REGULAR MEETING OF THE EATON PLANNING
ZONING AND BUILDING BOARD ON MAY 13, 2003
AT 7:30 P.M., IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The Eaton Planning, Zoning and Building Board met in regular session in Council Chambers on Tuesday, May 13, 2003, at 7:30 p.m.
The roll was called and the following was found to be:
Present: Ron Coleman
Pat Kieffer
Tim Lane
Harold Geeting – Vice Chairman
Gary Wagner
Joe Renner
Tom Jordan – Chairman
Also in attendance were City Manager Dave Daily, City Engineer Doug Spitler and City Law Director Donnette Fisher.
MINUTES:
The minutes of the March 11, 2003 meeting were read and approved as written. Harold Geeting made a motion to approve and Ron Coleman seconded it. Motion was passed as follows.
Ayes: Coleman, Lane, Geeting, Renner, Jordan (5)
Nays: None
Abstain: Kieffer, Wagner (2)
SWEARING IN:
All members of the audience anticipating to testify before the Board were asked to stand and be sworn in. The Secretary administered the oath or affirmation to the audience.
64.959 Acres. U.S. Rte. 35 East
Jordan: The first thing on the agenda tonight is Z-03-04 and we will open the public hearing on the zoning amendment. Is there anyone here tonight to represent this application?
Frizzell: My name is Jim Frizzell, I don’t know if there is anyone that has any questions? We tend to find the property for the present until we feel the need to go on farther from the adjacent property to the west when we need more ground for development. That depends on the timing and that is kind of hard to say. It depends on the economy and how well it does as far as sales. Are there any questions, anybody?
Jordan: Not at this time. Does anybody wish to address the Board on this matter? If not I will close the public hearing at this time and turn the discussion to the Board and City Staff. Doug would you like to proceed?
Spitler: Sure.
In accordance with Chapter 1133.03 (b) (2) Planning Board shall review and make a recommendation on proposed zoning changes to the City Council in accordance with the Comprehensive Development Plan. Additionally, the regulations of Chapter 1135, Amendments and Chapter 1137.04, Zoning Upon Annexation, apply to this application. The land shall be zoned as land that is already within the City and immediately adjacent to the land to be annexed. This land is currently used for crop production and the proposed zoning district is ‘R-1B’, One Family Residential. Planning Board shall recommend the appropriate permanent zoning district to council within three months after the effective date of the annexation; council passed the ordinance accepting the annexation on January 30, 2003, which became effective March 1, 2003.
The new Comprehensive Development Plan indicates a proposed land use designation of ‘Suburban Residential’ (page 10-35, also page 10-4).
Jordan: Board members have any questions or comments on this matter?
Coleman: What is going to happen to the other land, that island that is going to be in there?
Spitler: It remains part of the county.
Coleman: Part of the county.
Geeting: We have to make a recommendation within three months from the effective date?
Fisher: Once it is annexed it comes in as whatever it is next to, it is already ‘R-1B.’ Under our code, within three months you have to make a recommendation to Council whether you think that should be the permanent zoning classification or not. So it’s a question of, it is currently ‘R-1B’ and do you think it should stay that.
Geeting: What I was wondering is, since we are going to redo the zoning code and so forth, how would that affect that? I am not sure we should do this since this is a pretty good size development. Maybe we should wait for the new regulations.
Fisher: Well, I don’t think you can. Under our zoning code, within three months you have to recommend something. If our new zoning code contains a different zoning classification that Frizzell’s thinks would be better, they can always apply for that if and when they are ready to develop that property.
Wagner: So it is already Single Family, ‘ R-1B’?
Fisher: Right. If the new zoning code contains Planned Unit Development and they think that would be better, then they can come back and apply for that when they get ready to develop that property.
Geeting: I was thinking that in the Comprehensive Plan that they talked about Suburban Residential that would be comparable to this. Then inside that, once we get the new code put out we may change the setbacks and these kinds of things. They could be a little different. I didn’t know if we should go ahead and set that or if they could be changed later or not.
Fisher: I think when we redo the zoning code; I would be very surprised if most of our classifications change. The setbacks may change; I don’t think they would get any more restrictive than they are. They are pretty restrictive now, if anything they would get less restrictive in which case the new setbacks would apply. I am sure the zoning code will be redone before they are ready to develop this.
Jordan: I guess for a matter of clarification, if it is set at ‘R-1B’ now and the new zoning code has something different than ‘R-1B,’ do we go back to this zoning code and meet the requirements or do we go with the new? Say we don’t have a ‘R-1B’ in the new zoning code, it is called something different.
Fisher: What we do in the zoning code if we change it to something else, that will be listed in the zoning code and the map. The map is part of our zoning code and the map will get redone. If we are not going to call it ‘R-1B’ and are now going to call it Suburban Residential it will say, anything that was ‘R-1B’ is now Suburban Residential. I don’t see changes that major coming with the zoning code.
Jordan: I don’t either, but what I am saying is if they would go out there tonight and set up a plan with ‘R-1B’ and plat this off and within the next six months we decide it is going to be Suburban Residential and it is going to change the setbacks and lot sizes, they will have to deal with the new lot size restrictions?
Fisher: It depends on when they decide to develop it. My take it is probably going to be several years before you decide to develop?
Frizzell: It’s probably not going to be within the next year.
Fisher: The new zoning codes will be in place within 12 months.
Daily: If they come in to get a subdivision approval prior to the zoning code then that will be similar to where they are at now, where they are adjoining to it.
Renner: I move for favorable recommendation to City Council on Z-03-04. It is in compliance with the Comprehensive Development Plan and it is next to ‘R-1B’ zoning and it seems to be appropriate.
The motion was seconded by Harold Geeting and passed as follows:
Ayes: Coleman, Kieffer, Lane, Geeting, Wagner, Renner, Jordan (7)
Nays: None
AB-03-05
– Conditional Use – 112 East Main Street – James & Ron Hensley:
Jordan: The next item on the agenda is AB-03-05, James and Ron Hensley, 112 East Main Street. The applicants have applied for a conditional use permit to put an upper floor dwelling unit in their building located at 112 East Main Street, which is zoned ‘C-4’, Central Commercial District.
Who is representing this request tonight?
Earley: Dirk Earley. I am here with Mr. Hensley and Mr. Hensley. I am sure you guys are probably all aware that it looks like there is finally going to be something in the old Sweet Shop besides rainwater and pigeons. There is going to be a carpet store on the lower floor and office space, there was an existing apartment in the upper floor, that is probably the last thing on his agenda to finish but will at some point in time become an apartment again. I think that is about it unless you have other questions.
Jordan: Not at this time. Doug, what is the staff review on this?
Spitler: In accordance with Chapter 1133.03 (b) (4), Planning Board shall review conditional uses and make a recommendation to the Appeals Board following Chapter 1133.08. Additionally, Chapter 1163.03 (b) (10) addresses dwelling units. This parcel is zoned ‘C-4’and an upper floor dwelling unit is an identified conditional use (Chapter 1151.03 (d)). Separate direct access to a ground floor entrance must be provided for dwelling units. We looked at parking, 1167.07 states that all land zoned ‘C-4’ on the Official Zoning District Map is exempt from all off-street parking space requirements. The conditional use must meet the general requirements of Chapter 1163.03 items (1) – (3).
Jordan: Board members have any questions, comments or discussion on this?
Wagner: Is there any requirement for a one single dwelling above that as to how many people can live there?
Fisher: That goes more to the Building Code.
Wagner: Also, does it need just one entrance and one exit only or does it require more than one access.
Fisher: All it says is a separate direct access to the ground floor entrance.
Wagner: So one would be adequate. So since there is only one building being asked for, parking is not an issue?
Fisher: Chapter 1167.07 says that anything in ‘C-4’ is exempt to off street parking. The only thing that would override that is under Conditional Use is if they would have more than four (4) units and they are only asking for one.
Jordan: You have noted on your application two little parking spots, are those yours, are they existing spots?
Earley: This is the parking lot that Hiestands owned back there. They are not really designated parking spots. There are two spots provided for that building in the lot. It is just like everyone else back there that has parking. Jim Simon has two (2) or three (3) spots. They are not specifically designated, just part of the easement that goes with the building that they will provide two (2) parking spots in the lot behind the bank. Generally, I think the way the other buildings use it with their apartments is that there is nobody in the apartments during the day and then the people use the parking spots during the night. The bank lot is usually fairly full.
Jordan: That was my main thing about the parking in that it is not a requirement and you do have the access. It is bound to be a plus for the downtown district.
Earley: That is what I figure. You don’t see the rain pouring out of the front of the building anymore.
Jordan: Does any of the Board members have any questions or concerns on this matter?
Kieffer: I would like to ask, that hallway, the stairs in the front of the building, that will go to the apartment, correct?
Earley: To the rear they had to take it down. Because the way the building is built the code requires a stairway that is 36 inches wide and there is only 35 inches there to put it in so they are going to have to see if they can work something out. He wants to put the rear stairs back up there. The way it is now, you can’t build a stairway wide enough to meet the code and still have it all be on his property. They are going to see what they can do to get a 35 inch stairway there so that there is access front and back.
Wagner: I noticed there is an attached letter from Fire Chief Crowe, is this part of the building code or part of the building
Fisher: That is part of the fire code.
Wagner: So he doesn’t really have to put the back steps up, does he?
Fisher: Not for the fire code.
Jordan: Maybe for the building code?
Fisher: Maybe for the building code.
Jordan: If we grant approval then he has to meet all of the building codes specifications.
Any other questions?
Renner: I move for favorable recommendation of AB-03-05 to the Appeals Board. There does not appear to be any conflict with Development Plan, it is in the proper district and I can’t see any adverse impact on the health, safety or welfare of the surrounding area. All the other standards have been spelled out. This was seconded by Gary Wagner and passed as follows:
Ayes: Coleman, Kieffer, Lane, Geeting, Wagner, Renner, Jordan (7)
Nays: None
Old Business:
Jordan: Next on the agenda is old business. Is there any old business to be brought before this board?
Coleman: What happened to the school?
Jordan: It will be here next month.
Spitler: The school, the 15th is Thursday and I talked to Christa at Fanning & Howey today and she said it was either in the mail or sent today, their submittals for the site plan. They are anticipating being at the June 10th meeting.
Coleman: They were okay to put that wall up? I thought they could just put the pad in.
Spitler: What we approved was the building location, parking lot location, and storm sewers and additionally that was the site plan approval that this Board did. Additionally they were allowed two accesses on St. Rt. 732 in the City’s jurisdiction, and that is from the office of the City Manager and their temporary curb cuts so they can get access to their site. If they get approval from the Building Department for those items, and I believe they have or they wouldn’t be building, they are okay. I know that Bob has been out there everyday. I am assuming that they have all of their permits through the building department.
Renner: They didn’t have lakes on that plan did they? They were pumping the one into the other one today. I am not sure what they were doing.
Spitler: I saw that.
Jordan: Any other old business? If not I will move on to new business.
NEW BUSINESS:
Jordan: Doug do you have anything?
Spitler: Everyone got a letter this evening on their desk. We are having a kick off meeting between the Appeals Board, Planning Board, Council and ACP. ACP is the consultant that we have hired to help us write our zoning/building code. It is at 5:30 p.m. before the regular meeting of this Board. We are going to have pizza and start talking about comments and suggestions. This will be sort of an issue identification meeting. Much like we did for the Comp Plan. Everyone is encouraged to attend that meeting at 5:30 p.m. and then we will have our regular session at 7:30 p.m.
Jordan: Is that all we have?
Coleman made a motion to adjourn and Wagner seconded it. Motion passes as follows:
Ayes: Coleman, Kieffer, Lane, Geeting, Wagner, Renner, Jordan (7)
_______________________________ ___________________________________
Secretary Chairman