The Miami Township Board of Trustees met in special session at 8:30 PM, Thursday, June 05, 1997, at the Miami Township Civic Building. The purpose of the session was the PUBLIC HEARING of CASE #426 Grand Communities/Hawley Todd, Jr. and Ruth Todd Lawrence, Trustee.
Chairperson Jean Schmidt called the meeting to order. The Pledge of Allegiance was given. Miami Township Clerk, Eric C. Ferry called the roll. In attendance were Jean Schmidt, Edwin H. Humphrey and Joseph W. Uecker.
Chairperson Schmidt opened the Hearing on Case #426. Mr. Ferry read the Legal Notice, the Planning Staff Report which recommended approval of the request. The Clermont County Planning Commission Report which recommended approval of the request. The Rural Zoning Commission Decision which was to deny the request.
Mr. Martin Kenworthy, of 600 Vine Street #25000 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202, Attorney for the applicant presented Mr. Bob Garlock who will present the site plan, Mr. David Todd representing the owner. Other representatives of the applicant present to answer questions are Larry Sprague, Jim Gorham and Mr. Jack Gehrum. Mr. Todd presented an overview of his family’s history in the area . He stated he was in favor of the proposed project because he felt this would be the best transitional use of the land. Mr. Kenworthy reviewed the proposed development. The developer has added a second access road. The property is heavily wooded with multiple ravines. The traffic impact study was deemed to be acceptable even before the second access road was added. Mr. Kenworthy reviewed the Miami Township Comprehensive Planning Goals and Policies in relationship to this project. Mr. Bob Garlock of Bear Becker Engineers 865 Lila Avenue, Milford, Ohio is the land planner for the project. Mr. Garlock presented an outline of the planned usage of the land, why trees have been left and why buildings have been positioned as shown. The plan provides two traffic access roads and sidewalks throughout the development. The project contains three type of units, townhome, villas and terrace home units. Garages and parking places are included for the units. Recreation facilities are also provided in the project. There will be a club house and pool, a game room and a half court basketball playing area. Mr. Menelaos Triantafillou, a professional planner hired by Miami Township presented an overview of his recommendations. Mr. Triantafillou recommended approval of this application for an R-PUD mainly because of the topography and location of the property. He stated he felt the developer was in compliance with the requirements of the planning goals of the Township. He also felt the 5.7 units per acre is well within the goals of the Township. Mr. Larry Fronk, Miami Township Director of Planning and Zoning stated he agrees with Mr. Triantafillou and recommends approval of the application.
Chairperson Schmidt called on adjoining property owners for statements.
Jan Purtle of 5988 Woodridge Drive in the Woodcreek subdivision stated she is not in favor of the zone change. She presented results of a survey of 50 Woodcreek PUD area residents stating the majority of the residents want to maintain single family zoning.
Dr. Bob Lyon 5940 Shallow Creek Dr. Milford, Ohio came forth to say he was against approving the project. He stated he felt the land could be restructured and easily used to develop single family homes. The traffic impact of this multi-family development will affect everyone negatively.
John Aufdenkampe 5985 Meadowcreek (President of the Homeowners Association of the village of Woodcreek) stated he was against granting the zoning change to an R-PUD for the Fischer multi-family development. He stated this project would increase the flow of traffic onto Cook Road by 2000 cars a day.
Peter Schwarberg 959 Woodcreek Drive stated he was not against development of this area, however he was of the opinion multi family development will destroy the beautiful area, which is one of the reasons he bought his home in this area.
Sue Gifford 953 Cooks Knoll Drive stated she is against granting the zoning change. She asked why the property could not be developed under the current zoning which is single family.
Doug King 5976 Woodridge Drive stated he is against the zone change. He likes the country setting and wants to keep it the way it is with single family development.
Beth Armitage 5986 Woodridge Drive stated she is definitely against the zone change.
Mr. Humphrey asked Mr. Kenworthy if the plans call for the roads to remain private? Mr. Kenworthy replied Yes. He also asked if street lighting is planned. The reply is Yes. He asked about the relationship between the two phases of the development. Mr. Larry Sprague responded. Your question relates to the structuring of the phases and the homeowners associations and so on. In the existing development you have two homeowners associations. Bridgehaven Community Facilities Association and Bridgehaven Condo Association. The Community Facilities Association is set up so it can be an umbrella association over the entire development in that it would care for those items that are common to everyone who lives in the community. That would include the club house, swimming pool, recreation facilities and the main drive. Mr. Sprague stated the main drive and the second access planned will basically serve the entire community. The people who live in the development pay two monthly assessments. One is to the Community Facilities Association and one is to their Condo Association which specifically takes care of the roadways that serve their buildings and the maintenance of the lawns and condo buildings. Everyone pays the same monthly fee for the facilities association. Mr. Sprague gave an overview of the Ohio Condominium Statue.
John Calhoun 5989 Woodridge Drive stated he purchased the first lot in Woodcreek in 1977 and the original plan was for 210 homes. After developing 143 homes, the sales market of single family homes declined, the developer changed the plan to include condos. Things can happen. The promises made today are not written in stone and can change tomorrow.
Mr. Uecker made a motion to close the public portion of the Public Hearing of Case #426. Mr. Humphrey seconded the motion. Upon roll call, all voted "AYE."
Mr. Uecker stated there are a number of issues to consider. Mr. Uecker stated he felt the mainstay is the density problem. He stated he was not sure the Township could defend a decision that the area should be kept as single family residential. If the decision is adverse to the developers, how much are we willing to spend of the tax dollars to defend that decision? We have to consider we are stewards of the Township tax dollars. Mr. Uecker stated he cannot make a decision tonight.
Mr. Humphrey stated his chief concern is the density. The last piece of 31 acres with 5 units per acre and the new phase is 37.3 acres with 5.68 units per acre. That seems like the density is expanding. The additional roadway is very positive. Mr. Humphrey was not prepared to make a decision tonight.
Mrs. Schmidt added she is not always opposed to condos or planned unit developments. Her chief concern is the density issue on this project. Mrs. Schmidt was not ready to make a decision. She stated she wished to review the data received tonight.
Mr. Humphrey made a motion to continue this portion of the Public Hearing of Case #426 until 7:00 PM June 17,1997. Mr. Uecker seconded the motion. Upon roll call, all voted "AYE."
With no other business to come before the Board, Chairperson Schmidt recessed the meeting at 11:10 PM
MIAMI TOWNSHIP BOARD OF TRUSTEES
PUBLIC HEARING - CASE #426 CONTINUED
JUNE 17, 1997
The Miami Township Board of Trustees met in special session June 17, 1997 at 7:00 PM. The purpose of the meeting was the continuation of the June 5, 1997 Public Hearing of Zoning Case #426. Chairperson Schmidt called the meeting to order. The pledge of allegiance was given. Miami Township Clerk, Eric C. Ferry called the roll. Jean Schmidt, Edwin H. Humphrey and Joseph W. Uecker were in attendance.
Chairperson Schmidt reviewed the information discussed at the June 5, 1997 meeting. Case #426 is a requested zone change to a PUD for the Grand Communities Bridgehaven development Since that meeting Miami Township Director of Planning and Zoning, Mr. Larry Fronk has held several meetings with the representatives of the Woodcreek Homeowners and representatives of Fischer Homes.
Mr. Fronk presented a report on the results of those meetings. Fischer Homes has agreed to reduce the density to 200 units on 37 acres or 5.4 units per acre. Fischer Homes has also agreed to construct the second access road to Montclair Boulevard. The road will first be a gravel construction entrance during the early phase of infrastructure development and initial building construction. The road will then be paved. The proposed street will be constructed to County standards. The street will be 25 feet wide with curb and gutter. There will be sidewalks on one side. Mr. Fronk recommended these conditions be placed on the motion to approve the zone change. The Board members asked Mr. Fronk if one of the roads was a stub road or was there the potential to open up the roadway to development at a later date. Mr. Fronk stated it was a stub road and the topography of the land prohibited future development. Chairperson Schmidt asked Mr. Larry Sprague, a representative of the developer about the pricing of current and proposed units. Mr. Sprague stated they are proposing three types of buildings. The terrace building, a villa building and a townhome building. In Brookhaven there are two types; the terrace and townhome buildings. The terrace homes are the least expensive, the townhomes the most expensive and the villas are priced in between. The current pricing for the townhomes starts at $125,000.00 base price for the smallest unit and $160,000.00 is the base price for the largest townhome. The terrace home buildings are 12 unit buildings with four homes per floor. The prices range from the low $70’s to the upper $80’s. The average selling price for the terrace homes is $108,000.00.
Mr. Uecker made a motion to open the discussion for both parties involved for 10 minutes each side. Mr. Humphrey seconded the motion. Upon roll call, all voted "AYE."
Mr. Arthur Price of 5990-6 Meadow Creek Drive stated he lives in the condominiums and is a purchaser of one of the new terrace homes. Mr. Price stated he is concerned about the added traffic on Meadow Creek. He also asked if the new project of 200 units will use the club house and other recreational facilities that were planned for the original 156 units.
Jan Purtle of 5988 Woodridge Drive asked who owns the land where the proposed second road will be constructed. The Trustees responded the developer can not build the project without the second road if that is a stipulation of the PUD so it doesn’t matter who owns the land. Ms. Purtle also stated that when the land for the second road is developed she would like sidewalks to be on both sides. Ms. Purtle asked if they had plans to develop the 25 acres at the end of the stub road. She stated she would like to see the development continued at a density of 5 units per acre.
Mr. Larry Sprague representing the developer responded to Ms. Purtle. Fisher Homes has a written contract with Mr. Todd for the property where the second road is proposed. There are no plans to develop the 25 acres, due to the topography. Mr. Sprague stated sidewalks are required on both sides.
Sue Gifford of 953 Creek Knoll Drive asked how many terrace home, how many villas and how many townhomes will there be in the new development. She felt the area would be better developed as an office building.
Bob Lyon of 5940 Shallowcreekk Drive stated the home owners are interested in having a nice development with a reasonable density. He does not want to see the standard of living taken away.
Beth Armitage of 5980 Woodridge Drive said the Woodcreek PUD started out as single family development. Now Fischer wants to make more money so they’re trying to expand the boundaries of the PUD. She stated there should be some balance.
Mr. Larry Sprague stated the original plans show the number of each type of home proposed. 54 townhomes, 158 terrace homes and villa homes.
Mr. Martin Kenworthy, Attorney for the applicant stated 8 units per acre developments can be very good while 4 units per acre can be very bad, you have to look at the project in total to see what’s going on. We are in compliance with the zoning regulations and request your approval.
Mr. Humphrey made a motion to close the public portion of the meeting. Mr. Uecker seconded the motion. Upon roll call, all voted "AYE."
Chairperson Schmidt stated her overall concern is with the density. Her second concern is with the other 25 acres. She stated she was concerned with the artificial extension of the Woodcreek PUD. She stated if the Board is to overturn the Rural Zoning Commission’s decision the vote must be unanimous. Mr. Uecker stated he was concerned about the same issues. He thanked both sides for their presentations tonight. He stated this was a beautiful development. He has reviewed the traffic study and ascertained there would be no great traffic impact with the addition of a second road. He felt this was non defensible as a single family development. Mr. Humphrey stated he felt this was a good transitional use for this land. He stated he felt this was a very upscale multi-family development.
Mr. Humphrey made a motion to overturn the Rural Zoning Commission’s finding and accept the PUD with the following modifications; 1. The total number of units within the PUD will not exceed 200 or 5.36 units per acre. 2. The developer will construct the second access road to Montclair Blvd. At such time that the initial grading will begin on the site. This will be the construction entrance to the site. This will be the only entrance used for construction. Initially the road may be gravel. When 60 percent of the zoning permits are issued, the base coat of asphalt will be completed. Before 80 percent of the zoning permits are issued, the final street will be constructed to County standards with at least a 25 foot width, curb and gutter, and sidewalks on one side. 3. No additional units added to this PUD or increase in acreage or future extension of sharing of amenities. Mr. Uecker seconded the motion. Upon roll call, all voted "AYE."
Chairperson Schmidt adjourned the meeting at 7:55 PM.
ATTEST____________________________________________CLERK, ERIC C. FERRY
___________________________________________CHAIRPERSON, JEAN SCHMIDT