REGULAR MEETING OF THE EATON PLANNING

(Return to Minutes)

ZONING AND BUILDING BOARD ON July 13, 2004

AT 7:30 P.M., IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS

The Eaton Planning, Zoning and Building Board met in regular session in Council

Chambers on Tuesday, July13, 2004, at 7:30 p.m.

The roll was called and the following was found to be:

Present: Ron Coleman

Chris Atkins

Tim Lane

Harold Geeting

Gary Wagner

Tom Jordan

Absent: Steve Deffner

Also in attendance were City Manager Dave Daily, City Engineer Doug Spitler and Law Director Donnette Fisher.

MINUTES:

The minutes of the June 8, 2004 meeting were presented. Harold Geeting made a motion to accept the minutes as written. Ron Coleman seconded the motion and it passed as follows:

Ayes: Coleman, Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Wagner, Jordan (6)

Nays: None

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.

Z-04-03 – Zoning Amendment – Rocky Run Farm Tract – Permanent Zoning.

Jordan: Per Section 1137.04, where county-zoned land is annexed to the City, that land comes into City zoned in the same zoning district as the city-zoned land that is adjacent. In this case, the land annexed is the Rocky Run Farm tract, which lies to the east of Preble Crossing. The annexation of this land became effective on May 19, 2004, and the land came into the City zoned C-1, as that is what the adjacent Wal-Mart tract is zoned, per Federal Court Order. Per Section 1137.04, Planning Board must recommend the appropriate permanent zoning districts to Council for areas that have been annexed to the City, within three months after the effective date of the annexation.

Tonight, you will be assigning permanent C-1, C-3, P-1 and Agricultural Zoning to this annexed land, as required by the Federal Court Order, and as shown on the attached map.

I will now open the Public Hearing for the permanent zoning assignment. If anyone would like to address this subject please come to the podium. No one came to the podium for discussion so the Public Hearing was closed.

Doug Spitler gave his staff review stating that this item follows Chapter 1137.04, Zoning Upon Annexation. Planning Board is to recommend the appropriate permanent zoning to City Council within 3 months of the effective date of the annexation. The annexation was effective May 19, 2004. Permanent zoning to the tracts is per the Federal Court Order.

Law Director Fisher did explain to the board that this was spelled out in mediation and this is what was ordered.

No questions or discussion was received from the Board. Gary Wagner made a motion to approve the amendment and Ron Coleman seconded it. The motion passed as follows:

Ayes: Coleman, Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Wagner, Jordan (6)

Nays: None

MR-04-03 – Minor Subdivision – Scott & Mark Vosler – Eaton Lewisburg Rd.

Scott and Mark Vosler are requesting to separate 2.165 acres from a 20.870 acre tract to form a minor subdivision.

Jake Earley is representing the Vosler’s and stated that if the minor subdivision request passes then they will proceed with the zoning amendment asking for ‘C-3 Community Commercial instead of the ‘R-3’ Multi Family Residential it currently is zoned. At this time it is all vacant ground.

Spitler: The application for a minor subdivision follows Chapter 1103.03. For the lot split to be recorded, the deed must have a statement of approval signed by the Planning Board chairman as approved by the Planning Board.

The minor subdivision must be in conformance with the subdivision regulations, zoning code, and the master plan of the City. The Comprehensive Development Plan shows this subdivision in the “Suburban Residential” designation of the future land use map. The tract has the minimum required frontage and area.

Connie Moore, from the audience, came to the podium and asked what the definition of a minor subdivision was.

Fisher: A minor subdivision is anything under five acres. This is only two acres and it is not creating any new roads or right of ways, it just sits right on the road. It is a 2-acre tract and that is what makes it a minor subdivision.

Moore: Does it consist of houses or apartments?

Fisher: That would be a major subdivision. It is currently zoned ‘R-3’ multi family residential so they could if they wanted to, as it sits and is zoned now. It has never been zoned signal family.

Jordan: What they want to do is, they have ‘R-3’ now, which is multi family on this 20-acre tract. They want to take the 2.165 acres and make it commercial, it would be a less density. Instead of having apartment buildings you would have small business.

Earley: I have a contract on the property subject to the approval of the minor subdivision, subject to the rezoning, subject to extending the water line to the property from Washington’s. That is signed.

It was stated that the criteria presented did meet the requirements for a minor subdivision. Everyone agreed that they would rather see a small business then an apartment complex.

Tim Lane made a motion to accept MR-04-03 for a minor subdivision as submitted. The motion was seconded by Ron Coleman and passed as follows:

Ayes: Coleman, Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Wagner, Jordan (6)

Nays: None

Z04-04 – Zoning Amendment – Park OL 86 and Part OL 87 – From ‘R-2’ to ‘C-3’.

Scott and Mark Vosler are asking for a zoning amendment for 2.165 acres from a 20.870-acre tract, part of O.L.#86 and part of O.L. #87. At this time it is zoned ‘R-3’ Multi Family Residential and used for agricultural and they are requesting ‘C-3’ Community Commercial. At this time there are no buildings on the property.

The Public Hearing was opened and Jake Earley approached the board.

Earley: The application here is to create a ‘C-3’ community commercial district which is a low-density district. Voslers have a contract with Farm Credit Services of Mid America to sell that 2.165 acres to them. Farm Credit Services is intending to build a branch. All of their branches look much the same and this is what it would look like. It would be approximately 3,000 sq. feet and they would move their offices out of Eaton Center to this new facility. The office at Eaton Center does not have the space that they need. We have a signed contract. The contract calls for it to be rezoned so they can build their building. This would require an extension of an 8” waterline that is on the property line or barely inside of Washington’s property. Voslers would bring the 8” waterline down across this property and tie into a main at Washingtons. This would complete a big 8” loop. That would be mostly at Voslers expense except for a small amount the City would pay. Once the waterline was in Farm Credit would apply for their building permit.

We felt that the request for the ‘C-3’ district, given the expansion on North Barron Street and the move across by extension of the Washington Jackson Road to the Eaton Lewisburg Road, this would create a partial block from a high density commercial use to a low density use that abuts a nice residential neighborhood. It also is a reduction in the density from the ‘R-3’ that it now holds to the ‘C-3’ district and we felt that it was probably more in compliance with thoughts behind the Comprehensive Development Plan than what we presently have zoned there. . Two employees of the Farm Credit Bureau are here to answer questions. Dr. Mark is also here for questions and to confirm anything you want to know about the extension of utilities.

Jordan: Does any of the Board have any questions?

Geeting: I assume that the drainage problem in that area will be corrected?

Earley: I think that is a site preparation plan and there is storm drainage there. If what is there is not adequate then it would be made adequate.

Wagner: Is the facility going to have all parking or will there be some grass area?

Earley: I haven’t seen the lay out of where the building will be situated on the lot. I know they want to have at least enough parking space that semi’s can get off of the road. They do have farmers that come in to make payments while they are driving rigs and they want to have enough space that they can get off of the road.

Chairman Jordan: Are there any other questions?

Moore: I want to know exactly where this property is?

Earley: You know where Mr. Washington lives?

Moore: Yes.

Earley: It runs from his house to Gary’s Pharmacy and then it runs back. I am not sure where you live?

Moore: I live at the corner of Eaton Lewisburg Road and Aukerman.

Earley: Then you are farther down this way. The minor subdivision is to take the 2.165 acres from the 20.870- acre tract.

Jordan: If there are no more questions I will close the Public Hearing and turn it over to Doug Spitler for staff review. Wait.

Washington: I am Jane Washington. I would like to know if this would fall through and it is zoned ‘C-3’ what other types of businesses would be allowed to be there? Is there a certain type? Would a liquor store be allowed to go in?

Fisher: ‘C-3’ is the smaller uses. Businesses offices, this falls in to the personal services that include banks, consumer retail. Per the zoning code you are only allowed one main building per lot. Once they put the Farm Credit on there they can’t put anything else.

Washington: I understand that but, I have been to other zoning meetings and other people looked at that land and it fell through and that is why I am asking.

Jordan: If there are no other questions I will close the Public Hearing and turn it over for staff recommendation.

Spitler: The Planning Board reviews and recommends zone changes to City Council in accordance with the Comprehensive Development Plan.

The requested zoning is ‘C-3’ Community Commercial and the intent of ‘C-3’ is to provide for low-intensity retail uses providing primarily convenience goods and personal services for community residents. This District is intended to be located at the periphery of residential areas with good access to primary and secondary arterial streets.

In looking at the Comprehensive Development Plan it indicates a future land use designation of ‘suburban residential’. This tract is located in the “Jamesway” planning area; recommendations for this planning area include the continued use as Suburban Residential.

Jordan: Anyone with other questions?

Wagner: Doug, you indicated that ‘C-3’ was low intensity, consumer retail. What would that be?

Spitler: Real estate office, dentist office, barber or beauty shop would be personal service.

Fisher: Consumer retail would be drug store, a toy shore or a florist shop.

Spitler: A restaurant could go there.

Fisher: Community service would be like the Y.

Wagner: Does the new zoning code change the ‘C-3’ classification from what it is tonight?

Fisher: No.

Jordan: I would rather it be ‘C-3’ Community Commercial than a multi family district.

Wagner: Are there any other plans for the remaining acres?

Earley: Not at this time.

Geeting: I move that we give a favorable recommendation of Z-04-04 and Gary Wagner seconds it. The motion passed as follows:

Ayes: Coleman, Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Wagner, Jordan (6)

Nays: None

AB-04-07 – Conditional Use – Bullen Ultrasonic.

Jordan: The applicant has applied for a conditional use permit for an addition to the existing building that exceed 35 feet in height. This lot is zoned I-2 General Industrial. Who is representing this application?

Little: I am Tony Little and I will be representing the application. I am not sure if you have the elevation but I have it here. We want to continue the existing building to the east. The new building height will not be any higher than the present one.

Jordan: You have that one section that is?

Little: The one there is 44.8 ft. and this one will be 45ft.

Jordan: Have you talked to the fire division about this?

Little: John Walker looked at it but that is all I can tell you.

Spitler: Mr. Jordan, I talked to John Walker today and Chief Crowe is away on vacation and will be back tomorrow. John looked at it and would prefer to have Chief Crowe make the final decision. I was going to state that. One of the requirements of the conditional use is to have the fire division state that they have the protection available to cover that building. I don’t have that tonight but they are working on it and I will get with Chief Crowe as soon as he gets back. It will be available for Appeals Board.

Fisher: You could approve it on the condition that they get the documentation from Chief Crowe that they need.

Jordan: As long as it gets there at the Appeals Board I don’t have a problem with it. They have already had it approved for the first section. As long as they have it by Appeals Board we can go ahead and approve it. How does everyone else feel?

Wagner: I feel the same way.

Jordan: Doug staff review.

The Planning Board makes a recommendation to the Appeals Board on conditional uses following Chapter 1133.08, the Comprehensive Development Plan, ad Chapter 1163.

The conditional use, a structure in excess of 35ft. in height, may be permitted in an ‘I-2’ district and this is an ‘I-2’ district. Structures in excess of 35 ft. in height shall provide additional setbacks from those required in the district which the structure is located at a rate of one foot additional for every one foot of building height. The proposed building height from the application is 43ft., 8 ft. above the 35 ft. requirement, resulting in an additional 8 ft. in setbacks; scaling from the proposed site plan shows this requirement to be adequate.

Wagner: I see no problem at all.

Geeting: I agree.

Wagner: I make a motion for recommendation to Appeals Board for AB-04-07, in that it complies with Section 1163.04. Harold Geeting seconded the motion and it passed as follows:

Ayes: Coleman, Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Wagner, Jordan (6)

Nays: None.

Old Business:

Jordan: The next item is old business.

Wagner: I have a question about the last motion. I failed to mention about the approval of the fire department. What should we do about that?

Fisher: I thought I heard you say if it complies with everything.

Wagner: That is what I said.

Coleman: What about the old depot sign?

Fisher: I talked to Bob Wehrley and he is sending them a letter.

Wagner: There was one item in the minutes that I failed to follow up on. I was to bring up to Council about the house in Washington Landing that was built too close to the lot line and I forgot to do that.

Daily: I have talked to Doug and Bob about that and I will talk with you about that on Friday. If Council wants to discuss it at the upcoming meeting I will have Bob Wehrley here. Some time ago we took this before Council to give us the tools to assure that building placement was proper and at that time we did not get the tools that we needed. There is a way that we can assure that it doesn’t happen in the future and if it does happen there will be a remedy.

Spitler: We have extended our zoning review meetings to 9:00 p.m. and the other night it went to 9:30 p.m. They are about 2 ½ to 3 hours long. We are on Chapter 6.

Jordan: I would encourage all the members here, if you have the time, to attend. It is going to make your job a whole lot easier when it hits this Board if you see what we are doing. We are making progress. There is a lot to digest in this new code.

Fisher: We would like to be done by the end of August. I think we are going to present it to you in sections. We will probable give it to you in September and then not talk about it until October. If you have spare time and can make it to the next couple of meetings it will help you.

New Business:

Terry and Chris Roach approached the Board.

They met with staff on Monday, July 12, and wishes to use a home that they have purchased at 625 North Barron Street and it is zoned ‘R-2” residential. They are looking for guidance from the Planning Board for the best route to take to be able to use their property for a photography studio. They wanted to know if it should be rezoned or if they should ask for a conditional use.

Spitler: It is the house that used to house the insurance business on North Barron Street and Eidson. They have purchased the property and came in to talk to staff yesterday. We looked at Home Occupation but they do not plan to live in the building so we decided that would not work. The other two options were to look at a Conditional Use, they would need to go through the Planning Board and then the Appeals Board for an interpretation for similar use or conditional use for that property or look at rezoning. If they would pursue ‘C-3’ it would be a permitted use. They were coming to the Board tonight to get some direction or feed back as to what they would suggest.

Fisher: It is somewhat like a beauty shop or a barbershop. If you go to a barbershop or a beauty shop you can buy shampoo and they take the pictures but you can still buy film. The other option is to go to Appeals Board first and have them find a dissimilar to what is already allowed in ‘R-3’ and then back to you for Conditional Use. Then you would have to deal with, in a Conditional Use permit, whether you are going to allow them to have a sign, what size. They wanted to get the feeling from you as to what avenue you think they should go.

Jordan: Currently it is zoned ‘R-2’?

Spitler: Yes.

Jordan: Basically in that block right now we have Parker Hannifin behind it, we have a barber shop or beauty shop right behind the house, we have a church, Landmark I think that would be your best bet.

Roach: We have talked with Stanley Spencer and the people living in Mr. Barger’s house.

Wagner: Did you talk to Mrs. Lincoln across the street?

Roach: Yes, and she is okay with it.

Fisher: Rezoning would be the cleanest way to do it.

Jordan: My thoughts are to rezone it to ‘C-3’. What does everyone else think?

Wagner: North Barron Street from Monfort Street all the way up to Chicago Street, is that ‘R-2’?

Spitler: It is ‘R-2’ from Monfort Street up to Debbie Drive.

Wagner: Would that be considered spot zoning? Is that a good thing to do?

Jordan: I wouldn’t say it is not spot zoning because look at what is south and west. You have Industrial and you downgrade to ‘C-3’, it is not as dense of use. To me is you were going to go up between Spring Street and Chicago Street and ask for ‘C-3’, with residential on both sides, I would have a different opinion about that. When you have industrial here and go to ‘C-3’ next, it would be a lot cleaner.

Did we give you a little direction?

Roach: Yes, thank you very much.

Wagner: Do you see anything in ‘R-2’ that is similar to what they are going to do?

Fisher: That is up to the Appeals Board.

Jordan: Any other New Business?

Ron Coleman made a motion to adjourn the meeting and Gary Wagner seconded it. Motion passed as follows:

Ayes: Coleman, Atkins, Lane, Geeting, Wagner, Jordan (6)

Nays: None

________________________________ _________________________________

Secretary Chairman