PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION
TUESDAY,
NOVEMBER 11, 2008
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, Mrs. Evans, and Mr. Sauer were present. Mr. Bosch arrived at 7:32 P.M. Mr. Nicholas and Mr. Binkley were
absent. Others present were: Lance Schultz, Joe Henderson, Lynda Yartin,
Mitch Banschefsky, Kathy Rojena, Robbie Colombo, Cathy Olshefski, Shari Nutter,
Kantu Patel, Shashi Savla, John Raush, Trisha Sanders, Trent McMurray, and
others.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF October 14, 2008, Regular Meeting. Mr. Hackworth moved to approve; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake, and Mrs. Evans voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 4-0.
3. SCHEDULED
MATTERS:
A. Review
and request for motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit for an Outdoor Patio
for Don Patron’s Restaurant located at 1282 Hill Road North (TABLED
04/08/08).
B. Review and request for motion to approve a comprehensive Sign Plan for Ground Signage for Lots 10, 11, and 12 of the Windmiller Square Commercial Subdivision located just south of Krogers (TABLED 10/14/08). Mr. Hackworth moved to remove from the Table; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Evans, and Mr. Blake voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0. Mr. Blake stated the Commission had received a request from the applicant to remove their application from the agenda. Mr. Hackworth moved to withdraw this item from the agenda; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Evans, Mr. Blake, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0.
C. A
public hearing and review and request for the Rezoning of an approximate
5.82-acre parcel from C-2 (Limited commercial [Violet Township]) to C-3
(Community Commercial) for the Gillilan property located on the northeast
corner of the Refugee Road and Milnor Road intersection. Mr. Henderson stated the owner is requesting
the rezoning and currently the property is zoned C-2 (Limited Commercial)
Violet Township. He stated this is the
zoning classification that it had in Violet Township prior to being annexed
into the City in March of 2005.
Mr. Blake stated he would open the floor for a public hearing and community comments at this time. Mr. Blake further clarified the applicant was not present due to illness, however, staff had recommended this hearing go forward. There being no comments, Mr. Blake closed the public hearing.
Mr. Henderson stated staff supports the rezoning of the property with the condition that the requirements of the annexation agreement would have to be fulfilled by the City and the property owner.
Mr. Blake ascertained the uses of C-3 zoning allowed most commercial uses. Mr. Schultz clarified that when the annexation occurred our attorneys made the interpretation that the property would keep the Violet Township zoning until they came in and rezoned it per the annexation agreement, which they were now doing. Mr. Hackworth moved to approve the rezoning request with staff’s condition; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Evans, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Blake voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0.
D. Review and request for motion to approve an amended Commercial Design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan and Building Materials for Rule (3) located on the south side of Windmiller Drive located between Dilley Road and Gray Drive. Mr. Henderson stated the owner is proposing to amend the 30,011 square foot Rule (3) bowling alley (formerly known as Strike City) Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan and Building Material. He stated the proposed plan identifies removing the separate entrance into the Stoner’s Sports Pub as well as some changes to the elevations of the building. He stated there is also a minor change to the site plan with the removal of a walkway near the southwestern corner of the building. Mr. Henderson stated there are some minor changes to the conditions approved by this Commission in August. Mr. Henderson stated the only site plan change is the walkway near the former entrance to Stoner’s Sports Pub at the southwest corner of the building being removed and replaced by what appears to be landscaping. He further stated on the north elevation the approved plan identifies five bays of windows facing Windmiller Drive and the proposed plan identifies six bays of a dark colored EFIS material in place of the approved windows. He stated staff recommends the windows remain on the elevation. Further, on the south elevation the approved window location between the second and third column to the west has been removed and instead of a double door they are showing a single door with a glass overhead garage door next to the patio. Mr. Henderson stated there also appears to be modifications to the entrance. Mr. Schultz stated staff did not have a recommendation on these modifications because they did not notice the change until today. He stated if there are any issues the Commission does not feel comfortable with, he would have the staff architect review it once more and bring it back at the next meeting. Mr. Bosch clarified the architect has reviewed the proposal, but also did not notice these modifications. Mr. Henderson stated staff supports the amended Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan and Building Materials with the following three conditions:
(1) That all the conditions of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on August 12, 2008, shall remain.
(2) That the windows on the north elevation shall remain as originally approved on August 12, 2008.
(3) That the garage door window on the south elevation shall be removed from the elevation.
Mr. John Rausch stated he was present representing the applicant. He stated since the last time they were before the Commission the applicant has hired a new interior designer and the entire inside of the building has been reworked. He stated in doing this the need for the other entry was eliminated. He stated when they redid the interior they needed to get rid of any windows because you cannot have windows going into the game area. He stated the games will be against the wall and you cannot have natural light going in with the video screens, etc. He stated they wanted to keep the metal louver pieces and to create a dark window looking effect under there, a faux window. He stated he felt with the mounding and landscaping that would be done he did not feel this would be noticeable. Mr. Blake clarified the intent was to maintain the awnings. Mr. Rausch stated he also would like to change the color of the cornice piece to a lighter color so that the only orange colored EFIS would be the main front fan piece. Mr. Sauer clarified this would be the same light cream color used on the rest of the building. Mr. Rausch stated they really didn’t change the front main entry; it was just that a different architect did the new rendering and it just shows up differently. He stated there was no intention of changing anything there and the proposed changes were to get rid of the entry, the use faux windows, removing the window that would be right in the kitchen on a cooking line, and the addition of the garage door. He stated the garage door would be an entry area to the family dining area and the concept is on nice days to open the garage door and blend the patio dining seating into the family dining area. He stated the building would maintain the exact same noise requirements, and would not create any additional noise.
Mr. Trent McMurray stated he is President of the Windmiller Ponds Homeowner’s Association and he questioned if the sign would be a neon sign. Mr. Schultz stated the sign package has not been approved as yet. Mr. McMurray stated he would question where the noise from inside the building would go if the garage door were open. Mr. Schultz stated the approval for the patio had conditions regarding sound and that is a conditional use and this is a Certificate of Appropriateness. Mr. Schultz stated it will still have to meet the conditions of the Conditional Use Permit dealing with sound that was approved. Mr. Trent stated his concern was that the noise would spill over into the neighborhood when that door was open. Mr. Sauer stated staff’s recommendation was against the garage door and stated he would like to know their reason for doing so. Mr. Schultz stated our architect reviewed this and he supports the changes to eliminate the entrance, however, he is not in favor of the faux windows or the garage door. Mr. Schultz stated from an architectural perspective the garage door does not fit in with the rest of the building. Mr. Schultz stated Mr. Woodruff would have been present this evening, but since this was submitted late he already had another commitment.
Mr. Schultz stated this project is under our old Commercial Design Guidelines; it is not under our new Non-Residential Design Standards. He stated Mr. Woodruff, when he reviewed the plans, indicated that from an architectural perspective the garage door did not look appropriate on that elevation. Mr. Rausch stated in his letter, Mr. Woodruff had stated he did not approve it because it did not conform with the Non-Residential Design Standards, and since this started before those were in place it is under the old Commercial Design Guidelines. Mrs. Evans stated Mr. Rausch was asking for faux windows and questioned why staff is recommending against that because she understands why they would not want windows there. Mr. Schultz stated he could not answer for the architect as to why he was recommending against it, however, he felt it was because of aesthetic reasons. Mr. Blake inquired if Mr. Woodruff was made aware of the reason for the deletion of the windows, and Mr. Schultz stated when this was submitted they said it was for one change to the elevation, taking two entrances into one. Mr. Schultz continued that as staff reviewed it further they found additional changes.
Mr. Hackworth clarified the garage door is similar to ones you would see at a car wash. Mr. Blake stated he has started to see these more and more in commercial buildings in downtown areas. Mr. Rausch stated the door looks nice and is not a detraction to the building. Mr. Bosch stated he has seen this type of door in more buildings as well, and in looking back at the original design of the building it would not fit in, however, it looks more modern in its present state and the door fits in. He stated the reason he was leaning towards supporting the faux windows is because just across from it, Diley Town Center, this Commission allowed them to put in faux doors, etc. Mr. Bosch further stated he felt this looked cleaner going down to one entrance. Mr. Bosch moved to approve the Commercial design Guidelines Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan and Building Materials for Rule (3) with the condition that all the conditions of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on August 12, 2008, shall remain, and removing the remaining two staff conditions; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Evans, and Mr. Hackworth voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0.
E. Review
and request for motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit for a Church for
Grace Fellowship on an approximate 18.497-acre parcel located at 1443 Refugee
Road just west of the Pickerington Police station. Mr. Henderson stated the Grace Fellowship
Church is proposing to purchase the 18.5-acre site with plans to build a
church. He stated the site is currently
zoned AG (Rural District) which allows churches with a Conditional Use
Permit. Ms Cathy Olshefski stated the
address was incorrect and should be corrected to 1449 Refugee Road. Mr. Henderson stated staff supports the
Conditional Use Permit with the condition that the proposed church shall comply
with Certificate of Appropriateness and all other City development requirements. Mr. Schultz stated this is a unique process
as the property was going to go to a Sheriff’s Sale and the church indicated
they wanted to purchase this site, but they had to make sure they could get a
Conditional Use Permit before they could purchase the site. Mr. Schultz stated he felt it was only fair
for the property owner, since the Church was willing to purchase the site for a
certain cost, that he accepted the site plan with the understanding that with
the Conditional Use Permit the loan on this property could close. Mr. Schultz stated the site plan could change
in the future as the Church does not plan on constructing for two years, but to
allow them to close on the property they need the Conditional Use Permit
approved. Mr. Schultz stated further
because the Church would not be constructed for two years he would like to see
it occur simultaneously with the Certificate of Appropriateness. He stated he had made the decision to accept
this with the contingency that when they move forward in two or three years
that they would meet all of the City’s requirements, which would mean a revised
site plan, the access and set backs would be reviewed in more detail, and the
architecture. Mr. Schultz stated
approval of the Conditional Use Permit tonight would only allow a Church on
this site and when they come in for a Certificate of Appropriateness we will
review the site plan, architecture, landscaping, lighting, and access to this
site. Mr. Sauer moved to approve the
Conditional Use Permit for a Church at 1449 Refugee Road; Mr. Bosch seconded the
motion. Roll call was taken with
Mrs. Evans, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Blake, and Mr. Bosch voting
“Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0.
F. Review
and request for a motion to approve Non-Residential Design Standards
Certificate of Appropriateness for Architecture for Hampton Inn located at 1890
Winderly Lane. Mr. Henderson stated the
owner is proposing to modify the existing roof of the Hampton Inn in order to
maintain the franchise license with Hilton Group. He stated the existing roofline is a metal
mansard style roof and it would be replaced by an EIFS cornice and metal
fascia. Further the renovated roof will
match the building and the color of the building would not change. Mr. Henderson stated staff supports the
request with the following conditions:
(1) That the proposed roof should match the building in color and style.
(2) That the samples of the proposed material types and colors be submitted for review and approval.
(3) That all mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view.
Mr. Shashi Savla stated he was present representing the applicant and they had no problems with any of staff’s recommendations. Mr. Hackworth clarified no equipment is on the roof of the building. Mr. Sauer moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for Architecture for Hampton Inn with staff’s conditions; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mrs. Evans voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0.
G. Review and request for a motion to approve an amended Comprehensive Sign Plan for Building Signage for Walgreen’s located at 1101 Hill Road North. Mr. Henderson stated Walgreen’s is proposing to amend their building signage for the store located at the northwestern corner of Hill Road North and Refugee Road, 1101 Hill Road North, by decreasing the “Walgreen’s” sign in size on the south and east elevations and adding a third “Walgreen’s” sign to the north elevation. He stated they are also proposing to remove the “24 HR” sign on the south and east elevations. Mr. Henderson stated they are removing the “24 HR” sign as this will not be a 24-hour location. Mr. Henderson stated staff supports the amended Comprehensive Sign Plan with the following conditions:
(1) That all signs and graphics shall have a matte finish.
(2) That the channel letters face, trim, and returns shall have material and color uniformity.
Ms Kathy Rojena stated she was present representing the applicant and they had no problems complying with staff’s conditions. Mr. Sauer moved to approve the amended Comprehensive Sign Plan for Building Signage for Walgreen’s with staff recommendations; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake, Mrs. Evans, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yea.” Motion passed, 5-0.
4. REPORTS:
A. Planning
and Zoning Director. Mr. Schultz stated
he was expecting a copy of the final draft of the Diley Road Corridor Study
sometime this week or early next week.
He stated he was trying to schedule a public hearing next month with the
Planning and Zoning Commission and Council to review that and move it
forward. Mr. Sauer clarified in the past
public hearings we have had members of the Violet Township Planning and Zoning
Commission and representatives from Canal Winchester attend, and we anticipate
have the same attendance.
(1) BZA
Report. Mr. Schultz stated the BZA
approved a setback for a deck last month and there are no agenda items for
November.
(2) FCRPC. Mr. Schultz stated there were no items in
Violet Township at the last meeting.
5. OTHER
BUSINESS:
A. Commission
Discussion. Mr. Blake clarified that at
the Exxon Station site, they are working on the financing and lot split. Mr. Schultz stated he cannot sign off on the
lot split until the Exxon buildings come down.
B. Planning
Report. No report.
6. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further, Mr. Blake moved to adjourn; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake, and Mrs. Evans voted “Aye.” Motion carried, 5-0. The Planning and Zoning Commission adjourned at 8:35 P.M., November 11, 2008.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
___________________________
Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk