PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 2008

REGULAR MEETING

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. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Binkley and Mr. Sauer were present. There were no members absent. Others present were: Mitch Banschefsky, Lance Schultz, Joe Henderson, Paul Woodruff, Robert Micah, Jeff Brown, Stacey Bashore, John Roush, Brian Hoy, and others.

2. A. APPROVAL OF MNUTES OF May 13, 2008, Regular Meeting- Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley abstaining and Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Blake, Mr. Hackworth and Mr. Nicholas voting "Yea." Motion passed, 5-0.

Mr. Schultz introduced Paul Woodruff as the new Architectural Consultant for the City and stated he will be reviewing architectural standards based on our nonresidential design guidelines. He further stated that he will be presenting his findings on the architectural review and will be able to answer any questions. Mr. Blake clarified that Mr. Woodruff would be attending the meetings as needed.

3. SCHEDULED MATTERS:

A. Review and request for a motion to approve Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for an Outdoor Patio for VIP Lounge at 1751 Hill Road North (TABLED 6/12/07) Mr. Blake stated this item would be removed from the agenda.

B. Review and request for a motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit for an Outdoor Patio for Don Patron's Restaurant located at 1282 Hill Road North (TABLED 4/08/08) Mr. Blake stated this item would remain on the table per applicant's request.

C. A Public Hearing and review and request for a motion to approve a Final Development Plan for approximately 8.55 acres for Anchor 204 Business Park located on the North Side of SR 204 between Freedom Way and Holiday Inn Express. Mr. Blake stated that this item would remain on the table per the applicant's request.

D. Review and request for a motion to amend a Conditional Use Permit for an Outdoor Patio for Happy Endings Pub located at 1128 Hill Road. Mr. Henderson reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated that that staff does not support the amendment based on Planning and Zoning Commission previous recommendation. Mr. Blake asked why staff does not support the color change and Mr. Schultz stated that Planning & Zoning previously approved a burgundy color. Brian Hoy stated he was the owner of the Pub and at the time they had asked for the awning to be maroon it actually matched the previous sign. He stated that they did not have a set idea on the theme and concept of the pub and shortly after they came up with the idea of have a theme of Pickerington Purple. Mr. Hoy stated they were not trying to go against the Commission's previous approval, but at that time they did not have their theme picked out and they would appreciate the Commission allowing them to keep the purple theme throughout. Mr. Blake clarified that all of the signs on the building are different colors. Mr. Nicholas asked if there was an application for signage and Mr. Henderson stated that because it is an older center it did not need to come in for comprehensive sign plan, but they did submit for a zoning certificate for the signage. Mr. Nicholas asked if the color change was discussed with staff before it was put up and Mr. Hoy stated that was an unintentional error on their part. Mr. Blake clarified that the lighting above the canopy would be added. Mr. Hackworth clarified that the only thing being addressed was the color of the canopy. Mr. Bosch asked if they were proposing to add the word pub to the awning and Mr. Hoy stated they didn't think about putting that on there and would like to add that in white letters to the awning. Mr. Binkley asked where they would put the word pub and Mr. Hoy stated he would prefer to put it on the side where it is most visible. Mr. Binkley asked if there was a speaker on the patio and Mr. Hoy stated there was a speaker that is attached to their Jukebox which they don't play after 9:00 p.m. Mr. Hackworth moved to amend the original Conditional Use Permit to allow the canopy color to remain purple; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Binkley and Mr. Blake voting "Yea." Motion passed, 6-0.

E. Review and request for a motion to approve Nonresidential Design Standards Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan, Architectural, Landscaping and Lighting for Value Place Hotel located on the west side of Freedom Way on Lots 1 and 2 of the Ashton Crossing Commercial Subdivision. Mr. Henderson reviewed the report as presented to the Commission and stated that staff supports with the following eight conditions:

1. That the applicant shall receive a maximum building height variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals.

2. That the Ashton Crossing Plat shall be recorded prior to zoning certificate approval.

3. That interior parking lot landscaping shall encompass 10% of pavement area or a Board of Zoning Appeals variance shall be required unless waived by two-thirds of the Planning and Zoning Commission.

4. That the primary and secondary façade shall comply with the permitted exterior building material requirements unless waived by two-thirds of the Planning and Zoning Commission.

5. That the development shall comply with City Engineering requirements. 6. That the development shall comply with Violet Township Fire Department requirements.

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

8. That the wall mounted lights shall be compatible with the gooseneck light fixtures in the parking lot.

Mr. Woodruff stated he reviewed the proposal for the hotel and he found a couple items that needed to be addressed, but generally the building scale and massing meets the requirements that were approved. He stated that Planning and Zoning needed to address the brick because it was not true brick material. Mr. Woodruff stated that the front of the building was not quite there with 50% of it being windows, but he didn't find that to be a problem with this building and it looks appropriate and is acceptable for the use.

Mr. Schultz stated that when we adopted the nonresidential design guidelines we added a waiver section for unique buildings and this is our first hotel in seven years, so that requires two-thirds majority of the Commission to vote in the affirmative for the waiver. Mr. Blake clarified that it is two-thirds of the members in attendance. Mr. Hackworth asked if each condition would be voted on separate and Mr. Schultz stated that it depends on how the Commission wanted to address it. Mr. Jeff Brown introduced himself as the attorney for the project and they feel it is an appropriate use for the area. Mr. Brown stated they have already filed a BZA application to address the height issue and to address the interior landscaping requirement. He stated that the only issue they have with the City Engineering requirements was with straightening out the drive entrance because they would lose a couple of parking spaces. Mr. Robert Micah introduced himself as one of the architects for the project and stated they have not found anything that is compatible to the goose neck lights for the wall packs and Mr. Schultz stated that the intent of that requirement was that it was the same color and the same type of light. Mr. Micah stated they were fine with that. Mr. Micah passed around the synthetic material they are wanting to use and stated they have used it on other hotels they have built. He stated that it is certified and is a very good product. Mr. Blake clarified that Condition #3 could be addressed without it going to BZA. Mr. Schultz stated that there are some site constraints with grading and they are putting additional landscaping out there and typically the intent of interior landscaping are for developments that are along the S.R. 256 corridor. He stated that it would not be as vital for this location as it would be on S.R. 256. Mr. Schultz asked if they had a ground sign or would the cupola remain and Mr. Brown stated that the intent is to remove the cupola based on the sign package. Mr. Schultz clarified that if they get a ground sign the cupola would not be included in the design and it could be handled administratively. Mr. Binkley stated he would like to see a few parking spaces taken away and would recommend that the Board give them relief on that and Mr. Schultz clarified that the only thing we can give relief on are on the nonresidential design standards. He further stated that we cannot give relief on parking or the height of the building. Mr. Bosch stated that he would agree with removing parking spaces near the entrance because this only has one point of access. Mr. Micah stated that they will have 125 rooms and they didn't feel that the entry point would be a problem. Mr. Schultz stated that our staff engineer is addressing the technical issues on this and she will address the radius issues because this is a private street. Mr. Hackworth asked if there was a sidewalk on the west side of Freedom Way and Mr. Schultz stated there is a sidewalk that stubs there however there is a significant grade difference. He stated that the Building Codes addresses the safety issues on that and Mr. Micah stated that it will have to come down the private drive and come across which will work well because there is another lot between the road and their development. Mr. Bosch stated that the intent of the sidewalk is to provide the opportunity to access the other developments in the area and Mr. Schultz clarified that it would not have to be ADA accessible because it is a private street. Mr. Schultz stated that when the next development comes in we will have to require sidewalks on their site. Mr. Bosch stated that we would like to see a sidewalk in there when they build the road and Mr. Schultz stated they will require that of the next development as well. Mr. Micah stated that they would need to put the driveway in to access their development and it would make sense to put a sidewalk that comes into it. Mr. Binkley asked where the transformer pad would be and Mr. Micah stated it would be in the concrete. Mr. Schultz stated that our design standards require that all mechanical equipment has to be screened from public view. Mr. Binkley asked if there needed to be at least one van accessible handicapped space and Mr. Micah stated he didn't believe there was a number that was required. Mr. Hackworth asked about the water line and Mr. Schultz stated that he was not sure because they are county utilities and at one time the City was contemplating extending Freedom Way back to the Hall of Fame to create a loop, but those plans have not moved forward. Mr. Bosch clarified that could still be done in the future. Mr. Hackworth clarified that the fire hydrant lines will be looped on their site. Mr. Bosch asked about the poles in the lighting specifications and wanted to keep the consistency by switching the pole to a solid black round pole or the whole pole being fluted. Mr. Micah stated he didn't think that would be a problem. Mr. Bosch clarified that the lights would be dark night certified. Mr. Bosch asked if the 25 foot pole height was the total structure height or would it be put on a concrete pillar and Mr. Micah stated that it would be on a concrete basin and that would vary a little based on the topography that it is on. Mr. Bosch clarified that we like to see the light height from the ground up. Mr. Hackworth asked about the tree preservation ordinance because he didn't think there were a lot of trees in that area and Mr. Schultz stated that there are some trees and they will need to document the actual location of the trees. Mr. Binkley stated that from the site perspective he would like to see some discussion on that and Mr. Schultz stated they would discuss it with the engineer. Mr. Binkley stated he was not familiar with the brick material and it looks like it chips easily. Mr. Bosch stated he would like to see the cupola taken off and in response to more windows on the front he thought it would look odd. Mr. Woodruff stated they actually have more windows than they need, it is just in the one area that there isn't enough. Mr. Hackworth asked if the brick material tended to fade or chip and Mr. Blake stated it is a hardy plank material. Mr. Micah stated there is a 30 year guarantee on it. Mr. Bosch clarified that the color went throughout the brick. Mr. Hackworth clarified that sections of it could be replaced or repaired if damaged or sun bleached. Mr. Bosch asked if they were looking to get some kind of pylon sign to get the height to get rid of the cupola and Mr. Micah stated they would like a sign with various tenants. Mr. Schultz stated that the City would prefer a single or two signs for the entire development. Mr. Sauer asked where the front door would be and Mr. Micah stated that the west elevation is the front. Mr. Bosch clarified that hardy plank trim boards would cover the corners of the building. Mr. Blake stated he is seeing more buildings getting away from EIFS and stucco and a water resistant material goes a long way down the road. He stated that he personally doesn't have a problem with the material based on size and scale of the building. Mr. Schultz clarified that the design standards were focused on one and two story buildings. Mr. Nicholas asked if the lighting would affect the highway and Mr. Bosch stated it would not. Mr. Nicholas clarified that the color samples were the finished colors. Mr. Bosch stated he has heard from various fire departments that they would like to have two entrance points and this is limited and they may be able to get an easement from the other property. Mr. Binkley asked about parallel parking spaces and Mr. Micah stated they might be able to get a couple in there and the easement isn't locked in stone so we can move it an line it up. Mr. Schultz stated he is confident between their engineer and our engineer we will be able to address this entrance issue. Mr. Nicholas clarified that the dumpster enclosure was a true masonry wall. Mr. Nicholas stated he like the cupola in his opinion. Mr. Micah stated that the only reason they have the cupola would be for signage, but they prefer not to have it. Mr. Hackworth asked if the Commission approves the building materials would it establish a precedence and Mr. Banchefsky stated there is no legal precedent but there would be a fairness element. Mr. Schultz stated there needs to be a justification as to why this is different than other buildings. Mr. Nicholas asked what the screening would look like for the transformers and would like to see that handled administratively. Mr. Schultz stated he would like some guidelines and we will look at the Code to see what the intent was. Mr. Nicholas stated he would be in favor of it being a similar look as the dumpster enclosure to tie it together. Mr. Nicholas stated it was his first exposure to this brick material and wanted to know the warranty on the color and Mr. Micah stated there was a fifteen warranty. Mr. Nicholas stated that was a concern especially where pedestrians would be as far as longevity. Mr. Brown asked about the Fire Department requirements and Mr. Schultz stated that when it comes to roadway requirements the City signs off on the engineering plans and from the City's perspective it meets the minimum zoning requirements. He further stated that if the Fire Department doesn't issue a building permit that is outside of our jurisdiction. Mr. Bosch moved to approve with staff recommendations and with the addition that the light poles shall be consistent with other light poles in the area; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Binkley and Mr. Sauer voting "Yea." Motion passed, 6-0.

4. REPORTS:

A. Planning and Zoning Director

(1) BZA Report- Mr. Schultz reported that BZA did not meet in May and will be meeting in June to discuss two decks and Value Place Hotel.

(2) FCRPC - Mr. Schultz reported that there were no township agenda items so we did not attend.

5. OTHER BUSINESS:

A. Commission Discussion- An applicant was requesting review of a project during the open discussion portion of the agenda. Mr. Blake asked about an applicant being there to discuss something that wasn't originally on the agenda because the Commission was concerned about setting a precedence. Mr. Banschefsky stated that it was a problem based on his understanding that people want to address the Commission on something that isn't on the official agenda. He stated that is a technical violation of the Sunshine Law because you have to post the nature of your meetings. Mr. Banschefsky stated there are ways to accomplish it by having an informal meeting or as an informal agenda item where you are not going to take an action. He continued that there could also be a workshop to discuss it if it was properly noticed. Mr. Banschefsky clarified that to just add something to a meeting that hasn't been published is not appropriate. Mr. Schultz stated that there are also some staff concerns that work sessions could compromise the integrity of the development standards. He stated that in the past we have not wanted to make decisions quickly and there are other cities that have workshops to discuss items that are coming on the agenda. Mr. Schultz stated there is a submission process they have to meet to be on the agenda. Mr. Binkley stated that this probably isn't a request that comes up that often and in order to get an official ruling it needs to go through the proper channels. He further stated that the opportunity to come before a board and work out issues informally and get ideas may be something that would be valuable. Mr. Schultz stated that some of the concern is we would not have formal review of the application and Mr. Binkley stated that it isn't something that could occur before staff had been contacted. Mr. Hackworth stated that we are a public commission and we have our power through the City Council and we are bound by the Sunshine Laws so we cannot arbitrarily put things on the agenda without it being published 24 hours in advance. Mr. Blake asked if he would be out of order if he asked Mr. Roush his purpose in being there and Mr. Banschefsky stated that he would have discretion to ask. Mr. Roush stated in general there are many occasion where the staff follows fairly strict guidelines on what the City's code is, but this Board uses judgment to look at each scenario and render an opinion on it. He further stated it would be very helpful to talk to the voting member to give them an idea of what they want to do and get their thoughts. He stated they could then go back and make adjustments that make sense and get good ideas. Mr. Roush stated that they would be looking to get a temperature check. Mr. Banschefsky stated that is a perfect reason to have a workshop so you can kick ideas around and get the thoughts of the Commission informally so they know how to modify it when they come back. He continued that the problem is that the City has officially adopted the Ohio Revised Code Sunshine Law and that says that all meetings have to properly noticed and published. Mr. Binkley clarified that there would have to be another meeting. Mr. Schultz stated that he thinks it could make the process longer because you would be adding another two weeks to it. Mr. Bosch asked when they would have to notify staff to get on the agenda for an informal meeting and Mr. Schultz stated he would have to check on it. Mr. Hackworth stated there are some issues that the Commission cannot override and if we set up a workshop we may be going against what Council has required. He stated he would rather have staff look at it and have it sorted out before the meetings and would suggest having applicants tabling it after they have heard what the Commission has said. Mr. Bosch asked how community comments would be different and Mr. Banschefsky stated it is different than an application that could be formal. Mr. Nicholas suggested having public hearings to discuss the items. Mr. Schultz stated he would check with other communities and see how they handle these type of requests and report back to the Commission next month. Mr. Banschefsky stated he could also look into the public records provisions.

B. Planning Reports - Mr. Schultz reported that he is reviewing a draft for the Diley Road Corridor Plan and hopes to have a public hearing on it in the next few months.

6. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Hackworth moved to adjourn; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Mr. Sauer, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Binkley and Mr. Blake voted "Aye." Motion carried 6-0. The Planning and Zoning Commission adjourned at 9:45 P.M. on June 10, 2008.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Stacey L. Bashore Lance A. Schultz

Deputy Municipal Clerk Director, Planning & Zoning