PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION

CITY HALL, 100 LOCKVILLE ROAD

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2011

 

REGULAR MEETING

7:30 P.M.

 

 

1.         CALL TO ORDER:  Mr. Blake called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. with roll call as follows:  Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Bosch were present.  Mrs. Evans, Mr. Binkley, and Mr. Blair were absent.  Others present were Joe Henderson, Scott Fulton, Asam Hague, Karen Risher, Keith Cobb, Pat Reade, and Tiffany Davis.

 

2.         APPROVAL OF MINUTES of August 9, 2011, Regular Meeting. Mr. Bosch moved to approve; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake, and Mr. Nicholas, voting “Yes”.  Motion passed, 4-0.

 

3.         SWEARING IN OF APPLICANTS. Mr. Blake asked that anyone who plans to offer testimony or evidence at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting tonight stand and raise their right hand.  Keith Cobb, Pat Reade, and Tiffany Davis did so.  Mr. Blake asked the following: “Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you about to give before the Pickerington Planning and Zoning Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”?  All standing stated “I do”.

 

4.         SCHEDULED MATTERS.

 

            A.        Review and request for a motion to approve a Comprehensive Sign Plan for wall signage for the Giant Eagle located at 873 Refugee Road.

 

Mr. Fulton reviewed the report provided to the Commission members and stated the applicant is proposing to amend the Comprehensive Sign Plan approved in February 2006 for Giant Eagle in the Pickerington Square center. There will be a reduction in the size for two existing channel letter signs and the addition on one new channel letter sign on the exterior of the building.  The original Comprehensive Sign Plan was approved for a total of 498.84 square feet of signage. The applicant is proposing a reduction in size for two existing channel letter signs and the addition of one new channel letter sign on the exterior of the building. The “OPEN 24 HOURS” sign on the left side of the front façade of the building is currently 40 square feet and will be reduced in size to 34 square feet, an overall reduction of six square feet.

 

Mr. Fulton further stated that the “PHARMACY” sign on the far right side of the building will be replaced.  It is currently 33.84 square feet and will be reduced to 25.95 square feet, an overall reduction of almost 8 square feet on that. The new sign will have ‘FOOD & DRUG” and will be located on the front of the building under the “GIANT EAGLE” sign. The new sign will be 42.7 square feet in size. The overall square footage of wall signs would be 427.65 square feet, an increase of 28.81 square feet.  Staff supports the amended Comprehensive Sign Plan for building signage for Giant Eagle that complies with the minimum zoning code requirements.

 

Mr. Keith Cobb stated he is with Litech Lighting, the company that will be doing the sign installation and he is also representing MC Sign Company.  Mr. Blake clarified that Mr. Cobb did not have any questions, comments, or concerns with Staff’s recommendations.  Mr. Blake clarified that all of the signs will be changed to LED lighting.  Mr. Nicholas clarified that the existing “PHARMACY” sign on the north end of the building will be taken down.

 

Mr. Nicholas moved to approve the Comprehensive Sign Plan; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Blake voting “Yes”.  Motion passed, 4-0.

 

            B.         A public hearing and review and request for a motion to approve a rezoning for approximately 0.18 acres located at 35 West Church Street (parcel #041-02790-00) from PO – Planned Suburban Office to C2 -  Central Business/Mixed Use.

 

Mr. Fulton reviewed the report provided to the Commission members and stated that this property was rezoned from R4 residential to PO – Planned Suburban Office District in 2006 with the condition that the property be limited to office uses only. The applicant is proposing to rezone the property from PO – Planned Suburban Office District to C2 -  Central Business/Mixed Use so that the existing single family home currently being used as an insurance office can be used for either business or residential uses as well.  The applicant is consolidating their business at another site in Canal Winchester and no longer needs to use this property for offices for their business. The applicant would like to use this for residential purposes for a potential renter or if the right commercial business came along they would rent it out to them for that use. Staff supports the rezoning with the minimum zoning code requirements.

 

Mr. Blake opened the public hearing at 7:41 P.M. 

 

Ms Tiffany Davis stated she resides next to 35 West Church Street and that she respectfully hopes that the Commission would reconsider and not allow this to be rezoned for business use.  This is a community of homes and as they have found out over the years with the business across the street, when you do not live in the place, you do not take ownership as being a part of the neighborhood community because you do live there. Ms Davis further added that as an example, they were power washing the business at 8:00 A.M. on a Sunday morning. None of the neighbors would have done that because they would have had more courtesy and respect for their fellow neighbors.  As a household, her family agreed not to put up a fuss when 35 West Church Street went to office use because that was an 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. use and there was no chance that they would have to keep their side windows closed to block out noise at 11:00 P.M. so they could sleep.

 

Mr. Blake closed the public hearing at 7:43 P.M.

 

Mr. Pat Reade stated he has owned the property at 35 West Church Street since 1995, he has always taken care of the property and has made great improvements to it.  It suited him very well as offices for his insurance agency.  Now that they are located in Canal Winchester this house is empty and his preference would be to rent it to a family.  He has no intentions of selling the property but at the same time, if the right business came along that did not create a lot of traffic and had the right type of business such as the frame shop on West Church Street down the street, he would like to have that option.  Mr. Reade further stated he lives 10 minutes from the property and takes very good care of it, it obviously is in much better shape than it was when he purchased it, and he sees no reason not to have it zoned to the C2  he is requesting.

 

Mr. Blake clarified that this is currently zoned PO - Planned Suburban Office. Mr. Henderson stated that some uses this piece of property could be used for under the current PO zoning would be office use only.  The house that is there does not have any parking available other than street parking so it is not like any of those uses would pop up for this location. Mr. Henderson further stated that in the Old Village there are a lot of C2 zoned districts for the flexibility of residential or office on Columbus Street and on a few properties on West Church Street.  The C2 use is a zoning classification that is designed for the Old Village area.  Mr. Blake clarified that on the PO zoning that is here today does have the condition that states it is for office use only.  Mr. Blake further clarified that potential uses for the C2 zoning would be commercial, office, retail, restaurant, and daycare, there is a long list that could possibly go in there now and that the parking requirements for a C2 district that apply in other commercial districts in the City  do not apply in the Old Village district. Mr. Blake clarified that in this corridor on Church Street around this property, the properties on either side of this property are zoned residential and across the street on the north side it is an M district where the Creamery was located, and that the empty lots west of the Creamery are also zoned M, and that there was a warehouse building there that was torn down for safety reasons. Mr. Henderson stated there is a daycare, Little Tigers, and the offices of the Good Company next to that area. There is a framing shop at 77 West Church Street that is zoned C2.  Mr. Reade stated there is also a barber shop on Columbus that backs up to his property.  Mr. Henderson stated that the downtown area is a mix of C2, Office, and R4 zoning.

 

 Mr. Hackworth clarified that this applicant had to come before the Planning and Zoning Commission for the rezoning request to the current PO - Planned Suburban Office zoning and that conditions or restrictions can be put on with that rezoning, and that with this rezoning request to C2 the Commission cannot put any conditions with it. He clarified that in C2 the permitted, allowable uses would be arts or craft studios, business retail, daycare, medical facilities, family restaurant, professional and business offices. Conditional Uses would be hospitals, research, and development, animal clinics without boarding, bars, churches, drive through banking, hotels and motels, taverns, non accredited vocational schools, universities and wholesale businesses. He further clarified that permitted uses would go through the Zoning Certificate process that is done administratively by staff and would not come before the Planning and Zoning Commission, and that the conditional uses would have to come before the Commission for approval.  Mr. Henderson stated that the allowable uses in the C2 district are pretty similar to what is found in the Office district as well as the C3 district.  The reason that we have the C2 district is that it also allows the residential component to it whether it is a single family use or apartments on the second story and PO does not allow residential use.  Mr. Blake clarified that Mr. Reade could not rent this out as a residence with a PO zoning.  Mr. Henderson stated the owner wants to be able to rent this as residential while also having the ability to rent this out as on office use.  The C2 district allows that flexibility in the Old Village district. Mr. Hackworth stated that he wishes we had some sort of a zoning that anything other than residential would have to come in to the Planning and Zoning Commission for a conditional use so that we could have some sort of standards or conditions that could be set, and that he is not sure that we are not leaving ourselves wide open for something undesirable to move in there.  Mr. Blake stated he understands that Mr. Reade wants to have the flexibility to use this as a rental property or sell it as a residence and not a commercial piece of property.  He also understands Ms Davis’s side of it that with C2 it is wide open.

 

Mr. Bosch clarified that currently, even through this is a planned district where we can put conditions, we can’t allow residential there.  He further clarified that if this changes to a C2, knowing the lot and the way it sits, it really can’t be developed into a high intensity use. Mr. Bosch stated that if a block of a few lots zone C2 that are next to each other were available someone could  purchase all of the lots and put a larger facility on there without having to come in to the Planning and Zoning Commission.  Mr. Blake stated the question is, if four or five of these lots get clustered together and have C2 zoning could a use that the residents that are there would consider as desirable come in without going through a rezoning? Mr. Henderson stated that if it’s an allowable use they would have to come to the Planning and Zoning Commission for a Certificate of Appropriateness.  Mr. Bosch stated he does not have a problem with the small businesses coming in as they do not generate a lot of traffic etc., but if you start putting blocks together then you do have something that could redevelop and just because we can control what the building looks like, and especially with the parking restrictions being different in the Old Downtown, it does concern him that at some point there could be a large block become available that is zoned C2.  Mr. Henderson stated this applicant does want the option to bring residential back into this site and that the C2 zoning does allow that.  Mr. Bosch stated he understands that, but he also understands that if the Commission passes this as C2, it is C2 period.

 

Mr. Nicholas clarified that the major differences between the two zonings is the new zoning would allow residential and commercials uses and the current zoning is only office. Mr. Nicholas also clarified that conditions cannot be put on a straight letter rezoning.  Mr. Hague stated that is correct, whatever is in the code for C2 zoning is what they would be allowed to do. He clarified that if the applicant wants to use that structure for a family restaurant, a permitted use in C2, they would have to meet whatever setback requirements there are, parking requirements etc.  He clarified that if they are coming in and not changing anything on the exterior, they would need a Zoning Certificate from the Planning and Zoning Department which is an administrative function. They would also need to meet the Ohio Revised Code Building Code requirements and in order to do that in this building it would mean almost a total remodel.  Mr. Reade stated that it would take a major modification on the inside to change this to commercial. Given the historical significance of this house, he has no plans of changing the inside of house. Ms Davis inquired what happens if he sells the house and Mr. Reade stated he has no intention of selling the house and that he does not want the house to be vacant and his intent is to rent it to a nice family. Given the magnitude of the care and improvements he has put into this house in the last 16 years he is not inclined to make any changes to the inside of the house that compromise the construction of the house. 

 

Mr. Hague stated to analyze the worst case scenario as being business retail right next to these residential areas, the business retail would have to take place in the existing structure, if it did not then whatever improvements or reconstruction that took place would have to meet code and that would be seen by staff.  If the use is the same then they would not need to come back to this Commission but there would be administrative functions that would have to take place.  Mr. Henderson stated are administrative functions both in the Building Department and in the Zoning Department, and also that anything that would change the appearance would automatically have to come in before this Commission because of the district it is in. Mr. Hague stated then there is that level of oversight for this Commission.  Mr. Hackworth clarified that if they wanted to put in parking lot behind this house it would most likely have to come before the Commission as it would be probably be a 10 percent site change that would require that.  Mr. Reade stated there is no parking in the rear of the house.  Mr. Bosch stated his biggest concern when it comes to C2 zoning in the downtown area is the waiving of all of the parking criteria.  Mr. Henderson stated this has been in place for years.  Mr. Bosch clarified that there has been a C3 Planned District in the City and that Mr. Henderson is not aware of a current C2 Planned District in the City.  Mr. Bosch stated that a C2 Planned District might allow the property owner do what he wants to do and still give the adjacent neighbor and this Commission that security of keeping it to that small, low traffic type of commercial. Mr. Henderson stated to go to a Planned District he doe not think the Commission could change it from a C2 to a PC2 tonight.  The applicant would have to come back in next month and it would be a longer process. 

 

Mr. Blake stated that we typically have all seven members of the Commission present, tonight we have four and for approval this would require three affirmative votes of the four votes and the applicant does have the option of having this tabled until next month.  Mr. Reade stated that a C2 zoning on his property would be consistent with other properties in the area that are within close proximity to his. Mr. Henderson stated it is surrounded by R4 and C2 zoning.  Mr. Nicholas stated he is empathetic with both sides of this request.  Mr. Henderson stated he thinks the intent of the rezoning is to allow residential use in that property.  Mr. Nicholas stated he understands Ms Davis point of view because, for an example, if Mr. Reade should sell his property, or pass away and his estate needed to settle the property, there are no controls there.  He also understands Mr. Reade’s point of view as he seems well intended to put a respectable, quiet business in there or a residence.  Mr. Henderson clarified that parking is restricted on West Church Street, that there is Permit Parking Only available there. Ms Davis stated that at times some people ignore the Permit Parking Only signs and she has come home and not been able to park in front of her house because someone is parked there. She understands that the police department does have more important things to do than deal with parking complaints. It is not a big problem now, however, it could be a concern in the future. Mr. Nicholas clarified that there is Permit Parking Only on the south side of West Church Street,  Mr. Reade’s property is located on the south side, and that if Mr. Reade was present at the time, he allowed his clients to park in his Permit Parking Only spot and was very sensitive and would tell them not to park in front of Ms Davis’ house because he knew that was a sensitive issue. Mr. Nicholas clarified that if, in the future, Mr. Reade would have a residential tenant in the upstairs and they had the Permit Parking Only spot, and there was a commercial tenant in the downstairs they would be able to park on North Center Street, Columbus Street, the municipal lot on Columbus Street and the old Bus Barn lot.  He stated he is not concerned about the parking issue. Mr. Nicholas clarified that with C2 zoning, the whole building could be commercial, the whole building could be residential, or it could be a mix of both.  He clarified that Ms Davis’ biggest concern is the activity and the noise, there could be teenagers living there playing loud music etc.

 

Mr. Blake stated with the Manufacturing district across the street and C2 zoning to the east and west he feels C2 is appropriate.  Mr. Nicholas stated that it might be to the benefit of the applicant and/ or the concerned neighbors to wait a month until we get all of the Commission members here.  Mr. Reade stated he has someone interested in it now and if he has to wait until December that is a couple of months. He stated his only other option is apply to have it rezoned to residential. Mr. Blake stated there is the option to bring it back in before the full seven members Commission. Mr. Reade stated if he leaves it as it is now he could rent to anyone for office use that could have more employees.  He further stated that he does not want to change the structural integrity of the house, has no intentions of selling it, and that he thought this would be the easiest way to be able to turn it back to a residence while at the same time have the ability to lease it somebody with his approval on a business standpoint that would fit what he feels is right for that property.  Mr. Bosch stated that his issue was the traffic, however he had forgotten that there is Permit Parking Only in place there to help with that. There are restrictions in place regarding a daycare, the exterior would have to stay intact or have to come back in. He further stated with what can go in there now regardless of whether the Commission takes any action or not, and with the existing controls we have in place that this does take care of some of his concerns and he does feel better about this.

 

Mr. Bosch moved to approve the rezoning to C2; Mr. Blake seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Blake and Mr. Bosch voting “Yes” and Mr. Nicholas and Mr. Hackworth voting “No”.  Motion failed, 2-2.

 

            C.        A public hearing and review and request for a motion to approve text amendments to Chapter 1286.34 Outdoor Service Facility Regulations.   

 

Mr. Fulton reviewed the report provided to the Commission and stated the need for this text amendment came to staff’s attention in early 2011 when there was a proposal for a temporary garden center on a property zoned M – General Industrial on Hill Road North. Under the current code, outdoor service facilities are not permitted in the M district and the applicant went to Council for a Councilmanic variance in order to do this. In reviewing this, it is staff’s opinion that when this chapter of the code was written the intent was to include the M district rather than the M1 district.  There is no property in the City of Pickerington currently zoned M1.  Staff supports the proposed text amendment.

 

Mr. Blake opened the Public Hearing at 8:33 P.M, and closed the Public Hearing at 8:33 P.M.   

 

Mr. Nicholas stated under the title “Outdoor Service Facility Regulations” perhaps that should be changed to “Services”, under item B. where it states “Outdoor services facilities are conditionally permitted uses in C1, C2, C3, C4, O, M, and M1 districts” perhaps we should add “subject to approval" after that, and perhaps we should consider adding and Item G. that would state “Outdoor service facilities shall not consist of any permanent improvements”. 

 

Mr. Henderson stated some of the types of things this would cover are outdoor dining areas, restaurant and bar patios, outdoor storage areas, and open markets.  The only issue the City has had with this is when it came up that it did not have the M district, it had M1, and there is nothing in the City zoned M1. Mr. Nicholas stated what triggered his comment was whether we want outdoor service facilities to have enclosed, heated type structures.  Mr. Bosch stated if you look at item (a)  it states “Outdoor Service Facility is defined as an area that is not fully enclosed by solid walls and a roof” so he would think if it was any type of permanent structure it would have walls and then they would have to come in for a Certificate of Appropriateness.  He further stated he did like the addition of “Subject to Approval” because it says permitted, but it is actually only permitted if the Commission allows it.  Mr. Nicholas clarified if there was an open air market and they put in a concession stand they would have to come in for a Certificate of Appropriateness.  Mr. Henderson stated this was not meant to be a comprehensive review of this section of this code, it is strictly to address the issue of the omission of the M district.  He further stated that if the Planning and Zoning Commission wants to direct staff to do a comprehensive review he can bring that up to the City Manager and he can move forward on that issue. 

 

Mr. Blake clarified that this being addressed with regard to the Good property. He further stated that we do have three Commission members absent and clarified that if this is tabled tonight it would not impact anything the Good’s may bring in as staff is not aware of whether they are, or are not, planning on coming forward on this for next year. Mr. Bosch clarified that by approving this it would mean an applicant would not be able to go before Council for a councilmanic variance, they would have to come before the Planning and Zoning Commission, and if it is not approved then an applicant could go be before Council and request a councilmanic variance.  Mr. Nicholas clarified that the letter M could be added as well as the words “subject to approval” in an approval tonight. Mr. Fulton stated that it does state “outdoor facilities are conditionally permitted uses” so by default it is subject to approval and adding subject to approval would be kind of redundant.

 

Mr. Blake clarified if this passes tonight, it would move forward to the City Planning, Projects and Service Committee for approval to forward on to Council and that technically an applicant could still come in for a councilmanic variance.  Mr. Blake stated if this passes tonight he hopes that  City council will be made aware that the Planning and Zoning Commission is acting to get this issue cleared up.  Mr. Henderson stated his concern is getting this started sooner rather than later.  Mr. Hackworth clarified that every outdoor patio that has come in for a conditional use has been reviewed under these regulations since they were adopted. 

 

Mr. Nicholas moved to approve with staff recommendations; Mr. Bosch seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Hackworth, and Mr. Blake voting “Yes”.  Motion passed, 4-0.

 

Mr. Henderson stated this will be moved forward to City Planning, Projects, and Services Committee next.

 

            D.        Review and request for a motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit for an Outdoor Service Facility for a farmers market and Christmas tree sales located on the two vacant parcels south of 29 Hill Road South (Circle K). 

 

Mr. Fulton stated he did email notification of when this meeting would occur and the staff report to the applicant and did receive a read receipt that the email had been read.  He reviewed the report provided to the Commission members and stated the applicant is proposing to operate a farmers market and Christmas tree sales on the two properties south of Circle K.  There is not a physical address for this. There will be no permanent structures constructed on this site.  There farmers market is proposed to operate between Memorial Day and October 31, one day a week for no more than six hours. They will have a total of 16 vendor spaces.  The vendors will come in, unload what is needed, set up their stations and after it closed they will take it back to their vehicles and leave. There will be four spots for people who want to sell their goods from the back of their trucks. Of those 16 vendor spaces, one of those spaces will be reserved each week for a community focused activity. The determination of who that community group will be is to be decided by the Chamber of Commerce.  Parking will be in the Circle K lot, the Old Pickerington Village municipal lot  and West Columbus Street area, and the Berry & Miller lot across the street.  It is one day a week for no more than six hours.  The applicant has suggested either Saturday from 8:00 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. or on a weekday from 4:00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M. Staff is recommending that the farmers market should be done on a weekend based on parking concerns.

 

Mr. Fulton stated for the Christmas tree sales the applicant is proposing to operate from the Saturday before Thanksgiving through Christmas Eve and the maximum hours of operation on those days would be from 10:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M.  Customers would use the same parking arrangement, of the Old Pickerington Village municipal lot and West Columbus Street  area, the Circle K lot, and the Berry& Miller lot across the street.  This appears to meet all of the conditional use requirements, however, there was some concern with Section D which states outdoor service facilities must not be hazardous to, or have a negative impact on, existing or future surrounding uses. Staff is recommending that they do the farmers market on a weekend so that there will not be parking conflicts. The Circle K Shopping Center tenant space is full and the parking is allocated for Circle K, a salon, skate board shop and a barber shop there and that creates a conflict between the two.  If they can utilize the Berry & Miller lot across the street when their offices are closed, that will hopefully alleviate the parking conflict.  If the farmers market can make arrangements with  Berry & Miller across the street for the use of their lot, staff feels that the condition of sub section (d) will be met. Mr. Blake clarified that one of staff’s suggested conditions is to require that the farmers market will have permission to use all of the Berry & Miller and not just  four spaces without any issues.  Mr. Henderson stated there is also parking within the Old Village area that can be utilized.  Mr. Blake stated he understands that, but if someone is loading a Christmas tree he doesn’t think they are going to haul it down West Columbus Street. Mr. Hackworth stated would also have to carry it across the street.  Mr. Henderson stated they would pull into the lot to load it and leave.  Mr. Fulton stated that the police department has expressed a preference for the Saturday morning option.  Violet Township Fire Department mentioned that the two vendor spots behind Circle K cannot be used or parking as that would block fire department access in the event of a fire.

 

Staff supports the Conditional Use Permit for an Outdoor Service Facility for a farmers market and Christmas tree sale that complies with the minimum zoning code requirements and the following conditions:

 

1.         That a letter shall be provided by the owner of the Berry lot stating that use of their lot is allowed for the farmers market and Christmas tree sales.

 

2.         That the farmers market shall be permitted to operate from Memorial Day to October 31.

 

3.         That the two designated vendor spaces to the rear of the Circle K shall not be permitted.

 

4.         That the farmers market shall only be permitted to operate on weekends.

 

Mr. Blake stated the applicant is asking approval for this for five years and he would support this for one year only because we don’t know what impact this will have on traffic.  He was at Circle K a couple of times over the weekend and each time their parking lot was full. Mr. Blake stated he doe not think someone is going to park on West Columbus and drag their Christmas tree over there, they are going to drive down Hill Road South on Friday night and block traffic while they load their tree. He stated he is sure that staff advised the applicant that parking could be an issue and he wished that the applicant or someone representing them was here so he could ask them how they came up with only these four lots. The Police Department has concerns regarding the Circle K lot already being busy and the shortage of spots leading to overcrowding or congestion issues in the area as they has suggested reducing the number of vendor spaces from 16 to 10. It would be wonderful to have a farmers market but he does not feel this is anywhere close to the best place for it. 

 

Mr. Hackworth stated five or six years ago there was an incident with drainage across that field.  Mr. Henderson stated the rear of the property is in the floodplain and the City Engineer has said that there shall be no grading or fill in that floodplain. Mr. Hackworth clarified that there is a swale cut in at the back of this property and he has a concern on how they will get trucks across that field.  Mr. Bosch stated according to the Engineer this is a stream corridor protection zone and that definitely limits what you can do there and the engineer also stated there shall be no additional curb cuts off of Hill Road. Mr. Bosch clarified that there is a curb cut on the corner of one parcel, but these two parcels are a joint use. Mr. Hackworth clarified that the tents or canopies would only be up during the farmers market.

 

 Mr. Bosch stated he has a concern regarding access to the site and parking.  There is no crosswalk here and he does not think people will walk to the traffic light to cross, instead they are going to cut right across Hill Road South from the area of these two parcels. From a safety and vehicular standpoint he has a real concern with this and with the information he has before him, he does not feel he can support this at this time. Mr. Nicholas stated he is not in favor of this location.

 

Mr. Bosch moved to approve with staff recommendations; Mr. Hackworth seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Blake, Mr. Bosch, Mr. Nicholas, and Mr. Hackworth voting “No”.  Motion failed 0-4.

 

5.         REPORTS.

 

                        A.        Planning and Zoning.

                                    (1)        BZA report.  Mr. Henderson stated BZA met last month and approved the setback variance for Mark Matthews Insurance and there was also a rear yard setback in The Reserve at Pickerington Ponds that was approved.  There are three cases on the agenda for next month.

                       

B.         FCRPC.  Mr. Henderson stated Mr. Fulton will be going to these meetings in the future.  The only thing on the agenda for Violet Township was an extension for Winding Creek section 5 and that was approved.  Membership dues will be due.  Our dues are going up because our population jumped to over 18,000 in the 2010 census.  FCRPC is looking to increase the dues from .20 to .25 per person.  Mr. Bosch clarified that the dollar figure for the City would be 3,600. without the increase and 4,500. with the increase.

 

6.         OTHER BUSINESS.

 

            A.        Community Comments.  There were none

 

            B.         Solar Panel Discussion Update.  Mr. Fulton stated that Solar Zoning Regulations provided to the Commission are simply a draft for review and to open up discussion for next month. 

 

            C.        Commission Discussion.  Mr. Hackworth stated that he noticed there were two or three calls to Rule 3 for excessive noise and he thinks this happens once or twice a month where there have calls there for excessive noise. They also use the vacant lot across the street for parking and if they are having a large event on Friday or Saturday night it is hard to get down Windmiller Drive.  Mr. Henderson stated the City Engineer has been working on some things related to parking on Windmiller Drive.  Rule 3 did have a big event recently with one of the radio stations and they were cited by the police department for excessive noise. It appears they may not have followed the outdoor service facility condition of non amplification. In discussion with Rule 3 they advised the only way for them to stay successful and stay open is to on occasion have that type of activity.  Mr. Henderson stated the staff and the City cannot support that and the owner, Don Smith, was advised of this.

 

 Staff did advise Mr. Smith if he wants to do this in the future he would have to come before this Commission to amend their outdoor service facility condition. Mr. Smith will be coming in during the next few months to request to amend to allow this type of event once or twice per year.  Mr. Blake stated that when that is going to come before the Commission he would like staff to provide the Commission members with copies of any police reports that involved Rule 3 during the past  12 – 15 months and also requested that staff include Chief Taylor’s thoughts on this. Mr. Hackworth stated his problem is that they come in before the Commission and say have to have this and that, so we make all these arrangements for them that they swear they will abide by, and then they have all kinds of problems on a Saturday night and the police are there half of the night. Another issue is the temporary banners and signs they are putting out on the corners on weekends. Mr. Henderson stated the City Manager has spoken with them about that issue, they have been advised to stop, and if it continues they will be cited into court.  Mr. Hackworth stated this is not to pick on Rule 3, however they seem to be getting into a lot of trouble recently.

 

Mr. Bosch clarified that regarding the amplification of the music, with Rule 3’s patio being a condition use, there is something in the code that if it becomes an issue where we are continuously getting calls and complaints that Rule 3 could lose that conditional permit. Mr. Blake stated that is correct, because it is conditional.  Mr. Bosch stated he can stand in his house and feel the thumping of the bass guitar. Mr. Henderson clarified that Mr. Bosch is not in the direction where he should be hearing that.  Mr. Bosch stated he is not in the front of the subdivision where the first house is 600 feet from Rule 3, he is on the back side of the subdivision. Mr. Blake stated this Commission bent over backwards to help Rule 3 be a successful member of the community in spite of the opposition of the folks that packed this room on numerous occasions.  Mr. Blake clarified that for Rule 3 to come back before the Commission it will not require that the residents nearby receive a public notice.  He stated he does not want to see someone go out of business, however, they still have to play by the rules.

Mr. Henderson stated he agrees, they agreed to the conditions in order to get them approved and they should follow them.

 

Mr. Hackworth clarified that Keller Farms has approval from Council to be there through October 15th.  Mr. Blake asked if the two trailers and the pick up truck that is against code and still sitting there will have to be moved by the 15th.  Mr. Henderson stated he will have to check what the councilmanic variance says. Mr. Blake stated the truck is not licensed, it does not run, and it can’t be driven to move it as it is sitting there with flat tires. 

 

Mr. Bosch stated there is a borer machine sitting close to the white line of Hill Road North in the area of Courtland Lane.  Mr. Henderson stated they do not need a permit from Planning and Zoning but may need something from engineering or the service department. Mr. Bosch stated his concern is safety related as that machine could be hit with a truck and the machine still would not move. Mr. Hackworth stated it also creates a visibility problem as you have to almost onto Hill Road before you can see if can pull out.  Mr. Henderson stated if this is still there in morning he will make someone aware of this. Mr. Bosch stated regarding Keller Farms, they have a meter on the fire hydrant so they can use the water. On Saturday morning he almost called the police because someone in the white Keller Farms pick up truck stopped in front of a couple of cars so he get over there to park facing the wrong way just so that he could  turn the water on.  If he had to then go back to his site he may well have made a u-turn to get there.  In his opinion it is not worth the possibility of causing an accident or hurting someone just so you can water your flowers. 

 

7.         ADJOURNMENT.  Mr. Bosch moved to adjourn; Mr. Nicholas seconded the motion.  Roll call was taken with Mr. Nicholas, Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Blake, and Mr. Bosch voting “Aye”.  Motion carried, 4-0. The Planning and Zoning Commission meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M., September 13, 2011

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

____________________________

Karen I. Risher, Deputy City Clerk

 

ATTEST:

 

 

___________________________________________

Joseph P. Henderson, Development Services Director