Pataskala council hears plan to rezone 7164 Hazelton-Aetna Road for 38 townhomes

Pataskala City Council held a public hearing on a proposed amendment to the preliminary development plan that would rezone Subarea E of Heritage Town Center, a 4.35± acre parcel at 7164 Hazelton-Aetna Road, to permit an attached single-family (townhome) development.

City planning staff presented the proposal, describing a 38-unit development with a density of about 8.7 units per acre, minimum lot widths just under 27 feet, 80-foot lot depths, two garage spaces per unit plus driveway parking, and 9 additional visitor spaces near the mailbox kiosk. Staff said vehicle access would use an existing private street through Subarea D terminating in a cul-de-sac, with an emergency-only access to State Route 310 and proposed extensions of the multi-use path along Broad Street.

The developer requested one divergence from the city code (cited as Section 11.17.17(c)) to allow lots without a front door facing a public thoroughfare. Staff summarized architectural standards proposed by the developer—maximum building height of 35 feet, neutral exterior colors, asphalt-shingled roofs and decorative lighting—but noted the requested divergence and that the city’s residential design standards apply only to buildings of three units or fewer.

A staff memo cited the city comprehensive plan’s guidance for medium-density mixed use (5–10 units per acre) and said the proposed density (8.7 units per acre) is at the upper end of that range. Staff also noted limited improved open space apart from required stormwater facilities; the developer’s materials show two proposed gazebos and proposed pedestrian linkages into adjacent subareas.

Staff reported the developer met with the school district (transcript reference: “Southwest”) and provided a letter raising concerns about the cumulative impact of new housing on school capacity. Staff said the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning at its Sept. 3 meeting; staff also received one written objection from a Ridgeview Drive neighbor citing noise, flooding and wildlife concerns.

During council discussion, several members raised concerns about building materials, front-facing garages and 35-foot building heights. Council members and staff discussed that the residential design standards in the municipal code exempt buildings greater than three units, which means the townhome buildings proposed (four, five and six-unit buildings) would not be subject to those particular standards. Council members said they would like to see improved materials and varied building elevations where feasible.

Council confirmed the units would be fee-simple lots intended for purchase, not rental. A speaker identified in the public-comment portion said the plan “went through a lot of scrutiny” and that the developer reduced divergences to one; the speaker emphasized the units would be sold and maintained by the owners.

Council and staff discussed the procedural implications of amending the approved development text after Planning and Zoning’s recommendation; staff said such text changes could require returning to Planning and Zoning or could be handled by council action depending on the nature of the change and whether a supermajority vote is used to approve something the commission did not recommend.

No rezoning ordinance vote was recorded during the hearing. The meeting concluded after public comment and a motion to adjourn passed on roll call.