PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2007

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: Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Bosch were present. Mr. Sauer was absent. Others present were: Lance Schultz, Joe Henderson, Brenda VanCleave, Steve Smith, Stacey Bashore, Eric Shaver, Dan O'Donnell and others.

2. A. APPROVAL OF MNUTES OF December 12, 2006 Public Hearing regarding a Preliminary Development Plan for a 38,100 square foot retail development on the northeast corner of SR 204 and Freedom Way (Shoppes at Yarmouth). Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas abstaining and Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake and Mr. Nicholas voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0.

B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF December 12, 2006, Public Hearing regarding a Preliminary Development Plan for a 34,480 square foot retail development on the southwest corner of SR 204 and Freedom Way (Hunters Run Phase V) Mr. Binkley moved to approve; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas abstaining and Mr. Bosch, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Blake voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0.

C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of December 12, 2006, Public Hearing regarding a Comprehensive Sign Plan at 35 West Church Street. Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Bosch and Mr. Binkley voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0.

D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of December 12, 2006, Regular Meeting Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas abstaining and Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Hackworth and Mr. Blake voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0.

E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of January 9, 2007, Regular Meeting. Mr. Hackworth moved to approve; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas abstaining and Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Binkley and Mr. Hackworth voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0.

3. SCHEDULED MATTERS:

A. Review and request for a motion to appoint a Vice Chairperson Mr. Blake stated he would like to move this item to the end of the meeting if there are no objections and there were none.

B. Review and request for a motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Lighting for an 8,600 square foot building addition for the Pickerington Health Center at 475 Hill Road North. Mr. Schultz reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated staff supports the request with the following two conditions:

1. That the light pole and fixtures shall match the existing lights.

2. That the illumination of the lights shall comply with City foot-candle requirements.

Mr. Shaver stated they would comply with the recommendation. Mr. Schultz clarified staff is supporting this type of light pole fixture because that is what they have presently on the site. Mr. Nicholas clarified that the colors would match. Mr. Hackworth asked about sidewalks on S.R. 256 and Mr. Schultz stated the sidewalks would be required. Mr. Schultz further stated there would be sidewalks in front of the assisted living facility, however there will be a gap at the undeveloped lot between the subject property and the assisted living facility. Mr. Nicholas moved to approve with staff recommendations; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch and Mr. Binkley voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0.

C. Review and request for a motion to approve a revised Comprehensive Sign Plan for Building Signage for Dippin Dots located in Hunters Run Phase IV just north of Marcus Cinemas. Mr. Henderson reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated that staff supports with the following conditions:

1. That the three previously approved colors, brilliant green (376c), red (2283) and white shall be the only colors used for the building.

2. That the brown squares in the gabled portion of the corner building façade shall remain.

3. That all signage shall have a matte finish.

Mr. Dan O'Donnell introduced himself as the franchisee for the Dippin Dots and stated he understood the sign code, but as a franchisee they have franchise colors and fonts that they are asked to adhere to and consistency is very important. He further stated it is imperative because they only have two colors that they have an option on with those being teal or white. He stated the biggest issue is the cream background and if we had a dark background the white sign would not be an issue. Mr. O'Donnell stated as a business owner it is very important to have sign recognition and what we proposed was a two fold process where the sign would be teal by day and white at night and there is technology that supports this. He further stated the matter of the brown square on the façade is secondary to them and they could put their sign over it. Mr. Blake clarified that the sign would be internally illuminated so that it looks white in the evening. Mr. Schultz stated the Code allows the Commission to have discretion to revise the sign plans as you feel appropriate. Mr. Smith clarified that in our opinion Cities do have the ability to impose requirements such as three colors, there is no case law in our district which addresses this issue. He further stated his only concern was with the owner of the center for which those conditions were originally imposed because they are not a part of this application nor do we have anything in writing that they would consent to some deviation to what was originally approved, so he would recommend that we have something from the owner that would consent to such a change. Mr. O'Donnell stated he had received an e-mail from Plaza Properties stating they are approving the use of the teal sign. Mr. Blake clarified that all of the mechanics of the sign would be internally hidden in the building and then clarified that the trimcap would be white. Mr. Bosch clarified we are still within our guidelines with the two colors. Mr. Bosch asked for clarification on the exact color of the teal and Mr. O'Donnell stated the official name is pantone color 3145c. Mr. Bosch moved to approve with staff recommendations 2 and 3 and with the addition that the new color is pantone color 3145c and with the addition that there is a written agreement from Plaza Properties to this modification and with the addition that the internal illumination of the sign would be white; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0.

D. Review and request for a motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials, Landscaping and Lighting for Max & Erma's located on S.R. 256 just north of proposed Stone Creek Drive extension. Mr. Henderson reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated that staff supports with the following ten conditions:

1. That the six parking spaces closest to the access drive shall be removed for traffic safety reasons.

2. That a sidewalk shall be installed to connect the site to the public sidewalk.

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

4. That the roof shall be asphalt shingles.

5. That the patio shall have a fabric canopy.

6. That the patio furniture shall be black metal furniture with a black metal fence.

7. That a 3-4-ft high undulating mound with continuous landscaping shall be installed along Hill Road North (S.R. 256).

8. That a 2-3-ft high undulating mound with continuous landscaping shall be installed along Stonecreek Drive.

9. That a 2-3 ft high undulating mound with continuous landscaping shall be installed along the west side of the parcel between the parking lot and the access drive but not within the extended site triangle.

10. That the light fixtures shall be Granville Series Luminaire or similar style that matches Huntington Bank and Sky Bank.

Larry Fornay stated he was with Max & Erma's and the site plans would be revised to accommodate Staff Recommendations #1 and #2. Mr. Fornay passed out photos of a identical building that they are proposing with a few minor exceptions. He further stated they understood Recommendations # 7, 8 and 9, and those changes will be made on the drawings when they resubmit. Mr. Fornay stated he met directly with Mr. Stacy to clear up confusion and Mr. Schultz added he met with Mr. Stacy as well and he was fine with the building materials as submitted. Mr. Bosch clarified that Mr. Stacy's comments regarding building materials have been met. Mr. Schultz stated he would keep staff recommendation number three the way it was and have Mr. Stacy revise his memo to reflect what we have discussed per the drawings submitted tonight. Mr. Hackworth raised a question regarding the mounding with landscaping in the site triangle and Mr. Fornay stated their landscape architects would work directly with staff on it. Mr. Fornay requested that for Recommendation Number 4 the standing seam metal be approved for the roof and also requested for Recommendation 5 a roof in lieu of a fabric canopy over the patio. Mr. Smith stated if it was a roof and with all of the roof structures on the building the Commercial Design Guidelines does permit either asphalt or standing seam metal and the Guidelines have a section on materials for awnings, however there was no definition of what constituted an awning as distinguished from a roof, so that was open for interpretation. Mr. Schultz stated the photos depicted what was being proposed more than the submitted drawings and after reviewing them he would agree that what was over the patio would likely be considered a roof structure. Mr. Fornay proposed an alternate lighting fixture to Recommendation No. 10 and handed out information on the alternate fixture and Mr. Smith suggested that for Recommendation No. 10 change the wording to say similar to the surrounding businesses and subject to staff approval. Mr. Blake clarified that the mechanicals on top of the building would be shielded. Mr. Schultz requested that the drawings be updated to depict where the fiber cement siding and EIFS would be. Mr. Binkley asked about landscape screening for the electric transformer and Mr. Fornay stated he would be meeting with the electric company and they may be changing the location of the transformer. Mr. Nicholas asked for clarification on the rear elevation for the coolers if those would be EIFS and Mr. Fornay stated they would not be EIFS, they would be metal panels and they would be a little smoother than EIFS. Mr. Schultz clarified that right now the drawing shows EIFS, but they are requesting metal for the coolers shown on the rear elevation. Mr. Nicholas clarified that the glass in the tower would be directly backlit. Mr. Nicholas suggested having stone on the main building corners to break up the mass of the building and Mr. Fornay stated it was difficult to see where to stop the stone. Mr. Nicholas suggested the Commission look at the breaking up the mass of the building at the next meeting as the only item. Mr. Smith stated the way to approve it was with some form of condition because the Commission can't piece out parts of the exterior, make the condition subject to staff's approval, because if it is not approved they would be up for discussion next time. Mr. Nicholas recommended a condition that the applicant and staff work to achieve the goal of breaking up the mass of the building. Mr. Blake asked for clarification on attaching the fiber cement siding to the coolers and Mr. Fornay stated they could attach it to them and they would customize a design for it. Mr. Nicholas clarified that based on the renderings submitted this evening that the black band would still be on the freezer units even after the fiber cement siding. Mr. Nicholas summarized that the applicant work with staff to come up with solutions to the concerns of the Commission. Mr. Blake summarized the concerns of the Commission as being fiber cement siding on the cooler area and working with staff to break up the large mass of the building and with the added condition that the mechanicals be screened from public view. Mr. Bosch asked for clarification on Condition No. 10 handling the lighting and Mr. Smith stated the suggestion was that the light fixtures be a similar style to adjacent businesses as approved by staff and Mr. Schultz stated we are also going to strike conditions four and five and number three will be revised as per the submitted site plans with the revisions that had been discussed. Mr. Bosch moved to approve with staff recommendations and with the following additions; that fiber cement siding be applied to the freezer units in the rear of the building; that Staff Recommendation 10 be revised requiring the light fixtures be a similar style to adjacent businesses as approved by staff; that Staff Recommendations 4 and 5 be removed; that Recommendation 3 be revised as per the submitted site plans with the revisions that had been discussed; and with the addition of Staff Recommendation 11 that all mechanicals be screened from public view; Mr. Nicholas seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas and Mr. Bosch voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0.

E. Review and request for a motion to approve Comprehensive Sign Plan for Ground and Building Signage for Max & Erma's located on S.R. 256 just north of proposed Stone Creek Drive extension. Mr. Henderson reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated staff supports with the following seven conditions:

1. That the brick on the ground sign shall match the brick used for the Max and Erma's building.

2. That all signage and graphics shall have a matte finish.

3. That the ground sign shall be located 5-ft from the property line and outside the site triangle.

4. That the height of the ground sign shall not exceed 9-ft above the elevation of the sidewalk grade adjacent to the sign.

5. That all ground and wall signage shall be limited to three colors.

6. That the wall signs shall be internally illuminated.

7. That the raceways for the wall signs shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent wall.

Mr. Fornay stated they intend to comply with staff recommendations and clarified that recommendation number 3 should state a minimum of 5-ft from the property line. Mr. Nicholas clarified that the sign above the door would be round. Mr. Nicholas asked about the ground signage and Mr. Schultz stated this sign is similar to the Kohl's sign. Mr. Bosch moved to approve with staff recommendation: Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake, and Mr. Nicholas voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0.

Clerks note: The Commission recessed at 9:38 p.m. and reconvened at 9:42 p.m.

F. Review and request for a motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan Building Materials, Landscaping and Lighting for Diley Towne Center a 50,308 square foot retail development located on the northwest corner of S.R. 256 and Diley Road (DiCesare/Buerk Property). Mr. Schultz reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated staff supports with the following 16 conditions:

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

2. That out lots 1, 2 and 3 shall have access from the internal access road only.

3. That the developer shall widen Old Diley Road from the terminus of the Kroger access road (T&M Pickerington LLC property) to the main entrance of the subject retail development. If the subject construction cost is less than one-third of the estimated cost to widen Old Diley Road (roadway widening costs need to be approved by the City Engineer), then the remainder of the money shall be set aside for an escrow fund for widening the remainder of Old Diley Road.

4. That the construction drawings for the Old Diley Road widening shall address all storm water engineering issues and details.

5. That a dedication plat and legal description shall be prepared for the City to accept and record the right-of-way as needed along S.R. 256, Diley Road, Windmiller Drive and Old Diley Road per the City Engineer.

6. That a four foot wide sidewalk shall be extended along S.R. 256, constructed along the south side of Old Diley Road to connect to the S.R. 256 sidewalk and a four-foot sidewalk extended along Diley Road.

7. That all retail buildings and out lots shall be connected by sidewalk to the City public sidewalks.

8. That the dumpsters shall be screened with brick that matches the building and have wooden doors.

9. That the building materials and colors of the brick, stone, EFIS, asphalt shingle, storefront window glazing, etc., shall be identified and approved by staff.

10. That a water table shall extend the entire length of the front elevation of each building.

11. That the rear elevation shall be constructed of brick and EFIS instead of block.

12. That the awnings shall be canvas or other similar fabric.

13. That the pitched roofs shall have asphalt shingles.

14. That all of the light pole fixtures shall be a gooseneck style and the wall mounted fixtures shall be compatible.

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

16. That the sanitary reimbursement fee shall be paid prior to construction drawing approval.

Mr. Buerk stated he represented the development and there were two items they would like to identify for consideration. He requested clarification on recommendation number 6 and Mr. Schultz stated the remainder of the road will be constructed by the future developers north of this site or potentially by the City. The construction of the sidewalk is a moving target because the developer is widening one-third of the road and the remainder of the road may be widened in the future by adjacent owners as the sites develop. Mr. Binkley clarified if they have already agreed to a certain monetary amount and they are already paying one-third of it now that would include the sidewalks for that portion. Mr. Bosch clarified that they did not want to build the sidewalk to serve no purpose and if they could agree to a cost it should be built when they build the curb and gutter section and have it set up in an escrow account to be used for that project. Mr. Schultz clarified there would be sidewalks around three of the four sides of the site and one-third1/3 of the fourth side. He further stated his opinion was it should be done as the road gets widened, because once this side starts to develop there will likely be pressure to for the adjacent properties to develop. Mr. Binkley asked for point of clarification on where the six foot sidewalks would go and Mr. Schultz stated along S.R. 256 and Old Diley Road to connect to S.R. 256, but the Commission has the ability to recommend four foot sidewalks. Mr. Buerk stated we are ready to comply with Recommendation 11 that would require brick and EIFS along the rear elevation, however staff is also recommending considerable landscape screening along the rear of the building, so if we are going to put the extra money into the brick then let's not screen it. Mr. Schultz stated there are three reasons we are requiring brick: 1) there was a six to ten foot parking variance approved where they are closer to the road; 2) the site is surrounded by four roads and other developments in the City in the past have been required to have four sided architecture; 3) the enhanced buffer has been reduced to ten feet and the enhanced buffering is subjective and we could review that as we move through the process and the variance is going to lessen the buffering considerably. Mr. Buerk stated they were willing to use a combination of the enhanced brick and EIFS in replacement of split face block and it is also intention that signage will be on the rear of the building. Mr. Blake clarified that on Recommendation 8 he would like the addition of metal frame gates that are encased with wood. Mr. Nicholas asked for clarification on where the different colors of brick would be used and Mr. Buerk stated the higher features would be the darker brick and the lighter brick is on the lower features. Mr. Schultz clarified that Recommendation Six should be revised from six feet to four feet and that the sidewalks shall be located on the south side of Old Diley Road and Mr. Bosch stated we were going to have them put that extra amount for the other two-thirds along Old Diley into escrow if there is anything left. Mr. Bosch clarified that if that is already taken care of, do we take that out of Recommendation No. 6 and Mr. Schultz answered yes, it just needed to be clarified. Mr. Schultz stated it should read from where they are widening the road to S.R. 256 and the section that is not being widened they do not need the sidewalks. Mr. Hackworth moved to approve with staff recommendations and with the revision to Staff Recommendation Six that the sidewalks be revised from six feet to four feet and only from where they are widening the road to S.R. 256 and with the addition to Recommendation Eight of metal frame gates that are encased with wood; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Binkley and Mr. Blake voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0.

Mr. Hackworth moved to amend the previous motion to exclude the landscaping so that the applicant can come back to address that issue in the future and to approve the remaining items addressed by staff in the conditions for building materials and lighting; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Binkley voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0.

G. Review and request for a motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan/Building Materials, Landscaping and Lighting for the Shops at Hill Road a 20,020 square foot Retail Development located on S.R. 256 just south of Cross Creeks Boulevard (Exxon Gas Station site). Mr. Henderson reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated that staff supports with the following 16 conditions:

1. That the right-in/right-out on S.R. 256 shall have a raised landscaped median installed on S.R. 256, approved by the City's Engineer.

2. That a stop sign shall be located on Clint Drive going north at the Cross Creek Blvd. intersection.

3. That each retail building shall be connected by a sidewalk to the City public sidewalk.

4. That the dumpsters shall be screened with stone to match the buildings and have wooden doors.

5. That any mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view.

6. That the buildings shall comply with the City's architectural consultant's recommendations.

7. That the rear elevation shall be made of stone and EIFS materials in a rhythmic pattern to break up the long elevation.

8. That a 3-ft high water table, made of cut stone, shall be added to the front elevation and side returns of the building.

9. That any outdoor patios shall require a Certificate of Appropriateness approval.

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

11. That the development shall comply with the City Engineer's requirements.

12. That a 3-4 foot high undulating mound with continuous landscaping shall be installed along S.R. 256

13. That a 2-3 foot high undulating mound with continuous landscaping shall be installed along Cross Creeks Blvd. and Clint Drive

14. That the development shall comply with Tree Preservation Ordinance.

15. That the pole lights shall not be located in the City's right-of-way.

16. That the light fixtures shall be a gooseneck style.

17. That the light poles shall not exceed 25-ft in height and colored black.

18. That the footcandles (fc) on the site shall not exceed 10-fc and shall average no more then 5-fc.

Tom Warner stated he was representing Northstar Realty and introduced Michael Lusk from Lusk and Harkin. Mr. Warner reviewed the site with the Commission and stated they are looking into to cleaning up the underground storage tank leaks and they won't know what they have until they remove them. He asked for clarification on the landscape median on S.R. 256 and Mr. Schultz stated it was staff's goal to have a landscaped boulevard going down S.R. 256, so any new medians should be landscaped. Mr. Warner stated there was some discussion on plantings in between the trees on the rear elevation and they would rather not have continuous landscaping there and Mr. Schultz stated we leave that up to the landscape architect to determine what it is appropriate and as long as we come relatively close to continuous screening. Mr. Bosch asked about any cross access agreements with Clint Drive or Advanced Auto Parts and Mr. Schultz stated it depends on what happens to the out lots behind them and we could do some more research on it. Mr. Lusk stated they are proposing an extended screening material along the back to hide the mechanicals. He further stated on Recommendation 7 they would like to propose using a split face masonry material with more of a stone dimension on the rear elevation so it won't look like concrete block and their other issue is the 3-ft high water table going across the front elevation. He stated that is critical to the owner for maximum flexibility in leasing to different tenants. Mr. Lusk stated as far as the dumpster they would make it very compatible to the rear elevation so it has a stone and brick look. Mr. Nicholas stated historically the water table has been requested to limit the glass. Mr. Lusk asked what if the water table would take on more of a wood look with wood raised panels and Mr. Nicholas stated if it could tie in with the existing cut stone base. Mr. Lusk stated they would work with staff and give them more detail on it and Mr. Schultz stated if the City's architect is not convinced that would work, they would have the opportunity to come back to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Mr. Nicholas requested that the dormer material be reviewed by staff and City architect. Mr. Schultz stated consistency is his concern with the rear elevation. Mr. Nicholas stated we want to make sure that this does not look like split face block. Mr. Lusk stated they would bring samples in and Mr. Schultz stated if they could bring samples in and if it is approved by the architect they could come back in March. Mr. Schultz stated he was not comfortable with approving something we haven't seen. Mr. Nicholas suggested based on the City's Architect's comments, if they used EIFS along the rear including the tower elements and took the water table on the south elevation across the back, that could be an acceptable design. Mr. Lusk recommended quick brick at the bottom and for the two towers and then use EIFS for the remainder of the rear elevation. Mr. Nicholas clarified that the two towers at the end would stay as they are and then do a quick brick water table across the entire rear elevation and then the balance of the rear elevation would be EIFS. He further stated he would like them to bring in a sample for staff. Mr. Lusk stated they would bring in samples as well as revising the elevation. Mr. Schultz clarified that the entire dumpster enclosure would be quick brick and the gates would have a metal casing. Mr. Nicholas requested staff research the discussions on the future development of this property with respect to the billboard. Mr. Nicholas moved to approve with staff recommendations; Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch abstaining and Mr. Binkley, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Hackworth and Mr. Blake voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0.

H. Review and request for a motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit for a Drive Thru for the shops at Hill Road a 20,020 square foot Retail Development located on S.R. 256 just south of Cross Creeks Boulevard (Exxon Gas Station site). Mr. Henderson reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated that staff supports with the following three conditions:

1. That the drive thru shall be striped clearly to separate it from the driving lanes.

2. That the drive thru shall be limited to 500 trips per day or 250 trips per 1000 square foot of gross leasable floor space, whichever is less on weekdays.

3. That the drive thru shall be limited to 100 trips per hour or 50 trips per 1,000 square foot of gross leasable floor space, whichever is less during peak hours.

Mr. Schultz stated the reason for the restricted number of trips was to prevent back-ups and to limit future uses. Mr. Binkley moved to approve with staff recommendations; Mr. Nicholas seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch abstaining and Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Binkley and Mr. Hackworth voting "Yea." Motion passed, 4-0.

Review and request for a motion to appoint a Vice Chair- Mr. Nicholas moved to appoint Brian Bosch to Vice Chair; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Binkley voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0

4. REPORTS:

A. Planning and Zoning Director

(1) BZA Report- Mr. Schultz stated BZA met tonight and approved a rear end setback variance for a house addition in Melrose Subdivision.

(2) FCRPC - Mr. Schultz stated they did not meet last month.

B. Planning Studies- Mr. Schultz stated the tentative date scheduled for the work session is March 14th at 6:30 p.m. The meeting date will be confirmed next week.

5. OTHER BUSINESS:

A. Tree Commission. - No Report.

B. Commission Discussion- Mr. Nicholas requested that staff investigate the Post Office sign and getting it moved and Mr. Schultz stated we are looking into that.

Mr. Blake requested that Council try to appoint someone for the vacant spot on the Commission.

6. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Nicholas moved to adjourn; Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Blake, and Mr. Binkley voted "Aye." Motion carried 5-0. The Planning and Zoning Commission adjourned at 11:38 P.M. on February 22, 2007.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Stacey L. Bashore Lance A. Schultz

Deputy Municipal Clerk Director, Planning & Zoning