Park up next? So bump these next to Viola Park and Ordinance twenty twenty five dash one twenty four up, and then we'll jump back onto the agenda. So let's see. If applicant the would like to come forward for the revised design guidelines.
Yeah. And I'll run through the slides as soon as I can.
Welcome. Hey. Hi. If you wanna go ahead and state your name and address for the record, that'd be great.
Thank you. Karen DeBenedetto, 33368. Karen Dry, Avon Lake. Danielle DeBenedetto, 33667
Great. Welcome.
Thank you
for having us tonight.
We'll let mister Vidal do his presentation, then we'll get your comments.
Okay so the purpose is to add more material choices and include colors and finishes that were chosen by the home builder. And they reflect client preferences. They're practical, available, they elevate attractive standards set by the current design guidelines. So you have an expanded range of colors and materials. The selections remain harmonious and provide variety that helps avoid a monotonous appearance within the community.
It's the same design for each unit. There's seven units there total. And so one way to break that up is to allow a variety of materials so that they can be personalized but still everything still blends. So that was the reason for this. They also there's the guidelines in addition to the other materials does also include the building elevations.
They're not changing the building elevations except to a lot of different materials. So the current guidelines are very simple. Just all white hardy board siding, weather ledge stone on all four sides, black windows, standing seam metal, one color metal roof, and an asphalt shingle that's also one color. So they've expanded siding, choice of Hardy or vinyl shake, five color options. Vinyl by the way is not included as a siding option in twelve thirty seven point zero four C3 so this would require modification for vinyl.
And she can explain why that is a good choice for these. Stone five options and they would like the homeowner to choose how many sides to apply stone but we think that there should still be at least stone on one side. The current design does show stone at the base of on all four sides. Windows Windsor wood casement or vinyl casement three color choices right now it's just one window again. Roof standing seam metal there's three different colors for that.
And asphalt shingles there's a variety of asphalt shingle colors as well. Garage door flush style four color choices. Lighting in front door this is something that would be left up to the homeowner to select. And the current design guidelines provides only one wall fixture and does not specify the front door selection at all. So we'll probably want to come back to the screen at some point.
But these are all the different selections that are being presented. And as I mentioned, there's a couple drawings just so that we can remember what they would look like. So if you are able to approve this, there's a modification to allow the use of vinyl shake siding and a condition that the homeowners may determine the number of building sites to which stone is applied provided that stone is installed on at least the front facade of the dwelling. Thank you.
Thank you. Welcome again. Would you like to add anything to Mr. Vidal's report?
Thank you Jim very much. So the reason that we wanted to do this was when Chad Chelimi first came to me and asked us to do this for him. He did not realize when they came in the first time that it was only supposed to be one color because it was not his vision. Because I I said to him, I go, you do realize this only has one choice. And he said, I did not realize that.
I thought that I was going to be able to let my homeowners, kinda warm up instead of just a stark black and white community. He wanted to have, he had a vision of them having their own selection, their own colors, but he wanted to keep it very simple and, he wanted it to gel. So he loves the light gray tones and the beige tones and and the white, just making it just a nice community that you wanna drive into and see and giving the homeowner some choices. And the one thing about the vinyl siding, which thank you for bringing up, Jim, was the reason for the vinyl siding is I have found out talking to a lot of the homeowners that are interested development, that, you know, today, things are very expensive, especially the Hardie siding. And I did not wanna lose the integrity of the development by just putting the straight slat vinyl siding.
I I it was not our vision. So wanted to offer the shake siding because it's a lit you know, it's a little more upper class. It it it will blend very well with the stone samples that I have here. And I feel it would be a a good option for them especially, you know, if they're retired or their new family's starting. It it gives them a way to save a little money and that was the same concept of not having them have to use stone all the way around.
We wanted to mix up the stone and the vinyl on the front and they still have the option if they want to put the stone around, I mean, some people might, but it also give them an option to save a little money if they want to use the vinyl siding or stone partially around.
Great. Thank you. Anything else to add?
I just have one thing. So this is in the motion. This is unusual in that this is something that the Planning Commission actually approves. Council will have to approve it as well but the way it's written it does actually say that it's submitted for for approval by the Planning Commission and City Council.
Thank you. And then do you have design samples you want to pass around to?
You can walk that around. I can take that. Yeah. We have two two of the samples.
Okay. Great.
They're just They're basically the same color.
Started and end. That would be great. And while they're looking at that, I think we'll start with our fellow commissioner's comments. Mr. Del Ragnell?
First is there's a Volkswagen SUV outside with their lights on.
I don't
know if anyone drove an SUV Volkswagen, but your lights are on. It's
fine. No
problem. That's my public service address. The one question I do have is lighting in front door. We're kind of particular on our lighting and
want to
make sure that everybody understands what we're looking for as far as lighting goes. I don't know if you have if you're giving them different fixtures to try or to pick from or what.
I can limit it.
Yeah. I think I think it would be best to work with Mr. Beadell on
That's fine.
The lighting for that. Sure. And then the you're also looking at front door and garage door, I believe, are four styles on the garage door. But the front door, what are we doing with that? Is that
So I'm envisioning more for the front door to have a little bit of glass
Mhmm.
And then letting them I mean, honestly, I'm fine if you guys just wanted to have the glass door with the panels. I'm fine with that. I think that'll be a beautiful look for the front door.
Don't think we want to necessarily I think we we don't wanna go like, we're trying to do it a little bit less expensive for an individual. And if we give them a door options, there's as you know, there's numerous door options that are much more
Right. I was kind of of limit them.
Okay. Then on the shake siding on the vinyl shake, have one you is are you familiar with installation on that? The second part of it is, I found that because of the, what I'll say, a three-dimensional to it, it does tend to become more brittle over time as opposed to the flat panel, which I don't like flat panel. I like to shake. But I just want to make sure that you're aware that I've come across that personally.
That's interesting. I haven't come across that one yet. But thank you for that.
Other than that, am good for now.
Oh, thank you. Sorry. Gonna stay out today.
Okay. Another. Any other questions, mister Dahl right now?
No. I'm good. Thank you.
Okay. Missus Smith? I think
the colors look great. I think you've done a good job preselecting Thank you. The the choices for the the potential homeowners so that they could pick almost anything and have it go with the other. Have you preselected the garage doors? I think I missed some of this.
I believe we did. It's the one that is shown in the picture up there. We're going to keep all the garage doors the same. Okay. Yeah, with those color choices, correct.
I don't have any other questions right now.
Okay. Councilman Van Dyke.
Yes. Thank you. So this project you have here is actually one that was, I believe, the first of doing
Plaster.
With our code. We did some code enhancements here over the last few years, and this was the first project that sort of fits under that Mhmm. Those guidelines, let's say, or requirements. And I will tell you we've we debated an awful lot about materials and so so I'm gonna first I want to get a clarification about so mister Biddell so the original plan that we approved was that each of these units were the exact same architect the same layout and building elevations on
one style that was provided. There was only one thing. So, yeah, that
See, I I for some reason, I you know, I thought it was a that there was at least with the elevations that there was variation in the actual elevations of the units.
I think it was the renderings just showed the way they positioned it and the renderings, the different views made it look like there were more than one unit. But no, was just 100% sure about it. 100% sure, yeah.
So all the units are intended to be the same exact design.
Correct.
So well first of all I guess I'm not so sure about that. But, alright. So the
I don't want to speak for Karen, but I think you would like to have more than one style. Right? You didn't have to build the same unit over and over seven times, you'd be happy with that. Right?
I would have been, yes.
Right. So and I'll just tell you, so there are a couple of the developments that we've discussed over time and all I think kind of like are things like Clubside, you know where that is off Detroit Road? That was done by Chandler years ago. So all the units were white brick and stone and they used the same materials but they're very each unit was a little different. It's the same architectural style but different layouts and configurations.
And then the another one was was Century Oaks. Same kind of thing. So each unit is different but they're really pretty similar materials. So there was some consistency to them. So so my first concern is is because this especially since this is such a small development, is having it be too busy in terms of colors and materials and all that. And while you've picked out materials that are sort of compatible, I would say, there's still you could have seven different schemes over there.
Possibly.
Yeah. So, you know, should should the should we limit it a little bit? Should we say you can have three or, you know, four or two? Or so that's one concern I have. And the second concern is the with the materials themselves.
So I understand, you know, we purposely didn't want to have vinyl siding because we've had a lot of, know, multifamily units being built here in the city that are all vinyl sided, giant vinyl siding, lots of vinyl siding. So we wanted to get away from that. And and also we and and so the concern I have with if we say, okay. Well, vinyl siding's okay on this one, we might as well just say it's okay on everyone after that. Because every time we do something here, we set the precedent. Every single time. And everybody says, no. No, Duane. The next time, it's different. But then the next one comes along and says, hey.
You let them do it here. Why can't we do it here? So that's, I guess, a concern I have. Because if we we might as well just say, vinyl siding on all the multifamily going forward. We're done. Because the next person's gonna ask the same thing for the same reasons. We wanna control cost and all that kind of thing. And it's not that that shake siding is, you know, pleasant enough looking, but my point still is that it's final siding. So I guess I'm I'm I'm not quite there with what you've proposed here today. And so tell me, first of all, with with the units being different and if you could, you would you design them slightly different? Or what what what's your thoughts on those?
Well, I would have liked to have designed them all differently, but it was already plotted out on every one of the lots the same, which would mean I'd have to start from scratch all over again.
Yeah. Alright.
And so we just don't have time or
Right. Yeah. Yeah. But even on the I mean, are you sure I thought we had like, they were gonna do some with clipped some were gonna have peaks, some were gonna have clipped gables, some of that. I thought we had that. That was part of the proposal.
Don't I don't recall that.
The the two peaks are clipped a little bit. There's
Right. Just soften it a little bit, but I thought there was some break. Right. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. I don't know.
I'd be glad to I mean, if if that would, you know, make a difference if I had to use the Hardie, I mean, that would be fine. We could stick to the Hardie. And
and I'll just go then let's talk about the stone a little bit. Again, part of the reason we were trying to put stone on all the elevations was because these I don't particularly like it in sub developments where you just have the front where it's decorated and the sides aren't. But in these cluster homes where they're you're gonna see all force all the sides around them. I mean, it's not like there's a you know, there's there's sides and backs and fronts that are all facing some street. So that was the reason for trying to work some stone into each of the elevations.
But I'll just say this, I'm only one vote here. So let's see what the rest of the council wants to do here. Our commission, I should say.
Thank you, mister councilman Van Dyke. Mister Jones?
Thank you. Yeah. I can understand councilman Van Dyke's concern about it maybe getting too busy with too many choices, but I kinda feel like the the choices that they've offered are all kind of in the same family. I mean, it almost like, if I look at the three different stone options, you know, to an untrained eye, the bottom two almost look the same to me. The top one definitely has some variation in size and shape. But the colors are all kind of in the same family. I think you could say the same thing about the vinyl shake and the hardy board. I think those are all kind of in that same you know, they're all in the same family at least. So I don't think you're gonna have a situation where there'll be so much variation that it's starting to clash. You know, like I I don't see that happening.
I think giving a few different options is good particularly since it sounds like they're gonna be sticking with the idea of all of the units being basically the same floor plan or, you know, layout, whatever. So I think just to give them a little bit of variation in that regard, I think I think makes sense in this case. I'm with you. I'd rather they be able to offer multiple multiple different, you know, layouts, models, whatever. But if that's not how it is gonna work out, then, you know, I I think this is a good way to, you know, sort of, you know, let people personalize a little bit and give give some variation in the neighborhood.
So I I'm okay with all that. As far as the material selections, you know, I mean, I I I would defer to the architects on that. But, you know, I do. I can totally understand, you know, the rationale for including vinyl. I do appreciate that they've limited it to just the vinyl shake, which I think has a much different look than, you know, your standard vinyl siding, which, you know, full disclosure, I have a new house with some of that vinyl siding on it. And thankfully, I was able to put it on there because otherwise I wouldn't be living in a new house. They they get too expensive after a while. Right? So I think and again, I think it can be made to look nice. I mean, think I think vinyl gets a bad rep personally.
I I think that, you know, if it's if it's done properly and in the right locations on the structure, you know, as long as you're not talking about doing the whole front that way, which they're clearly not looking at looking to do, I I think that this I think that it can work okay. So I I don't have a problem with it. I would I would support moving forward with these that they've submitted.
Thank you. Thank you. I just have a question on the garage door. So the picture you're showing, that's not really a color choice. Right?
No. No. That's just the style.
Style. Okay. Good. I was like, I don't like that color.
No. Yeah. Agreed.
I was
gonna say, like, it's a
good point. I didn't
like that either. Okay. Good. They're all
they're all in the same family, like, grandsort. Yeah. No.
I'm getting I'm getting
it now. Okay. I guess, what's the price point of these houses again? Remind me.
I believe they'll be in the 7 6 to 700,000 Okay. Dollars Not including the lot.
Yeah. Yeah. So and the difference between vinyl versus Hardie is or how much? I mean, what's the difference between?
Significant. It's probably 30% higher.
Okay. Yeah. Yeah, I guess guess I'm okay with it too because I'd rather get people in houses. Mean, and again, it's gonna vary the neighborhood obviously a little bit if it's you can make a house a little bit cheaper. So I guess I'm okay with it.
Any other comments? Any comments from the public on this one?
Anything else? I do have one more comment.
Sure. Go ahead.
So then in that case, if final's okay here, then we should just make vinyl okay for all of them. Because otherwise, every single time we have a project come in, it's gonna have the same request.
Well, I will say this. One of the only reasons I'm okay with it in this particular case is because they've limited to a certain style of vinyl. I'd So still like to have the ability to review these things and look at them and have it be case by case. I I don't I don't necessarily think that it's gonna be appropriate in every single instance, but I think it works here based on
what they've submitted. Because it's a shake.
It's a shake.
Yeah. Yeah. A seven inch
that everyone's or six inches everybody puts up. Yeah. And I also don't wanna just say vinyl shake only. Like, somebody might come to us with another style of vinyl that looks better than the the what we think of as the standard just, you know, vinyl planks. You know? So I'd I'd like to continue to continue for us to have the ability to look at it and review them on an individual basis.
And it is only seven houses. That's another idea of mine. It is a small development. I mean, it's not
It's a smaller element.
It's a smaller development. It's a smaller element.
Oh, smaller development. Yeah. Both.
Yeah. Mhmm.
Alright. So what about the stone, though?
I like the stone. Like having more stone. Mhmm.
Right. But what are we saying? That they can put stone just on the front if they want? Or
Well, I guess that's a compromise. Yeah. I prefer to see it on all three on three sides. I mean, would. Yeah. But Agreed.
I'd like to see it on street frontage. I mean, the you know, some of these houses have double street frontage. Right? I mean, I'm trying to remember how the how the street lays out. Right.
But what you don't want have is just, you know, like two sides and not two sides.
Know. It's either it's going to be
Yeah, I know.
It has to be the three sides?
Deliberate. Well, is it
Not doing the back?
I don't have a problem with no stone on the rear on these things at all. Right. I I think that's a waste of money, personally. But I can see the argument to having some on a side that you see when you're pulling on the street.
So here's another question. Should
it I be agree.
Should it be another approach would be to say then rather than just the this Wayne's I always say it incorrectly Wayne's cot or Wayne's code.
I say Wayne's code and I'll probably pronounce it.
What do the AI tell us?
Right. Right.
You know, maybe it should be just if you're gonna do it on the you know, say, okay, you can do it on one side, but, you know, you have to do a more not just a little short band. Maybe you take a portion of the elevation or something like that. It would be a thought.
Wayne, like you would do like this this whole bump out right here would all be stone.
Or maybe something like that. Right? Yeah. So but I don't know. Or just do it on the front as a base and be done with it. Just then always looks like it's tacked on. Alright. Well, if you guys make a motion, then we'll
see here.
Let's see what the motion says. Will you show will you show us the motion again? Make sure we have okay.
Conditional
So you're saying put more GT sports. The wrong one. Yeah.
Oh, that's the right it's just the name. Yeah. The modifications are right. Yeah.
I don't
know yeah. Sorry. I don't know why that's
No worries. We'll fix it.
But are you saying me to put something in there? Let's see.
Stone is applied.
Talking more about how many sides the stone is. Councilman Van Dyke, is that something you
wanna Yeah. I don't know. I mean, I think it's
Do we wanna look at the layout of the street so that we can kinda see which is face street facing?
Do you
do you happen to have that?
Yeah. Yeah. Do you have that? I actually might
have that with me.
So that I kinda agree that if it's street facing
For me.
Stone should be added?
No. You're gonna put it
right at a seal. I'm gonna zoom in.
On the seal. Right there.
The table.
On the seal. Right there. Right
Right Upside
down?
No. There you
go. There you go. Okay. Oh, I
thought this is where you come down the street there.
Where's center? Center's on the left here.
Left side.
Right here.
Is it
so hard? Really is kind of in a nook back there, so you're not seeing a ton of sides other than the first couple.
But if we look at number seven, for example, would we do yep. And do the Vuela Court side and Vula Way side since they're both streets. That makes sense. Well, you know what?
I would agree with
that. Yeah.
And the same with four?
But see, I you know, architect in me either says do it on the front or do all four sides, but not this you know, if you do partial sides, then it's I think it'll look even.
See, to me, 7 faces Villa Court. Villa Way is a dead end at that point that nobody's ever gonna drive on those.
And look at numbers. Look at Lot 4.
Center Ridge.
Lot 4. Vula Way and
Vula Way. You know, I there might be some And same with Lot 1. Lot 1 for sure because Lot 1 you'll see from Center Ridge.
So the rear of Lot 1, you'd see from Center Ridge.
Yeah. It's yeah. You'll see all of it.
All of it. Yeah.
Other than the north side, which is a side you know, the left side.
I'm deferring to the architects. Yeah. This is architectural things.
Why did I get involved in
this one?
If if we said stone if we were to say Stone Wainscot on three public facing sides, does that that seems like it would cover the corner of Vuela Court and Vuela Way. Are we splitting hairs there?
Or I I would just that's fine. I just leave it the way it is where it's, you know, let the homeowner decide one or at least it's on the front. And then if somebody wants to run it around the I I don't wanna do partial. I think he gotta do the whole thing or
Okay.
Or one one or four.
Probably right.
Do you
know what I'm saying?
Mhmm.
Not two. Okay. My opinion.
Okay. Do we have a motion then?
Thank you. Sure.
I fixed it. Oh, nice.
Thank you.
That was quick. Based upon the findings of fact, I move to approve the Villa Park revised design guidelines with the following. One, modification to allow the use of vinyl shake siding. Two, condition, homeowners may determine the number of building sides to which stone is applied, provided that stone is installed in at least the front facade of the dwelling.
Second. Roll call, please. Jones? Yes. Del Cone? Yes. Del Reigno?
Smith? Yes. Van Dyke? No. Motion carries.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it.
Mhmm. Next item on the agenda is ordinance twenty twenty five dash 124 code amendment for office permitted uses and office lab districts
yes so this was referred by council last month on the twentieth. Purpose is to add salon to the schedule of permitted conditional accessory uses in the office lab zone. It allows an existing salon in the zone to also provide micropigmentation, medical tattooing it's called sometimes. There's a definition from Google up there. I won't read it.
But you've got it in your report as well. So this was actually presented at the Planning Zoning Legislative Committee, PZL Committee, back on the twelfth. It does differ from decorative tattooing. And offering unlicensed services could jeopardize her professional license. So this is not something that could become a tattoo parlor, in other words.
It's a very specialized medical thing. It's something that actually health insurance certain insurances will cover as well. In addition to the micropigmentation position, her business includes two stylists and a nail technician. And there were some enforcement concerns raised by PCL members. The law director confirmed that such procedures fall under state jurisdiction.
So the proposed text amendment would classify this as a conditional use. And if it's adopted then she would be back here in the future to secure a conditional use permit. And the city of course retains a discretion to approve deny or impose safeguards as part of that process. So it's pretty simple. You're just adding salon to the list of conditional uses.
Why is that happening? Well it's happening because when somebody is wanting to do micropigmentation or medical tattooing, the County Board of Health contacts our office and they ask us about zoning. And we check to see if the zoning will allow that. And so in looking at this, salon does need to be added in order to have medical tattooing at this location. So it kind of makes it possible.
Right now it wouldn't be possible. So if you do approve of course there's always the standards for evaluating conditional use permits. It's not an automatic thing at this or other locations. But those are the main safeguards I'm sorry standards that would apply. Those are safeguards and conditions.
Now I'll take a look at zoning by the way this is a it's kind of interesting so it's a it's a those are all individual units are all condominium units she actually owns her unit in that location. Office lab is not expected to result in many similar facilities in this zone. There are only 17 properties that are zoned office lab and 10 are unlikely candidates due to their their use as large single tenant industrial buildings Energizer being an example of that. Or because they're part of other operations such as the crown treatment facility where there's some vacant land. Highly unlikely that you would see that there.
So you know at most you could have seven other locations where these would occur. So we really don't think this is going to be impactful for this zone or for any of the other zones where it would be allowed. So with that said, this is a you know it's a zoning text change so it's really you're gonna recommend approval or not approval.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for seeing me tonight. Your name and address, please? Angela Tempest. 507 Lindbergh Boulevard, Berea. Great. Do you have anything to add to mister Biddell's report? No. I think he covered it. Okay. Great. We'll ask the fellow commissioners if have any comments, mister Del Ragneaux.
I sat through zoning, so I'm okay.
Thank you, missus Smith.
I have no comments. Councilman Van Dyke.
So I also sat through the Planning Zoning Legislative Committee. So just a couple of things I would like to highlight. Mr. Bedell, can you go to the zoning, big zoning map there? And just so if if this if the applicant was located in F Or H which is so I can read it office is F right right Or H is general business. If the applicant was neither of those locations, they'd be fine.
For general business, yes. For office, I will have to I don't think so for office. Check on that. But definitely for general business. Let's see what else do we have here.
H is general business in here.
Yeah. And then G that you see there, which is shopping center. So definitely could go in G would work. And then I, which is interchange service, it would work in I as well.
Yeah. I guess my point being maybe if I I thought f also it was included. But in other words, this is adjacent to a zoning district. Actually, the property touches the that's similar zoning district on two sides. So it's not like it's a not spot zoning. It's Right. It's consistent with what is we that area would be.
Yes. I I would agree.
So I think that, you know, in my opinion, make makes it, an easy decision. So
Great. Thank you. Mister Jones?
Thank you. I I would add to that. You know, I also consider this this proposed use to be pretty comparable to the use that she's already allowed to have in this location. So I mean, if, you know, if if it was gonna be like a comparable use determination type thing, which I'm not sure if they if you guys even do comparable use determinations here that's like work running to that in other communities that I work in. I I think that it probably would have passed muster just under that standard. I have no issue with it. I think it's a great thing that you guys are doing. So
I would agree with my fellow commissioners. I think it is a a good use, and I'm willing to support it. So yes. Any comments from the audience on this one? Seeing none, can we have a motion, please?
Yes. I move to recommend that council approve ordinance twenty twenty five dash one twenty four. Second.
Roll call, please. Belcone yes Del Reigno yes Smith yes Van Dyke yes
Jones yes
motion carries
great thank you very much good luck thank you thank you
thank you
next item on the agenda is the Scheibond Park
actually if you wanna just take this just to
sure. Don't worry about it later.
Ordinance twenty twenty five dash one twenty three is a conditional use permit for a bank.
And the applicant did ask to be tabled?
Yes. So we'll table it to the January 5, 2026 meeting. If I can get a motion?
So moved. Second.
Roll call, please. Del Bracknell? Yes. Smith? Yes. Van Dyke? Yes. Jones?
Holcomb? Yes. Motion carries. Great. Thank you. Now we'll move on to the Cheyenne Park revised preliminary development plan. We'll have mister Bodell do his presentation first.
Okay. I think most of this we went through last time. All buildings could be up to 30 feet tall except Building 1 at 30 about 35 feet and Building 3 at about 18 feet. The only real change in terms of parking is in front of the building is a row on the west side of the lot. The rest of the things you see highlighted we've gone are italics we've gone over before.
So just kind of focus on what has changed for tonight. Which actually let's see. Yeah. We have a little bit more information in terms of how buffering would be handled. Did receive a kind of a last minute change.
And it just included some more numbers. And I have asked them to load their presentation on the computer. Because I'm not able to enlarge this. So it's a little hard to read some of those numbers. I'll let them go through that. Great. But for tonight what they will go over with you are some of the site line study to go over. Showing the berm, showing vegetation and how that will work, contextual elevations, line of sight studies. And they can explain this a lot better than I can. So with that said, I'm gonna
Thank you. Switch Would the applicant come forward, please?
Welcome. Are
these new submissions? Or is this what you already submitted for the packet?
I believe it's the same thing as the
So they've already received these then.
Had the walk through last last time, so this is kind
Friday is this
what you submitted?
These are glosses of what submitted.
So it's the same thing though?
Correct. Okay.
Okay.
I'm Brady Matheny. I'm the attorney for Scheibin Park's application.
Great.
To my right is Roberta Vega Peralta. He is the architect. To my left is Chris Scheibin. And then to my far left is Jason Scheibin. Great. Do you need our addresses?
Yes, please.
Okay. So mine is 107th Avenue, Suite 150, Chardon, Ohio 44024.
32506 Gurse Road
and Avon Lake. 822 Current Court, Brunswick, Ohio.
16394 Pepperwood Court, Strongsville, Ohio.
Great. Welcome. Thank you.
Thank you.
We were
just gonna walk through actually the Perfect. Okay.
Alright. Can you hear? Yes.
Please use the mic. Okay.
We really appreciate your feedback from the last time. I think it was really clear that you wanted to see three things. You wanted to see wanna
push the mic just over a little bit more. Thanks. Yeah. I can hear you at home.
Again, sorry about that. I'm gonna do my best to have my voice here heard. So there were there were three key things that that you wanted to see from last time. This includes aerial views, contextual side diagrams, and elevations, and that line of sight studies. Right?
That's what we always spoke about for for last time. So I think most importantly, what I wanted to highlight highlight from the plan is that the concerns were well received about the neighbors, especially the residential neighbor and neighbors to the north and and to the east. So with with that in mind, we're having we have added a substantial berm and fence in addition to the abundant tree foliage cover that we have on this end of the project. And so what this creates and what I did with the diagrams here is that it creates a very clear visual story of how we really take the the serious comments made by by both the planning commission and the and the residents, the neighbors, to to keep that in mind. Obviously, we have a a very commercial corridor in Crocker Road and Crocker Park with a history and a legacy of of of of entertainment, of dining, of retail that is part and parcel of Crocker Park and of and of the the place where we reside here.
So this is this is completely unchanged. We we've respected the 155 foot setback that was one of the requests that was made of of the development even though right across the street, it's just 85 feet or so across the average in Crocker Park. It's a 155 foot setback coupled with the water main line and other easements that are present in the in the site really force our hand to be able to develop a building and development into a cohesive whole as you see it here. It's it's it's the most western, most available amount of development that we can do. The the water main easement prohibits us from doing any developments along here, and the storm and sanitary sewer easements prevent us from doing any development, and we we we've respected your 155 foot building setback requests.
So with all of this in mind, our best approach was to, like we said, provide that berm and fence and trees to provide that visual and acoustic separation. So with the sight lines that that you that you requested, this is what the view would be for the proposed view from the residence at Farmington Road. So if you were standing on this property's backyard, this would be the view, and here's a key kind of explaining where Farmington Road is. Then if you went up north for the residence at Sunset Drive, if you were to stand at one of the residences' backyards, this is the view that you would see. As you can see, we have successfully removed in its entirety any view to the development whatsoever.
And that was, again, the main concern that was brought up about having any visibility. We wanna also provide peace and comfort for all the residents on the planning commission that, no, we are not planning six, ten story office buildings as as as some of the residents expressed and some of the planning commission expressed. There were those concerns that that is not happening in this development. This is only a one story to at most a one story with some form of a mezzanine development that is very low in its in its stature, and yet it provides the level of luxury and experience and retail that we've we've promised to to deliver on from the very first day that we stepped in here about almost two years ago now. So we've kept we've kept true to the to the story and
to the
spirit of the place, and there's not much more to add other than than the exhibits that we've been requested of. So that's what we've produced and we're more than happy to answer any questions or anything else.
Thank you. Anything else to add from the rest of the group?
Just so that it's noted, the berm that we are proposing or contemplating is 10 feet high, and then on top of that is a six foot high privacy fence.
Great. Anything else? Okay. We'll go through the fellow commissioners, then we'll get to the public comments. So, first comments, missus Smith?
You basically, I think you, have really tried as far as the rear sight line goes, you know, with the the 10 foot berm and the fence and some trees. I guess the concerns that some of the residents have brought up, like the sounds and smell, potential smells of any restaurants, I think those are very valid concerns. And I think, in my opinion, I would like to see the rear two to four, actually the back four buildings, office rather than retail occupancy. But perhaps you could explain the use of each of the buildings again.
Yeah. We we do not have a a designated use for each of the six buildings other than Building 1, which is the Scheiben Jewelers Of course. Of course, building with the mixed use of retail on the office. Buildings 2 Through 6 really have not yet been claimed to my to the best of my understanding, but they will be reserved for luxury complimentary uses such as medical and upscale retail, something that complements the the Cheyenne jewelers.
Well, that's a goal, but if you were not to be able to rent it to the high end retail clients that you desire, you would have plan to build it hoping that they will come. They may not necessarily come, depending on the economy and how much they continue to like this location. But I guess that's out in the future. I guess a concrete question that you could answer is where is the dumpster? Where are the dumpsters planning to be located? Because those do generate a lot of noise.
So trash pickup in its full entirety would be developed in concert with the tenants once that is fully satisfied. During phase one, which is Buildings 1 And 2, which takes up the balance of the next decade or so, the trash pickup location has been identified as the back of Building 2, which as you know, neighbors the commercial neighbor to the north in Huntington Bank. Right. So we have identified an access point here that does have the roadway inlet right here. So it would just be an in and out scenario to avoid having the traffic disruption on the The residents.
Correct. Correct. On the resident neighbors. Exactly. So that is our planned approach, and to the extent possible, we will keep that route as the only trash delivery and pickup. Okay. Big big wheelbase trucks to come in and out of.
I may come up with some questions after I hear my fellow commissioners ask theirs. So I guess I'm done for the moment.
Great. Thank you. Councilman Van Dyke.
Thank you. So I just wanna I'm gonna step back to the earlier back to the beginning. So this side of the street was supposed to be office, a zoned office. And and, of course, two office buildings were built. Some had a bank in front, a restaurant in front, and the one to the north there.
And then a couple years ago, we had the proposal for the parcel that's at the South, which they came in with wanting to do some retail. And we, after a number of meetings, landed on a concept of having retail in the front with office in the back. And the purpose of that was that the the the the thought behind it was that the office would act as a buffer before the retail. And it was more in the spirit of the original zoning, which was to be all office, recognizing that offices have changed, so building an office tower wasn't going to make as much sense. And also, the thought was, you know, having a tower next to somebody's house, maybe this was better to have a one story building, which is why we have hipped roofs there and it's lower scale, etcetera.
I will say I was a little troubled by the email from miss Evans when she writes here that we hear the repeated loud trash pickup early in the mornings often before dawn year round. So first of all, you you can contact us now that you've told us this. And and, you know, the city has ordinances as to terms of noise. So if somebody's picking up trash at five in the morning or six in the morning or seven in the morning, they need to stop that. So I don't know, you know, mister Riddell, if that's something we can, you know, or we can do it through the council or something.
But in you know, because I get these calls every once in while too that a dumpster the trash trucks come in at, you know, dawn and wake in the, you know, neighborhoods. So that's not right. And then to hear the loud generator from the office building directly behind us kicking on for forty five minutes to an hour, so I guess, first of all, I didn't know we were having, they had generators on the building. That wasn't part of the original review, and now if they do have generators, that should also be, you know, something that's not first of all, I can't believe they run an hour, they should be running for ten minutes. But secondly, they should be done at a time that's less disruptive.
I'm only bringing these things up here. And then the third thing is the smell of the restaurants with the grills and cooked meat in the air and all that kind of stuff. So I'd kind of like to go see what this issue is because that was the whole reason we put those those that office building in between. And I remember the applicant specifically saying that they had certain vent devices on or, you know, scrubbers on these You're right, to stop the smell. So if they're not working properly, that should be checked out. And if they haven't put them in, they should put them in. And if they have put them in and they're not functioning properly, then we should know about
that.
Because this, you know, we approve these things here based on
Quality of life issue. Trust.
What people are telling us, and then they're not working that way. So because the whole point of this with these residents was it's supposed to be less intrusive. And at the same time, you know, it wasn't like this was this this parcel was never ever gonna get developed. Everybody knew it or should know it. So that's the first thing.
So now we're we'll talk about your development. So your development now has become even if you're saying, well, we might have medical offices and all this stuff, it's a it's a retail development. I see this as a retail development. You might have a tenant that's a that's something, but this looks like a a a a a every building and the whole layout. And not that it's not a I think it's kind of a a handsome layout in some respects.
Well, I have to say I've seen a few, not not from this team here, but other firms have shown this sort of well, they tried to make it look like it was this town center. But by the time they were done with it, it looked like a shopping plaza with some colonial architecture on it because things got spread out too far and all that kind of stuff. So I'm still concerned with the functionality of this because now it's not an office. Now we've gone 100% into retail. So and then on top of it is and this is what happened with the strip center to the south of you, is we came in when they said there would be no restaurants or there'd be one restaurant.
And then there were two restaurants. Well, we really we need to be able to lease this out. We've to get to four restaurants. And we have to have drive up windows. And each one of those was an incremental decision that had to be made by this planning commission.
So the problem is we start with one here's what it's gonna be and it all sounds great and we approve it. And by the time we're done, incrementally, we end up in a different location. So I'm not convinced this is the right here for this you know, the original thing I voted for and approved. You know, the original concept with it sort of towards this towards everything up towards Crocker. But now you've added more buildings, you've moved further back, and so I have a little concern with it.
So that's where I'm at at the moment. I'd like to hear what the other fellow commissioners have to say, I'd like to hear what the residents have to say. And then we can go from there.
Could I just make one comment with respect to your comments, Mr. Van Dyke? None of the uses have changed from what was approved a year ago. I understand that, you know, it may have been zoned at one point executive office. But if you look, we have not changed any of the uses with proposed buildings three through, at that time, five. But now Buildings 2 Through 6, they've all they're all the same.
I understand that. But you but you've also the whole development is moving east. It's not what before it was sort of the front half of the property, and then the back half was alone.
Do I we are so we can Am I allowed to say something with that?
Chat shoving to the east.
Yeah. I mean, with the 155 foot setback and water main dead center and and the sewage in the front, I could promise you this. We wanna stay away from the residents in the rear. We're trying everything we can do to stay away from the residents in the rear. And between all of us here, I mean, the total 54,000 square foot of total building versus anywhere to to the south of us. And I don't wanna point at the neighbor or anything like that. But we were we were really trying to be as lean as possible and push forward as much as possible. And I I could promise you that. I mean, you can ask Moka on how many iterations we went through just to do that. But we're trying to fit something between a rock and a hard spot.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you.
Pam? Let's see. I got you guys. Mister Jones?
Thank you.
So I was the one that I think that they had requested the line of sight study, and I appreciate that. I I think that that kind of shows that, you know, from a visual standpoint, you know, from an aesthetic standpoint for the that you've made a pretty significant effort and are taking some pretty significant steps to visually screen the residents on Sunset and Farmington from this. I and I think that you've accomplished that with what you're proposing here. So that's great. I do have some concerns, with, some of the permitted uses that would that are now gonna be closer, not because you'd be able to see them, but because you can hear them in in the case of restaurants and smell them.
Right? So, I think, my initial thought on this is that I'd I'd like to see buildings. I don't know if they're e and f or five and six, whatever you're calling the easternmost two buildings. I I would like to bring it up for consideration not having restaurants as a permitted use in those two buildings. Agree.
And and I think and you would and councilman Van Nyk, I think you had suggested that the that the eastern four buildings shouldn't have them. I I think that I think that restaurants could potentially work in the middle two buildings, largely because, again, you will have, the same thing that we approve to the site to the south, which is an office use. Or in this case, maybe it's not an office use. Maybe it's a retail use, but, you know, they've listed the retail uses that they're looking to market here. And I realized that, you know, that could change over time.
Right? I understand that. But these are pretty low noise, pretty low we're we're we're not gonna in my mind, I'm not seeing a whole lot of opportunity for there to be disruptions to the neighbors from a from a auditory or or smell standpoint. Right? Again, the visual aspect we've dealt with.
So I think that that's good. And, also those middle buildings, if you take a look at how far those buildings are from the residents on Farmington, and I guess also you could say the sunset versus how far the restaurant uses are in the corporate circle development, to those same houses, it's kinda comparable. You know, I mean, they're sort these are a little little bit farther east, but Farmington turn also turns a little farther east at that point, hence the Creative Street name. So I think, you know, my my guess is that this would work okay at least to the same level the corporate circle does. And I realize have noted that they've had issues with some of the restaurants and corporate certain, you know, in that development.
You've brought that up. It sounds like this may be an enforcement issue, and something that we need to research further. But I do think all in all, as you take a look at how they've laid this out, I think they've taken pretty strong strides to minimize the disruptions to the neighbors. I and I do and while I agree the original intention for this site was office, we know that's not happening. They still need to be able to get some use out of their land.
You know, we can't tell them that they can't use their land. So I think that, you know, what they're proposing provided that we can come to an agreement with them on where some of these allowable uses will be within the site. And it's on us to hold the hard line on that. You're right. We've allowed some we allowed some things to trickle in the site to the south. Well, I guess, you know, that's on us. And and we have to you know, if we decide that we're going to allow restaurant uses in the Western 4 Buildings, then we need to draw hard line on Buildings 5 And 6. And I I think that that's that's that's where I'm at with it on this point. As far as the layout, the design, all those other things, talked about it last time. I like it.
I think it's a good use of the land. I I think that it's, I don't think it's too intensive a development for this property. I think that, again, it's just can we make it work with the surroundings? And I think these are the things we need to consider.
Thank you. Mister Del Reigno?
Won't belittle everything or restate everybody said, but restaurants. I thought we said originally one restaurant was what we were allowing in this location. I thought that was the original plan going forward. So I spread it up last time. I think one restaurant is attainable and again moving it closer to Crocker is the ideal.
We're I truly appreciate your efforts to form the buffering. I think that was a great step. On the side note of that comes, you know, the neighbors on Farmington and Sunset are gonna look at the side of the hill now as opposed to what they are used to being flat wooded areas. The question I have would be if we look at Buildings 5 And 6 and mister Jones calls them 5 And 6 If we flip flopped them and did the smaller one in the back in the Northeast corner versus the larger one. I don't know what that does other than trying to pull some of the heavier traffic, larger buildings, more noise away from sunset that corner, that pocket, maybe would give us a little bit of a, relief for them, and put the larger building where the the smaller one is.
Yeah. That's, you know, I don't know if that assists anything other than it's just gonna cut down on possible noise at that back corner. And I do think that there's a concern. Didn't think of it before, but the concern of trash pickup. So if we did use, excuse me, the backside of Building 2 or the north side of Building 2, I don't think your tenants in the rear are going to enjoy taking their trash up to that north corner.
And the individual that's 150 feet away from the bank and now has neighbors to the south of them that are going to cause more disturbance if you will. That's a concern for me. The odor, the visual barrier does great, the odor does not. I don't think the mounting nor the fence are going to cut back on that or the sound as much as we would would hope. If we did, we use some of the nighttime activities, the restaurant, the retail shops probably aren't that bad.
You know, if we took five and six and said those are strictly for officeretail, That would be help matters to the to the West and allowed you know, if you wanted to do a restaurant, it would be in the North East or North Middle. Those two would be more acceptable in my opinion. But I don't, you know, and you were talking phases here, right? So you have phase one being Buildings 1 And 2345 And 6. What's the timeline look on that? Is that something that's going to happen immediately or wait for tenants? Do we build it and hope they come?
Well, that's actually a really good point. Wanted to mention that earlier. You guys are concerned about tenancy and what tenants we're going to be putting in here. We can assure you we're not going to build a single building until we're at least 50% full signature. So we are going to monitor the type of tenants that we're putting in these buildings before we even build the building.
That that's the end goal. I'm not gonna put money in our building, which we are building a very expensive jewelry store just to surround it by your I don't know how to say this as comparable So we're not going to build a single building until we're at least 50% occupied on it signature wise before we even break ground.
So the question on that would be then you have six buildings. Correct. One and two. One is 100% occupied since it's yours. Building 2, you're gonna build that one before when you have 50% of that occupied.
Which we should already.
Well,
I would agree. Then you go into three and four. Three and three and four or and what happens when someone says, well, I want building 6. And we jump back to the furthest point and leave our void in the middle. I I that's what I'm trying to avoid is build it if we then if the need is there and you've proven that we're, you know, everyone's neighbors are in good shape and we like what we see, we can't go we can't skip three and four and build five and six and come back to three and four. Does that make sense?
Correct. Yeah. We've already declined two land leases for the rear. Okay. So we're it's not necessarily about money here for us. It's more or less building building the property.
And again, I I totally don't get me wrong. I really appreciate what you guys are doing. You're you definitely seem to have a vested interest in this, not only from the financial side of it, but from the city of West Lakeside. And we appreciate that. So yeah, I just want to make sure that one restaurant to the north or I'm sorry, to the west.
And the visual barrier side of it is if we can get creative and try and pull some of the setbacks and it's never going to be perfect. I can tell we're setting it up now with 100 and on the building to the North or to the South, a 150 on the building to the north. I read that loud and clear on why we're through showing these numbers on the screen here as you guys are doing much better. But we're also telling you that we're hearing complaints from the 150 and the 160 right now. So we've got to make sure that we're is 100 feet going to cut it? Don't know. But you're doing a great job of trying to minimize that.
Dave, if I could just step in real quick. Sure.
I would imagine to, mister Van Dyke's point, at some point or another, somebody's going to develop this property. All the same issues that they are bringing are are brought forth now are going to be the same issues down the road in the future. Where is the trash going to be picked up? You know, a a lot of these things are gonna happen regardless of whoever develops it, whether it's us or somebody else. Now we come forth, and we want to be able to develop develop this property.
We see Westlake as a viable area for the type of location that we want to bring. But also furthermore, regarding the co tenancy, a lot of the global brands we work with are looking at the co tenancy that is around us. So not only just us, but the brands that we work with as well are considerate of what brands are around you. And we want to be in a luxury environment. We want to we want to live, eat, and breathe the type of environment that we're in and what we are bringing to the table.
I don't think it makes sense for us to be able to put this investment forth if we don't have the right co tenancy. You you could build the Taj Mahal, but if it's gonna be in, you know, in East Cleveland somewhere, it's not really gonna do very much good. So the two things have to align very well. And, again, compliments of the city of Westlake, this is what has brought us here. But the the idea is to bring value and add value to the city. Thank you. Alright. Ma'am Goodland?
You're good? Okay. Thank you. I guess I just have a couple questions. What's a private training school? You have that listed in the corner. What would be an example of a private training school?
So I'm sorry. Go ahead, Robert. We envision the the tutoring for math and computer science has been really, really in high demand lately. Uh-huh. So these are kids that have shown a huge interest in CS computer science Olympiads. That's the kind of appetite that we've seen in that industry at this moment.
Okay. Thank you. That helps. And then I guess I would agree with my fellow commissioners. I mean, we're trying to figure out how this fits and making sure that the residents are protected. I agree with the one restaurant idea. I agree with, you know, office in the back, or this the private tutoring, think, is a great example of something that could go in the back. In my opinion, I would think the hours would not be too late. It would be a quiet use. No smells.
But yeah, I think that we need to really think about that. And I know I'm looking at an email from residents, and safety was a big issue. And I think that with the six foot, 10 foot wall or barrier and the six foot fence, I think that definitely helps. I would agree that, yeah, the shift to retail, just keeping that more balanced with the office uses or the private training or whatever you want to call it, I think that helps. Let's see. I think that's all I had right now. Oh, outdoor patios and terraces. That was one of the questions, live music. So do any of these buildings have outdoor terraces except for the common area? Just the common area would be outdoor use.
Building 3.
The the architecture and specificity of the outdoor terraces hasn't really gotten there right because the like we said, we we could be, you know, five years, ten years out from from Buildings 345, and But we did envision an outdoor terrace on Building 3 that spills into the
town square,
which is basically just an extension of that town square. So the idea was to congregate and generate the energy towards the town square. And
that one, I think I can maybe live with, but the one on five, I think, is gonna be a problem. So I guess that's in the back of my mind too. So I guess I will open it up to residents at this point. We got a limit time or we're okay? We're okay. We're okay.
Yeah. That's what we have.
That's why we have restarted early for you guys. So the residents would come over or come up and, state their name and any comments they have or questions for the applicant, that would be great. Name and address, please.
Good evening. My name is Dan Reddish. 2008 Farmington Turn. So I've spent a lot of time on this with the Chibin team directly and with my neighbors via emails, via meetings. What you were reading
from is a
They're comfortable.
That's what we all
put together. As I stated in my cover, some of the priorities vary person to person. Some people are more concerned than others. I'd say that those that back up directly to the property, are gonna be far more concerned. And while I wanna say thank you to Jason and his team for being very open, and very willing to discuss, There's a few things that really stand out in that matter.
And as councilman Van Dyke pointed out, this is a matter of giving the inch and taking the mile. And with each progressive development that's taken place, it stretches a little more and a little more and a little more. And we don't want it to stretch anymore. Some of the plans, I mean, it's beautiful. It looks pretty cool.
It looks pretty awesome. But it's right in our backyard. And to the extent that some of those buildings, excuse me, are not office anymore. They can be almost anything, that's retail. And retail is open later than office, which is one of the major concerns that we put forth, is we wanna restrict activity later into the evening.
And retail that's open can be open till 10:00 at night is way different than office settings or other businesses that are gonna be closing at six or 07:00. And I'd also like to point out, again, the the Scheibing team has been very cooperative. The the berm and trying to clear out sight lines really appreciate what they've done, and their openness to even tinkering with that if the residents preferred landscape material over a fence. They've been wonderful about that. But the reality is this plan is way different than what's also been allowed along the road, has extended it a lot, and it is very different than last year.
If you look at the buildings, there's more, more square footage, and everything's moving closer to the neighborhood. So I would ask that you continue to keep those constraints and make them real constraints. I trust that they want to have great cotenants. Makes perfect sense. We're thrilled, me personally, that they're gonna be there and not Joe Developer and Timbuktu. That matters. But the other thing that really does matter is what are you gonna let be that close to the residents, not just on Farmington, but on Sunset as well. And this is definitely closer, and it is in office, other operating hours. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Welcome. Hi.
I'm, Becky Williamson at 2047 Farmington Turn, so directly behind development. I just appreciate all the questions that you guys have had and appreciate everything the Scheiben team has done to work with, especially Dan. I guess one question that I had is in the in the back, they have the land banked parking, and it's kind of confusing for us whether the parking would go into that. Some of the pictures have trees that cover that parking, But so I wasn't sure if in the future that could become actual parking spaces because that really gets the development much closer to the houses in the back. So any restrictions that can be put into place to prevent the parking from going back as far as some of the it's almost like camouflage parking in some of the pictures.
And also as being right behind the development, fully supportive of restricting restricting the the use of those back buildings five and 6, hope maybe even possibly three And 4 as well to be office space. So thank you.
We'll have the applicants come back up and answer all the questions after we're done with residents' comments. Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak on this?
Welcome. Hi. Summer Corey. Do you need my address?
Yes. Okay.
1634 Queens Court Mhmm. Wesley. My family has owned businesses throughout the entire city. We had a restaurant in front of the Cheybann Jewelers in Strongsville for thirty years. They've always been stellar members of their community there, their dad. Very excited they're coming to Westlake. We've been friends with them for that many years. And anytime we ever needed anything or we had any, you know, anything that went wrong or right, they were always there to help us within the city of Strongsville. So and I actually work
of the office two street or two offices down at Reserve, and my family owns that building. So just bringing them to the city and having that type of retail facility just doors down elevates definitely elevates the street, definitely elevates the community. I understand the whole idea of not having restaurants in the back, but I don't doubt that, you know, these guys are men men of their word and whatever, you know, you guys put forth. I believe they will follow that. But I think that this will bring a lot to Westlake. A lot.
And tell me your address. It was what city are you in? I'm in Westlake. You're in Westlake. Okay.
Yeah. Thank you.
In 43?
1634QueensCourt. Thank you.
Great. Thank you very much.
No problem.
Welcome.
Dibbo Elias. 28663 Touchstone Circle, Westlake, Ohio. You know, I think about this development, you know, really excited for the proposal. I think everyone here would agree that it looks pretty cool. Understand some of the concerns that the residents have as well.
But when you think about delivery, excuse me, with these projects, you wanna think about what they've done in Strongsville, their family has done in Strongsville, the development, their commitment to excellence. You know, I have no doubt that they're gonna take this forward and and deliver. You know, I, for one, would love to spend my money in Westlake rather than Strongsville. Not that Strongsville's bad or anything, but, you know, really, if we had this home, which is Westlake's been home for me for over thirty years, you know, this is what I think we're missing. And we certainly have a bunch of luxury brands in in Crocker, and that's that's fantastic.
But when you when you really think about this proposal and what it would bring, I think it adds another element to the street, you know, and their their thoughtfulness in in their approach to things, I think, you know, Summer's point just now, is is second to none. So, no no doubt that these guys will deliver on their promises.
Thank you very much. Welcome. How are you?
Good. Maha Corey. 1645. I have been a resident of Westlake for almost thirty years next year. I also work in Westlake. And so Westlake is home to me and my family. And so anything that comes to Westlake, I'm a huge advocate for. Listening to this proposal from the CheyBand family and their team has been wonderful. I mean, just like everyone said over here, they're short of nothing but excellence. I feel like this is something that we've been needing in Westlake for a long time.
And like Deebo just said, spending your money in your city and the place that you work and your family resides, I feel like is such a blessing to have right next door to you. I completely understand the concerns with the Farmington residents. Even though I'm not right behind, I am thirty seconds away from Crocker Park. So this to me is just something that we've been needing for a long time as well as being a young professional. And also being almost 30, I feel like this is something that we've been needing in the city for the new generation to come.
Luxury stores, high end service, that's something that I, for my family to come, also really want to have in the city of Westlake. And I think people look at that as, you know, really cool to see in your city, nearby, in in the city, or anywhere, you know, around the area. So I completely love this idea. I completely understand the concerns. My family comes from restaurant business as well.
So we've had businesses for over fifty years in the restaurant business. And while I completely understand the, you know, smell, those kind of things as concerns, I will say that restaurants do also bring families together. And some of my best memories are made in restaurants. So while I do understand the concerns, I do know the Cheyenne team will do a great job at definitely working around the city regulations and what the residents have to do. But I'm really proud of everything they've put together. We've known them for a long time. They are just tremendous people, and I know that they will bring such great things to Westlake. So I'm really excited for this and for the future of Westlake.
So thank you. Very much. Yeah. Welcome.
Hello. Mike Venari. 28520 Stonegate Circle, Westlake, Ohio. So I I think at this point, I'm just echoing what the rest of the residents have said. I think that I'm very excited for for this project to go forward.
I've known the Shybans now for five years, being a customer of theirs at their Strongsville store. I do want to put a little more context to some of the things that, Chris Scheiben was saying about luxury brands. I'm a watch enthusiast myself, and one of the big aspects of their store is the watch or luxury watch brands. The luxury watch industry is growing very significantly. In 2023, the entire watch industry for luxury brands was 3,800,000,000.
This is projected to go up to 5,800,000,000 by 2030, and so that gets you to a compounded aggregate or annual growth rate of about 6.2%. And what Westlake currently does not have is that market or that supplier for that market. You do have other jewelers out there that carry secondary brands, but they are authorized dealers. And so being able to have that in the city that I live in, I would like to spend my money in this city. And so I think that that is a great opportunity there.
Luxury brands do care about where you surround yourself. It is a very big selection process. And so if the concern is, will ultimately this development be surrounded by not luxury brands, I don't think that that's the case just given the industry that they're in. So I'm I'm very I'm looking forward to this. I think that the Cheybins will continue to work with the community to address a lot of the valid concerns that were brought up before this commission.
Great. Thank you.
Welcome.
Good evening. My name is Yuri Boda. Address 2011 Farmington Turn. My concern is only that if you remember from last year, we were talking about five buildings smaller. You know, we were talking about if there is enough parking lot.
Now it seems like we are expanding more and more and it's getting closer to the houses. So that's my concern that it seems like maybe now or last year it was okay, one rest around in the front, nothing in the back. Now it's in the middle is fine. So it seems like, you know, we we are pushing it a little bit farther and farther. So I'm hoping that it'll be compromised between developer and neighborhood somewhere in between. Thank you.
Great. Thank you. Is there anyone else that wants to speak on the project? Alright. If we could have the applicant come back and answer those questions that the seven residents were talking about. I guess maybe four of them.
Just one item. Mister Del Reigno, I believe you brought this up regarding what was the condition with respect to the approval for the restaurant last year.
And it was that the uses allowed in section one two one two point o two e are permitted except for residential and hotel uses, which are not permitted, and limited to one restaurant you which is subject to further review by the planning commission. In addition, there was another condition that the retail and restaurant uses are closed by 11PM. But as far as Buildings 2 Through 5 at that time, all uses that are permitted in the PUD, with the exception of residential and hotel, were permitted in those buildings.
One restaurant, doesn't no matter where it goes, it has to be closed at eleven?
That's correct. That's what that's what I believe the condition was. Yes. Same with the retail use as well.
Retail use is closed at eleven as well? That's correct.
Okay. That was one of the conditions that was approved last year. The other was just to address just really quick. Again, I I understand that, you know, there there's definitely a change as far as moving some of the development further back, I suppose, to the east. But keep in mind again, the uses that have been proposed have not changed. So while I understand the concern and the thought that there would be offices possibly towards the back of the property, that was actually not one of the conditions. The permitted uses were, again, buildings two through five at that time included all of the permitted uses in the PUD with the exception of the residential hotel and the one restaurant. Okay.
So I I think some of the concerns were coming from inching something closer and closer. Just so on the record, that was never the intention to, you know, pitch something and then try to repitch something else that is different than the original. We had to make changes to the property based off of what we had. We had discussed some of those things in the past, so I don't want to dive too deep into that. But this is the final revision that we are looking at.
So we don't have any intentions of changing anything. But again, we have been through many, many revisions getting to this point point and appeasing everybody. We had to set back. We had to build a fence in the back. We have really tried to make all accommodations necessary to make all parties happy. And although the residents in the back, they do have concerns and we hear those concerns. We understand those concerns. That's a small portion of the city of Westlake. We have also heard from other members of Westlake that feel that it would be very valuable. And I strongly feel that the majority of people within Westlake, if you were to pull people off the street and show them this, I think most people would be proud to say, this is my city.
And in answer to the setbacks, none none of the setbacks have changed in any way, shape, or form. So front, side, and back setbacks both for building and parking have been unchanged. So they're exactly the same.
And I think there was a resident that well, first off, thank you to all the residents that came up, especially the people advocating for the people in the rear. I appreciate it. And then, of course, our support. We really appreciate everything. But I think there was a question about the land bank parking as well. And I wanted to address that just to make sure that we get that answered for her. The land bank parking is we're hoping we don't have to go into it. Right? That's the whole goal of it. Why pave more parking than need be?
I would like to keep more of a grass buffer and some trees back there. But in all reality, it all depends on what uses we end up signing with. A lot of this is kind of trying to put chicken or the egg kind of situation. We we don't know if we're gonna need that parking. We're hoping not. We're hoping even if we do, we won't have to utilize all of it. So I guess, to answer your question, it's it's not necessarily, planned for right now, but it all depends on on the tenancy that we end up signing.
Okay. And then let's see. I'm looking at mister Radish's question. Mister Radish's question. I think he he was just talking about the berm and the clear sight lines. You know, the retail being open later than office, obviously, the 10PM versus the 5PM. I guess after hearing all this, do my fellow commissioners have any more questions?
I I actually, I'd like to see the, approved site plan compared with the, new proposed site plan.
Do you wanna put Bonnie's picture up there?
I I have that. Do you do you have it?
You can you have both slides.
I like right next to each other. If that's okay with You
you have it next week. If you have it, I I think I have it next
to each other. You have them. If you can show
them. Okay.
That's that'll be great. Thank you. She's this too.
No. I I I believe I have it here.
I have
it. But, Jim, keep in mind there were two options that were approved.
Right.
You're going be showing total berm and one was a tree. Jim, it's essentially the
you show this the first time you
showed Yeah, the
I have
it here. So here's the
that's what
was approved. There was two. So and the difference had to do with how buffer was being handled. So you'd really you see some things on the right hand side that change and squiggly line goes away. And so and then this is the revised.
Yeah. So when it was five buildings, it was, you know, roughly at go back to the first one, please. So it was, you know, well set in from the adjacent jog in the property line. So so it was really the front half of the properties. Now so show us the next one again. Yeah. So it's moved back. Mhmm. Yeah. I'd be curious as to how many feet that has moved back.
So the the main answer for that is the water main line easement. So that diagonal line that you see running through there on the road b that's diagonal there, that's the water main line easement that there's no building allowed. So we were faced with a very difficult circumstance where we were forced to adopt the 155 foot building setback to the front and respect the water main line easement of 50 feet.
So point out the water line easement again, please. Don, do want me to
judge center.
Here, I'll I can point at the screen right here, right here.
Yeah. So so those 50 feet Okay. Twenty twenty five feet either
So so on the original diagonal line. I'm sorry.
Were forced to, on the original one, air everything to the left of that water main line easement. But if if we were to respect the 155 foot building setback to the front and have the required necessary pro form a development that a development like this requires in order to be viable economically, we have to build those six buildings. Now the dilemma that we face is that we would love to present you with our original plan that had the 85 foot building setback to the front that respects the exact Crocker Park development, but that was rejected by the planning commission because the 155 foot building front setback was the requirement. So we respected your requirement to keep that 155 foot setback. Now to build that necessary pro form a to have a viable development, we need to build those six buildings.
And in order to build those six buildings, you have to build on the right side of that water main line easement. That's what's driving everything.
Yeah. So let's talk about this front setback, which you brought up several times here tonight. So while the zoning setback is closer to the road, if you if show us that aerial that shows the the other side of the street. There was there was one we had that also showed
I will I'm gonna have to look it up.
I think that's on So
and or I can just tell you. So if you look at that Cracker Road, the other side, where there is a little where the buildings are a little closer to the street, but they don't have any parking up there. So that's what they're they've got grass there. And so if you look at it, it's kind of the equivalent amount of grass and they've got a drive and then they've got the building. So what we're trying to what we tried to achieve with the adjacent your neighbor to the south, was to provide some green space that mimicked the other side of the street and still had parking.
They originally wanted two rows of parking, which would have taken it all the way to street, and then the building. So that's where and then it also sort of coincided a little bit better with the two buildings to the north. So that was the rationale behind why we did that. And so it doesn't look like it's a strip center shut up shut up against the
the like other places around Westlake and other cities. So, you know, we're trying to get a a different look to Crocker Road, which is part of the reason why you wanna bill here.
A 100%. And that's the reason why we wanted that 85 foot setback was not to provide out strip parking in any shape way, shape, or form. It was to provide you this very same elevation that you're seeing here at 85 foot.
Right. And I understand. But but it's right. But the you know, it's not that's not the whole reason everything got shoved back was because of that. That was sort of
a requirement. The beginning. If you see the master plan, that's the reason why we were forced to go right of the water main line easement. If we were able to keep the 85 foot setback to respect the residents that have requested to be to have their properties farther away from their properties. That's what we proposed originally, but the 155 foot setback was enforced. And and
So let me let me ask you a couple other questions, though. So if I may, madam
Please. Chair Go ahead. Go ahead. No.
Please. Mean to just No.
We appreciate it. Go.
I kept looking at the clock. I thought we might actually No.
It's early.
Get home early, but
I'll drag it out a little bit.
It won't be as much fun.
Yeah, don't think it's too
much for eleven.
So let's take those two buildings in the back that you got the arrows pointed. Is there a reason why you can't shift those a little further south? And for a couple of thoughts, one is it gives you a little more presence off of Corporate Circle and off of Crocker Road.
Yeah. Our our building setback, again, here is right on on the edge of the of the building line. I mean, we gave it around 20 foot buffer additional. I mean, there there is 20 feet that that we could take advantage of, but that's about it.
And this building setback, that's there's some lines on a piece of paper, right?
You you can adjust. Planning Commission Council can set that at a different number.
Well, so where I'm going with the whole thing, you could zoom back out again, is what if you were able to move those down a little bit? And even that and then actually then that parking that's to the North side closest to those residents, if you could move all of that down a little bit, so now you're getting a little bit more buffer in there because that's really the closest part where you've got cars. And the other thing is, of course, you want to have a view to Crocker Road.
Right.
Right? I mean, that's what you do, you know, which is why you were, you know and and then I'm not even sure you you could still keep the larger building there if you shoved it over more. And then actually that open that gives you some vista over to that center line, which is you were trying to get some view through there.
Yeah. That would be that would be wonderful for for both the residents and the visibility. It's a that's a that's an excellent suggestion if if we were allowed to.
And and, you know, I you know, we the thing is you've got that corporate circle called it you know I mean almost you could have seen where at some point you could have designed it so that would the buildings would have been all around the circle.
Absolutely yeah that's a great point.
Alright. So
He adjusts that. Well, I mean, from an architectural standpoint. I know
you have
the and I I don't mean to be designing here up with the
Can you tell he's vetted? Yes.
He's you've got a good team member here with Vocon. But so the so I I would be willing to you if you can give the residents a little more space, then I will be more immediate, let's put it that way. The other thing is the question that Mrs. Smith brought up about the dumpsters. I I think you gotta give us a better answer than just we're gonna figure out later where they go.
I think all that stuff needs to be and this is I know this is sort of the first preliminary, but those details matter. I agree. And frankly, you know, the dumpsters between the shopping center and the office building, we got they got beautiful gates on them that are always wide open. Yeah. So but then so let's go back to the uses.
And I understand that we have this based on what the uses were of the permitted. So and you keep talking about high end, which is which is fine. But what, I don't know. I, you know, do we just say, I mean, I guess we've sort of said one restaurant up at the front, the rest of it has to be something else. Is that
And the rear buildings need to be a lesser use or a earlier close or office. I mean, sort of use that's not gonna be open late.
Yeah.
Is what I'm hearing from the residents.
I think the applicant was and I don't want to take it out of turn, but was saying that the way we wrote this does not restrict them to a east building or a west building on the restaurant is what you were alluding to when you answered my question. Correct. Is where I'm going with it. So what they were trying to say is we can put it anywhere per the code or per what we've approved previously. And my response to that is, at the same time, you're in here asking us for an extra building and more space. Let's Of
course. Respectfully.
I just wanted
to tell you exactly
what I
totally appreciate. I understand where you're going
with I
just want to make sure that Councilman Van Dyke understands it. At this point we do not have it specified that it has to be in one or two. Now per what we've approved previously it's saying that it's in any just one restaurant.
It could be anywhere in the entire Correct.
So now, I would like to see we had the water the water mains not didn't just magically appear and come into our thought process, right? It's been there. We've known about it and knew about it prior to the purchase and all of that. Jim, on your drawing where we were flopping back and forth between original and existing or proposed, there was everything was held tight to it. Were we holding 155 foot setback on the Crocker on that one as well?
Yes. Yeah. So that's what we originally saw. You were giving us that $155 and you were keeping us to the west of the waterline, which inevitably gave us more buffer and more space between and I'm assuming pro form a or the analytics that ran on it says, hey, it doesn't fit into this space because to get our return on the investment, we need more square footage, more building, more tenants. Is that a fair statement? Correct.
Okay.
Partially and the flow.
Well, the the the the first plan before the before the the PUD approval with the one that that mister Bedell just showed. Mhmm. The first one showed an 85 foot building setback.
That that one did show an 80 that was my question. It did not show
That's how it started. Yeah.
It's true. Can you please
Yeah. Could we yeah.
This is I'm
looking at my version of it, not my version necessarily.
Yeah. I need you to can you hold for a minute, sir?
Sorry, Dan.
Come forward and get on the mic.
We got protocol around here, you know.
So this is this is at the one this is at the 1 5th so the question is, is this the 155 distance from Crocker Road? And the answer is, yes. Yes. This is 155. Okay.
So you were able originally, we were able to hold the 155 and keep us to the West of the Water Main that was coming through with your square footage of overall square footage. I can't read the numbers on there, but what are we at store or square footage of space for this version? This one right here.
I have to go back and confirm
the available space to retail.
5 to 30,000.
Okay. So 25 to 30,000 in this version of it. And the new version
It's like it's closer to 30 because you
got Yeah.
I was
gonna say it was 30 plus. I thought it was mid thirties, but don't quote me
that.
Can So 30,000 square feet is what we're what we approximately. Approximately 30. And the new version has?
54,000 square feet. Okay.
That's correct.
That's that's where I was going with that.
So in Your original statement was correct, Yes.
Yes. Okay. So it does fit inside of the waterline. It doesn't fit the business plan, in my opinion, right? Right. A better way of saying that. We can make it fit, the 155 and the waterline and all of that. But it doesn't fit your business plan.
Well, partially. Just to speak to that, I believe that if you're going to build an environment, you have to have enough players there. So that was the other part of it as well. That if we're going to be if people are going be driving
Which is part of your business plan. Correct. Yeah. So it doesn't fit the business plan. Whether it's financial or if it's the model or the thought or the vision, it's still the business plan. So this version does not fit the business plan. So it didn't it's not that we pushed we'll say it's not that we pushed you back 155 feet off of Crocker. It's that the original plan expanded and that you and it's not a bad thing. Believe me, I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I'm just stating facts at this point. So, okay.
Correct. I think what Roberto was trying to say earlier is if had that open space because we've went through so many different iterations of this, and I promise you, I'll be happy to email you all 150 of them. I'm good. But I think what he's trying to say is if we did not have that one fifty five setback, we may be able to fit the business model that we're trying to fit in this setback Right. Further further ahead.
That is a very fair statement, and I recognize that and and appreciate that.
So And if we can move the water main, that would make my life a lot easier.
We could probably figure
that out.
I'm just saying, nightmares We're not doing anything. Water mains can be moved, but it's not cheap.
Split the cost?
Exactly. So and you you totally get what you're saying about, you know, like, this what we approved was totally on the other side of the water main. That's only partly true, because we approved a lot of parking on the East Side of A the water lot of that parking is pretty close to these residents, probably closer to them than some of the if we make some of the adjustments that we that he was just doing on the fly there with sliding the buildings down, moving some of that parking further from sunset, then so you'll have buildings on the east side of the water. I mean, the buildings will be closer to the residents, sure. But the parking, which in some ways is just as disruptive as the buildings from a noise standpoint Yeah.
Would have still been just as close. And again, you know, it is it looks like it's right here, this layout that we're seeing. The parking is as close, maybe even slightly closer than what we approved. But if we make some of these changes that we're talking about where we get rid of that northernmost row of parking, slide buildings 5 And 6 down south, I think that you could have developed area no closer than what you know, what we previously approved. It's just, you know, again, if we're gonna do that, I would go back to we really have to think about are we going to limit the permitted uses in those buildings, which I would strongly suggest that we do.
Mister Jones, you're you're absolutely correct. And that's a good point. As we did do the 150 revisions, we added more space, for parking further to the west. Right? And Mhmm. That was done on purpose to to keep everybody more forward. And that's
the other thing this one does too is that it actually you're giving people parking spaces that are closer to the buildings which would make it less well, certainly if somebody's visiting Buildings 1 Through 4, they're very unless, you know, unless you guys are Completely. Unless you guys are absolutely slammed, you know, with with with people and you all the spaces are taken up to go to Shyman's one day.
We hope
to be.
You know? And, hey, if that happens, great. But, you know, chances are pretty good you'll be able to find parking, you know, West Of The Water Main Easement to go to any of those buildings, which again, less disruptive to the residents to the East if people are focusing their parking more to the West.
So I'll just so that's an excellent point though about the parking. Now you've got one row of parking back there, not two rows. So it looks less like a parking lot, a little more like a town center. And also I did appreciate the having those the parking along the front it's a parallel parking you have in front of those different shops is so that's actually you know makes it scales it down a little bit so I would agree with that. Oh may I
jump in again. Can we look at the architecture again for a minute? And what are if we were to approve something and it still sounds like we have to have one more one hundred and fifty first scheme.
Probably. Are you sure?
We approve this as a PUD, is the architecture getting approved at the same time or they have to come back with their architecture?
They come back. It's a separate development plan for each building too.
Okay. So this is meant to be more a conceptual pass at the architecture. And so I'll just say I find it and I like Vocon's very modern aesthetic. But I think it looks a little austere somewhat. I think this the buildings need you know, your building, actually, you've got some you know, with the cornice and some of the things you did on that one, I think the the it looks it's got a certain presence to it. These other buildings all look like they're gonna look a lot like retail. Especially the ones go show me the ones with the like the four things in a row or whatever they are.
And I I mentioned about the development plans. There there are design guidelines too that you do approve at this point that does And
I'll agree with you, mister Van Dyke. That was actually something that we wanted to work on, but we, at least wanted to put that in front of you guys. We don't know exactly what's going in those buildings. Right? But I could tell you that they will look a little bit better than what those are.
I just think they look more like a they look too strip centered to me. Right.
Something in Fairview Park or something.
Yeah. And actually, you know, we we what was the one across the street where the old Kmart? What what what do they call that?
West Bay Plaza.
West Bay Plaza.
Bay Plaza.
Yeah. The West Bay Plaza. You know, I'm not saying to do that exact style, but we spent a lot of time with them coming up with schemes that I thought they did a pretty good job breaking up the scale and, you know, making it more not a row of the same.
The one thing I will tell you is the brands and the the, I guess, type of tenancy we we're targeting, they are going to come with their own architecture, their own look. And it's not going to be a cheap build whatsoever. So although we did just put that kind of together for the visual and the walk through, I can almost assure you that it will be a level, if not a couple levels above what you're seeing right there.
Alright. Yeah. The the design guidelines do a little bit more work to to to describe this. Yeah, absolutely Buildings 2 Through 6 VI in this development as you're seeing it in this three-dimensional walkthrough are placeholders, of course. Building 1 is the one that's fully matured and that you will see the first set of development plans like Mr. Bedell was referring to. So we will have a complete set of development plans for each one of the buildings, which will have a matured and very refined aesthetic. Yep. Point well taken.
One thing you haven't discussed yet are the design guidelines. I know you So want to take a look at that? Please they're up on the screen.
While they're here let's do
it. Yeah.
Yeah. So back to the point about the architecture and we can we can digest each one of the points on the design guidelines. We'd be happy to to walk you through those. But And the point of architecture, we do have a chapter on building form and articulation where the building frontages should be articulated and developed to create an engaging and lively pedestrian, human scale, elevated experience. So blank walls without fenestration on the primary frontages are discouraged, and buildings with frontages more than 50 feet in length should provide a horizontal offset of 12 inches for a minimum of 10 inches.
So the style and aesthetic, again, this district will embody a refined architectural language rooted in classical proportions, natural materials, and enduring craftsmanship. So some of the examples that we've talked about before involve the Miami District, Rodeo Drive, the Houston landings, and other developments that have a very, very matured, refined aesthetic sensibility, not only with the architecture, with the landscaping as well. So I encourage everyone to review the the design guidelines. And if if we have enough time, I'm happy to to walk you through them. And it's I I just out of out of respect for time, the the five points that that we develop are not just the introduction, but the site planning, the architecture, the signage, and the district visualization itself.
So a little bit of of the history. You know that the Shibans have over fifty years, in in a very storied illustrious career in in jewelry design, and so that's the birth of of of of really the district. And from that, and spirit, then those design guidelines really outline the aesthetic and functional principles that will shape refined and cohesive environment that complements the existing offerings in the surrounding area and neighborhood. So we're aiming to create a visually striking and walkable district that balances modern luxury with timeless design. And so I hope that, you know, that again, I I do not want to exhaust you guys because of the time issues.
But if if you haven't had a chance to read the design guidelines, I strongly encourage everyone to to do so. We have a a very well thought out exposition of the building placement, the landscaping, the architecture, the parking, open space considerations, public art signage, paving materiality, landscaping. A point on the on the landscaping because not only the architecture is important, but the building the the space between the buildings is almost even more important than the architecture itself. Not to mention the interiors, which, of course, is where all of us humans end up spending almost 90% of our time, which will be absolutely I I can't wait to show you guys the interior of of the the Scheibron Jewelry store because it's absolutely breathtaking, but we won't we won't go there yet. But the the space between the buildings is extremely important.
Mean, that this is a place, like I've said before, where I want to bring my kids on a Saturday, on a Sunday. And it's not a place where necessarily I'm gonna go in and buy a very fancy watch. I hope to someday when I make a confession, but the point is on the weekends, I wanna bring my kids here. And that whole heart of the plaza, of the development is really what excites me. And so we've put all this thought into I mean, want the residents that live behind this building to come here every weekend.
I mean, want them to love and and and own this place. And we're doing it with them in mind and with families in mind. And and so, I mean, I'm I'm probably the wrong biased person to talk to about this because I know that this is relevant and have dedicated my whole last few years to it. I think it is very well thought out. Any questions that you guys have about the design the architecture or the or the aesthetics, I'm happy to expand upon.
Wanna go through the questions? I mean, I I'm a planner. I appreciate good design guidelines. I think they look great. I think the only question I think that came up was was the sign. Right?
Or do
you wanna talk about that?
I I think you have to get through that other
Okay.
Other aspect of the PDP first.
Okay.
So this is we're putting this on the back burner. Oh, I've used those signs in some
my I do have one question though. You're, when you're calculating for that, monument sign at the bottom there, you must have been measuring the square footage of the entire thing, the wall, maybe the foundation.
Correct.
Yeah. Yeah.
I realized that the document was
so very We don't yeah. This is like 300 square feet and I thought there's no way that this it's gonna be 300 square feet.
It's meant
to be as generous as humanly possible and and and and and to be as transparent.
But like that District 56 right there, if you were just doing the District 56, that's not 300 square feet of lettering. Right? Exactly. Alright. So we we we can fix that.
We're on the same page there.
Yeah. So you
got After
Guess some things to correct with the sign, master sign criteria and with this document, we can fix that then. That's kind of what I thought. I saw that two ninety square foot monument sign, I
thought And I apologize. As an architect, I'm always thinking of every single piece and to be as transparent and as possible. But but, yeah, the the text
It's just
the lettering that we calculate.
Yeah. Is quite reduced. I mean, the the the esplanade does a good job of that too. You know? Right. We've got an architectural feature that's
Yeah. We're not gonna measure the whole thing.
Yeah. The letters themselves are definitely within the realms of
That's a pretty neat sign.
Almost needed. So tenant signage is, you know, is sober, but yet, you know, stands out. So, I mean, that's it's it's walking that delicate line of, you know, being able to have that street presence from Crocker Road, but also have an an intimate human scale pedestrian quality. A colleague of mine actually worked on the Storm Ford store, and we got all excited about the g r f r c paneling that goes into and the architecture that goes into stores like this. I mean, we have all kinds of ideas and
Those are all the reverse lit channel letters too that we love.
Yes. Exactly.
No vinyl. No vinyl. Good.
Yeah. I mean, it's it's it's it's a high end district for for everyone to enjoy. And so that's that's kinda like what I want to the the message that I really wanna impress on on everyone. And and it's it's a contribution to to the city of Westlake, and I hope that that that really gets taken into account.
And just to add one more point. I mean, we've as you've heard, we've been in business for a very long time. We've, you know, worked with some very affluent, very well known people, anything from athletes, a list actors or actresses. So, you know, we want to bring them to our showroom. We want to bring them to our environment.
We've quite literally to you that might not be, you know, timepiece or jewelry collectors. It might sound crazy to hop on a plane and fly somewhere to purchase something, but our clients have done that. And this is the environment that we would like to bring them into. So not just for us, but again, speaking of the whole environment that they would be driving into, This is it it has to be presentable, not just for us, but also for our clients that are coming here that expect this kind of white glove environment.
Okay. Any more questions, I guess, on what we're talking about? So we'll probably table the design guidelines and master sign criteria for sure.
It's it's Because we
get Well, I do wanna just so Yeah. The canopy trees. I don't know. Do you address trees in your with the landscaping portion?
Yeah. The So the development plans will have all of the required canopy for the city of Westlake, for all the regulated.
Okay. Because if you're gonna be here another fifty years, we wanna have a nice canopy of trees. You know, they may not grow that quick, but And then the entry signage. Can you put that up again just for a moment? And so the idea is you're you're where are you proposing them on the site?
So on these three locations.
Okay. And these are so there would be three signs that would say what this development is. I think it would define it. Do you have a name for it?
What's that? Right now, it's Cheyenne Park, but that's still up in there a little bit.
Yeah. So but there would be a sign at a c a, b, and c, all three of them, and they would be the same sign size, or you're proposing one monument sign and then the others are
Yeah.
There would be one key main monument site and then the other two describe the tenants in it and they're more secondary in nature.
Okay. So a might just be the we'll call it Cheyenne Park for now. And then B and C would be your other tenants or wayfinding. And I won't call them wayfinding but the B sign might have here's the tenants for the area there or C. All right.
Okay. Thank you.
Any more questions on the actual revised preliminary development plan?
Good? Well, so I guess What
are we gonna do?
Well, I think we, you know, we've suggested a plan revision Mhmm. Which I think I I would like to see. Yes. And along with that, I think, you know, we we while the original you know, I I wanna still give you some flexibility on your tenants because I understand that part of it. But at the same time, we've heard pretty clearly about those two back buildings.
And so is, you know, maybe they need to come back to a with a proposal to us for, you know, the limitations on those two buildings. So if if there are any or, you know, I certainly, I think we would rather well, I would not be in favor of restaurants back there or a restaurant.
Mhmm.
So but, know, maybe you know better who you're talking to and how what would be reasonable. You know what I'm saying? In other words, I'm not trying to limit you totally, but, you know, you've heard what where we're well and I you know, what let's just say a low a lower impact use on those rear buildings would probably be a good SuJET, would be what I'd look for.
I think that was all of our ideas. SuJET, yeah.
We we can go back and and definitely consider that. I mean, we'd have take a look at the pro form a and and what we were expecting in per square foot for per use in the square foot because that really does matter. But we're happy to at least take a look at it. Absolutely.
And and if I may, mister Vanac, to to that point, the the 60 foot setback, that's really what's limiting our ability to move farther from the north and the east residence. So would it be possible to, in light of your comments about the traffic circle here and for the idea for buildings to be at that traffic circle, would it be possible to reduce that 60 feet building setback to accommodate this move?
I I I would be willing to look at that.
Absolutely. I I would consider it.
I would
Yeah. Just for more of a buffer for
the residents. Traffic circle. Alright.
Would that require like a a variance or is that something that we just suggest as a setback change?
You design it this way and when the PDP's preliminary development plan is approved, it establishes this is the setback. This is what this does. It's showing you where the know, it's basically laying out. It's the master plan for how this development will look. Uh-huh.
It Yeah. There's a certain amount of refinement that happens when you do go to the development plan stage, obviously, because, know, you just have general outlines based, you know, things will change somewhat. But by and large, it will generally follow what you see here. And so you are establishing the setbacks. In fact, when you draw this in and you shift this to the south, you should actually update those setback building lines accordingly too so that it goes around wherever this building is. And then that will establish whatever that distance becomes.
Perfect. So in fairness to them though, I think that we can't leave we need to give them some sort of guidance on that. I mean, if we just tell them, you bring it to us, and we'll tell you if it's good or not. We don't want it on the curb, right? I mean, we've got to tell them it's got to stay off at some distance. Well, there's utilities there that they're going stay I mean, we've keep that in mind. There's definitely utilities running out there and things like that. And from a safety standpoint, I don't know what
Well, least police on Jeff's fire and all that stuff. So I think the drawing is more dramatic than it needs to be. Right. Probably. I think it just needs to shift a little bit down from the north.
So I almost think if you had a facade that curved around the front of that 60 foot, you could almost make something work. Gotcha. Understood. You know, and so in other words, go to the upper portion of it. Right.
You know, if you took that parking and where the just curve the drive down a little, the upper drive for the 13 spaces, start the curve sooner there you go, and go something like, you know, right, whatever would work and then parking on both sides. And, you know, so not going to be, you know, if you moved it at the upper part 20 to at most 30 feet, I think you'd be probably be in a good spot.
Understood. Can this is gonna be a little bit crazy to ask, but, are you envisioning just those rear two buildings moving to the South? Because the only thing I think of is, when we moved all of them to the South, we can fit a whole second row of parking in the North, right where they have parking on our neighbor. And then we could probably reduce parking from the rear and help the residents in the rear.
That's a great idea.
That's great. Yeah.
Because it will
protect the landscape or land bank parking.
Right. So we would we would then be reducing the parking from the rear to to help, the tenants that were just mentioning that. Mhmm. We'd be pushing away from the other residents in the North, and then we'd be adding more parking where, technically, we really want it. It's closer to to the to the actual Yeah. Yeah.
Just because I have to ask, would you be willing to reduce the 155 foot buildings at, like, even an an inch?
For both of those are funny.
I'm sorry.
I have to I have
to One fifty four.
Or 54 foot 11 would
be fine. 2.78.
But that doesn't how does that help you with that? Because you still have the waterline. Yeah. The waterline is the dividing line for that rear portion. So even if you go forward It
would it would have to be, again, the 85 feet. So if if we had 85 feet, again, back and I I could probably pull this out, but it's gonna take me a while to find the master plan that did it. But, if we pulled it to 85 feet, then what what that does is that it allows us to jump the water main line.
Roberto, would it would it allow us to fully jump it? Well I think that's their
parking behind it, I'm sure.
Right? Yeah.
Yeah. And it does create a compressed circumstance, but but it it dramatically changes the the need for us to have any form of development or land vent parking or anything else next to the residence. That's the one thing I will say. Not promising that it fits, but if if there were an 85 foot building setback to the front, then that would be a win win.
Except except then we have a parking lot right
up against
the road. Aesthetically, it's not gonna look right.
Yeah. And and, again, there wouldn't there wouldn't be any parking. That could be a condition, that we all agree to here. There wouldn't be any parking on Crocker Road. There's a breeze.
It's okay.
Similar to what's across the street is what you're saying?
Correct. The drive through.
Same same as Crocker, if we go to Crocker.
With the Building frontage
with a road. It's exactly
But what would it look like with the buildings next to it, though? Other side or near side.
As far as alignment?
Yeah.
What do mean?
Well, this is these are vast scales that are quite separated. So the the visual continuity is arguable. And we have a very strong datum line across the road. That's that's 75 to 85 foot setback.
It's a
very strong datum. It it kind of is emblematic of this road. I I don't see why just because these guys set this back and gave you an ocean of parking in front. I don't I don't understand why, your comment about the parking makes sense because this is actually doing this actually gave you a notion of parking in front of Crocker Road.
It was a pretty large green space, though, or buffer.
Yeah. That was the compromise was that, you know, the green space was maintained.
I think if if it's okay with you guys, maybe we could at least just draw it out and and see if it would make sense. January.
We think we've got two plans then?
And maybe combine both of those for January.
Yeah. Then we'll see you
in February. I don't really get
into the weeds.
I mean, if we're gonna be redoing it, might as well put something in front of with us.
I just think you gain more buffer more buffer going towards Crocker than you do kicking down because you get you're you're holding the 60 foot setback on the on the circle right now. Correct. You're gonna gain a 100 or you're gonna gain what did I just do here? Was just playing on my phone. You're gonna need 70 foot up in the front. 70 you're pulling you can potentially pulling a 70 foot closer to Cracker away from the residence versus call it 30 feet to the south if we kept a 30 foot buffer. But that's just I I I don't know.
What do you think?
I think we need to see the other one. If we want to see one hundred fifty two and one hundred fifty three then we show it to us pulling it down to the south and show it to us pulling it to the north. With the northern one or I'm sorry, north. West. West.
West. The western one, I do think I'd like to see what that does to the neighbors to the north and to the south alignment. How far does that how far off are they? Where does it put you kind of a rendering or showing us what that would look like? The last thing I don't think we what we're trying I think the other thing we're trying to avoid is having Crocker, which was a boulevard, to have this nice green look to it and flowing. And now we have your beautiful store sitting right up on the front.
Yeah. Well, the Crocker the 85 feet provide you with ample greenery on Crocker Road. Right? Where as you drive I mean, you can see it in this in this street view. Right? I mean, that that's 85 feet. And I mean, all you see is greenery. That's all you need.
I think we could try it out. I think what he's saying is we maybe have to see it. Right?
I I like I like and I like to see what it aligns to with, you know, we don't want everybody back 155 and you guys up
80 Yeah. Think it's no
one's it's uniform across that that prep.
I think it's more important that the green space be uniform. Oh, green space is different. Think that because you have some steps on the on at Crocker Park as well. I mean, you know, it gets as close as that 85, but not everything is at 85. You've got some things that are stepped a little farther.
You've got some areas where there's parking up close. Like, when we first saw this, one of the first things I thought of when I saw this plan was, why are we maintaining a 155 foot setback on this site? Because that's one of the ways that we could keep this thing away from the rear residents. And I totally understood the rationale behind keeping it because we're trying to maintain alignment with, the the two existing developments, the north and south. But I think if we can have it in a way where it's mirroring what's across the street, I think that to me is just as cohesive as maintaining a setback on the East Side.
As long as you can maintain the same sort of look where there's significant green space in the front, there's no parking in the front. If you're pushing the building this close, I would be a hard no on parking.
I agree. Yeah, I agree.
But it's, you know, again because at that point, know, well yeah, the building's closer but the parking is not closer. So you still have this, you still have the same same kind of feel as you have on the other side of the street. If you can somehow mirror what's happening at Crocker Park in this location, I'd be willing to be flexible on the front yard setback.
Okay.
That's that's just me, though.
Is that how we all feel?
Not how I feel.
I think
it's I agree with it. I would need to see it. Yeah. But I've but in principle, I think it could work if it were done right.
Okay. It just gives us a direction.
Off here where we're where it's enabling us to the rear of the site undeveloped.
But that I if they do some of the stuff we've already talked about, I think that they're going to come pretty darn close.
I agree.
And I think proportionally, it all kind of lays out better. And I think the problem with moving it forward is I don't like that idea of driving down and you've got all these buildings sticking out into your sight line, where I get it that across the street there is
someone Right. You're mirroring it. You're mirroring as opposed to
getting Got
to in the same.
Right. And so I just think it will they will it'll just be visually this thing sticking right.
I think it could work either way. And I do think I will say this. I think that having the buildings having their current layout, if we can somehow get the buildings to be shifted, as we just talked about, southward as opposed to westward, that does enable parking to be more focused closer to the buildings. And I think it gets a lot of the parking use away from the eastern part, which I already talked about. I think that's a major benefit to the current layout with the 155 separate.
And it spreads it around. Mean, that's Spreads it around. Correct. Instead of having you pointed this out, the better part of this solution is that you had one row of parking in the back instead of two rows. And now it goes from it looks like a city center versus Right.
You're right.
Shopping center
parking the negative is, yeah, parking in the front. But then again, sort of the buildings to the north and south of it. Yeah. They can be it can be made to look nice as as we've proven on the other side of the road.
Okay.
152 and 153
it is. You're close.
We will table both to the January 6 meeting.
January 5.
Fifth. Oh, gosh. Okay. Fifth.
Of twenty sixth.
Yes. Thank you.
Alright.
Alright. Do I have a motion to table? Preliminary development plan.
Okay. Yes. Motion to table the, Scheven Park revised preliminary development plan to the 01/05/2026 meeting.
Second. Roll call, please. Smith? Yes. Van Dyke?
Yes. Jones? Yes.
Del Cone? Yes. Del Reigno?
Motion carries.
And I think then we also need a motion to table the Shepherd Park design guidelines and master sign criteria to the 01/05/2026 meeting.
Second. Roll call, please. Van Dyke? Yes. Jones? Yes. Del Cone? Yes. Del Reigno? Yes. Smith? Yes. Motion carries.
Thank you so much for working with us. We really appreciate it. Thank you.
Thank you very
much. We'll see you next year.
I had a quick question, though.
If Sure.
If we had a trip planned for the fifth, if we were already gonna be out of town and we can't move that.
We could table you again.
We would table it again. Just table
you to February then. Right?
We would just email or call you.
Yeah. Oh, yeah.
Dank. Okay.
February date would be
hold on. I mean Wait. It's right here.
Oh, it's right here.
It's right here.
February 2, it looks like.
Yeah. February 2 would be the February date.
Okay. We'll do our best to make the fifth. But if we can't do that,
then I just yeah. Then just let us know. So that's
Okay.
You. I really appreciate
Take care.
Thank you.
Take care. Alright.
Miscellaneous? BBZA? Yes. Bonnie, do you wanna split BZA with me? We need a representative because Dave's rolling off BZA. She's looking at me like, no.
They're fun.
You're lying. I hear
it with your voice. Oh, yeah. More of this. Yeah.
Don't need to decide it this evening,
but we do need to
know for January.
We could do it every other month.
Okay. Because
I they she said she doesn't table stuff.
They don't just do it back to you?
It's not very often. It's not common. It happens.
Table. A lot of my fault.
We'll each be tabling.
Yeah. We'll table. Table. We'll still put
it. Oh, great.
Send us a send us a schedule.
K. And then 2026 schedule?
Oh, yeah. 2026 schedule's here. So we are going to try to do earlier meetings. That was my idea. Sorry.
Yeah. This is nice because it's not even 09:00 yet,
and we we have no more meeting.
I don't know how that works for you.
Five thirty? I know it's not great, but once a month you do.
Remember, one of us isn't gonna be here.
Yeah. So one once a month, I mean, you can suck it up. I mean, Matt's also got a problem with it. But
05:30 is gonna be a real challenge for me, but I will try to make it work.
If it doesn't, I'm more than willing to move it back.
We I'm willing to try. Yeah. We'll see how it goes.
Yeah. I mean, if it's because I I know the two of the meetings are bad because you're somewhere else. The second Monday of the month.
Right? Second Mondays are gonna be dicey.
And the plan would also be to do the schedule like we did today where you've got items that don't have notification early.
Okay. That's great.
So that way, you know, the later stuff where you notify the people that
they don't have to be
here at 05:30.
Yeah. That's fine.
And then we can get a lot of stuff done so you have more time to discuss stuff without the pressure of there's eight more things still.
No, I think that's good.
So my suggestion would be though still 06:00. And the reason is not just for the commission but also residents who need to be able to come here That's and Right. So that would be
One at 05:00. I get no. I get it.
05:00, I couldn't
No. I know. 05:30. I work
at 05:30.
I could
I could make work, but it's gonna be a challenge.
Oh, do you wanna do six? Or what do you think? 05:30, six? This has been published already?
It doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter.
Amended.
Yeah. Yeah.
I mean,
I can make 05:30 work.
It's just Yeah.
Because you
can amend it at any time you
want. Yeah.
If you find out that 05:30 doesn't work and you wanna go to six and you find out you don't like six, you can
Yeah.
You have the ability to do whatever time you
wanna first one and see what happens. I mean, does everyone work a half hour
We're supposed to work till 05:45
minutes away.
Yeah. That's the problem.
Yeah. Anyway, according to my wife, I don't work. So
So it sounds like Dwayne is saying is is going for six. Six?
I'm fine with it. Six
is his office hours.
Yeah. Six
is probably better for you if you're
forty five minutes away.
Six is probably better.
You have to leave
at five.
Yeah. Take it here by six.
Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. It's it was fine tonight. It was I mean, it worked six, seven, eight, nine. I mean, MOQ was three hours.
Yeah. At nine instead of ten. Yeah.
And and like Nicole said, we'll we'll do those the signs and simple lot splits,
things that don't require public notification. That's contractors.
And then
they can get there by here by seven because that worked out really well tonight. Mhmm.
It did.
Yeah. Good. Alright. Anything other new business?
Without hearing it. No, ma'am.
Alright. Adjourned before 09:00. Thank you, guys.
Great. Thanks.
And I guess we'll see some of you next year, some of you not.
Thank you all.
Thank you everyone.
It's been fun.
This transcript was automatically generated from the official public meeting video and is presented unedited. It reflects remarks made on the public record by elected officials, staff, and public commenters. Transcript accuracy may vary; view the original recording for reference.