* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. ALL RIGHTY. [ AGENDA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION City Hall - Council Chambers 6131 Taylorsville Road September 10, 2024 6:00 P.M. ] [00:00:05] I SHALL CALL THE MEETING OF THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS, PLANNING COMMISSIONER. ORDER SECRETARY, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? MR. CASSIDY? HERE. MR. JEFFRIES? HERE. MS. THOMAS? HERE. MS. VARGO? MR. WALTON HERE. I HAVE NO OPENING COMMENTS AS ANYONE ELSE ON THE COMMISSION. UM, I GUESS ONE, I GUESS TO AARON AND JERRY, YOU GUYS ARE MISSING YOUR APPRECIATION DINNER, SO WE APPRECIATE THE TIME YOU'RE GIVEN. THANKS . THANK YOU. NEXT ON THE AGENDA AND CITIZENS' COMMENTS, THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE TIME FOR ANY CITIZEN'S COMMENTS NOT PERTAINING TO ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. AND HEARING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO SWEARING OF WITNESSES. I ANNOUNCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ANYONE WHO MAY WISH TO SPEAK OR GIVE TESTIMONY REGARDING THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING NEEDS TO BE SWORN IN. SO I ASK EVERYONE TO STAND, RAISE THEIR RIGHT HAND AND RESPOND, I DO TO THE FOLLOWING OATH, DO YOU HEREBY SWEAR OR AFFIRM ON THE THREAT OF PERJURY TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU? GOD, PLEASE BE SEATED. I ALSO ASK ANYONE COMING UP TO THE PODIUM TONIGHT TO, UH, STATE THEIR NAME AND SIGN IN ON THE SIGN IN SHEET. PROVIDED WE HAVE NO, UH, PENDING BUSINESS, OUR FIRST ITEM UNDER NEW BUSINESS IS A MINOR CHANGE. THE APPLICANT, KEITH BOWMAN, IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A 1,100 SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION TO ACCOMMODATE TWO ADDITIONAL EXAM ROOMS, MC 24 16 MR. RELL, GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AARON RELL WITH THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS. SO THIS IS A MINOR CHANGE. THE APPLICANT DESIRES TO CONSTRUCT AN 1100 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO HIS DENTIST'S OFFICE FOR TWO ADDITIONAL EXAM ROOMS. UH, IT'S LOCATED AT, UH, 71 35 OLD TROY PIKE. UH, THE AREA IN PURPLE IS THE SUBJECT SITE IN QUESTION. UH, IT'S PRETTY BASIC. UH, BASICALLY TWO EXAM ROOMS ON THE SOUTH SIDE. NONE OF THE PERIMETER LANDSCAPING IS DISTURBED. UH, THERE ARE FOUR PARKING SPACES THAT WOULD BE REMOVED AS PART OF THIS RENOVATION AS WELL AS A CHANGE TO THE ORIENTATION OF THE DUMPSTER. OTHERWISE, UM, EVERYTHING ELSE, UH, STAYS THE SAME. SO IT IS THE, UH, DENTAL OFFICE IS A PRINCIPALLY PERMITTED USE WITHIN THE PLANNED OFFICE DISTRICT. UH, THE SITE PLAN MEETS ALL OF THE PARKING AND BUILDING SETBACK AND YARD REQUIREMENTS. UH, THERE ARE EXISTING STREET TREES ALONG OLD TROY PIKE. BUILDING DESIGN MEETS THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS REQUIREMENT, AND THAT ADDITION WILL, UH, ALSO CARRY OVER THE SAME, UH, EXTERIOR MATERIALS. ALL UTILITIES STAY THE SAME. THE ONLY, UM, SLIGHT CHANGE IS RIGHT NOW THERE ARE 42 EXISTING PARKING SPACES. AS I SAID, UH, FOUR WILL BE BE REDUCED FOR A TOTAL OF 38 PARKING SPACES. THE CODE TECHNICALLY REQUIRES 39 PARKING SPACES. UH, THAT BREAKDOWN WOULD BE THE DENTAL OFFICE BASED ON THE 10, UH, EXAM ROOMS OF, UH, THREE SPACES. AND THEN THE SECOND BUILDING WOULD, BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF OFFICES, WOULD TECHNICALLY REQUIRE NINE SPACES. HOWEVER, THAT SECOND BUILDING, WHICH IS ALSO OWNED BY THE, A APPLICANT, IS AN INSURANCE COMPANY AND A ROOFING OFFICE. THEY HAVE VERY FEW EMPLOYEES. THERE ARE THREE, UH, TO FOUR EMPLOYEES THERE AND, AND VERY LITTLE WALK-IN TRAFFIC. UM, THE, UH, APPLICANT HAS INDICATED TO US THAT THE, UH, THE PRIMARY PARKING AND EVERY TIME I'VE DRIVEN BY IT'S OB, YOU KNOW, THE PRIMARY PARKING IS THE DENTAL OFFICE. UM, FIRE PROVES THAT IS SUBMITTED. THE ENGINEER, CITY ENGINEER PROVIDED NO COMMENTS. UH, STAFF ALSO RECOMMENDS, UH, APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU, SIR. I WOULD OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT? KEITH BOWMAN, UH, THE CAR BUILDERS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. HAVE ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD? NOT MUCH. NOT WHAT JUST WENT OVER. OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR. OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ZONING CASE IN HEARING? NO ONE. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY THE APPLICANT, KEITH BOWMAN FOR APPROVAL OF A 1,100 SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION TO ACCOMMODATE TWO ADDITIONAL EXAM ROOMS. PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 71 35 OLD TROY PIKE CASE [00:05:01] MC 24 16 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF'S MEMORANDUM DATED SEPTEMBER 5TH, 2024, AND THE PLANNING DECISION RECORD ATTACHED TO MOVE BY MR. JEFFRIES. IS THERE A A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. SECOND BY MS. THOMAS. UH, SECRETARY, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLE MR. CASSIDY? YES. MS. THOMAS? YES. MR. JEFFRIES? YES. MR. WALTON? YES. MOTION PASSES FOUR TO ZERO. WHAT'S NEXT FOR THE APPLICANT? UH, THE APPLICANT WILL SUBMIT BUILDING PLANS TO MONTGOMERY COUNTY AND ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION TO US. THAT'S IT. FANTASTIC. GOOD LUCK. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS A LOT SPLIT. THE APPLICANT, THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS, IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A RECORD PLAN CREATING ONE 2.81 ACRE LOT EXISTING USE IN A SEPARATE 0.28 ACRE LOT THAT WILL BE USED AS AN ACCESS DRIVE FOR THE CITY'S NEW YARD WASTE FACILITY. LS 24 DASH 18. MR. SORELL? YES. SO, UH, WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF RELOCATING OUR YARD WASTE, UH, DISPOSAL SITE FROM WILDCAT TO, UH, THIS AREA SOUTH OF, UH, BRIDGEWATER ROAD. UM, THE APPLE OR THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER, WHICH IS A, UH, TRUCKING FACILITY, THIS IS ONE OF THEIR, UM, FUELING STATIONS, UH, HAS OFFERED TO SELL US BASICALLY A 30 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF LAND SO THAT WE CAN ACCESS THE SITE FROM BRIDGEWATER RATHER THAN CREATING AN EXTREMELY LONG DRIVEWAY OFF OF RIPRAP ROAD, WHICH WOULD LIKELY FLOOD OCCASIONALLY. UH, SO THIS RECORD PLAN IS REQUIRED FOR US TO FACILITATE THAT PURCHASE, UH, AND THEN CONSTRUCT THE ACCESS ROAD. THIS LOT DOES MEET ALL OF THE, UH, I ONE REQUIREMENTS FOR, UM, BASICALLY AN AN ACCESS WAY. UM, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY, THIS IS THE, UH, THE RECORD PLAN. THAT'S THE, THE, THE LOT ON THE SOUTHEAST SIDE. WE'LL BE SPLIT INTO TWO. UH, THE 30 FOOT WIDE STRIP WE WILL, UH, WE WILL PURCHASE, UH, AND THEN THE, UH, THE CURRENT USER WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE THEIR FUELING FACILITY AS IS. UH, FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVED IT AS SUBMITTED. THE ENGINEER HAD NO COMMENTS, UH, AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? JUST WANT JUST A SIDE NOTE, ANY PLANS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE OLD SITE OR ANYTHING IN MIND SO THAT, UM, YEAH, WELL WE ACTUALLY SOLD THAT SITE TO THE, UM, CAMPGROUND THAT IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION FOR HIDDEN HEIGHTS, WHICH IS NECESSITATES THEM MOVE OF THE YARD WASTE FACILITY. THAT FIXES PART OF THEIR ACCESS PROBLEM THEN, DOESN'T IT? IT DOES. OKAY, GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU SIR. WE'LL OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ZONING CASE? I, I'LL GO AHEAD. I'M MICHAEL SEALE, 91 10 MAN ROAD TIP CITY. I OWN A 14.5 ACRES THERE THAT BORDERS THE FOR ANNEX LAND THAT, UH, YOU'RE WANTING TO CHANGE THE ZONING ON TO A HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT. UH, I FEEL THAT THIS WILL PRETTY MUCH DESTROY MY PROPERTY. AND WHAT, YOU GOT SOMETHING? YEAH, I JUST, CAN YOU WAIT TILL THE NEXT CASE COMES? THIS IS ABOUT THE, THE ONE THAT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT. OH. I THOUGHT WE WAS MOVING ON TO THE STOVE. WE'RE NOT WHERE WE ARE, BUT WE'RE NOT THE YET. WE TOWNSHIP WE'RE NOT THERE YET. OH, OKAY. JUST A MINUTE. THANK YOU SIR. COMING UP, YOU'LL BE FIRST. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ZONING CASE? OKAY, HEARING NONE. WE'LL, WE'LL CLOSE THAT PORTION. UH, IS THERE A MOTION, UH, TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY THE APPLICANT? THE CITY HUBER HEIGHTS, FOR THE APPROVAL OF RECORD PLAN CREATING ONE 2.81 ACRE LOT, UH, IN A SEPARATE 0.28 ACRE LOT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 72 55 BRIDGEWATER ROAD, CASE LS 24 DASH 18 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF'S MEMORANDUM DATED SEPTEMBER 3RD, 2024 IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION RECORD ATTACHED THERE TOO. MOVED BY MR. JEFFRIES. I'LL SECOND SECONDED. THANK YOU, SIR. UH, SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. MS. THOMAS? YES. MR. CASSIDY? YES. MR. JEFFRIES? YES. MR. WALTON? YES. MOTION PASSES FOUR TO ZERO. WHAT'S NEXT FOR THE APPLICANT? UM, SO I WILL CONTINUE TO PUSH THIS THROUGH AS FAR AS THE SALE OF THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN THE SUBSEQUENT FILING WITH THE COUNTY OF THE, UH, THE RECORD PLAN. OKAY, THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, UH, BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE APPLICANT CARRIAGE TRAILS [00:10:01] COMPANY LLC, IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF REZONING TO PLAN MIXED USE AND A BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 296.236 ACRES RECENTLY ANNEXED INTO THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS. PROPERTY IS LOCATED BETWEEN CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE AND US 40 BDP 24 DASH 17 MR. RELL. OKAY, SO THIS SITE IS, UH, JUST SHY OF 300 ACRES RIGHT NOW. IT'S ZONED A TWO. UM, SO IT'S ZONED A TWO FROM BETHEL TOWNSHIP ZONING. WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE A PROVISION IN THE ZONING CODE IN HOW TO BRING IN ANNEXED, UH, LAND. SO IT'S RIGHT NOW AGRICULTURE, UH, AND VACANT LAND. THE ADJACENT LAND, UH, WEST, NORTH AND EAST IS ZONED A TWO IN BETHEL TOWNSHIP TO THE SOUTH. IT'S PLANNED MIXED USE IN, UH, WHICH IS CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE. SO THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING, UH, A REZONING, UH, TO PLAN MIXED USE AS WELL AS THE APPROVAL OF A BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. UH, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ARE VERY SIMILAR TO THE EXISTING CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE DEVELOPMENT, AND I WILL GET INTO SOME DETAIL IN THAT A LITTLE BIT LATER. SO THE OUTLINE IN BLUE IS THE 296 ACRES THAT WAS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY. THIS IS EXHIBIT C THAT IS PART OF THE APPLICATION, WHICH WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE, UH, BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. YOU CAN SEE THE, UH, THE ROUGH STREET, UM, CONNECTIVITY PLAN, UH, THE AREA IN BLUE SHOWS. SO THE ACTUAL ACREAGE, UH, THAT'S IN QUESTION HERE. THE AREA IN GREEN IS, UM, THE TENTATIVE LOCATION OF WHERE WE WILL BE SETTING ASIDE BETWEEN 16 AND 18 ACRES FOR A NEW PUBLIC SCHOOL, UH, AND PUBLIC PARK. UM, THE APPLICANT IS ALSO, UM, INLAID WHAT WILL LIKELY BE THE FIRST PHASE. YOU CAN SEE THE, UM, THE ACTUAL SUBDIVISION. UM, SO IT'LL BE BUILT BASICALLY FROM THE SOUTH, UH, HEADING NORTH, CONNECTING TO THE EXISTING CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE INFRASTRUCTURE. THE, THE PLACEMAKING ELEMENTS ARE NEARLY IDENTICAL. UH, THIS IS THE SIGN PACKAGE THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH, OR THE WAYFINDING PACKAGE THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION. UM, THESE, THESE ELEMENTS ARE FOUND THROUGHOUT, UH, CARRIAGE TRAILS. ONE. UH, AS FAR AS THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES, THAT WAS ALSO, UM, PROVIDED, UH, AND VERY, VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT IS CURRENTLY EITHER BUILT OR UNDER CONSTRUCTION, BOTH FROM THE MULTIFAMILY, THE SINGLE FAMILY, THE ATTACHED TOWNHOUSES, UH, AND THEN A POSSIBLE COMMERCIAL, UH, ELEMENT IN THE FUTURE. UH, OF NOTE, THE, UM, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS CARRY FORWARD THE SAME, UM, EXTERIOR MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS THAT CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE, UH, HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED, UM, BY SINCE 2008. SO, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO JUST NOTE, UM, 'CAUSE THIS REALLY IS AN EXTENSION OF CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE, UM, THERE ARE SOME DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE EXACTLY THE SAME, SOME THAT ARE SIMILAR, AND THEN A FEW THAT, THAT ARE ADDED. THAT IS, THAT IS NEW. SO AS FAR AS OPEN SPACE, WHAT WAS APPROVED IN 2008 WAS A 20% OPEN SPACE, UH, THAT WAS WITH CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE, UH, THAT IS BEING PROPOSED TO CONTINUE WITH CARRIAGE TRAILS. TWO IS 20% OPEN SPACE, A 30 FOOT, UH, 35 FOOT HIGH MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL BUILDING HEIGHT. UM, ON AS FAR AS THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING HEIGHT, ANY, ANY COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES THAT ARE OVER 20 FEET NEED TO EITHER HAVE MULTIPLE FLOORS OR LOOK LIKE THEY HAVE MULTIPLE FLOORS. SO IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, A TALL POLE BARN. UM, THE MAXIMUM NON-RESIDENTIAL LOT COVERAGE IS 50%. THAT'S BOTH, THAT'S THE EXISTING IN CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE AS WELL AS WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED HERE. UH, THE EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS ARE THE SAME. THE SETBACKS AS FAR AS UM, SINGLE FAMILY, MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL ARE THE SAME. UH, AS WELL AS REQUIRING A TRANSITION AREA FROM THE EXISTING CARRIAGES TRAILS ONE DEVELOPMENT TO, UM, CARRIAGE TRAILS TWO, THE 2008 BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CARRIAGE TRAILS. ONE SAID THAT THE LOTS BASICALLY HAD TO BE THE SAME SIZE OR LARGER ON THE SOUTH SIDE 'CAUSE THEY WERE BUILDING FROM SOME EXISTING AN EXISTING SUBDIVISION. THAT'S WHAT THE, THESE PLANNED, UH, REGULATIONS SAY. THE LOTS THAT A BUCK CARRIES TRAILS ONE NEED TO BE THE SAME [00:15:01] SIZE, IF NOT LARGER. SO AS FAR AS THOSE REGULATIONS THAT ARE THE DEVELOPMENT AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT ARE SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR, THE MAIN DIFFERENCE I WOULD ARGUE BETWEEN CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE AND CARRIAGE TRAILS TWO IS I THINK THAT THE, THE MARKET BROADENED AS FAR AS THE TYPES OF HOUSING THAT, UM, IS, IS, IS DESIRED. AND SO THE, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS SPECIFY IN MUCH MORE DETAIL THE TYPES OF HOMES. SO, UH, IN THIS CASE WE HAVE TOWN HOMES ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY, A CLUSTER, HOME, VILLAGE, HOMES, SMALL SINGLE FAMILY, UH, AND LARGE SINGLE FAMILY. AND YOU CAN SEE ON THE CHART, THE TOWN HOMES HAVE A MINIMUM WIDTH OF 20 FEET, WHICH IS PRETTY STANDARD FOR A A ZERO LOT LINE, UM, TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT WHERE YOU HAVE PARITY WALLS FOR BOTH, UH, ON BOTH SIDES, UH, DOWN TO THE, THE LARGEST LOT OF A 60 FOOT LOT. UH, IN THE ORIGINAL 2008 BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN, BASICALLY THE CLUSTER HOMES AND TOWN HOMES WERE THE SAME. UH, THEY WERE, UH, 35 FOOT WIDE LOTS. IN THIS CASE, THEY'VE MADE THE TOWN HOMES, THEY'VE SPECIFIED THAT IT'S 20 FEET. THE CLUSTER HOMES, UH, REMAIN AT, THEY ACTUALLY ENLARGED TO 40 FEET. UM, THE, THEY ALSO, THERE WAS NOT A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE SMALL SINGLE FAMILY LOT AND A LARGE SINGLE FAMILY LOT IN 2008, IN THIS CASE, THEY WERE JUST 60 FEET. IN THIS CASE, THEY HAVE CREATED A SMALL SINGLE FAMILY LOT THAT'S 50 FOOT WIDE IN A LARGE FAMILY LOT THAT IS 60 FOOT WIDE. UH, AND THEN THE MA MINIMUM LOT AREA SORT OF CORRESPONDS TO THOSE SAME, UM, THOSE SAME WIDTH, UH, RATIOS. SO THEY ARE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT. WHAT THEY REALLY ARE ARE JUST MORE DETAILED. UM, SAME WAY WITH THE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA. THE FLOOR AREA IS SIMILAR, BUT TO THE LOT THE, THE, THE VARIETY OF LOTS HAVE CHANGED. AND SO THEREFORE THE, UH, MINIMUM FLOOR AREA REQUIREMENTS HAVE, HAVE, UH, CORRESPOND WITH, WITH A BROADER SET OF CATEGORIES AND A BROADER SET OF LOT WIDTHS. BUT AS FAR AS THE 50 FOOT AND 60 FOOT LOTS, WHICH ARE THE PREDOMINANT BUILDING STYLE IN THE DISTRICT, UM, THOSE ARE ROUGHLY THE SAME AS FAR AS THE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA. WHAT IS DIFFERENT IS, UM, UNDER THE MAXIMUM GROSS DENSITY. SO UNDERCARRIAGE TRAILS ONE, THEY DIDN'T SET UP THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AS A TYPICAL DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. THEY, THEY CAPPED IT AS FAR AS THE NUMBER OF UNITS. SO IN CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE, IT WAS 2045 UNITS, WHICH WORKS OUT TO ABOUT 3.3 DWELLING UNITS AN ACRE. UM, BECAUSE WE ARE REQUIRING THE SET ASIDE OF THE SCHOOL, UH, WE HAVE INCREASED AND THE WANTING TO GIVE THE DEVELOPER A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY TO DO SMALLER LOTS, ONE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT WOULD NOT ADD AS MANY CHILDREN INTO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. WE'VE, UH, PROPOSED A GROSS DENSITY OF UP TO SEVEN UNITS AN ACRE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL EVER IF THERE'S A MARKET FOR THAT, BUT IT DOES GIVE THE DEVELOPER A LITTLE FLEXIBILITY TO DO SMALLER, LOTS SMALLER BEDROOMS, WHICH PUTS LESS KIDS TYPICALLY IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. UH, AS WE ALSO THERE IN CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE, THERE WAS A MAXIMUM CAP OF THE NUMBER OF MULTI-FAMILY UNITS. THERE'S NOT A PROPOSED CAP IN CARRIAGE TRAILS TWO. UM, WE ARE PROPOSING A SET ASIDE OF 16 TO 18 ACRES AND A PUBLIC PARK, UH, IN CARRIAGE TRAILS. TWO, THERE WAS NO SET ASIDE FOR PUBLIC PARKS, UH, OR SCHOOLS IN THE ORIGINAL, UM, DEVELOPMENT. WE ARE PROPOSING THAT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS BE PERMITTED. UM, THAT'S REALLY A NEW, NEW ONE FOR HUBER HEIGHTS IN GENERAL. UH, AND THEN THE ONE THING THAT I THINK IT'S GLARINGLY MISSING WHEN YOU GO UP THERE, BUT WE ARE REQUIRING SHADE IN STREET TREES BEHIND THE RIGHT OF WAY ONE PER LOT IS REQUIRED. CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE DID NOT HAVE BASICALLY A TREE REQUIREMENT. AND IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THAT, UH, THESE REGULATIONS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? AS OF HOW MR. JEFFRIES, JUST TO CONFIRM AARON, I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THE ADUS, WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE LATER. IS THAT AS FAR AS JUST MEETING WHATEVER CODE WE DO COME UP TO, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A CODE AROUND THEM AT ALL RIGHT NOW. CORRECT? WE DON'T. UM, THAT IS ONE THING THAT, THAT I WOULD LIKE TO GO FORWARD WITH, YOU KNOW, WITH COUNCIL'S PERMISSION IN THE FUTURE TO, TO HAVE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AS AN OPTION. WHEN WE ADD THAT TO THE CODE, THEN WHATEVER THOSE REGULATIONS WOULD FALL ALONG WITH IN, IN THE SPACE OF DEVELOPMENT. SO PROVEN THEM WITH THESE NOW WOULD BE SUBJECT [00:20:01] TO THE CITY CODE. 'CAUSE I KNOW SOMETIMES THE COVENANTS TRUMP CODE, LIKE IF WE ALLOWED CHICKENS IN THE CITY A WHILE BACK, THE HOA RESTRICTED THAT AND IT TRUMPED THE CITY CODE. SO YEAH. IN THIS CASE, DO WE NEED TO SPELL THAT OUT OR IS THAT SO ONE OF THE, UH, AMENDMENTS THAT, YEAH, ONE OF THE CONDITIONS IS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THIS AFTER THE FACT IS THAT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS PER CITY ZONING CODE. OKAY. SO REAL QUICK, AARON, IF WE, IF WE ALLOW THOSE ADUS AS A, AS A CODE ELEMENT, DOES THAT OPEN THE REST OF THE CITY UP TO THE, THE SAME PERMISSIONS ON ADUS? OR IS IT RESTRICTED TO JUST THIS DEVELOPMENT? SO, RIGHT. IT WOULD DEPEND ON HOW WE WRITE IT. SO IT WOULD, IN MY MIND, IT WOULD OPEN IT UP TO THOSE AREAS. I MEAN, I'M JUST THROWING IT OUT HERE. R ONE, R TWO, SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. UM, IT WOULD DEPEND ON HOW THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF EACH SUBDIVISION WAS WRITTEN. IF THEY JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, UH, IF THEY SAY SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT, AND SOME OF THEM DO, UH, USE IS PERMITTED IN THE R FOUR DISTRICT, AND THERE ARE SOME PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS THAT JUST SAY THAT THEY JUST BRING OVER WHATEVER THE R FOUR OR R THREE REQUIREMENTS WERE. IF WE ALLOWED ADUS IN THE R FOUR A OR R THREE AREA, I WOULD ARGUE THAT THOSE WOULD, THAT PRINCIPLE THAT PRINCIPALLY PERMITTED USE WOULD, WOULD CARRY FORWARD. IF THEY ARE VERY DETAILED LIKE THIS AND REALLY CARRIES TRAILS, IS IS THE MOST DETAILED AS FAR AS THE DESIGN STANDARDS AND DENSITY ELEMENTS AND THE DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS, UM, THEY PROBABLY WOULDN'T. BUT THAT'S A FUTURE. I MEAN, I'M NOT GONNA DIE ON THE HILL OVER THIS. UM, I WAS JUST WANTING TO OPEN THIS UP AS PART AS, YOU KNOW, AS A, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR WHEN, YOU KNOW, WE TALK ABOUT AGING IN PLACE AND GIVING THOSE OPPORTUNITIES MOVING FORWARD. YEAH, SO I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS TO THINK ABOUT AS WE THINK ABOUT THIS CODE ELEMENT IS WILL WE HAVE INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNERS WHO MAYBE ARE NOT IN THOSE QUALIFIED R THREE, R FOUR, WHATEVER IT ENDS UP BEING COMING TO PLANNING COMMISSION EVERY TIME THEY WANNA DO AN A DU. SO JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. IT MIGHT GENERATE SOME LEVEL OF TRAFFIC THERE. YEAH, AND I, I KIND OF WANT TO GET A A AVOID THAT. YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. OKAY. AARON, CAN YOU PULL YOUR MICROPHONE UP A LITTLE BIT? YEP. SORRY. THANKS. ANYTHING ELSE MR. CASSIDY? NO, THANK YOU, MS. THOMAS. OKAY. ANY QUESTION? PROCEED. OKAY. UM, SO I'M JUST GONNA GO BRIEFLY THROUGH THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARD ANALYSIS. THERE ARE, I BELIEVE, 12, UH, DIFFERENT CRITERIA. IT'S ALL LAID OUT IN THE STAFF REPORT, SO I'M NOT GONNA DWELL ON ALL OF EVERY ONE. UM, BUT THERE WAS A MINIMUM, EXCUSE ME, A MINIMUM LAND AREA REQUIREMENT OF 20 ACRES. THIS APPLICATION INCLUDES, UH, NEARLY 300. UH, WE DO REQUIRE COVENANTS TO BE SUBMITTED, PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO THE MAINTENANCE OF, OF OPEN SPACE. UH, THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THAT THEY PLAN TO AMEND THE EXISTING CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE COVENANTS TO INCORPORATE THESE, UH, RECENTLY ANNEXED LANDS. UM, THE PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT DOES REQUIRE A MIX OF LAND USES. IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE THE RESIDENTIAL AS WELL AS THE INSTITUTIONAL OR EDUCATIONAL USE OF THE, OF THE POTENTIAL SCHOOL, UH, AND PUBLIC PARK. THERE POTENTIALLY COULD BE A FUTURE COMMERCIAL USE, MAYBE NEAR US 40 IF CONDITIONS ARE FAVORABLE. BUT THAT IS WAY DOWN THE ROAD, I THINK. UM, AS FAR AS SITE PLANNING, UM, IT DOES, THE REGULATIONS DO REQUIRE, UH, THAT THE COMBINATIONS OF, OF USES BE, UH, SORT OF DESIGNED TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH EACH OTHER, UM, AND THAT THEY DO NOT CREATE EXCESSIVE NOISE, LIGHT VIBRATION, ODOR, ET CETERA. UM, SO IN THE NEAR FUTURE, UH, ONLY RESIDENTIAL INSTITUTIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOL USES ARE BEING CONSIDERED. THOSE USES ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE OVERWHELMINGLY RESIDENTIAL NATURE OF THE AREA AND THE CARRIAGE TRAIL TRAILS ONE DEVELOPMENT. UH, KEEP IN MIND WE'RE BUILDING FROM THE SOUTH FROM CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE HEADING, HEADING NORTH. THE PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT DOES REQUIRE BASICALLY, UH, 25% IMPERVIOUS, UM, SURFACE, UM, OR SORRY, PERVIOUS SURFACE. UM, THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT WERE IN CARRIAGE TRAILS, ONE WAS 20% GREEN AND OPEN SPACE, UH, WHICH WAS ESSENTIALLY, UH, THE PARKWAY AS WELL AS, UH, THE RETENTION POND DETENTION PONDS. WHEN YOU ALSO THEN ADD INTO THE YARDS THE, UH, THE, THE SIDE SET, THE SIDE SETBACKS OF THE VARIOUS INSTITUTIONAL USES, SUCH AS THE MULTIFAMILY, IT [00:25:01] WELL EXCEEDS, UH, THAT 25%. I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE CASE HERE AS WELL. UM, BUT AGAIN, WE ARE CARRYING FORWARD THE ORIGINAL CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. SO, UH, I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GONNA, 20% IS THE MINIMUM. I THINK THEY WILL FAR EXCEED 25% WHEN IT'S ALL SAID AND DONE. THE WAY THIS IS MEASURED. THE SECOND SORT OF UNDER SITE PLANNING CRITERIA IS THAT, OOPS, SORRY. THIRD CRITERIA, UH, IS THAT THE NUMBER OF EGRESS AND ACCESS POINTS ONTO PUBLIC STREETS ARE, UH, LIMITED IN ORDER TO REDUCE TRAFFIC CONFLICT POINTS. UH, THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN RIGHT NOW SHOWS PRETTY MUCH A BROAD CIRCULATION PATTERN SHOWS CONNECTIONS TO THE EXISTING CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE DEVELOPMENT, UH, ONE MAJOR CONNECTION POINT AT, UH, US 40, AND THEN A POTENTIAL EASTERN CONNECTION POINT AT, UH, UH, AT ALSO AT 40 AS PROBABLY ONE OF THE, THE LATER PHASES, UH, YOU CAN SEE THAT. SO THE, THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOES SHOW CONNECTIVITY TO BOTH THE EXISTING STREET NETWORK SIDE NETWORK, SIDEWALK NETWORK, UH, AND THEN ONE CONNECTION, ONE PRIMARY CONNECTION TO 40 TO LIMIT THOSE, UH, CONFLICTS. UH, AND THEN ONE POTENTIAL, UH, ONE EASTERN SIDE, UH, ACCESS TO 40 IN IN THE FUTURE. AS WE BRING THIS FORWARD IN, IN SECTIONS OVER THE NEXT 10 TO 15 YEARS, UM, THAT THAT TRAFFIC PATTERN WILL, WILL GET FURTHER REFINED. THE, THE NEXT FEW, UH, SECTIONS REALLY APPLY MORE TO, TO MULTIFAMILY. UM, SO WE TALK ABOUT, UH, DISCOURAGING LARGE UNBROKEN PAVED, UH, PAVED LOTS THAT THIS IS REALLY AT, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, MOSTLY A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE WILL BE SIDEWALKS THAT ARE INCORPORATED THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT FOR, FOR CONNECTIVITY. UM, SIGNS SHOULD BE CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE IN THEIR DESIGN THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. AS I SHOWED EARLY ON THE SIGN PACKAGE THAT IS BEING PROPOSED. AND THE WAVE FINDING, UH, SIGNAGE IS SIMILAR TO CARRIAGES TRAILS ONE, UH, THAT EXHIBIT D, WHICH IS THE SIGN PACKAGE, WILL BE INCORPORATED, UH, INTO THIS BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. UH, MINIMUM LOT AREA FRONTAGE, ET CETERA, UH, IS ALSO SUPPOSED TO BE COMPATIBLE. UM, AS I MENTIONED AND WENT THROUGH THE CHARTS, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE EXTREMELY SIMILAR TO THE CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE DEVELOPMENT. UH, THE ARCHITECTURAL, UH, THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND THE DETAILING OF WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED, UH, ARE CONSISTENT WITH, UH, THE NON-RESIDENTIAL EXTERIOR STANDARDS IN BOTH THE ZONING CODE AS WELL AS WHAT A LOT OF THE MULTIFAMILY, UM, STRUCTURES THAT WERE BUILT, UH, RECENTLY, UH, IN THE DISTRICT. LASTLY, UM, PRIVATELY OWNED, UH, OPEN SPACE AND PUBLICLY DEDICATED PARK IS ENCOURAGED TO BE PART OF THAT, OF A PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, UH, AND, AND MAINTAINED BY, UM, THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. SO THE PROPOSED PARK WILL LIKELY BE OWNED BY THE CITY OR AN ENTITY OF, UM, AND THEN ALL OF THE OTHER SPACE, ALL OF THE OTHER OPEN SPACE IN THE, THE STORMWATER DETENTION BASINS, UH, WOULD BE MAINTAINED BY EITHER THE DEVELOPER OR THE FUTURE HOA. AS FAR AS THE, UM, PHASING, UM, THE PLAN MIXED USE DOES REQUIRE PHASING PLANS TO BE SUBMITTED AS PART OF, UH, THE DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, UM, WHERE IT, I, I THINK SEVEN VERY SECTIONS THAT, THAT YOU HAVE, HAVE SEEN OVER THE YEARS. UM, THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHOWS WHAT WILL LIKELY BE THE FIRST ONE OR TWO SECTIONS AT THE SOUTH END OF THE, OF THE DEVELOPMENT JUST NORTH OF CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE. UM, THE DEVELOPER WILL BRING IN THOSE FUTURE SECTIONS AS THEY HAVE, UM, JUST LIKE CARRIAGE TRAILS. UH, ONE LASTLY, UM, IS CONSISTENT. SO AS FAR AS STAFF ANALYSIS FOR THE STANDARDS OF APPROVAL, I'M GONNA HIT ON, UM, SIX ITEMS. THE FIRST ITEM IS WHETHER OR NOT THIS BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN, UH, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE PLAN, COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND OTHER APPROPRIATE OR APP APPLICABLE PLANS AND POLICY. SO THE ANNEXATION OF THIS LAND INTO THE CITY WAS RECENTLY APPROVED BY THE HUBER HEIGHT CITY COUNCIL, AND THERE WAS EXTENSIVE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE RESIDENTIAL NATURE OF THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. UM, ADDITIONALLY, THIS AREA WAS INCLUDED IN OUR ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS PART OF THAT NORTHTOWN PATTERN AREA. [00:30:01] SO THIS WAS NOT UNINTENDED, UH, UNEXPECTED, AND IT IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR, OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. UM, ADDITIONALLY, WE, UM, IT IS GOING TO TIE INTO THE, UH, EXTENSIVE ROAD NETWORK AS PART OF CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE, INCLUDING THE, UH, THE PARKWAY. SECONDLY, WHETHER, UH, THE DEVELOPMENT COULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETED WITH A PERIOD OF TIME SPECIFIED IN THE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE, UM, SUBMITTED BY THE DEVELOPER. THERE'S NOT AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, UM, BUT IN OUR DISCUSSIONS, UM, WE ANTICIPATE A 10 TO 15 YEAR BUILD OUT OF CARRIAGE TRAILS. TWO, UH, THAT'S FAIRLY SIMILAR TO WHAT HAS BEEN OCCURRING IN CARRIAGE TRAILS. UH, ONE THIS IS SMALLER THAN THE, UH, THAN CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE. SO I THINK THAT IS REASONABLE. UH, OF COURSE, IT ALL DEPENDS ON MARKET CONDITIONS. UM, THE FIRST PHASE I WOULD EXPECT TO BEGIN WITHIN THE NEXT 12 MONTHS OR SO. UH, AS FAR AS ACCESSIBILITY TO PUBLIC ROADS, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS, THE ROAD NETWORK WILL BE CONNECTED TO THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, LINKING IT TO OUR EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. UH, LASTLY, OR NOT LASTLY, BUT ONE OF THE ITEMS D IS SHALL NOT IMPOSE UNDUE BURDEN ON PUBLIC SERVICES SUCH AS UTILITIES, FIRE, POLICE PROTECTION IN SCHOOLS. SO THE SITE IS SERVED BY ADEQUATE UTILITIES, UH, OR UTILITIES THAT ARE IN CLOAKS PROXIMITY THAT WILL BE EXTENDED. THERE WAS EXTENSIVE DISC EXTENSIVE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT ON BETHEL SCHOOLS. UH, AND SO AS A RESULT, WE'VE DONE TWO THINGS. ONE, UH, WE'RE SETTING ASIDE AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT, THE 16 TO 18 ACRES FOR A NEW SCHOOL SITE. UM, AND SECONDLY, WE HAVE PROVIDED ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY FOR THE DEVELOPER TO BUILD UNITS THAT AREN'T TRADITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AND TRADITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ARE WHAT ADDS SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNTS OF KIDS COMPARED TO, UH, YOU KNOW, MULTIFAMILY OR SMALLER TYPE OF OF UNITS. UM, LASTLY, THE REZONING OF THIS LAND TO THE PUD DISTRICT AND APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PUBLIC PEACE, HEALTH, MORAL SAFETY OR WELFARE STAFF DOES NOT FEEL THAT THE REZONING OF THIS LAND WILL ADVERSELY, UH, AFFECT THE PUBLIC PEACE, HEALTH, SAFETY, UH, MORALS OR WELFARE . SO OTHER CONDITIONS OR OTHER COMMENTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED AS FAR AS, UH, INTERNALLY. SO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS RE APPROVED THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REZONING, UH, AND IN INITIAL CONCEPTS FOR TRA UH, TRANSPORTATION. UH, OF COURSE, AS SECTIONS COME IN, TURNING RADIUSES, FIRE PROTECTION, ALL OF THAT WILL REVIEW BE REVIEWED AT THE DETAILED DEVELOPMENT, UH, PHASE. THE CITY ENGINEER HAS PROVIDED, UH, NO COMMENTS ON THIS. UM, YOU RECEIVED, WE RECEIVED, UH, A COUPLE OF, UM, OPPOSITION EMAILS TODAY, WHICH WERE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET OR WERE PROVIDED TO YOU. UH, AND THOSE ARE THE ONLY COMMENTS THAT, THAT WE'VE RECEIVED, UH, TO THIS PARTICULAR CASE. SO, IT'S STAFF'S OPINION THAT THIS PROPOSAL MEETS THE STANDARDS OUTLINED IN 11 71 0 6. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN, UH, THAT WAS SUBMITTED ON AUGUST 20, AUGUST 20TH, 2024, TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO PLAN MIXED USE AND APPROVE THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN, INCORPORATING THE SUPPLEMENTAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT, UH, AND OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE ONE CONDITION THAT THE, UH, THAT THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS BE PERMITTED PER ZONING CODE. SO THAT WAS A LOT. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. , ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, MR. CASSIDY? YEAH, I, I HAVE SEVERAL, SO I DON'T SURE KNOW IF YOU WANT TO GO RIGHT AHEAD. SO I'LL PROBABLY BOUNCE AROUND JUST A LITTLE BIT. THAT'S GOOD. I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE ADUS FOR JUST A MINUTE. UM, I THINK WHAT I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY ADUS BUILT UNTIL THE CODE IS IN PLACE. OKAY. UM, OTHERWISE I JUST, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD WORK. UM, AND ONE OF THE THINGS TO THINK ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW, IF THE LOT SIZE IS GOING TO DETERMINE WHETHER AN A DU IS FEASIBLE FOR THAT PARTICULAR, UM, LOT. SO JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. UM, I'M SURE THE, THE MOA WOULD HAVE TO INCORPORATE SOMETHING ABOUT ADUS AS WELL. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME LEVEL OF CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE TWO JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY SERIOUS CONFLICTS THERE. 'CAUSE ADUS ARE PRETTY NEW FOR HUBER, AND SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE, WE DO IT RIGHT. SO, FAIR ENOUGH. YEAH. UM, ON, UH, [00:35:01] LET'S SEE, ON THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SUBMITTAL ATTACHMENT ON, UH, PAGE SIX, NUMBER NINE, ITEM THREE. I JUST HAD A QUESTION. SO WE DID OUTLINE SPECIFICALLY THE HARDY PLANK FIBER CEMENT, AND I DON'T THINK WE'VE DONE THAT PREVIOUSLY. IS OUR CODE UP TO SPEED ON THE HARDING PLANK SIDING OR THIS FIBER CEMENT SIDING? IT IS. WE ACTUALLY, WE DO, WE DO ALLOW THAT, UH, NOW. OKAY. YEAH. AND IT'S NOT CONSIDERED MASONRY, RIGHT? UM, IT IS ACTUALLY, YES. OKAY. YEAH. SO DOES THAT QUALIFY UNDER THE 20 OR 25% MASONRY FACADE THAT'S REQUIRED ON THESE UNITS? SO NOW I'M DOUBTING MYSELF . UM, THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY CONCERN. UM, SO, SO THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT, AND THIS WOULD TRUMP OUR CODE. THIS IS THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT IS IN THE CARIES TRAILS ONE, UM, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. AND SO WHAT HAS BEEN BUILT IS, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY STRAIGHT IS MOSTLY BRICK ALONG WITH HARDY PLANK, UH, ACCENTS. MM-HMM. . SO THIS MIRRORS EXACTLY WHAT IS, UH, IS BEING CONSTRUCTED TODAY AND WOULD WOULD TRUMP OUR ZONING REGULATIONS. OKAY. SO THERE WOULD NOT BE A REQUIREMENT FOR THE, I DON'T, WHAT IS IT, 20 OR 25% OF THE FACADE BEING MASONRY. SO WE REQUIRE 25% OF THE PRIMARY FACADE. YEAH. WE SH WE SH FOR A SINGLE STORY BUILDING IT, IT'S 25% OF THE PRIMARY FACADE. UM, AND THEN WE CHANGED IT SLIGHTLY FOR MULTIFAMILY BECAUSE IT USED TO BE A FULL WRAP. YEAH. THE ZONING CODE WAS A FULL WRAP. UH, AND, AND NO ONE IS REALLY DOING THAT. YEAH. YEAH. SO WE, WE BASICALLY CRAFTED THE CHANGES THAT WE MADE TO THE ZONING CODE, LARGELY BASED OFF THIS. UM, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT, UM, THIS REQUIRES, UH, 50% OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT TO HAVE MASONRY. THE ZONING CODE REQUIRES ALL OF THE HOMES TO HAVE SOME ELEMENT OF MASONRY. MM-HMM. . OKAY. YEAH. I JUST DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT THE HARDY PLANK SIDING SHOULD ACTUALLY COUNT AS MASONRY. SO I'LL LET MY COLLEAGUES DECIDE IF THEY AGREE, BUT I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S A, A MASONRY LOOK, EVEN THOUGH I KNOW IT'S A MASONRY PRODUCT TECHNICALLY. SO I JUST DON'T WANT TO GET SOME LOOPHOLE THERE WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO THE 25% ON HARDY PLANK SIDING. SO, SO, SO JAMES HARDY MAKES A NUMBER OF PRODUCTS, NOT JUST SHIPLAP. OKAY. UM, THEY DO MAKE A FAUX BRICK THAT LOOKS EXACTLY LIKE STONE. OKAY. THAT IS STILL TECHNICALLY HARDY PLANK, BUT IT'S NOT A SHIP LA LAP LOOK. OKAY. WHICH IS REALLY WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO AVOID. YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. UM, FIRE AND POLICE COVERAGE. YES. HAVE, HAVE WE HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CITY ON WHAT WE EXPECT THOSE NEEDS TO BE OVER THE PHASING PROCESS OF THIS? WE DID. WE HAD AN EXTENSIVE DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT AS PART OF THE ANNEXATION DISCUSSION. UM, I'M NOT SURE IT'S ON, IF I CAN FIND IT. THE, THE POLICE COVERAGE WAS RELATIVELY MINIMAL. UM, AS PART OF THE ANNEXATION DUE DILIGENCE DISCUSSION, WE DID HAVE PHASE IN OF WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED AS FAR AS NUMBER OF NEW OFFICERS AND NUMBER OF NEW, UM, PATROL CARS. YOU KNOW, MOST OF THAT COMES IN THE BACK END AS, AS THIS GETS BUILT OUT. SAME WAY WITH FOR FIRE. UM, WE, ONE OF, WE, THE DEVELOPER HAS AGREED TO DONATE TO US SUBJECT TO, UM, ANY RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT MIGHT EXIST WITH THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. THERE'S ABOUT THREE ACRES OF LAND. THAT IS WHERE THE ENTRANCE TO CARRIAGE TRAILS PARKWAY FROM BRANT, THERE'S A, THERE'S ABOUT A TWO AND A HALF ACRE PARCEL, WHICH WOULD BE PERFECT SITE FOR A FIRE STATION. UH, AND WE'VE, WE'VE, WE'VE LO WE'VE DONE THE DESIGN TO TO, TO CITE IT. UM, SO THAT COVERS REALLY BOTH, NOT ONLY CARRIAGE TRAILS, BUT ALSO KIND OF THE NORTHERN AREA OF WHERE WE ARE LACKING IN, IN COVERAGE ON, ON THAT EAST SIDE. NOT REALLY COVERAGE, BUT JUST SPEED AND ABILITY. THERE'S NOT MUCH OF, UH, AN EMS DEMAND, UM, 'CAUSE THIS IS A FAIRLY YOUNG COMMUNITY. UM, MOST OF THE EMS DEMAND COMES FROM THE, UH, REHAB FACILITY THAT'S OFF [00:40:01] OF RED BUCKEYE DRIVE. THAT'S MOST OF THE EMS RUNS, UH, AS FAR AS PUBLIC WORKS. WE ALSO, UM, HAVE FIGURED OUT THAT WE NEED, I THINK ONE, ONE OR TWO, UH, ADDITIONAL, UM, MAINTENANCE WORKERS AS WELL AS A, UH, A PLOW TRUCK. SO YEAH, WE WENT THROUGH AN EXTENSIVE DUE DILIGENCE PROCESS OF WHAT THE DEMAND ON SERVICES WOULD BE AFTER THAT 15, 10 TO 15 YEAR BUILD OUT. MM-HMM. . GOT IT. THANK YOU. UM, THE BETHEL SCHOOL BOARD, ARE THEY, MAYBE THIS IS MORE OF AN OPINION, ARE THEY RECEPTIVE TO THIS PLAN OF THE SET ASIDE FOR THE 16 TO 18 ACRES? I'M NOT SURE. UH, I HAVE NOT HAD DIRECT CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM. UM, THAT HAS BEEN HANDLED REALLY ON THE COUNCIL AND SIDE. UM, WE WANTED, I MEAN, THIS IS A LONG RUNWAY. UM, BUT SO WE WANTED TO AT LEAST SET ASIDE THE, THE LAND, UH, AND THIS IS, THIS LOCATION IS, IS PRETTY MUCH THE MOST CENTRAL AREA THAT WE COULD PUT FOR IN THE DEVELOPMENT. UH, THAT WOULD ALSO, UM, FACILITATE WALKING. UM, BUT THAT WILL BE A, A CONVERSATION THAT, THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE IF THIS ONE, IF THE ANNEXATION GOES THROUGH, WELL, THE APPLICATION DID GO THROUGH, IF THE REZONING AND BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THEN WE WOULD START UP INTENSIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH, UM, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ABOUT THIS. UH, WE ARE STILL ALSO, UM, IN DISCUSSIONS ON, UM, NO, THAT, YEAH. YEAH. GOT IT. THANK YOU. NO, THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION. UM, AND I JUST WANNA CLARIFY, I THINK, I THINK DON WEBB AND THE COUNCIL MEETING ACTUALLY ASKED THIS QUESTION, BUT I JUST WANNA CLARIFY. SO IN THE, UM, I THINK IT WAS A PRE ANNEXATION AGREEMENT. THERE WAS SORT OF A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WHERE BETHEL SCHOOLS COULD DECIDE KIND OF WHETHER TO BUILD OR NOT BUILD. AND THEN THERE WAS A FAIR AMOUNT OF DISCUSSION THAT SAYS THAT'S NOT A HARD AND FAST DEADLINE. SO I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT THERE IS FLEXIBILITY AROUND THAT BECAUSE IF WE'RE TALKING A 10 TO 15 YEAR TIMELINE TO, TO BUILD ALL THIS OUT, WE MAY NOT EVEN NEED ANYTHING AT, YOU KNOW, YEAR FIVE OR SOMETHING. SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S FLEXIBILITY, UM, THAT THE SCHOOL HAS TO BUILD IF AND WHEN THEY CHOOSE TO. YES. AND, AND THIS, THERE, THERE IS PLENTY OF FLEXIBILITY BUILT IN. UH, THIS IS NOT A CASE OF WHERE THE LAND WOULD BE SET ASIDE TOMORROW AND THE CLOCK STARTS TICKING AT THE FIVE YEARS. UM, I THINK THERE'S AMPLE, UH, TIME TO FIGURE OUT THE NEEDS, UH, BOTH THE NEEDS AND HOW TO, HOW TO FINANCE THIS AND GET THOSE, THOSE, THOSE STARS IN ALIGNMENT. OKAY. YEAH. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. YEAH, THE, YOU KNOW, WE GET TO YEAR 10 AND, AND THEY'VE STILL NOT NEEDED TO BUILD OR WANTED TO BUILD AND SOMEHOW THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THAT LAND ANYMORE. SO YEAH, THE WAY WE DRAFTED IT WAS THAT THE CLOCK STARTED TO TICK WHEN WE TRANSFERRED THE PROPERTY. UH, I DON'T KNOW IF WE WOULD TRANSFER THE PROPERTY OR IF IT WOULD BE A LAND LEASE, BUT WHAT WHAT WE DIDN'T WANT IS IF WE TRANSFERRED THE PROPERTY, IT SITS THERE INDEFINITELY AND THEN WE'RE HELD HOSTAGE. EXACTLY. UM, SO THAT, UH, THAT CLOCK TECHNICALLY WOULDN'T START TO TICK UNTIL THE, THE LAND TRANSFER HAPPENED. UH, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WOULD BE, IF I WERE ON THE SCHOOL BOARD, WOULD BE EXCITED TO TAKE THE LAND UNTIL WE KNOW HOW TO FINANCE IT. UH, SO I THINK THAT WE HAVE SAFEGUARDS ON BOTH SIDES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UH, SORRY, TWO MORE QUESTIONS. UM, DO YOU EXPECT ANY CHANGES TO ROUTE 40 AS A RESULT OF THIS? AND AND WHO MAKES THE CALL ON THAT? IS THAT COUNTY, IS THAT STATE? WHAT'S THE SO AT, AT THE POINT OF WHERE THEY'RE GETTING CLOSE TO WANTING TO BUILD, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT INTERSECTION THAT WOULD BE LARGELY CONTROLLED BY THE, THE BOTH THE CONVERSATION THE STATE WOULD WEIGH IN HEAVILY. IT'S OUR, IT'S OUR LAND NOW, IT'S WITHIN THE CITY. SO WE, WE CONTROL THAT DISCUSSION. BUT GIVEN THAT IT IS A FAIRLY HEAVILY TRAVELED STATE ROUTE, ODOT ISS GONNA HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR US . I, I MEAN, I WOULD FULLY ANTICIPATE THERE'S GONNA BE DROP DOWN LANES AND, AND THAT KIND OF THING. I MEAN, THERE WILL BE NEED, THERE WILL NEED TO BE IMPROVEMENTS MADE ON 40 AT A, AT A FUTURE TIME. YEAH. DO YOU EVER THINK THERE'S A POSSIBILITY FOR A LIGHT AT THAT MAIN INTERSECTION? I WOULD THINK THAT GIVEN OUR, UH, SO GIVEN OUR, UH, HISTORY WITH THE EAST SIDE OF, UM, CARRIAGES, TRAILS ONE, WE WOULD CERTAINLY PLAN FOR IT NOW. OKAY. UH, WHAT'S DIFFERENT BETWEEN THIS ANNEXATION AND PAST ANNEXATIONS, UH, IS YOU WEREN'T REQUIRED TO TAKE ALL OF THE ROADWAY. [00:45:01] UH, SO THAT'S WHY CARRIAGES THE EAST SIDE OF CARRIAGES TRAILS, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T GO ALL THE WAY. THE, THE HUBER PROPERTY LINE DOESN'T GO, ALL THE MUNICIPAL LINE DOESN'T GO EVEN ALL THE WAY TO THE ROAD. UH, SO THAT'S WHAT HAS HANDCUFFED US FOR SO LONG. OKAY. IT'S NOT THE CASE ON THE WEST SIDE. YEAH. ALRIGHT, LAST QUESTION AND THEN I'LL TURN IT OVER TO SOMEONE ELSE. UM, THOSE PARTIAL LANES ON BRANT PIKE THAT, UM, ARE SORT OF COMING OUT OF THAT EAST ENTRANCE AND THEY, THEY SORT OF STOP AT LEAST ON THAT SOUTHERN SIDE. AND THEN ON THE NORTHERN SIDE TOO, I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT BEFORE, THAT THERE'S SORT OF TWO EXTRA LANES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ROAD THERE, UM, OR ONE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ROAD. I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE SOME SERIOUS DISCUSSION HAPPENED ABOUT THE LANES BEING EXTENDED ALL THE WAY TO THAT EASTERN ENTRANCE IF THIS ENDS UP GOING THROUGH, BECAUSE THERE IS GONNA BE QUITE A BIT MORE TRAFFIC THERE. SO I DO THINK THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE CALCULUS THAT WE THINK ABOUT IN TERMS OF THE TRAFFIC FLOW. SO, UM, THAT IS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CARRIAGE TRAILS PARKWAY? YEAH. YEAH. SO THAT IS BEING DESIGNED, IT'S, IT'S 50% DESIGNED RIGHT NOW. UH, DECK DONATED 2.3 ACRES TO US TO BURN FOR US TO BE ABLE TO BRING THE CITY LINE OVER TO BRANT PIKES. SO WE CAN IN CON ONE CONSTRUCT THOSE THAT SOUTHBOUND THAT LANE. SO THERE'LL BE A, A SECOND SOUTHBOUND LANE AS YOU HEAD INTO TOWN. UH, AND THEN ALSO A, A TRAFFIC, UH, LIGHT, A TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT THAT SECTION. OKAY. SO IT'S BEING DESIGNED AS WE SPEAK. THANK YOU, MS. THOMAS. NOTHING AS OF RIGHT NOW. OKAY. MR. JEFFERIES. YEAH, I'VE JUST ECHOED DAVID'S COMMENTS ON THE ADUS AROUND THE ZONING, WHICH I THINK WE GOT THAT COVERED. I MEAN, I, I THINK A LOT SIZE WILL AFFECT WHAT CAN GO THERE BASED ON SETBACKS AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO DEFINE IF YOU ALREADY HAVE A SHED, CAN YOU HAVE A SECOND ACCESSORY UNIT? 'CAUSE RIGHT NOW YOU CAN'T. SO THAT I THINK IT'LL ALL GET WORKED OUT. DID, DID I HEAR YOU CORRECT ON THE, UH, THE FIRE STATION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT UP AT THE 2 0 1 ENTRANCE AREA INSTEAD OF IN THE PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT? CORRECT. OKAY. 'CAUSE THAT'S A BIT OF A CHANGE FROM WHAT WE HAD, WASN'T IT? IT, IT, IT, EVERYTHING WORKS BETTER IF IT'S ON THE OH, I AGREE. I THOUGHT IT WAS STUPID. NOT, NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE, UH, PENGUIN. UM, BUT IF IT'S ON THE WEST EDGE YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. NO, I THINK IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO BE ON 2 0 1. I MEAN, THAT'S THE RESPONSE TIME, SO I THINK MUCH BETTER. I WAS GLAD TO HEAR THAT. UM, AND THEN WITH THE, THE INFLUX THAT WE KNOW IS GONNA COME, I KNOW WE'VE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE, THE 2 0 2 ENTRANCE, SOME IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE COULD LOOK AT UP THERE. OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING UP THERE AND AT THE SAME TIME AS THE TRAFFIC LIGHT, BUT IS THAT STILL ON THE TABLE AS FAR AS FREEING UP THAT LEFT TURN WITH THAT CONTINUOUS LANE POSSIBLY? YOU REMEMBER WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT? YES. SO THE CHALLENGE THERE. YES. I, I KNOW WHAT, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. THE CHALLENGE ON THE OLD TROY PIKE SIDE IS THAT, UM, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH RIGHT OF WAY ON THE, THE WEST SIDE OF OLD TROY PIKE FOR US TO DO. YEAH. WE DON'T NEED IT TO DO WHAT I WAS LOOKING. WE CAN LOOK AT IT. I YEAH, I KNOW. YEAH. YEAH. EITHER WAY THERE'S ANYTHING LOOK AT, YEAH, IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE ON THAT END, I GUESS IT'D BE THE, THE THING IF WE CAN START TO SYNC THAT UP IS IF WE GET THE TRAFFIC LIGHT GOING AND WE GET ALL THIS GOING, THAT JUST LEAVES THAT END. IF THERE'S AN IMPROVEMENT WE CAN DO TO FREE UP THAT LEFT TURN LANE COMING SOUTHBOUND CORRECT. TO HELP EXPEDITE THAT. I, I, I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT THOUGHT ABOUT AS WELL. OKAY. SO, UH, IF WE HAVE ANYTHING AS FAR AS RESPONSES TO THE EMAILS THAT WERE SENT, WOULD THIS BE THE TIME TO ASK YOU A COUPLE QUESTIONS THERE? SHOULD WE GIVE THEM TIME TO SPEAK FIRST? UM, I, I, I THINK YOU, I WOULD HAVE, I WOULD LET THEM SPEAK AND THEN I CAN RESPOND IF YOU CHOOSE. OKAY. THANK YOU. I'LL HOLD THE OTHER COMMENTS THEN. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU SIR. MM-HMM, , WE'LL OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC. ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK FOR THE APPLICANT? GOOD EVENING. KEN CONAWAY WITH CARRIAGE TRAILS. IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE. MM-HMM. THAT IT HAS SINCE WE STARTED THIS IN 2009, TYPICALLY WOULD COME IN AND GIVE YOU KIND OF AN UPDATE ABOUT WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING IN A BIT OF A WALL. NOW, OF COURSE, AS WE, UH, AWAIT THE ANNEXATION PROCESS IN ZONING, WE DO HAVE, UH, ONE NORTH STREET, THE LAST STREET THAT YOU ALL PLATTED, UH, TO THE REMAINS TO BE COMPLETED AND CARRIED JOBS. THE SOUTH SECTION THAT WE'RE WORKING ON IS ABOUT FOUR HOMES LEFT TO BUILD OUT THERE THAT ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN SECTION TWO. AND I WAS THINKING ABOUT THIS TONIGHT. REMEMBER WE, I KNOW MOST OF YOU REMEMBER THE RED MAP THAT WE HAD, AND THEN AS WE COME IN MONTH AFTER MONTH, WE'D BE FILLING THAT [00:50:01] THING IN AND, UH, UNTIL WE GOT IT ALL FILLED IN, WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO STARTING THAT PROCESS AGAIN. UH, I'M HERE WITH BILL KEEF FROM MY OFFICE TONIGHT AND WE'RE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT, THAT YOU ALL MIGHT HAVE. UH, ONE MATTER OF BUSINESS POINT, THE SHADE TREES, UH, I UNDERSTOOD THAT WE WERE AGREEING TO PUT THE SHADE TREES IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, NOT BEHIND THE RIGHT OF WAY BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT 'EM GOING BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE CURB. SO BEFORE WE HAVE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS BEHIND THE RIGHT OF WAY, I THOUGHT WE MIGHT WANT TO JUST CLARIFY WHERE YOU ALL WOULD INTEND TO HAVE THE SHADE TREES. SO, SO MY PRE, EXCUSE ME, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY, UNLESS THERE'S UTILITIES THAT ARE GONNA BE A PROBLEM. AND THAT'S HARD TO KNOW AHEAD OF TIME. SOME, SOME STREETS HAVE UTILITIES BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE CURB AND SOME DON'T. RIGHT. BUT IF YOU WANT THAT CONSISTENT LOOK THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT, THEN THEY ALMOST NEED TO GO IN THAT AREA. YEAH. UH, IF YOU WANT TO AMEND THE LANGUAGE OR SAY SOMETHING THAT WOULD GIVE YOU SOME FLEXIBILITY AS TO WHETHER THEY'RE PLACED IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, UH, THAT SHOULDN'T CHANGE. ONCE A STREET DESIGN IS ESTABLISHED, IT WOULD, WE'D BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT IN A, UH, FINAL. AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DETERMINE AT THE DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN TOO. YEAH. BUT THE, THE POINT THAT I WAS MAKING IS THAT, THAT THAT AREA IS REALLY DEVOID OF, OF STREET TREES AND, AND SHADE TREES THAT REALLY ADD A LOT OF CHARACTER. SO I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT WITH THIS NEXT PHASE. AND WE DON'T DISAGREE. WE, WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THAT EARLY ON, TERRY, YOU PROBABLY REMEMBER. YEAH. BUT ORIGINALLY IN 2009 THERE WAS A CITY, UH, OPINION THAT YOU DIDN'T WANT TREES IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. RIGHT. SO THAT'S WHY WE PURPOSELY DIDN'T DO IT. BUT, UH, IT WOULD, IT'D BE A GREAT LOOK AND, AND FEEL AND THEN WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. SO I THINK WE CAN WORK THAT OUT DURING THE DETAILED. OKAY. DEPENDS WHAT TYPE OF INFRASTRUCTURE IS THERE, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A BIG DEAL OR NOT. SO WE DON'T NEED TO AMEND WHAT WE'VE GOT. I DON'T THINK SO. OKAY. YEAH. ALRIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. JEFFRIES CAN, ON THE ONES TOWARDS THE, I GUESS THE BACK LINES WHERE OBVIOUSLY THERE'S THE ANNEXATION, WHICH HAS BEEN DISCUSSED PLENTY, BUT THERE ARE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, STILL IN THERE THAT AREN'T PART OF THE ANNEX LAND. IS THERE STUFF THAT WE CAN DO EARLY IN THE DEVELOPMENT TO START BUFFERING ANY OF THAT OR PLANTING TREES OR AT LEAST KEEP IT IN MIND, I GUESS WE DON'T HAVE TO COMMIT TO A NAME, BUT IF AS YOU'RE LAYING OUT THE PLAN IN THE DEVELOPMENT, IF THERE'S SOMETHING WE CAN DO TO KIND OF START THAT EARLIER INSTEAD OF LATER TO LET THAT STUFF START TO MATURE BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT ACTUALLY GETS BACK THERE IF THERE'S ROOM, I GUESS THAT'D BE THE ONLY ASK. YEAH. WE, WE WILL WORK TOGETHER ON THAT. I MEAN, WE CAN LOOK AT TREES OR, AND THEN MAYBE JUST TRY TO STAY TWO YEARS OUT AHEAD OF OURSELVES OR SOMETHING TO GET 'EM GONE SO THAT THEY MATURE A BIT BEFORE THAT. YEAH. JUST SOMETHING TO SHOW WE'RE TRYING TO GET EFFORT TO HELP OUT WITH THE GROWTH A LITTLE. YEAH. NO, THERE WILL BE SOME PLACES THAT WE WON'T HAVE TO CLEAR TO THE PROPERTY LINE. RIGHT. UH, THAT I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CASE CASES WHERE, WHERE IT'S CLEAR PRESENTLY OR IT YEAH. BECAUSE MEAN YOU'VE GOT A THICK TREE LINE ON ONE SIDE ALREADY. OBVIOUSLY THAT'S THERE IF YOU, AS LONG AS IT STAYS. BUT IF, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ONES THAT'S JUST FARMLAND UP TO HOUSING, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S STUFF THAT'S GOING TO, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO COME THEIR WAY. IF THERE'S STUFF WE CAN DO AHEAD OF TIME, IT, IT TAKES A WHILE FOR THOSE TREES TO GET GOING OBVIOUSLY. OR SO. WELL IF THERE'S ANYTHING WHEN WE GET, IF WE MOVE AS WE MOVE FORWARD. YEP. I'LL ASSUME THAT, UH, I WOULD BE IN ON A FAIRLY REGULAR BASIS LOOKING AT PLAN APPROVAL. CORRECT. AND WE CAN DO LIKE WE DID IN THE PAST WHERE WE ALWAYS LOOK OUT LIKE A YEAR AHEAD AND TALK ABOUT WHAT WE'RE PLANNING ON OR TWO YEARS AND THEN WE COULD LOOK AT WHAT THE, UH, SCREENING PROTECTION IS IN THAT AREA. THANKS MR. CASSIDY. I HAVE SEVERAL. OKAY. UM, JUST REAL QUICK ON THE TREES IN THIS RIGHT OF WAY, ONCE THEY'RE PLANTED, 'CAUSE I SAW WHERE THE HOMEOWNER'S GONNA BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PLANNING THOSE, UM, OR ASKED TO PAY FOR IT OR SOMETHING. ARE THOSE GONNA BE A REQUIREMENT TO BE MAINTAINED IN PERPETUITY OR HOW ARE WE GONNA ADDRESS THAT? WELL, OR DO WE KNOW? IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. UH, THE MOA HAS MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES, BUT IF SOMEBODY CHOOSES NOT TO WATER THEIR SHRUBS OR THEIR TREES, IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE, UH, YOU KNOW, MAINTENANCE. UH, TECHNICALLY THEY'RE ON THE LOT. 'CAUSE EVEN IF IT'S IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, IT'S PART OF THAT LOT LINE. AND THE HOMEOWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OVER THE SIDEWALK TO THE CURB. SO IT WOULD BE WITHIN THE AREA OF THEIR MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY, BUT THE ENFORCEABILITY OF ENSURING THAT THAT HAPPENS IS A DIFFERENT, IS ANOTHER ISSUE. OKAY. THAT WOULD NOT BE UNIQUE TO THIS DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH [00:55:01] EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUE. I GET IT. OKAY. UM, I'M GONNA GO BACK TO THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTAL, UM, ON PAGE SIX. I'VE GOT A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS HERE. UM, I'M A BIT OF A DISA ANGLE. I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME THAT YEAH. YEAH. I, I'LL, I I THINK YOU'LL BE ABLE TO ANSWER 'EM WITHOUT REFERENCE. YEAH. SO, UM, JUST FOR THOSE FOLLOWING ALONG, IT'S PAGE SIX, NUMBER NINE, ITEM TWO. UH, IT MENTIONS AN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE. IS THAT, IS THAT PART OF THE, WHO IS THAT? I GUESS I'VE NEVER HEARD OF THAT. OKAY, SO THE DEVELOPER STILL IS IN CONTROL OF THE MOA. SO WITHIN OUR GROUP WE REVIEW ALL HOUSE PLANS. SO THAT'S THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE. ACTUALLY IT'S BILL AND MYSELF. OKAY. SO OUR PROCESS IS BEFORE A PLAN IS APPROVED HERE FOR A ZONING PERMIT, YOU, THE CITY REVIEWS ALL THE HOUSE PLANS FOR THE SECTION. SO WE WILL INTRODUCE NEW PLANS FOR THIS BUILD OUT, BUT IN CARRIAGE TRAILS ONE, EVERY PLAN THAT'S APPROVED HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY YOUR ZONING DEPARTMENT SIGNED OFF ON. SO WE BRING THE BUILDER'S PLANS IN, THEY GO THROUGH 'EM, THEY LOOK FOR THE MASONRY FACADE, THEY LOOK FOR ROOF SLOPES, THEY LOOK FOR SETBACKS, UH, LOT COVERAGE AND SO FORTH. AND THEN THEY SIGN OFF ON THE PLAN. THEN IF THE BUILDER WANTS TO BUILD THAT HOUSE SIX DIFFERENT WAYS, OR WITH A BAY WINDOW OR THREE CAR GARAGE OR SOMETHING, YOUR ZONING DEPARTMENT KNOWS THAT IT'S OKAY TO ISSUE A ZONING CERTIFICATE ON IT. SO WE HAVE OUR INTERNAL REVIEW, WE MAKE SURE THAT IT MEETS THE, THE STREETSCAPE PRIMARILY. WE JUST WE'RE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE LOOK, UH, THAN WE ARE ALL THE STATISTICS THAT YOUR ZONING DEPARTMENT LOOKS FOR. BUT THAT'S THE REVIEW PROCESS. WE DO THE INITIAL REVIEW, THE CITY DOES THE FINAL REVIEW, AND THEN THE ZONING PERMITS ISSUED, UH, ON A, UH, APPLICATION BASIS AS THEY BRING PERMITS IN. GOT IT. THANK YOU FOR EDUCATING ME ON THAT. UM, THERE'S ALSO THE MOA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE, DOES THAT FUNCTION THE SAME WAY? CORRECT. OKAY. AND THEN ON UH, NUMBER 13, IT SAYS THAT THE MHA WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN CONJUNCTION WITH OR PRIOR TO THE FIRST DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN. I WOULD MUCH RATHER SEE AT LEAST A DRAFT OF THAT AT THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN STAGE. UM, I THINK THAT THAT'S GONNA BE AN IMPORTANT DOCUMENT THAT THOSE IMPACTED ARE GONNA WANT TO HAVE SOME FEEDBACK ON. EVEN IF THIS AND WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE DOCUMENT AGAIN? I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T, IT'S THE, I'LL JUST READ IT. IT SAYS PROCEDURAL CONDITIONS. ALL OF THE ABOVE STANDARDS SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR THE MASTER HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, WHICH WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN CONJUNCTION WITH OR PRIOR TO THE FIRST DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE, THAT'S BEEN DONE. OKAY. CAN YOU CONFIRM AARON THAT'S BEEN DONE? YEAH, I'VE GOT A COPY OF ALL THAT. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. WELL, THAT ANSWERS THAT ONE. UM, I'LL ASK ABOUT THIS AND THEN I'LL LET SOME OTHERS TALK, BUT IT, THERE, THERE HAVE BEEN SOME COMMENTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED AROUND MOA ANNUAL MEETINGS NOT BEING HELD, UH, AND SOME DISCONTENT WITH THE FACT THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE A LACK OF HOMEOWNER INVOLVEMENT IN THE MOA. IS THERE ANY COMMENTS OR CONTEXT THAT YOU CAN SET FOR US AROUND THAT? WELL, I WASN'T SURE HOW FAR DOWN THIS ROAD Y'ALL WANT TO GO TONIGHT, SINCE IT'S WELL BEYOND THE PURVIEW OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT I'LL BE HAPPY TO GIVE A GENERAL ANSWER THAT'S OKAY WITH THE LAW DIRECTOR. FINE TO DIGRESS IF HE'S GOT A QUESTION. OKAY. SO THE MOA WAS SET UP BEFORE WE DID THIS PROCESS IN 2008, 2007. SO WE DESIGNED IT, WE, WE DEVELOPED IT, WROTE ALL THE CRITERIA FOR IT, AND WROTE IN A MANNER THAT WE COULD MAINTAIN MANAGEMENT OF IT UNTIL WE WERE FINISHED THE BUILD OUT AT CARRIAGE TRAILS. WITH THAT ASSURANCE THAT WE HAD THAT CONTROL, WE'VE, WE'VE INVESTED OVER TWO AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS INTO VMO AND WE'VE DONE THAT BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THAT WHEN WE STARTED CARRIAGE TRAILS, THE FIRST HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT IN CARRIAGE TRAILS DIDN'T PAY THE $400,000 THAT THE MOA COST THAT YEAR. THEY PAID ONE 2000TH OF IT. AND THAT'S HOW WE'VE ALWAYS CHARGED THE MOA ASSESSMENT. OKAY. WE HAVE COVERED ALL OF THE UNBUILT HOUSES TO DATE. SO IF THERE'S A LOT THAT'S FACTORED [01:00:01] INTO THE OVERALL BUDGET, IT'S A NONPROFIT, WE DON'T MAKE MONEY ON IT, WE JUST COVER OUR EXPENSES. SO IF THERE'S 2000 PEOPLE PAYING, THERE'S 1,478 HOMES, THERE'S SOME NUMBER OF MULTIFAMILY UNITS, SOME NUMBER OF CONDOS, THEY'RE ALL PAYING IN EACH QUARTER TO THE MOA IF, IF WE'RE NOT COMPLETE ON ANY OF THE BUILD OUT, WE'RE STILL MAKING THAT UP. OKAY. UH, EVEN IF THEY DON'T PAY ON TIME. SO WHEN THEY'RE LATE, THE DEVELOPERS STILL PAYING THAT UP. WE HAVE AN INTEREST IN, IN MAKING SURE THE MOA IS SOLVENT. UH, WE HAVE OBLIGATIONS TO THE CITY UNDER THE MOA, THE PARKWAY MAINTENANCE, THE GREEN SPACE MAINTENANCE, THAT'S PART OF THE PUBLIC ACCESS EVEN. SO OUR INTEREST IS TO ENSURE THE SOLVENCY OF THE MOA, THE MANAGEMENT OF IT ALLOWS US TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BUILD OUT OF CARRIAGE TRAILS CONTINUES UNDER THE SAME STANDARD QUALITY THAT IT HAS TO DATE. THE MAINTENANCE IS TAKEN CARE OF AND MULTIPLE TIMES DURING THE COURSE OF THE YEAR, WE'RE FUNDING IT BECAUSE DELINQUENCIES ARE A HUGE PROBLEM. THE MEETINGS ARE NOT A REQUIREMENT OF THE MOA. SO IF YOU, WHEN YOU GET THE COPY FROM AARON, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE ANNUAL MEETING IS NOT A REQUIREMENT. THE ONLY ANNUAL, THE ONLY REQUIREMENT IS TO PUBLISH THE BUDGET, WHICH WE'VE DONE EVERY YEAR. WE HAD MEETINGS UP UNTIL COVID. WE ACTUALLY HAVE A MEETING SCHEDULED FOR THIS YEAR. WE'VE GOT ENOUGH INTEREST IN HAVING ANOTHER MEETING THAT WE HAVE A MEETING SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 16TH THIS YEAR TO START THAT PROCESS. SO, UM, DID I COVER ALL YOUR QUESTIONS ON THAT OR? I THINK SO, YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR ME. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ZONING CASE? NO. ALRIGHT. TO SIGN. COME ON. ADAM, IF YOU WOULD, IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME AND SIGN IN PLEASE. MICHAEL SEAL, 91 10 MAN ROAD. I OWN THE PROPERTY THERE. 14 AND A HALF ACRES. THIS THE CLARIFICATION, I'LL SHOW YOU WHERE IT'S I OWN PROPERTY RIGHT HERE. I GO BACK THERE. I FEEL IF YOU APPROVE THIS REZONING, YOU'RE PRETTY MUCH GONNA DESTROY MY PROPERTY ENVIRONMENTALLY. IT'S GONNA BE A NUISANCE THERE FOR THE NEXT 10 TO 15 YEARS WHILE CONSTRUCTION'S GOING ON. I ALREADY HAVE TRASH BLOWING OVER FROM CARRIAGE TRAIL ONE WHERE THEY WAS BUILDING THE LAST BUNCH OF HOUSES ONTO MY PROPERTY. THERE'S GONNA BE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TO THE, TO MY PROPERTY AND THE COMMUNITY. GONNA BE A STRESS ON THE, UH, SCHOOL SYSTEM POLICE, FIRE AND EMS SERVICES. ARE GONNA BE STRESSED, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE GONNA PUT SEVEN UNITS TO AN ACRE, WHICH I, I BELIEVE THAT'S WAY TOO MANY. SO I THINK YOU NEED TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AT ALL THIS BEFORE YOU MAKE A DECISION AND SEE IF THEY'VE DONE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, SEE IF THEY'VE DONE COMMUNITY IMPACT STUDIES. AND ALSO I BELIEVE THEY NEED TO MEET WITH ODOT AND SEE WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO ABOUT THE TRAFFIC PROBLEM. 'CAUSE THERE'S ALREADY BAD TRAFFIC PROBLEMS. IF YOU TRY TO GO DOWN 2 0 2, BETWEEN THREE AND SIX O'CLOCK ANY DAY OF THE WEEK, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A PROBLEM GETTING TO TAYLORSVILLE ROAD FROM TWO OH FROM TWO OH FROM 40 DOWN 2 0 2 AND TWO OH ONE'S ALMOST AS BAD. AND THERE'S A WRECK, AT LEAST ONE WRECK A WEEK UP THERE. CARRIAGE TRAILS DRIVE AND 2 0 1. AND I KNOW THEY SAY IT'S BEING ADDRESSED, BUT I'VE NOT SEEN ANYTHING HAPPENING YET. IT'S BEEN BEING ADDRESSED FOR QUITE SOME TIME NOW. BUT I SEE A LOT OF WRECKS THERE. I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE TRAFFIC STUDIES DONE. I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES DONE, AND I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A COMMUNITY IMPACT STUDY DONE BEFORE YOU GUYS MAKE A DECISION. SO THAT'S REALLY ALL ABOUT ALL I'VE GOT TO SAY. BUT I AM OBJECTING TO THAT BEING REZONED TO RESIDENTIAL WITH SEVEN UNITS PER ACRE. NOW, I MIGHT NOT OBJECT IF IT WAS LIKE TWO OR THREE UNITS PER ACRE, BUT, AND ALSO I THINK WHEN THEY STARTED OUT THERE WAS GONNA BE 900 UNITS BUILT BACK THERE WHEN THEY FIRST STARTED TALKING ABOUT THIS. NOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH 20% [01:05:01] IN GREEN SPACE, WE'RE TALKING UP TO ABOUT 1500, 1600 UNITS BACK THERE WHEN IT STARTED OUT AT 900. BUT NOW THAT IT'S ANNEXED AND ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S JUMPED UP ABOUT FIVE OR 600 UNITS. SO I THINK YOU, UH, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF YOU'D REALLY, UH, TAKE A HARD LOOK AT IT BEFORE YOU MAKE A DECISION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE ZONING CASE? OKAY. HELLO, MY NAME IS SHEENA MAYS AND I AM ACTUALLY GOING TO SAY A FEW THINGS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY THAN I HAD INTENDED TO TONIGHT. UM, MR. CONWAY, YOU ACTUALLY GAVE US MORE INFORMATION JUST IN THE TIME THAT YOU WERE AT THIS PODIUM THAN I HAVE HAD THE ENTIRE TIME THAT I'VE LIVED IN CARRIAGE TRAILS ABOUT THE MOA AND FOR RESIDENTS IN CARRIAGE TRAIL. RIGHT NOW, IT'S A PRETTY HUGE DEAL BECAUSE THERE IS A HUGE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY AND COMMUNICATION. AND THAT IS A PROBLEM ON MULTIPLE LEVELS BECAUSE AS THE LETTER THAT YOU RECEIVED FROM A GROUP OF OWNERS, UM, FROM CARRIAGE TRAILS STATED, WE BELIEVE THAT WE ARE AT A POINT WHERE WE DESERVE TO BE RELEASED FROM AN MOA AND THE TRANSFER OF CONTROL SHOULD BE TURNED OVER TO US. NOW, I DO REALIZE THAT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF LOTS ON BUTTERCUP THAT THOSE PARCELS HAVE BEEN SITTING IDLE BECAUSE THEY DON'T MEET THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AGREED TO BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUBER AND DEC LANCO. UM, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, HE HASN'T HAD QUALIFYING PROPERTY SINCE OCTOBER OF 2023. EXCUSE ME. NOT TO INTERRUPT, BUT JUST TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE I'VE SEEN THIS GO ON A WHILE. HE AND DECK ARE NOT THE THE DEVELOPER. THANK YOU. THE DEVELOPER AS DEFINED BY THE SECTION IN OUR MASTER DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR CARRIAGE TRAILS, OUR CCRS, UM, THAT TRANSFER SHOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN INITIATED AND STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT SMALLER HOAS DO BETTER. SO OWNERS ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT 10 TO 15 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD. WHAT IT'S, WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE AT THIS POINT, FIRST OF ALL, BECAUSE THERE ARE 1400 HOMES, LIKE THAT'S GONNA BE A LARGE MESS. BUT ULTIMATELY, WHAT'S IT GONNA LOOK LIKE LATER? AND IS THERE A PLAN FOR THAT? BUT WE HAVE VERY LITTLE TO GO ON BECAUSE WE DON'T GET COMMUNICATION. WE HAD, I HAD TO EMAIL THE OFFICE OF THE DEVELOPER TO GET THE CCRS UPDATED. WE JUST GOT THEM AT THE END OF LAST MONTH. YOU ALL HAD THEM TWO YEARS BEFORE WE DID. THE LAST NEWSLETTER WE HAD WAS IN APRIL. IT BASICALLY TOLD US THAT WE HAD GREEN SPACE WE SHOULD BE UTILIZING AND THAT PEOPLE WERE LATE ON THEIR MOA DUES AND THEY NEEDED TO PAY THEM. AND I AGREE THAT THEY DO. UM, THE FINANCIAL UPDATES THAT WE GET ARE THE EQUIVALENT OF END OF THE YEAR BUDGETS FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR. AND THEY'RE VERY INSUFFICIENT AND INADEQUATE. UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE EVER FOUND AN END OF THE YEAR REPORT. SO WE HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE KIND OF STUFF HE WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT. SO BASIC EXPECTATIONS FOR TRANSPARENCY AND COMMUNICATION CONTINUE TO GO UNMET. AND IT JUST FEELS LIKE THERE IS A PROFIT OVER PEOPLE, UM, MENTALITY GOING ON A LOT OF TIMES. AND PROFITS ARE PRIORITIZED OVER SUSTAINABILITY [01:10:02] IN THIS DEVELOPMENT. I DON'T, UM, LOOKING AT THAT MAP AND KNOWING SOME OF THE THINGS THAT, UM, WAS SAID EARLIER ABOUT THE SCHOOL, AND I'M A FORMER EDUCATOR. I USED TO WORK WITH VERY LOW INCOME SCHOOL CHILDREN. AND KNOWING THAT SOMEONE FROM THIS COMMITTEE HASN'T SPOKEN AND HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH BETHEL AND DOESN'T KNOW HOW THEY FEEL, I WATCHED A MEETING FROM BETHEL SCHOOL DISTRICT. I'VE LIVED FOR, LET ME SAY THIS, I'VE LIVED HERE FOR A YEAR. I WATCHED A CONVERSATION GO ON WITH BETHEL SCHOOL BOARD AND THE THINGS THAT I HEARD WAS, WE DON'T KNOW. WE DON'T HAVE A SAY. IT IS WHAT IT IS. THAT SHOULD NOT BE THE SITUATION. YOU GUYS, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO SAY TO YOU ALL LIKE THIS ZONING. IT'S NOT THAT, IT'S NOT THAT THE RESIDENTS OF CARRIAGE TRAILS ARE NECESSARILY ALL AGAINST DEVELOPMENT, MOVING AHEAD, HAVING THINGS BETTER. IT'S JUST THAT SOMETIMES THE PRACTICES SEEM A LITTLE UNETHICAL AND THERE'S NEGLECTFUL BEHAVIOR GOING ON. AND WE JUST NEED THAT YOU, WE NEED YOU ALL TO REALIZE THAT SOME OTHER THINGS NEED TO GO ON. UM, AND MAYBE YOU ALL HAVE THE POWER TO GIVE A LITTLE SUPPORT TO YOUR COMMUNITY BY MAKING, UM, THE DEVELOPER TAKE A LOOK AT, UM, WHAT MIGHT ACTUALLY BE BEST FOR THE HOMEOWNERS THAT CURRENTLY LIVE THERE BEFORE THEY START EXPANDING THE COMMUNITY. MR. JEFFRIES? YES. SO JUST MS. MAX, JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE DID GET THE LETTER, THE EMAIL THAT YOU SENT. YES. OKAY. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ETHICAL STUFF, TO GO ONLINE AND MAKE COMMENTS THAT THEY LIE BECAUSE THERE WERE NO EMAILS RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION ABOUT A PACKET DATED FOR THE FOURTH WHEN WE GOT YOUR LETTER TODAY. THAT'S A LITTLE MISREPRESENTATIVE. ALSO, I AM AN OWNER IN CARRIAGE TRAILS. WHEN I SEE A LETTER COME THROUGH, THAT'S A LEGAL THREAT ON BEHALF OF THE OWNERS OF CARRIAGE TRAILS. THAT DID NOT INVOLVE ME. JUST SO THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT I'M NOT PART OF THAT AND I ACTUALLY DON'T WANT IT TURNED OVER TO THE RESIDENTS. I THINK OUR HOA HAS RUN WELL. SO THAT'S MY PART OF THAT. NOW I DO HAVE A QUESTION BECAUSE THERE IS ALL THAT WE SHOULD HAVE CONTROL. WHAT IS MISSING FROM THE HOA THAT IS NOT BEING DONE? THAT THE RESIDENTS IN YOUR CASE ARE DEMANDING? WHAT IS MISSING FROM THE HOA? THEY SAY WE'RE NOT GETTING SOMETHING. SO WHAT IS IT THAT YOU WANT US TO HAVE THEM DO OTHER THAN TURN IT OVER TO YOU? WELL, PER THE MASTER DECLARATIONS OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN TURNED OVER THAT ASIDE. WHAT IF, IF WE ASK THEM TO DO SOMETHING, WHAT WOULD OTHER THAN TURN IT OVER TO YOU? 'CAUSE THAT'S ILLEGAL. IF YOU, THAT'S A LEGAL ISSUE. ASK, WHAT DO YOU WANT US TO ASK FOR THEM TO DO? IF I WOULD LIKE RESCIND AND AMEND THIS APPLICATION SO THAT IT DOESN'T AS AN HOA, WHAT DO YOU WANT THE HOA TO DO THAT THEY ARE NOT CURRENTLY DOING OR OFFERING? THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. IF YOU'RE WANTING US TO BE IN A POWERFUL A POSITION TO ASK THEM TO DO SOMETHING, BE MORE TRANSPARENT. OKAY. COMMUNICATE. OKAY. SO ASSOCIATE, THEY SUCK. I DEAL WITH ASSOCIATE TOO. THEY'RE HORRIBLE. THAT IS AGAIN, AND, AND IT, IT IS, IT'S, BUT THE DOCUMENTS HAVE TO GET TO THEM BEFORE THEY CAN SHARE THEM WITH THE HOMEOWNERS. THEY ALSO HAVE TO RETURN YOUR PHONE CALL BEFORE THEY CAN SHARE 'EM. BUT SORRY, I'M, I'M ASSOCIATE DOES I'M I'M WITH YOU THERE. THEY DO. I'M STILL WAITING ON, AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT KIM IS REALLY SICK OF MY NAME POPPING UP IN HER EMAIL BOX, BUT SHE DOES RESPOND TO ME AT THIS POINT. OKAY. UM, BUT IS IT, I MEAN, ARE WE LOOKING AT, IS IT AMENITIES? IS THERE A MAINTENANCE THAT'S NOT BEING DONE? IT'S IS IT? YEAH. MAINTENANCE WAS NOT BEING DONE. OKAY. UM, [01:15:01] BUT THE DEVELOPER RECEIVED REQUESTS BECAUSE THERE WERE RESIDENTS THAT WERE TALKING ABOUT, FOR INSTANCE, LIGHTS THAT NEEDED TO BE FIXED THAT HAD BEEN LAYING ON THE GROUND FOR A YEAR, A YEAR AND A HALF. AND THAT'S WHAT, NOT ME. OKAY. RESIDENTS WORDS, NOT MINE. UM, AND SO REQUESTS WERE SUBMITTED AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT THEY WERE TAKEN CARE OF, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS HAS NOT BEEN THE CASE. OKAY. IN THE PAST. SO IMPROVED MAINTENANCE IS WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE? CORRECT. THE THINGS BEING TAKEN CARE OF WHENEVER, AND PEOPLE KNOWING HOW TO DO THAT. THERE'S SUCH A HIGH TURNOVER RATE IN CARRIAGE TRAILS AT THIS POINT. UM, I THINK PEOPLE COME IN LIKE, WHENEVER I MOVED THERE, I HAD NO IDEA WHO TO CONTACT. OKAY. NO ONE TELLS YOU THAT. OKAY. BUT THAT UNFORTUNATELY, TOO IS NOT THE DEVELOPERS THAT THAT WOULD BE A REALTOR. A REALTOR EDUCATION. AND I AGREE, THE COMMUNITY DOES A GOOD JOB IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PAGE OF TRYING TO HELP NEW COMMUNITY MEMBERS. THAT IS CORRECT. BUT THAT'S ALSO SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE WITHIN THAT APP THAT WE ALL HAVE ACCESS TO. MM-HMM. IT, AND I WOULD IMAGINE IT SHOULD ALSO BE PART OF THE CLOSING DOCUMENTS WHEN YOU BUY AN A DEED RESTRICTED COMMUNITY, THAT'S YOUR COVENANTS OR THAT MADE OF HERE. 'CAUSE I KNOW YOUR, YOUR LENDER REQUIRES CERTAIN THINGS. THE TITLE COMPANY REQUIRES CERTAIN THINGS. SO SOMEBODY ELSE OTHER THAN JUST THE DEVELOPER IN THE HO A'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIND, WHAT DOES THE HOA SPECIFIC, I MEAN, SOCIO HAS ACCESS TO ALL OF THAT STUFF. THERE'S, THERE'S A PLACE IN THAT APP FOR THEM TO LIST CONTACT INFORMATION. THEY COULD LIST CONTACT INFORMATION FOR DEVELOPERS AND THE HOA, IT'S NOT THERE. I'VE NEVER LOOKED AT IT TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH. SO I'VE NEVER NEEDED, SORRY, CAN I JUST INTERJECT HERE? SO OBVIOUSLY THE ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT IS, IS AN ISSUE WITH SOME CORRECT. UM, BUT WE ARE, WE ARE STARTING TO DRIFT WELL BEYOND THE, UH, THAT'S WHY I STOPPED YES. THE, UH, THE SCOPE OF WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR. YEP. I APOLOGIZE. THAT'S OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE ZONING CASE? MS. LINDA . THIS IS PROBABLY WHAT MIKE WAS REFERRING TO ABOUT TRASH BLOWING. MM-HMM. , UM, PROBABLY IN HIS YARD. YEP. THIS IS WHAT I AGREE WITH YOU A HUNDRED PERCENT ON THAT DEAL WITH. UM, AND I KNOW SOME OF THE , I I WILL COMMENT, JUST SO YOU KNOW, MS. SCHWARTZ, I DEALT WITH THAT EXACT ISSUE ALSO, AND I WENT DIRECTLY TO THE BUILDER. THAT'S NOT YOU. YEAH. I WENT DIRECTLY TO THE BUILDER MULTIPLE TIMES TO ADDRESS THAT. SO AGAIN, JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE SILO THE BLAME WHERE IT NEEDS TO GO. 'CAUSE I THINK THAT'S THE FIX IS EVERYBODY KNOWING WHO'S ACTUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT. I I HAD THAT. YEAH. I'M, I'M FULLY, I'M FULLY AWARE I'M NOT. OKAY. I'M TALKING ABOUT, UM, THE ZONING, THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND MY THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS AND WHAT I EXPERIENCED IN THE COMMUNITY AS TO WHY I AM FOR OR AGAINST IT. UM, I THINK YOU TOOK THE SIGN IN SHEET, BUT I'M CINDY SCHWARTZ CARE TRAILS, UH, OG . UM, I'M A LIFELONG RESIDENT OF HUBER HEIGHTS, AND I CURRENTLY RESIDE IN WHAT'S COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS CARE TRAIL ONE. I STAND BEFORE YOU TODAY AS A CONCERNED CITIZEN AND AN ADVOCATE FOR RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT, SAFETY, OVERALL WELFARE AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN THIS COMMUNITY. OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, I HAVE VOICED OPPOSITION TO THESE DECISIONS LIKE THE ANNEXATION OF ADDITIONAL LAND FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. NOT OUT OF RESISTANCE FOR GROWTH, BUT BECAUSE THE IMPACT ON PUBLIC PEACE, SAFETY, OVERALL COMMUNITY WELLBEING. UNFORTUNATELY, THE VOICES OF RES RESIDENTS LIKE MINE WERE OVERSHADOWED BY THE ONES OF A FEW. AND AT THE EXPENSE OF WHAT WE TRULY NEED. PROPER PLANNING AND CONSIDERATION FOR CHALLENGES THAT WE ALREADY FACE TODAY. I WANTED TO BRING TO LIGHT SOME ONGOING ISSUES WE EXPERIENCED IN CARRIAGE TRAILS, PARTICULARLY REGARDING PUBLIC SAFETY. EXCESSIVE SPEED ON BOTH THE PARKWAY AND RESIDENTIAL STREETS IS A DAILY CONCERN. STREETS LIKE LAKESIDE AND SENA, UH, WHERE HOMES ARE JUST 25 FEET FROM THE ROAD AND CHILDREN PLAY OUTSIDE REGULARLY. NOT REGULARLY. WE SEE CARS SPEEDING AT AT LEAST 45 MILES PER HOUR, I'D IMAGINE. I DON'T HAVE A RADAR GUN. UM, THESE AREN'T MA MAJOR THOROUGHFARES. THEY'RE [01:20:01] NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS. AND WITH THE HOMES SO CLOSE TOGETHER IN LIMITED SPACE FOR PARKING, IT BECOMES A HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENT. PARKING IS ANOTHER SERIOUS ISSUE. AS OUTLINED IN OUR MOA, WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO PARK IN DRIVEWAY EXTENSIONS PAST THE FRONT OF OUR HOMES, FORCING MORE CAR CARS ONTO THE STREETS. HOW MANY HOUSEHOLDS HAVING MORE, OR WITH HOW? WITH MANY HOUSEHOLDS HAVING MORE DRIVERS THAN AVAILABLE GARAGE OR DRIVEWAY SPACE, STREET PARKING BECOMES UNAVOIDABLE. SO IN, IN MY HOME, I HAVE FIVE UH, DRIVERS. I CAN ONLY PARK TWO IN THE GARAGE, TWO IN THE DRIVEWAY WITHOUT BLOCKING THE SIDEWALK PER CITY CODE. UM, THE OTHER ONE'S GOTTA, IT'S GOTTA BE ON THE STREET AND WITH THEM RAI AND ARROW, IT. UM, THE STAFF REPORT CLAIMS THAT THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY ADEQUATELY SUPPORT HOUSEHOLDS. BUT THAT IS, BUT IT'S CLEAR THAT THEY DON'T. ADDING ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS IS AS, AS THE CURRENT PLAN SUGGESTS, WILL ONLY EXACERBATE THESE ISSUES. THESE ADU WILL ALLOW HOMEOWNERS DEAD SECONDARY SUITES AN APARTMENT EITHER ABOVE THE GARAGE OR IN OR IN THE BASEMENT TURNING THESE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES INTO MULTI-UNIT PROPERTIES. WHERE WILL ALL THE ADDITIONAL CARS PARK? HOW WILL OUR ROADS ALREADY STRAINED, HANDLE THE INCREASED VOLUME? AND WHAT ABOUT OUR SCHOOLS? THE IDEA DOES 16 TO EIGHT. 16 TO 18 ACRE LOT COULD HOST A SCHOOL FOR 600 TO 700 STUDENTS IS OPTIMISTIC AT BEST. WE'RE ALREADY DEALING WITH THE OVERCROWDED BETHEL LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT AND ADDING MORE HOMES, POTENTIALLY WITH EVEN MORE STUDENTS. WE'LL STRAIN THE SYSTEM FURTHER. THE CITY WOULD OWN THE SCHOOL, LEASE IT BACK TO THE DISTRICT PER WHAT? THE DEVELOP PER WHAT AGREEMENTS HAVE STATED PREVIOUSLY LEAVING BETHEL LOCAL SCHOOLS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STAFFING FURNISHING AND, AND EQUIPPING IT. MEANWHILE, THE CITY COLLECTS LEASE PAYMENTS AND THE PROPOSED NCA FEES, THE RESIDENTS OF CT TWO WILL, WILL BE PAYING FOR THE SCHOOL AS WELL. HOW DO WE KNOW THAT THE NCA WILL NOT BE ADDED TO CARRIAGE SPOUSE ONE? UM, IT CAN'T, IT CAN'T, YOU CAN'T ADD THE NCA TO THE TEST, CAN YOU? LEGALLY NO. UM, BECAUSE THE NCA NEEDS TO BE ESTABLISHED EARLY ON BECAUSE THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS TO, UH, TO, UH, AGREE TO BE PART OF THE NCA AND THE LIKELIHOOD OF GETTING CAN'T BACKDATE IT. YEAH, IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN. THAT IS, THAT IS GREAT TO HEAR. 'CAUSE I, I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. I SHEENA, UM, BRUSHED ON THE, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW THE MOAS HAS BEEN IN LIMBO FOR YEARS. UM, NOW WITH THE ANNEXATION THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED. AND IF WE APPROVE TONIGHT, UH, FOR THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ZONING, OUR MOA CAN AND WILL BE EXTENDED FOR AT LEAST ANOTHER 15 YEARS, GIVING US RESIDENCE VIRTUALLY NO VOICE IN THE MANAGEMENT OF OUR COM, OUR OWN COMMUNITY. WHEN I WAS COLLECTING SIGNATURES FOR THE PETITION, MANY RESIDENTS IN CARRIAGE TRAILS DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THE ANNEXATION AFFECTED US OR THAT THE MOA COULD COULD BE EXTENDED. INSTEAD OF OUR MOA TELLING ANY RESIDENTS ABOUT THIS, THEY WERE SILENT. JUST LIKE ALL THE OTHER DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE FOR US, ABOUT US, THAT WE ARE LEFT TO EITHER LIKE IT OR LEAVE IT OR, OR LEAVE. AND THAT'S EVEN IF WE KNOW ABOUT 'EM. SO FINALLY, I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS THE PUBLIC SAFETY ONCE MORE. THE STATISTICS ARE CLEAR. TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN OUR AREA ARE STILL A PROBLEM. IN, UH, 2022, THERE WAS 23 CRASHES AND 22, OR IN 23 THERE WAS 22 CRASHES AND 17 SO FAR THIS YEAR, UM, ODOT HAS REALIZED THAT THERE IS A NEED FOR A TURN LANE AT 2 0 1 AT CARRIAGE TRAILS. BUT WE'VE YET TO SEE ANY REAL PROGRESS. THIS CITY HAS BEEN ENTERTAINING THE THOUGHT OF THE TRAFFIC LIGHT FOR YEARS, AND WE STILL DON'T OWN ALL THE LAND WE NEED. SIMILARLY, THE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED FOR 2 0 2 REMAIN UNRESOLVED. UH, THOUGH THEY MANY THINGS WERE TALKED ABOUT TONIGHT, UM, NEW HOMES AND APARTMENTS ARE SOON TO BE BUILT. THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIRED TO SUPPORT THEM IS UNACCEPTABLE. I'VE HEARD TALK RECENTLY BY SEVERAL OF YOU ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION ABOUT HOW THERE NEEDS TO BE A MORE PROACTIVE [01:25:01] APPROACH ABOUT OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL. AND WE NEED TO TAKE CONSIDERATION OF THE IMPACTS THESE DEVELOPMENTS MAKE PRIOR TO HAVING THEM COME TO LIFE. SO I ASK YOU TODAY, HOW CAN WE AS RESIDENTS BELIEVE THAT THIS EXPANSION WON'T FURTHER DEGRADE OUR QUALITY OF LIFE? HOW CAN WE TRUST THAT THIS STAFF REPORT WON'T MAKE OUR COMMUNITY LESS SAFE, LESS LIVABLE, AND MORE BURDENED BY THE PROBLEMS THAT HAVE BEEN IGNORED OR JUST MERELY TALKED ABOUT FOR TOO LONG? DOES ANYTHING IN THE APPLICATION AND REPORT FIX ANY EXISTING PROBLEMS OR DOES IT ADD TO THEM? SO I URGE YOU TO THINK CAREFULLY ABOUT THE REAL IMPACT THIS PLAN WILL HAVE. REMEMBER THE APPROVAL OF THIS MEANS THAT YOU AGREE WITH CITY STAFF THAT THIS WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT PUBLIC PEACE, HEALTH, MORALS, SAFETY OR WELFARE. ALSO, THIS, THAT THIS WILL NOT PLACE UNDUE BURDEN ONTO SCHOOLS, PUBLIC SERVICES, OR STREETS. THANK YOU MR. JERS. JUST TO CLARIFY ONE PIECE THERE, MS. SCHWARTZ, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT HOW WE NEED TO LOOK FORWARD AT KIND OF THE PROJECTIONS OF THE IMPACTS MM-HMM. , THIS IS THE FIRST DEVELOPMENT THAT I REMEMBER BEING PART OF, OF ALL THE DEVELOPMENTS. 'CAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CITY. IT'S NOT JUST CARRIAGE TRAILS. ABSOLUTELY. THIS IS THE FIRST ONE THAT HAS TOLD US THE EXPECTED IMPACT ON POLICE, FIRE, PUBLIC WORKS, ALL OF THE STUFF THAT AARON DISCUSSED EARLIER. SO I DO THINK WE ARE MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION. IS ANYTHING PERFECT? MM-HMM. ? MAYBE NOT. BUT I DO THINK THE STAFF DESERVES A LITTLE BIT OF CREDIT FOR THAT IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THEY, THEY HAVE IMPLEMENTED SOME OF THAT IN THERE. SO NO OTHER, NO OTHER DEVELOPMENT THAT SAID, WE'RE GONNA ADD PUBLIC WORKS. WE'RE GONNA ADD THIS MANY UNITS AS FAR AS POLICE, THIS MANY UNITS AS FAR AS FAR AS FIRE. SO WE, HE, IN THIS CASE, STAFF HAS TAKEN THOSE STEPS AND I THINK THEY DESERVE A LITTLE CREDIT FOR THAT. SO, YEAH, I, WHILE I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT THEY HAVE, I JUST KNOW THAT I'VE HEARD WHEN I'VE BEEN TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS THAT, UM, IT WAS ACTUALLY YOU YEAH, I WAS GONNA SAY IT WAS ME THAT SAID IT. THAT'S WHY I, IT IT WAS YOU THAT, THAT BROUGHT IT UP. LIKE, HOLD ON. HEY, THESE APARTMENTS ON EXECUTIVE, ARE WE, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THE HOUSE ON CHAMBERS. IT'S THE CHAMBERSBURG WIDE OR WHAT? YEP. SO I WAS SAYING YEP. TO JUST KEEP THAT GOING. YEP. I WASN'T SAYING THAT. YOU'RE NOT DOING IT. YEP. SO MY NAME IS SUSAN DONAHUE. I LIVE ON ROUTE 40 JUST ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS PROPERTY. UM, I HAVE A QUESTION. I'LL BE, BE PRETTY QUICK. JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS. DOES THE PLANNED MIXED USE ZONING COVER THE COMMERCIAL STRIP SHOPPING AREA THAT WAS PICTURED ON THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN, EXCUSE ME. SO THAT, UH, PICTURE WAS JUST A, A RENDERING OF, OF WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF STANDARDS WOULD BASICALLY RESULT IN. BUT AT THIS POINT, THERE IS NOT A PLAN FOR A COMMERCIAL AREA. OKAY. SO THAT WAS KIND OF MISLEADING FOR US TONIGHT. WELL, NOT REALLY. SO THERE, THE, THE WAY THAT DEVELOP THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN, UM, LAYS OUT KIND OF THE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS OF WHAT THE BUILDINGS ARE, ARE EXPECTED TO LOOK LIKE. SO THAT'S WHY THERE WAS MULTIFAMILY, SINGLE FAMILY TOWNHOUSES, COMMERCIAL, ET CETERA. OKAY. SO WITH THE IDEA THAT THERE WILL BE SOME COMMERCIAL IN THE FUTURE, MAYBE 12 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD OR SOMETHING, WOULD IT BE ON ROUTE 40? MY GUESS IS IT WOULD BE, OR NEAR ROUTE 40. BUT, UM, JUST THINKING FROM A, FROM A DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT. BUT NONE, NONE IS BEING PROPOSED AT THIS POINT IN TIME. OKAY. AND THEN I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. WE ARE ACTUALLY, WE LIVE ON THE CORNER OF FLICK AND 40, WHICH WOULD BE, UM, ACROSS, UH, NORTH OF THE SCHOOL, NORTH OF THAT GREEN AREA. SO MY QUESTION IS, WHAT'S GOING ON IN THAT BLUE, PURPLE AREA NORTH OF THE SCHOOL? IS THAT AFTER THE 10 15 YEAR, OR, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A BUILDER QUESTION OR, BUT WHAT'S THE PLAN FOR THAT AREA? SO, SO LIKELY IT WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL. UM, BUT THAT WOULD BE A FUTURE PHASE, UH, A FUTURE SECTION. SO REALLY THE WAY THAT THIS LIKELY WILL BE BUILT OUT IS STARTING FROM THE SOUTHEAST, WORKING NORTH. [01:30:01] OKAY. AND, AND I DON'T SEE IT ON THERE, BUT IT MIGHT BE IS, IS FLICK ROAD PLANNED TO GO THROUGH AT SOME POINT DOWN THE ROAD IN THE FUTURE? UM, AT THIS POINT THERE, THERE WOULD, THERE COULD BE AN INTERSECTION THAT WOULD ALIGN WITH FLICK ROAD. UM, BUT THAT WOULD BE, UH, THAT WOULD BE MANY YEARS OUT. OKAY. YEAH. OKAY. UM, THAT'S ALL I HAVE, JUST SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE ZONING CASE? I SIGN, UH, LET'S SEE. GOT MY LITTLE CARD HERE. I WAS INVITED. UH, MY NAME IS JEFF MORFORD, MIAMI COUNTY BETHEL TOWNSHIP. UH, JUST A FEW THOUGHTS, IF I MAY. JUST FOR GENERAL INFORMATION. THAT WAS A FEW WEEKS AGO, A SMALL GROUP OF CITIZENS CIRCULATED A REFERENDUM PETITION AGAINST THE HUBER HEIGHTS. CITY COUNCIL'S VOTE TO ACCEPT THE ANNEXATION OF 300 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED IN BETHEL TOWNSHIP IN FOUR DAYS WHILE OVER 1200 HUBER HEIGHTS RESIDENTS SIGNED THE PETITION GOING ON RECORD AND OPPOSITION TO THE VOTE OF THEIR CITY COUNCIL. TO ORGANIZE A REFERENDUM PETITION IS A VERY DIFFICULT PROJECT. IT IS NOT SOMETHING THE AVERAGE CITIZEN TAKES ON DAILY. AND BECAUSE OF THE MANY DIFFICULTIES CIRCULATING, THE PETITION WAS DELAYED, ONLY LEAVING FOUR DAYS TO DO THE JOB. I BELIEVE REFERENDUMS ARE DESIGNED TO BE DIFFICULT. STATE GUIDELINES CALL FOR REQUIRED AMOUNT OF SIGNATURES TO BE 10% OF THE NUMBER OF VOTERS IN THE LAST GOVERNOR'S RACE, AND ALLOWS 30 DAYS TO COLLECT THOSE SIGNATURES. SUBSIDIES LIKE YOUR CITY CAN CHANGE THE GUIDELINES. YOUR CITY ALLOWS 30 DAYS, BUT REQUIRES 15%. THE CITY OF NEW CARLISLE KEPT IT 10%, BUT ONLY ALLOWED 15 DAYS. IN MY OPINION, THIS IS ALWAYS AN ATTEMPT TO SILENCE THE CITIZENS MAKING THE JOB MORE DIFFICULT. I BELIEVE IF CITIZENS DON'T AGREE WITH THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND BELIEVE THE CITIZENS NEED TO INDIVIDUALLY VOTE, THEN IT SHOULD NOT BE SO DIFFICULT. BUT PLEASE CONSIDER THIS. THE MOMENTUM WAS GROWING EVERY DAY, AND I BELIEVE THE NEEDED NUMBER OF SIGNATURES WOULD HAVE EASILY BEEN ACHIEVED, AND AN ISSUE WOULD HAVE BEEN PUT ON THE BALLOT FOR THE CITIZENS OF HUBER HEIGHTS TO VOTE ON. WHERE I BELIEVE THE DECIS DECISION OF SUCH MAGNITUDE NEEDS TO BE EVERY TIME ANY CITY COUNCIL SHOULD VOTE. AS YOUR REPRESENTATIVES ON DAILY CITY BUSINESS, I BELIEVE VOTING ON ANNEXATIONS IS MUCH MORE IMPORTANT AND SHOULD BE VOTED ON BY INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS. WE VOTE ON ELECTED OFFICIALS. WE VOTE ON SCHOOL LEVIES, FIRE, POLICE ISSUES. WE VOTE ON THESE ISSUES BECAUSE OF THEIR IMPORTANCE. ANNEXATIONS ARE EQUAL TO THESE ISSUES. I BELIEVE ANNEXATIONS ARE GREATER IMPORTANCE THAN ALMOST ALL OTHER ISSUES BECAUSE ANNEXATIONS CHANGE COMMUNITIES FOREVER. THERE IS NO RESET BUTTON, NO DO-OVER. THIS IS WHY THIS IS WHY INDIVIDUALS SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE. I BELIEVE YOUR CITY COUNCIL HAS FAILED THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS IN REGARDS TO THE REZONING REQUEST FROM CARE TRAILS COMPANY, LLCC, WHATEVER THAT IS, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN MIAMI COUNTY. BETHEL TOWNSHIP. YOUR COMMITTEE, NOR YOUR CITY COUNCIL, HAS NO MORAL OR ETHICAL RIGHT TO MAKE DECISIONS REGARDING THIS PROPERTY. AGAIN, IT IS LOCATED IN MIAMI COUNTY, BETHEL TOWNSHIP, ACROSS COUNTY LINES, AND ACROSS SCHOOL DISTRICT LINES. THE RESIDENTS OF BETHEL TOWNSHIP, THE THREE BETHEL TOWNSHIP TRUSTEES, THE THREE MIAMI COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ALL OPPOSE THE ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY. EXCEPT WITHIN THE ZONING REGULATIONS OF OUR COMMUNITY, THE [01:35:01] PROPERTY OWNER DEVELOPER HAS DECIDED THEY COULD NOT MAKE ENOUGH MONEY WORKING WITHIN OUR ZONING REGULATIONS. SO THEY THOUGHT THROUGH PREJUDICIAL, DISCRIMINATORY AND CIVIL LIBERTY VIOLATING ANNEXATION LAWS MOVED TO ASK FOR ANNEXATION INTO HUBER HEIGHTS. YOUR CITY COUNCIL CONDONED THESE REASONINGS PUTTING FINANCIAL GAIN IN FRONT OF THEIR RESIDENT OF THE RESIDENTS FROM BETHEL TOWNSHIPS. NUMEROUS REASONS NOT TO. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO BRING UP. 40 YEARS AGO, DAYTON TRIED TO TAKE OVER THE THEN WAYNE TOWNSHIP. WAYNE TOWNSHIP WAS ABLE TO OFFEND OFF THIS ATTACK BY BECOMING A CITY. WE IN BETHEL TOWNSHIP DO NOT HAVE THAT OPTION. I AM ACTUALLY CONFUSED BY HUBER HEIGHT'S WILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT ANNEXATIONS OPPOSED BY BETHEL TOWNSHIPS. WHEN YOU FOUGHT SO HARD TO KEEP YOUR INDEPENDENCE AND THE ABILITY TO SELF-GOVERN, I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT YOUR COMMUNITY ABOVE ALL OTHERS CONSIDERING YOUR HISTORY, WOULD'VE BEEN SYMPATHETIC TO OUR PLIGHT AND WOULD HAVE COME TO OUR RESCUE. BUT I GUESS WE EASILY FORGET. AND NOW THE SHOE IS ON THE OTHER FOOT AND YOUR CITY IS DOING THE KICKING. AT THIS ANNEXATION, REZONING AND DEVELOPMENT WERE SUPPORTED AND PROMOTED BY BOTH COMMUNITIES. I WOULD NOT OPPOSE IT, BUT IS NOT SUPPORTED, PROMOTED BY BETHEL COMMUNITY. IF ANY RURAL TOWNSHIP CROSS OHIO OPPOSES ANNEXATION SLASH DEVELOPMENT, THEY HAVE NO LEGAL MEANS TO PROCEED. THE BETHEL CITIZENS HAVE NO VOICE, NO VOTE. THE THE BETHEL COMMUNITY HAS NO REPRESENTATION. THE THREE ELECTED BETHEL TRUSTEES HAVE NO VOICE, NO VOTE. THE THREE ELECTED MIAMI COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAVE NO VOICE, NO VOTE, BUT THE EIGHT HUBER HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN LOOK AT THE ANNEXATION REQUEST, DECIDE IF THE REQUEST IS IN THE BEST INTEREST FOR YOU FOR HUBER HEIGHTS AS IT SHOULD BE, THEN VOTE YES OR NO. THE EIGHT HUBER HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE IN ESSENCE ALSO VOTING ON A MAJOR CHANGE FOR THE COMMUNITY OF BETHEL TOWNSHIP. BUT THE CITIZENS BETHEL TOWNSHIP DID NOT ELECT THEM TO BE OUR REPRESENTATIVES. THE BETHEL RESIDENTS CANNOT VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE. IF THE CITIZENS ARE NOT SATISFIED, SATISFIED WITH THEIR LEADERSHIP, A BETHEL RESIDENTS CANNOT SIGN A REFERENDUM PETITION IF THE BETHEL CITIZENS DISAGREE WITH THE HUBER HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL VOTING, I PERSONALLY BROUGHT TO LIGHT THAT THE ANNEXATION LAWS DO NOT ADHERE TO DEMOCRACY WHERE ALL TAX PAYING CITIZENS, NO MATTER WHAT SEX, NO MATTER WHAT RACE, NO MATTER WHAT RELIGION, NO MATTER WHAT PART OF THE COUNTRY OR STATE YOU LIVE IN, BE IT IN AN URBAN CITY OR RURAL COMMUNITY, WE ALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE OR BE REPRESENTED BY OUR LOCAL OFFICIALS ON ALL MATTERS REGARDING OUR FUTURE, THE FUTURE OF OUR FAMILY, THE FUTURE OF OUR COMMUNITY. SADLY, THE MAJORITY OF YOUR CITY COUNCIL CHOSE TO DISREGARD THIS INFORMATION. SO I CAN ONLY ASSUME THAT THEY CONDONE THAT THE ANNEXATION LAWS DELIBERATELY SIDESTEP THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL PART OF THE CONSTITUTION, THE RIGHT TO VOTE. THE SAME US CONSTITUTION THAT DURING THEIR SWEARING IN CEREMONY, THEY SWORE TO SUPPORT THE US CONSTITUTION THAT PROVIDES VOTING RIGHTS FOR ALL THE ANNEXATION LAWS GIVE CITIES THE RIGHT TO VOTE AND ACCEPT OR REJECT ANNEXATION REQUESTS WEST. BUT THE CITIZENS OF THE SMALL RURAL COMMUNITIES WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED DO NOT HAVE THE SAME RIGHT. AGAIN, I CONSIDER THIS LAW DISCRIMINATORY IN A VIOLATION OF OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE LIVING IN TOWNSHIPS ACROSS THE STATE. OHIO'S POPULATIONS APPROXIMATELY 12 MILLION. THERE ARE 1,309 TOWNSHIPS IN OHIO. APPROXIMATELY ONE THIRD OF OHIOANS LIVE IN TOWNSHIPS AS IT RELATES TO ANNEX STATIONS. IF ANY OF THESE SMALL RURAL TOWNSHIPS ARE AGAINST ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT, THEY HAVE NO LEGAL MEANS TO ACT. IF ONE PERSON LOSES THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE, IF ONE COMMUNITY LOSES THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE, THEN WE ARE ALL IN DANGER OF LOSING OUR RIGHT TO VOTE. WHEN IT IS INCONVENIENT OR TROUBLESOME, I AM ASKING YOU TO PERSONALLY EVALUATE A MUCH BIGGER ISSUE. IS THE ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE VOTING RIGHTS THAT THE US CONSTITUTION AFFORDS US ALL? PLEASE DO NOT SUPPORT THIS REZONING. CHANGE [01:40:02] ANOTHER FACT OFF THE OHIO FARM BUREAU WEBSITE BETWEEN 2000 2020, EXCUSE ME, 2017 AND 2022, OHIO LOST 300,000 ACRES OF LAND THAT WAS BEING USED AS A AGRICULTURAL LAND. AGAIN, I PLEASE, AGAIN, PLEASE DO NOT SUPPORT THIS REZONING CHANGE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, MR. JEFFRIES. SORRY, ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION TOO, ACTUALLY, THE ON THE REFERENDUM ATTEMPT, I APPLAUD YOUR GUYS' EFFORTS CONTRARY TO WHAT MOST OF YOU MIGHT THINK YOU, SO KUDOS FOR STEPPING UP AND TRYING TO EXECUTE ON YOUR CIVIC RIGHTS. JUST TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE THIS KEEPS COMING UP ON THE ANNEXATION COMPARISON OF DAYTON AND WAYNE TOWNSHIP. DAYTON WAS COMING IN TO FORCEFULLY TAKE ALL OF WAYNE TOWNSHIP. THIS IS AN ANNEXATION REQUEST AS A RESULT OF A BETHEL PROPERTY OWNER MAKING A LAND TRANSACTION AND REQUESTING THE ANNEXATION. SO IT IS A, IT IS DIFFERENT. AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION ON THAT BECAUSE THIS COMES UP A LOT AND I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A HOT TOPIC AND, AND YOU ARE, UH, PERSONALLY AFFECTED BASED ON THE VICINITY OF IT AND, YOU KNOW, SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY SO THAT WE UNDERSTAND THE, THE FACTS. OKAY, SO IF I MAY YEAH, I AGREE. I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENCES, BUT IT, IN THE DAYTON TAKING OVER WAYNE TOWNSHIP SITUATION, IT WAS STILL YOUR LOSS OF GOVERNING POWER. YEP. IT WAS STILL YOUR LOSS OF DECISION MAKING THAT WOULD'VE BEEN AFFECTED. YEP. AND I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU. THE LAWS ARE SKEWED AGAINST SMALL TOWNSHIPS. I THE BUT THE LAWS ARE THE LAW. SO I, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. SO, AND THEN I'LL SAY THAT THIS IS, THAT'S THE BASIC THING I'M GOING BY IS YOU WANT TO KEEP YOUR GOVERNING POWER AS A CITY. YOU DESERVE IT. YOU WANT TO KEEP YOUR DECISION MAKING POWER AS A CITY. YOU DESERVE IT. WE IN BETHEL WANT TO KEEP OUR GOVERNING POWER TO DECIDE WHAT'S GOOD FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND WHAT'S NOT GOOD FOR OUR COMMUNITY. WE HAVE ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT WE HAVE ELECTED TO DO THAT JOB FOR US. AND THEN SOMETIMES WE VOTE ON ISSUES SUCH AS TAXES AND LEVIES AND STUFF LIKE THAT. JUST AS YOU DO, JUST AS YOUR COMMUNITY DOES NOT, NOT ONLY YOU. SO, UH, AND THE OTHER THING WITH THE, UH, THE LANDOWNER SLASH DEVELOPER ASKING FOR ANNEXATION, UH, PETITION REQUEST, WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL IT, I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, BUT IT IS GIVING YOU THE, YOU AND YOUR CITY OFFICIALS THE POTENTIAL TO VOTE YES OR NO. IT'S GIVEN YOU THE RIGHT, I AS A US CITIZEN, I PAY MY TAXES JUST LIKE YOU HAVE. I BELIEVE I HAVE THE RIGHT, THE SAME RIGHTS THAT YOU, YOU HAVE, IF I WANNA GO TO A CERTAIN SCHOOL, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO A CERTAIN SCHOOL. YOU, I SHOULD NOT BE OMITTED FROM SOMETHING BECAUSE I LIVE IN A SMALL RURAL TOWNSHIP. AND WHEN IT COMES TO THE, UH, THE DEVELOPER AND THE DEVELOPMENT, THEY COULD HAVE GONE BY OUR ZONING REGULATIONS TO TRY TO DO SOMETHING. BUT I'M ASSUMING I NEVER TALKED TO ANY OF EITHER OF THEM. I'M ASSUMING THAT FINANCIALLY THEY THOUGHT IT WAS A BETTER DEAL TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOUR COMMUNITY BECAUSE YOUR COMMUNITY HAS, LET'S SAY, LAXER, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, LAXER ZONING REGULATIONS. WE'VE GOT WATER THERE, WE'VE GOT POLICE THERE, WE'VE GOT FIRE THERE, WE'VE GOT SCHOOL THERE. AND THEY COULD HAVE DEVELOPED ACCORDINGLY, BUT OBVIOUSLY THEY WOULD'VE HAD TO WORK WITHIN OUR ZONING REGULATIONS. THEY CHOSE NOT TO. RIGHT. AND I JUST FEEL THAT THAT'S A LITTLE BIT LIKE, YOU KNOW, I I'M GONNA ASK YOU A QUESTION AND UH, I DIDN'T GET THE ANSWER I LIKED. WELL, NOW I'M GONNA ASK YOU THE QUESTION. SAME QUESTION. WILL I GET THE ANSWER? NO, I DIDN'T. I DIDN'T. I'M GONNA ASK YOU THE QUESTION. I'M GONNA KEEP GOING TILL I GET THE ANSWER I WANT AND IT WORKS OUT TO ME THE BEST. YEP. THANK YOU. SO IT'S JUST, THANK YOU SIR. UNJUST, UNFAIR, UN AMERICAN UNDEMOCRATIC, AND YOU'VE GOT A CHANCE TO STOP IT. THANK YOU. IF NOT, YOU ARE IN CAHOOTS WITH 'EM ALL. WELL, JUST, JUST A POINT. WE'LL GO TO THE TRUMP. UM, THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL AND THE THE REZONING ARE REALLY A SEPARATE ISSUE. I MEAN, THE ANNEXATION IS NOT GONNA BE UNDONE. I I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY CERTAIN FACTS 'CAUSE THEY WERE ON THE RECORD. THAT WAS ALL AND FLATTERY. WE'LL GET YOU NOWHERE. MR. MUMFORD . IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE ZONING CASE THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE US? HELLO, MY NAME'S TRISHA ROGERS. I LIVE IN CARRIAGE TRAILS. I'VE BEEN IN CARRIAGE TRAILS FOR SEVEN YEARS. UM, IF YOU WERE TO APPROVE THE [01:45:01] PLANNING RE THE REZONING THIS EVENING, MY ONLY ASK IS THAT, AND I KNOW IT'S MENTIONED, BEEN MENTIONED SEVERAL TIMES ALREADY THAT YOU HAVE ALREADY LOOKED AT THE INCREASE IN POLICE AND MEDICAL SERVICES. MY ONLY ASK IS THAT YOU DO THE INCREASE IN POLICE SERVICES QUICKLY BECAUSE AS MR. CASSY AND MR. JEFFRIES KNOW, THOSE OF US IN CARRIAGE TRAILS ARE A TARGET FOR CAR THIEVES AND THE SPEEDERS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED. WE HAVE A LARGE INCREASE IN CAR THIEVES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS. AND WITH AN INCREASE IN HOUSES, IT'S JUST GONNA GET WORSE. UM, WHEN THE LAST PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION HAVE HAPPENED, THERE WERE NUMEROUS INSTANCES OF VANDALISM AND THEFTS OF THOSE BUILDS. SO THAT IS MY ONLY ASK FOR THIS EVENING. AND I DID ALSO WANNA MENTION, UH, MS. SCHWARTZ MENTIONED THE, IN REGARDS TO THE MOA NOT BEING ABLE TO PARK A VEHICLE NEXT TO ON THE CONCRETE, THE DRIVEWAY EXTENSIONS. I KNOW THIS IS DIGRESSING, SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, BUT I WANTED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS WITH MR. CONWAY HERE WITH THE MOA HUBBERT ALLOWS YOU, HUBER ZONING ALLOWS YOU TO PARK A VEHICLE ON A DRIVEWAY EXTENSION. THE MOA DOES NOT. SO IF I COULD GET IT ON RECORD, HUBBERT ZONING, IF YOU HAVE A CONCRETE SLAB, YOU CAN PARK RVS TRAILERS NEXT TO YOUR HOUSE. YOU MEAN NEXT TO THE DRIVEWAY? NOT ACROSS NEXT TO THE DRIVEWAY. I THOUGHT YOU MEANT ACROSS THE SIDEWALK. SORRY. NO, NEXT TO THE DRIVEWAY. GOTCHA. OUR MOA DOES NOT ALLOW THAT IF YOU HAVE A DRIVEWAY EXTENSION ON THE SIDE OF YOUR HOUSE. THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS PEOPLE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE GOTTEN FINE TICKETS FROM THE MOA WARNINGS FOR VEHICLES PARKED ON THEIR DRIVEWAY EXTENSIONS. BUT MY BIG ASK IS FOR AN INCREASE IN POLICE SERVICES WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE REZONING. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE ZONING CASE? I'VE GOT A QUESTION. NO, DID I ASK A QUESTION? COME AHEAD. WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO GET THE WATER AND THE SEWER SERVICES FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT? THAT'S UP IN THE AIR TOO. NOBODY'S EVER SET. THAT'S SO, SO WATER WILL COME FROM THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS. UM, THOSE EXTENSIONS ARE, ARE, ARE THERE EFFECTIVELY FROM CARRIAGE TRAILS? ONE SEWER SERVICE WOULD BE SUPPLIED BY, UH, THROUGH THE, UH, IT'S IN THE CLARK COUNTY. UM, FPA, THE FACILITY PLANNING AREA. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. BUT THERE WAS TALK OF MIAMI COUNTY SUPPLYING THE WATER AT ONE POINT. I MEAN, AT, AT SOME POINT MAYBE IT MAKES SENSE FOR WHEN, WHEN, YOU KNOW, THE DEVELOPMENT GETS NORTH CLOSER TO 40. BUT FOR RIGHT NOW, ALL THE CONNECTIONS ARE THERE AT THE SOUTH STAND TO THE DEVELOPMENT. SO NOTHING ABOUT ITS ETCHING STONE YET, I GUESS. YEAH, I MEAN IT'S REALLY THE DEVELOPER'S DECISION ON WHERE TO GET THE WATER. SEWER'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE, BUT HUBER'S WATER'S RIGHT THERE. OKAY, THANK YOU. SO TO PIGGYBACK ON, SORRY TO PIGGYBACK ON WHAT HE WAS JUST ASKING, DO YOU HAVE STATEMENTS FROM ANY OF THE COMPANIES? BECAUSE I KNOW WHENEVER YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT STARTING ON UTILITIES EARLIER, YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THE SCHOOL, BUT DO YOU HAVE STATEMENTS FROM GAS, ELECTRIC, WATER, INTERNET ABOUT HOW IT WILL OR WILL NOT STRAIN THEIR SYSTEMS? SO GAS IN THE BUSINESS SERVE GAS, SO THEY WILL, THAT HAS NEVER BEEN AN ISSUE AS FAR AS GETTING GAS INFRASTRUCTURE. UH, IT'S, IT'S IN THE PROXIMITY. SAME WAY WITH INTERNET. IF THEY'VE GOT A BUYER, THEY'VE GOT, THEY'LL, THEY'LL SELL IT. WE'VE GOT ADEQUATE CAPACITY ON THE WATER SIDE TO SERVE THIS DEVELOPMENT. UH, AND THEN ON THE, UH, THE SEWER SIDE, UH, THE DEVELOPER HAS BEEN DISCUSSING HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH MIAMI CLARK COUNTY VIA MIAMI COUNTY. BUT UTILITIES, THIS CAME UP WHEN WE WERE DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE PROCESS ABOUT, UH, UTILITIES. THERE'S NOT A, THERE'S NOT A REALLY A, A UTILITY ISSUE HERE. OKAY. TALKING WITH A S TOO. I DIDN'T HEAR A S YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. YEAH, PRETTY MUCH ALL THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE FINE. AND DID I HEAR YOU CORRECTLY EARLIER WHENEVER YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, UM, THE PUBLIC OPEN AND GREEN SPACES, UM, FIRE DEPARTMENT AREA, CITY PARK, THE [01:50:01] PLACES THAT THE CITY WILL OWN CITY PROPERTY, THAT, UM, THE CARRIAGE TRAILS WILL STILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THAT THOUGH. SAY THAT AGAIN? LIKE CITY PROPERTY WITHIN THE BORDERS OF CARRIAGE, TRAILS, FIRE DEPARTMENT, THAT SORT OF THING. LIKE CITY, WHATEVER THE PARK IS GOING TO BE THERE. CARRIAGE, IF IT'S WITHIN THE BORDERS OF CARRIAGE TRAILS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S CITY PROPERTY, CARRIAGE TRAILS WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THAT. NOT NECESSARILY IF IT'S OUR PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, LIKE OUR, OUR FACILITY, OUR FIRE STATION, WE WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THAT SAME WAY IF IT WAS A DEDICATED PUBLIC PARK, UNLESS WE HAD MADE SOME OTHER ARRANGEMENT WITH THE, THE MOA. UM, BUT MY GUESS IS THAT WE WOULD MAINTAIN, WE WOULD WANT TO MAINTAIN IT, PROGRAM IT SEPARATELY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE ZONING CASE? CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION. ANYONE ON THE DIOCESE HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? ANY QUESTIONS? MR. SORELL? WILL YOU, UH, GIVE US THE, UH, AMENDED? THAT'D BE, I DO BELIEVE NUMBER TWO ON HOW THAT WOULD BE WRITTEN. YES. HOLD ON A SECOND. SO THERE ARE TWO CHOICES. UM, I'LL LEAVE THAT UP TO THE, TO THE BOARD. WHAT I'VE HEARD IS THE CONCERN ABOUT ADUS. SO, UM, WE CAN EITHER JUST STRIKE THAT, UM, ALTOGETHER OR SAY, UM, UM, THE SECOND, SORT OF THE SECOND CONDITION WOULD BE, UM, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, UM, WOULD BE PERMITTED PER CITY ZONING CODE, WHICH AT THAT TIME WE WOULD HAVE LOT STANDARDS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. I AGREE WITH THAT. WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME BACK AND DEAL WITH IT. WE DON'T HAVE TO AMEND THE BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. RIGHT? YEP. YEAH. SO WHAT IS IT THEN? UH, CONDITION NUMBER TWO WOULD BE, UM, ACCESSORY DEVELOPMENT. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, UM, SHALL BE PERMITTED ACCORDING TO CITY HUB RIGHT. ZONING CODE STANDARDS. AND RIGHT NOW THEY'RE NOT PERMITTED. SO JUST FUTURE PROOF THIS AND SOMEWHAT. OKAY. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY THE APPLICANT CARRIAGE TRAILS COMPANY LLC FOR APPROVAL OF A REZONING TO PLAN MIXED USE PM AND A BASIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 296.26236 ACRES. PROPERTY IS LOCATED BETWEEN CARRIAGES, TRAILS ONE AND US 40 CASE BDP 24 17. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF'S MEMORANDUM DATED, UH, SEPTEMBER 4TH, 2024, AND THE PLANNING COMM AND THE AMENDED PLANNING COMMISSION DECISIONS RECORD. MAKE A MOTION. MOTION BY MS. THOMAS, SECOND BY MR. JEFFRIES. SECRETARY, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL SECOND. MR. CASSIDY? YES. MR. JEFFRIES? YES. MS. THOMAS? YES. MR. WALTON? YES. MOTION PASSES FOUR TO ZERO. WHAT'S NEXT FOR THE APPLICANT? UH, WE WILL, SORRY. WE WILL MOVE THIS TO A, UH, A PUBLIC HEARING IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL, UH, IN LATE SEPTEMBER. THANK YOU. NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS APPROVABLE. MINUTES WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 13TH, 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WOULD BE APPROVED AND HEARING NO OPPOSITION, THEY ARE APPROVED. UH, REPORTS AND CALENDAR REVIEW MR. RELL. UH, ONLY A COUPLE THINGS COMING UP. THERE'S GONNA BE A REZONING AND LOT SPLIT, UH, APPLICATION IN FRONT OF YOU AT THE, UH, THIS'LL BE THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF CHAMBERSBURG AND, UH, ROY PIKE. IT'S THE JUST NORTH OF THE KEY BANK, UM, BUILDING. UM, THERE'S A PROPOSAL TO PUT, UM, EEB CHARGING STATIONS AT SHEETS DOWN THE, DOWN THE STREET. SO THAT'S GONNA BE, UH, A CHANGE. [01:55:01] UH, AND THEN, UM, I ANTICIPATE YOU WILL BE SEEING, UH, MARIJUANA, UH, REGULATIONS, UPDATED MARIJUANA REGULATIONS EITHER IN LATE SEPTEMBER OR, UH, EARLY, UH, OCTOBER. ABOUT DUBLIN PUB. HMM, DUBLIN PUB DUBLIN SEVEN. OH, UH, YEAH. SO, UM, THE, THE, THE APPLICANT IS, UM, THEY ARE REVIEWING OUR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH, UH, THEIR ATTORNEYS. UH, AND THEN ONCE THAT IS FINALIZED, I ANTICIPATE THE, UH, TO BE, DEPENDING ON THE WAY IT'S LAID OUT, EITHER A BASIC OR A DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN COME THROUGH. BUT THEY, UH, THEY HAVE GIVEN US INDICATIONS THAT THEY, OF ALL THE INDICATIONS THAT THEY WANT TO MOVE THIS FORWARD, WILL THAT BE ON EXECUTIVE? YES. AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING TO BRING BEFORE I PLAY ANY COMMISSION? THE NEXT MEETING IS, WHICH IS . OUR NEXT MEETING WILL BE OCTOBER 15TH, 2024. THANK YOU ALL FOR ATTENDING. WE STAND ADJOURNED. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.