PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY,
MARCH 14, 2007
6:30
P.M.
The Planning and Zoning Work Session was called to order at 6:30 P.M. with the following Commission members present: Doug Blake, Brian Sauer, Brian Bosch, and Joshua Binkley. The following City Council members were present: Ted Hackworth, Keith Smith, Cristie Hammond, Jeff Fix, and Mike Sabatino. Others present were: Greg Dale, Emily Crow, Judy Gilleland, Lynda Yartin, Lance Schultz, Joe Hamilton, and Bruce Englehardt.
2. SCHEDULED MATTERS:
A. Review
and discussion on update to Commercial Design Guidelines and proposed Diley
Road Corridor Plan. Mr. Schultz stated
McBride, Dale, and Clarion, our consultants who prepared our Growth Management
Plan, were retained to prepare the Commercial Design Guidelines and Diley Road
Corridor Plan for us as well. Greg Dale
stated they were present this evening to talk about a direct outgrowth of the
growth management plan done earlier. He
stated the purpose this evening was to talk about two separate projects, the
Diley Road Corridor Study and Commercial Design Guidelines. Mr. Dale stated while the City does have
design standards in the Code, they are what are characterized as first
generation design standards; they are not bad, but they are not where you want
to be. He continued the idea tonight is
to determine what the City feels constitutes good quality commercial
development, what the City feels is important, what is not important, and what
elements make good quality design. Mr.
Dale stated that was one reason they had requested both Planning and Zoning
Commission members as well as Council members attend this work session. He stated once that it is determined what the
vision was for the City they would bring some draft standards back for
review. Mr. Dale stated Ms Crow had a
power point presentation and she would answer any questions anyone might
have.
Ms Crow stated she had distributed a building design preference survey that she would like everyone to complete and return to Mr. Schultz. (Attachment 1 to these minutes.) Ms Crow further stated she had distributed a map showing the existing land use in the Diley Road Corridor and one showing the potential development areas in the corridor. (Attachment 2 to these minutes.) Ms Crow stated it is approximately an 8-12 month process for both of these projects, and this is the beginning phase right now of research and analysis. Ms Crow stated after this evening’s discussion she will prepare a memorandum on each project that she will provide to Mr. Schultz summarizing what all of the issues are and where to go from here.
Ms Crow gave a power point presentation on both projects. (Attachment 3 to these minutes.)
Ms Crow stated with regard to the Commercial Design Standards, currently the City’s Code contains several references to maintaining a rural residential character, and she would like to know if that is still the same vision the City is trying to convey. She stated if that vision has changed, now is the time to have it reflected in the guidelines or define more clearly what that vision is. Ms Crow stated she would like to have the building design preference survey returned to Mr. Schultz no later than next week so he could forward them all to her at one time. She stated any comments that anyone wanted to make could be included in the survey. She stated if there were items in the existing standards that you feel work, include those comments in the survey as well as what you would like to have as new standards.
Ms Crow stated for the Diley Road Corridor she had included approximately 1400 acres in the study, some of which was not in the City limits. She stated of the potential development areas, Area 1 and 2 are the largest parcels for potential development, Area 3 is partially owned by the City, Area 5 is probably the largest single parcel, and Area 8 wraps around a retention pond. Mr. Schultz stated this area is largely unusable. Ms Gilleland clarified that of the developable areas, approximately two-thirds are in the Township. Ms Crow stated this is a difficult situation, where you are actually in and out of the City as you travel down the corridor. She stated the idea is that it is always a good idea to plan for an area that is not in the City at the time. Ms Crow clarified the only large areas that are actually in the City are Areas 1 and 2. Mr. Dale stated from a planning perspective, he would be interested in hearing to what degree Township officials and residents should or should not be involved. He stated he would like to know if this was a project the City would undertake alone, indicating what they felt is the best land use plan for the area, regardless of how the jurisdictional matter plays out over time, or did the City want to prepare a land use corridor plan that was prepared in consultation and with input from the Township and, if so, how to go about that. Mr. Smith questioned if there was a possibility for the Township’s version of our Planning and Zoning Commission and our Planning and Zoning Commission to work toward a joint corridor plan that both entities could agree to. Mr. Bosch stated he would definitely support that because the Diley Road project will benefit residents of both entities. Mr. Sabatino stated if we can figure out a way to bring the two parties together so everyone feels they are being treated fairly, then that would be a good idea. Mr. Schultz stated we do need to look at Canal Winchester’s plans for the southern portion and see what they are planning for.
Ms Crow stated the next step will be to start drafting the annotated outline for the guidelines themselves, and for the Diley Road Corridor she will start with the land use, and she will come back with concept plans for each of the locations. Mr. Dale stated he would like to clarify the issue of collaboration with the Township, and Ms Gilleland stated she would suggest getting the Township and City Planning and Zoning Commissions together with staff. Mr. Blake stated he felt that would be wise as both Commissions have the same agendas. Ms Gilleland stated she would work with staff to get a meeting set up with both Commissions.
3. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, the Work Session closed at 8:20 P.M., March 14, 2007.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
___________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk