HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 01-24RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc. Form No. 30043
Ordinance No. 01-24 Passed _, 20
AMENDING ZONING CODE SECTIONS 153.042, 153.048, 153.053,
153.066, 153.159, AND 153.236 TO ADDRESS ADMINISTRATIVE
APPROVAL CRITERIA (CASE 24-001ADMC)
WHEREAS, it is necessary from time to time to amend Dublin’s Zoning Code to
protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Dublin, and
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin Zoning Code needs to be updated to provide clarity
and consistency regarding regulations to maintain the high-quality development
standards within the City, and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and recommended
adoption of the proposed amendment to Sections 153.042, 153.048, 153.053,
153.066, 153.159, and 153.236 of the City of Dublin’s Zoning Code on February 1,
2024 because it serves to improve the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of
the City of Dublin,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, |
of its elected members concurring, that:
Section 1. Sections 153.042, 153.048, 153.053, 153.066, 153.159, and 153.236 of
the Codified Ordinances of the City of Dublin is hereby amended and shall provide as attached to this Ordinance:
Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective on the earliest date permitted by law.
Passed this __| |= day of Vow oh , 2024.
Lo A 2
Mayor - Presiding Officer
ATTEST:
(orsarh, (CM Lol
Clef of Copthcil
§153.042 DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL PROCESS (WID)
(E)Modifications to approved development plans.
(1)The Director may authorize minor modifications to an approved development
plan that are required to correct any undetected errors, that are consistent with
the purpose of the approved application, or that are necessary to ensure
orderly and efficient development. Minor modifications shall be limited to:
(a)Adjustments in lot lines, provided no additional lots are created and
required setbacks are maintained;
(b)Adjustments in the location of and layout of parking lots, provided
perimeter setbacks, yards and buffers are maintained;
(c)Modifications of building footprints up to 10% in total floor area of the
originally approved building, building height(s) or floor plans, that do
not alter the character or intensity of the use;
(d)Substitution of landscaping materials specified in the landscape plan
with comparable materials of an equal or greater size;
(e)Redesigning and/or relocating stormwater management facilities
provided that general character and stormwater capacities are
maintained;
(f)Adjusting and/or relocating landscape mounds, provided that the same
level and quality of screening is maintained;
(g)Minor modifications to an existing sign location, sign design, landscaping
and lighting, provided the other sign requirements of the final
development plan are maintained. For purposes of this section, “sign
design” includes elements such as the sign cabinet, channel lettering,
and similar design elements;
(h)Minor changes in building material or colors that are similar to and have
the same general appearance comparable to or of a higher quality as the
material approved on the final development plan;
(i)Changes required by outside agencies such as the county, state, or
federal departments; and
(j)Other minor modifications deemed by the Director that do not alter the
basic design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the original
approval.
(2)Any modifications to be made to an approved development plan that are not
deemed minor by the Director shall require the filing and approval of a
development plan application in accordance with this section.
As Adopted 03-11-2024
§ 153.048 REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA. (MUR)
(K) Administrative Approvals.
(2) Purpose and applicability.
(h) The Director may authorize an Administrative Approval (AA) to an
approved FDP or MP that is required to correct any undetected errors or
omissions, address conditions discovered during the permitting process
or construction, or that is necessary to ensure orderly and efficient
development.
(i) Any approved AA must be consistent with the intent of the related
approved FDP or MP.
(j) The Director may also authorize an AA to existing structures and
associated site improvements that are necessary to complete ordinary
maintenance, refurbishment, or Zoning Code compliance.
(3) Administrative Approval defined. The following are considered AA’s:
(h) Adjustments to lot lines;
(i) Adjustments to the location and layout of parking lots;
(j) Adjustments of up to 10% in total building floor area or floor plan;
(k) Adjustments to building height up to 10% for no more than 10% of the
floorplate of the highest occupied floor when necessary, to
accommodate building equipment or features required to comply with
building code;
(l) Substitution of landscaping materials specified in the landscape plan;
(m) Redesigning and/or relocating stormwater management facilities;
(n) Relocating fencing, walls, or screening (not including screening walls);
(o) Modifications to sign location, sign design, landscaping, and lighting,
provided the other sign requirements of the Zoning Code are
maintained. For purposes of this section, “sign design” includes elements
such as the sign cabinet, channel lettering, and similar design elements;
(p) Changes in building material or color;
(q) Changes required by outside agencies such as the county, state, or
federal departments; and/or
(r) Other modifications deemed appropriate by the Director that do not
alter the basic design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the
original approval.
§ 153.053 PROCEDURES. (PUD)
(G) Modifications to approved final development plans. Requested modifications to approved
final development plans shall be reviewed according to the following:
(1) Administrative approval. The Director, in administering the approved final
development plan and development text, may authorize minor plan modifications to
building layouts, parking arrangements, sign locations, lighting, and other site-
related improvements that are required to correct any undetected errors, address
changes to the site made necessary during construction, and allow minor
modifications to existing structures and associated site improvements that are
necessary to complete ordinary maintenance, refurbishment or Zoning Code
compliance, provided the modifications remain consistent with the purpose of the
approved final development plan.
(a) No modifications shall be made that increase the permitted density of
development or add to the list of permitted or conditional uses.
(b) Modifications deemed minor may include such changes as:
7. Minor adjustments in lot lines provided no additional lots are created and
required setbacks are maintained;
8. Minor adjustments in the location of and layout of parking lots provided the
perimeter setbacks, yards and buffers are maintained;
9. Minor adjustments in building footprints up to 10% in total floor area of the
originally approved building, building height(s) or floor plans, that do not
alter the character or intensity of the use;
10. Substitution of landscaping materials specified in the landscape plan with
comparable materials of an equal or greater size;
11. Redesigning and/or relocating stormwater management facilities provided
that general character and stormwater capacities are maintained;
12. Redesigning and/or relocating landscape mounds, provided that the same
level and quality of screening is maintained;
13. Minor modifications to an existing sign design and location, landscaping and
lighting, provided the approved development standards are maintained. For
purposes of this section, “sign design” includes elements such as the sign
cabinet, channel lettering, and similar design elements;
14. Minor changes in building material or colors that are similar to and have the
same general appearance comparable to or of a higher quality as the material
approved on the final development plan;
15. Changes required by outside agencies such as the county, state, or federal
departments; or
16. Other minor modifications deemed by the Director that do not alter the basic
design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the original approval.
(c) The Director shall report approved modifications to the Planning and Zoning
Commission. The Director may submit any modification to the Planning and
Zoning Commission that would otherwise be considered minor if the Director
finds that the overall extent and effect of the proposed modification should be
reviewed by the Commission.
§ 153.066 REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA. (BSD)
(M) Administrative Approval.
(1) Purpose and Applicability.
(h) The Director may authorize an Administrative Approval (AA) to an approved
FDP, AFDP, or MP that is required to correct any undetected errors or omissions,
address conditions discovered during the permitting process or construction, or
that is necessary to ensure orderly and efficient development.
(i) Any approved AA must be consistent with the intent of the related approved
FDP, AFDP, or MP.
(j) The Director may also authorize an AA to existing structures and associated site
improvements that are necessary to complete ordinary maintenance,
refurbishment or Zoning Code compliance.
(2) Administrative Approval Defined. The following are considered AA's:
(h) Adjustments to lot lines;
(i) Adjustments to the location and layout of parking lots;
(j) Adjustments of up to 10% in total building floor area or floor plan;
(k) Adjustments to building height up to 10% for no more than 10% of the
floorplate of the highest occupied floor when necessary to accommodate
building equipment or features required to comply with building code;
(l) Substitution of landscaping materials specified in the landscape plan;
(m) Redesigning and/or relocating stormwater management facilities;
(n) Relocating fencing, walls or screening (not including screening walls);
(o) Modifications to an existing sign location, sign design, landscaping and lighting,
provided the other sign requirements of the Zoning Code and/or Master Sign
Plan are maintained. For purposes of this section, “sign design” includes
elements such as the sign cabinet, channel lettering, and similar design elements;
(p) Minor changes in building material or colors that are similar to and have
the same general appearance comparable to or of a higher quality as the
material approved or existing on the structure;
(q) Changes required by outside agencies such as the county, state, or federal
departments; and/or
(r) Other modifications deemed appropriate by the Director that do not alter the
basic design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the original approval.
(I) Minor Project.
(2) Minor Projects Defined. The following projects shall be considered eligible for
review and approval as an MP:
(a) Additions to principal structures that increase the gross floor area by not more
than 25%, or not more than 10,000 square feet gross floor area, whichever is
less, existing as of the effective date of this amendment, or when first
constructed, and associated site development requirements.
(b) Exterior modifications to principal structures involving not more than 25%
of any individual facade elevation of the structure.
(c) Signs, landscaping, parking, and other site related improvements that do not
involve construction of a new principal building. Parks, when used to meet
requirements as an open space type, as provided in § 153.064, shall require
a PDP, FDP, or AFDP.
(d) Accessory structures 1,000 gross square feet or smaller and the related
accessory uses in accordance with § 153.062(B)(3)(e).
(e) Modifications to existing structures in accordance with § 153.062(B)(2) that
increase the gross floor area by not more than 25%, or not more than 10,000
square feet gross floor area, whichever is less, existing as of the effective date of
this amendment and associated site development requirements; and
(f) Parking plans when not associated with a PDP, FDP, or AFDP.
(J) Administrative Departure.
(2) Administrative Departure Defined. An AD shall be limited to any modification of no
greater than 10 percentage points to a numeric zoning standard related to building
dimensions, lot dimensions or coverage, open space, landscaping, parking, fencing,
walls, screening, or exterior lighting.
§ 153.159 SIGNS WITH SPECIAL CONDITIONS. (Sign Code)
(I) Drive-Thru Menu Board Signs.
(1) This shall include free-standing, pole, pylon and monument signs. A single drive-
thru menu board sign is permitted only when all of the following conditions are
fulfilled:
(a) The sign is located on the property to which it refers;
(b) The sign is screened from the public right-of-way;
(c) The sign does not exceed 32 square feet in size;
(d) The sign does not exceed 8 feet in height;
(e) The sign does not contain continuous movement, flashing, scrolling, video, or
animation;
(f) The sign frame color is black or dark bronze;
(g) The sign is turned off or dimmed during non-operational business hours; and,
(h) The sign contains only one source for speakers and sound.
(2) A total sign plan conforming to all the requirements of this Code shall be submitted
to the Planning Director or designee for review and approval before any sign permit
will be issued. Should a sign not meet a requirement of this Code, the sign plan shall
be reviewed by the required reviewing body.
§ 153.236 PROCEDURE FOR AUTHORIZING A CONDITIONAL USE. (Conditional Use)
(H) Change in Use Following Conditional Use. When an approved conditional use in a
building is replaced with a similar use also considered a conditional use in the zoning
district, Planning Staff has the authority to approve the change in use. This authority is
only applicable to uses within the same use category approved by the Planning and
Zoning Commission, and does not allow new conditional use categories to be approved
by Planning Staff.
(1) The Director shall report approved conditional use changes to the Planning and
Zoning Commission. The Director may submit any conditional use request to the
Planning and Zoning Commission if the Director finds that the overall extent and
impact of the proposed use should be reviewed by the Commission.
To: Members of City Council
From: Megan D. O’Callaghan, City Manager
Date: March 5, 2024
Initiated By: Jennifer M. Rauch, AICP, Director of Community Planning and
Development
Zachary C. Hounshell, Planner II
Re: Ordinance 01-24 – Amendments to Zoning Code Sections 153.042,
153.048, 153.053, 153.066, 153.159, and 153.236 to address
Administrative Approvals Criteria (Case 24-001ADMC).
Summary
The Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) has requested an amendment to the Zoning Code
addressing the scope of the Administrative Approval criteria and identifying opportunities to
expand additional staff approvals. The goal is to reduce the number of minor applications
appearing before PZC that require minimal discussion, which in turn allows for more expedited
reviews for applicants. Planning Staff has researched and proposed draft code language for the
applicable sections. The changes are highlighted in red in the accompanied documents.
Update
At the first reading, City Council raised questions regarding the text amendments to the building
materials and the latitude this modification would allow to approve large-scale renovations of
buildings. Additionally, Council members requested information about the application timeline
difference between the Administrative Review Team (ART) and Planning and Zoning Commission
(PZC), and the differences between Minor Projects and Amended Final Development Plans.
Application Types and Timeframes
Council requested more detailed information regarding the application types impacted by the
proposed amendment, which include Administrative Approvals (AA), Minor Projects (MP), and
Amended Final Development Plans (AFDP). The chart below identifies in which Zoning districts
each application type is applicable in the City:
Zoning Districts AA MP AFDP
Bridge Street District
Historic District
West Innovation District
Planned Unit Development District
Mixed Use Regional District
Standard Zoning Districts
Office of the City Manager
5555 Perimeter Drive • Dublin, OH 43017-1090
Phone: 614-410-4400 • Fax: 614-410-4490
Memo
2nd Reading
Memo re. Amd. Ordinance 01-24 – Administrative Approvals Criteria
March 5, 2024
Page 2 of 5
An Administrative Approval is a request reviewed and determined by the Planning Director for
minor modifications to an approved development plan or existing development. These requests
are minor in nature, and stem from a request to correct an issues in the development of a site or
building, or refurbishment to enhance the character of the site or building. Administrative
Approvals are typically reviewed and determined within 2 weeks of the request and do not have
an associated fee. An example of an Administrative Approval within a Planned District includes
the adjustment to the PZC approved paint color for EASE Logistics, while an example within the
Bridge Street District includes patio post changes for Revelry Tavern.
A Minor Project is intended for smaller projects that do not have significant community effects,
reviewed and determined by the ART and intended to provide a more streamlined development
review process. Minor Projects were introduced with the Bridge Street District in 2012, and
currently operate as an application type to bridge the gap between a Director approval (i.e. AA)
and Planning and Zoning Commission approval (i.e. AFDP). Minor Projects are also utilized in the
Historic District and MUR District. Minor Projects are generally similar between the MUR District
and BSD, but differ in the Historic District, as Minor Projects in the Historic District can include
full-scale development projects such as new single-family residences. The typical review timeline
for Minor Projects in both the Bridge Street District and MUR District is 4-6 weeks, which includes
acceptance of the application, review and coordination with the applicant, and determination by
the ART. A Minor Project costs $780 for minor applications or $1,295 for major applications. An
example of a Minor Project in Bridge Street District includes the minor storefront modifications,
including a new canopy for Z Cucina. With the proposed Code modifications this application would
be able to meet the Administrative Approval criteria given the minor nature of the change.
In comparison, an Amended Final Development Plan is intended for projects that exceed the
maximum requirements of a Minor Project application and provide a review process similar to a
Final Development Plan at the PZC. These applications have greater community and character
impacts, and require additional scrutiny. Amended Final Development Plans require the most
review, as the submittal requirements resemble a full Final Development Plan submittal. The
typical review timeline is 6-8 weeks, but can exceed this timeline depending on the complexity of
the application. An Amended Final Development Plan costs $940 for sign applications, $1,380 for
minor applications, or $2,340 for major applications. An example of an Amended Final
Development Plan in Bridge Street District includes the exterior modifications to the Penzone Base
One building, which included new siding materials and colors for the entire building, new roof
and painting of the brick. Due to the complexity of the application and the overall change in the
building character and design a similar application would continue to be an AFDP and require PZC
determination.
Building Materials Code Amendment
The proposed Code amendment for building materials in the BSD Code was intended to address
a discrepancy between approval allowances between Administrative Approvals and Minor
Projects, and to match the Administrative Approval allowances in the West Innovation, Mixed Use
Regional and Planned Districts. Following Council’s discussion during the first reading, Staff has
updated the proposed text for Administrative Approval criteria for building materials and colors in
the Bridge Street District to match the language provided in other sections of the Code. The
proposed modification states: “Minor changes in building material or colors that are similar to and
have the same general appearance comparable to or of a higher quality as the material approved
Memo re. Amd. Ordinance 01-24 – Administrative Approvals Criteria
March 5, 2024
Page 3 of 5
or existing on the structure”. This update provides more structure to the Administrative Approval
criteria to address Council’s concern about maintain the building character and materials, while
allowing minor changes to be approved by the Director. This proposed change would be
consistent with the Administrative Approval criteria within the West Innovation District, Mixed Use
Regional and Planned District sections. A minor update to the Minor Project criteria was added to
exclude the need for a Minor Project when a request fits within the Administrative Approval
criteria.
Background
Current Administrative Approval Criteria
Administrative approvals are an approval process that permits the Planning Director to authorize
minor plan modifications to building layouts, parking arrangements, sign locations, lighting, and
other site-related improvements that are required to correct any undetected errors, address
changes to the site made necessary during construction, and allow minor modifications to existing
structures and associated site improvements that are necessary to complete ordinary
maintenance, refurbishment or Zoning Code compliance. Administrative approval criteria are
provided for Planned Unit Development Districts, Bridge Street District, West Innovation District,
Historic District, and Mixed Use Regional, and are largely consistent for each district.
Planning Commission Feedback
In July 2023, Commission members raised the topic of consent agenda items and the opportunity
to review the Administrative Approval criteria to understand whether the items that staff is able
to approve could be expanded. In August 2023, the PZC was provided with all existing
Administrative Approval criteria, and a summary of consent agenda items over the past 6 years
to inform the conversation. Staff identified that Conditional Use applications for minor intensity
use changes, signs, and minor building material changes were typically approved via consent
agenda. The Commission recommended Staff provide language also including menu board signs
for Staff approval.
On February 1, 2024, staff presented draft Code language and PZC provided a recommendation
of approval to the Administrative Approval criteria to address sign location, menu board signs,
material changes, minor conditional use changes, and Administrative Departures. The
Commission raised minor questions regarding the modifications for existing signs and what would
require PZC approval, but were supportive of the proposed changes as written.
Zoning Code Amendments
Existing Signs
Planning Staff has proposed modifications to several sections of the Zoning Code to modify
language referring to minor modifications to existing signs in Planned Districts [153.053(G)], the
Bridge Street District [153.066(M)], the West Innovation District [153.042(E)], and the Dublin
Corporate Area [153.048(K)]. Existing language generally states that the Planning Director may
approve minor modifications to an existing sign face, landscaping, and lighting. The proposed
language would allow Staff to approve additional minor modifications to signs, including the
location and design of an approved sign. For purposes of this section, “sign design” includes
elements such as the sign cabinet, channel lettering, and similar design elements. These sign
modifications would be required to meet the approved development standards in order for Staff
to approve the changes.
Memo re. Amd. Ordinance 01-24 – Administrative Approvals Criteria
March 5, 2024
Page 4 of 5
This change does not permit Staff to approve new signs for a property, or significantly-altered
existing signs. Planning Staff would have the authority to require a sign modification to submit
for review and approval by PZC should the modification be deemed significant.
Building Materials
The draft language included in Zoning Code Section 153.066(M)(1)(i) addresses the partial or full
painting of buildings as accepted modifications for a Staff approval. PZC has previously reviewed
painting applications at locations such as Penzone Base One and First Watch, which were both
approved. Modifications that create significant character change would likely still require PZC or
Administrative Review Team (ART) review and could include the painting of natural materials, or
color changes that significantly alter the aesthetic of a building. However, in cases where the
modifications do not significantly alter the character of a building, Planning Staff would have the
purview to approve the change. A detailed description of the change made following the first
reading of the Ordinance is outlined above.
Additionally, Staff has proposed modifications to the criteria for Minor Projects in the BSD to
remove a stipulation that exterior modifications to principal structures involving not more than 25
percent of any individual façade elevation of a structure be approved by a Minor Project. Staff
recommended removal of the 25 percent requirement, which was in conflict with the criteria for
an Administrative Approval. As currently proposed, any changes in building material or color that
do not meet the criteria for an Administrative Approval would require submittal of a Minor Project
application.
Administrative Departures
The proposed language in Zoning Code Section 153.066(J) modifies the definition of an
Administrative Departure (AD). Currently, an AD is a review process which allows the ART to
approve minor deviations to numerical zoning standards of no greater than 10 percent. This
requirement is currently written as 10 percent of a requirement, not 10 percentage points. For
example, if an AD were requested for a deviation to the 60 percent transparency requirements
for loft buildings, the ART could approve a deviation as low as 54 percent, which is 10 percent of
60 percent.
Planning recommended the AD language be updated from 10 percent to 10 percentage points to
allow more clarity of the requirement and provide greater latitude for the ART to approve minor
modifications to development projects and tenant improvements. Based on the previous example,
the ART could approve a deviation as low as 50 percent to the 60 percent transparency
requirements for loft buildings, which is 10 percentage points below 60 percent.
Menu Board Signs
Zoning Code Section 153.159(I) Signs with Special Conditions has been modified to include
additional parameters for menu board signs that are consistent with previously-approved signs in
the City. The draft language establishes requirements for maximum size, maximum height,
location, screening, sound, and operations. The amendment also allows the Planning Director or
designee to review and approve the sign plan prior to submittal of a sign permit. In cases where
a menu board sign does not meet these requirements, the sign would need to be reviewed by
the required reviewing body.
Memo re. Amd. Ordinance 01-24 – Administrative Approvals Criteria
March 5, 2024
Page 5 of 5
Minor Conditional Use Changes
In August 2023, the Commission requested more information regarding conditional use changes
and like-for-like applications. A Conditional Use is an application intended for uses that, although
often desirable, may have impacts on the surrounding area in which they are located. Conditional
Uses are individually listed in each zoning district. In cases where a Conditional Use has been
approved, and a ‘like-for-like’ user with similar operations wanted to replace the previously-
approved Conditional Use, the user would typically be permitted to use the approved Conditional
Use. However, any change in use would require Conditional Use approval.
Planning and Legal Staff have reviewed the opportunity to eliminate the need for PZC approval
of minor use changes, and have provided draft language in Zoning Code Section 153.236(H) that
specifies Planning Staff can approve changes that are within the same use category as the
approved Conditional Use. For example, if the Planning Commission approved a hair salon
(personal service), and the business moved out and was later replaced by a nail salon (personal
service), Planning could administratively approve this change without PZC approval.
Similar to the language for Administrative Approvals, Staff has added an allowance for the
Planning Director to submit any conditional use request to the PZC if the Director finds that the
overall extent and impact of the proposed use exceeds what is existing. This change is not
intended to allow approval of new Conditional Use applications, but to maintain existing, approved
uses in existing buildings/tenant spaces.
Recommendation
Approval of Ordinance 01-24.
§153.042 DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL PROCESS (WID)
(E)Modifications to approved development plans.
(1)The Director may authorize minor modifications to an approved development
plan that are required to correct any undetected errors, that are consistent with
the purpose of the approved application, or that are necessary to ensure
orderly and efficient development. Minor modifications shall be limited to:
(a)Adjustments in lot lines, provided no additional lots are created and
required setbacks are maintained;
(b)Adjustments in the location of and layout of parking lots, provided
perimeter setbacks, yards and buffers are maintained;
(c)Modifications of building footprints up to 10% in total floor area of the
originally approved building, building height(s) or floor plans, that do
not alter the character or intensity of the use;
(d)Substitution of landscaping materials specified in the landscape plan
with comparable materials of an equal or greater size;
(e)Redesigning and/or relocating stormwater management facilities
provided that general character and stormwater capacities are
maintained;
(f)Adjusting and/or relocating landscape mounds, provided that the same
level and quality of screening is maintained;
(g)Minor modifications to an existing sign location, sign design, landscaping
and lighting, provided the other sign requirements of the final
development plan are maintained. For purposes of this section, “sign
design” includes elements such as the sign cabinet, channel lettering,
and similar design elements;
(h)Minor changes in building material or colors that are similar to and have
the same general appearance comparable to or of a higher quality as the
material approved on the final development plan;
(i)Changes required by outside agencies such as the county, state, or
federal departments; and
(j)Other minor modifications deemed by the Director that do not alter the
basic design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the original
approval.
(2)Any modifications to be made to an approved development plan that are not
deemed minor by the Director shall require the filing and approval of a
development plan application in accordance with this section.
As proposed 03-11-2024
§ 153.048 REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA. (MUR)
(K) Administrative Approvals.
(2) Purpose and applicability.
(h) The Director may authorize an Administrative Approval (AA) to an
approved FDP or MP that is required to correct any undetected errors or
omissions, address conditions discovered during the permitting process
or construction, or that is necessary to ensure orderly and efficient
development.
(i) Any approved AA must be consistent with the intent of the related
approved FDP or MP.
(j) The Director may also authorize an AA to existing structures and
associated site improvements that are necessary to complete ordinary
maintenance, refurbishment, or Zoning Code compliance.
(3) Administrative Approval defined. The following are considered AA’s:
(h) Adjustments to lot lines;
(i) Adjustments to the location and layout of parking lots;
(j) Adjustments of up to 10% in total building floor area or floor plan;
(k) Adjustments to building height up to 10% for no more than 10% of the
floorplate of the highest occupied floor when necessary, to
accommodate building equipment or features required to comply with
building code;
(l) Substitution of landscaping materials specified in the landscape plan;
(m) Redesigning and/or relocating stormwater management facilities;
(n) Relocating fencing, walls, or screening (not including screening walls);
(o) Modifications to sign location, sign design, landscaping, and lighting,
provided the other sign requirements of the Zoning Code are
maintained. For purposes of this section, “sign design” includes elements
such as the sign cabinet, channel lettering, and similar design elements;
(p) Changes in building material or color;
(q) Changes required by outside agencies such as the county, state, or
federal departments; and/or
(r) Other modifications deemed appropriate by the Director that do not
alter the basic design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the
original approval.
§ 153.053 PROCEDURES. (PUD)
(G) Modifications to approved final development plans. Requested modifications to approved
final development plans shall be reviewed according to the following:
(1) Administrative approval. The Director, in administering the approved final
development plan and development text, may authorize minor plan modifications to
building layouts, parking arrangements, sign locations, lighting, and other site-
related improvements that are required to correct any undetected errors, address
changes to the site made necessary during construction, and allow minor
modifications to existing structures and associated site improvements that are
necessary to complete ordinary maintenance, refurbishment or Zoning Code
compliance, provided the modifications remain consistent with the purpose of the
approved final development plan.
(a) No modifications shall be made that increase the permitted density of
development or add to the list of permitted or conditional uses.
(b) Modifications deemed minor may include such changes as:
7. Minor adjustments in lot lines provided no additional lots are created and
required setbacks are maintained;
8. Minor adjustments in the location of and layout of parking lots provided the
perimeter setbacks, yards and buffers are maintained;
9. Minor adjustments in building footprints up to 10% in total floor area of the
originally approved building, building height(s) or floor plans, that do not
alter the character or intensity of the use;
10. Substitution of landscaping materials specified in the landscape plan with
comparable materials of an equal or greater size;
11. Redesigning and/or relocating stormwater management facilities provided
that general character and stormwater capacities are maintained;
12. Redesigning and/or relocating landscape mounds, provided that the same
level and quality of screening is maintained;
13. Minor modifications to an existing sign design and location, landscaping and
lighting, provided the approved development standards are maintained. For
purposes of this section, “sign design” includes elements such as the sign
cabinet, channel lettering, and similar design elements;
14. Minor changes in building material or colors that are similar to and have the
same general appearance comparable to or of a higher quality as the material
approved on the final development plan;
15.Changes required by outside agencies such as the county, state, or federal
departments; or
16.Other minor modifications deemed by the Director that do not alter the basic
design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the original approval.
(c)The Director shall report approved modifications to the Planning and Zoning
Commission. The Director may submit any modification to the Planning and
Zoning Commission that would otherwise be considered minor if the Director
finds that the overall extent and effect of the proposed modification should be
reviewed by the Commission.
§153.066 REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA. (BSD)
(M)Administrative Approval.
(1)Purpose and Applicability.
(h)The Director may authorize an Administrative Approval (AA) to an approved
FDP, AFDP, or MP that is required to correct any undetected errors or omissions,
address conditions discovered during the permitting process or construction, or
that is necessary to ensure orderly and efficient development.
(i)Any approved AA must be consistent with the intent of the related approved
FDP, AFDP, or MP.
(j)The Director may also authorize an AA to existing structures and associated site
improvements that are necessary to complete ordinary maintenance,
refurbishment or Zoning Code compliance.
(2)Administrative Approval Defined. The following are considered AA's:
(h)Adjustments to lot lines;
(i)Adjustments to the location and layout of parking lots;
(j)Adjustments of up to 10% in total building floor area or floor plan;
(k)Adjustments to building height up to 10% for no more than 10% of the
floorplate of the highest occupied floor when necessary to accommodate
building equipment or features required to comply with building code;
(l)Substitution of landscaping materials specified in the landscape plan;
(m)Redesigning and/or relocating stormwater management facilities;
(n)Relocating fencing, walls or screening (not including screening walls);
(o)Modifications to an existing sign location, sign design, landscaping and lighting,
provided the other sign requirements of the Zoning Code and/or Master Sign
Plan are maintained. For purposes of this section, “sign design” includes
elements such as the sign cabinet, channel lettering, and similar design elements;(p)Minor changes in building material or colors that are similar to and have
the same general appearance comparable to or of a higher quality as the
material approved or existing on the structure;(q)Changes required by outside agencies such as the county, state, or federal
departments; and/or(r)Other modifications deemed appropriate by the Director that do not alter the
basic design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the original approval.
(I)Minor Project.
(2)Minor Projects Defined. The following projects shall be considered eligible for
review and approval as an MP:
(a)Additions to principal structures that increase the gross floor area by not more
than 25%, or not more than 10,000 square feet gross floor area, whichever is
less, existing as of the effective date of this amendment, or when first
constructed, and associated site development requirements.
(b)Exterior modifications to principal structures that do not change the gross
square footage of the building, except as outlined in the Administrative
Approvals §153.066(M)
(c)Signs, landscaping, parking, and other site related improvements that do not
involve construction of a new principal building. Parks, when used to meet
requirements as an open space type, as provided in § 153.064, shall require a
PDP, FDP, or AFDP.
(d)Accessory structures 1,000 gross square feet or smaller and the related
accessory uses in accordance with § 153.062(B)(3)(e).
(e)Modifications to existing structures in accordance with § 153.062(B)(2) that
increase the gross floor area by not more than 25%, or not more than 10,000
square feet gross floor area, whichever is less, existing as of the effective date of
this amendment and associated site development requirements; and
(f)Parking plans when not associated with a PDP, FDP, or AFDP.
(J) Administrative Departure.
(2) Administrative Departure Defined. An AD shall be limited to any modification of no
greater than 10 percentage points to a numeric zoning standard related to building
dimensions, lot dimensions or coverage, open space, landscaping, parking, fencing,
walls, screening, or exterior lighting.
§ 153.159 SIGNS WITH SPECIAL CONDITIONS. (Sign Code)
(I) Drive-Thru Menu Board Signs.
(1) This shall include free-standing, pole, pylon and monument signs. A single drive-
thru menu board sign is permitted only when all of the following conditions are
fulfilled:
(a) The sign is located on the property to which it refers;
(b) The sign is screened from the public right-of-way;
(c) The sign does not exceed 32 square feet in size;
(d) The sign does not exceed 8 feet in height;
(e) The sign does not contain continuous movement, flashing, scrolling, video, or
animation;
(f) The sign frame color is black or dark bronze;
(g) The sign is turned off or dimmed during non-operational business hours; and,
(h) The sign contains only one source for speakers and sound.
(2) A total sign plan conforming to all the requirements of this Code shall be submitted
to the Planning Director or designee for review and approval before any sign permit
will be issued. Should a sign not meet a requirement of this Code, the sign plan shall
be reviewed by the required reviewing body.
§ 153.236 PROCEDURE FOR AUTHORIZING A CONDITIONAL USE. (Conditional Use)
(H) Change in Use Following Conditional Use. When an approved conditional use in a
building is replaced with a similar use also considered a conditional use in the zoning
district, Planning Staff has the authority to approve the change in use. This authority is
only applicable to uses within the same use category approved by the Planning and
Zoning Commission, and does not allow new conditional use categories to be approved
by Planning Staff.
(1)The Director shall report approved conditional use changes to the Planning and
Zoning Commission. The Director may submit any conditional use request to the
Planning and Zoning Commission if the Director finds that the overall extent and
impact of the proposed use should be reviewed by the Commission.
To: Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Megan D. O’Callaghan, City Manager
Date: February 20, 2024
Initiated By: Jennifer M. Rauch, AICP, Director of Community Planning and
Development
Zachary C. Hounshell, Planner II
Re: Ordinance 01-24 – Amendments to Zoning Code Sections 153.042,
153.048, 153.053, 153.066, 153.159, and 153.236 to address
Administrative Approvals Criteria (Case 24-001ADMC).
Summary
The Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) has requested an amendment to the Zoning Code
addressing the scope of the Administrative Approval criteria and identifying opportunities to
expand additional staff approvals. The goal is to reduce the number of minor applications
appearing before PZC that require minimal discussion, which in turns allows for more expedited
reviews for applicants. Planning Staff has researched and proposed draft code language for the
applicable sections. The changes are highlighted in red in the accompanied documents.
Background
Current Administrative Approval Criteria
Administrative approvals are an approval process that permits the Planning Director to authorize
minor plan modifications to building layouts, parking arrangements, sign locations, lighting, and
other site-related improvements that are required to correct any undetected errors, address
changes to the site made necessary during construction, and allow minor modifications to existing
structures and associated site improvements that are necessary to complete ordinary
maintenance, refurbishment or Zoning Code compliance. Administrative approval criteria are
provided for Planned Unit Development Districts, the Bridge Street District, the West Innovation
District, the Historic District, and the Dublin Corporate Area, and are largely consistent for each
district.
Planning Commission Feedback
In July 2023, Commission members raised the topic of consent agenda items and the opportunity
to review the Administrative Approval criteria to understand whether the items that staff is able
to approve could be expanded. In August 2023, the PZC was provided with all existing
Administrative Approval criteria, and a summary of consent agenda items over the past 6 years
to inform the conversation. Staff identified that Conditional Use applications for minor intensity
use changes, signs, and minor building material changes were typically approved via consent
agenda. The Commission recommended Staff provide language also including menu board signs
Office of the City Manager
5555 Perimeter Drive • Dublin, OH 43017-1090
Phone: 614-410-4400 • Fax: 614-410-4490
Memo
First Reading
Memo re. Ordinance 01-24 – Administrative Approvals Criteria
February 20, 2024
Page 2 of 3
for Staff approval.
On February 1, 2024, staff presented draft Code language and PZC provided a recommendation
of approval to the Administrative Approval criteria to address sign location, menu board signs,
material changes, minor conditional use changes, and Administrative Departures. The
Commission raised minor questions regarding the modifications for existing signs and what would
require PZC approval, but were supportive of the proposed changes as written.
Zoning Code Amendments
Existing Signs
Planning Staff has proposed modifications to several sections of the Zoning Code to modify
language referring to minor modifications to existing signs in Planned Districts [153.053(G)], the
Bridge Street District [153.066(M)], the West Innovation District [153.042(E)], and the Dublin
Corporate Area [153.048(K)]. Existing language generally states that the Planning Director may
approve minor modifications to an existing sign face, landscaping, and lighting. The proposed
language would allow Staff to approve additional minor modifications to signs, including the
location and design of an approved sign. For purposes of this section, “sign design” includes
elements such as the sign cabinet, channel lettering, and similar design elements. These sign
modifications would be required to meet the approved development standards in order for Staff
to approve the changes.
This change does not permit Staff to approve new signs for a property, or significantly-altered
existing signs. Planning Staff would have the authority to require a sign modification to submit
for review and approval by PZC should the modification be deemed significant.
Building Materials
The draft language included in Zoning Code Section 153.066(M)(1)(i) addresses the partial or full
painting of buildings as accepted modifications for a Staff approval. PZC has previously reviewed
painting applications at locations such as Penzone Base One and First Watch, which were both
approved. Modifications that create significant character change would likely still require PZC or
Administrative Review Team (ART) review and could include the painting of natural materials, or
color changes that significantly alter the aesthetic of a building. However, in cases where the
modifications do not significantly alter the character of a building, Planning Staff would have the
purview to approve the change.
Additionally, Staff has proposed modifications to the criteria for Minor Projects in the BSD to
remove a stipulation that exterior modifications to principal structures involving not more than 25
percent of any individual façade elevation of a structure be approved by a Minor Project. Staff
recommended removal of the 25 percent requirement, which was in conflict with the criteria for
an Administrative Approval. As currently proposed, any changes in building material or color that
do not meet the criteria for an Administrative Approval would require submittal of a Minor Project
application.
Administrative Departures
The proposed language in Zoning Code Section 153.066(J) modifies the definition of an
Administrative Departure (AD). Currently, an AD is a review process which allows the ART to
approve minor deviations to numerical zoning standards of no greater than 10 percent. This
Memo re. Ordinance 01-24 – Administrative Approvals Criteria
February 20, 2024
Page 3 of 3
requirement is currently written as 10 percent of a requirement, not 10 percentage points. For
example, if an AD were requested for a deviation to the 60 percent transparency requirements
for loft buildings, the ART could approve a deviation as low as 54 percent, which is 10 percent of
60 percent.
Planning recommended the AD language be updated from 10 percent to 10 percentage points to
allow more clarity of the requirement and provide greater latitude for the ART to approve minor
modifications to development projects and tenant improvements. Based on the previous example,
the ART could approve a deviation as low as 50 percent to the 60 percent transparency
requirements for loft buildings, which is 10 percentage points below 60 percent.
Menu Board Signs
Zoning Code Section 153.159(I) Signs with Special Conditions has been modified to include
additional parameters for menu board signs that are consistent with previously-approved signs in
the City. The draft language establishes requirements for maximum size, maximum height,
location, screening, sound, and operations. The amendment also allows the Planning Director or
designee to review and approve the sign plan prior to submittal of a sign permit. In cases where
a menu board sign does not meet these requirements, the sign would need to be reviewed by
the required reviewing body.
Minor Conditional Use Changes
In August 2023, the Commission requested more information regarding conditional use changes
and like-for-like applications. A Conditional Use is an application intended for uses that, although
often desirable, may have impacts on the surrounding area in which they are located. Conditional
Uses are individually listed in each zoning district. In cases where a Conditional Use has been
approved, and a ‘like-for-like’ user with similar operations wanted to replace the previously-
approved Conditional Use, the user would typically be permitted to use the approved Conditional
Use. However, any change in use would require Conditional Use approval.
Planning and Legal Staff have reviewed the opportunity to eliminate the need for PZC approval
of minor use changes, and have provided draft language in Zoning Code Section 153.236(H) that
specifies Planning Staff can approve changes that are within the same use category as the
approved Conditional Use. For example, if the Planning Commission approved a hair salon
(personal service), and the business moved out and was later replaced by a nail salon (personal
service), Planning could administratively approve this change without PZC approval.
Similar to the language for Administrative Approvals, Staff has added an allowance for the
Planning Director to submit any conditional use request to the PZC if the Director finds that the
overall extent and impact of the proposed use exceeds what is existing. This change is not
intended to allow approval of new Conditional Use applications, but to maintain existing, approved
uses in existing buildings/tenant spaces.
Recommendation
Approval of Ordinance 01-24 at the second reading/public hearing on March 11, 2024.
§ 153.042 DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL PROCESS (WID)
(E)Modifications to approved development plans.
(1)The Director may authorize minor modifications to an approved development
plan that are required to correct any undetected errors, that are consistent with
the purpose of the approved application, or that are necessary to ensure
orderly and efficient development. Minor modifications shall be limited to:
(a)Adjustments in lot lines, provided no additional lots are created and
required setbacks are maintained;
(b)Adjustments in the location of and layout of parking lots, provided
perimeter setbacks, yards and buffers are maintained;
(c)Modifications of building footprints up to 10% in total floor area of the
originally approved building, building height(s) or floor plans, that do
not alter the character or intensity of the use;
(d)Substitution of landscaping materials specified in the landscape plan
with comparable materials of an equal or greater size;
(e)Redesigning and/or relocating stormwater management facilities
provided that general character and stormwater capacities are
maintained;
(f)Adjusting and/or relocating landscape mounds, provided that the same
level and quality of screening is maintained;
(g)Minor modifications to an existing sign location, sign design, landscaping
and lighting, provided the other sign requirements of the final
development plan are maintained. For purposes of this section, “sign
design” includes elements such as the sign cabinet, channel lettering,
and similar design elements;
(h)Minor changes in building material or colors that are similar to and have
the same general appearance comparable to or of a higher quality as the
material approved on the final development plan;
(i)Changes required by outside agencies such as the county, state, or
federal departments; and
(j)Other minor modifications deemed by the Director that do not alter the
basic design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the original
approval.
(2)Any modifications to be made to an approved development plan that are not
deemed minor by the Director shall require the filing and approval of a
development plan application in accordance with this section.
As proposed 02-26-2024
§ 153.048 REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA. (MUR)
(K)Administrative Approvals.
(2)Purpose and applicability.
(h)The Director may authorize an Administrative Approval (AA) to an
approved FDP or MP that is required to correct any undetected errors or
omissions, address conditions discovered during the permitting process
or construction, or that is necessary to ensure orderly and efficient
development.
(i)Any approved AA must be consistent with the intent of the related
approved FDP or MP.
(j)The Director may also authorize an AA to existing structures and
associated site improvements that are necessary to complete ordinary
maintenance, refurbishment, or Zoning Code compliance.
(3)Administrative Approval defined. The following are considered AA’s:
(h)Adjustments to lot lines;
(i)Adjustments to the location and layout of parking lots;
(j)Adjustments of up to 10% in total building floor area or floor plan;
(k)Adjustments to building height up to 10% for no more than 10% of the
floorplate of the highest occupied floor when necessary, to
accommodate building equipment or features required to comply with
building code;
(l)Substitution of landscaping materials specified in the landscape plan;
(m)Redesigning and/or relocating stormwater management facilities;
(n)Relocating fencing, walls, or screening (not including screening walls);
(o)Modifications to sign location, sign design, landscaping, and lighting,
provided the other sign requirements of the Zoning Code are
maintained. For purposes of this section, “sign design” includes elements
such as the sign cabinet, channel lettering, and similar design elements;
(p)Changes in building material or color;
(q)Changes required by outside agencies such as the county, state, or
federal departments; and/or
(r)Other modifications deemed appropriate by the Director that do not
alter the basic design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the
original approval.
§ 153.053 PROCEDURES. (PUD)
(G) Modifications to approved final development plans. Requested modifications to approved
final development plans shall be reviewed according to the following:
(1) Administrative approval. The Director, in administering the approved final
development plan and development text, may authorize minor plan modifications to
building layouts, parking arrangements, sign locations, lighting, and other site-
related improvements that are required to correct any undetected errors, address
changes to the site made necessary during construction, and allow minor
modifications to existing structures and associated site improvements that are
necessary to complete ordinary maintenance, refurbishment or Zoning Code
compliance, provided the modifications remain consistent with the purpose of the
approved final development plan.
(a) No modifications shall be made that increase the permitted density of
development or add to the list of permitted or conditional uses.
(b) Modifications deemed minor may include such changes as:
7. Minor adjustments in lot lines provided no additional lots are created and
required setbacks are maintained;
8. Minor adjustments in the location of and layout of parking lots provided the
perimeter setbacks, yards and buffers are maintained;
9. Minor adjustments in building footprints up to 10% in total floor area of the
originally approved building, building height(s) or floor plans, that do not
alter the character or intensity of the use;
10. Substitution of landscaping materials specified in the landscape plan with
comparable materials of an equal or greater size;
11. Redesigning and/or relocating stormwater management facilities provided
that general character and stormwater capacities are maintained;
12. Redesigning and/or relocating landscape mounds, provided that the same
level and quality of screening is maintained;
13. Minor modifications to an existing sign design and location, landscaping and
lighting, provided the approved development standards are maintained. For
purposes of this section, “sign design” includes elements such as the sign
cabinet, channel lettering, and similar design elements;
14. Minor changes in building material or colors that are similar to and have the
same general appearance comparable to or of a higher quality as the material
approved on the final development plan;
15. Changes required by outside agencies such as the county, state, or federal
departments; or
16. Other minor modifications deemed by the Director that do not alter the basic
design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the original approval.
(c) The Director shall report approved modifications to the Planning and Zoning
Commission. The Director may submit any modification to the Planning and
Zoning Commission that would otherwise be considered minor if the Director
finds that the overall extent and effect of the proposed modification should be
reviewed by the Commission.
§ 153.066 REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA. (BSD)
(M) Administrative Approval.
(1) Purpose and Applicability.
(h) The Director may authorize an Administrative Approval (AA) to an approved
FDP, AFDP, or MP that is required to correct any undetected errors or omissions,
address conditions discovered during the permitting process or construction, or
that is necessary to ensure orderly and efficient development.
(i) Any approved AA must be consistent with the intent of the related approved
FDP, AFDP, or MP.
(j) The Director may also authorize an AA to existing structures and associated site
improvements that are necessary to complete ordinary maintenance,
refurbishment or Zoning Code compliance.
(2) Administrative Approval Defined. The following are considered AA's:
(h) Adjustments to lot lines;
(i) Adjustments to the location and layout of parking lots;
(j) Adjustments of up to 10% in total building floor area or floor plan;
(k) Adjustments to building height up to 10% for no more than 10% of the
floorplate of the highest occupied floor when necessary to accommodate
building equipment or features required to comply with building code;
(l) Substitution of landscaping materials specified in the landscape plan;
(m) Redesigning and/or relocating stormwater management facilities;
(n) Relocating fencing, walls or screening (not including screening walls);
(o) Modifications to an existing sign location, sign design, landscaping and lighting,
provided the other sign requirements of the Zoning Code and/or Master Sign
Plan are maintained. For purposes of this section, “sign design” includes
elements such as the sign cabinet, channel lettering, and similar design elements;
(p) Changes in building material or color, including full or partial painting of
buildings;
(q) Changes required by outside agencies such as the county, state, or federal
departments; and/or
(r) Other modifications deemed appropriate by the Director that do not alter the
basic design or any specific conditions imposed as part of the original approval.
(I) Minor Project.
(2) Minor Projects Defined. The following projects shall be considered eligible for
review and approval as an MP:
(a) Additions to principal structures that increase the gross floor area by not more
than 25%, or not more than 10,000 square feet gross floor area, whichever is
less, existing as of the effective date of this amendment, or when first
constructed, and associated site development requirements.
(b) Exterior modifications to principal structures that do not change the gross
square footage of the building. involving not more than 25% of any individual
façade elevation of the structure.
(c) Signs, landscaping, parking, and other site related improvements that do not
involve construction of a new principal building. Parks, when used to meet
requirements as an open space type, as provided in § 153.064, shall require a
PDP, FDP, or AFDP.
(d) Accessory structures 1,000 gross square feet or smaller and the related
accessory uses in accordance with § 153.062(B)(3)(e).
(e) Modifications to existing structures in accordance with § 153.062(B)(2) that
increase the gross floor area by not more than 25%o, or not more than 10,000
square feet gross floor area, whichever is less, existing as of the effective date of
this amendment and associated site development requirements; and
(f) Parking plans when not associated with a PDP, FDP, or AFDP.
(J) Administrative Departure.
(2) Administrative Departure Defined. An AD shall be limited to any modification of no
greater than 10 percentage points to a numeric zoning standard related to building
dimensions, lot dimensions or coverage, open space, landscaping, parking, fencing,
walls, screening, or exterior lighting.
§ 153.159 SIGNS WITH SPECIAL CONDITIONS. (Sign Code)
(I) Drive-Thru Menu Board Signs.
(1) This shall include free-standing, pole, pylon and monument signs. A single drive-
thru menu board sign is permitted only when all of the following conditions are
fulfilled:
(a) The sign is located on the property to which it refers;
(b) The sign is screened from the public right-of-way;
(c) The sign does not exceed 32 square feet in size;
(d) The sign does not exceed 8 feet in height;
(e) The sign does not contain continuous movement, flashing, scrolling, video, or
animation;
(f) The sign frame color is black or dark bronze;
(g) The sign is turned off or dimmed during non-operational business hours; and,
(h) The sign contains only one source for speakers and sound.
(2) A total sign plan conforming to all the requirements of this Code shall be submitted
to the Planning Director or designee for review and approval before any sign permit
will be issued. Should a sign not meet a requirement of this Code, the sign plan shall
be reviewed by the required reviewing body.
§ 153.236 PROCEDURE FOR AUTHORIZING A CONDITIONAL USE. (Conditional Use)
(H) Change in Use Following Conditional Use. When an approved conditional use in a
building is replaced with a similar use also considered a conditional use in the zoning
district, Planning Staff has the authority to approve the change in use. This authority is
only applicable to uses within the same use category approved by the Planning and
Zoning Commission, and does not allow new conditional use categories to be approved
by Planning Staff.
(1) The Director shall report approved conditional use changes to the Planning and
Zoning Commission. The Director may submit any conditional use request to the
Planning and Zoning Commission if the Director finds that the overall extent and
impact of the proposed use should be reviewed by the Commission.
PLANNING 5200 Emerald Parkway Dublin, Ohio 43017 phone 614.410.4600 dublinohiousa.gov
RECORD OF ACTION
Planning & Zoning Commission
Thursday, February 1, 2024 | 6:30 pm
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
2.Administrative Approval – Code Amendment
24-001ADMC Administrative Review - Code Amendment
Proposal: A Zoning Code Amendment to modify the requirements for administrative
approvals throughout the City.
Request: Request for review and recommendation of approval to City Council for
proposed amendments to the Zoning Code under t he provisions of Zoning
Code Section 153.232 and 153.234.
Applicant: Megan O’Callaghan, City Manager, City of Dublin
Planning Contact: Zachary C. Hounshell, Planner II
Contact Information: 614.410.4652, zhounshell@dublin.oh.us
Case Information: www.dublinohiousa.gov/pzc/24-001
MOTION: Mr. Supelak moved, Mr. Way seconded, a recommendation for City Council approval of the
Code amendment regarding Administrative Approval Criteria.
VOTE: 6 – 0.
RESULT: The Code Amendments were recommended for approval and forwarded to City Council.
RECORDED VOTES:
Rebecca Call Yes
Mark Supelak Yes
Kim Way Yes
Kathy Harter Yes
Jamey Chinnock Yes
Warren Fishman Yes
Lance Schneier Absent
STAFF CERTIFICATION
_____________________________________
Zach Hounshell, Planner II
DRAFT
MEETING MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Commission
Thursday, February 1, 2024
CALL TO ORDER
Ms. Call, Chair, called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. and welcomed everyone to the February
1, 2024 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. She stated that the meeting also could be
accessed at the City’s website. Public comments on the cases were welcome from meeting
attendees and from those viewing at the City’s website.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Ms. Call led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Commission members present: Jamey Chinnock, Kim Way, Mark Supelak, Warren Fishman,
Kathy Harter, Rebecca Call
Commission members absent: Lance Schneier
Staff members present: Jennifer Rauch, Thaddeus Boggs, Bassem Bitar, Taylor Mullinax,
Zachary Hounshell
ACCEPTANCE OF DOCUMENTS/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Supelak moved, Mr. Chinnock seconded acceptance of the documents into the record and
approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) Regular Meeting Minutes of 01-18-24.
Vote: Ms. Harter, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Supelak, yes; Mr. Chinnock, yes; Mr. Way, yes; Ms.
Call, yes.
[Motion carried 6-0]
Ms. Call stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission is an advisory board to City Council when
rezoning and platting of property are under consideration. In such cases, City Council will receive
recommendations from the Commission. In other cases, the Commission has the final decision-
making responsibility. Anyone who intends to address the Commission on administrative cases
must be sworn in. Ms. Call swore in individuals who intended to give public testimony.
Case #23-138INF – Informal Review, Midwestern Auto Group – Volvo & VW
A Request for Informal Review and feedback on a proposed rezoning to construct two automobile
dealerships on a vacant lot. The 6.78-acre site is zoned Planned Commerce District (PCD) –
Perimeter Center and is located northwest of the intersection of Perimeter Drive and Wall Street.
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes – February 1, 2024
Page 2 of 9
Applicant Presentation
Brad Parish, Chief Exec. Officer, Archall Architects, 49 E. 3rd Avenue, Columbus stated that he is
representing Midwest Auto Group (MAG) for their proposed business expansion. MAG proposes to
move two of their brands, Volkswagen and Volvo, which are currently located on the main MAG
campus, to a new 6.7-acre site. The site is located next to Wall Street in the Planned Commercial
District (PCD), Perimeter Center Subarea C. The primary use for this subarea is Office, Medical Use
and Limited, Light Assembly. All the surrounding properties in Subarea C and D are zoned Office.
The use to the west of their site is Office with a Conditional Use of Personal Services, the
Schoedinger Funeral Home. The original MAG site was located in the Community Plan’s Future Land
Use (FLU) map as General Commercial, but their expansions throughout the years have bled into
the Standard Office and Institutional designations in the FLU. This is the same land use as the
Subarea C site on which they propose to expand. He displayed the overall site plan. The brands
would be combined into one building with the Volvo brand located to the east and the Volkswagen
brand located to the west. There would be a service drive in the middle and a 26-bay service area.
The primary reason for relocating these brands is to enable MAG to expand their service business,
which has become limited on the main campus. The site was purchased by MAG in 2015, and they
have held it to see how this corridor would be developed. This would seem to be the right time to
submit their proposal. All of the vehicle display area would be at the front of the site. The site has
been developed consistent with the Planned Unit Development (PUD) text for the main campus.
With the proposed rezoning, that PUD text would be adopted for this site, as well. With the
proposed floorplan, the sales area would be located in front, service drives in the middle, a
screened-in loading dock to the east and an auto detail area at the rear of the building. The
elevations would follow suit with the brand standards for the showroom. Since the PCD zoning on
the land was approved in 1988, this land has remained vacant. The MAG business has been located
in Dublin since 1997. In 2023, they employed 230-240 employees generating approximately $22.5
million in wages. In moving the two brands to the new site, they estimate creating 35-40 sales and
tech jobs, generating another $3.0-3.5 million in wages. This move will also give MAG the
opportunity to locate two new luxury brands on the main campus. Some of the surrounding office
space has experienced a turnover in tenants. It would appear that the uses of office, medical or
light manufacturing have shifted to other Dublin corridors and are no longer pertinent for this
corridor. He pointed out that a precedent exists for an auto dealership to be located in the standard
Office and Institutional areas of the Community Plan’s FLU plan. MAG is excited about this
opportunity to expand their business.
Staff Presentation
Ms. Mullinax stated this is a request for an Informal Review, which is an optional step in the Planned
Unit Development (PUD) process to provide applicants with nonbinding feedback from the
Commission prior to submitting formal development applications. The vacant 6.78-acre site is
zoned Planned Commerce District (PCD) - Perimeter Center and is located northwest of the
intersection of Perimeter Drive and Wall Street, with frontage along both streets. The Future Land
Use (FLU) recommendation for the site is Standard Office and Institutional. As Envision Dublin, the
City’s Community Plan update, is developed, City Council has adopted Interim Land Use Principles
to guide development during this transition. The proposed rezoning and development do not align
with Principles #1 and #3 of the Interim Land Use Principles. The proposed use disrupts the
recommended FLU pattern, which may not be compatible with existing adjacent uses. An
automobile dealership more closely aligns with the General Commercial FLU, which allows for auto-
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes – February 1, 2024
Page 3 of 9
oriented uses concentrated along certain corridors in the City. The Community Plan states that this
type of commercial development is not recommended for additional areas beyond existing sites. If
rezoned, the site would be an outparcel of the existing MAG PUD and would lack connectivity to
the rest of the MAG campus across Perimeter Drive. Under the existing PCD-Perimeter Center
zoning, automobile dealerships are not a permitted use in Subarea C; therefore, the applicant
proposes to rezone this site to PUD - MAG to establish a new subarea. The applicant is proposing
to construct the two automobile dealerships in two phases.
Staff has provided the following discussion questions for the Commission:
2) If the Commission supports the proposed rezoning and uses, does the Commission
support the site layout and arrangement of parking?
3) If the Commission supports the proposed rezoning and uses, does the Commission
support the conceptual architecture?
4) Any additional considerations by the Commission.
Commission Questions
Mr. Chinnock inquired the applicant’s response to the concerns expressed by staff regarding
connectivity to the main MAG campus, the integration with the neighborhood, and the mixed-uses,
which this proposal lacks.
Mr. Parish responded that for years, MAG had the site on Post Road, where the Toy Barn is now
located. The two sites worked well operationally. In regard to connectivity, the funeral home on
the adjacent site really does not add to the connectivity in a neighborhood that is primarily office.
Although the intent for this corridor was to be a vibrant office community, it has not developed in
that manner since 1988. In regard to connectivity to the main MAG campus, this is an infill
destination site, and the associated sales and service is a good use for this site.
Mr. Chinnock inquired if the City were to require mounding and landscaping to minimize the views
of the space, that would be an issue for the applicant.
Mr. Parish responded that the original PUD text provides for a 25% display window for the main
campus. That text would adopted for this site, as well; they are not intending to re-write the
development text.
Jack Reynolds, Attorney, Smith and Hale, 37 W Broad St # 460, Columbus, stated that contextually,
this site would fit well with the surrounding sites, all of which have a building in the middle of a
large parking lot. While its use may be different, its appearance will be contextually consistent with
the surrounding area.
Mr. Way stated that the proposed display area appears to be double-stacked. He inquires because
of the character that would be established along the road. The density of the automobiles displayed
will have an impact on that character.
Mr. Parish responded that is the 25% display window. The display will be double-parked. It is a
similar type of automobile display as exists on the main MAG campus. There will be mounding at
the entrance, similar to the main campus, as well.
Ms. Harter inquired how customers would become aware of this site. Will they be directed there
from the main campus, or will there be signage that will direct them there?
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes – February 1, 2024
Page 4 of 9
Mr. Parish responded that automobile sales are not a drive-by habit. Potential customers conduct
extensive research online, find the desired dealer, and go to that specific site.
Public Comments
There were no public comments.
Commission Discussion
Ms. Call directed Commissioners’ attention to the first discussion question:
1) Does the Commission support a proposed rezoning for this site to accommodate
automobile dealerships and associated uses?
Mr. Fishman responded that he would not be supportive of rezoning the site for use by an
automobile dealership. He recalls that the original zoning for office was very specific in that they
must be brick and attractive. The funeral home had to abide by those requirements. The proposed
zoning would completely change the character of this area. He does not believe the owner of one
of the office buildings would be supportive of a car dealership on the adjacent site. He does not
believe the proposed use is appropriate for this area.
Mr. Supelak stated that he also is averse to rezoning this site to accommodate an auto dealership.
We have been fortunate that the auto dealerships within Dublin have clustered in appropriate
places that were destined to be commercial uses. The existing MAG campus adjacent to the
expressway makes sense, even though it has started to bleed down into the Standard Office area.
He is not supportive of locating the auto dealership use further back into this subarea.
Mr. Way stated that Perimeter Drive does not “feel” like a retail street. A car dealership has a very
retail feel. In addition, the service/repair component of the business would generate a lot of
coming/going traffic to the site. This street was not intended for this type of use. This site is
located near residential. The character and function is not appropriate for this particular site.
Ms. Harter expressed agreement with her fellow commissioners. While she is confident that MAG
would make the site look nice, the dealership would change the area.
Mr. Chinnock expressed agreement with fellow commissioners, as well. The proposed use is too
much for this site. This is not a retail street. The MAG campus has been a wonderful addition in
the area, and the Commission wants to support MAG as a company. However, this is not the right
site for their expansion.
Ms. Call expressed agreement. Because the Community Plan’s FLU plan designates this area as
Office and Institutional, and the proposed use is not consistent with the Interim Land Use
Principles, too much is being asked of the site. In addition, the intent to apply the development
text of a non-contiguous parcel is too much of a stretch. However, the Commission and the City
appreciate MAG. We love having MAG here and appreciate that the business has grown as the city
has grown. That has been mutually beneficial to the MAG dealership and to the City. The
Commission looks forward to seeing a future application for a parcel that is more fitting for a
commercial, auto-oriented business.
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes – February 1, 2024
Page 5 of 9
No action was taken on the Informal Review case.
Case #24-001ADMC - Administrative Approval – Code Amendment
A request for review and recommendation of approval to City Council for proposed amendments
to the administrative approval criteria in the Zoning Code under the provisions of Zoning Code
Section 153.232 and 153.234.
Staff Presentation
Mr. Hounshell stated that several months ago, the Commission requested an amendment to the
Zoning Code addressing the scope of the Administrative Approval criteria and identifying
opportunities to expand additional staff approvals. The goal is to reduce the number of minor
applications appearing before PZC that require minimal discussion. In August 2023, the PZC was
provided with all existing Administrative Approval criteria and a summary of consent agenda items
over the past 6 years. Staff identified that Conditional Use applications for minor intensity use
changes, signs, and minor building material changes typically were approved via consent agenda.
The Commission recommended that staff also include menu board signs for administrative
approval, distinguishing between conditional use changes and like-for-like applications. There are
5 areas of focus in the proposed amendment:
1. Existing Signs. Modifications have been made to several sections of the Zoning Code to
modify language referring to minor modifications to existing signs in Planned Districts
[153.053(G)], the Bridge Street District [153.066(M)], the West Innovation District [153.042(E)],
and the Dublin Corporate Area [153.048(K)]. Existing language generally states that the Planning
Director may approve minor modifications to an existing sign face, landscaping, and lighting. The
proposed language would allow staff to approve additional minor modifications to signs, including
the location and design of an approved sign. This change does not permit staff to approve new
signs for a property, or significantly altered existing signs; such signs would continue to be
reviewed and approved by the Commission.
2. Building Materials. The language in Zoning Code Section 153.066(M)(1)(i) has been revised
to include the partial or full painting of buildings as accepted modifications for administrative
approval. In cases where the modifications do not significantly alter the character of a building,
staff would have the purview to approve the change. The criteria for Minor Projects in the BSD has
been modified to remove the stipulation that exterior modifications to principal structures involving
not more than 25 percent of any individual façade elevation of a structure be approved by a Minor
Project. Modifications that create significant character change would still require Planning
Commission or Administrative Review Team (ART) review.
3. Administrative Departures. The language in Zoning Code Section 153.066(J) has been
changed to modify the definition of an Administrative Departure (AD). Currently, an AD is a review
process that allows the ART to approve minor deviations to numerical zoning standards of no
greater than 10 percent. This requirement is currently written as 10 percent of a requirement, not
10 percentage points. The AD language has been updated from 10 percent to 10 percentage
points to provide more clarity of the requirement and greater latitude for the ART to approve minor
modifications to development projects and tenant improvements.
4. Menu Board Signs. The language in Zoning Code Section 153.159(I) Signs with Special
Conditions has been updated to include additional parameters for menu board signs that are
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes – February 1, 2024
Page 6 of 9
consistent with previously approved signs in the City. The language establishes requirements for
maximum size, maximum height, location, screening, sound and operations and allows the Planning
Director or designee to review and approve the sign plan prior to submittal of a sign permit. In
cases where a menu board sign does not meet these requirements, the sign plan would need to
be reviewed by the required reviewing body.
5. Minor Conditional Use Changes. Per the Commission’s request, Planning and Legal staff have
reviewed the opportunity to eliminate the need for Commission approval of minor use changes,
and have provided language in Zoning Code Section 153.236(H) that specifies staff can approve
Conditional Use changes that are within the same use category as the approved Conditional Use.
This change would not allow administrative approval of new Conditional Use applications, but allow
changes to maintain existing, approved uses in existing buildings/tenant spaces.
Staff requests the Commission’s feedback on the proposed Code amendment. If the Commission
should accept the proposed changes, they would make a recommendation of approval of the Code
amendment to City Council.
Commission Questions
Mr. Chinnock referred to the language regarding sign plans and requested clarification of the intent
concerning “similar design elements” for signage.
Mr. Hounshell responded that signs that meet the requirements would be administratively
approved; signs that meet the requirements but are more creative, taller or have greater impact
would be forwarded to the Commission for review and approval. Regular updates would be
provided to the Commission of administratively approved cases.
Mr. Chinnock inquired if items such as logo and color would continue to come before the
Commission.
Mr. Hounshell responded that they could; it would depend upon the degree of impact of what is
proposed.
Mr. Boggs clarified that color would be determined by the particular development text. Logos relate
to content, and unless the logo would change the size of the sign, we would want to avoid putting
the Commission in the position of regulating content on a sign.
Ms. Call stated that staff has made recommendations regarding the Code amendment, but if the
Commission is not comfortable with any of the proposed changes, those items can be removed for
later consideration and the remaining amendments would be recommended to City Council for
approval.
Mr. Way referred to sign design and location. Would that include any potential impact to the existing
landscaping on the surrounding site?
Mr. Hounshell responded that it would include modifications to the sign face, landscaping and
lighting. Those are items that staff would continue to review against the standard Sign Code.
Ms. Harter referred to the drive-thru signs, which must be only one sign. Does that mean they
could be eliminating two signs?
Mr. Hounshell responded that when the Commission reviewed menu board signs in the past, it has
always been one sign. Historically, pre-menu boards have not been approved, and it has been just
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes – February 1, 2024
Page 7 of 9
one sign, either digital or standardized. Most businesses are moving to digital, which is
accommodated.
Ms. Call stated that this does not prevent an applicant from requesting multiple signs. Should they
do so, however, such requests would not fall within the purview of administrative approval.
Mr. Hounshell responded that if it were a PUD, and the applicant requested more signs than
permitted by the development text, they would need to come before the Commission to request a
text modification.
Ms. Call stated that if a parcel were not entitled to a menu board sign, the applicant would need
to have it included with the PUD development text, or an Amended Final Development Plan.
Ms. Rauch stated that there is the opportunity with the current Code that says if there is an
application that staff believes needs to be advanced to the Commission for review, staff has the
authority to do so.
Public Comments
There were no public comments.
Mr. Supelak moved, Mr. Way seconded a recommendation for City Council approval of the Code
amendment regarding Administrative Approval criteria.
Vote: Ms. Harter, yes; Mr. Supelak, yes; Mr. Chinnock, yes; Ms. Call, yes; Mr. Way, yes; Mr.
Fishman, yes.
[Motion carried 6-0]
COMMUNICATIONS
Ms. Rauch provided the following updates:
Commission members were made aware of the following training/travel opportunities:
2024 APA (American Planning Association) Conference in Minneapolis, April 13-16 and ULI
(Urban Land Institute) Spring Conference in New York City, April 8-11, 2024.
A detailed Envision Dublin update will be provided at the Commission’s February 15, 2024
meeting. Subsequent updates will be provided at future Commission meetings.
Mr. Way inquired when the final draft of the proposed Community Plan Update is anticipated for
Commission review and recommendation to City Council.
Ms. Rauch responded that it is tentatively anticipated for the second May meeting date, which is
currently a tour date. That tour date may need to be moved to an alternative date. Before that
review occurs, there will be public meeting opportunities for the public to see the proposed plan.
Mr. Way inquired if one of the next steps is addressing the area plans, and if the Commission would
have the opportunity to review the proposed area plans before the final review of the revised
Community Plan.
Ms. Rauch responded that it would be one of the subsequent updates that will be provided to the
Commission before the final draft plan is prepared. There may be an opportunity for a joint work
session for discussion of the Envision Dublin Plan before it is scheduled for final review.
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes – February 1, 2024
Page 8 of 9
An update was provided regarding the Metro Center Strategic Framework. A Council work
session on the topic was held this past Monday, January 29, in which Mr. Way participated
because he was part of the original visioning process. On Tuesday, January 30, there was
a public meeting, which involved a panel discussion followed by an open house. Staff plans
to bring a more detailed update to a future Commission meeting.
Mr. Way stated that there are active cases that involve Metro Center and Blazer Parkway. Will the
Metro Center Strategic Framework process/guidance align well with the decision-making?
Ms. Rauch responded that cases would be reviewed on their merits according to the current
Community Plan and Code regulations. The Interim Land Use Principles will help guide applications
in the interim. There will be a need for patience on the part of applicants as this is sorted out.
Potentially, there may be significant changes with road networks, open space and greenways,
which would affect proposed projects.
Mr. Fishman stated that he attended the Tuesday public meeting on the Metro Center Strategic
Framework visioning. He learned that there are 24 current property owners in Metro Center. Will
the City be investing in that area? Will there be public meetings that will include those 24 property
owners?
Ms. Rauch responded that as part of the Metro Center Framework Visioning, the consultant team
has already conducted some stakeholder interviews; there will be a future round of interviews, as
well. The purpose of the plan is to advance the vision but also identify if there are certain projects
and investments for which the City would be responsible. The effort may be similar to what
occurred with Bridge Park, for which the City moved Riverside Drive and built street connections.
Mr. Fishman inquired what the owners’ responses were during the stakeholder interviews. Are they
willing to invest significantly in this renovation of Metro Center?
Ms. Rauch responded that some property owners have their property leased and are satisfied. The
implementation of the plan will be driven by what the individual property owners want to do. The
City’s goal is to establish a vision for how this area should look, so that future projects will be set
up for success.
Mr. Fishman inquired if the owners have committed to how much they are willing to participate in
the financial investment.
Ms. Rauch responded that the visioning process has not advanced to that stage.
Mr. Boggs responded that the City is just at the beginning of this process. There will be many
discussions at the City Manager and City Council level, which will define a robust development plan
for this area. The Commission’s role is not the financial piece but the land use and development
component.
Mr. Way stated that there is currently a 25% vacancy in Metro Center, so that is an incentive for
something better to occur.
Mr. Fishman inquired if the intent is that the City adopt a plan, and the property owners could
choose whether to participate.
Mr. Boggs responded that is similar to any other visions the City has adopted for a large area. The
City begins the visioning with the stakeholders in the area, which is the purpose of the interviews
Planning and Zoning Commission DRAFT
Meeting Minutes – February 1, 2024
Page 9 of 9
that are being conducted. The discussions will culminate in drafting a plan, which will come before
the Commission for review and before Council for adoption. Then it is up to the property owners
and development community to determine what projects they wish to pursue. The plan provides
the map. If the property owner does not want to participate in the plan and prefers to leave their
property as is, that is their prerogative. At this point in the process, we do not yet know what the
plan will be, but we know how we will get there.
ADJOURNMENT
As there was no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 7:32 p.m.
The next regular PZC meeting is scheduled for Thursday, February 15, 2024.
Chair, Planning and Zoning Commission
Assistant Clerk of Council
To: Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Jennifer M. Rauch, AICP, Director of Planning
Date: February 1, 2024
Initiated By: Zachary C. Hounshell, Planner II
Re: 24-001ADMC – Administrative Approvals Criteria
Summary
The Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) has requested an amendment to the Zoning Code
addressing the scope of the Administrative Approval criteria and identifying opportunities to
expand additional staff approvals. The goal is to reduce the amount of minor applications
appearing before PZC that require minimal discussion. Planning Staff has researched and
proposed draft code language for the applicable sections. The changes are highlighted in red in
the accompanied document. The PZC is tasked with providing a recommendation to City Council
on the draft language.
Background
In August 2023, the PZC was provided with all existing Administrative Approval criteria, and a
summary of consent agenda items over the past 6 years. Staff identified that Conditional Use
applications for minor intensity use changes, signs, and minor building material changes were
typically approved via consent agenda. The Commission recommended Staff provide language
also including menu board signs for Staff approval, and provide clarity distinguishing between
conditional use changes and like-for-like applications.
Zoning Code Amendments
Existing Signs
Planning Staff has made modifications to several sections of the Zoning Code to modify language
referring to minor modifications to existing signs in Planned Districts [153.053(G)], the Bridge
Street District [153.066(M)], the West Innovation District [153.042(E)], and the Dublin Corporate
Area [153.048(K)]. Existing language generally states that the Planning Director may approve
minor modifications to an existing sign face, landscaping, and lighting. The proposed language
would allow Staff to approve additional minor modifications to signs, including the location and
design of an approved sign. For purposes of this section, “sign design” includes elements such as
the sign cabinet, channel lettering, and similar design elements. These sign modifications would
be required to meet the approved development standards in order for Staff to approve the
changes.
This change does not permit Staff to approve new signs for a property, or significantly-altered
existing signs. Planning Staff would have the authority to require a sign modification to submit
Office of the Planning Division
5200 Emerald Parkway • Dublin, OH 43017-1090
Phone: 614-410-4400 • Fax: 614-410-4490
Memo
Memo re. 24-001ADMC – Administrative Approvals Criteria
February 1, 2024
Page 2 of 3
for Planning Commission review and approval should the modification be deemed significant.
Building Materials
Planning Staff has updated the language in Zoning Code Section 153.066(M)(1)(i) to include the
partial or full painting of buildings as accepted modifications for a Staff approval. Planning
Commission has previously reviewed painting applications at locations such as Penzone Base One
and First Watch, which were both approved (Penzone Base One went back to PZC in November
to revise their painting proposal and were disapproved). In both of these cases, the request was
to paint brick. Modifications that create significant character change would likely still require
Planning Commission or Administrative Review Team (ART) review, which the Planning Director
has the capacity to do under the existing Administrative Approval procedures. This could include
the painting of natural materials such as brick or stone, or color changes that significantly alter
the aesthetic of a building. However, in cases where the modifications do not significantly alter
the character of a building, Planning Staff would have the purview to approve the change.
Additionally, Staff has made modifications to the criteria for Minor Projects in the BSD to remove
a stipulation that exterior modifications to principal structures involving not more than 25 percent
of any individual façade elevation of a structure be approved by a Minor Project. Staff has
removed the 25 percent requirement, which was in conflict with the criteria for an Administrative
Approval. As currently proposed, any changes in building material or color that do not meet the
criteria for an Administrative Approval would require submittal of a Minor Project application.
Administrative Departures
Planning Staff has updated the language in Zoning Code Section 153.066(J) to modify the
definition of an Administrative Departure (AD). Currently, an AD is a review process which allows
the ART to approve minor deviations to numerical zoning standards of no greater than 10 percent.
This requirement is currently written as 10 percent of a requirement, not 10 percentage points.
For example, if an AD were requested for a deviation to the 80 percent primary materials
requirements for buildings, the ART could approve a deviation as low as 72 percent, which is 10
percent of 80 percent.
Planning is recommending the AD language be updated from 10 percent to 10 percentage points
to allow more clarity of the requirement and provide greater latitude for the ART to approve minor
modifications to development projects and tenant improvements. Based on the previous example,
the ART could approve a deviation as low as 70 percent to the 80 percent primary materials
requirements for buildings, which is 10 percentage points below 80 percent.
Menu Board Signs
Planning Staff has updated the language in Zoning Code Section 153.159(I) Signs with Special
Conditions to include additional parameters for menu board signs that are consistent with
previously-approved signs in the City. The language establishes requirements for maximum size,
maximum height, location, screening, sound, and operations. The amendment also allows the
Planning Director or designee to review and approve the sign plan prior to submittal of a sign
permit. In cases where a menu board sign does not meet these requirements, the sign plan would
need to be reviewed by the required reviewing body.
Memo re. 24-001ADMC – Administrative Approvals Criteria
February 1, 2024
Page 3 of 3
Minor Conditional Use Changes
In August 2023, the Commission requested more information regarding conditional use changes
and like-for-like applications. A Conditional Use is an application intended for uses that, although
often desirable, will more intensely affect the surrounding area in which they are located.
Conditional Uses are individually listed in each zoning district and planned district. In cases where
a Conditional Use has been approved, and a ‘like-for-like’ user with similar operations wanted to
replace the previously-approved Conditional Use, the user would typically be permitted to use the
approved Conditional Use. However, any change in use would require Conditional Use approval.
Planning and Legal Staff have reviewed the opportunity to eliminate the need for Planning
Commission approval of minor use changes, and have provided language in Zoning Code Section
153.236(H) that specifies Planning Staff can approve conditional use changes that are within the
same use category as the approved Conditional Use. For example, if the Planning Commission
approved a hair salon (personal service), and the business moved out and was later replaced by
a nail salon (personal service), Planning could administratively approve this change without PZC
approval.
Similar to the language for Administrative Approvals, Staff has added an allowance for the
Planning Director to submit any conditional use request to the PZC if the Director finds that the
overall extent and impact of the proposed use exceeds what is existing. This change is not
intended to allow approval of new Conditional Use applications, but to maintain existing, approved
uses in existing buildings/tenant spaces.
Recommendation
Planning Staff is requesting feedback on the proposed language. Should the Commission accept
the proposed changes, the Commission could make a recommendation of acceptance to City
Council for the proposed code amendments.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – August 10, 2023
Page 10 of 12
This area is zoned for Office, Laboratory and Research. The Land Use Principles challenge us to
think comprehensively. We are looking at one parcel within a greater area that will be undergoing
significant redevelopment in the next few years. The issue here is the layout. Currently, the site
layout mirrors the surrounding area, which has surface parking surrounding the buildings. The
challenge starts with the public realm. The Commission has stressed the need to provide ground
level activation. The applicant has stated economically, rooftops are needed to support the ancillary
uses. However, the City needs the ancillary uses to support the area development. The concept
plan’s use of the open space and the Cosgray Ditch is done well. The walkability component is also
good. She is not supportive of covered parking. The Commission is cautiously supportive of a
residential component in this area, if done well and addresses the associated needs. It is a challenge
to be the first residential development within this area, and unfortunately, what has been proposed
is not quite what it needs to be.
Mr. Fishman stated that when the developers built the first office project in this area 50 years ago,
it was considered a “wow” project in its use of open space, glass and contemporary design. It has
since worn out, but what we need here once again is a similar “wow” project.
Ms. Call inquired if the applicant needed any further feedback from the Commission.
The applicant indicated they did not.
Because this was a Concept Plan review, no actions were taken.
DISCUSSIONS
• Administrative Approvals
Ms. Rauch provided the list of items currently addressed by administrative review and a list of
typical Consent Agenda items. If any of those items were to be added to the list of administrative
review projects, they would no longer be reviewed by PZC. She described the administrative review
process and documentation of reviewed projects. Many of the items are raised during the building
permit stage. The intent is not to diminish the quality or expectation of something already approved;
any modifications must be equal to or greater. Example of administrative review items include lot
line adjustments; plant material relocation or substitution; sign face, lighting or landscaping
changes; building footprint modifications less than 10%. Since 2018, 65 administrative review
approvals have been granted within planned districts, and 85 administrative review approvals have
been granted within the Bridge Street District. Consent agenda cases are items the Planning
Director does not have authority to approve, but are typically minor in nature, such as sign or
building material changes. They are items on which staff and the applicant are in agreement
concerning proposed conditions for approval and on which no public comment has been received.
In the last 5 years, 78 cases have been on the Consent Agenda, 20 of which were pulled off for
discussion purposes. Conditional Use applications for minor use changes are also typically approved
by the Commission without discussion. Those are items that potentially could be considered for
administrative review approval. When Preliminary and Final Development Plans are approved, the
associated Preliminary and Final Plats are also approved without discussion, but those items are
not recommended for administrative review. Previously, there was a Commission suggestion that
menu boards be considered for administrative review.
Commission Discussion
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – August 10, 2023
Page 11 of 12
Mr. Fishman stated that there is need to tighten the PUD review process, so that we can achieve
the quality development desired. When there are different driveway materials permitted, for
example, the applicant will always choose blacktop, the least expensive, less durable and less
attractive material.
Mr. Boggs responded that Council recently addressed that need through adoption of the Residential
Design Guidelines, which address, among other items, driveway materials. The developer will now
have those design guidelines to work with from the outset as they prepare their application. When
that application is submitted, staff will compare it against the guidelines. If the application diverges
from the guidelines, staff will advise the applicant that their application is not likely to be approved
by the Commission. With a PUD, the Commission is able to accept, reject or modify what is proposed
before it is ultimately approved by City Council.
Ms. Call stated that in regard to Consent Agenda items, the Commission still prefers to see
Conditional Use applications and the Preliminary and Final Plats. Review of menu board signs could
be considered for inclusion as an administrative review item.
Mr. Schneier stated that he believes Conditional Use applications could be handled via the
administrative review process. He also believes some sign applications could be reviewed
administratively.
Ms. Call stated that, typically, the Commission does not review minor sign applications. The
Commission reviews Master Sign applications, because they are requesting something more than
what the Code permits. She suggested that staff provide clarification distinguishing between
Conditional Use changes and like for like applications.
Ms. Rauch stated that staff would pull together that information for future Commission
consideration.
• September Tour
Ms. Rauch stated that the September site tour is scheduled for September 14. The tour is intended
to include a variety of commercial, residential, parks and open space and Bridge Park projects that
have come before the Commission. Some of the projects have been constructed and others
currently are under construction. Commission members are invited to provide a list of sites and
topics that they would like to be included in the tour.
Commission members will review the proposed list of sites and forward recommendations to staff
for refinement of the list of tour sites for consideration at the first September meeting.
Ms. Rauch noted that the tour is considered a public meeting and will be advertised as such. There
will be an additional vehicle to accommodate members of the public who want to join the tour.
There will be some discussion on the tour, so staff will take notes documenting any discussion. An
overview and summary of the tour will be scheduled as a discussion item on an upcoming
Commission meeting agenda.
COMMUNICATIONS
• The next regular PZC meeting is scheduled for Thursday, August 17, 2023.
• A Community Plan open house will be held on Tuesday, August 29 at the City Development
building.
• The Council-PZC-ARB-BZA joint work session is scheduled for Wednesday, August 30.
• The Commission tour of approved and developed or developing project sites within the City
is scheduled for September 14, 2023.