PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
April 12, 2011
7:00 P.M.



I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman, Don Darby.


II. ROLL CALL

Members Present: David Okum, Richard Bauer, Tom Vanover, Steve Galster, Marge Boice, Don Darby, Carolyn Ghantous

Others Present: William McErlane, Building Official; Don Shvegzda, City Engineer; Jeff Tulloch, Economic Development Director


III. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2011

Mrs. Boice moved to adopt the March 8, 2011 Planning Commission Meeting minutes, Mr. Vanover seconded the motion and the minutes were adopted with seven affirmative votes.


IV. REPORT ON COUNCIL

Mr. Galster: Under correspondence we received a letter to Mrs. Harlow proposing Zoning Code text amendment for special event signs; that is set for Public Hearing on April 20th.


V. CORRESPONDENCE

Chairman Darby: As Mr.Galster mentioned we received a copy of letter to
Mrs. Harlow concerning the text amendment for special signs. Also you received replacement pages for your Zoning packets and a copy of Ordinance No. 8-2011.


VI. OLD BUSINESS

Chairman Darby: There is no Old Business to present at this meeting.

   
VII. NEW BUSINESS

A. Chairman Darby: The first item of New Business is the Minor Modification to the PUD for Full Throttle Karting at 11725 Commons Drive.

Mr. Joe O’Gorman: I am co-owner and business development Vice-President
for Full Throttle Indoor Karting; a newly formed company. With me is
Aaron Banfield, the other co-owner and Vice-President of Operations. Also with me is David Santel, Marketing and Sales Manager for the newly formed company.
The Commission has received a copy of the application complete with the multiple tabs, I did have two addendums to that; revised covenants as well as one sign being omitted at the corner of Kemper and Commons Drive, and one additional proposed sign that was left out of our application. (At this time
Mr. O’Gorman passed out copies of the addendums mentioned to all the Planning Commission Members.)
We are a start up company, we actually formed our LLC just about a year ago and we have been working diligently to find a spot to add to some recreation. Each of us are motor-sports enthusiasts and Mr. Santel is actually the Regional Executive for the local Sports Car Club of America; Mr. Banfield has competed in grass roots Nascar and Circle-Track Racing in his past, and I am an active competitor in the Sports Car Club of America as well as a member of the Board of Directors here locally. We hired the services of Peter Becker, Peter has been building tracks starting in Europe in 1994, to have him focus on our environment and to give people a racing experience in a safe and an environmentally controlled venue. The carts that we are to be using are specifically designed for the indoor carting, they are a rental cart and they are manufactured by the largest manufacture of carts in the world. We are planning on using about 32,000 s.f. space and we will have a road course wide enough to allow some competition. We did a lot of research and we did determine that the City of Springdale is an ideal spot for us for a couple of reasons; the proximity to 275 and 75, the corridor there is really an ideal demographic draw to stay in Northern Cincinnati and also a study of the economic development plans for the City of Springdale entertainment venues in the City, seem to be something that the City is promoting and welcoming and we decided that venue; that is why we are here tonight.

(At this time Mr. McErlane read his Staff comments.)
(Ms. McBride was not present at this meeting due to a Planner’s Convention and Mr. McErlane reviewed with the Planning Commission Ms. McBride’s comments.)
(Mr. Shvegzda followed with his comments.)

Mr. Shvegzda: I have a question of the applicant; it almost looks like the parking area is being necked down from the existing drawing but it is difficult to tell?

Mr. O’Gorman: The drawing was actually a copy and our stance on the parking is to maximize the parking spaces and do what is right by Code and what the recommendations of this Commission would be. What is there presently are four dock doors that won’t be used so there is no need to bring semi trucks in and out. Our intent was to maximize parking as close to the building as possible.

Mr. Shvegzda: On the north side, that 17’-3”, does that represent the actual distance to the real edge, to the parking lot, to the parking stall?

Mr. O’Gorman: Yes. When I measure the existing spaces, those that are adjacent to the curbs are 17’-3” and those that are in the center are 19’ so there are two different dimensions on the site of the existing spaces. The question is, do we make all the dimensions 19’?

Mr. Shvegzda: Truly they should be 19’; the shorter dimensions were permitted because in the overall layout of the parking lot that would reduce the impervious surface ratio and we are not dealing with that right here now.
The applicant indicated that their peak hour traffic was about 30 and they factored in an additional 10 for employees. While this certainly seems realistic because this is the overall tabulation for what is currently on the site, we would still like some additional verification of those numbers.

Mr. O’Gorman: If I could get clarification; what would that verification be, is that going to a facility and doing tick marks or what would that be?

Mr. Shvegzda: What we have done in the past is to actually have traffic counts for other similar facilities done and then submitted.

Mr. O’Gorman: That is information that we did receive from other track owners; we belong to the Professional Indoor Carting Association and that was the question that was posed and we heard from a number of track owners with a consistent message. Would we have to travel to another site?

Mr. Shvegzda: They may be able to supply an actual traffic count to you.

Mr. Larry Bergman: Have you considered the impact of Walmart not being in the front facility, the reduction of traffic? Hopefully you will take that into consideration so that we can get this approved.

Chairman Darby: Thank you. That makes a lot of sense.

Mr. Galster: I don’t have an issue with the amount of traffic that this place will generate; looking at the parking layout it would be important to try to get the employee parking as far away from the front door as you can and utilize those existing spaces. As a Council Member, I don’t think that this is a major change; I think that this is a minor change. I have used indoor carting in the past in different cities and I look forward to the opening of this facility. “F” looks like a new monument sign that is proposed if you can’t use the existing monument sign that is already there that has three or four tenants advertised on there; is that correct?

Mr. O’Gorman: That is exactly correct. Our intent is that there is a directional sign that is represented as “E” in the drawings. We are proposing no changes to the south face, but we would like to change the north face to split that between ourselves and the Morris Furniture. We would like to change the Morris Furniture language because every time we have been in this building we have had somebody try to pick up a TV.

Mr. Galster: I don’t know if we want to leave “F” out of the equation or leave it in and see if they need it. I think that the signage based on the size of the building is o.k. whether or not you have “F” or “E” in there. I understand that there used to be a canopy with a checkered flag?

Mr. O’Gorman: We actually decided to remove the checkered flag at this point. We would like to take advantage of that architectural feature at some time in the future.

Mr. Vanover: As the other Council person, I would echo Mr. Galster’s concerns and I don’t see this as a major revision to the PUD.

Mr. Okum: I have a question regarding the Full Throttle Indoor Karting directional sign up on Kemper Road; we didn’t calculate that into their sign calculations, is that correct? Do we need to include a reference to that being included as part of the sign package?

Mr. McErlane: Certainly you can do that; we typically don’t include that in our square footage.

Mr. Okum: Because it is directional and informational?

Mr. McErlane: Right.

Mr. Okum: Sir, did you say there was one sign that you are not going to put in?

Mr. O’Gorman: Our intent was to not put in “F”, at this point.

Mr. Okum: What are your hours of operation?

Mr. O’Gorman: We will be open from 11:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m. during the week and we will extend those hours on Friday and Saturday, we expect to be open until 11:00 p.m. or midnight; we haven’t determined that exactly. We will have shortened hours on Sunday.

Mr. Okum: Do you have a liquor license?

Mr. O’Gorman: No.
Mr. Okum: With most go-cart facilities there are exhausted out parts that are broken, have you allowed for an indoor storage location for those spent parts and tires?

Mr. O’Gorman: We do have a maintenance and storage area that is roughly
1600 s.f. and we will have on staff a full-time mechanic and we don’t intend to be retiring carts, we intend to repair them. As they wear out, we will sell them back to the manufacturer to be refurbished and replace them. We will certainly have to work through a way to dispose of tires; we will probably do that through a local tire dealer.
A big part of our draw is corporate business; we do plan to have private events where people can rent the track and bring their employees in for team-building or celebrations or whatever.

Mr. Okum: Staff commented that obviously there needs to be a final review of the covenants by Staff and our Law Director’s office. Have the rest of the parties signed off on the covenants, the changes?

Mr. Bergman: As far as I know; yes.

Mr. O’Gorman: Dave and Buster’s had a restrictive covenant that said “No more than 250 s.f. in aggregate video games” and we will comply with that with no problems. Their other concern was a liquor license and we have no intentions of doing the liquor; so we have actually received in writing from Dave and Buster’s Council that they are good with our use.

Mr. Tulloch: In regard to Mr. Okum’s question, the City actually did a rough draft of the covenants and Bill and I talked about what needed to be said, it was fairly simple; it still needs to be reviewed by the Law Director.

Mr. Bauer: I have a couple of safety questions: the exhaust at go-cart facilities plays heavily in my mind, where they are not exhausted well, you have some verbiage here about the standard air change per hour, does that meet the requirements?

Mr. O’Gorman: Our intention is to actually exceed the recommended and
Mr. McErlane had given us the guidance to say if we follow an indoor parking garage, which is 1-1/2 air changes an hour; we plan on having that plus capacity because we plan on using the exhausting for cooling in the summertime, so it serves two purposes. The mechanicals will be designed by Genesis Mechanical Services and they are the company that did a lot of work at Cincinnati Bell’s data centers; their focus is clean air. Our intent is to bring fresh air in off the roof and we will be venting it out the south-side of the building. Because the carts are made to run indoors they will have a catalytic converter on them; they are running Honda 270 cc engines which are rated high-efficiency engines. Additionally, we will also have sensors that will be controlling the fans.

Mr. Bergman: The requirements in the lease was that both ventilation and sound, if there are any sort of problem that we interpret relating those two things they have to mitigate it and that is in the lease and that was something that we were very pressing on; they brought engineers in to identify these facts.

Mr. Galster: Most of these go-cart tracks have higher ceilings; almost two stories with an observation deck up on top and that gives it a little bit more air movement inside; so this is a typical single story retail space and I assume you just glassed in the observation areas to allow the viewing, the fact that it is lower, are you going to have to do anything special?

Mr. O’Gorman: When we looked at the height it is actually the ideal height for the track. The intent is to have three fans and three intakes to actually keep that air moving.

Mr. Galster: You only have a single track, so there will have to be segregation from the novices opposed to the advanced; do you have to switch out cars?

Mr. O’Gorman: In the pit area you will actually have three lanes of carts; two that are suited for adults, and we are calling adults, 16 and over, and then there is a youth cart for ages 10-15. We will run youth carts with youth carts or youth carts with adults that came with a group. For instance, if you had a group of Boy Scouts, the adult leaders could run with that group.

Mr. Galster: As far as the concrete area in front of the handicap parking, I assume that there will be parking blocks and even if you just make an outdoor seating area, something to utilize that space to dress that up a little bit more as opposed to just a slab of concrete, I would be o.k. with that. As far as the parking, I think there is plenty of space to work out the parking to meet Staff’s approval.

Mr. Okum: We all know there is a huge parking field there; so we either tell them that what they have is acceptable or are we going to tell them that they need to work out the final location of the allocated parking with Staff?

Mr. McErlane: The parking is out there, they have 66 that are allocated to their lease space. The comment that Ms. McBride made was that there is additional parking out there that is not utilized to a great degree. If there are instances where they would exceed that 66 for some period of time, it would probably not be a burden on the parking field.

Mr. Okum: Then the quantity of 66 provided shall be acceptable, in my opinion.
If ultimately things change, I think Ms. McBride said that because she wants to be sure that the proportional quantities for each of the businesses applies, and things have changed a lot for that development from when we started over 20 years ago.

Mr. McErlane: There are some spaces not currently leased and we have pretty much eaten up the parking on that side of the building; the utilization of that space will be kind of limited as to how you can lease that space out.

Mr. Okum: The other item is the mechanical units; I want to make sure that Staff takes care of the review of screening and so forth. Obviously, there is going to be air handlers added to the top of the roof and it is visible when coming down Commons Drive. As far as fuel, are you going to have a tank?

Mr. O’Gorman: No. We are planning on doing purely a portable solution and what we will be doing is using a flammable liquid rated transfer tank; gallons to be determined at roughly 100 gallons. The carts have a 3 gallon fuel tank, so our intent is to only have on site what we are going to need and we generally can go a couple of days on a tank of gas because we are going to be running at 8 minute increments. We will have a pick-up truck that will have a tank mounted in it; a flammable rated tank with an electric pump. We are dealing with one that is flammable rated and not combustible, so it is designed specifically for the handling of gasoline. It would be parked in the parking lot and go to the gas station and then we will use portable fuel caddies in the building to fuel the cars.

Mr. Okum: Where will that truck be stored when you are operational?

Mr. O’Gorman: My assumption is behind the building while we are open and the potential might be as we fence in the dumpster area, just for security purposes at night, to put it behind that fence where the dumpster will be.

Chairman Darby: Mr. McErlane, the Fire Department did review this?

Mr. McErlane: We did review this with the applicant; the Fire Marshall and the Fire Chief visited the site and talked about fuel handling and the other concerns they had about fire safety.

Mrs. Boice: You made a great presentation. On the vending area, are you talking just strictly vending machines, or do you intend to have live people serving something?

Mr. O’Gorman: Our intent is just to sell pre-packaged snacks, so it will be soft drinks and chips and those kinds of things. We don’t have a desire to run a kitchen.

Mrs. Boice: I noticed that you say the market is primarily based on ages 16-45; does that preclude that this go-cart granny couldn’t come there?

Mr. O’Gorman: We would hope that you would because one of the things that we figured out is that there is an underserved market; what we hope to do is to have driving schools.

Mrs. Boice: I have a couple of grandchildren that love to race with grandma down in Gatlinburg.

Mr. Vanover: It is refreshing when we see a presentation like this. If you are going to draw corporate groups, then I could almost foresee catering.

Mr. O’Gorman: Our expectation would be that we would bring in outside catering.

Mr. Galster: I hope you will offer a season pass for people who want to get more involved.

Mr. O’Gorman: We will have a membership program and you can purchase an unlimited racing pack on a six month or annual basis. What you get with a membership is a greater deal of electronic information and you also get discounts.

Mrs. Ghantous: How many employees are you going to have?

Mr. O’Gorman: We will have primarily a part-time work force working the track so the expectation is we will have on staff at any time a track manager, one or two cashiers and then a minimum of three people on the track, and we will also have a mechanic; so the staff will be fairly small. We would like to partner with the Great Oaks Joint Vocational School and their fire-fighting program because the students are already trained first-responders and we would give them a really nice title of “Safety Marshall”.

Mr. Vanover: I do have another question; the dead landscape material out there, are we going to get that taken care of?

Mr. Bergman: Yes.

Chairman Darby: Gentlemen, I would like to thank you for a very comprehensive package, it was an easy read. As a person who had no knowledge of this industry, I am excited about the idea. How big are the carts?

Mr. O’Gorman: The carts will have adjustable pedals, adjustable seats and part of the fleet will have a large seat and an extra-large seat because we do want to try to accommodate different size individuals.
Can I get a clarification; we had a request for additional traffic study, can we get clarification on what we can do?

Chairman Darby: I am hearing that it is the pleasure of the Commission that this will not be a requirement. Is that correct?
(The Planning Commission Members responded that it was not a necessary requirement.)



Mr. Okum: I would like to move to approve the Full Throttle Karting at
the address identified by the submittal on Commons Drive to include the specifications and designs contained in the exhibits provided to include all Staff, City Engineer and City Planner’s recommendations which shall include a review by our Law Director’s office and our Staff of the covenants with one exception that there shall be no traffic study required for this site; that the mechanical units effected by this development be screened and Staff and Planning Commission’s approved enclosure screening, that the parking and site plan conditions shall include a quantity of 66 parking spaces as provided is acceptable and that the final proportions and layout to be reviewed and approved by Staff; that the signage presented shall be included with the deletion of the monument sign identified as “Sign F” and it shall not be included at this time. Parts and used equipment, which include spent and damaged cart and equipment shall be contained within the structure; a fueling truck shall be kept for purposes of fueling, behind the building and parked off-hours within the dumpster enclosure.
Mr. Vanover seconded the motion.

Mr. Shvegzda: Just in regard to clarification, there was that area of pavement out by the handicap spaces that were to remain and be utilized for outdoor seating?

Mr. Okum: I will amend my motion to exclude the removal of the area that was identified by the City Engineer from the recommendation; incorporating some seating. The pavement identified by the City Engineer, to be removed shall be left in place and changed to an outdoor seating area.
Mr. Vanover seconded the amendment to the motion.

Mr. Bauer polled the Planning Commission Members and with a unanimous “aye” vote the request was approved.


B.    Chairman Darby: The next item under New Business is Exterior Elevation Changes for Cititrends at Springdale Plaza, 455 East Kemper Road.

Mr. Gary Brown: I am here on behalf of the tenant, which is Cititrends, a national clothing chain out of Atlanta, Georgia. They are requesting to enlarge their sign; basically the parapet wall above the shopping center to be equal in size to the half-round parapet that adjoins it. The request for the change has been approved by the landlord, which I also represent.

(At this time Mr. McErlane read his Staff comments and reviewed Ms. McBride’s comments.)
Mr. McErlane: Again, since this is a PUD, the City Council Members need to make the determination whether this is a major or minor modification of the PUD.

Mr. Okum: I think the secondary arch to the right is in fairly close proximity; one does have a keystone type of effect and this one would not, is that correct?

Mr. Brown: That is the shopping center identification; the “SP” is up there in that keystone and it is a pineapple finish, a half round.

Mr. Okum: I guess the reason for this mass being constructed is to give it a bigger sign.

Mr. Brown: It is hidden behind the Panera Bread. DSW and Bed, Bath and Beyond have more visibility from Kemper than this store does and they are trying to gain some signage visibility. They are also hidden behind Michaels store and the Panera Bread. There is one color EIFS and it would be the same color throughout the shopping center.

Mr. Okum: If I recall there is some relaxing or cross-hatching effects that are in the existing EIFS; it is not very noticeable?

Mr. Brown: It is a pineapple-diamond finish.

Mr. Okum: And that is going to be on here?

Mr. Brown: No. It can be, but no, it was not recommended in that fashion.

Mr. Okum: I think it is going to look quite different, don’t you think?

Mr. Brown: I am not the architect and I am not here to sell you on the aesthetic appeal of it. They can adjust it accordingly and I think they would be willing to do that. They are looking for the advantage to equal their signage so that they can compete with the T.J. Maxx down at the end and the Bed, Bath and Beyond; that is what they are really looking for. Aesthetically, they can put the pineapple lines in it or leave it out.

Mr. Okum: I certainly think if the Commission is going to consider this for the purposes of signage and identification of the business, I certainly think that the EIFS needs to be consistent with the rest of the EIFS on the development; especially with its proximity to the identity EIFS that is just a business and a half away.

Mr. Brown: And I think it would be perfectly acceptable with Cititrends.

Mr. Okum: I shop at that center a lot and there are pedestrian worn areas over that island and there are a couple of walk through spaces; but they are very hard to locate. There needs to be something there to keep people from stepping over into the flow of traffic

Mr. Brown: As of April 1st, Schottenstein Property Group took over the management of the shopping center; they are the larger partner. The initial drive-thru is one of the things that he wanted to see changed and that was one of the items we were going to address with Randy Campion in the Building Department. We are going to inquire what steps we need to take to make improvements in that area because it is trampling down the landscaping.

Mr. Okum: I don’t want to get rid of the landscaping but on the other hand the people getting out of the cars need a passageway to get to and from that.

Mr. Brown: We share the same concern; maybe we will come up with a solution working with the Building Department.

Mr. Bauer: As I look at the rest of the radius’s there, they tend to match the building line; do you know why they stuck that piece up a little before, because the radius blends in on the other ones?

Mr. Brown: It matches the size of the one right next door.

Mr. Bauer: The total width of that radius?

Mr. Brown: They are the exact same size; yes.

Mr. Bauer: But the radius doesn’t end into the top of the parapet wall.

Mr. Brown: It would look similar where the radius would dive right into that same parapet.

Mr. Bauer: I think that architects try to make things stand out, whether you like it or you dislike it; they just want you to notice the thing.

Mr. Brown: The intent is to match the other one next door.

Mr. Bauer: I think it would be better if the radius matched that building line.

Chairman Darby: Could we get some clarification; at its current intended size it will match the other one?

Mr. Brown: Yes, it will match the other one identically; size wise.

Mr. Galster: I don’t think that architecturally that this adds anything to the center. I think that it creates a hump out in the middle of nowhere-land, to me. All the retail space along that section of the mall, all of its signs are in a certain sign band area and this would take this outside of that sign banding. I am not in favor of it; I don’t think that it adds an architectural feature or that is beneficial to the center.

Mr. Vanover: There is a parapet that exists through the end of Cititrends; are you going to mount to that or reduce that parapet back?

Mr. Brown: It will be flush with the face of the parapet wall; to one that is parallel with the storefront.

Chairman Darby: I am going to echo some of Mr. Galster’s comments because I don’t feel that this adds anything to the presentation of the center. The existing sign with the “SP” logo is not exactly equal distance from both ends, but it is pretty close and this very large sign throws off the balance that is part of the identification of this center. I cannot support this particular approach to signage.

Mr. Brown: I think the intention was not to improve the aesthetic appeal of the shopping center; the intent was to give Cititrends a larger sign.

Chairman Darby: It is hard to separate the two.

Mr. Brown: I think their point is that they want the advantage and they want an equal shot at surviving their location in Springdale when other “big-box” have signs at higher elevation, and they are hidden behind the corner.

Mr. Okum: I agree with the comments I have heard, but if I were to be making the motion not knowing how everyone on this Commission feels about it, I would certainly want to make at least those two items be part of those conditions. It does throw an imbalance to the building elevations and it does change the purpose of what those building elevation identity features were to the Mall when it was updated. So, I would not be supporting my motion.

Mr. Brown: I understand. I am here as a representative.

Mr. Galster: I am not opposed to trying to find a way to get more signage and I understand the need for signage. I am not opposed to trying to modify a pylon to get more space to give them more exposure; I understand that they are hidden behind the “L” shape of this building, but I think there has to be a better way to do that even if there is an additional at-the-road sign or monument signage.

Mr. Brown: This was not promised by the landlord, but it was approved by the landlord; and then I told them they needed the approval of the City. The landlord will not approve of additional signage at the pylon. I don’t think there would be other options acceptable to the landlord.

Mr. Galster: I am not opposed to more directional monument kind of signs at the entrance to allow more exposure out on the main thoroughfare.

Mr. Okum: For purposes of bringing it to the floor, I move that Cititrends at Springdale Plaza request for building elevation changes and signage changes be approved to include Staff’s considerations and also if this shall be approved that the building elevations EIFS surface texture and color match the existing development and the new building elevation eyebrow or rise shall match the center marquee size and dimension.
Mr. Galster seconded the motion.

Mr. Richard Bauer polled the Planning Commission Members and with 1 “aye” vote and 6 “no” votes; the request was denied.

C.    Chairman Darby: Moving on to the next item; exterior finish changes at 5 Guys Burgers, 810 Kemper Commons Drive.

    Mr. Sheanshang: I am with JLS Architecture and I am representing Picerne Development Group, they are the franchisees for Five Guys Burger & Fries in the Tri-State area. We are requesting revisions to the exterior of the existing Donato’s Pizza to a Five Guys Burgers & Fries. We are looking at taking the silver roof and replacing it with a red roof and removing the existing awnings, using the existing frames and replacing them with a solid red fabric awning; they would not be internally lit and the lighting would be the existing lights. We would be painting the exterior to a burgundy wine color in some areas, the EIFS finish to a tan color, the existing brick at the entry would remain the same, as is. We will not be having a drive-through window at all, and we will be enclosing the walk-in cooler areas that are currently the metal to an EIFS material to make it consistent with the building. We have proposed some signage for the front of the building; there are two signs, one over each front door and then one on the front side facing Kemper Road. The corporate office of Five Guys came back and they would prefer instead of doing those three signs, they would like to do three signs that just say “Five Guy’s”, one on Kemper side, and one on the Common Road and one on the Target side of the building and nothing over top of the doors. We would still be under the allowable signage.

    (At this time Mr. McErlane read his Staff comments and presented Ms. McBride’s
comments.)
    Mr. McErlane: It looks like a portion of that drive-through lane will be utilized for loading, as well.

    Mr. Sheanshang: We won’t be closing that drive-through lane because when a truck comes in they will use it as their turn-around and exit out that way. They receive deliveries anywhere from 3 to 5 times a week; everything they have is fresh, there are no frozen meats or vegetables or anything like that.

    Mr. McErlane: Ms. McBride’s last comment concerns signage and my comment would be that we exclude the signage and let that go through the typical administrative process for approval.

    (Mr. Shvegzda followed with his Staff comments.)

    Mr. Okum: I agree with Ms. McBride’s comments concerning the parapet to change the beige to a couple two-tone beige colors and buffs but I don’t think I would be supporting a red banding on the top rim of the building. I do want to make sure that what signage is approved for this site, that it be individually channel-lit enclosures.
   
Mr. Galster: Based on Mr. Okum’s comments where he wanted to have the channel letters, I agree with that for the main sign but depending upon what package they bring back I have no problem with the bullet below that says “Burgers & Fries” being in a case. On the drive-through, is that going to be paneled back in and EIFS over the top of that and repainted?

Mr. Sheanshang: Correct; and the band going around it would match the existing band.

Mr. Galster: I would anticipate that if you are going to finish this drive-through window that it would have the same finish as the existing wall and a flush feel instead of a boarded up section. Basically you won’t know that there was a drive-through there?

Mr. Sheanshang: Correct.

Mr. Galster: This is your drawing for this building; on the one side where the “Five Guys” is centered up, and on the other one it is not, it is all the way up by the tower as opposed to being centered on this wall?

Mr. Sheanshang: It will probably be centered. At the time, on that plan, most of the signs were closer to the entrance and now the “Five Guys” corporate is asking the signs to be on three sides of the building, so I would center on each side of the building.

Mr. Galster: On sheet 8-10 which shows the exterior elevation and I believe the east elevation, that sign location should be centered in that banding area because it looks funky.

Mr. Sheanshang: O.K.

Mr. Vanover: For the record to clearly state, I do not see this as a major change to the PUD.

Mr. Galster: I also believe that this is a minor change to the PUD.

Mr. Okum: I would like to move that Five Guys at 810 East Kemper Road be approved to include Staff, City Engineer and City Planner’s recommendations, along with the motion that all four elevations shall be treated with the color palette for the samples provided with one exception, the banding and cornice work on the building is identified to be red shall remain the EIFS color. The two-toning of the EIFS shall be approved and is part of this motion; the second color shall be in the darker range of the beige tone that was presented. The signage shall be as per code with the exception that the main signage shall be individual channel lit enclosures, with the exception of a limited auxiliary capsule signage being permitted on the property.
Mrs. Boice seconded the motion.

Mr. McErlane: Mr. Okum had suggested that they comply with the City Engineer’s comments and his only comment was that he should remove the drive-through.

Mr. Okum: They did.

Mr. McErlane: They are not removing the drive-through lane.

Mr. Okum: O.K. With the exclusion of the City Engineer’s recommendations, I so amend.
Mr. Galster seconded the amendment to the motion.

Mr. Richard Bauer polled the Planning Commission Members and with a unanimous “aye” vote the request was granted with conditions.


D. Chairman Darby: The next item of business is minor modifications to a PUD for the Springdale Farmer’s Market at 11550 Springfield Pike.

Mr. Jeff Tulloch, Development Director: I am representing the City and the Chamber who are the co-conspirators in the initiating the Farmer’s Market. In 2009 Planning Commission approved PUD variance for the use of Springdale Towne Center for the purposes of a farm market for a period of two years and I’m here to request an extension of that and my recommendation will be to extend it for five years so we are not wasting the Planning Commission’s time by coming back here in another two years. There are modifications from what was originally proposed and you will see on your drawings the area shaded in green, originally that was just a little corner down at the end and it has expanded well beyond that.
We anticipated around ten vendors and that has grown to up to twenty-two vendors with the average being fifty and then dropping to as low as ten during the off season. The configuration has been approved by Randy Cooper, the owner of the property and he signed the affidavit. The original proposal request is really three signs with specific placement; we have adjusted those and there is a photo showing they are approximately 42” X 84”. The signs are pretty effective, they go up the night before the event and they are taken down the morning after the event. The hours are the same as last year, 3:00 p.m. through 7:00 p.m. on Thursdays.

Chairman Darby: What happens to that project when that empty building becomes occupied?

Mr. Tulloch: The one on the corner; I don’t think it will necessarily affect it, although it could shift it farther to the south; there is plenty of room. We tried to keep it up closer to the Kemper intersection but when that building gets leased we have a pretty good understanding with the landlord that we may have to shift it entirely south of that drive.

Mrs. Boice: I don’t see any sense in doing this every year; but five years and then you get a tenant that moves in there that could be a sticking point. I am not sure I would want to go five years.

Mr. Tulloch: The only reason to bring up five years was not to consume the Planning Commission’s time, but I would be happy with two or three years.

Mr. Galster: I think two years is an appropriate number. In having talked to the tenants of the building, I know that the dry-cleaners has said that it is almost better for them to close because nobody can park to do drop-off and pick-up. The green space may represent the display area and the sales area but by the time you park the people that are there, there is no parking is in front of these businesses. We have talked about what happens if that building leases, up on the end, but it has parking around it so it has the additional ability to park around it. It would be nice if we could get a spot or two reserved for people that are still trying to patronize the tenants that are actually in the building. I know that Subway has an issue, because nobody can park and walk into the Subway Store during the Farmer’s Market. The dry-cleaner says that they might as well close because nobody can park; it is really a challenge. If we could make some kind of an arrangement to allow some parking for those establishments, that would be appreciated. I am o.k. with two years, I am comfortable with that. Also, I do not consider it a major change to the PUD.

Mr. Vanover: I don’t have a problem with this and I would be willing to say three years. If huge changes occur the landlord will pull his feelers in as well as the City. It is one of those old-time, feel good things that the community shows up for. The parking for the tenants can be a problem and we could put signs up but we have seen people abuse signage.

Mr. Okum: I tend to agree with Mr. Galster’s position, there needs to be parking spaces, at least the first two in each row dedicated to the existing businesses there, so that those businesses can get some people in and out pretty quick. You could limit those spaces to no more than 15 minutes; does it work? No, people ignore it anyway. I have gone to the farmer’s market many times and the cross over on that main street is awkward, the plywood that is put out to walk on over the grassy area is not protected with anti-slip type protection and there are a lot of older people that are going across that. I would very much encourage the shift to go further to the south.

Mr. Tulloch: And maybe more cones are needed in the traveled surface, larger cones.

Mr. Okum: If we do the two years, I think we are better, and then visit it through your committee.
I move to approve the Farmer’s Market for a two year period with considerations.
Mr. Galster seconded the motion and with a unanimous “aye” vote the request was approved.

VIII. DISCUSSION

Mr. Okum: The Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission is the parent organization for the Planning Partnership and Mr. Galster was Chairman of the Planning Partnership for a couple years. The Planning Partnership that we are members of by virtue of the City approved a commitment of finances to that. The one thing that we don’t know is what is available to us for free. I thought I would bring everybody in the Planning Commission to light on the services: There is an appointment of Planning Partnership Representatives; but the more important items are there is free admittance to the training for the Planning and Zoning Commissioner’s training, there is free attendance for the Committee Representative to the annual meeting and another item is up to eight hours of complimentary technical service and site plan review, project research and meeting facilitation provided by the Planning Partnership. There is also the availability to make decisions through the partnership through trade journals, etc.
There is also GIS mapping that is available, so if we have a project that is coming into Springdale and we need the help, these things are available to us and they are paid for already. We should really take advantage of this. On their website, they are downloading all of the census data and that will be available on-line.

Mr. McErlane: I emailed or mailed to everyone information for Planning Partnership; if you didn’t get the email, please let me know.

Mr. Vanover: Unfortunately, we don’t have a code or ordinance to fall back on to enforce it but I have a neighbor who still has the remainder of her mulch from last year in the driveway and this is ongoing. I know from time to time we will see people get topsoil and gravel but the only thing I can think of is to give them an enforcement vehicle to work with by basically putting a time frame on some of this stuff, maybe a year. With the heavy rain we have had the past couple of days, it will wash down the sidewalks and into the storm-sewer. To me sixty days is legitimate.

Mr. Okum: I have a neighbor that has an excavation ditch across the front of his house and has had it there for two years.

Mr. Galster: So do we have to have the property maintenance code looked at in order to put a time frame on there, or to make it more enforceable?

Mr. Okum: The excavation is a cut-away of the hill, but it is pretty washed out.

Mrs. Ghantous: Is there a legitimate reason why that person is not able to take care of the mulch?

Mr. Vanover: No, for three years running they leave a portion of it on the driveway.

Mr. Okum: Is it the City’s mulch?

Mr. Vanover: Yes.

Mr. Galster: So, if we look at some type of change to the property maintenance code that would address delivered items to a driveway, whether it is gravel or dirt or mulch in bulk or in bags and that at some point it needs to be moved.

Mr. McErlane: Property maintenance code isn’t reviewed by Planning Commission but we can take a look at this.

IX. CHAIRMAN’S REPORT

A.    Chairman Darby: We have one item under Chairman’s Report, an approval of a sign at I Buffet, 705 Kemper Commons Circle.
   

X. ADJOURNMENT

Mr. Galster moved to adjourn; Mr. Vanover seconded and with a unanimous
“aye” vote from the Planning Commission Members, the meeting adjourned at
8:53 p.m.



Respectfully submitted,

________________________, 2011 ___________________________________
            Don Darby, Chairman


________________________, 2011 ___________________________________
                Richard Bauer, Secretary