REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

7:30 P.M.

1. ROLL CALL. Mr. Blake called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M., with roll call as follows: Mr. Fix, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, and Mr. Bosch were present. Mr. O’Brien was absent as he was on vacation. Others present were: Lance Schultz, Lynda Yartin, Philip Hartmann, George Parsley, Emily Brahm, Dick Brahm, Rich Jackson, Steve Hermiller, Michael McCall, Clayton Warren, David Dorfman, David Youse, Christine Jenkins, and others.

2. A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of May 10, 2005, Public Hearing. Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Mr. Fix stated he would like to add that he arrived late, but he was in attendance at the public hearing. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Fix, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Kramer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.

B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF May 10, 2005, Regular Meeting. Mr. Fix moved to approve; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Fix, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Blake voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.

3. SCHEDULED MATTERS:

A. Review and request for motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Lighting for Remax Office Building at 10400 Blacklick Eastern Road. Mr. Schultz stated the owner installed light poles without the approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission. He stated eight poles had been installed throughout the parking lot that are 28 feet in height and the light fixtures are cut-off type with a square lamp and these lights do not match the lamps that were installed at Powershack, just west of the building. Mr. Schultz stated the owner is proposing to install light fixtures that match the lamps at Powershack, and no other light fixtures (wall mounted, etc.) are identified on the plan. Mr. Schultz stated the lighting plan meets the foot-candle illumination standards at the property lines. Mr. Schultz stated staff supports the Certificate of Appropriateness request for lighting with the condition that the light fixture lamps (Model MON-2) shall match the type and color of the lamps at Powershack. Mr. Warren stated he was present representing the owner and he would like to apologize to this Commission as the installation of the light poles without prior approval was his error. Mr. Warren stated the owner will replace the lights with the ones Mr. Schultz had indicated that would match the lights at Powershack. Mr. Fix moved to approve with staff conditions; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Kramer Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Fix, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Binkley voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.

B. Review and request for motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials and Landscaping for Huntington Bank located on S.R. 256 just south of Postage Drive (TABLED, 5-10-05). Mr. Fix moved to remove from the Table; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Kramer, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Fix, and Mr. Blake voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0. Mr. Schultz stated the owner is proposing a 4,200 square foot bank that would be 26 feet high. He stated the site plan was revised to indicate only one curb cut from a private access drive in front of Kohl’s, and a drive thru is proposed on the southern portion of the building that would require a Conditional Use Permit. He stated the building elevation has been modified per this Commission’s request and the east elevation fronting 256 would include the drive thru and the radial portion of the building would be separated by brick piers dividing up the glass as opposed to the undivided window that was previously submitted. Mr. Schultz stated the main entrance would be comprised of brick and the roof would be asphalt shingles that meet our requirements. He stated the west, north, and south elevations would match the front elevation with building materials and style. Mr. Schultz continued for the landscaping they are providing perimeter buffering to the south and west with trees, and streetscape buffering with four foot mounding is required along the entire length on S.R. 256. He stated they are proposing 15 trees and shrubs in this area and that meets the City’s requirements, and interior landscaping is provided throughout the parking lot. Mr. Schultz stated staff supports the Certificate of Appropriateness request for site plan/building materials and landscaping with the conditions that the brick color shall be Continental 450 Full Flashed Colonial to match Sky Bank and that the dimensional asphalt shingles color shall be Valley Forge Green to match Sky Bank. He further stated a Conditional Use Permit for the drive thru, a Comprehensive Sign Plan and a Certificate of Appropriateness for Lighting are required. Mr. David Dorfman stated he was present representing the applicant and he would note that staff’s report indicates the radial element is comprised of glass and EIFS and it is actually brick. Mr. Schultz stated that was an error in his report. Mr. Dorfman stated the building has been modified since the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. He stated the major difference is the drive thru is located on the south side of the building rather than on the Kohl’s side of the building, and that was done due to circulation and staff’s request to eliminate a curb cut. Mr. Kramer clarified the cars going through the drive thru will have their headlights going out toward S.R. 256, and the mounding along S.R. 256 should prevent any problems there. Mr. Nicholas stated with regard to the drive thru, we have recently had applications come through where we have had materials on the columns, either brick, stone, or wood trim of some sort to make them a little more architectural. He stated we had given the past applicant’s the option of doing all brick with some sort of design in it, in other words, not just a straight tube of brick, or you could do something with a 30-36 inch brick height with some type of a hardy trim or some kind of a low maintenance trim to build out an architectural column. Mr. Nicholas stated he would not have a problem with having the applicant work something out with staff on this issue. Mr. Bosch stated as long as the applicant had the understanding that the columns should be something like what we have worked out with Giant Eagle and Sunoco, they could work that out with staff. Mr. Fix moved to approve with staff conditions and the understanding the applicant will work with staff to come up with an agreeable solution to the architectural look of the drive thru columns; Mr. Blake seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.

C. Review and request for motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit for a drive thru for Huntington Bank located on S.R. 256 just south of Postage Drive. Mr. Schultz stated a conditional use approval requires compliance with eight conditions, and with the elimination of the second curb cut into Kohl’s this site plan meets all of these conditions. Mr. Schultz stated staff supports the Conditional Use Permit for the drive thru. Mr. Dorfman stated he was present representing the applicant and he would answer any questions. Mr. Bosch moved to approve the Conditional Use Permit for a drive thru for Huntington Bank; Mr. Nicholas seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Fix, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Binkley voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.

D. Review and request for motion to approve a Preliminary Plan for Windmiller Square Commercial Subdivision (property south of Kroger). Mr. Schultz stated back in April or May, this Commission approved a preliminary development plan for this site that included a public dedicated road throughout the project. He stated this application shows a private drive connecting into a public dedicated road. He continued the almost nine acre site would be divided into four commercial out lots. He stated the existing drive where the signal is at Kroger’s is a private drive, owned by Regency, and that would remain and extend almost 250 feet to the three-way stop. From that point south a new private drive would extend to the property line, and that is again owned by Regency. He stated from that point, where T&M Property owns the site, there would be a 36-foot dedicated public drive extending to Diley Road. He stated there would be three out lots east of the private/public drive and a single out lot west of the public street just south of Krogers. Mr. Schultz stated we would be limiting curb cuts on this private drive to one per out lot, and the out lot to the west would have curb cuts adjacent to the out lots to the east. Mr. Schultz stated the curb cuts along where the Kroger gas station is would be a single right-in until you get to the new three-way stop where we control movement in that area. He stated building and parking setbacks are identified on the site plan as are landscaping and buffering requirements. Mr. Schultz stated staff supports the preliminary plan with three conditions: (1) That the proposed plan shall be revised to meet the above mentioned traffic access plan, building/parking setback requirements and buffering requirements; (2) That the proposed development shall meet all other City development requirements; and (3) That the existing and proposed private road issues on the Regency Center Corporation property shall be addressed to satisfy City requirements. Mr. Schultz stated the City would like to have the entire road dedicated and we are working with the two property owners for that to occur. He stated because this is a preliminary plan there are two more steps in the process which would be a preliminary plat that would come before you and then go to Service Committee, and a final plat would come before you, go to Service Committee, and then have three readings at Council. Mr. Steve Hermiller stated he was present representing the applicants. He stated this is back with a little different twist than the plan that was previously presented. He stated right now they will dedicate the part of the property that they can so future tenants and land buyers can commence operations. Mr. Hermiller stated the plan is currently to put in the service road to get access, and it will terminate at the right-of-way at Diley Road that in the future may be connected, and also to provide service to the three new out lots. Mr. Bosch stated he understood the intent is to tie this service road to what will become the stub of Diley Road. Mr. Schultz stated hopefully the connection to Diley Road would happen this year, but that has to be worked out from a financial perspective. He stated it was never in the original scope to widen old Diley Road to three lanes, it would just be cul de sac’d, and now with the opportunity to potentially connect with this property and the light we felt it was important to do that. We do, however, have to look at our funding to see if we have the appropriate funds to make that occur this year or potentially next year. Mr. Fix stated then, we would ask the citizens of Pickerington to pay for a road extension that would lead into this center. Mr. Schultz stated that was correct, but it was for better traffic circulation of the whole area, not just for this development, as it would relieve the intersection at Drug Mart and our engineer has indicated it is a good overall transportation plan to do this. Mr. Bosch stated it is the engineer’s suggestion that the existing portion of Diley would need to be upgraded from two lanes to three lanes. Mr. Kramer stated he liked what was being done at the gas station as that is currently a traffic nightmare. He stated he would also like to suggest that the entrance into Krogers’ more isolated, and Mr. Schultz stated he has been working with the three entities, Regency, T&M and Kroger, since January and each entity wants to maintain certain access points, and this has been the best plan that we could arrive at. Mr. Schultz stated he felt this should be moved forward, get into preliminary plats, and work out some of these issues as they arise. He stated he will take these concerns into consideration and address those, but he felt it was best for the City and the developer to move this forward through the process. Mr. Schultz clarified what is being approved tonight is a preliminary development plan. He stated, again, the next step would be the preliminary plat that would come before this Commission and the Service Committee, and then the final plat would come before this Commission, Service Committee, and then to Council. Mr. Fix clarified this Commission gets three reviews of this plan. Mr. Schultz stated he may know more about Diley Road and when the City could make that connection by the next meeting. Mr. Kramer clarified that Diley Road was designed to be a two lane cul de sac, and this would just connect Windmiller to the cul de sac, but would make it three lanes with curbs and gutter. Mr. Bosch moved to approve the Preliminary Plan for Windmiller Square Commercial Subdivision with staff conditions; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mr. Fix, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Kramer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.

E. Review and request for a motion to approve Final Plats for Section 2 – Phase 1-4 of the Spring Creek Subdivision (Dominion Homes). Mr. Schultz stated this development was approved in Violet Township as a planned development in July 1996 and modified in 1999, and stated this property was annexed into the City in March 2005 in the 362 acre annexation. Mr. Schultz stated Section 1 of the subdivision was approved and constructed in the County and construction is still occurring in Section 1 now that it is in the City. He stated the owner proposes to develop Section 2 which consists of 109 lots on 59 acres, with Section 2 being divided into four phases. He stated Phase 1 would consist of 29 lots on almost 23 acres, and there would be open space and two retention basins in the area along Milnor Road. Phase 2 would consist of 34 lots on 15 acres, Phase 3 would consist of 22 lots on 9 acres, and Phase 4 would consist of 24 lots on almost 12 acres. Mr. Schultz stated the proposed plat appears to be consistent with the original preliminary development plan that was approved in Violet Township, and the construction drawings for Section 2 were approved by Fairfield County in December, 2004, and these are County sanitary sewer and water services. Mr. Schultz stated a right hand turn lane northbound on Milnor Road into Bridgewater Street would be required in this section, and a traffic signal is proposed at the intersection of Refugee Road and Spring Creek Drive. He stated the City, County, and Township will need to meet to determine when the signal is warranted and who is responsible for installing it. He stated the developer apparently put $50,000 in escrow when Section 1 was approved and staff is researching the escrow account details. Mr. Schultz stated Spring Creek Drive goes from Refugee Road through Sections 1, and 2, and Sections 3 and 4, which are in the Township. Mr. Schultz continued that for Sections 3 and 4 a preliminary plan has been approved, but no final plats have been approved. He further stated after speaking with Mr. Yaple of the Township, he indicated that the developer of Sections 3 and 4 had an agreement to realign Spring Creek Drive where it does not become a cut through. That original concept has, apparently, been agreed to but has not been to the Fairfield County Regional Planning Commission for consideration and approval. He stated the realignment is apparently contingent upon other developments along Pickerington Road east of this site. Mr. Schultz stated according to Violet Township the realignment issue should be resolved in the next few months, and the realignment would revise the street and lot layouts in Section 2, Phases 3 and 4, and, therefore, staff recommends tabling or withdrawing Section 2, Phases 3 and 4, until the realignment issue is resolved. Mr. Schultz stated the street names have been approved by the Fire Department, 9-1-1, and the Police Department. He further stated there was a pedestrian bike path between Sections 1 and 2 that extended a block along the creek bed, and Violet Township, Fairfield County, and the City recommends that pedestrian bike path be eliminated as it goes nowhere and there are sidewalks in this block area, and it does not meet the City’s pedestrian facilities master plan. Mr. Schultz further stated perimeter mounding along Milnor Road, per the preliminary approval plan, would match what is out there today. Mr. Schultz stated staff supports the final plat approval for Section 2, Phases 1 and 2, with the conditions that the bike path requirement in Section 2, Phases 1 and 2, shall be eliminated, that the perimeter landscaping and mounding along Milnor Road in Section 2 shall be compatible with the existing landscaping and mounding along Milnor Road in Section 1, and that a Homeowner’s Association Agreement shall be submitted and reviewed by the City prior to the third Council reading. He stated staff does not support final plat approval of Section 2, Phases 3 and 4, until the Spring Creek Drive realignment issue is resolved. Mr. Schultz stated this would go to Service Committee and then to Council for three readings. Mr. Dick Brahm stated he was present representing Dominion Homes and as indicated in the staff report this is a rather complex project. He stated it is essentially a single subdivision that started in the Township in 1996. Mr. Brahm stated the part of the subdivision that belonged to Dominion Homes, the City entered into a pre-annexation agreement, so that portion of the subdivision was, in fact, proposed for annexation to the City and that annexation was delayed for quite some time. He stated the subdivision is zoned in the Township and by the pre-annexation agreement remains in place, and platting has been done in the subdivision under the County because the annexation was held up for approximately 4 and one-half years. Mr. Brahm stated Phases 1 and 2 of Section 2 meet all of the requirements as pointed out by staff. Mr. Brahm stated Phases 3 and 4 of Section 2, the Township and County, even before the annexation was completed in 2005, said they would like to look at a realignment of a portion of the roadway covered by those two phases. There has been a concept plant, but he was not aware of an agreement. Mr. Brahm stated Dominion intended to cooperate with the City, the Township, and the County and try to work a solution for the realignment that is acceptable. Mr. Brahm stated he would request approval of Section 2, Phases 1 and 2, while Phases 3 and 4 be tabled to allow him to work with everyone to get an agreement. Mr. Blake ascertained that tabling these two sections was acceptable to staff. Mr. Nicholas clarified that if these phases are tabled, it will remain on the agenda for a report each month until it is ready to be taken off the table. Mr. Bosch stated he assumed when this went through the County Planning Commission process there was a traffic study done that showed the need for the right turn lane and the signal at some point of build out, and when we accepted that plat and those conditions the turn lane and the signal would be part of the building of that main road off of Milnor. Mr. Schultz stated he was not sure when that signal would be installed as we need to deal with the County Engineer and the Township to see when it would be warranted, who would pay for it, and how much is in escrow. Mr. Bosch stated he would request Mr. Schultz get a copy of the traffic study and provide it to our engineer for review because the right turn lane has a lot less stringent requirements and it may be required with Phase 2 construction rather than waiting. Mr. Schultz stated from his conversations with the engineer, the right turn lane will occur in Phase 2. Mr. Bosch clarified that Phases 1 and 2 are in the City, however, none of Milnor Road is in the City, we just annexed to right-of-way. Mr. Bosch stated then, theoretically, the right turn lane is in the County. Mr. Fix clarified there does not seem to be any reason for the bike path to be there, it does not connect to anything, and everyone is agreeable to eliminating it. Mr. Bosch moved to approve the Final Plats for Section 2, Phases 1 and 2, with staff recommendations, and to Table approval of the final plat for Section 2, Phases 3 and 4; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Blake abstaining, and Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Fix, and Mr. Nicholas voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0. (Section 2, Phases 3 and 4, TABLED)

F. Review and request for motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials for commercial buildings on Lots 2, 3, and 4 of the Windmiller Square Commercial Subdivision located on the south side of Refugee Road and west of Windmiller Drive (west of CME Credit Union). Mr. Schultz stated the owner is proposing to develop these three out lots into three commercial buildings, all in the 6,000-6,600 square foot range. He stated the site would have a single access point from Windmiller Drive through a private drive, and the site plan identifies 241 parking spaces. He stated the storm water would likely be retained in the existing Windmiller Detention Pond. Mr. Schultz stated the site plan appears to meet all zoning requirements, and there appears to be sufficient area to accommodate interior and perimeter landscaping. Mr. Schultz continued that a traffic signal is to be installed later this year at the Refugee Road/Windmiller Drive intersection, and the owner has dedicated 50-feet of right-of-way per the Thoroughfare Plan. Mr. Schultz stated staff is suggesting a cross easement or parking agreement should be established between the three lots or consolidate them into a single parcel. He stated the dumpster location for Lot 3 has not been identified, and it should be screened with a brick wall with wooden doors, and the mechanical equipment appears to be located on the roof and it should be screened from all elevations. Mr. Schultz stated there are some trees on the site, but according to our City Arborist they are of no significance and our typical requirements would easily replace the trees that would be removed. Mr. Schultz stated the buildings would match the CME Credit Union, they would have brick with a pitched roof and asphalt shingles, and each building would have a difference entrance rather it be a hip or gabled entrance, and there would be windows on each elevation that would extend to the water table and have grids to separate the window panes. He stated the buildings on Lots 4 and 3 would be different while the Building on Lot 2 would be the same as the one on Lot 4 except for two gabled covered porch entrances on the south elevation. Mr. Schultz stated staff supports the Certificate of Appropriateness with five conditions:

(1) That a cross easement access/parking agreement shall be established and recorded between the three lots or the lots shall be consolidated into a single parcel.

(2) That the dumpster location and screening shall be documented on the plans for the building on Lot 3 (middle building).

(3) That the brick color and dimensional asphalt shingles shall match the CME Credit Union.

(4) That the color of the columns, hardiplank siding, and trim shall be identified,

(5) That the mechanical equipment on the roof shall be screened on all elevations

Mr. Schultz stated a Certificate of Appropriateness for Landscaping, Lighting, and a Comprehensive Sign Plan would be required for this site.

Mr. Michael McCall stated he was present representing the applicant and they have no objections to any of the staff recommendations, and he has done a few things to address those already. Mr. McCall stated these are office condominiums and they are looking for professionals who actually own and operate inside these properties. He stated by doing this, they felt they would be maintained much better than a retail center might be. Mr. McCall stated they were planning to extend the drive all the way to the western property, which is a requirement in that easement. He stated the original plan had it stubbing into their property, but the development of that private access drive is required to go to these properties. Mr. Blake clarified the applicant has no problems with the conditions stated by staff. Mr. Nicholas stated we have been requesting at an entry, even though there are side lights, that the glass stop and not go below the water table. Mr. Nicholas stated he also had a concern about the mass located on the south elevation and that it was not in proportion. Mr. McCall stated he would certainly work on that issue. Mr. McCall stated he did not have a problem with that. Mr. Nicholas stated he was concerned about running storm water into the waterway there as a lot of water fowl use that water way and he is concerned about pollution. He stated he would like to find out, in the record, what was the purpose or what was permitted to go into that water way. Mr. Schultz stated he could discuss that with our engineers, and Mr. McCall stated that pond was originally designed for that entire water shed and he would work with his engineer and the City engineer to see about filters or something like that. Mr. Binkley stated it appeared on the plans that a structure was being proposed over a manhole, and Mr. McCall stated he would have to verify everything with the survey and if he had to avoid that, he would do so. Mr. Nicholas moved to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials for commercial buildings on Lots 2, 3, and 4 of the Windmiller Square commercial Subdivision with staff recommendations and with the condition that the developer work with staff on the mass of the south elevation entry features, the stormwater issue with respect to filtration, and that the side lights terminate at the water table; Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Blake abstaining, and Mr. Kramer, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Fix, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Nicholas voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0.

4. REPORTS:

A. Planning and Zoning Director - Lance Schultz

(1) BZA Report. Mr. Schultz stated last month’s case was withdrawn and there are five cases scheduled for June.

B. FCRPC - Lance Schultz. Mr. Schultz stated he had no report.

5. OTHER BUSINESS:

A. Tree Commission. No report.

B. Central Ohio Planning and Zoning Workshop. Mr. Schultz stated this workshop is scheduled for Wednesday, July 20^th, and if anyone is interested please contact him and we can take care of the registration. Mr. Schultz stated this might be a very educational experience, especially for new members.

Mr. Schultz stated at the next Planning and Zoning meeting, there are four public hearings scheduled and 12 scheduled cases on the agenda. He stated it appears the first public hearing will begin at 6:50 P.M., and that meeting will be held on July 12^th.

6. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Fix moved to adjourn; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Mr. Binkley, Mr. Fix, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Kramer voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 6-0. The Planning and Zoning Commission adjourned at 8:38 P.M., June 14, 2005.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

___________________________ ___________________________

Lynda D. Yartin Lance A. Schultz

Municipal Clerk Director, Planning and Zoning