PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION
CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD
TUESDAY,
OCTOBER 11, 2005
PUBLIC
HEARING
7:20
P.M.
OPEN DISCUSSION
REGARDING A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE RETREAT AT SPRING LAKES
LOCATED ON THE SYCAMORE CREEK CHURCH PROPERTY JUST WEST OF PICKERINGTON NORTH
HIGH SCHOOL
Mr. Kramer
opened the public hearing at 7:20 P.M., with the following members of the
Planning and Zoning Commission present:
Mr. Fix, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, and Mr. O’Brien. Others present were: Judy Gilleland, Lance
Schultz, Lynda Yartin, Phil Hartmann, George Parsley, Jennifer Frommer, Richard
Ricketts, Joshua Hardesty, Jeff Monebrake, Scott Seaman, Jim Watkins, Jeff
McInturf, Todd Henry, and others.
Mr. Schultz stated the applicant is proposing to construct 90 single-family, detached condo units on a 20 acre site for a density of 4.5 units per acre. He stated the site would have a single curb cut from Refugee Road, and is on the Sycamore Creek Church property west of the high school.
Mrs. Sharon Bucilla clarified there are approximately 7 additional acres on this property that is zoned PR-10 and is vacant at this time. She stated this property abuts her property and she would like to ensure there are regulations regarding buffering. She further clarified this would be a private street and Mr. Schultz stated he did not know if the developer wanted to stub that into her property or not. Mrs. Bucilla further clarified the additional 7 acres may be developed in the future.
Mr. Richard Ricketts stated he was the attorney representing the applicant, Beazer Homes, and he would be happy to answer any questions the Commission may have on this development. Mr. Ricketts stated he felt it was important that everyone understood this was not a development of the entire property and the Church has their own vision as far as not developing a significant part of this property.
Mr. Jeff McInturf, Realty Options, stated approximately one year ago the Church made a commitment to the community to come up with a development that would be satisfactory to everyone in the area and that everyone would be happy with. He stated he felt the project being proposed tonight was a development everyone would be proud of.
There being no further comments, Mr. Kramer declared the public hearing closed at 7:30 P.M., October 11, 2005.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: ATTEST:
____________________________ _____________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, Lance A. Schultz,
Municipal Clerk Director, Planning and Zoning
CITY OF PICKERINGTON
PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION
CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD
TUESDAY,
OCTOBER 11, 2005
7:30
P.M.
1. ROLL CALL. Mr. Kramer called the meeting to order at 7:30P.M., with roll call as follows: Mr. Nicholas, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Fix, Mr. Kramer, and Mr. Binkley were present. Mr. Blake and Mr. Bosch were absent. Others present were: Judy Gilleland, Lance Schultz, Lynda Yartin, Phil Hartmann, Jennifer Frommer, George Parsley, Tracy Beckman, Jason Norton, Sharon Bucilla, Chris Foley, Gary Foley, Richard Ricketts, Tim Watson, Teri Watson, Joshua Hardesty, Jeff Moneybrake, Scott Seaman, Kevin Zippernick, Jim Watkins, Doug Tailford, Jeremy Benton, Todd Ferris, Doug Calper, Jeff McInturf, Todd Henry, Paul McKnight, Jim Hiltz, Jason Heitmier, and others.
2. A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF September 13, 2005, Public Hearing regarding Comprehensive Sign Plan at 19 North Center Street.
B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF September 13, 2005, Public Hearing regarding Comprehensive Sign Plan at 18 East Columbus Street.
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF September 13, 2005, Regular Meeting.
Mrs. Yartin stated she had been on vacation for two weeks and these minutes have not been distributed as yet. Mr. Kramer stated he would request these items remain on the agenda for the next meeting.
3. SCHEDULED MATTERS:
A. Review and request for motion to approve Final Plats for Section 2 – Phases 3 and 4 of the Spring Creek Subdivision (Dominion Homes). (TABLED, 06/14/05). Mr. Kramer stated this would remain on the Table.
B. Review and request for motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Building Materials and Signage at 57 Hill Road North for PaPa Joe’s Pizza (former Texas Jim’s Bar-B-Que). Mr. Schultz reviewed his report that had been provided to the Commission. Mr. Schultz stated staff supports the Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for building materials and signage with the following conditions:
(1) That the drive thru facility shall remain closed.
(2) That the northern curb cut shall be designated as an “in only” and the southern curb cut shall be designated as an “out only” with pavement striping or with small directional signs.
(3) That the roof shall be replaced to comply with property maintenance standards.
(4) That the proposed sign shall be constructed of wood, PVC, or other recently approved materials.
(5) That the northern landscape buffer shall remain as currently planted.
Mr. Tracy Beckman stated he is the owner of the property and he would be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Beckman stated he is planning on putting in a very high quality pizza restaurant that would be pick-up and delivery and have two tables in the inside. He stated PaPa Joe’s of Columbus is the franchise and they have very high standards for quality of food and service. Mr. Beckman stated he felt the pick-up window was vital to the success of the business. He stated this business was different in that people would not be placing orders at the window, but it would be strictly a pick-up window. Mr. Beckman stated he had measured to see how many vehicles could go around the building from the window before it would cause a back-up into the street. He stated he had used the measurements of a Ford Excursion, which is a very large vehicle, and it would take nine of those vehicles before it would cause a back-up on the street. He stated he felt the pick-up window was a vital and necessary thing for the success of this business. Mr. Beckman stated a lot of research went into the sign he was proposing which is a canvas sign projecting over the sidewalk on Hill Road. He stated the sign would be a minimum of eight feet above the sidewalk and could be seen by north and south bound traffic. Mr. Beckman stated he had driven around and looked at signage and he has seen even the City hanging canvas signs on the light poles promoting Pickerington. He stated he has also seen vinyl banners that are not nearly as attractive as what he was proposing. Mr. Beckman stated he had also shown his proposed sign to the President of the Chamber of Commerce and she did not see a problem with the sign. Mr. Kramer clarified that there will be a table or two inside so people can have lunch or whatever.
Mr. Schultz stated from a process perspective he would like to clarify that when he met with Mr. Beckman a month ago, he had indicated there would be no drive thru. Mr. Schultz stated a drive thru requires a conditional use approval, and he would be hesitant to approve a conditional use until he has the time to study it from an engineering perspective and determine if, potentially, conditions could be put on so it could be approved. Mr. Schultz stated when the drive thru was eliminated on this property in 2002, the concern was the traffic back-up, and that condition is still on this property. Mr. Fix clarified there is no distinction between a pick-up window and a drive thru window in our Code.
Mr. O’Brien questioned with regard to the sign, if the applicant’s engineer couldn’t plan a sufficient pole to hold a sign constructed of PVC? Mr. O’Brien stated a lot of the signs in the old downtown area are constructed of a composite of PVC materials that are painted to look like wood. Mr. O’Brien stated the banners Mr. Beckman referred to are temporary and permits are required for those. Mr. O’Brien further stated the flags the City has on the light poles are not advertisements. Mr. Kramer stated his concern with a banner would be that it would need to be replaced frequently, and Ms Gilleland stated she would estimate a banner would need to be replaced at least once a year. Mr. Beckman stated if the banner is not approved he would have to go back to square one, however, he did feel it was important that any sign faced north and south. Mr. O’Brien stated he felt the Commission was comfortable with the sign facing north and south. Mr. O’Brien stated the photos submitted show a neon sign in the window, and Mr. Schultz stated the previous owner was allowed neon signs in the two windows because he removed the large pylon sign that was there, and a new owner would still be allowed the neon signs. Mr. Binkley inquired if we require an accessible space if we have a handicapped parking. He stated you can’t just have a stripped handicapped stall, you need an accessible route to get into the building. He further stated the two parking spots marked for delivery personnel only cuts down on the required parking. Mr. Schultz stated the request this evening was for signage only. Mr. Nicholas stated he would prefer not to see a banner sign like this in the old village, and would prefer a sign similar to what has been approved over the past few years that are PVC and mounted on architectural brackets, and so forth. Mr. Nicholas stated he was sure Mr. Beckman could work out something very nice in a sign like that, of the PVC material, so that it is not heavy, and there are great ways of anchoring those signs to those brackets. Mr. Nicholas stated he would not be in support of a canvas sign. Mr. Fix clarified the drive thru would require a conditional use approval, and there are certain requirements that have to be met. Mr. Schultz stated again, that is not what is being discussed tonight, however, he just wanted to reaffirm that in 2002 the drive thru window was eliminated. Mr. Fix further clarified that no matter what the Commission did tonight, the applicant would have to come back in and apply for a conditional use approval on the drive thru window. Mr. Fix moved to approve the Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Building Materials and Signage at 57 Hill Road North with the five conditions stated by staff; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0.
C. Review and request for motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials and Lighting for a 7,590 square foot office building located on Lot 6 of the Creek Bend Business Park. Mr. Schultz reviewed his report presented to the Commission members. Mr. Schultz stated staff supports the Certificate of Appropriateness request for site plan/building materials with the following seven conditions.
(1) That the entrance curb cut into Lot 6 shall be a shared entrance with Lot 5 (currently vacant). A cross easement agreement shall be prepared to document the shared access.
(2) That the dumpster shall be screened with stone material that matches the building and have wood doors.
(3) That the stone veneer, hardiplank siding, and roof shingle color shall match the buildings on Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the Creek Bend Business Park.
(4) That all windows, including around the entrance doors, shall only extend to the stone veneer water table.
(5) That the windows shall have grids that divide the windows in equal sections.
(6) That a frieze board shall be incorporated in the design along each elevation.
(7) That the light poles shall be a maximum 20-feet in height and the light fixtures shall match the lamps (Model ALN445) installed on Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the Creek Bend Business Park.
Mr. Paul McKnight stated he was present representing the applicant and he would answer any questions the Commission might have. Mr. McKnight stated he would like clarification on the condition that the windows only extend to the stone veneer water table. He stated he was not proposing extending the windows to the ground, however, they do extend below the water table by approximately six inches. Mr. Schultz stated the intent is that the windows do not go to grade, so extending six inches below the water table would not be a problem. Mr. McKnight stated the second condition he would like clarification on was that the windows have grids that divide the windows into equal sections. He stated they would prefer not to put grids on the windows. Mr. Nicholas stated our Code states that large expanses of glass shall not be permitted, however, it appears from the drawings that the glass is being broken up with the aluminum storefront, and he was not sure that the grids would be necessary on this building. Mr. Fix moved to approve the request for Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials and Lighting for a 7,590 square foot office building on Lot 6 of the Creek Bend Business Park with staff conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7, and that condition 4 be amended to state that all windows, including around the entrance doors, shall only extend to a maximum of six inches below the water table; Mr. O’Brien seconded the motion. Mr. Nicholas clarified that condition 5 was not included in the motion to approve. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Fix, Mr. O’Brien, and Mr. Binkley voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0.
D. Review and request for motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials for an outdoor patio for Wings and Things in the Hunters Run Centre Phase IV commercial building at 10501 and 10503 Blacklick Eastern Road for Plaza Properties. Mr. Schultz reviewed his report as presented to the Commission members. Mr. Schultz stated staff supports the request with the following conditions:
(1) That a six-inch curb and black wrought iron fence shall separate the outdoor patio from the parking lot.
(2) That the Planning and Zoning Commission shall reassess the approval of the outdoor patio if any problems deemed substantial by the City occur that impacts the health, safety, and general welfare of the community.
Mr. Andrew Delzoppo stated he was representing the applicant and would answer any questions the Commission may have. Mr. Nicholas clarified the aluminum fencing is black and is similar to that at Cup o’Joe’s. Mr. Kramer stated the plans state the fence is wrought iron, not aluminum. Mr. Nicholas stated it was black aluminum that appears to be wrought iron. Mr. Schultz stated the condition is for the fence to be wrought iron. Mr. Fix moved to approve the Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Material for an outdoor patio for Wings and Things with staff conditions; Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mr. Fix, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Kramer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0.
E. Review
and request for a motion to approve a Preliminary Development Plan for the
Retreat at Spring Lakes located on the Sycamore Creek Church property just west
of the Pickerington North High School.
Mr. Schultz reviewed his report as presented to the Commission
members. Mr. Schultz stated staff supports
the preliminary development plan approval with the following conditions:
(1) That the eastbound turn lane shall be constructed prior to occupancy of any condominium units.
(2) That all the private streets shall be constructed to public street standards.
(3) That the active open spaces and the open space around the existing pond and retention ponds shall have amenities installed to create a park like setting.
(4) That the perimeter buffering to the west shall meet the Type B buffer requirements while maintaining the existing trees along the property line.
(5) That the Sycamore Creek Community Church shall dedicate a bike/pedestrian path easement across their property to the City.
(6) That the condominium unit building model type specific housing mix shall meet the plan submitted to create an aesthetically pleasing development.
(7) That the condominium buildings shall meet the minimum standards of the proposed Residential Design Standards if approved by the City.
(8) That a condominium association document shall be prepared and reviewed by the City prior to third reading at City Council.
(9) That the secondary condominium entrance sign shall be five feet from the right-of-way or street easement and outside the site triangle.
(10) That the development plan shall meet the fire department requirements.
Mr. Richard Ricketts stated the Commission had been provided with a binder with extensive information regarding the preliminary development plan. Mr. Ricketts stated he would like to clarify that the property currently being proposed for development does not extend all the way back to the property line. He stated, however, if that property is developed there would in fact be buffering requirements that would be met. Mr. Ricketts stated further the traffic access study has received a great deal of attention. He stated there have been a number of meetings with the City, the City’s engineer, Violet Township, and the Fairfield County Engineer. Mr. Ricketts stated one of the most important aspects with relation to this project is that Refugee Road is still under the control of Fairfield County at this particular location. Mr. Ricketts stated due to the multi-jurisdiction of this area, everyone has been involved in trying to figure out what will happen at this site. He stated one of the issues he felt it was important for this Commission to understand is that Fairfield County has not yet provided their input in response to the traffic study that was prepared by Stilson and presented to them. Mr. Ricketts stated therefore, with regard to the time table for the left turn lane, it was their position that the ultimate determination of the access plan issue and the left turn lane issue is something that could be deferred until the Final Development Plan because they do need the input of the Fairfield County Engineer’s office to make sure everyone is in agreement. He stated they would be asking that that particular issue be withheld until they come back in with a Final Development Plan and they have the specific letter of instruction from Fairfield County and what they want. Mr. Ricketts stated with regard to the walkways, the Church is committed to having the walkway with one caveat, and that is the future development of the site may result in the walkway needing to move. He clarified the walkway is okay, but the exact location of the walkway could have to be adjusted from time to time depending on final development. Mr. Schultz stated when he prepared his report, our engineer, himself, and the County had been unable to meet on the traffic study issue. Ms Frommer stated the County engineer had acknowledged that a turn lane will be warranted at some point, however, they were not prepared to make that determination. Ms Frommer stated it was very likely some of these things will be worked out between now and the submittal of the Final Development Plan. Mr. O’Brien clarified Mr. Schultz felt the City could work with the developer and the Church on the location of the bike path. Mr. Nicholas stated he trusted this would be the same high quality development that Beazer Homes has done in other communities. He stated he also appreciated the thorough packet the Commission had been presented as it had answered most of the questions he had on the project. Mr. O’Brien moved to approve the Preliminary Development Plan for the retreat at Spring Lakes with staff conditions two through ten and the clarification that approval of condition one wait until the Final Development Plan is approved; Mr. Nicholas seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, and Mr. O’Brien voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0.
F. Review and request for a motion to approve a draft ordinance adopting Residential Development Design Standards (Section 1276.23) and amending Section 1276.22 of the Pickerington Codified Ordinances. Mr. Schultz stated the proposed residential development design standards have been discussed in depth at the last several meetings, and the Commission had been provided a new draft that contained all of the recommended revisions. Mr. Schultz reviewed the revisions that had been incorporated into the proposed standards. Mr. Schultz stated staff supported adoption of the Residential Development Design Standards as presented this evening. Mr. Jim Hiltz stated he was present representing the BIA of Central Ohio. He stated he would like to note that the suggestion regarding the overhang he had submitted at the last meeting was not included in the revisions, and he would appreciate it if the Commission would reconsider that. Ms Gilleland stated it was impossible to include everything in this document and these are design guidelines. She stated what we want to do is to allow architectural creativity, compatibility with an area, etc. She stated the phrase “exceptions to the standards set forth shall be considered by the BZA,” had been included just so everyone was clear that we are open to looking at exceptions. Mr. O’Brien stated he was willing to remove the requirement for flowers in the section dealing with mulch beds and just leave in shrubs and accent plants. He stated further he did not have a problem with the suggestion made by the BIA that the subsiding shall be a minimum of 7/16 OSB or plywood in lieu of ˝ inch. Ms Gilleland stated she had inadvertently included stucco in the section that details where shutters or window trim is not required, and she would like to have stucco removed from that sentence. Mr. Fix inquired if this Commission wanted to make any changes regarding the overhang and Mr. O’Brien stated he would prefer that issue be resolved at Service Committee. Mr. Nicholas stated he agreed with the removal of the requirement for flowers, and further 7/16 OSB is the normal requirement so he agreed with that change as well. Mr. Nicholas stated with respect to the overhangs where you have brick or stone, perhaps we should state that is an eight-inch net overhang. Mr. Heitmier stated an eight-inch net is okay except where you would have stone or brick. Mr. Nicholas stated if he understood it then, with brick or stone you would only have enough room for a two-inch continuous overhang. Mr. Fix moved to approve the Residential Development Design Standards with the following changes: (1) On the subsiding that the ˝ inch OSB be changed to 7/16 inch; (2) The sentence that states “shutters or window trim is not required on elevations comprised of brick, stone, or stucco” that we remove the words “or stucco;” and, (3) That under landscaping the word “flowers” be omitted from the last sentence; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Mr. Nicholas clarified that when someone goes for a permit, for example, if someone wanted to do a colonial house where they have narrower corner boards, they would need to go to the Board of Zoning Appeals for that. Mr. Hartmann stated that was correct, anything that would deviate from these guidelines. Mr. O’Brien questioned if a developer was doing a subdivision that had five different models in it, they could go to BZA once to get the model approved, it would not be house by house, and Mr. Hartmann stated that could go either way. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Fix, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Kramer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0.
4. REPORTS:
(1) BZA Report. Mr. Schultz stated there were two cases in September and in October there are four cases on the agenda.
B. FCRPC - Lance Schultz. Mr. Schultz stated Winding Creek received an extension on their plat and there were two rezonings in Violet Township near Canal Winchester from residential to commercial.
5. OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Tree Commission. No report.
6. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. O’Brien moved to adjourn; Mr. Nicholas seconded the motion. Mr. Nicholas, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Fix, Mr. Kramer, and Mr. Binkley voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 5-0. The Planning and Zoning Commission adjourned at 9:15 P.M., October 11, 2005.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Lynda D. Yartin Lance A. Schultz
Municipal Clerk Director, Planning and Zoning