PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

TUESDAY, JANUARY 25, 2011

REGULAR MEETING

7:30 P.M.

1. ROLL CALL: Mr. Blake called the meeting to order at 7:37 P.M. with roll call as

follows: Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mrs. Evans, Mr. Bosch, and Mr. Blair were present. No members were absent. Others present were: Bill Vance, Susan Crotty, Joe Henderson, Mitch Banchefsky, Karen Risher, Brian Hoy, Matthew Maynard and John Bernard.

2. A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of December 14, 2010, Regular Meeting: Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Blair abstaining, and Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas voting “Yes”. Motion passed, 6-0.

3. SCHEDULED MATTERS:

A. A public hearing and review and request for a motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit for Horvath Towers LLC., for a Cell Tower located at 671 Windmiller Drive (TABLED 10/12/10). Mr. Blake stated the applicant has requested that this remain on the table.

B. Review and request for a motion to approve Nonresidential Design Standards Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan for Seton Parish located at 600 Hill Road North (TABLED 12/14/10). Mr. Bosch moved to remove from the table; Mr. Nicholas seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mrs. Evans, Mr. Bosch and Mr. Blair voting “Yes”. Motion passed, 7-0. Mr. Henderson reviewed the report provided to the Commission and stated that the applicant, Seton Parish, is proposing to build a service structure that would enclose two recycling containers along the northern property west of the building. The proposed service structure would be located outside the front yard setback and would enclose three sides of the recycling containers with a six foot tall wood privacy fence. The south side of the service structure would not have a gate and this would allow parishioners and the public to have easy access to the recycling containers. Staff supports the Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan that complies with the minimum zoning code requirements and the following condition:

(1) That the service structure shall only be used for recycling containers.

Mr. John Bernard stated he is the business manger for Seton Parish. Mr. Blake clarified that the applicant did not have any questions, comments or concerns regarding staff’s recommendations. Mr. Nicholas stated that he does not have a problem with the location and it is well screened from northbound viewing. As far as screening it from the Pickerington Youth Athletic Association side, there are only a couple of feet between the proposed fence and the existing chain link fence and some planting material there, if necessary, would be about the only thing that could be done to shield it from view in that space. Mr. Hackworth clarified that one of the containers will be for newspapers and the other one is currently for parishioners use and is for cardboard, plastics one and two, glass and aluminum cans. Mr. Hackworth stated that at times people will use recycle containers as a place to drop off their unwanted items and if the container is full the items end up being piled around the dumpsters. He clarified that these containers will be the type that a truck can come in and lift up the container. Mr. Bernard stated that they will be

picked up by the same company that does their trash removal. Mr. Bosch clarified that the reason the applicant is asking to do this is a result of it coming to staff’s attention. There were no further questions or

comments. Mr. Bosch moved to approve the Nonresidential Design Standards Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan for Seton Parish with the following condition:

1. That the service structure shall only be used for recycling containers.

Mrs. Evans seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Blair, Mrs. Evans, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Hackworth and Mr. Blake voting “Yes”. Motion passed, 7-0.

C. Review and request for a motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit for an outdoor Patio for Happy Endings Pub located at 1128 Hill road North (TABLED 12/14/10). Mr. Blake stated that the applicant has requested that this remain on the table.

D. Review and request for a motion to approve a Nonresidential Design Standards Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan and Architecture for the Offices at Stonecreek located along Stonecreek Drive South. Mr. Blake stated that the applicant has requested that this be tabled. Mr. Bosch moved to table; Mrs. Evans seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mrs. Evans, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blair, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch and Mr. Binkley voting “Yes”. Motion passed, 7-0.

E. Review and request for a motion to approve a Nonresidential Design Standards Certificate of Appropriateness for Site Plan, Architecture, and Lighting for Pickerington Elementary School located at 775 Long Road. Mr. Blake stated that the applicant has requested that this be tabled. Mr. Hackworth moved to table; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Binkley, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blair, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch and Mrs. Evans voting “Yes”. Motion passed, 7-0.

F. Review and request for a motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit for an Outdoor Patio for Asian Bistro located at 10503 Blacklick Eastern Road, Suite 900. Mr. Blake stated the applicant has requested that this be tabled. Mr. Bosch moved to table; Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Binkley, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, Mrs. Evans, Mr. Bosch and Mr. Blair voting “Yes”. Motion passed 7-0.

4. Sustainability/Green Building Regulations. Ms Crotty stated that she had provided the Commission members with a memo suggesting that we start looking at solutions for alternate energy sources. The City currently does not have anything to regulate, or to encourage, sustainable building. The suggestion was made to start looking at one energy source and the focus is currently on solar energy. She has done further research to find some zoning regulations and has attached those. Ms Crotty further stated that Mr. Nicholas had advised her that Portland, Oregon had already adopted code that regulates solar panels and their use. She stated that what a lot of cities look at when they regulate solar panels are the location and the height of ground mounted panels. It generally is more about the aesthetics of them. She stated something she thinks the City should look at is how we can encourage the use of alternative energy sources. The City may want to look at some incentives to encourage applicants proposing new construction to use alternative energy sources and be more environmentally friendly. If the Commission agrees, staff will further investigate regulations on solar energy and look for more ways to offer incentives. Mr. Hackworth asked for clarification on incentives. Ms Crotty stated that she is not necessarily suggesting the City do this, however a lot of communities give the applicant a density bonus for construction. We want to encourage people toward a more sustainable form of building and to encourage alternative energy sources. Mr. Hackworth questioned why the City would want to encourage this and stated that he does not think the wind or solar energy possibilities would be happening if there were not huge incentives from the federal government and that most of them are not cost affective. Ms Crotty stated the idea behind it is more that it’s better for the environment. Mr. Hackworth stated that is probably the only argument for it and that during the oil crisis in the 70’s there were solar panels put up on houses and they are still there. Mr. Blake stated the technology has changed dramatically since that time. He further stated he knows someone who heats a pool using just the solar panels on his roof and a small pump. The only cost involved is the initial investment of $1000.00 for the solar panels. Mr. Blake further stated that it costs him $500.00 to heat his own pool for three months. Mr. Vance stated he thinks the emphasis from staff is more on the items related to the installation of the structure itself. Potential incentives would be a policy recommendation if the majority of Planning and Zoning Commission wanted to pursue such a policy recommendation. Staff obviously wants to cover all bases and mention all possibilities for the Commission’s potential consideration but the emphasis was on the structures themselves. Mr. Blake stated his concern, and he thinks that the City is being proactive to this, is that the City will see more and more of the wind turbines coming in and that is where it could affect this Commission dramatically more than even the solar panels. He further stated he thinks it is a good move to investigate what is out there. Mr. Hackworth stated he agrees that some people are going to want to put in the smaller wind turbines and the City has to be ahead of that. Ms Crotty stated we are going to get questions on these items and we do need to have something in place. Mr. Hackworth stated that solar panels on the roof would need to be on the south side and that would result in half of the solar panels being seen from the street. Ms Crotty stated this is something that Portland addressed in their code; they do require that they not face the street. Mr. Blake stated that this is huge on the west coast and is coming this way and he would rather be proactive than reactive and he thinks it would be a good move for staff to pursue this. Mr. Bosch stated he agrees and that he thinks the solar and wind will be the first things we will see coming in, also rain gardens. Mr. Henderson stated we have already seen this with the rain garden that staff suggested for Essie’s Angels. The owner of that property was very favorable to putting in a rain garden. Mr. Binkley stated if we had provisions in place there could be incentives that would lower some of the applicant’s costs and not be something the City would have to actually pay for. The applicant would benefit from it and there would be sustainability involved. Mrs. Evans stated perhaps we could also consider taking a small percentage off of the impact fees for the structure itself as an incentive. Ms Crotty stated staff would do further research and have that at the meeting next month.

5. REPORTS

A. Planning and Zoning Director

(1) BZA Report. Ms Crotty stated the last meeting was on December 16^th and there was one item on the agenda. A setback variance was granted for the Offices at Stonecreek. There are no agenda items for January.

(2) FCRPC. Mr. Henderson stated FCRPC met and there was nothing substantial for the Pickerington area.

6. OTHER BUSINESS

A. Community Comments. There were no community comments.

B. Temporary Signage Code Change. Mr. Henderson stated there was a memo in the Commission’s packets regarding this. Staff has added the suggestions that were made during the discussion on this issue at a prior meeting into the proposal for the code change. The code would change from allowing three temporary banners per year for 30 days each to allowing six temporary banners per year for 15 days each. The total amount of time they allowed per year remains the same, it is just spread out more frequently for a shorter time frame per occurrence. This was due to feedback received from various businesses in the City.

C. Refugee Road Corridor Study. Ms Crotty stated staff is evaluating options to get this completed. The goal is to have it completed in the middle of this year.

D. Main Street Public meeting on Thursday, January 27, 2011, at 7:30 P.M. Mr. Henderson stated this was on the City website and that the OPVBA and the Chamber of Commerce were advised. Ms. Crotty stated it was also on the City’s Facebook page.

E. Commission Discussion. Mr. Hackworth stated there has been a banner up for about a month by the duplexes that are behind the post office on Courtright Drive East and has been up for a month or so. Mr. Henderson stated he would look into this. Mr. Vance started that he would try to send out an email with updates as to progress in handling some of these issues. He requested that if the Commission members see anything regarding a banner that they send and email and staff will check into it. Mr. Blake stated he thinks the difference is night and day between three months ago and today. Mr. Vance stated the Mr. Hopper is doing a fantastic job, in coordination with Mr. Henderson.

7. ADJOURNMENT. There being nothing further Mr. Nicholas moved to adjourn, Mr. Binkley seconded the motion. Roll call was taken with Mrs. Evans, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Blake, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Binkley and Mr. Blair voting “Aye”. Mr. Bosch had a prior commitment and departed at 8:00 P.M. Motion carried, 6-0. The Planning and Zoning Commission meeting adjourned at 8:09 P.M., January 25, 2011.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

______________________________

Karen I. Risher, Deputy City Clerk

ATTEST:

_____________________________

Susan Crotty, Development Director