001All right, 7 o'clock. Uh, we will call to order the village of Oxburg Planning Commission meeting on this day, Tuesday, June 17, 2025 at 700 p.m. Let us rise. To the flag to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Madame Secretary of Roll calls here. Flynn here. Gold star here. Gtor here and Schultz here. Do we have a motion to approve the agenda for this evening, June 17th? I'll make a motion to approve the agenda tonight, June 17, 2025. I'll second that. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Okay, we have approved agenda. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes from April 15th, 2025? Just uh one quick uh comment. Um doesn't need to
002change the minutes, but uh I wasn't here the last meeting. I didn't get the packet, so that's been cleared out. So, it wasn't unexcused and I just didn't think we had meetings. Okay. So, thanks. Good comment. Uh, I'll make a motion to approve the minutes for April 15, 2025. I'll second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Uh, Madam Secretary, do we have any correspondence? All public, assuming no one in the audience, we can now move to our new business and a couple uh items here to discuss this evening. Uh first on the uh agenda is the election of officers. So for the 2025 calendar year, we need to elect a chairperson, a vice chair, and a secretary. Um moving backwards, if you will, from right to let I'd like to make a motion to elect
003Vicky Hoff as the secretary. Second. Um can I get a roll call vote? Schultz, right? Yes. Um, Ballard, yes. Lyn, yes. Yes. Schultz. Yes. All right, Vicki. Congratulations. Can I get a motion for the vice chair? I'd like to uh make a motion to appoint uh Justin Ballard as vice chair. I will second. Vicki, can we do another roll call vote when you are ready? All right, and yes. Justin, congratulations. Thank you. Last but not least, we are seeking a motion for the chairperson. Like to make a motion to appoint Scott Flynn as chairperson of the plan commission. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Madam Secretary, whenever you're ready or roll call vote, please. Yes. Yes. Schwarz, yes. Yes. Yeah. Yes. Okay. And now we're ready to go for the next 6 months. Um, moving
004on to the annual report. Um, Mario, I believe you helped draft up a report for 2024, which also includes a section on the action plan draft. So, if you would please walk us through what you've uh prepared as a summary. Uh yes, that's correct, Mr. Chairman. Um this is the annual report that we uh submit to council to summarize the activities for the past year. So, we um we list the various meetings we've had based on the uh uh applications we've received. So, we had eight meetings in 2024. Uh we do summarize for them in case they forgot who's on the planning commission. some of the membership there and then we just go over the various applications and site plans uh that were approved um previously. So, we did have uh not only the um
005the uh coffee u big be on on 20 Church get their approval, but also uh Chuck Schneider's 12 12 unit apartment building did receive an approval as well as a planning commission approval for the Meadows of Oxfords, the town homes. They're very assigned. And then uh the other uh main crux of the activity planning commission last year was several se uh signed design reviews. uh for uh businesses within the downtown. So that basically summarizes for them and then and then we also did tackle uh the landscape ordinance looking at that to try and uh shore that up to be more uh in sync with what the act actions we've um normally done during site plan review just to point out those highlights we normally did put those in the ordinance. So then um in addition
006to that annual report, we can the planning commissioner could uh identify an action plan uh communicate to the council the uh topic areas you'd like to see uh considered uh this the remainder of this year I guess and moving on to the next year. Um and so really uh it in front of you is just the draft text from the previous version and mainly it's just talking about uh once again if there's any uh ordinance uh within uh regulation within the zoning ordinance I should say that um the mass that the coun the planning commission feels uh needs to be addressed in terms of possible uh uh amendments to uh that's something that could be tackled. Um it's you know one of the while it might seem basic it's one of the primary tenants of
007the planning commission to make sure to update those ordinances as you know development occurs in the village and then also training for members is something uh you know it's good to remind the um council it would be nice to get the latest and greatest uh information from these different councils uh um resources out there uh for the planning character. So that's that's pretty much the report and any changes you can see I can make those prior to uh your consideration of sending it to council. Thanks Mario. Any comments for questions for Mario from the commission? Um no you're good. I'm good. Okay. Certainly there was a uh a clear theme on the uh site design reviews or some consistency which aligns with one of the uh agenda items this evening. What I would like to
008do is make a motion to present the 2024 annual report along with the 2025 action plan draft to the village council with one amendment to specify in the proposed action plan item one zoning ordinance reviews. Let's specify the um sign ordinance amendment as a primary or specific focus in 2025 for awareness at the uh village council level. Do I have second? Second from Schulz. And any discussion hand I think Oh, okay. Uh, can I get a a roll call vote? Yes. Schultz? Yes. Yes. Yes. Great. Thank you very much, Mario. But your work's not done this evening, sir. Uh, that moves us to the uh draft review of the signed ordinance amendment. um walk us through what you reviewed um for discussion. Yes. So, as we've talked about uh a lot of uh over over
009the course of time, we've seen a lot of sign reviews and we've we've come into a pattern of dealing with the issues that that are brought up by the internal illuminated signs within the downtown. Um so uh at your direction uh there's a draft language in front of you to amend that section about internally illuminated assigns uh in the C1 core and C1 transition to specify what we've been typically what the planning commission has typically been requiring as a condition of approvals mainly that uh all these signs should be installed with a photo sensor and automatic dimmer so that way their light levels can be controlled and specify that life level as 100 candela when there from Duskill Dawn. And then also uh I took liberty of trying to uh promote uh to uh make
010a recommendation on design style uh and mainly to deal with the illumination and deal with uh a configuration that would result in a more bright sign. Basically, you know, a lot of times if we had box signs that had a white background with dark letters, that causes more light transmission, a lot more glare. So just uh B2 in this draft in the in the blue uh underline uh is just suggesting people would utilize the backgrounds as a as a darker color. Not not as not to specify the color but just darker colors still allow them to have creativity but then focus on letting the light transmit through any kind of text or logo they might have. Um so just as a suggestion um and I wasn't sure how much more we wanted to get into
011it. Uh, I do have it written currently as stating that the um, and it might sound a little odd, but you never know, it might happen. Allowing number one, the applicant could choose to request a formal review by the planning commission uh, for their sign. uh or the zoning administrator uh can request uh first they can request that these uh signed design signed uh applications be reviewed by either staff or or myself or the village consultant uh to determine compliance and then uh but then the zoning administrator has the final discretion as to whether requiring these applications to um be submitted to planning commission or uh for design review or not. So, so they zoning administrator in this case that that dual hat is worn by the uh village manager and it um would be
012their determination as to uh consistent whether to based on this based on whatever detail of the application they feel it might be necessary to run it by planning commission or or not. So, that's the way it's set up currently. Once again, I know we talked about this uh maybe about a year ago, maybe about trying to just make it all completely administratively run. Uh so it's up to you. This gives them the discretion going coming here or not based on the zoning administrator, but it's uh it's up to you whether to modify that structure. Don't always require them to come to planning commission. Mr. Chair, may I before we delve into another base on some of that as well? um re reading through this for one it it's like you mentioned leaning for maybe a
013permissive uh approval administratively but there's still some gray areas there so I'm not sure if that's what I want to be the sole governor of right um for instance in the C1 core I think every internally implemented sign that's come before the planning commission they've always said we want to see channel cut letters and that's that's you know if you want your sign per submitted here we're going to request a few and I think everyone has comply with that, but it's kind of arbitrary and and you know, it's nice when you're going making arbitrary decisions that you wish, but it's still arbitrary sometimes. And I don't know if we should somehow codify that to some degree, especially in the C1 core. I think that's kind of a a given that most everyone has stuck with
014down further when we've done the box signs. That seems fine. Just have your speed traffic. You got a center trim lane maybe. Um, so I it would be nice if I had to solidify a little more. And I remember when we were doing the moving place, one of the old estate farming place, it's 100 cells or 110 cells, something like that. The last internal sign you did and they did switch it to a darker background, white letters kind of how you described. I I believe the sign installer was here and one of the issues we always talk about is the dimmable fixtures and stuff. I think that the tubes are not dimable. I remember him saying that. So certain things are not difficult and so we we one of the standards we stand is it
015must be but in some cases it can't be so it's a little bit bigger still and I just if we could dial in a little better maybe or just recognize those differences um you know the LED signs of course are all dimable and I remember him saying that that night those some of those two pictures are not dimable. Yeah, I I believe that's correct and I do believe that. So, so that's one aspect of this draft is that it would be imposing on all the businesses. Uh it would it would direct their options towards LED signs and LED illumination. The tube signs uh probably probably most likely I don't know if there's a fact, but most likely they're probably less expensive and so it would but that that's probably because they don't have as much
016of the they don't have the capability as other ones. So, you know, we've been requiring the the the dimmable all the time and not sure that we've ever come across that other than the one time you mentioned, Joe, that that that was an issue, but it's just that would be a an effect of of of if we went with this language in front of you tonight that then people would be then uh basically forced to go up to LED signs for for that situation and the C1 Corin transition. and and and I agree with Joe that you know uh there is a lot of uh permissive and leave a lot of interpretation grant given to the zoning administrator and with the way this is written some other other ways to do that is is just
017to take that power back and keep it with planning commission just so that way uh it's a deliberation amongst individuals another way could be in theory you could put in I could put in some text about uh the criter criteria that someone might have to reach, but that still is a means of interpretation. They'd have different criteria. The zoning administrator would like look at three or four different things, aspects of a design, but I guess the thing about it is that design is pretty uh subjective. It's not. So, it's something that it's up to you guys whether you want it. I was just curious in terms of and I you know I guess the other reason I put it this way is I wasn't sure if we've gotten any blowback or if people have felt
018that like the uh requirement was too ownorous. It doesn't seem like it but I don't know it it es and flows all the time with people that when they get ory or not makes them upset. I do have a question. Uh so I have like two questions. One of the questions is one of the reasons why we we were doing it and one of the things that we always have a concern is is that a sign being too bright and they could be turned down if it is too bright. Right? That's one of the major concerns that we have with with changing the language or being able to have control with this ordinance. Have we had anybody complain with any of the new signs that we've had? No. So we've had no complaints. It kind
019of like then also goes hand in hand. Like the next thing is the technology or um the mechanisms or how the signs are built. I'm not a sign expert. I'm just only going back off of what we're being what I'm being told if you know from from Mario and and some of the requirements that we have. If we're asking for a dimmer when then the expert will come in, the sign the sign gentleman says, you know, sometimes that doesn't make sense and that doesn't. So, so I guess what I'm kind of trying to say is is that how do we put the language in there with not knowing the technology and how it might change or the mechanisms of how a sign might be built will change, but we still have that control over the
020brightness of the sign. Don't we have the ability or the technology which is fair um don't we have in writing here there is the ability for the applicant to request sign approval for from the planning commission as well as the zoning administrator. So if the applicant using the subject matter expert of the signed developer says hey I can't use a dimmer here then the applicant says I want this application to go to the planning commission that gives them the ability to bring it to our attention. Okay. Yeah. And it doesn't solve the problem. just makes it even more aware, right? That's okay. Like the box sign that at Posie whatever it was in the place whatever down there 110 I I believe you drive by that sign it probably does not dim at all because
021what he talked about that evening and how it's not but again down there and using the darker you know reversible basically the the light letters and dark background it probably doesn't noticeable if you stuck to all of the channel letters and then the back lit or halo back lit ones you those are always LED I think those are always dimable. So for the main core downtown, I think they're always going to be in good shape. They're you say we want channel cut letters and we know those design or the or they back lit those designs all come with LED billable options. So they they should be those can be pretty easily. Yep. Check check check. You're approved, right? It's the other ones that I was like, well this guy's down here and it's a box
022sign. Then do we need to define or specify or create a definition of box sign versus channel cut? I I would like to see something like if if the feeling of the just by watching the last year it seems to be in the C14, you know, from Dennis up East Street where the historical buildings in downtown field is. I think each one of those K blocks, uh, the Harmon glass, all those said, you know what, Merill Merrill, they all were approved based on the desire to have a channel cut or back lit and so therefore they can comply with an inable part. So if we wrote in internally limited signs in the C1 core bus E channel letter or back lit then they makes it easier for them to then comply with the other part
023which we're more concerned of in the downtown brightness. And I also believe that by specifying a channel cut in the downtown uh core, we're also clearly communicating what our expectations are. I think that's fair and reasonable to so people aren't bringing sign designs that that aren't going to be right are going to work. you say, "Look, yeah, we're open to them as long as you're A, B, and C, you know, China cut back or you know, and then and the difficult portion and they can those I would feel comfortable with doing administratively because they're already I know they're already language goals and past practice what you guys have looked at. Okay. by simply looking adding that part above the C1 core different standard. But yeah, further down the car wash and all was the box
024that signs with you know trying to minimize brightness by the backgrounds the reversing of it. In some cases we've had the I think input from the DDA state. Yeah, I think because an ordinance it does say so if a sign or something DA they're always supposed to at least give an opinion, right? Um a lot of times like oh forget about that you guys have asked about some time. Yep. Yep. Does should that be incorporated reference to or subject to DDA? Here's the thing. What what would you say if they someone else said no we don't like that. We would like to see something different. Now we're going to go back to that again and say well show us something. Now the planning commission kind of already has proved these types and they kind of
025it's become almost cookie cutter. So they've given it to admin for approval. Now someone here is going to trump it because of color scheme or something. Right. We're trying to automate automate this so we can bypass any like red tape, right? Any red tape. So make it go through smoother because we want to be business friendly at the same time. Right. chances of a DBA coming back and just saying I just hate this guys. I I I doubt that's happen because it seems like people especially in the downtown they recognize where they're at in this get nice looking sign. Okay. Well, is the DEA ever disagreed with that? I mean, I'm I'm just trying to just trying to think if why wouldn't we want their input? I mean, it's um Well, I think we want
026their input put for like this part like the the the writing of it, but not like the date the day on day like items like and I think that they like that it has been their input is that they want to channel cut the channel cut signage. So, we have their input now. putting it into action removing my tape. Can I make one kind of comment as as as the business owner who's putting up a sign, his sign, he wants to make the sign as most attractable as possible, right? He's a business that wants to attract people. So, he's not going to have a a sign that is that's not uh if it is, you know, the the community would be like, oh, could make comments on it and then that affects the business in
027in general. So I think in some ways um the business owner will try to make it as aesthetically as pleasing as possible because he wants patrons to come in. So it's almost like they the design itself is um we have to do less of of an aesthetically a pleasant sign because the business owner will do it for us. Yeah. So I think it might be a moot point to to worry about um the DDA kind of saying hey this sign will be um should be reviewed. the and you hit on something, Justin, and I I mean, there's always two sides of the coin. I agree with you. I mean, as a business owner, they're going to want to make it look nice. You know, to me, something that looks nice might be black background with
028hot pink lettering. You know, for for me, that might be really nice. For the for the downtown area, that may not be so nice. So, so I I I I'm not I understand cutting red tape and and getting things through, but you know, I I I think I think there needs to be I personally would like to have it come to the planning commission. I you know, 50 years ago when I was on the planning commission, there were a lot of signs that came that that that actually there was a lot of work that went into it, a lot of signs that that didn't get approved. Uh and and understandably why because of exactly what I what I was talking about that they came with with either the style of the lettering, the color of
029the lettering, the size of the sign. Um I I I saw a lot that that the plan commission gave some some great feedback on and especially in the core area because you know that's you know obviously the you know we we want the aesthetics you know it's it's the you know the heart of our of our community. So that's just from from previous experience I think that's the route that we should go. I would add though that um the zoning administrator has the option to um have the discretion to require any application um be submitted to the planning commission. So if there was a hot pink sign, I imagine you would say, "hm, someone thought that I don't want to do this on my own." And I could whether it's required or not, you know,
030consultation with the BD is just what we do on a day-to-day basis any just that looks great, then that make me feel better than okay going forward with something that's subtle and nice, judy, and crazy. A perfect example was four or five years ago where Rod Charles is like the 12 cell that cell phone repair, you know. No, when that first went in there, we had some feedback. You know, some of it was from some of the old town folks that went on here 40 years ago. I just thought it was bright green, but it cut bright green. It was broken apart. You see white through the cracked areas and and it did pop and I was a little concerned about that. Concerned it was too bright. Yeah. So that gets back to the point
031well too gody right more so I think I think the style of most of them again may or may not say it would be related to you okay it comes down to what I'm hearing if I may is the not necessarily the planning commission but the community's willingness to trust the subjectivity of the zoning administrator Okay now, if things were to go sideways in the sense that the subjectivity of the zoning administrator who has approved a sign uh request or permit and then there's feedback that gets relayed to this office that says what was the community thinking approving this sign? Then we'll have a discussion whether it's us or somebody within the the village. Um is that horse out of the barn at that point? What was that? That horse is out of the bound
032at that point. You know us up, right? But again, I'm I'm a pretty conservative guy. I understand what's going on, but I'm not going to be here forever either, right? I I like to see stuff. I like to see some classic signs. Uh you know, I'm not this either. I like creative. I love the sign you get in the group. But to your point, you're not going to be here for ever, right? But then, but isn't it But but still style and color and all that stuff is all subjective. You might like it, somebody else might not. And just because that somebody else doesn't like it doesn't mean that it shouldn't be up or they shouldn't have the right to put it up. Like the crack signs, for example, some didn't like it, some liked
033it. The thing is, it's it still fit within the the rules of what they had. It has to be this size and it has to be within this brightness and with this thing and as long as it fits within those parameters should be able to go in like regardless if you like it or you don't like it. It's kind of like once again as well as somebody else like on your property, you know. And so I think it's I think it's um yeah and it gets back to just trying to of all the the whole time that I have been on the planning commission we we would always see the exact same things and we always approved it on the exact same conditions which were um was the the lighting because all the rest of
034the uh parameters of it the square footage was always in place that was always all those things were always met. It was just the terminology of the lighting and um uh the dimmer switch. I think those two things and other than that it went by super quick and um they had to wait weeks longer than they probably should have if it was just administratively put in the place. I I will say sorry that's what I wanted to go after as well is that like that t time is money time is money and we want people to invest and if they can make money a few extra weeks I think that some people might choose Oxford that might not have otherwise. Mario, uh, two things. Uh, one, uh, when it comes to sign companies, in my
035experience, they seem to be very, um, efficient because a lot of times in my communities, the sign company, the sign contractor is the first one through the door before even the applicant or the business is through the door. they've gone and talked to their sign company and they're ready to install a sign even when the the community hasn't even heard of this business coming in. It's like, wait, what are you talking about? So, uh while I do agree and the point of this is to try and make it more efficient and maybe like have someone not wait for that time, uh it's all part of the applicant themselves. So they they put their uh ducks in a certain row and they have that signed contractor lined up. The sign will be on the building before
036they open. I don't think it sounds like we haven't current encountered anything in which a business is like I need this sign open uh up in in in two days because I'm going to have a grand opening. Well then that's you know a little bit more of a management issue. But that's just a a frame of reference. I don't always I don't believe science lack of sign is is usually a fault of uh uh the process per se but uh then the next thing um to go back to it uh while I I agree that uh putting in the ordinance you know having you know very specific criteria and if that's met it's approved that is that is uh generally always the the best approach but the planning commission does have discretion uh and and
037one aspect ect of that discretion is can be designed. Usually uh you usually we've been in the past we've been hanging our hat on uh other aspects of a design that might cause it to be negative. Like for example the godliness while that sign might have been goddy glare was the issue that we pointed out to them as the because of the characteristic and the style of that. One other aspect to consider that that you do like like I mentioned, you do have the some design um uh pre um ability uh and means of influence uh because and but so one other way though you could look at it is if there was other signs that you that if the if the board started to switch another way and wanted to go and say emphasize
038more historic factors of of things sometimes that can be something that uh can be considered. and the C1 core and based on the building itself, we'd like to see this style and design of a of a building if you wanted to do that. Uh the the commission in this case hasn't. They we've gone the other way, which personally I I mean not personally, but just the um you've gone a way in which you've you've selected design and styles and we've been fortunate everybody's picking styles and design that is I say I think emphasizes and complements the historic character of downtown. It doesn't clash with the historic character. it makes it it updates it. It makes it more modern and and makes it more uh attractive. Uh so we've been you know it's been kind of
039unfortunate that way the Africans coming in. So while I agree you probably don't need to you always want to try and be objective you do have options if you wanted to have that leave the door open for some design subjectivity by by a group of people not just one person but a group of people. Thanks Mark. I have a question either for you and or Justin. The root cause of this of this whole dialogue is based on a theme and at some point there is a decision made to incorporate a condition of sign approval to have an installed photoometric sensor. What triggered that? Was that a we call it industry benchmark or what was common across other communities and municipalities? Why was that even brought up as a condition to begin with or was it
040well from from an industry or zoning standpoint? Historically, sign regulations are an attempt to allow creativity but also make sure that the sign signs don't become uh hazardous. And in this case it's the glare is the issue and a lot of you know back in the day things used to move and you used to have you know things on top of roof and you know flashing lights and strobes and everything those have all gone away because in the end uh basically we know businesses left to their own devices it'll be you know escalation like this someone has a 5ft gorilla the next one's going to have a 10 foot gorilla or something. So, uh, that's why the the parameters were created and in this case it's about the glare and a lot of from what
041I remember is that it was always part of um, you know, part of your packet and it was part of the recommendation you put in every one of the signs and so that became a common thing with with but why why did we make that recommendation? And it's based on more or less safety and uh not so much tribal knowledge but and also and also an attempt to be objective be objective and like glare is the issue whatever the design the font chosen or the characteristic or the composition of it I was trying to just leave leave the subjectivity to the planning commission interpretation and focus on like you said the safety and glare and that sort of thing. And it's defined that the 100 candela per square meter is the maximum level for we'll
042say glare or safety of drivers especially in a uh roadway similar to and actually it's also intended to allow for legibility to make sure the lights the business the sign still functions and it can be easily le uh legible because we want the signs to be legible. We want the businesses to succeed. So that's why you want to make sure allow them to function and not be clear. And historically in the ordinance there's always been on the commercial people on the commercial businesses or or properties like their trust pass issues. Right? If you remember when brick financial came a couple years ago they were looking to have one on the south side on Enley but there was a residential cross. It was going to be kind of tough for them to meet with that and
043they said forget it. lesser favorite one on the front because it faces the commercial corridor. And so there's always always been some kind of restriction on how bright the lights would be in relation to neighboring properties, especially residential stuff. And um just near my home on M15, um a new sign went up to place a few years ago and you can go in there and change your settings on sign. So certain times of night, you have a photo light, it'll follow that. It'll dim automatically, you know, things like that. Well, there wasn't set like that. During the day, it looks great. drive by at night. That thing was so bright. You couldn't read it. You couldn't, you know, when you looked at it, it's like the sun and but you couldn't read it cuz it
044was so bright at night. Like your car when you turn that thing the radio dance, right? At night, you don't need bright in your face cuz like Tamaro said, it's more legible then too. And then not to be a dead horse, but one other example that that I can't even think of and it's not the downtown area. It's uh you know uh the white houses you know where where Chuck's I mean those signs I mean you have no idea what businesses are in there. Now that was approved that at the time the village had an administrative position that those types of things went through and that person you know approved it. Um, and that's where I was kind of getting back to you. And and Joe, I'm not saying you have bad taste, but you
045know, if if you leave, you know, if if you leave it up to to one person and their subjectivity, that's where you could get into, you know, into a a mess and and where where if you have at the planning commission level, I mean, we have the guidelines, we have a committee that's, you know, that's that's reviewed itself. That's like I said, I don't want to be the dead horse, but just want to administrative thing. So, and I'm comfortable the process. I'm not pushing back on it, but don't get me wrong. I just want to know, but that's where it could lead to. And if if somebody came to me and they're proposing something, I think it's just kind of crazy. I said, you know, let's take it. But for the the run-of-the-mill, the ones
046that I've been watching you guys approve and things like that, but again, it saves time, saves money, saying you guys have been having to come out on a Thursday night in July or whatever or Tuesday in July for approving a sign that was a stand out. That's what I think. That's that's a whole that's a whole point and I think that's reasonable. Yeah. And from my experience of being on the planning commission that has been all of them and that's part of this. So that's part of the reason why it's been years now. So it's a good goal for that purpose and and I'm comfortable with that. And I would hope that a new zoning administrator when you decide you're going to move on, retire to Hawaii or wherever would get some orientation and have
047you know that a way to be someone coming in blind and just starting to approve signs without having some background. I mean anybody comes after me people have experience people questions been on for years. You might come from planning question some other community and you come here and you've already dealt with science over the years too. So I think it's okay for me. So we so so I'm like I'm person like I am good with the uh the B1 and B2 and also um to allow us to give us the uh the administrator uh the ability to send it to planning commission should like I think that's like a like a backs stop for us with some of uh Schultz's concerns and that gives us that ability to still have control of that sign. Should
048we need to I'm also in agreement with the language as proposed with maybe one minor amendment to B2 where it says box signs shall utilize. Could we consider uh that to be a recommendation? It is recommended that box signs utilize backgrounds X, Y, and Z. integrate some additional not so much ambiguity but subjectivity that there is a directional recommendation that the sign should follow this base design criteria otherwise I'm in agreement with the proposed language as is what about inserting language about the channel cut letters that we were just talking about where there was the uh there was a suggestion that the basically separating them out a little bit and saying in the C1 core channel cut letters uh wall sign internally wall internally illuminated wall signs shall be comprised of channel cut letters and
049then in C1 transition an applicant may utilize channel cut letters or box signs or that sort of thing. I could separate that out. So like to have different standards per district if you prefer or or recommendations based on those two different districts, right? Could be recommendation. Yeah. It doesn't have to be shall if you wanted to go with recommendations. Yeah. CJ, final comments. Yeah, I I think that might be nice to have them split up. Um the that there are there are differences between there. And if we can the more that we can just make make it like really clear and cut what we're looking for at each level so that it can get auto approved by the businesses. I think that'll just or by by the zoning manager. We need to define our recommendation
050or suggestions in order to then adhere to B. I'm not sure if that's BB or B3. The final comment regarding administrative approval. Um at this point yeah um above that I have a typo correct as well too. Uh number A5 we have COC1 multi story building and the CO we don't have a CO anymore. Oh yeah thank you. So let's get that out of there. Um but yeah to to your point about the difference between the C14 core and C1 transition C14 core it ends up dilated or Dennis in there are any room they're all fronting and right up to the rightway right there is no air for a monument sign so therefore they're always in the wall sign so therefore the jumps work as you head south by the dentist office and everything else
051predominantly they're going to people want to see the alignment sign so therefore it's more chance it's going to be a box sign some will have protruding sign or wall sign perhaps options too. But yeah, the the only option they pretty much have core is a wall sign. So yeah, but we want to be able to like eventually maybe expand the C1 core for example, say we got some houses down the way and maybe there isn't a building front facing yet that we want it to be in the future. Yeah. Again, I think by having that option, the minus sign down there makes sense because a lot of times that's what they're going for. Just can't do it cuz so in order to uh progress forward there there is a request for Mario to um add
052some additional language. I would suggest as a recommendation but to differentiate C1 core versus C1 transition and possibly then the box sign versus channel cut. Now do we need a motion in order to execute or close and have that recommendation? He's got his Y I I think the only thing is do you guys want to see that final fact we pass it on? Yes. So amendment I'm based on 30 minutes of dialogue here that we should review the amendments uh one more time. Well, you do still have to have a public hearing to the floor. A lot of times it goes to council then they'll do they do the first hearing first reading and then they'll get some comments on it then set the public hearing at the next one because we have to do
053it twice. I think you're more talking about we review the we review your next draft and then from there we start Yeah, we're going to do it twice anyway. Yeah, council will do it twice anyways. First meeting, second meeting. So that's when the public hearing will take place. But in the meantime, you guys get it how you want it. Yes. Yeah. Exactly. Yep. Good. Then with that, I believe we've defined our next steps on the signed ordinance amendment and we can proceed accordingly. Mr. Chery. Yes. forgive you, but it's not it's there's an amendment that I'd like to toss out to you, a request I should say, from downtown. They can currently have a temporary ban for 30 days and by the time they pay that permit fee and application gets like 85 bucks. There's
054been a request um by by Is there any way to extend that or maybe could be two months? I mean, some it's an upstairs business. they kind of struggle and stuff and so I all I said to them was I will just bring it to the planning commission and I said it's been a while um you have any thoughts on that because for them to pay 85 then 85 the next month there isn't anything in there that said you can't do it month after month after month or you have a couple that do and he has plenty they have them inside the building they come in and they'll pay it and they'll pay it again next month so it's sooner or later it gets the point where you pay that over and over again if
055there's something in the ordinance I think every year because a permanent sign regulations. But so currently a business owner can apply for a 30-day banner, vinyl or whatever material, temporary banner that's valid for 30 days. That goes through a separate review and approval process that is entirely administrative. Correct. After 30 days, they then must reapply and they pay the $85 fee and that can continue on for 12 consecutive months. Yeah. There's a section in there where it talks about temporary signage. So mostly it kind of alludes to like for sale and stuff like that too, but um it says after 12 months a sign becomes is deemed a permanent sign was comply with a regular sign ordinance at that point. So in a worst case scenario, we have we collectively as a community, not the
056commission, has to deal with or see a temporary sign for up to 12 months, in which case then it would be removed because it's no longer comp. I have some ideas. I don't know. So Joe, are you asking for that 30 days to be extended to 60 days? That's what this gentleman was asking me. Is there any way I'm struggling to get by? I can't afford to eat 500 months every month every month. Um, and without, you know, putting out there, it's a second story business and there aren't a lot of them retail. The the counter argument is we could say, okay, you can have 60, then you have to be down for 60 days before you have another. That kind of spits the other side of the coin. We're not going to have now
057temporarily 85 months for 12 months. So there's there's two sides of the coin that we deal with. One is too short in this guy's opinion. One of them is too long I think in our opinion, right? So are we opening up for discussion about it right now or Well, it's not really an agenda item. I just want to bring it up to future consideration. Yeah, it could be on a future. Mario's heard it now for me and but you guys have heard it now. So maybe there's something in the future we can an additional possible amendment to the signs. Yeah. As it relates to the signed ordinance amendment, I would like to make a request for Mario to maybe benchmark or consider amended language on the temporary sign verbage in our current ordinance. Okay. Thank
058you. That's really what I have to accomplish tonight. Yep. Good. Okay. Um, let's move on. Old business. There is a empty planning commission seat uh with the resignation of Mr. Null. Um, Joe, at this point, we are seeking or is the council going to make a recommendation? How do we proceed to address this? The council president needs to receive an application and then that application she would make a recommendation to the council to appoint the person. But we have no applications for the com for this planning commission for the planning commission seat that John N did um sir Joe from not from council let me clarify that yeah we will have a council that'll have to be taken care of resignation was uh accepted last month and we have 30 days supposed to but we
059don't have any applications for that either okaycepted last Does anyone on the planning commission have a lead or if so they could our application is on our website uh they can fill it out send to myself as a credit to council president emails on the website all those appointments are done to the council president and then those are made to council don't we need to don't we need somebody from um so we need somebody from village council but don't we also have to have a representative from township don't have to that's a a nice that we do yes and And here's the thing. When when Jonathan Null became unelected last November, um I spoke to Jack Curt says, "Well, we're going to appoint so and so to take over John." Like that's not how it
060works. State statute says when you're appointing question, you have a three-year term. They don't care if you're in the township or the village or wherever. You have a three-ear term. The only difference in that is if you're an ex official means by your position, which is our council member is on here as an exeicial member. They represent the council leader. Their term coincides with their term of office. So they could come in in November of 24 November 28th because that's a term of office. Everybody else the three-year term no matter what. So when John fel John became unelected, he was still on question because he wasn't there in any official exicial capacity. It was just a nicity to the township say you know if you have somebody because we are allowed to have someone outside
061of our that's a non-elector non-append. You're not required to but you're allowed to. he filled that non-elector position and we deferred to the township. They could appoint anybody from the township. Could be just a resident. Doesn't have to be someone from their board. They choose someone from their board on a planning commission which breaks experience. Um but and technically even though John resigned, state statute says you were on there until your replacement shows up. Now he's told us he resigned and he's out of state family stuff he's dealing with. So he's not showing up. But as far as the state statute is concerned, he is still on here. until his replacement is appointed. But it doesn't have to be um from reach out to Jack again to see if they want to they have some
062they could probably be happy to fill in that position for us. But it was kind of in limbo at first because General was elected. So we didn't resign. So we're I mean fundamentally we're operating in a gray area depending Yeah. I mean it it's always been um but do we allow the township because they overlap all township residents as well right? Um to them too. Hey who do you guys have you guys on here? I was on the township for a while. So I can reach out to Jack again for that one because I think initially they were going to be replacing John with somebody else but then it wasn't it was Kenneth Gray. I need to back clarify the Jack. I bet if I go back there verify with him John's now at least
063you you can't they could remove him from it and replace him but now he's offered his letter of resignation they could appoint somebody else okay recommend Kelly appoint somebody else what they would be doing they're not appointing they would recommend the name before the name sure then I'll see if I can recruit like s drive soldiers we'll go from there yeah but I mean that's again to your point though the cons might like that. See again I should check with him first. Y seems fair agenda item discussed. U no need for a motion to close that open dial. I correctly understand where we where we sit. No pun intended at the moment. Okay. Public comment there is none. uh consultant and administrative comments. Mario, anything? Nope. No other comments at this time. Okay. In front
064of administration. Um I just want to say, you know, um Hampton Block has been issued their demo permit. Yay. I convinced the DDA to give it a $7500 grant to uh help them and they were happy to receive that. If you all know Sar Dang Construction right here, they're the local owners. They've been meeting. We have no idea what their plan is. We know it's its own multif family. Two of the three parcels of this little parcel that flags off on Broadway that's still signaled residential. But um they have met I know with Jim Sher a few times on what are we going to do, what can we do, what's it going to look like. We have no idea yet, but we did issue the demo I think early last week. Um they're supposed to
065let us know when they're getting ready to knock it down so someone can get some pictures. but they're excited about getting at least knocked down and leveled out and looking nice this year. Secondly, um 18 South Washington, which is the old party shop, which has been closed for a long time before my I got here 2017 has been closed. Um they're getting even more serious with their demolition plan. I spoke to their demo contractor, a pretty good size company, I think it was. I told them what we need a serious plan for our building officials look over There's concern about the shared walls, shared basement debris floating 24 investment and things like that. But it sounds like they're getting ready to get closed. I guess with that they sent me over the architect said what's
066going to look like when they rebuild. I'm like that's great when we got this building. Then the South Washington triangle conditional resilient you guys did last September. They've got a few roadblocks in that. I think some of it's financing, some of it's they're trying to work work with. We met with them uh earlier, what a month or so ago, Mario about um we had a little issue, engineering issue with their retention pond and stuff like that. They're trying to they're going to need to extend water and sewer from Lincoln Street down the back mechanic and come in. They were hoping to maybe do that work over the summer, but they didn't realize how long it takes the Eagle to issue a water man extension permit. four, five months. Um, it's still clicking along. Okay. They're
067learning some things as they go. You said the Hampton Block building is listed as multifamily. The property property. Yep. And if you look on our website, we have our our master plan. There's a future Elder Plans. I think there are that's called the Near East Elder Plan. You'll see what was laid out there. Mario's predecessor, Chris Corey, was part of that. Now that incorporated the narrow property rightway between the post office and Hampton block in their 50 foot that plan in there incorporated that site into two but now that's separate owners. I've talked to the owners of the narrow 50ft property which does flag out a little behind the sides post office there. that you really need to get with find a way to work that get that to those guys so big parcel I'm
068hoping that they will good good updates so we have like on that corner there are some businesses on the other call uh I think it's call to order let's wait until we get to commissioner commerce that's fine um if there's nothing else on consultant and admin from the Oxford for Township Planning Commission ZBA or DDA. Do you have any updates? There has been no ZBA meetings, which is means good for us. We're not running across a thousate plan here, East and West Berdict. Um M do you cause a wrinkle, we saw it coming. I saw it coming that about putting this crosswalks too close to the intersection of M24 and they have jurisdiction over that turning radius and things like that. less cause a um bump in that plan. But then also have out to
069bid right now. They have the gazebo refurbishment project. It's out to bid to do the 30th in our office to totally redo the the railing and decking and stuff like that and to add an ADA ramp to kind of and the way it decided I was pretty pleased. I thought that was going to look horrible to add ADA ramp on there. Architect laid it out because it's going to look nice. So, good. Hopefully that'll be a feast in price with them and that'll get that done yet after parker done. Excellent. Good. All right. Now, commissioner comments, I believe there is one. Thank you. So, so on that across from the Hampton block there, there's going to be um like on that corner there, we've got some shops there. There's like a it's like a dog
070dog treats shop. And that's kind of a glass. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, not continuous across but yeah and in that area we have established established shops there. Um I would love to see to see if there's any possibility of having um like some C1 zoning in that direction. See if we can start densifying out a just a little bit and working working to see if we can have some multi- multi-use shops on the bottom, housing on top, and see if there's any possibility of that. I know I know that DDA has has that there's been discussions in there about about trying to expand down the downtown down the Verdict Berdick Street. And I think it would be a shame to miss out on this opportunity to at least discuss it before before whatever is there or
071not there is built. That's it. Oh, thanks CJ. Maybe a followup just to close that. Um is that a planning commission topic or a Yeah. Go to your master plan and your zoning ordinance of master plan review. Right. So the Hampton block property is in the DVDA, but then there's four to five houses I think Glasby which is all single family residential and then that property's over on the east side that you referenced with the dog treats and that one isn't quite in compliance with the order. Let's just leave it at that. Okay. Um but again that's the ordinance I had to deal with, right? It is ordinances and master plans and future development plans change over time and those considerations are all taken at that time. What You all want it to look like
072and the committee wants it to look like. Okay. Then we'll add those uh comments into the meeting. Anything else from the commissioners? Okay, good. Well, then at 8:00 p.m. sharp, we will Oh, I'm sorry. We need a motion. Is there a motion to move? I'll second. All in favor? I All right. That's still