The Washington Township Board of Trustees met in Special Session on July 25, 2007, at 4:17 p.m. at the Washington Township Government Center, 8200 McEwen Road. President Blair opened the meeting, gave an invocation, and led the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. Snyder was present but abstained from participating in the zoning case. Mr. Barlow, Acting Fiscal Officer, filled in for Tom Zobrist.
ZONING CASE – Z-681 A QI EXCHANGE CORP.
Mr. Blair noted that the public hearing portion of this case was closed at the July 2, 2007, Trustee meeting. At that time, the Trustees asked for staff to present some findings of facts and additional information.
Mr. Huff indicated that staff met with the White Oak representatives and requested additional elevations and other information. This information is included in the Trustees’ packets. Staff has reviewed this information and has submitted comments as it relates to the additional information.
JoEllen Postle, Development Services Director, made a staff presentation. She indicated that this proposal is for a Planned Development Residential zoning classification. The property consists of approximately 86 acres and the proposal is for a total of 332 units, 49 being single-family, 168 being attached garden cottages, and 115 being in the lodge. There is also an extensive amenities package. Mrs. Postle’s presentation included a site plan, an accessory
structures and amenities plan, gazebo specifications, and detailed elevations. She indicated that staff requested and received a more detailed site plan, which she presented. She noted that the gazebos would have a maximum height of 23 feet and a maximum footprint of 1,000 square feet. Mrs. Postle then presented elevations with more detail than what was previously submitted.
Mr. Blair and Mrs. Young asked the applicant questions about the seven points mentioned in a memo to Gary Huff from Jo Postle dated July 25, 2007.
David Montgomery, Pickrel Schaeffer & Ebeling, represented the applicant. He confirmed with Jim Alt, the architect, that no changes have been made to the four unit elevations, which were previously provided. In response to Mrs. Young’s question, David O’Neil, representing White Oak, indicated that the width of the walking paths will vary between 6 feet and 12 feet. The secondary paths will be six feet. The 12 foot path will circle the lodge and can be used by a fire apparatus in the event of an emergency.
Mrs. Young asked if, in the event the geothermal units are not used, the mechanicals will be screened. Mr. Montgomery responded that they would.
Mr. Blair referred to a memo from Robert Surdyk and presented it to the applicant. Mrs. Young noted that some of the issues in this memo were already addressed at a previous meeting; however, Mr. Surdyk was not in attendance and may not be aware of their resolution. Mr. Surdyk added that most of them were already addressed at this meeting.
Mr. Blair asked staff about the status of the Kirby house. Mrs. Postle indicated that the applicant provided a detailed report that concluded it did not have any historical significance. Additionally, the applicant has indicated that they are not interested in incorporating it into their development, but they would be willing to relocate the structure within a mile or two of their site.
After reviewing the memo from Robert Surdyk, Mr. Montgomery indicated that he believed all of the issues raised by Mr. Surdyk have been addressed, but was willing to answer any questions. Mrs. Postle also believed that all of the issues in Mr. Surdyk’s memo were addressed, either in their submission or in staff’s comments.
Mr. Blair asked about the road system. Mr. O’Neil indicated that the weight-bearing capability of the road system would be dependent upon the amount of base that would be put underneath it. They are willing to meet the 75,000 pound weight standard.
In response to Mr. Blair’s comment about approval from Montgomery County, Mr. O’Neil indicated that traffic control islands were put into the plan in response to Montgomery County’s review of the interior roadways.
Mr. Surdyk asked about parking on the south pod. He questioned whether there was sufficient parking. Mr. O’Neil pointed out that there will be a shuttle service and that they are comfortable with the parking counts. They are willing to work with staff on this issue.
Mr. Surdyk asked about a timetable for the landscaping and the flow of the stream. Mr. O’Neil informed Mr. Surdyk that a detailed construction phasing schedule was provided and that one of the conditions placed by the Zoning Commission was that the stream bed be maintained. There will be pedestrian and roadway bridges going over the stream. Additionally, the actual rate of discharge from their site will not increase from what it is now and will have no effect on the stream. The stream bed will not be modified except for the bridge components.
In response to Mr. Surdyk’s question about any restrictions on the number of cars the residents may own, Mr. O’Neil indicated they do not plan to have such a restriction since the majority of their units will be occupied by a single individual. They do not anticipate more than one car per resident and there will be a shuttle service to facilitate the use of the parking lots.
Mr. Surdyk asked for representation that the horticultural center will be used solely by residents and that it will not be leased, rented, or advertised for the general public or outside groups. Mr. O’Neil indicated he had no problem with that.
Mrs. Young expressed her concern that the parking lot would compromise the rural look of the area because of its large size. She was informed that, in addition to the parking lot being four feet below the grade, there will be extensive landscaping, which far exceeds what is there now. Additionally, there will be mounding with vegetation and arborage placed on top of the mounding. Behind the mounding there is the four foot grade change. This will involve significant investment in landscaping by the developer. It is one of their goals to have exclusivity for this site. It will be a very well-screened area. It is also screened from the interior roadway. From a visual impact point, the developer is very confident that the rural nature of Clyo Road will be enhanced and not just maintained from its current condition. Mr. O’Neil guaranteed that the parking lot will not be visible from a normal sized vehicle on either Clyo Road or from their entryway. There would be both a high canopy and low canopy on the mound.
Mrs. Young expressed her concern about the guest lodge building. Her concern is that it was not a part of their original concept and was not approved by the Zoning Commission. She indicated her desire that the guest lodging be added later and that it be presented to the Zoning Commission. Mr. Montgomery indicated that administrative offices and guest lodging were discussed with the Zoning Commission and they have worked with staff on this issue. The lodge is an accessory use to the permitted residential use. It is not accessible to the general public. It is limited to a maximum of 15 rooms. It is 5,000 square feet and has a footprint of 2,500 square feet. The Zoning Commission signed off on it by a unanimous vote. Mr. Blair suggested removing the lodging component from the plan being submitted for approval and having it resubmitted to the Zoning Commission for approval. Mr. Montgomery believed this would be redundant and he did not see what would be accomplished by doing this. Mrs. Young stated she would feel more comfortable with having the Zoning Commission look at this further since it was not part of the original concept plan. Both Mr. Montgomery and Mr. O’Neil indicated the guest lodging could not be considered a hotel or motel and would not have a secondary, viable commercial use. It would be only used for guest lodging for the residents and their visitors. It will be a small building located close to an entry point. According to Mr. O’Neil, the Zoning Commission saw the footprint and elevations and approved it. Additionally, it is another building that will not be seen from Spring Valley Road due to the mounding. Mr. Montgomery added that this has been consistently presented as an amenity for the residents of the overall community. Mrs. Postle clarified that the guest house was included on the site plan and was reviewed by the Zoning Commission. The building elevations, however, were not submitted until prior to the Trustee’s first public hearing.
Mr. Surdyk asked about the entranceway and signage. Mr. Montgomery indicated that there was a very detailed sign description incorporated in the application. Mrs. Postle indicated that staff review comments were to clarify the landscaped entry features at each entrance into the development and in the center of the roundabout since they were not included in the latest site plan. Mr. Montgomery indicated this was addressed earlier and they are in agreement with staff. Mrs. Postle interjected that Mr. Surdyk’s point was that there were no details of what the landscaping is going to be. Mr. Montgomery indicated they did not want signage to delay the overall site plan. If it is something the Trustees want them to come back with as a minor modification, they would be willing to do so. Mr. Surdyk suggested that the Trustees may want to have the task delegated to staff with instructions to consult with the Visual Improvement Committee.
Mr. Blair suggested that one of the conditions for approval may be for the developer to work with the Landmarks Foundation concerning the Kirby house. Mrs. Young agreed.
Mrs. Young asked about aeration of the ponds. Mr. Montgomery indicated there will be water features. He believed the system would be designed so that most of it would be internally circulated throughout the site. This will take care of any bubbling or algae issues. What they are proposing will also keep the geese away.
It was moved by Mrs. Young, seconded by Mr. Blair, that the Board approves the Zoning Commission’s recommendation for approval of Zoning Case Z-681 A including all of their modifications and subject to the following conditions: 1) Remove the guest lodging component from the application and site plan as it is not in agreement with the concept plan that was approved in Zoning Case Z-681. 2) All staff comments including those dated July 25, 2007.
3) Staff is to consult with the Visual Improvement Committee to approve the landscaping plan.
4) The exterior identification signage is not to be any larger than what is allowed in the Zoning Resolution for a single-family residential community. There will be one on Spring Valley and one on Clyo Road. 5) The developer is to continue to work with the Landmarks Foundation as to the disposition of the Kirby house. 6) All representations made by the developer during the course of the presentation, including the following: a) Stream and stream bed depicted on the site plan will not be modified in any fashion; b) the rate of discharge of water into the stream will not increase as a result of the proposed development; c) the horticultural center will be used solely by residents and their guests and will not be leased, rented out or used by outside groups; d) there will be no advertisement of activities at the horticultural center off of the premises or to the general public; e) paver blocks will be utilized in all roadway systems and will be of sufficient strength to support fire equipment that weigh in excess of 75,000 pounds and shall be subject to approval by the Township Fire Department; f) trucks in excess of 35 feet in length will not be permitted to make deliveries or stops within the development; g) a sufficient amount of landscaping shall be planted so as to preclude the visibility of any vehicle in the parking lot adjacent to Clyo Road. This will include the visibility of vehicles in the lot by motorists traveling north or south on Clyo Road or entering the development by means of the entrance roadway onto Clyo Road; h) all food service facilities and other convenience uses as well as activities within the lodge shall not be open to the general public, but shall be limited solely to use by residents and their guests; i) all mechanical units, transformers and utility hardware will be screened from public view with materials harmonious with the building or landscaping as required by Article 9 Section 9(f) in the Township Zoning Resolution; j) paver blocks will be used for all walking trails within the development, except those trails within the wooded areas which shall be covered by natural materials such as bark or mulch; k) the surface of the parking lot adjacent to Clyo Road shall be a minimum of four (4) feet below the existinggrade of Clyo Road and the entranceway road into the development; l) no vinyl siding will be used anywhere on any of the structures within the development; and m) the site manager of the facility will enforce the Township Fire Department’s prohibition of on-street parking within the development.
Mr. Blair pointed out that in removing the guest lodging component from this plan, it is not their intention to eliminate it. It is their intention to have the developer further clarify it through both staff and perhaps the Zoning Commission.
Roll Call: Blair, aye;
Snyder, abstained;
Young, aye.
Vote on Motion: Young, aye; Blair, aye; Snyder, abstained. M2007-256
Mr. Surdyk indicated that the minutes will be prepared and presented to Mr. Montgomery first to make sure there is no misunderstanding and prior to going to the Trustees for their approval. Once the minutes are approved, their actual will become official and there is no thirty day waiting period.
Trustee Comments
None.
ADJOURNMENT: 5:38 P.M.
All formal actions of the Board of Trustees of Washington Township concerning and relating to the adoption of resolutions and/or motions passed at this meeting were adopted in an open meeting, and of any of its committees resulting in such formal action, were in meetings open to the public, in compliance with the law, including Section 121.22 of the Ohio Revised Code.
_______________________________
President
_______________________________
Acting Fiscal Officer