PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

TUESDAY, JANUARY 12, 2010

 

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, Mrs. Evans, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Sauer were present.  Mr. Binkley was absent due to a work commitment.  Others present were:  Lance Schultz, Lynda Yartin, Joe Henderson, Mitch Banschefsky, Mayor O’Brien, Brian Hoy, Matt Maynard, Lee Gray, Don Smith, and others. 

 

2.         APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF December 8, 2009 Regular Meeting.  Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, and Mrs. Evans voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 6-0.  

 

3.         ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING:

 

A.        Motion to elect Chairperson and Vice Chairperson.  Mrs. Evans moved to elect Mr. Blake as Chairperson and Mr. Bosch as Vice Chairperson; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Hackworth, Mrs. Evans, and Mr. Blake voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 6-0. 

 

B.         Motion to schedule meeting day and time for 2010.  Mr. Sauer moved to continue scheduling the meeting for the second Tuesday of each month at 7:30 P.M.; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mrs. Evans, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Sauer voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 6-0.  

 

            Mayor O’Brien stated that Mr. Hackworth would continue on the Commission as the Mayor’s Representative. 

 

4.         SCHEDULED MATTERS: 

 

A.        A public hearing and review and request for motion to approve a rezoning for Lot 1 of the Willow Pond subdivision, an approximate 1.31-acre parcel (#041-054-5600) from C-3 (Community Commercial) to R-3 (Residential) for Homewood Corporation located just south of the railroad tracks on the west side of Hill Road North.  Mr. Blake stated he understood the applicant on this item sent an e-mail requesting it be tabled this evening.  Mr. Bosch moved to Table; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Sauer, Mrs. Evans, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Blake voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 6-0.  (TABLED)

 

B.         Review and request for a motion to approve an amended Conditional Use Permit for an Outdoor Patio for Happy Endings Pub located at 1128 Hill Road North.  Mr. Henderson reviewed staff’s report provided to the Commission and stated the applicant is proposing to amend the Conditional Use Permit for an outdoor patio to allow seasonal side curtains on the canopy. He stated the side curtains would be made of a flame retardant polymer fabric and clear plastic windows.  He further stated the patio is approximately 276 square feet and has seating for approximately 26 patrons.  Mr. Henderson stated staff cannot support side curtains on the existing awning because the Planning and Zoning Commission has denied similar requests in the past year and this particular item is not addressed in the Nonresidential Design Standards.  Mr. Blake clarified the side curtains are currently in place.  Mr. Henderson stated that was correct and when it was brought to staff’s attention a letter was sent and they then applied to amend the Conditional Use Permit. 

 

            Mr. Brian Hoy stated he is one of the owners of the establishment and they were not aware that they needed a permit to add side curtains to the awning, and he wanted to let the Commission know they were not trying to circumvent any regulations; they were just unaware of the requirement.  Mr. Hoy further stated the patio will not seat 26 people and he wasn’t sure where that figure came from as they only have three tables out there and each table will only seat two people.  Mr. Hoy stated it is his understanding that currently there are no specific guidelines for side curtains so there is nothing in the regulations that state what they should look like or what the purpose of them are.  He stated obviously they are not the only business who would like to have wind curtains, and it is his hope that the wind curtains they have will be allowed and would hopefully set the standard for what this Commission would consider to be appropriate in the future.  He stated these curtains were specifically made for the awning at this business.  He stated the height of the black area of the curtains matches exactly to the height of their black fence, and the windows are exactly the same height and dimensions as their window openings, and from the road this is not an eyesore, and he felt it improves the look of that area and gives them a better use for that area in the cold months.  Mr. Hoy stated the side curtains were custom made by a local company, they are removable, and they would be removed during the warmer months.  He stated he felt they would be up from the late fall to the early spring although he does not have specific dates.  He stated these are fixed side curtains that would be professionally removed, stored throughout the warmer months, and then reinstalled.  Mr. Hoy stated he hoped the Commission allowed these wind curtains and, again, he hoped these would help the Commission set the standards for what these should look like. 

 

            Mr. Blake stated it appeared these were semi-permanent curtains and Mr. Hoy stated they are attached and are not removable by anyone other than the professionals at Advance Awnings who would be in charge of installing, removing, and storing them.  Mr. Hoy stated these curtains were designed to go in conjunction with the awning that was also designed and installed by Advance Awnings.  Mr. Nicholas stated by virtue of the history of what this Commission has done with other establishments, he would not be in favor of approving these side curtains.  Mr. Schultz stated late last year there was discussion on having an architect do a review of our Non-Residential Design Guidelines, and it might be appropriate to ask them to come up with appropriate outdoor awning materials or designs.   Mr. Hackworth stated he agreed with Mr. Nicholas and he did not know how he could support this.  Mrs. Evans stated initially she did not know how this could be approved, however, she has looked at these curtains and she agrees it is the nicest that they have had proposed.  She stated she is sorry it has already been installed, and she agreed that some of what has been done could be used for our guidelines.  Mrs. Evans stated one of the things that makes this more positive is that it is a semi-permanent structure and it looks more appropriate for the building than the other temporary ones that have been proposed.  Mrs. Evans continued that a number of businesses have requested this and will want something like this in the future.  She stated she felt it was not that the Commission disagreed as to whether they should have them, it was more of what it should look like, and it needs to look the best that it can.  Mrs. Evans stated she would question if the Commission could allow Mr. Hoy to keep these in place temporarily with the complete understanding that it would be temporary until our guidelines are put together, which should happen in the near future, and then if they did not meet the guidelines they would have to come down.   Mr. Banschefsky stated the nature of a conditional use is to address the issue and the impact and have it fit in and be harmonious and meet the spirit and intent of the zoning code.  He stated this Commission can put a condition on it, such as setting a date that it must come down, and at that point there would be an agreement that the conditional use would effectively expire unless we were to renew it once we get our guidelines in place.  Mr. Sauer stated he agrees with Mrs. Evans and he feels this fits in with the building very well and is as good as this Commission has seen with regard to these types of curtains.  Mr. Sauer stated further he hoped when our architect puts something together for our guidelines that it would look similar to this.  Mr. Sauer further stated his question would be if this Commission approved these to remain up until April, then the guidelines are approved, he would hate to see them have to come back in and get another amendment.  Mr. Blake questioned if the approval could then be done administratively.  Mr. Banschefsky stated if the guidelines that Council approves would encompass this, then staff could administratively approve it.  Mr. Schultz stated with the time required by our process it could be next fall before the guidelines are established.  Mr. Hoy stated as a business owner they would like to have the side curtains installed in October or November and then have them removed by mid-April, or whatever date the Commission decided upon.  Mr. Sauer stated he would be comfortable allowing these side curtains remain up until mid to late spring, and once they are taken down they must meet the design standards that are set.  Mr. Hackworth clarified that Pizza Cottage was supposed to come back with a proposal and Mr. Schultz stated in his last conversation with the developer he provide their options and they have not gotten back with him as yet. Mr. Bosch stated his only reservation is that another business had to remove their side curtains, and consistency is something that he feels strongly about.  He stated, however, that since we are at a position where we can take action, we have the ability to get an architect on board within a month or so, we have a nice structure here that we can have our architect look at, and he is of the same opinion as several other Commission members that this is the best he’s seen and is the type of structure we were looking for.   Mayor O’Brien inquired if this would be in violation of the state smoking ban, and Mr. Banschefsky stated if there is smoking going on, by the proximity of the door, it would probably be a violation.  Mr. Hoy stated that would be if it were enclosed 100 percent, and there is a doorway that is the exit way to the patio.  Mr. Schultz stated if this is approved it would be submitted to the building department and they will determine the type of structure it is from a State perspective.  Mr. Blake clarified that Mr. Gray was present this evening and asked if, as the landlord, he had any comments.  Mr. Gray stated he was not notified when it was put in, but he does think they did a good job on it.  He stated if it is okay with the City, then it is okay with him.  Mrs. Evans stated she would like to suggest conditionally approving the current outdoor semi-permanent structure, with the understanding that if, once the guidelines for patio enclosures are established and the current structure does not meet those guidelines, then the structure would be immediately removed or modified to meet the guidelines.  Mr. Banschefsky stated that would work, and he would suggest that there be some wording that would require it to come down by a date certain.  Mr. Sauer stated he would suggest adding that the curtains were to come down the end of April and they could go up at the first of November.  Mrs. Evans stated then the wording that in the interim the structure is to removed by April 15th and not be reinstalled by November 1st.  Mr. Banschefsky stated he felt that was fine, and he would also add something that it would be for staff’s review and approval so they did not have to come back with a new application.  Mr. Hackworth clarified that this would have to meet building department regulations.  Mr. Blake clarified this Commission would be approving the design, style, and use of the structure, not that it would meet any building codes or any rules and regulations.  Mr. Nicholas stated while he does not have anything against what has been put in; his concern is that if this were allowed to remain he felt it would put staff in a bad position with applicants who had to remove their side curtains.  He stated because of this he could not support allowing this structure to stay as installed.  Mrs. Evans stated if the side curtains that had been removed were anything like this, she would agree with Mr. Nicholas.  She stated, however, the difference in this one is that she did not feel staff would have any trouble defending this decision.  Mrs. Evans moved to conditionally approve the current outdoor enclosure with the understanding that once the guidelines for patio enclosures are established, and the current structure does not meet those guidelines, then the structure will be immediately removed or modified to meet the guidelines, and in the interim the structure is to be removed by April 15th and not be reinstalled before November 1st, subject to staff review and approval; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas and Mr. Hackworth voting “Nay,” and Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, and Mrs. Evans voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 4-2. 

 

C.        Review and request for a motion to approve an amended Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Service Facilities for Rule(3) located at 650 Windmiller Drive.  Mr. Henderson reviewed the staff’s report provided to the Commission and stated the applicant is proposing to amend the Conditional Use Permit in order to allow the volleyball courts, eastern patio, and southeastern patio to be utilized after dark.  Mr. Henderson stated the most recent Conditional Use Permit approved by this Commission in August 2009, contains the condition that the eastern patio, volleyball courts, and southeastern patio shall not be utilized after dark.  Mr. Henderson stated staff does not support amending the Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Patios and Volleyball Courts for Rule(3) that would allow the eastern patio, volleyball courts, and southeastern patio be utilized after dark.  Mr. Schultz stated that he would like to clarify that outdoor lights would be allowed in amending the Conditional Use, then Item D. on tonight’s agenda would deal with that issue.  He stated if this Commission does not allow approve the amended Conditional Use then they will not consider the lighting issue. 

 

            Mr. Don Smith stated he is the applicant and he is requesting to be allowed to utilize the volleyball courts after dark as if they start April leagues dark could be as early as 8:00 P.M.  Mr. Smith stated the building and volleyball courts had been positioned to not allow light to affect Gray Drive at all.  He stated they do not intend to exceed the City’s guidelines on foot candles at the property line.  He stated this would just allow the volleyball leagues to start in April and finish up by 9:00 or 9:30 P.M. 

 

            Mr. Blake stated he has visited the establishment and walked the volleyball court and patio area to see the orientation with regard to the subdivision, and he did not think it could be positioned better to have it lit and be able to use it.  Mr. Blake stated he did not have any problem with using this after dark, but his only concern would be the hours of operation.  He stated, however, he did not feel the lights or the noise would affect the subdivision at all.  Mr. Sauer stated he agreed with Mr. Blake that this would not be a problem.  Mr. Hackworth stated he had concern because when the restriction was put on that it would not be used after dark the applicant agreed with that.  He stated he did not know how many times applicants came back in and say conditions have changed.  Mr. Hackworth further clarified that the applicant’s intent was to have the lights off by 10:00 P.M. on week nights and by 11:00 P.M. on weekends.  Mr. Smith stated he was fine with putting timers on the lights to ensure they went off on time.  Mr. Hackworth further questioned if the Homeowner’s Association for Windmiller Ponds had been contacted regarding this and Mr. Schultz stated they had not.  Mrs. Evans stated she had the same concerns about changing the conditions, and her biggest concern was the noise and if the residents of the subdivision will be able to hear that, especially at 11:00 P.M. at night.  She stated even on weekends, some people do have other work hours, and they need their rest.  Mr. Smith stated they have had bands on weekends and they have received no complaints from any of the neighbors.  Mr. Bosch stated when this was being considered originally there was a great deal of discussion on the time cut offs for night time activities.  He stated homeowners had attended many of these meetings and to appease them the Commission determined that cutting the activities off at dark addressed those issues and he was not in favor of changing that now.  Mr. Nicholas stated he agreed with Mr. Bosch.  Mr. Blake stated after walking the area and looking at the proximity to the neighborhood, he would feel comfortable asking that this be tabled to allow the other members to go out and look at it.  Mr. Hackworth stated if a time were put on the use he might feel better, but part of any zoning condition has do to with the neighbors, and he would feel more comfortable if they had been notified.  Mr. Sauer moved to Table; Mrs. Evans seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mrs. Evans, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Blake, and Mr. Bosch voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 6-0.  (TABLED)

 

D.        Review and request for motion to approve an amended Nonresidential Design Standards Certificate of Appropriateness for Lighting for Rule(3) located at 650 Windmiller Drive.  Mr. Sauer moved to Table; Mrs. Evans seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, and Mrs. Evans voting “Yea.”  Motion passed, 6-0.  (TABLED)

 

5.         REPORTS

 

A.        Planning and Zoning Director. 

 

            (1)        BZA Report.  Mr. Schultz stated the Board of Zoning Appeals did not meet in December and there are no agenda items for January. 

 

            (2)        FCRPC.  Mr. Henderson stated the Fairfield County Regional Planning Commission met and there were no items that affected us considered.  Mr. Henderson stated MORPC is working on doing a regional planning for Central Ohio and all Commission members had been asked to go to their web site and take a survey.  He stated this information was included in the Commission’s packets. 

 

6.         OTHER BUSINESS:

 

A.        Commission Discussion.  Mr. Blake questioned if Taranto’s Pizza had an approved patio.  Mr. Schultz stated he has been researching this issue and the building was approved several years ago when the City did not have a building department.  He stated at that time the State reviewed all the plans and if the patio was established prior to our Certificate of Appropriateness requirement it would be grandfathered, but if it was after that time it would require a Certificate of Appropriateness.  He stated his department is still doing the research to see if they can find a time frame.  Mrs. Evans stated there is a new patio that was a carport that has been enclosed.  Mr. Schultz stated he would check with the building department to see if they have any record of that.  

 

B.         Refugee Road Corridor Study.  Mr. Schultz stated this project is moving forward.  He stated it is a little slow right now because of the holidays and because of the move of the Planning and Zoning Department into the building with the Building Department.  He stated he hoped to have more information next month. 

 

Mr. Schultz stated he would like to let the Commission know that the clock tower sign near S.R. 256 and I-70 was purchased by The Cracker Barrel.  He stated they are going to remove the clock and put in a “Welcome to Pickerington” sign per an agreement with the City to pay the electricity. 

 

Mr. Blake stated he would like to thank Mr. Schultz for putting together the packet on the zoning code interpretations.  He stated he would ask the Commission members to look at this between now and the next meeting and then review it at the next meeting. 

 

7.         ADJOURNMENT.  There being nothing further, Mr. Blake moved to adjourn; Mr. Sauer seconded the motion.  Mr. Bosch, Mr. Sauer, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, and Mrs. Evans voted “Aye.”  Motion carried, 6-0.  The Planning and Zoning Commission adjourned at 9:00 P.M., January 12, 2010.

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

___________________________                 

Lynda D. Yartin, Municipal Clerk