Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-15-20 Com Dev. Committee MinutesDUBLIN CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Monday, June 15, 2020 Minutes of Meeting Mr. Keeler called the meeting of the Community Development Committee to order at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers. Committee members present: Mr. Keeler and Mayor Amorose Groomes. Mr. Reiner, Chair was absent. Staff members present: Ms. Rauch, Ms. Puranik, Ms. Noble and Ms. Gilger. Also present was Liz Fields, Consultant with McBride Dale Clarion. Approval of Minutes Mr. Keeler moved to approve the Community Development Committee minutes of January 17, 2020. Mayor Amorose Groomes seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Keeler, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes. Dublin Corporate Area Plan Ms. Puranik stated that the Dublin Corporate Area Plan (DCAP) is part of the Community Plan and was adopted September 2018. As a Special Area Plan, this provides additional detailed policy guidance for specific geography of the City. This the first meeting of the phase 1 implementation focusing on zoning. The DCAP boundary covers three of the legacy economic development districts, which are Blazer Research District, Metro Office District and Emerald Corporate District. Ms. Puranik reviewed the DCAP goals, including: • Repositioning the "legacy" office sites for success; • Creating a walkable, mixed-use environment; • Identify under -served markets; • Establish a strategy to "refresh"the Frantz Road streetscape; • Recommend mechanisms to ensure neighborhoods are not adversely impacted; • Recommending zoning tools to ensure successful implementation; and • Consistent and compatible architectural and site design guidelines. When the DCAP was discussed by this Committee last year, a phased approach was recommended; however, the DCAP establishes more of an "umbrella" mixed-use regional district land use. The goal of mixed-use regional districts is to provide concentrated areas of high quality employment facilities, integrated with or adjacent to complementary retail and commercial uses as well as supporting residential and recreational uses. Ms. Puranik stated that Phase I is east of Frantz Road and close to a residential area. Resident stakeholders have been involved in the process. Current draft zoning code and guidelines include the overall structure for all MUR districts for Phase I (Llewellyn Farms). She introduced Committee Development Committee Minutes June 15, 2020 Page 2 of 5 Ms. Fields from McBride Dale Clarion to walk through the draft code. Ms. Fields stated that the intent is that the code and the guidelines will work together. The code represents the "must -do" items in a project such as the required uses, setbacks, development standards, parking, lighting, etc. The guidelines represent the optional, but "should" or aspirational items in a project. The guidelines will set forth the intent of what the City wants in the MUR districts. Ms. Fields explained the items that have been identified in the code that need further discussion, such as: • Existing Uses — the intent is to encourage new development but not harm the existing businesses • Use Table — Fitness, Transit stop — representing uses that are permitted in MUR 4. The Use Table that is in the current code is limited. It is anticipated that the table will be expanded as the future districts are included. Ms. Fields stated that there are ways to add in uses for businesses that will not harm the adjacent residents, for example, specifying that a fitness center cannot be on the second floor, or that exercise equipment cannot face windows. • Perimeter landscaping and Buffering — 1 tree/ 40ft and 6' opaque screen • Interior lighting, interior window screening, hours of operation, limit to number of windows • Setbacks — parking lot and building o Increased setbacks adjacent to residential o Different setbacks based parcel size • Review Process Ms. Fields asked the Committee for feedback regarding the uses. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that it would be helpful to include past discussion minutes in the meeting materials so the Committee can review what has already been discussed. Ms. Puranik agreed and stated she would include them in the future. Mayor Amorose Groomes was surprised to find this area was Phase I. Her recollection was that Phase I was going to be along Frantz Road closer to Metro. She asked how the determination was made regarding where Phase I would begin. Ms. Puranik stated that the determination regarding Phase I was due to the residents and their desire to push forward. Mayor Amorose Groomes referenced an e-mail that was received from Clay Daney on behalf of the Llewellyn Farms Civic Association. She asked for clarification regarding accessory uses versus primary uses, such as a use within the envelope of a building or parking lot. Ms. Puranik stated that staff has not engaged the residents yet, but will be happy to address their concerns when they have the opportunity to meet. Mayor Amorose Groomes clarified that an area -wide rezoning is not being considered in this phase. Ms. Puranik stated that the intent is to rezone so to align with the DCAP recommendations. Committee Development Committee Minutes June 15, 2020 Page 3 of 5 Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that she would not be supportive of an area -wide rezoning. She would rather view it as an update of the Community Plan that specifies how certain parcels will be developed if/when the time comes. Mayor Amorose Groomes noted two other concerns in the letter received from Mr. Daney, which were: the setback is not consistent and the one-story versus two-story buildings. She agreed that 150' is probably a more appropriate setback from commercial to residential than 50'. Ms. Puranik stated that this area is unique. If a consistent setback is used for other parcels, then some of the parcels become unusable in terms of a larger setback. Mayor Amorose Groomes reiterated why she is not supportive of area -wide rezonings and added that if this came before the Planning and Zoning Commission, her expectation would be that the Commission would require the same setbacks for commercial from residential. Ms. Puranik stated that the feedback received from commercial property owners expresses a desire to have a more straight -forward consistent process in terms of uses. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that an update to the Community Plan would be a compromise for both sides because it expresses the expectation of Council for the area and informs the commercial property owner the lens through which the Planning and Zoning Commission will view a project. In response to Mayor Amorose Groomes' question regarding whether or not this was R-1 as undeveloped land, Ms. Rauch stated that it is Community Commercial and added that staff cannot force the property owners to rezone to this MUR District and the residential property owners would like some assurances. With regard to setbacks, she suggested adding language to look at what adjacent buildings are since the size of the building determines the setback. She stated that there may be a way to do the area -wide rezoning to give the building owners some assurances as well as the residential owners. In response to Mayor Amorose Groomes' question regarding whether or not the residents know that this is a straight zoning currently, Ms. Rauch stated that they are aware, which is why they are so concerned. The Zoning Code currently doesn't provide security for them, it is more wide open. Ms. Gilger agreed that the 150' setback would destroy some of the commercial properties from being able to redevelop, which was the intent of the DCAP at the outset. Ms. Puranik noted that for parcels next to residential or depending on the acreage of the parcel, there are options. She gave an example of a parcel that is six acres and could hold up to a 40,000 square foot, two-story building. Ms. Fields stated that there is language in the Code to protect existing uses, so if the existing buildings need to add -to something, there is a process for that so as to not punish the existing user. However, if someone buys 3-4 properties and wants to redevelop them, the Code can help them do what is envisioned for the area. Mr. Keeler stated that he likes the idea of the square footage of a building determining the setback. He asked if that was something that was done in the Zoning Code in other areas or if it would be unique to this area. Ms. Fields stated that it is not common. Setbacks for commercial to residential are on average 30-40' in the codes that she has assisted in writing. 100' is average for industrial to residential. She stated it is sometimes difficult to find the balance between what the residents want and what the developers want in order to be able to use the Committee Development Committee Minutes June 15, 2020 Page 4 of 5 property as intended Mr. Keeler stated that we have the flexibility to be creative with the wording. Ms. Fields answered in the affirmative. Mr. Keeler asked about being able to restrict hours of operation and location of a fitness center inside a building, such as on the first floor. Ms. Fields stated that hours of operation can be written into the Code, but then enforcement becomes the issue. Regarding the location of a fitness center in a building, Ms. Fields stated that it would be an easy addition to the Code. Mr. Keeler stated that Planning and Zoning could require screening to help with the cover. Ms. Fields stated that it is currently written to be one tree for every 40 feet along a residential property line, but there is also the requirement of having a 6' continuous opaque screen. Mr. Keeler asked if residents were receptive to that when staff met with them. Ms. Puranik stated that they have not met with residents yet. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that it is ready to take to the residents for feedback with the caveat that the setback issue is still being worked out. She stated it is a reasonable expectation of the Llewellyn Farms residents that the setback on an adjacent parcel of a similar size should be similar. Ms. Puranik stated that the final point of concern for the residents was the lighting from inside the buildings. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that this should not be the expectation because that is not the expectation of the adjacent building. She would not be supportive of limited lighting as long as it is not an all glass building. The Committee asked if anyone in attendance had any comments on this topic. Ms. Fox was in attendance and reiterated the concerns that she has heard from residents are: • The uses because of the straight zoning; • To make sure that Planning and Zoning would make sure that things were done in context; • The DCAP suggests the use of transparent glass buildings, so lighting could be a concern; and • Strong wording in the Code relative to buffering. Mr. Keeler asked if, regarding the development plan envisioning a lot of glass, it could it be a requirement that the other sides of the buildings be opaque. Mayor Amorose Groomes added that there could be a maximum opacity that is adjacent to neighborhoods. Mr. Keeler stated that this district is treated a little differently because it is adjacent to residential. He noted there was not mention of a formal meeting, feedback or input process in the Code. He asked if that should universally be in the Zoning Code that there will be an opportunity for input or feedback. Ms. Rauch stated that it is not codified that developers or commercial property owners are required to meet with neighboring residents, but it is the practice. Mr. Keeler asked about the addition of a resident review step in the process Committee Development Committee Minutes June 15, 2020 Page 5 of 5 Ms. Puranik stated that staff strongly encourages applicants to meet with neighboring residents prior to Planning and Zoning Commission review. Mr. Keeler asked what would happen if the applicant said they would not meet with the neighboring residents. He would rather have language that requires it. Mayor Amorose Groomes agreed and stated that at least attempt should be made to meet. Ms. Gilger asked if Mayor Amorose Groomes was more in favor of the area -wide rezoning now that this has been discussed. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that since this is straight zoning currently, an area -wide rezoning would provide the most protection for the residents. Mayor Amorose Groomes stated that she is not supportive of area -wide rezoning in the balance of the DCAP. Ms. Gilger stated that the problem with not doing area -wide rezoning is that it is an unknown to developers that have an interest in an area that would need to be rezoned and may hinder modern redevelopment and allow for expanded uses. Ms. Fox commented that the guidelines are really important. We limit ourselves when we don't concentrate enough on intent. If we want the DCAP to operate as a really good mixed-use area, we should focus less on defining architecture and focus more on uses and expectations of how the uses operate together. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 6:49 p.m. Jennifer Delgado Deputy Clerk of Council