CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD
TUESDAY,
JULY 11, 2006
PUBLIC
HEARING
7:10
P.M.
OPEN DISCUSSION
REGARDING OLDE PICKERINGTON VILLAGE DESIGN GUIDELINES AMENDED COMPHENSIVE SIGN
PLAN AT 5 WEST COLUMBUS STREET (SASHA LI)
Mr. Blake
opened the public hearing at 7:10 P.M., with the following Commission members
present: Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Sauer. Mrs. Hammond and Mr. Binkley were absent. Others present were: Lynda Yartin, Lance Schultz, Joe Henderson,
Phil Hartmann, Brenda VanCleave, Tim Hansley, Rick Krigbaum, Rob Meyer, Dan
Roach, Dave Rossman, Mara Campa, Greg Summerfelt, and others.
Mr. Schultz
stated this dealt with an amended sign plan for the Blue Moon Shoppe. He stated the applicant is proposing to
change the wall sign and ground sign for one of the businesses utilizing the
building.
Mr. Blake
determined there were no comments either for or against the proposed
rezoning.
There being
nothing further, the public hearing closed at 7:12 P.M., July 11, 2006.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
____________________________ ___________________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk Lance Schultz, Director, Planning & Zoning
CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD
TUESDAY,
JULY 11, 2006
PUBLIC
HEARING
7:20
P.M.
OPEN DISCUSSION
REGARDING REZONING AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR APPROXIMATELY 4.22 ACRES FROM
C-3 (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL) TO P-O (PLANNED OFFICE DISTRICT) FOR PICKERINGTON
ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY FOR HOLIDAY RETIREMENT CORP., LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE
OF S.R. 256 JUST SOUTH OF THE PICKERINGTON HEALTH CENTER
Mr. Blake
opened the public hearing at 7:20 P.M., with the following Commission members
present: Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr.
Kramer. Mr. Binkley was absent. Others present were: Lynda Yartin, Lance Schultz, Joe Henderson,
Phil Hartmann, Brenda VanCleave, Tim Hansley, Rick Krigbaum, Rob Meyer, Dan
Roach, Dave Rossman, Mara Campa, Greg Summerfelt, and others.
Mr. Schultz
stated the applicant was proposing a 67,000 square foot, 86 suite, assisted
living facility. He stated this
Commission approved the preliminary development plan in May and Service
Committee approved it in June.
Mr. Dan Roach
stated he was present representing the applicant and he would be happy to
answer any questions the Commission members may have.
Mr. Rob Meyer
stated he was present representing the property owner to the south of this
parcel and he wanted to make the Commission aware that they have discussed the
access issue with Mr. Roach and they agree to work together on the access
issue.
Mr. Blake
determined there were no comments either for or against the proposed
rezoning.
There being
nothing further, the public hearing closed at 7:23 P.M., July 11, 2006.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
____________________________ ___________________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk Lance Schultz, Director, Planning & Zoning
PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION
TUESDAY,
JULY 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: Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Kramer, and Mr. Blake were present. Mr. Binkley was absent. Others present were: Lynda Yartin, Lance Schultz, Phil Hartmann, Joe Henderson, Dave Rossman, Brenda VanCleave, Tim Hansley, Rick Krigbaum, Dan Roach, Mary Campa, Greg Summerfelt, and others.
2. A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF June 13, 2006, Public Hearing regarding rezoning at 11460, 11438 and 11390 Milnor Road (Ebright property). Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Kramer, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
B. APPROVAL
OF MINUTES OF June 13, 2006, Public Hearing regarding rezoning at 11360 Milnor
Road (Ebright property). Mr. Kramer
moved to approve; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mr.
Kramer, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mrs. Hammond, and Mr. Blake voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF June 13, 2006, Regular Meeting. Mr. Blake moved to approve; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Mr. Nicholas stated in Item 3.C. in the minutes, Mr. Bosch moved to approve with staff recommendations and with the newly submitted design for the awning including signage and requiring a fabric awning. He stated he would just like to clarify the word “fabric.” Mr. Nicholas stated the applicant’s submittal stated vinyl and this Commission stated fabric. He stated for clarification of the motion, this Commission did not want a plastic awning; it should be fabric. Mr. Bosch stated that was the intent of his motion. Mr. Schultz stated the staff conditions clearly state a fabric awning, however, we did notice later that the design submitted at the meeting last month does state vinyl. Mr. Blake clarified with Mr. Hartmann that as long as our minutes state the motion was for approval with the staff conditions and a fabric awning it should be clear what the intent was. Mr. Bosch further stated if he recalled, the motion was to approve the design of the awning on the new exhibit, not the materials. Mr. Blake stated with that clarification he would ask for approval of the minutes. Roll call was taken with Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Kramer, and Mrs. Hammond voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
3. SCHEDULED MATTERS:
A. 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.
B. Review and request for motion to approve Olde Pickerington Village Design Guidelines amended Comprehensive Sign Plan at 5 West Columbus Street (Sasha Li). Mr. Schultz stated the owner is proposing to change the wall sign and ground sign for one of the businesses utilizing the building. Mr. Schultz stated staff supports the request with the following two conditions:
1. That the ground and wall sign shall be limited to the three colors identified; brown, pink, and white.
2. That the ground and will signs shall have a matte finish.
Mr. Kramer clarified the business owner did not have any problems with the conditions listed by staff. Mr. Kramer moved to approve with staff recommendations; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Kramer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
C. Review and request for motion to approve a rezoning and Final Development Plan for approximately 4.22 acres from C-3 (Community Commercial) to PO (Planned Office District) for Pickerington Assisted Living Facility for Holiday Retirement Corp., located on the west side of S.R. 256 just south of the Pickerington Health Care Center. Mr. Schultz stated this Commission approved the preliminary development plan at their May meeting and Service Committee approved it at their June meeting. He stated if approved this evening, it will go before the Service Committee in August, and likely be before City Council in September. Mr. Schultz reviewed his report as presented to the Commission and stated staff supports the request 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 the 4.0-acre parcel to the north shall share the same curb cut as the subject property.
4. That when the 4.0-acre parcel to the north and the 3.3-acre parcel to the east develop, traffic volumes of the future use(s) shall be analyzed by the City Engineer to determine when turn lanes would be required.
5. That $82,575 shall be paid to the City for the establishment of an escrow account for a turn lane prior to construction drawing approval.
6. That a dedication plat and legal description shall be prepared for the City to accept and record the right-of-way along S.R. 256 per the City Thoroughfare Plan.
7. That six-foot wide sidewalks shall be installed along S.R. 256.
8. That the front yard parking setback adjacent to the entrance turnaround area shall be reduced to ten feet with additional buffering if the developer dedicates 50 feet of right-of-way.
9. That a four-foot undulating mound with appropriate landscaping shall be installed along S.R. 256.
10. That the site plan shall be in compliance with the tree preservation ordinance.
11. That the site plan shall be in compliance with Fire Department requirements.
12. That the sanitary reimbursement fee shall be paid to the City prior to construction drawing approval.
Mr. Schultz stated after the rezoning process this project will come back before this Commission for Certificates of Appropriateness for site plan, building, landscaping, lighting, and signage.
Mr. Dan Roach stated he was present representing the applicant, and he would be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Roach stated this facility is appropriate for the area, and he has reviewed the staff recommendations and has no objections to them. Mr. Bosch clarified the location of the access is based on the topography, and since the parcel will be split in two this access will also serve the four acre parcel to the north. Mr. Schultz further stated there are four single-family houses on the east side, across the street, and if they would develop commercially, this would be the access location for them. Mr. Hartmann stated it was his understanding the developer was willing to donate the 50-foot right-of-way if it should be needed by the City, and if that happens the front yard parking setback adjacent to the entrance turnaround are would be reduced by ten feet. He stated he would like that condition to be reworded so it did not sound like it was the developer’s choice to dedicate it to prevent any future confusion. Mr. Hartmann stated he would recommend Condition No. 8 read: “That the front yard parking setback adjacent to the entrance turnaround area shall be reduced to 10-feet with additional buffering because the developer is dedicating 50-feet of right-of- way in lieu of the required 40-feet of right-of-way.” Mr. Schultz stated he felt that wording would prevent any confusion. Mr. Blake moved to approve with staff recommendations including the reworded Condition No. 8; Mr. Kramer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Kramer, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
D. Review and request for motion to approve an amended Comprehensive Sign Plan for ground signage for SkyBank at 126 Postage Drive. Mr. Schultz stated he would like to clarify the agenda inadvertently stated the approval was for wall signage, and it should read ground signage. Mr. Henderson stated the applicant is proposing to amend the comprehensive sign plan to add a ground sign and a directional sign along S.R. 256 just north of Postage Drive. Mr. Henderson reviewed his report as presented to the Commission and stated staff supports the Comprehensive Sign Plan with the following five conditions:
1. That the ground signs shall have three colors.
2. That the ground and directional signs shall have a matte finish.
3. That the ground sign shall be located outside the site triangle and five feet from the right-of-way.
4. That the height of the ground sign shall not exceed ten feet above the elevation of the parking lot grade (854.5 feet) adjacent to the sign.
5. That the directional sign shall be in a monument style and shall be located on the interior island just west of the drive-thru.
Mr. Greg Summerfelt stated he was present representing the applicant and he would be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Summerfelt stated he had reviewed staff’s conditions and he did not see any problems with them. Mrs. Hammond clarified the sign would have three colors although the rendering shows four colors. Mr. Blake requested a copy of the sign showing the three colors be provided for the record. Mr. Nicholas clarified the directional sign would be blue, white, and grey. Mr. Nicholas moved to approve with staff conditions, and with the condition that the brick shall match the building brick; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Kramer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 6-0.
4. REPORTS:
(1) BZA Report. Mr. Schultz stated the Board approved three variances in June, and they have one deck variance request on their July agenda.
B. FCRPC - Lance Schultz. Mr. Henderson stated the Regional Planning Commission approved one variance, one final plat, and one preliminary plat waiver.
5. OTHER BUSINESS:
Mr.
Nicholas stated this Commission in the past has requested the screening of HVAC
on roof tops, but there are several that are visible, mainly from housing
areas. Mr. Nicholas stated he would
suggest that in the Commercial Design Guidelines we address the screening both
on the roof and on the ground. Mr.
Nicholas further stated he has noticed some buildings where you see the vents
sticking up through the roof. He stated
these pipes are white, galvanized, or a totally different color than the roof
material itself. Mr. Nicholas continued
there are communities that have a provision those pipes and vents, etc., if
paintable, to paint them to match the roof color. He stated we may want to discuss this issue
as well.
A. Tree Commission. No report.
B. Commission Discussion. No items were brought forward.
Mr. Schultz stated Mr. Rick Krigbaum from “Signs by Tomorrow” has graciously volunteered to give a brief presentation to the Commission to address some of the sign concerns and issues that this Commission has been encountering.
Mr. Krigbaum gave a brief presentation to the Commission regarding sign construction, materials, colors, etc. Mr. Krigbaum answered various questions by Commission members.
6. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Nicholas moved to adjourn; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Kramer voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 6-0. The Planning and Zoning Commission adjourned at 9:10 P.M., July 11, 2006.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
___________________________ ___________________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk Lance Schultz, Director, Planning & Zoning