PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION
CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD
TUESDAY,
APRIL 11, 2006
WORK
SESSION
6:30
P.M.
OPEN DISCUSSION REGARDING COMMERCIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
Mr. Blake
opened the Work Session at 6:30 P.M., with the following Commission members
present: Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Binkley, Mr.
Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Sauer.
Mr. Kramer was absent. Others
present were Lance Schultz, Joe Henderson, and others.
Mr. Schultz reviewed the sections of the Commercial Design Guidelines dealing with signs and lighting. The Commission members concurred there were several areas they felt could be revised, such as requiring the sign colors for an entire development being limited to the same three colors, and the requirement for high pressure sodium lighting without a waiver from the Planning and Zoning Commission to allow other types of lighting, such as metal halite.
Mr. Schultz stated he would get with the Law Director and the engineer to review these suggestions, and determine if the revisions could be done in-house or if it would be best to contract with a consultant to review the current Guidelines and provide recommendations for the revisions.
There being nothing further, the Planning and Zoning Work Session closed at 7:25 P.M., April 11, 2006.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: ATTEST:
____________________________ _____________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, Lance A. Schultz,
Municipal Clerk Director, Planning and Zoning
CITY OF PICKERINGTON
PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION
TUESDAY,
APRIL 11, 2006
7:30
P.M.
1. ROLL CALL. Mr. Blake called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M., with roll call as follows: Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Sauer were present. No members were absent. Others present were: Lance Schultz, Lynda Yartin, Phil Hartmann, Joe Henderson, Dan Horne, Russell Henestofel, Sharon Worden, Janatta Hussey, Kantu Patel, Chetan Patel, and others.
2. A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF March 14, 2006, Public Hearing regarding text amendment relating to home occupations. Mr. Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Kramer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF March 14, 2006, Public Hearing regarding rezoning at 35 West Church Street. Mr. Kramer moved to approve; Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Blake voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF March 14, 2006, Regular Meeting. Mr. Kramer moved to approve; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Kramer, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
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 and Preliminary Development Plan for approximately 11.023 acres from R4 “Residential” and C3 “Community Commercial” to PC3 “Planned Community Commercial” at the northwest corner of S.R. 256 and Diley Road for a commercial development (JDC Real Estate Development LLC & PB Diley Road LLC) (TABLED, 02/14/06) Mr. Blake stated this item would remain on the table at the applicant’s request.
C. Review and request for motion to approve a Preliminary Plat for StoneCreek Station Commercial Subdivision located just south of Kohl’s for Equity Land Investment, LLC. Mr. Schultz stated at the last meeting, the Commission approved a preliminary development plan for the Equity development. He stated this is a three-step process; a preliminary development plan, a preliminary plat that is reviewed by both Planning and Zoning and Service Committee, and then a final plat that goes before this Commission, Service Committee, and then to City Council for approval. Mr. Schultz stated the developer is proposing to develop approximately 18 acres into two large parcels fronting the proposed Stone Creek Drive and two out lots fronting S.R. 256. Mr. Schultz stated Stone Creek Drive would be extended and would divide the property in a north/south orientation. Mr. Schultz reviewed his report presented to the Commission and stated staff supports the preliminary plat with the following 12 conditions:
(1) That the proposed plan shall be revised to meet the traffic access plan, building/parking setback requirements and buffering requirements.
(2) That the proposed development shall meet all other City development requirements.
(3) That a storm water easement with the adjacent property owner shall be prepared by the developer and approved by the City.
(4) That the traffic impact study shall comply with City Engineer requirements.
(5) That a cross easement access agreement with Kohl’s for delivery truck access and internal parking lot access shall be prepared by the developer and approved by the City.
(6) That an access easement between the northernmost out lot and the Pickerington Beverage Center shall be prepared by the developer and approved by the City.
(7) That the eastern most curb cut into the office development shall be eliminated.
(8) That if the western most curb cut into the office development were located on the adjacent property, the adjacent property owner shall have to sign the record plat and have an easement agreement recorded.
(9) That the boulevards, multi-use paths, intersection improvements, and engineering details pertaining to roadway width, turn lane locations, stacking space length, street light poles, etc., would need to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
(10) That the Board of Zoning appeals shall review and approve requested variances for the western boundary buffer setback, parking spaces for the office development, and building and parking setback variances east of the first curb cut on Stone Creek Drive.
(11) That the parking lot shall be in compliance with the interior landscaping requirements.
(12) That the buffer between the proposed detention pond and condominium units shall consist of six-foot high pine trees at installation, staggered 15-feet on center.
Mr. Schultz stated the first 11 conditions were approved last month, and the last condition regarding the buffer has been added. Mr. Schultz stated that condition has been included because the location of the detention pond will be adjacent; probably 20 feet from the condominiums behind Kohl’s, and we feel it is important to have a buffer between those units and the detention pond.
(Mr. Binkley requested he be excused from discussion on this item and withdrew from the hearing room.)
Mr. Dan Horne stated he was present representing the applicant and they agree with all of the conditions Mr. Schultz had listed. He stated further they are still working with Kohl’s and some of the other neighbors regarding the interconnectivity, and the additional condition for the buffering is not an issue. Mr. Horne clarified that a variance is required because the developer does not have the setback on their property, even if they have an agreement with the adjacent property owner. Mr. Horne stated he would be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Nicholas clarified that a detention basin is dry and restricts the runoff speed of storm water, and a retention pond is a standing body of water at all times. Mr. Nicholas moved to approve the preliminary plat with the 12 staff recommendations; Mr. Blake seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Blake, and Mr. Bosch voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
(Mr. Binkley returned to the meeting.)
D. Review and request for motion to approve a Comprehensive Sign Plan for a ground sign for Fairfield Federal Bank at 1515 Cross Creeks Boulevard. Mr. Henderson stated staff supports the request with the following three recommendations:
(1) That all painted surfaces shall have a matte finish.
(2) That the ground sign materials and colors shall match Dr. Duvall and Dr. Schone’s signs that are in the same PUD.
(3) That the ground sign shall be located outside the site triangle and five feet from the right-of-way.
Ms Sharon Worden stated she was present representing Fairfield Federal, and their original intention was to match Dr. Schone’s and Dr. Duvall’s signs, however, their architect has stated those signs are made of wood and in a short amount of time that will show wear. She stated he is recommending this sign be made of steel rather than wood. Mr. Blake stated he would question the use of steel for the sign. Mr. Schultz stated in the past we have allowed PVC material that looks like wood, and he cannot remember a steel sign being approved. Mr. Bosch stated a steel sign that large and that thick would be very expensive and Mr. Nicholas stated if it were painted it would peel as well. Mr. Nicholas ascertained Ms Worden would not have a problem if the sign were approved as a “wood look” sign with a matte finish. Mrs. Hammond requested Mr. Schulz provide Ms Worden with some of the manufacturers of the “wood look” signs that have been used in the old village area. Ms Worden stated she would appreciate that information. Mr. Nicholas moved to approve the Comprehensive Sign Plan with staff recommendations and an additional condition that the sign shall not be steel, but shall be a wood look or wood type signage as staff directs; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Mr. Blake clarified that would then leave the material open to wood or a vinyl product. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Kramer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
E. Review and request for motion to approve a Comprehensive Sign Plan for wall signage for Best Western at 1899 Winderly Lane. Mr. Henderson stated that ODOT has notified the applicant that he must remove his sign on the clock tower by I-70. Mr. Schultz clarified that only the owner of the parcel may advertise on that sign, so all of the panels except for the person who owns the clock tower must come down in the next few months. Mr. Schultz stated none of the tenants there own the structure, however, one of the tenants may purchase it. Mr. Henderson stated staff supports the Comprehensive Sign Plan with two conditions:
(1) That the wall signs shall have three colors; blue, red, and yellow.
(2) That the wall signs shall have a matte finish.
Mr. Kantu Patel stated he was the owner of the Best Western and the applicant. He stated he has spoken with the corporate offices and they have only one type of sign that they permit on the building, so he has no choice on the sign. Mr. Kramer clarified the sign currently on the clock tower has the same colors on the sign he is requesting. Mrs. Hammond clarified that the building would have two signs, one on the side to be visible from I-70, and one on the front of the building. Mr. Binkley stated there also was a monument sign on Winderly, but that cannot be seen from I-70. Mr. Kramer stated he felt this was the same circumstance the Commission dealt with last month with KFC. He stated in that case there was an existing sign that was outside of the three color guidelines, and in this case the existing sign on the clock tower is outside the three color guidelines. Mr. Kramer stated he would not support holding Mr. Patel to three colors. Mr. Binkley stated he agreed with Mr. Kramer, and he felt this was a building identity and not a ground mounted monument you would see with a retail center. Mr. Nicholas stated he would support it if the Commission were to approve the sign with the five colors, however, it would be reluctantly. Mr. Bosch stated he agreed with Mr. Kramer that this was the same circumstance as the sign approved for KFC last month, and he would support it based on that consistency. Mr. Kramer moved to approve the Comprehensive Sign Plan for wall signage at Best Western with staff recommendation (2) only; Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
F. Review and request for a motion to approve a Comprehensive Sign Plan for wall signage for Hampton Inn at 1890 Winderly Lane. Mr. Henderson stated this sign request was the same as the one just approved for Best Western, and they must remove their sign panel from the clock tower. Mr. Henderson stated staff supports the Comprehensive Sign Plan with the condition that the signs shall have a matte finish. Mr. Kantu Patel stated he is the applicant for this sign and he would be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Nicholas moved to approve with the staff recommendation; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Kramer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 7-0.
4. REPORTS:
(1) BZA Report. Mr. Schultz stated there were three cases last month, however, the variance request at 51 Homestead was tabled. He stated that would be considered on the agenda this month, along with a request for a deck variance. He stated the setback variance for the Embroidery Barn was approved last month.
B. FCRPC - Lance Schultz. Mr. Henderson stated he had attended this meeting and the extension request for Winding Creek, Section 5, Part 2, in Violet Township was approved, and a rezoning from R-1 (Residential) to S-1 (Professional and Service District) was approved in Violet Township.
6. OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Tree Commission. No report.
B. Commission Discussion. Mr. Blake stated there have been some instances regarding issues approved by this Commission and then applicant has come back to staff and requested changes. Mr. Blake stated he has requested these requests come back before the Commission so the Commission can address them. Mr. Schultz stated the current request deals with a buffer issue and the applicant has requested the fence be waived. He further stated a waiver must be approved by a three-fourth’s vote of this Commission.
7. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Nicholas moved to adjourn; Mr. Blake seconded the motion. Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Blake voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 7-0. The Planning and Zoning Commission adjourned at 8:20 P.M., April 11, 2006.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Lynda D. Yartin Lance A. Schultz
Municipal Clerk Director, Planning and Zoning