PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION
CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD
TUESDAY,
DECEMBER 13, 2005
PUBLIC
HEARING
7:10
P.M.
OPEN DISCUSSION
REGARDING THE REZONING OF 194 WEST CHURCH STREET FROM R-4 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
TO P-O PLANNED SUBURBAN OFFICE DISTRICT
Mr. Blake
opened the public hearing at 7:10 P.M., with the following members of the
Planning and Zoning Commission present:
Mr. Fix, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Bosch,
and Mr. O’Brien. Others present were:
Lance Schultz, Lynda Yartin, Phil Hartmann, Cristie Hammond, Joe Henderson,
Jack Bowman, Susie Bowman, Keeley Weaver, Frank Weaver, and others.
Mr. Schultz stated the applicant is requesting the rezoning to planned office. He stated at the public hearing held last month for a rezoning to C-2, Mixed Use Business District, and this Commission requested it go to a Planned Office District.
Mrs. Weaver stated she is the applicant and she would answer any questions anyone might have.
There being no questions or comments, Mr. Blake declared the public hearing closed at 7:13 P.M., December 13, 2005.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: ATTEST:
____________________________ _____________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, Lance A. Schultz,
Municipal Clerk Director, Planning and Zoning
PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION
CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD
TUESDAY,
DECEMBER 13, 2005
PUBLIC
HEARING
7:20
P.M.
OPEN DISCUSSION
REGARDING A COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PLAN FOR LANFAIR FEDERAL CREDIT UNION AT 35 WEST
COLUMUBS STREET
Mr. Blake
opened the public hearing at 7:20 P.M., with the following members of the
Planning and Zoning Commission present:
Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Fix, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas,
and Mr. Kramer. Others present were:
Lance Schultz, Lynda Yartin, Phil Hartmann, Cristie Hammond, Joe Henderson,
Jack Bowman, Susie Bowman, Keeley Weaver, Frank Weaver, Dennis Croft, Donald
Weaver, Tom Rutherford, Mike Vasko, Mike Collins, Baron Macvil, Ron Scott, Steve
Eversole, Jennifer Robinson, James Luse, Chris Humphrey Rick Sicker, John
Humbert, and others.
Mr. Schultz stated this Credit Union is located in the old downtown area and a Comprehensive Sign Plan in this area requires a public hearing. He stated the applicant is requesting a fifteen square foot building sign facing Columbus Street. Mr. Blake clarified this sign would be externally lit.
Mr. Dennis Croft stated he was representing the Credit Union and he would be happy to answer any questions.
There being no questions or comments, Mr. Blake declared the public hearing closed at 7:22 P.M., December 13, 2005.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: ATTEST:
____________________________ _____________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, Lance A. Schultz,
Municipal Clerk Director, Planning and Zoning
CITY OF PICKERINGTON
PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION
TUESDAY,
DECEMBER 13, 2005
7:30
P.M.
1. ROLL CALL. Mr. Blake called the meeting to order at 7:30P.M., with roll call as follows: Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Fix, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Blake were present. No members were absent. Others present were: Lance Schultz, Lynda Yartin, Phil Hartmann, Joe Henderson, Cristie Hammond, Jack Bowman, Suzie Bowman, Keelie Weaver, Francis Weaver, Lou Visco, Dennis Croft, Tom Rutherford, Don Weaver, Mike Collins, Baron Mascovic, Ron Scott, Steve Eversole, Jennifer Robinson, James Luse, Christ Humphrey, Rick Sicker, John Humbert, and others.
2. A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF November 8, 2005, Public Hearing regarding rezoning of 194 West Church Street. Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix abstaining, and Mr. Kramer, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. O’Brien voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF November 8, 2005, Public Hearing regarding rezoning of 100 Lockville Road. Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix abstaining, and Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Blake voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF November 8, 2005, Public Hearing regarding the Retreat at Spring Lakes Condominium Development. Mr. Kramer moved to approve; Mr. Blake seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix abstaining, and Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Kramer, and Mr. Binkley voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF November 8, 2005, Regular Meeting. Mr. Kramer moved to approve; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix abstaining, and Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Binkley voting “Yea.” Motion passed 6-0.
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. Blake stated this would remain on the Table.
B. Review and request for motion to approve a rezoning of 194 West Church Street from R-4 Residential District to P-O Planned Suburban Office District. Mr. Schultz stated the applicant had originally requested a rezoning to C-2, Mixed Use Office District, and this Commission suggested they apply for a Planned Office District. Mr. Schultz stated the remainder of the residents on Church Street had been notified of the public hearing scheduled for this evening. Mr. Schultz stated staff still suggested we look at the entire area, however, if this Commission is inclined to approve this rezoning, staff would suggest a condition restricting the number of trips for this use where it would only permit an office use and not any retail uses. He stated another suggestion would be to put a restriction on it to allow only an office use at this location, so any retail uses would not be permitted. Mr. Hartmann stated since this is a planned district, another suggestion would be to define it as an Office Use and in that use specifically exclude retail uses.
Keely Weaver stated she is the applicant for the rezoning and clarified that retail use would be excluded. She also questioned if this property would be allowed to be rezoned as a residence in the future. Mr. Hartmann stated if this Commission desired, they could approve the office use, include an additional use as residential, and also exclude the retail use. Mr. Schultz stated currently the office district zoning does not allow a residence and the C-2 district allows a mix of residential and commercial. Mr. Blake clarified Ms Weaver was planning on using this strictly as an office. Mr. O’Brien moved to approve the request to rezone 194 West Church Street from R-4 (Residential District) to P-O (Planned Suburban Office District) in accordance with the Table on page 295 of the Pickerington Codified Ordinances that outlines the permitted conditional uses, however, specifically excluding the permitted business retail in the office classification; Mr. Fix seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Fix, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Kramer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
C. Review and request for motion to approve a Comprehensive Sign Plan for Building Signage for Lanfair Federal Credit Union at 35 West Columbus Street. Mr. Schultz reviewed his report provided to the Commission members. Mr. Schultz stated staff supported the Comprehensive Sign Plan with two conditions: That the sign letters shall have a matte finish, and that the sign shall not be internally illuminated. Mr. Mike Collins stated he was present to answer any questions regarding the sign. Mr. Nicholas moved to approve the comprehensive Sign Plan with staff recommendations; Mr. O’Brien seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Kramer, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Fix, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Binkley voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
D. Review and request for motion to approve a Comprehensive Sign Plan for a modified Ground Sign for Marcus Cinemas at 1776 Hill Road North. Mr. Schultz reviewed his report provided to the Commission members. Mr. Baron Mascovic stated he represented Plaza Properties in this matter and they were requesting that what was approved in the original comprehensive sign plan for that out parcel building on S.R. 204, be the same as this sign. Mr. Schultz clarified they were requesting the panels on this ground sign to be similar to the wall sign panels. Mr. Mascovic stated it was his understanding the ground sign would be have a green background with white letters and would match the current ground sign. Mr. Schultz stated staff supports the Comprehensive Sign Plan with two conditions: That the ground sign panels shall be limited to a green background with white letters; and, that the ground sign logo and tenant panels shall have a matte finish. Mr. Nicholas clarified the tenant signs were for the out lot building near the intersection of S.R. 204 and S.R. 256. Mr. Nicholas moved to approve the comprehensive sign plan with staff’s recommendations; Mr. O’Brien seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Fix, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Blake voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
E. Review and request for a motion to approve a conditional Use Permit for an additional 2,560 square foot building for Rutherford Auto Body Shop at 685 Hill Road North. Mr. Schultz reviewed his report as provided to the Commission members. He stated the owner is proposing to construct a 2,560 square foot building that would be 23 feet in height to inspect vehicles for insurance agencies. He stated there is currently an approximately 13,000 square foot building on this site for automotive repairs. He stated this subject site spans two zoning districts; C-4 (Highway Commercial) and C-3 (Community Commercial). Mr. Schultz stated he did need the owner to verify that all work is carried on totally in the enclosed building. Mr. Schultz further stated storage of vehicles on the premises for periods of time exceeding seven days is prohibited unless located entirely in an enclosed building. Mr. Schultz stated when he inspected the site there were several vehicles stored on the site and it appeared several of them were there longer than seven days. Mr. Schultz stated the applicant would have to meet this storage regulation in the C-4 district, and storage of vehicles is prohibited in a C-3 district. Mr. Schultz stated staff supported the conditional use with the following four conditions:
(1) That all work on the site shall be carried on within an enclosed building
(2) That no equipment, processes, or storage associated with the use shall create odor, noise, vibration, glare, electrical interference, or other nuisances detectable to normal senses off the lot
(3) That the storage of vehicles shall not exceed seven days unless located entirely within an enclosed building in the C-4 zoning district
(4) That the storage of vehicles shall be prohibited in the C-3 zoning district
Mr. Tom Rutherford stated he is the owner of Rutherford Auto Body, and they have been in business in the Pickerington area since 1987. He stated they are good neighbors and go out of the way to ensure their site is kept clean and is not a negative for the community. Mr. Rutherford stated he has two types of vehicles on his lot; the collision damaged vehicles they are going to repair, and the collision damaged vehicles that insurance companies have totaled. He stated he has no control over the vehicles that have been totaled, and normally those vehicles are moved out pretty quickly since they charge the insurance companies a storage fee. Mr. Rutherford stated the reason he wants to build this building is because with today’s modern vehicle, an accurate estimate cannot be written until it is dismantled, and this space will be used for that purpose. Mr. Blake clarified Mr. Schultz has not received any code violation complaints against this business with it’s present use. Mr. O’Brien moved to approve the Conditional Use Permit with staff’s recommendations; Mr. Nicholas seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Kramer, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Fix, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. O’Brien voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
F. Review and request for a motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials for an additional 2,560 square foot building for Rutherford Auto Body Shop at 685 Hill Road North. Mr. Schultz reviewed his report provided to the Commission members. Mr. Schultz stated he understands the owner is proposing a new building to a development that was approved prior to current zoning and building materials standards, and he is not suggesting that the existing building be brought into compliance. Mr. Schultz further stated, however, the site plan features (parking lot, buffering, landscaping, lighting, etc.) should comply with current standards to be consistent with other commercial developments and, more importantly, to be compatible with the adjacent residential homes to the south. Mr. Schultz stated staff supported the certificate of appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials with the following six conditions:
(1) That the parking lot west of the existing building shall be in compliance with the City paving requirements
(2) That the number of parking spaces required for the proposed 2,560 square foot building shall be identified and paved
(3) That a six-foot high opaque wood fence shall be installed from the eastern end of the existing building to the western end of the proposed building along the south property line. The fence shall extend north along the western portion of the proposed building (the existing eight-foot fence could be utilized in this area if in good condition)
(4) That six foot high pine trees at installation shall be installed ten-feet on center in a staggered alignment on six foot high mound just west of the existing pine trees and extend to the western C-4 zoning boundary line
(5) That the proposed building shall be constructed of brick, stone, or wood
(6) That the roof shall be constructed of asphalt dimensional shingles
Mr. Tom Rutherford clarified the number of parking spaces required is based on the total square footage of the building. Mr. Rutherford stated his concern is the continuity of the site. Mr. Michael Vasco stated he is Mr. Rutherford’s legal counsel and he is concerned about the requirement of the shingles. Mr. Vasco stated the City’s code allows a standing seam roof and it appeared to be an arbitrary determination simply to make the product match the neighboring residential as opposed to matching the on-site improvements that are already in existence. He stated he felt that was an irrelevant consideration as this site is going to be screened with the opaque fence, large trees, and six feet of mounding. He stated the building would be virtually invisible, as the existing building is, to the neighboring properties and he felt this requirement is inappropriate. Mr. Vasco continued for the very same reasons, the split block is consistent with the structure already on site. Mr. Vasco stated he would urge this board to permit the split face block and the standing seam roof.
Mr. Fix clarified the applicant agrees with staff’s recommendations 1 through 4, but does not agree with recommendations 5 and 6. Mr. Bosch clarified the proposed standing seam roof would be the same color as the existing roof. Mr. Bosch clarified that one reason for Mr. Schultz’ condition is because of the road that is in the Thoroughfare Plan. Mr. Schultz stated we would like to connect Diley Road with S.R. 256 and it would meander where Old S.R. 256 is, potentially in front of this property and to the west of Diley Road. Mr. Bosch further clarified this road would be development driven, and is probably a few years out. Mr. Bosch also clarified the split face block would be painted to match the existing building. Mr. Kramer clarified the applicant’s intent was to make the buildings look the same, and with Mr. Schultz’ recommendations the roof and the walls would not match the existing building. Mr. Kramer questioned if this Commission makes an exception for this building, what would they do down the road? Mr. Schultz stated staff is requesting this building meet our guidelines of brick and asphalt shingles. Mr. O’Brien stated the difference would be a new construction versus the expansion or add-on of an existing structure. Mr. Rutherford stated if he were starting from scratch, he would have no problem with the guidelines. Mr. Blake stated his opinion was that this structure was not visible from a main thoroughfare. Mr. Rutherford stated aesthetically he felt the site would look better if the buildings were consistent with each other. Mr. Nicholas clarified the front of the current building has vertical strips of brick and grey cedar. Mr. Nicholas further stated he had driven around the subject property today and with respect to where the new building would be, and the evergreens to the south where the residential is, he would reluctantly support matching existing construction materials. Mr. Bosch moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the Site Plan/Building Materials for an additional 2,560 square foot building for Rutherford Auto Body Shop with staff recommendations 1, 2, 3, and 4, with the addition of bringing the tree line around and wrapped up the west side of the property line, and allowing the split face block and the standing seam roof with the colors to match the existing building; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Mr. Schultz stated he would like to clarify the trees will be on a six-foot high mound so it is all uniform. Roll call was taken with Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Fix, and Mr. Blake voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
G. Review and request for a motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Lighting for Barnyard Primitive at 799 Windmiller Drive. Mr. Schultz the site plan, building materials, and landscaping for this site were approved earlier this year. He stated they are now coming in for approval of the lighting. Mr. Schultz reviewed his report that was provided to the Commission and stated staff supports the Certificate of Appropriateness with three conditions:
(1) That the light fixtures shall match the Whitestone Building and Dr. Martello’s light fixtures or shall be a design that complies with the city design standards and compliments the barn from an aesthetic perspective.
(2) That the light pole shall be 25-feet in height not including the concrete base.
(3) That the illumination of lights at property lines shall not exceed City footcandle requirements.
Mr. Schultz stated staff does not believe the existing commercial lights match the rural character of the barn they are proposing, so we would like to see lights similar to what is next to this building.
Mr. Ron Scott stated he is a co-owner of this business and he understands and appreciates staff’s comments regarding the lighting recommended. He stated he would, however, like to stay with the cut off type lights in their submittal. Mr. Scott stated as a business owner he has a responsibility to supply a parking lot that is safe and secure through lighting in the evening hours. He stated the cut off style lights are a directional style light and gives a very uniform and thorough lighting. Mr. Scott stated his patrons are approximately 90 percent women and if he has a parking lot that will not give them a safe and secure feeling in the evening hours, they will not shop at his store. He stated the lighting system he is proposing is the type at Kohls’, Kroger, World Gym, and Windmiller Self-Storage, and he feels it is a necessity for his business to have that type of lighting so people will feel comfortable shopping at his store. Mr. Bosch clarified the lights at Dr. Martello’s office are the gooseneck type lights. Mr. Fix clarified the gooseneck lights might not provide as much light, however, you would be able to add additional lights or increase the body to get the same amount of lighting. Mr. Bosch stated with the gooseneck lights you loose the cut-off ability, so you would have more light bleed over or you would not have as good a coverage on the parking lot, you could get dark zones. Mr. Bosch stated he understood the applicant’s position, and his concern is that the decorative lighting would not allow this parking lot to be lit well enough without creating the dark zones. Mr. Bosch stated we want the minimum number of poles in the parking lot, and questioned if it would be possible to have some of the exterior parking with the cut offs out along the outside edge. Mr. Scott stated further the Whitestone Building and Dr. Martello’s office close at 5:00 P.M., and his business will be open until 9:00 or 10:00 P.M. Mr. Bosch stated there are some manufacturers that have cut off lights that are more than just a box so it looks more decorative. Mr. Schultz stated we typically like to match what is next door or across the street although one of the conditions he listed provides the option for something that is aesthetically pleasing and meets our requirements. He stated as he indicated in his report, this Commission could review that option and consider it. Mr. Nicholas stated there are architectural lighting fixtures that have block outs for adjacent properties. He stated he would recommend the owner investigate that option and the Certificate of Appropriateness be tabled to allow them to work with staff and come back next month with a light fixture that everyone can agree on. Mr. Nicholas clarified the owner was comfortable with tabling this one item. Mr. Nicholas moved to Table; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Fix voting “Yea.” Motion to Table passed, 7-0. (TABLED)
H. Review and request for motion to approve a Comprehensive Sign Plan for Building Signage for Barnyard Primitive at 799 Windmiller Drive. Mr. Schultz reviewed his report that was provided to the Commission. Mr. Schultz stated staff supported the request with the condition that the building sign letters and graphic shall have a matte finish. Mr. Ron Scott stated he had no problem with staff’s recommendation. Mr. Nicholas clarified the sign would not be externally lit, and clarified the building plan will show the lights. Mr. Nicholas requested a cut sheet on the building light fixtures be included with the package when they come back next month for the lighting. Mr. Bosch moved to approve the Comprehensive Sign Plan for Building Signage with staff recommendations; Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Fix, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Binkley voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
I. Review and request for motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials for a building addition for Pickerington Medical Complex at 641 Hill Road North. Mr. Schultz reviewed his report that was provided to the Commission and stated the applicant is proposing to convert the existing drive thru into a 463 square foot waiting room. Mr. Schultz stated staff supported the request with the condition that the building materials and colors shall match the existing building. Mr. Jim Luse stated he is the owner and he would be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Bosch stated he assumed the pavement leading to the current drive thru would be removed and seeded. Mr. Chris Humphrey stated he is the architect for the project and the landscape areas on either side will remain intact, and by virtue of the realignment of the curb to close off the canopy there will be a planting area on either side of the addition. Mr. Fix moved to approve the Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness with staff recommendations; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mr. Fix, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Kramer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
J. Review and request for motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials, Landscaping and Lighting for Luse Office Buildings, Phase 2, at 651 and 655 Hill Road North. Mr. Schultz stated Phase 1 was approved in October 2004. Mr. Schultz reviewed his report that had been provided to the Commission and stated staff supports the Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials, Landscaping and Lighting with the following four conditions:
(1) That the building materials and colors shall match building 2 in the development.
(2) That the appropriate Type C buffer shall be required along the southern property line for the length of construction in Phase 2. The buffering shall be increased in proportion to compensate for the minimal parking island landscaping.
(3) That the light poles shall be a maximum 20-feet in height.
(4) That the light fixture shall be GranVille Series Luminaire with three-inch decorative finial or ALN 445-H5 style.
Mr. Sicker stated he is the engineer on this project and he would like to point out that there are overhead power lines that would prevent putting in trees along the southern property line. Mr. Schultz stated he did not realize there were overhead power lines and that could preclude any trees from going in, but it would make sense to put shrubs in there. He stated it is C-3 adjacent to C-3, however, the C-3 to the south is a church, which is more of an institutional or residential use as opposed to commercial or office. Mr. Bosch clarified Mr. Schultz agreed the option of putting in shrubs would be appropriate. Mr. Schultz stated at some locations along the southern property line, the illumination of the lights exceed the City’s foot-candle requirements of 1.0 at commercial/office property lines. Mr. Bosch stated as we develop areas where you are trying to develop the walking community type of sense, the pole mount lights work well. He stated, however, in commercial developments where you are bound with some of the existing commercial areas you have cut offs all around. He stated perhaps if we reduce the height of the cut off lights, that might be acceptable. Mr. Schultz stated you can move lights around to make sure you don’t bleed into certain areas by moving them further away from residential properties. He stated his concern was that there were ten acres north of this project and it is possible we could get ten more buildings like this one, and it will be similar to the Creek Bend or Cross Creeks developments with the shared uses. Mr. Bosch stated the plan with the ten buildings that is front of the Commission has received preliminary approval. Mr. Schultz stated he was trying to maintain consistency and Mr. Bosch stated he agreed we need consistency, however, does it make sense to start that switch at this point or wait until the next development occurs. Mr. Nicholas stated his one concern over the light fixtures, when it gets back to the residential, would be the view out of the second story windows. Mr. Nicholas stated he was not satisfied with the lighting and could not support the proposed fixtures and would defer to staff’s recommendations. Mr. Schultz stated he felt it needed to remain consistent; whatever is on the back should be on the front. Mr. Fix clarified this lighting plan was for the first three buildings. Mr. Nicholas summarized this Commission was proposing that out of the proposed eight light poles, two would match what is on the existing property, and the remaining six, as the remainder of the property develops, will be the GranVille Series or similar to the ones at Creek Bend Business Park. Mr. Scott stated that would be acceptable. Mr. O’Brien moved to approve the Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials, Landscaping, and Lighting with staff recommendations and allowing for hedges or shrubs and the light poles as stated this evening; Mr. Blake seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Fix, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Bosch, Mr. O’Brien voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
4. REPORTS:
(1) BZA Report. Mr. Schultz stated there were no cases in November and one case is scheduled for December.
B. FCRPC - Lance Schultz. Mr. Schultz stated he did not attend the last meeting as he was at City Council.
5. OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Tree Commission. No report.
Mr. Hartmann stated at the last meeting Mr. Binkley had questioned bringing properties into compliance when they come in for Commercial Design Guidelines review. He stated his office had reviewed this issue and felt there was a way to do that, however, he would like to discuss this with staff prior to bringing it to the Commission.
6. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Nicholas moved to adjourn; Mr. O’Brien seconded the motion. Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Fix, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Kramer voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 7-0. The Planning and Zoning Commission adjourned at 9:35 P.M., December 13, 2005.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Lynda D. Yartin Lance A. Schultz
Municipal Clerk Director, Planning and Zoning