WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP ZONING COMMISSIONMINUTES

July 17, 2007

The Washington Township Zoning Commission met in regular session on July 17, 2007 in the Meeting Room of Washington Township Government Center. Members of the Commission present were Mr. Rogers, Mr. Drain, Mrs. Zobrist, and Mr. Anderson. Mrs. Winwood was excused.

Call to order at 7:00 p.m.

The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

MOTION – Mr. Rogers moved the minutes of June 19, 2007 be approved with modification.

Motion seconded by Mr. Anderson.

VOTE - Mr. Rogers, yes; Mr. Drain, yes; Mrs. Zobrist, yes; Mr. Anderson, yes.

CASE Z-588I – Divided Ridge Associates, Ltd. ( Washington Trace)

Request is for approval of a Planned Development Residential (PD-R) second and final stage plan for a daycare center located at the southwest corner of Sheehan and Social Row Roads.

Jo Postle, Development Services Director, stated that applicant requested this case be tabled and heard at the August 21, 2007 Zoning Commission meeting. She also stated that applicant indicated the case would be the same as submitted with no new information expected.

Case Z-588I tabled.

CASE Z-472K – Huber Management Corp. (Nisbet-Brower)

Request is for approval of a Planned Development Office (PD-O2) second and final stage plan for a new office/showroom on property located at the northwest corner of Paragon Road and Tavery Boulevard.

Mr. Rogers – Disclosed that he is a tenant of Huber Management; however, he has no other pending business with the owner and feels there are no issues of conflict.

Commission members agreed.

Jo Postle, Development Services Director, presented the case. Proposal is for an approximate 14,000 square foot building to contain office and showroom space for Nisbet Brower, a Cincinnati-based company that offers building supplies and fixtures.

Mr. Drain – Questioned if the access point of the project is in line with Tavery Boulevard. Also asked about the signs.

Mrs. Postle – Indicated that the access is existing between subject property and adjacent Modern Office Methods property. The signs will comply with the Washington Township sign regulations.

Mr. Drain – Pointed out that his concern is that the standing seam roof would not fit in well with the surrounding development.

Mrs. Postle – Noted that there are other buildings with metal roofs in the area, such as Design Forum and the Washington Township Post Office.

Applicants represented by Mark Rippe, CEO of Nisbet-Brower, 11575 Redding Road, Cincinnati. Mr. Rippe indicated that Nisbet-Brower is a well-established company currently in temporary space located on Senate Drive. Their Cincinnati showroom is located in Evandale and they have offices in Sharonville. The proposed building for this project will be a twin of the Evandale building. Mr. Rippe wanted to clarify to the Commission that there are no retail sales of products to occur at the proposed building; however, they will complete sales transactions there. There are no products carried away from this location. Nisbet-Brower furnishes products from the building foundation up which includes building materials, plus major kitchen and bath components. The showroom and display area within the building is set up like a living space so people can visualize the products being offered. Mr. Rippe provided a display and photos of the Evandale showroom which included shots of the interior and exterior of the building. He provided samples of the building materials to be used on the proposed building, such as the main brick and accent brick as well as the window color.

Mr. Drain – Asked why they chose a standing seam roof?

Mr. Rippe – Primarily for identification. They want to stand out and be identified easily. All the HVAC equipment is located in a well at the center of the roof, which does not have a peak. Nothing on the HVAC system shows on the photos of the Evandale building and this building will use the same design.

Mr. Drain – Stated he would expect this type of use to have lots of landscaping to give a more welcoming appearance. Mr. Rippe replied that they intend to have significant landscaping as part of the development.

Mrs. Postle – Indicated that the plan met the township’s landscaping requirements.

Joel Pence, 8927 Rossash Road, Cincinnati, architect for the project – Indicated they do not have a tenant for the tenant space. They would like to find an engineering/architectural firm or similar business that would compliment their activity. Mr. Rippe also stated that Nisbet-Brower may want to grow into that space eventually as well.

Mr. Rippe – Referred to the loading dock door picture provided with the packets. Indicated they wanted to stay with a more residential look. The door is an overhead door but has the look of a hinged door. Mr. Rippe indicated that all the company products are delivered from the Cincinnati warehouse directly to the purchaser or project site. There are no significant products sold here. It was reiterated that this showroom is strictly a “selection center”.

Mr. Drain – Asked how the signage will be handled?

Mr. Pence – Indicated the wall signs shown on the site plan will be on two sides only. Those two signs just repeat on different elevations. The future tenant will also have an identification sign. He is not sure if the wall signs will be illuminated, but they will probably have channel letters.

Mr. Rippe – Feels the site fits well with the other adjacent sites.

Mr. Anderson – Stated it is a nice building. Noted the roof is actually a mansard roof. Questioned if the retention pond is going to be dry?

Mr. Rippe – Indicated that it would.

Mr. Anderson – They also need to make sure that the plan correctly reflects what type of pond—detention or retention—will be there. Will there be headwalls or natural outlets at the pond?

Mr. Rippe – It is his understanding that there would be a window box to retain water, not the large headwall shown on the plan.

Mr. Anderson – Suggested that the monument sign could possibly be shared with Modern Office Methods as the line of sight is such that two separate monument signs may actually block each other.

Mr. Drain – Suggested the option of moving the sign to the north end of the site to increase distance between the signs.

Mr. Anderson – How will Modern Office Methods be “protected” from construction?

Mr. Rippe – Construction work can be done from the other side of the property or do something else to protect them. He did have a brief discussion with representatives of Modern Office Methods during the preliminary investigation of the site. Modern Office Methods did not express any concerns at that time.

Mr. Anderson – Would prefer to have no headwall in the retention area. The pergola at the building is identified as decorated wood on the elevation but the site plan shows fiberglass. Applicant needs to clarify the discrepancy.

Mr. Pence – Stated the columns would be fiberglass and the pergola would be wood.

Mr. Rogers – Asked about the Fire Department’s concern with the access?

Mrs. Postle – Stated it has been addressed by the sprinkling system of the building.

Citizens voicing concerns, questions and comments included: None.

Public hearing closed.

Commission remarks, concerns and comments included:

Mr. Anderson – Stated it will be a nice building. Likes the seam roof because it fits with the overall design.

Mr. Rogers – Great addition to the area.

Mrs. Zobrist – Feels the building is consistent with what is there but also has its own distinctive character.

Mr. Drain – Stated the drawings need to be updated and the signage clarified. They also need to stage a plan for construction to limit disruption to Modern Office Methods.

Hearing closed.

MOTION – Mr. Anderson moved in Case Z-472K to approve applicant’s request for approval of a Planned Development Office (PD-O2) second and final stage plan for a new office/showroom on property located at the northwest corner of Paragon Road and Tavery Boulevard, subject to: 1) drawings to be updated prior to presentation to the trustees with regard to detention pond details, and monument sign location; and 2) submittal to include a statement of plan to maintain acceptable access to Modern Office Methods during construction.

Motion seconded by Mr. Rogers.

VOTE - Mr. Rogers, yes; Mr. Drain, yes; Mrs. Zobrist, yes; Mr. Anderson, yes.

Mr. Rippe – Questioned if a letter of agreement with Modern Office Methods acceptable?

Mrs. Zobrist – Suggested that Mr. Rippe have a meeting with Modern Office Methods and provide a letter summarizing the mutual understanding of how access will be maintained during construction.

Case Z-472K approved with modifications.

Mr. Drain asked if there was any other business to be heard. There was not.

Meeting adjourned. A tape recording of this proceeding is on file in the Zoning Office.

________________________________

Harry Drain, Chairman

Washington Township Zoning Commission