WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP ZONING COMMISSIONMINUTES
September 20, 2005
The Washington Township Zoning Commission met in regular session on September 20, 2005 in the Meeting Room of Washington Township Government Center. Members of the Commission present were Mr. Rogers, Mr. Drain, Mrs. Winwood, Mrs. Zobrist, and Mr. Anderson.
Call to order at 7:00 p.m.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
All in attendance were duly sworn in.
MOTION – Mrs. Zobrist moved the minutes of July 19, 2005 be approved as submitted.
Motion seconded by Mr. Anderson.
VOTE - Mr. Rogers, yes; Mr. Drain, yes; Mrs. Winwood, yes; Mrs. Zobrist, yes; Mr. Anderson, yes.
MOTION – Mr. Rogers moved the minutes of August 16, 2005 be approved with modifications.
Motion seconded by Mrs. Winwood.
VOTE - Mr. Rogers, yes; Mr. Drain, yes; Mrs. Winwood, yes; Mrs. Zobrist, yes; Mr. Anderson, yes.
CASE Z-510X – Frick Entertainment XVI, Inc., dba Fricker’s
Request is for a change to the previously approved site plan in order to repaint a 13’ x 13’ metal roof from the existing green to red. This property is located in a Planned Development Business (PD-B) zoning district.
Greg DeLong, Senior Planner, presented the case.
Mrs. Winwood – Questioned the ability to use the bright colors along the top portion of the building (accent stripes).
Mr. Toberen, Deputy Administrator – Read the definition from the Zoning Resolution about the use of earth tone colors. Stated that staff felt the colors used met the definition.
Applicant represented by Cris D’Andrea, 1385 Miamisburg-Centerville Road. Mr. D’Andrea presented information to the commission.
Mr. Drain – Questioned why it is necessary for the roof to be painted red?
Mr. D’Andrea – Stated that the color red is the standard roof color used on the new buildings.
Citizens voicing concerns, questions and comments included: None.
Public hearing closed.
Commission remarks, concerns and comments included:
Mrs. Winwood – Stated that Sibcy Cline was denied changing their building color to white with a red stripe. Feels that Fricker’s should be held to the same standards.
Mr. Rogers – Feels this is different from Sibcy Cline. Stated there are a lot of red accent and roof colors used throughout the township.
Mrs. Zobrist – Noted that this is an area where the colors are not as contrasting with the surrounding environment.
Hearing closed.
MOTION - Mrs. Zobrist moved in Case Z-510X to approve applicant’s request for a change to the previously approved site plan in order to repaint a 13’ x 13’ metal roof from the existing green to red on property located in a Planned Development Business (PD-B) zoning district.
Motion seconded by Mr. Rogers.
VOTE - Mr. Rogers, yes; Mr. Drain, yes; Mrs. Winwood, no; Mrs. Zobrist, yes; Mr. Anderson, yes.
Case Z-510X approved.
CASE Z-659B – F.F.L.P. #2 Ltd. (The Enclave)
Request is for approval of a change to the previously approved site plan to preserve existing trees along E. Spring Valley Pike on property consisting of approximately 76.523 acres located in a Planned Development Residential (PD-R) zoning district.
Greg DeLong, Senior Planner, presented the case.
Mr. Drain – Asked about the rear yard setback of the southwest corner of the development.
Mr. DeLong – Indicated that staff comments recommend 50’ rear yard setbacks in the area, which mirrors the previously approved rear yard setbacks in the area.
Mr. Toberen, Deputy Administrator – Added that staff is recommending maintaining the same lot width and setbacks from the previous plan.
Mrs. Winwood – Questioned whether the plan would need to show lot dimensions?
Mr. Toberen – Said that staff will compare the lots sizes and basic layout on the site plan with the record plan.
Mr. Rogers – Asked about the existing trees along Sugar Ridge Lane?
Mr. DeLong – That is remaining as previously approved.
Applicant represented by Byron Firsdon, developer, 1944 Arbor Walk, and Chris Schaeffer, engineer, 1253 Lyons Road.
Mr. Drain – What are the estate lot widths in the southwest corner?
Mr. Firsdon – The widths will be 90’ to 95’.
Mr. Anderson – Questioned what the developer is doing to make sure the soil on the site is suitable for construction?
Mr. Firsdon – They have done soil borings on the site which did not indicate any soil problems.
Mrs. Winwood – Will there be a Homeowner Association? Also asked if the ponds are on private lots or common areas?
Mr. Firsdon – The ponds will be in the common areas and will be maintained by the Homeowners Association.
Citizens voicing concerns, questions and comments included:
John Shrader, 2717 Sugar Ridge Lane – Questioned if the site distance issue at Rooks Road is still being addressed. Mr. Shrader also questioned if the grading being done on site is for the current plan or the proposed plan. He questioned if there is any guarantee that the trees being saved will remain. Questioned if the existing pond will be affected by runoff from the lots. Questioned whether this case has to go to the Trustees or if this is the last meeting.
Mr. Toberen – Addressed the site distance issue and stated the township is in the process of hiring a consultant to study the area.
Mr. Firsdon – Addressed the other questions to the chairperson, Mr. Drain, as he refused to respond to Mr. Shrader.
Mrs. Winwood – Asked if the existing pond can be contained entirely in the common area rather than have a small portion of the pond located on private property.
Mr. Firsdon – There will be easements and this portion of the plan has not changed as previously approved.
Public hearing closed.
Commission remarks, concerns and comments included:
Mr. Drain – Likes that they are preserving the trees.
Mrs. Zobrist – Approves the proposed changes but is disappointed that the development is losing some of the amenities, such as the eyebrow cul-de-sac and interior open space.
Mr. Anderson – Echoes other commissioners’ comments.
Mr. Rogers – Is in support of the project but is disappointed that the developer intentionally refused to respond to the citizens concerns.
Mrs. Winwood – Echoes other commissioners’ comments.
Hearing closed.
MOTION - Mr. Drain moved in Case Z-659B to approve applicant’s request for approval of a change to the previously approved site plan to preserve existing trees along E. Spring Valley Pike on property consisting of approximately 76.523 acres located in a Planned Development Residential (PD-R) zoning district, subject to: 1) the developer submitting a complete landscape plan before the case goes before the Trustees; 2) all conditions of case Z-659A apply; 3) staff comments, with the exception of Fire Department comments A and C regarding inner connectivity, and the zoning comment #2 on soils, be included; 4) the updated plan to include lot dimensions.
Motion seconded by Mr. Anderson.
VOTE - Mr. Rogers, yes; Mr. Drain, yes; Mrs. Winwood, yes; Mrs. Zobrist, yes; Mr. Anderson, yes.
Case Z-659B approved with modifications.
CASES Z-670 & Z-670A – The Drees Company (Woodburn Farm III)
The request in Case Z-670 is for a change in zoning from the current Residential (R-4) to Planned Development Residential (PD-R) two stage for a development containing 48 single family lots on approximately 27.62 acres.
The request in Case Z-670A is for approval of a second and final stage plan in a Planned Development Residential (PD-R) zoning district for 48 single family lots on approximately 27.62 acres.
This property is located along the north side of Nutt Road.
Greg DeLong, Senior Planner presented the case.
Mr. Drain – Questioned the side yard setbacks for lots 17 and 18.
Mr. Drain – Also questioned the building setbacks inside the floodplain.
Mr. Toberen, Deputy Administrator, and Mr. DeLong – Addressed the question about the side yard setback and referred the floodplain question to the developer.
Mr. Drain – Wanted to point out that the township did not approve the density of 2 to 2.5 units/acre in the Suburban Neighborhood section of Create the Vision. The commission recommended it remain at 1.75 units/acre.
Applicant represented by George Reinke, Reinke Group, 959 Congress Park Drive.
Mr. Anderson – Questioned the setbacks inside the floodplain.
Mr. Reinke – Stated that the re-grading will occur to keep homes out of the 100-year floodplain.
Mr. Anderson – So there will be no buildable structures in the floodplain?
Mr. Reinke – Stated that is correct.
Mr. Drain – Feels additional landscaping would be a nice amenity around the retention basin.
Mr. Reinke – Said they could do something to spruce up the appearance.
Citizens voicing concerns, questions and comments included:
Bonnie Hartmann, 9558 Meadow Woods Lane – Requests that trees be preserved and maintained as the dense woods along the creek is a great amenity.
Karen Painter, 1229 Nutt Road – Questioned whether the entry will be illuminated. Does not want bright lights that may cause light pollution. Concerned with debris and erosion runoff during construction.
Mr. Reinke – Addressed Ms. Painter’s concerns.
Public hearing closed.
Commission remarks, concerns and comments included: None.
Hearing closed.
MOTION - Mr. Rogers moved in Case Z-670 to approve applicant’s request for a change in zoning from the current Residential (R-4) to Planned Development Residential (PD-R) two stage for a development containing 48 single family lots on approximately 27.62 acres subject to: 1) staff comments; 2) the setbacks as shown on the drawing; and 3) comments from the Washington Township VIP Consultant.
Motion seconded by Mr. Anderson.
VOTE - Mr. Rogers, yes; Mr. Drain, yes; Mrs. Winwood, yes; Mrs. Zobrist, yes; Mr. Anderson, yes.
Case Z-670 approved with modifications.
MOTION - Mr. Rogers moved in Case Z-670A to approve applicant’s request for approval of a second and final stage plan in a Planned Development Residential (PD-R) zoning district for 48 single family lots on approximately 27.62 acres subject to: 1) staff comments; 2) comments from the Washington Township VIP Consultant; and 3) a landscaping plan for the detention and retention areas be submitted prior to going before the Trustees.
Motion seconded by Mrs. Zobrist.
VOTE - Mr. Rogers, yes; Mr. Drain, yes; Mrs. Winwood, yes; Mrs. Zobrist, yes; Mr. Anderson, yes.
Case Z-670A approved with modifications.
In other business:
Mr. Toberen discussed how there are no cases filed for the October meeting. Tom offered to give the commission some training. The Board decided to have no meeting.
Mr. Toberen went over Commission Minutes from when Create the Vision was presented to the Commission. The Commission recommended density levels remain at 1.75 instead of being increased to 2.0 to 2.5.
Mr. Toberen presented the Create the Vision checklist. Staff will fill out the checklist and present it to the Commission. Comments on the checklist to be submitted to Mr. DeLong by October 20, 2005.
Meeting adjourned. A tape recording of this proceeding is on file in the Zoning Office.
________________________________
Harry Drain, Chairman
Washington Township Zoning Commission