PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2006

PUBLIC HEARING

7:00 P.M.

OPEN DISCUSSION REGARDING A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR APPROXIMATELY 4.4 ACRES FOR A 38,100 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SR 204 AND FREEDOM WAY (SHOPPES AT YARMOUTH)

Mr. Blake opened the public hearing at 7:00 P.M., with the following Commission members present: Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Sauer. Mr. Nicholas and Mr. Binkley were absent. Others present were: Lance Schultz, Joe Henderson, Brenda VanCleave, Phil Hartmann, Stacey Bashore, Jack Reynolds, Pat Reade, Conan Stephens, Trevor Cooke, Craig Bohning and others.

Mr. Schultz gave a brief summary of the application and stated it would be discussed later in the agenda. Mr. Jack Reynolds stated he was there on behalf of Plaza Properties and would be happy to answer any questions.

Mr. Blake determined there were no comments either for or against the proposed code amendment.

There being nothing further, the public hearing closed at 7:05 P.M., December 12, 2006.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Stacey L. Bashore Lance A. Schultz

Deputy Municipal Clerk Director, Planning & Zoning

PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2006

PUBLIC HEARING

7:10 P.M.

OPEN DISCUSSION REGARDING A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR APPROXIMATELY 5.5 ACRES FOR A 34,480 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SR 204 AND FREEDOM WAY (HUNTER'S RUN PHASE V)

Mr. Blake opened the public hearing at 7:10 P.M., with the following Commission members present: Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Binkley and Mr. Sauer. Mr. Nicholas and Mr. Binkley were absent. Others present were: Lance Schultz, Joe Henderson, Brenda VanCleave, Phil Hartmann, Stacey Bashore, Jack Reynolds, Pat Reade, Craig Bohning, Conan Stephens, Trevor Cooke and others.

Mr. Schultz gave a brief summary of the application and stated it would be discussed later in the agenda. Mr. Jack Reynolds stated he would be happy to answer any questions.

Mr. Blake determined there were no comments either for or against the proposed code amendment.

There being nothing further, the public hearing closed at 7:13 P.M., December 12, 2006.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Stacey L. Bashore Lance A. Schultz

Deputy Municipal Clerk Director, Planning & Zoning

PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2006

PUBLIC HEARING

7:20 P.M.

OPEN DISCUSSION REGARDING OLDE VILLAGE DESIGN GUIDELINES COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PLAN AT 35 WEST CHURCH STREET

Mr. Blake opened the public hearing at 7:20 P.M., with the following Commission members present: Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Binkley and Mr. Sauer. Mr. Nicholas was absent. Others present were: Lance Schultz, Joe Henderson, Brenda VanCleave, Phil Hartmann, Stacey Bashore, Jack Reynolds, Pat Reade, Trevor Cooke, Conan Stephens, Craig Bohning and others.

Mr. Schultz gave a brief summary of the application and stated it would be discussed later in the agenda. Mr. Pat Reade stated he was there to answer any questions.

Mr. Blake determined there were no comments either for or against the proposed code amendment.

There being nothing further, the public hearing closed at 7:22 P.M., December 12, 2006.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Stacey L. Bashore Lance A. Schultz

Deputy Municipal Clerk Director, Planning & Zoning

PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2006

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: Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer were present. Mr. Binkley and Mr. Nicholas were absent. Others present were: Lance Schultz, Phil Hartmann, Joe Henderson, Brenda VanCleave, Stacey Bashore, Pat Reade, Jack Reynolds, Konan Stevens, Craig Bohning, Trevor Cooke, Eric Shaver and others.

2.

A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of November 14, 2006 Public Hearing regarding a Code Amendment to Sidewalk Standards. Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond and Mr. Blake voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0.

B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of November 14, 2006, Public Hearing regarding a Comprehensive Sign Plan at 48 West Columbus Street. Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond and Mr. Blake voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0.

C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of November 14, 2006, Regular Meeting Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Blake, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Bosch and Mr. Sauer voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0.

Mrs. Hammond stated she wanted to take the opportunity to thank the Planning and Zoning Commission for the good work that they do and that she felt like we don't do enough to thank the Boards and Commissions. She further stated she was extending the thank you to other commissions for all of their good ideas and hard work.

3. SCHEDULED MATTERS:

A. Review and request for a motion to approve Old Pickerington Village Design Guidelines Comprehensive Sign Plan for a Building Sign at 35 West Church Street. Mr. Henderson reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated staff supports the request with the following two conditions.

1. That colors shall match the colors on the building

2. That the sign shall have a matte finish

Mr. Reade stated he was the owner of the property and the sign is consistent with the other signs in the area. He further stated the sign matched the existing colors of the roof and building. Mr. Bosch moved to approved with staff recommendations; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mr. Bosch, Mrs. Hammond and Mr. Blake voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0.

B. Review and request for a motion to approve a Comprehensive Sign Plan for Ground Signage for Circle K at 29 Hill Road South. Mr. Schultz stated the applicant requested that this item be tabled until the January meeting. Mr. Bosch moved to table this matter; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0

C. Review and request for a motion to approve a Comprehensive Sign Plan for Ground Signage for C3 Church at 200 Hill Road South. Mr. Henderson reviewed the report as presented to the commission and stated staff supports with the following two conditions;

1. That the sign shall be limited to three colors and have a matte finish.

2. That the ground spot light shall not exceed 10-footcandles

Mr. Stevens stated someone in the church donated the sign and we went ahead and put it up and didn't think about coming in line with the codes. He further stated the sign is very aesthetically pleasing, and it also represents our brand of who we are and what we believe, but we understand the guidelines. Mr. Bosch stated we have worked long to hold to three colors and consistency is very important and is something he would enforce. Mr. Blake asked for clarification on corporate logs and Mr. Schultz stated in the proposed Sign Code revisions they would be permitted on 10% of the sign area and the logo would have to be copyrighted. Mr. Bosch suggested that the applicant work with staff to guide them through this process. Mr. Bosch moved to table this matter, Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Blake and Mr. Bosch voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0.

D. Review and request for a motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials, Landscaping and Lighting for Pickerington Assisted Living Facility. Mr. Henderson reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated that staff supports with the following 13 conditions:

1. That the 4.0-acre parcel to the north shall share the same curb cut as the subject property.

2. That when the 4.0-acre parcel to the north and 3.3 acre parcel to the east develops traffic volumes of the future use(s) shall be analyzed by the City Engineer to determine when turn lanes would be required.

3. 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.

4. That a dedication plat and legal description shall be prepared for the City to accept and record the right-of-way along SR 256 per the City Thoroughfare Plan.

5. That the trees shall be located on the west side of the sidewalk (minimum 4-ft from sidewalk).

6. That no trees shall be located within any easements.

7. That a 4-ft undulating mound with a continuous landscaping shall be installed along SR 256 with enhanced landscaping adjacent to the turn around area.

8. That the site plan shall be in compliance with the tree preservation ordinance.

9. That the proposed development shall comply with the City's Architectural Consultant recommendations.

10. That the proposed development shall comply with all City Engineer's requirements.

11. That the site plan shall be in compliance with the Violet Township Fire Department requirements.

12. That only one type of lamp light shall be used.

13. That lights shall be installed on the front of the garage.

Mr. Bohning stated he was with EMH&T and worked closely with staff and agreed with all of the conditions as set forth. Ms. VanCleave stated we have reviewed the construction drawings and we are working the engineer to get it all together. Mr. Bosch stated he echoed staff sentiments with only one type of light fixture and the goose neck style for all exterior lighting and he assumed it would be a similar type goose neck for the garages and Mr. Schultz stated those lights were not identified. Mr. Bosch stated he still would have loved to have seen this driveway lined up with the existing driveway. Mr. Blake asked if we have taken Mr. Stacy’s and the Fire Department's comments into consideration and Mr. Schultz stated we have. Mr. Schultz stated Mr. Nicholas had forwarded comments to him in his absence and Mr. Nicholas wanted to ensure that dimensional shingles would be used and that the heating units would be buffered. Mr. Bohning stated they could agree to the dimensional shingles and he believed the heating units were ground units. Mr. Blake stated he would like to address in staff recommendations the dimensional shingles and some type of landscape screening around any of the outside units and Mr. Schultz stated the landscape plan addressed that. Mr. Bosch stated there needs to be some more details on the colors and if we feel comfortable making that a condition that they work with staff on comparable colors and Mr. Schultz stated Condition No. 9 is an all encompassing condition that outlines what Mr. Stacy requested. Mr. Bosch wanted to point out the one about the one light fixture and you may want to have the light plan redone based upon the characteristics of that light to make sure we are in compliance and with the sidewalk along SR 256 he wanted to make sure with the escrow account that we take into account the possibility of a future turn lane. He further stated are we far enough along to know what we want for lighting in that area and Mr. Schultz stated not at this point and will address that if SR 256 is ever widened. Mr. Bosch suggested as we start linking this up to start thinking in areas where we have potential to have people walking there that we put in some minimal lighting especially at intersections. Mr. Sauer asked if there would be lights on the back side of the garage and Mr. Bohning stated the road will not be installed until the next development goes in and at that point we can address that.

Clerks Note: Mr. Binkley arrived at the meeting at 8:03 p.m.

Mr. Bosch moved to approve with staff recommendations including the discussed architectural dimensional shingles and including Mr. Stacy's comments; Mrs. Hammond seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley abstaining and Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Blake and Mr. Bosch voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0.

E. Review and request for a motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials and Landscaping for an 8,600 square foot Building Addition for the Pickerington Health Center at 475 Hill Road North. Mr. Henderson reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated that staff supports with the following eleven conditions:

1. That a dedication plat and legal description shall be prepared for the City to accept and record the 50-ft right-of-way along SR 256 per the City Thoroughfare Plan.

2. That the plans shall comply with the City's architectural consultant's recommendations.

3. That the development shall comply with Violet Township Fire Department requirements.

4. That all trees shall have a minimum 2.5 inch caliper at installation.

5. That the street trees shall be located on the west side of the proposed sidewalk on SR 256 (minimum 4-ft from sidewalk).

6. That the street trees shall be located on the south side of the sidewalk along Courtland lane (minimum 4-ft from sidewalk).

7. That a 4-ft undulating mound with continuous landscaping shall be installed along Hill Road North (SR 256).

8. That a 3-ft undulating mound with continuous landscaping shall be installed along Courtland Lane

9. That the middle parking island shall have two trees installed.

10. That the dumpster shall be screened with a stone wall to match the building

with wooden doors.

11. That all mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view.

Mr. Shaver stated he was an architect with Trinity Health Group and we are prepared to comply with the recommendations. Mr. Schultz stated we cannot require additional lighting and the sign package will be submitted for next months agenda. Mr. Binkley moved to approve with staff recommendations; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Sauer voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0.

F. Review and request for a motion to approve a Preliminary Development Plan for approximately 4.4 acres for a 38,100 square foot Retail Development located at the northeast corner of SR 204 and Freedom Way (Shoppes at Yarmouth). Mr. Schultz reviewed the

report as presented to the Commission and stated that staff supports with the following thirteen conditions:

1. That a traffic impact study shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the City Engineer.

2. That the curb cut along SR 204 shall be eliminated.

3. That the curb cut on Freedom Way shall be located a minimum 250-ft from SR 204.

4. That the curb cut on Yarmouth Drive shall be located adjacent to the Powershack curb cut.

5. The engineering details pertaining to roadway width, right-of-way, turn lane locations, deceleration lanes, traffic appurtenances, etc., would need to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.

6. That a four-foot wide sidewalk shall be installed along SR 204, Freedom Way and Yarmouth Drive.

7. That the proposed plan shall comply with the required building, parking setback and buffering requirements.

8. That the proposed development shall meet all other City development requirements.

9. That a 4-ft high undulating mount with continuous landscaping shall be installed along SR 204.

10. That a 2-3-ft high undulating mound with continuous landscaping shall be installed along Freedom Way and Yarmouth Drive.

11. That the site plan shall be in compliance with the tree preservation ordinance.

12. That the site plan shall be in compliance with the Violet Township Fire Department requirements.

13. That a final grading plan shall be reviewed by the City prior to Final Development Plan submittal.

Mr. Reynolds stated he was an attorney with Smith and Hale and we are proposing a curb cut of a right-in/right-out on SR 204 and two full service access points on Freedom Way and we are in the process of going through a traffic study to investigate the curb cut placements based on the traffic and spacing requirements in order to support our request for the curb cuts. He further stated we tried to be sensitive by adding the landscaping along Yarmouth over and above what was originally submitted and we will also do the investigations under the tree preservation ordinance in terms of what is removed and what is on site. He stated what we have is a preliminary layout with our curb cuts that have yet to be fully examined and we are looking at something along the line of what we built across the street. Mr. Bosch stated in his opinion with having two signalized access points he could not support a right-in/right-out or any type of access point in the middle. He further stated with any type of access management plan by having access to two signalized intersections, there is no reason to provide secondary access in between that. Mr. Bosch asked what is staff’s understanding of development along Freedom Way and Mr. Schultz stated the intent is the traffic impact study will give us more guidelines than our Access Management Plan. Mr. Bosch asked the staff engineers when they review the traffic impact study to look at the full build-out of

Freedom Way and that the requirements of the turn lane coming out will be based on all of that. Ms. VanCleave stated that is why we are going to stick with our current Access Management Plan because it did look at the entire area. Mr. Bosch asked what the plan said

as far as the first access point and Ms. VanCleave stated it said one access point on Freedom Way and to make it further back. Mr. Schultz stated our Access Management Plan was adopted by Council in September and it states that a Traffic Impact Study could be approved by our Engineer that differentiates from the plan and the other purpose of the Traffic Impact Study is to make sure the lights on Freedom Way, Yarmouth and SR 256 and SR 204 are synchronized. Mr. Reynolds stated the Traffic Impact Study gives us the opportunity to make our case for what we would like to see. Mr. Schultz stated this is very preliminary and we will work out the details as this moves forward. Mr. Binkley asked for a point of clarification on the distance of the first access off of SR 204 along Freedom Way and Mr. Reynolds stated we moved it a little to provide more gap and it is about 175 feet to bring it in at a greater angle. Mr. Bosch moved to approve with staff recommendations; Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Hammond and Mr. Blake voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0.

G. Review and request for motion to approve a Preliminary Development Plan for approximately 5.5 acres for a 34,480 square foot retail development located at the southwest corner of SR 204 and Freedom Way (Hunters Run Phase V) Mr. Schultz reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated that staff supports with the following 13 conditions:

1. That a traffic impact study shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the City Engineer.

2. That the curb cut along SR 204 shall be eliminated.

3. That the curb cut on Freedom Way shall be located adjacent to the curb cut to Hunters Run Phase IV.

4. The engineering details pertaining to roadway width, right-of-way, turn lane locations, deceleration lanes, traffic appurtenances, etc., would need to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.

5. That a four-foot sidewalk shall be installed along SR 204 and Freedom Way.

6. That the proposed plan shall comply with the required building, parking setback, buffering and landscaping requirements.

7. That the proposed plan shall comply with the required building, parking setback, buffering and landscaping requirements.

8. That a 4-ft high undulating mound with continuous landscaping shall be installed along SR 204.

9. That a 2-3-ft high undulating mound with continuous landscaping shall be installed along Freedom Way.

10. That a grading plan shall be reviewed by the City prior to final development plan submittal.

11. That the site plan shall be in compliance with the tree preservation ordinance.

12. That the site plan shall be in compliance with the Violet Township Fire Department requirements.

13. That the developer shall prepare and record an easement with the City to allow public parking for the cemetery.

Mr. Schultz stated the primary issue with this site is the parking and staff has requested that they provide the appropriate setbacks for parking with mounding and it appears to be over parked, so unless they can give us justification we can't support that. Mr. Reynolds stated he was there on behalf of Plaza Properties and we have made a couple of alterations to the site plan, but it is basically what was proposed earlier. He further stated the footprint that we have this evening is about 7,000 square feet smaller, so it is about 31,000 square feet instead of 38,000. He further stated we are proposing one right-in/right-out off of SR 204 and we are also proposing a curb cut out of the backside of Marcus Theater in order to provide a relief outlet. Mr. Reynolds stated the reason we kept the setback the same is that when we went through Hunters Ridge Phase 4 we requested a variance because of the right-of-way along SR 204. He further stated the right of way is really extensive in terms of its intrusion into the south side of SR 204. Mr. Schultz added at that time the developer did dedicate some right of way to the City and we worked together on that. Mr. Bosch stated as far as the traffic access the first thought would be to protect the functional area of the intersection there, but he would be willing to look at that. Ms. VanCleave asked that their engineer contact her before they get too far on the stormwater, because there have been some concerns with the existing detention basin. Mr. Binkley moved to approve with staff recommendations; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Blake, Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Sauer voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0.

H. Review and request for a motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials for Storage Shed for Ebright’s Landscaping Business at 11360 Milnor Road. Mr. Schultz reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated that staff supports with the following two conditions:

1. That the storage shed shall be constructed as submitted.

2. That the storage shed shall have a non-continuous foundation.

Mr. Ebright stated we have a storage area where we keep the mulch and cover it with a tarp and it has become a hassle. He further stated we would like to put a storage roof over that area and close it off on 3 sides, but leave the front open. He stated we will make it blend nicely with the other buildings because we are not trying to commercialize the area. Mr. Blake asked if the adjoining property owners needed to be notified and Mr. Schultz stated this process does not require the neighbors to be notified. Mr. Binkley commended them for making it look nice. Mr. Bosch moved to approve with staff recommendations; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch and Mr. Binkley voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0.

4. REPORTS:

A. Planning & Zoning Director - Lance Schultz

(1) BZA Report- Mr. Schultz stated BZA approved two Equity projects for the TIF and we may see construction after the first of the year. He further stated the plat has

final approval next week and the project manager hopes to have some buildings up by July. Mr. Bosch asked about bringing in the next signal at Stonecreek and Mr. Schultz stated he couldn't answer that, but would discuss this issue with the staff engineer.

FCRPC- Mr. Henderson stated there was a presentation from the County about the new sewage guidelines at the State level. He further stated there was one zoning amendment in Violet Township that was changing from R2 to C2.

5. OTHER BUSINESS

A. Tree Commission- No Discussion

B. Commission Discussion- Mr. Blake asked how we get the word out about our sign

standards and Mr. Schultz stated we are working on a development brochure and we have the

sign code requirements on the website. Mrs. Hammond stated she had spoken with four other

Council members regarding changing the date of Service Committee meeting and most of

them are in agreement and that should eliminate at least one to two months from the process.

Mr. Blake stated the aerial view that was provided helped.

C. Discuss Revised Sign Standards- Mr. Schultz reviewed the revised sign standards with the Commission. He stated on Community Activity signage we would require administrative approval through a zoning certificate. Mr. Hartmann stated in other communities we haven't had backlash from the non-profits and an abuse of that type of sign, so that is why we came up with it and think we have to explain it to them. Mr. Schultz when this goes to a public hearing we can send a notice to some of the people who would be affected. Mr. Schultz stated our Code does not prohibit neon signs, this would only allow neon signs to show whether the business is open or closed and it would not allow any other advertising. Mr. Hartmann stated the current neon signs would be considered as a pre-existing non-conforming use and would be allowed to remain as long as they are in compliance with current code. Mr. Schultz stated the revised standards would allow for two colors only on the ground signs with background and lettering. Mr. Hartmann stated other communities are stricter. Mr. Binkley stated my biggest issue with the sign code is limiting a strip retail development. Mr. Sauer stated he was a big proponent of businesses having their own identity. Mr. Schultz stated we will have the attorneys review the sign revisions and it will likely go to a public hearing next month and we will give public hearing notices to the non-profits.

D. Planning Studies- Mr. Schultz stated we will likely be getting a scope of work and a time scheduled to have a work session sometime in January or February. Mr. Blake asked if other communities had separate Public Hearings and Mr. Hartmann stated they generally do not have two hearings because there is really no need for it. Mr. Schultz stated we will check on changing it.

6. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Bosch moved to adjourn; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Mrs. Hammond, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Blake, Mr. Sauer, and Mr. Binkley voted "Aye." Motion carried 5-0. The Planning and Zoning Commission adjourned at 9:26 P.M., December 12, 2006.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

Stacey L. Bashore, Lance A. Schultz,

Deputy Municipal Clerk Director, Planning & Zoning