DESIGN REVIEW
BOARD
FEBRUARY 8, 2006
MEMBERS
PRESENT: Alan Seymour, Ken Kraus, Pete Griffin,
Roger Yoder, John Cunningham and Don Bergwall. Paula Bodey was
excused.
OTHERS
PRESENT: Jeff Sackenheim, Larry Zimmerman, Mike White (Marysville
Schools), Gregg Hawkins, Tyler Hawkins, Donna Hawkins, Megan Van DerRoest, Steve
Bell (Pro-Rite Muffler), Jason Isaacs, Kevin Cowgill (
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 pm.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
The
minutes from the meeting of January 11, 2006 were approved as presented. The Design Review Board portion of the
minutes of the special meeting of January 23, 2006, were approved as
presented.
ADMINISTRATION COMMENTS: None
NEW BUSINESS:
New Building - ProRite
Muffler – 390 E. 9th Street – filed by Steve Bell for Gregg
Hawkins
Steve
Bell stated this business has been in existence since May 1988. It is a muffler and brakes, auto repair
shop, being located on
The
site plan was reviewed noting it is a paved, curbed lot. Page Engineering is presently preparing
the civil drawings per City of
Mr.
Seymour reviewed the checklist.
It was noted sidewalks are shown but there are no curbs along
Page
Engineering is working with the City on the storm water design. There are two catch basins in the City
right of way. The gutters from the
building and the underdrains under the parking lot will go to these catch
basins.
To the
east of this property is Scioto Janitorial, on the west is a vacant lot, to the
north an elevated old railroad bed.
Mr. Bell stated they will be removing about 3’ of old railroad bed. They are trying to save two existing
large trees.
It was
noted the dumpster is removed from the building and will be enclosed on all four
sides.
Mr.
Kraus noted this site was previously a petroleum storage site. Page Engineering has done Phase I study
and they have not requested any further studies.
Mr.
Seymour asked if the existing fence is going to be removed. Mr. Bell stated they may use it and add
more from the rear of the building to the back of the lot to enclose and secure
cars left overnight. The back will
be lit for security as well. There
has been vandalism at the nearby
Lighting
for the site will consist of two wall packs, one towards the parking lot to the
back and one on the west side of lot.
There will be no lights toward street. Will not be doing lit sign. There will be residential lights by
front door.
Building
materials were reviewed with it being noted wainscoting consisting of cultured
stone or brick in a gray shade will be used for the front office area. The shop area will be gray vinyl siding
and a hardy board on the façade facing street, all gray to match stone. The roof will be weather wood shingle
roof. Mr. Cunningham stated that
the 40% façade requirement of natural material is intended for all sides. Wainscoting should be on all sides of
the office space. Mr. Griffin
stated he agreed. Decision was made
to place wainscoting around the defined office area, as well as the front façade
of the garage. Mr. Bergwall stated
for this particular location, the use of building, surrounding area, etc., the
vinyl would be satisfactory for the garage area. Mr. Kraus stated he agrees with the
hardy board and wainscoting for the office area and front of garage. It will look better than anything else
in the area. Mr. Yoder
agreed.
Mr.
Bell stated the gutters will be one piece, continuous gutters. The roof pitch is 4/12. The windows will be
Mr. Kraus made the motion to approve this
agenda item with the following conditions:
·
Dumpster enclosure must conform to
codified ordinance 1144.10 – shall have four (4) sides with opening doors for
the purpose of trash removal, constructed of a wooden or vinyl fence structure,
or masonry wall with an opacity of one hundred percent (100 %)
and a height of 1 ft. above the top of the largest
container
·
Roofing to be
shingles
·
Parking lot to be paved and
curbed
·
Wainscot used for 3 sides of office area
and front section of the garage
(hardy board and wainscot meets 40% of façade because of this
particular location, the use of building,
surrounding area, etc., the vinyl is satisfactory for the garage area)
Question put, stood:
Mr. Cunningham Yes Mr. Kraus Yes Mr. Yoder Yes Mr. Griffin Yes Mr. Seymour Yes Mr. Bergwall Yes
Plans
to be revised and submitted to Zoning Inspector for final
approval.
New Elementary School –
2100 Creekview Drive – filed by Steed Hammond Paul, Inc., for Marysville
Schools
Jeff Sackenheim stated this is a
65,000 sq. ft. elementary school for grades K-4 to hold 500 students. This site is fairly flat and has three
entrances to school site. A
retention pond is planned with all storm water sent across street to the storm
sewer. This site is located north
of existing woods, adjacent to
Mr. Bergwall commented if future
addition is needed the lots to east look close. Mr. Sackenheim stated the landscape
plans shows all the buffering required by code for the residential area to the
east.
Larry Zimmerman stated the future
is forecasted into this building for when the Woods at
Mr. Bergwall asked why not loop
entire drive around building. Mr.
Sackenheim stated they may end up doing that; fire department may require
it. However, would like to
eliminate drive because of safety with students crossing without vehicular
traffic.
Mr. Seymour asked about traffic on
Creekview, will there be turn lanes required. Mr. Sackenheim stated civil engineering
has been completed and the traffic study shows the turn lanes and this is their
recommendation.
Mr. Kraus stated two handicap
parking spaces for staff and two for visitors may not be adequate. Mr. Zimmerman stated it meets state
minimum but not against adding more.
The board requested an additional handicapped space in parking area near
the dumpster located at the rear of the building near the
playground.
Dumpster to be located south of
building which shows landscape buffer; however, can construct out of masonry to
match building per code. There will
no fencing used.
Discussion held concerning building
materials. Mr. Sackenheim stated
they used this choice based on the residential homes in the area. Tried to break down scale of building to
blend with neighborhood. 95% of the
building is brick or split face block.
Brick will be utility size.
Asphalt shingles on hip portion of roof is 65% of the building. It was noted on the drawings the copper
area noted on the administrative part of the building will be constructed of
glazed structural tile instead of the copper. The lighting will be down lit to
minimize glare. One monument sign
is proposed constructed of masonry.
Mr. Yoder made the motion to approve this
agenda item with the following conditions:
·
Dumpster enclosure to be constructed of
masonry to matching building
·
At
least two more handicap spaces to be added
·
Add a handicapped
space in the parking area close to the rear playground area
Question put, stood:
Mr.
Kraus Yes Mr. Yoder Yes Mr. Griffin Yes Mr. Seymour Yes Mr. Bergwall Yes Mr. Cunningham Yes
New Office Park –
Jason Isaacs representing Dr.
Cowgill shared artist rendering. It
is intended to have a
Building #1 is very similar to
existing
The site plan was reviewed noting
the access to property and the entire parking area will be curbed. Discussion held on sidewalks along Scott
Farms Blvd. Barb McCoy stated they
may be required; will discuss this item with City Engineer. Mr. Yoder stated sidewalks should be
along drive for area residents. The
board agreed there should be a sidewalk on the one side between the entrance
drive for the office park and the new building. Mr. Seymour stated the sidewalk should
continue along one side of the street that stops but will later continue to
access the residential area with this phase. The remainder to be constructed when the
street advances to the future residential phase.
Mr. Isaacs stated there will be
catch basins in the parking lot to run to pond.
Mr. Kraus stated he would like to
see handicap parking spaces on building #2, 3, & 4 to be in front of front
door. For building #1, would like
to see two more spread out in front of the front doors.
It was noted the dumpsters will be
required to be enclosed, material to blend with structure. Required to be enclosed on all four
sides.
There will be no exterior
mechanicals. Board members agreed
if any to be outside, buffer is required per code.
Mr. Isaacs reviewed the building
material. It was noted building #1
will have cultured stucco stone wainscoting – 3’ to bottom of windows. White hardy board will be used to
complete the rest of the building.
Building #2, 3, & 4 will have wainscoting halfway up building. It was noted building #3 would not have
shutters as shown on the drawing submitted. 30 year dimensional shingles will be
forest green. All buildings will
have cupolas on top of the roof.
There will not be as many dormers as shown on rendering. They are not functional dormers, perhaps
could be used as storage attic.
Discussion held on the length of
building #1 – to be 213’. Mr.
Isaacs stated the dormers will not be on the back side. Board members stated from the code any
façade greater than 100’ is required to have at least 3% recess. Mr. Griffin stated the front of the
building meets the intent of code but not the rear. There is nothing shown that makes any
breaks, no dimensional breaks. Mr.
Isaacs stated the building is not meant to be seen from the rear; will have
landscape buffering. Mr. Seymour
stated it can be seen from SR4 and you need break in back of building. On other projects 8” extensions with
vertical columns have been used or porticoes over the
doors.
Mrs. McCoy stated since they don’t
want to use the same wainscot as from the front of the building, use the same
material and put in the 3-4 foot wide vertical columns, projecting
8”.
Board members agreed dormers not
needed; however should have three cupolas to be used to break up
roof.
It was noted windows will be added
on the rear of the building, one next to each door.
Mr. Isaacs stated lighting plans
have not officially been submitted but they will be down lit lights. Lights will be underneath porch beside
each entrance door also. They are
hoping to light the cupola in the center of the building with a glow
effect. Signage will be
determined. Will want at least one
sign by the entrance and each unit will have individual signage. It was agreed signs should be uniform in
appearance.
Board members asked if buildings
#2, 3, and 4 will all be the same.
Mr. Isaacs stated #2 and 4 are larger than building
#3.
Mr. Yoder made the motion to approve this
agenda item with the following conditions:
·
Building #1 to have 8 units and not 6 as
shown on drawing
·
Sidewalk to be constructed along entrance
on building #3 side
·
Two
additional handicap spaces to be added in front of building
#1
·
Dumpster to be enclosed per
code
·
Buildings to be constructed of hardy board
and wainscoting
·
Roof
to be forest green
·
Lighting to be down
lit
·
3
columns to be constructed on rear of building to be 8” x 40” to match wainscot
material
·
3
cupolas on roof
·
Windows to be constructed beside rear
doors
Question put, stood:
Mr.
Yoder Yes Mr. Griffin Yes Mr. Seymour Yes Mr. Bergwall Yes Mr. Cunningham Yes Mr. Kraus Yes
Plans
to be revised and submitted to Zoning Inspector for final
approval.
COMMENTS
OF INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBERS:
Board
members concurred this was a good, productive meeting.