HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 04-25(Amd) -RECORD OF ORDINANCES
BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Form 6220S
04-25 (AMENDED)
Ordinance No. Passed
REZONING APPROXIMATELY 14.2 ACRES (PID 273- 008618 AND PID 273-011149) FROM R-1, RESTRICTED
SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF 20 SINGLE- FAMILY LOTS WITH 5.8 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF ZONING CODE SECTION 153.050. (CASE 24-135Z-PDP).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin,
“1 __ of its elected members concurring, that:
Section 1. The following described real estate, (see attached legal
description), situated in the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned
PUD, Planned Unit Development District, and shall be subject to regulations
and procedures contained in Ordinance No. 21-70 (Chapter 153 of the
Codified Ordinances), the City of Dublin Zoning Code and amendments
thereto.
Section 2. The application, including the list of contiguous and affected
property owners, and the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning
Commission, revised and supplemented as provided in the staff memorandum
dated March 11, 2025, are all incorporated into and made an official part of
this Ordinance and said real estate shall be developed and used in accordance
there within.
Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after the
earliest period allowed by law.
jot Passed this__|“/ _ day of WV ch , 2025.
Lh LAE —
Mayor - Presiding Officer
of of Coféncil (]
On 03-17-25, City Council approved Ordinance 04-25(amended) with revised Condition 1 and
additional four Conditions, as follows:
1) The applicant provide a compacted aggregate drive and concrete apron, designed to
withstand loading of maintenance vehicles and accommodate safe and traversable
access to the detention basin for maintenance from Bright Road to the detention basin
within Reserve A to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
2) The applicant make adjustments to Lot 2, Lot 5 and Lot 13 to provide a minimum lot
width of 40 feet to achieve more flexibility in driveway location and provide
landscaping opportunities for a cohesive residential appearance and revise the
development text to require the minimum lot width of 40 feet, prior to City Council
submittal.
3) The applicant provide a uniform tree lawn within the entire development without any
discrepancies between the drawings prior to City Council submittal.
4) The applicant revise the development text to address the discrepancies between the
rear yard setbacks, primary structure setback and minimum private open spaces on
Lots 1- 10 prior to City Council submittal.
5) The applicant revise the development text to require minimum side yard dimension of
6 feet on one side and 14 feet total prior to City Council submittal.
6) The applicant revise the development text to provide minimum setbacks for the front-
loaded and side-loaded garages, prior to City Council submittal.
7) The applicant revise the development text to address lots along Bright Road (Lots
1,2,13 and 20) to be given extra attention and maintain relationship with Bright Road,
prior to City Council submittal.
8) The applicant show conceptual building envelopes with the submittal of the Final
Development Plan.
9) The applicant remove redundant development requirements that match the
requirements of the Zoning Code, prior to City Council submittal.
10) The applicant will need to continue to work with the Division of Engineering to
demonstrate stormwater management compliance in accordance with Chapter 53 of
the Dublin Code of Ordinances to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
11) The applicant correct any waterway deficiencies within Reserve B, identified by the City
through inspections, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
12) The applicant update the Preliminary Development Plan and Development Text
accordingly to ensure the documents are consistent.
13) The applicant revise the Preliminary Development Plan and Development Text to show
conformance with City street cross section standards, including sidewalk on both sides
of the street. Applicant further will make corresponding Preliminary Development Plan
and Development Text revisions as necessitated by the aforementioned revisions and
approved by staff.
To: Members of Dublin City Council
From: Megan D. O’Callaghan, P.E., City Manager
Date: March 11, 2025
Initiated By: Jennifer M. Rauch, AICP, Director of Community Planning & Development
Rati Singh, Assoc. AIA, Planner I
Re: Ordinance 04-25 - Rezoning approximately 14.2 acres (PID 273-008618 and
PID 273-011149) from R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential to PUD, Planned
Unit Development for development of 20 single-family lots with 5.8 acres of
open space and associated site improvements under the provisions of Zoning
Code Section 153.050. (Case 24-135Z-PDP).
Summary
Ordinance 04-25 is a request for review and approval of a rezoning from R-1, Restricted Suburban
Residential District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development District for the proposed Bright Road
Reserve development. The proposal includes 20 single-family estate lots on 14.2 acres, two new
public streets, and 5.8 acres of open space within four reserves.
Update
At the first reading of Ordinance 04-25 on March 6, 2025, City Council members raised several items
as listed below:
Ownership & Maintenance Responsibilities
Council members expressed concerns about the maintenance and ownership of the open space
reserves, as the initial proposal identified that the City would own and maintain Reserves A and B.
Based on the Council’s feedback, the maintenance responsibility of Reserve A will be shifted from
the City to the Homeowners Association (HOA), with the exception of the stormwater functionality
of the detention basin. The City will maintain the stormwater functionality of the detention basin,
which includes the storage volume capacity of the basin, inlet and outlet storm sewer pipes,
headwalls, outlet control structure, underdrain, and aggregate surrounding the underdrain and
headwalls. The detention basin is defined within Reserve A from the top of the bank into the basin.
The HOA will maintain the landscaping within the detention basin. The HOA will also be responsible
for mowing the detention basin.
Also based on Council’s feedback, the maintenance responsibility of Reserve B will be shifted from
the City to the HOA, with the exception of the waterway. Staff recommends the developer correct
any waterway deficiencies within Reserve B, identified by the City through inspections, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. The City is best suited to ensure proper long-term maintenance of
proposed residential stormwater management facilities and waterways. Additionally, City-owned
reserves provide an opportunity to relieve HOAs from the burden of paying property tax on the open
spaces and focus their costs on maintenance needs.
Reserve A Connection
With the first reading, staff recommended a continuous shared use path connecting Bright Road to
Office of the City Manager
5555 Perimeter Drive • Dublin, OH 43017
Phone: 614-410-4400 Memo
Memo re. Ord. 04-25 Bright Road Reserve
March 11, 2025
Page 2 of 9
the neighborhood through Reserve A encompassing the required maintenance path to the detention
basin and the addition of a crosswalk at the southwest corner of the site. The goal was to ensure
pedestrian and ADA connectivity throughout the proposed development from the southwestern
portion of the site, as well as access to the detention basin for maintenance.
Council members expressed support for the naturalization of Reserve A and found the shared use
path planned for the south side of Bright Road was sufficient to meet the needs of pedestrians and
cyclists. Staff identified the need to provide access to the detention basin for maintenance. Council
members expressed a preference for using a non-paved material for the access drives located within
Reserve A to better align with the surrounding’s area character. Based on the Council’s feedback
and to ensure the access drives can accommodate maintenance vehicles safely and effectively, staff
recommends using compacted aggregate material that provides durability while minimizing the
environmental impact. Staff also recommend using a concrete drive apron adjacent to Bright Road
in order to minimize the potential for the aggregate material to track onto the public street. The
access drive, including the associated drive subgrades, will be designed to withstand the loading of
maintenance vehicles and will accommodate safe and traversable access to the detention basin to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Additionally, a graded maintenance berm will be provided
around the detention basin in accordance with the City’s Stormwater Management Design Manual
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Also based on Council’s feedback on eliminating the shared
use path within Reserve A, staff no longer recommend a crosswalk at the southwest corner of the
site, along Reserve A frontage.
Internal Sidewalks
As part of the first reading, staff requested Council’s feedback on the proposed sidewalk location on
one side of the street within the proposed development. Staff raised this concern as sidewalks
located on one side do not align with the City’s standards and the recommendations outlined in
Envision Dublin. Staff shared information that the Bright Road Area Pedestrian Improvements Project
discussed as part of previous Capital Improvements Updates was based on community feedback
regarding the safe and convenient accessibility of Hopewell Elementary School to the neighborhood
children. Ensuring sidewalks on both sides of the street, regardless of the size of the neighborhood,
is a critical component of a well-connected pedestrian network, enhancing safety, accessibility, and
walkability for residents of all ages and abilities. A complete sidewalk system improves mobility,
supports active transportation, and aligns with best practices for creating a more livable and inclusive
community. This project is not currently programmed within the 2025-2029 Capital Improvements
Program.
Council members requested information on neighborhoods with one-sided sidewalks and a
comparison of the sizes. Some of the older neighborhoods in Dublin with one-sided sidewalk are:
• Sections of Waterford Village PUD (Section of Monterey Street and Waterford Dr) with
approximately 257 lots.
• Sections of Shannon Park PUD with approximately 180 lots.
• Campden Lake PUD with approximately 66 lots.
Additionally, staff outlined below City projects where sidewalks and shared use paths have been
constructed within existing neighborhoods and the associated costs for Council’s reference.
Memo re. Ord. 04-25 Bright Road Reserve
March 11, 2025
Page 3 of 9
Cara Road/Cara Court
This project includes adding a shared use path on the
south side, a five-foot sidewalk on the north side of Cara
Road, and sidewalks along both sides of Cara Court. It
also includes repaving of the streets, which is
consistent with past practice in other neighborhoods. The
cost also includes needed acquisition.
Mid-Century Neighborhood
This project includes adding sidewalks along Grandview
Drive, Longview Drive, Marion Street and Franklin Street
within the Mid-Century neighborhood. The costs included
are roadway repaving, sidewalks and street trees.
Background
2024
The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed a concept plan and provided feedback for 20
single-family estate lots and site improvements. Commission members expressed support for the
proposal, finding it responsive to the natural features with the clustered layout. The members
recommended adding connectivity with the surrounding area, that open space be a focal point of
the neighborhood, and that the applicant address resident concerns related to buffering of existing
residential uses.
2025
On February 6, 2025, the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) reviewed and recommended to
City Council that the rezoning/preliminary development plan and preliminary plat be approved with
conditions.
Neighborhood Engagement
The applicant engaged with the East Dublin Civic Association (EDCA) meeting on May 15, 2024,
and on October 29, 2024. Initial resident concerns were related to buffering between the existing
residential uses and the proposed development, which has been addressed.
Process
As outlined below, after the Concept Plan consideration, Rezoning and Preliminary Development
Plan (PDP) is the second step in a three-step process for a PUD and is heard by both PZC and City
Council (CC). The final determinations on the Rezoning and PDP are made by City Council. A PDP
establishes the framework for future development and a rezoning establishes the right to develop
in accordance with the PDP. Following the approval of the PDP, the applicant may proceed to the
third step in the process, which is the Final Development Plan (FDP). The criteria set forth in the
Zoning Code for approval of a PDP/rezoning.
1. Concept Plan (CP)
2. Rezoning/PDP (PZC Recommendation, CC Determination)
Memo re. Ord. 04-25 Bright Road Reserve
March 11, 2025
Page 4 of 9
3. Final Development Plan (PZC Determination)
City Plans and Policies
Community Plan
The Community Plan is a key policy document used to guide decision-making regarding the future
of the natural and built environment within Dublin. It assists in evaluating development proposals
and helps ensure that proposed development supports the community’s long-term objectives.
Future Land Use Plan
Envision Dublin’s recommended future land use (FLU) for this site is Residential Low Density. This
designation envisions large-lot residential development that considers environmentally sensitive
areas and integrates existing natural features. The goal is to create a transition from a rural setting
to suburban single-family residential neighborhoods. The FLU recommends single-family homes on
at least 0.50-acre lots and a density of 0.5 to 2 du/acre. The proposed density is 1.4 dwelling units
per acre, which aligns with the Community Plan recommendations. The site is not located within a
Special Area Plan nor have new connections or widening of thoroughfares through the site been
identified in the Thoroughfare Plan.
Neighborhood Design Guidelines
The city adopted the Neighborhood Design Guidelines (NDG) in March 2023 to ensure that
residential PUD developments are more creative and sustainable, provide a sense of community
and maintain Dublin’s desired character. The Guidelines are organized into a hierarchy of three
levels from the broad macro public realm of open spaces and preservation areas to the micro
level public realm of streetscapes as outdoor rooms, to the private realm of individual lots and
the functions of various areas within the lots and lot types. The Guidelines aim to give each new
neighborhood a distinct sense of place by recognizing its unique features and safeguarding cultural
and historical resources. Proposed PUD developments are reviewed against the NDG. The proposed
layout prioritizes the preservation of the natural environment. The circulation network and home
sites are designed to respect the existing topography. Vegetation along Bright Road, Billingsley
Creek, West Wood, and the tree buffer along the northern and southern property lines are
preserved to maintain the site’s rural character.
Overview
Site
The 14.2-acre site is comprised of two parcels located north of the intersection of Grandee Cliffs
Drive and Bright Road. The eastern parcel includes a steep, wooded ravine and a FEMA-identified
detailed floodplain (Zone AE), with a floodway that follows Wright Run (Billingsley Creek) and a
branch tributary. A single-family home located within this parcel was demolished in 2018 and the
remaining structures include a small barn built in the 1970s. The barn does not appear to possess
any historic or architectural significance. There is a grove of mature trees near the former home-
site, and an asphalt driveway that provides access to Bright Road at the intersection with Grandee
Cliffs Drive. The western parcel contains a swale and a wooded area referred to as West Wood.
The City Engineer has waived the Stream Corridor Protection Zone requirement for the swale
located on the western parcel.
The site is bordered by single-family residential neighborhoods. Hopewell Elementary School is
located across Bright Road to the southeast, while the Holder-Wright Earthworks and Ferris-Wright
Park are to the southwest, also across Bright Road. Bright Road has a rural character with no
Memo re. Ord. 04-25 Bright Road Reserve
March 11, 2025
Page 5 of 9
curbs, a ditch, many trees, and homes with large setbacks from the road. It has a low traffic
volume, and was converted to a cul-de-sac by the City in 2020.
Preliminary Development Plan
A proposed development consists of 20 lots organized around two curvilinear streets (Street A and
Street B), with Street B terminating in a cul-de-sac. The site is accessible from Bright Road at the
intersection of Bright Road and Grande Cliff Drive. Approximately 5.8 acres of public open space
are provided across four reserves (Reserve A-D).
Details
Uses/Density
Bright Road Reserve permits single-family residential, parks and open space, model homes, and
home occupation. The proposed density is 1.4 dwelling unit to the acre (du/acre), which aligns
with the recommended density within Envision Dublin.
Development Standards
The applicant has indicated that the development is intended to be sensitive to the established
character of the surrounding single-family neighborhoods while conserving the existing natural
features on the site. To align with the community theme, the development standards are largely
consistent, except for the rear yard setbacks between the Perimeter Lots and Interior Lots. The Lot
Type Example exhibits effectively depict a range of conceptually developed lots, as recommended
by the NDG.
*Patios may not encroach into any setback
Architecture and Building Materials
The development will consist of custom-built, high-quality, single-family 1.5- to 2-story homes
featuring 2- or 3-car garages. The homes will be designed to reflect the Midwestern Vernacular
and European Country styles, along with some Gothic elements from farmhouse designs, a style
prevalent in Dublin and nearby communities.
Minimum Requirements
Requirement Interior Lots Perimeter Lots
Lot Area 9,960
Lot Width 40 ft. (inside-corner lots)
Lot Depth 107 ft.
Front Yard Setback 15 ft. (build-to-zone 15 ft.- 20 ft. except inside corner lots)
Side Yard Setback* 6 ft. on one side, 14ft. total;
20 ft. (lot 20), 15 ft. (lot 1) (lots adjacent to Bright Road)
Rear Yard Setback* 15 ft. (lot 14-19) 20 ft., 15 ft. (lot 3, lot 4, lot 20)
Private Open Space 15’-25’
Minimum Distance
Between Structures
12 ft.
Max. Lot Coverage 45%
Parking 2 -3 garage spaces and 2 driveway spaces per home
Memo re. Ord. 04-25 Bright Road Reserve
March 11, 2025
Page 6 of 9
The development text permits 1.5-2-story homes with a maximum height of 35 feet, which is
consistent with the Code allowances in residential zoning districts. The proposal permits a variety
of primary cladding materials, including full-depth brick, thin brick, stone, manufactured stone,
wood, stucco, cementitious siding, or any combination thereof. The proposed development text
also defines permitted trim materials that include: wood, cementitious board, and aluminum (for
gutters and downspouts only). Permitted roof materials are dimensional asphalt shingles (25 years
or 240lbs/sq weight), wood slate, copper, standing seam metal and/or tile. Windows and Door will
incorporate trim that is architecturally appropriate.
Garages are to be consistent with the main building façade with decorative garage doors and a
maximum width of 18 feet. Per the development text, garage orientation may be determined
based on the individual site topography. Outdoor terraces, decks, pool and dining areas are
permitted as a part of the overall architectural character of home. All the ground mechanical
equipment is to be located and screened through architecture and/or landscape to minimize
visibility and noise.
Front yard fences include ornamental metal, painted/stained wood, stone, or a combination
thereof in keeping with the character of the house design and as approved by the HOA. The fences
are intended to define the “semi-public” space that is the home entry area and not enclose the
front yard.
The HOA will establish an Architectural Review Board (ARB) to evaluate each homesite and
building plan in the development for compliance with the Development Standards put forth by the
FDP. The Developer, as the sole builder of these custom homes, will serve as the ARB and retain
control of individual plan approval within the development until such time that all lots are
constructed.
Front Yard Character and Landscape
The front yard character is intended to provide a village streetscape. Each home is to be custom
designed with a variation of materials from home to home, and well-detailed front yards are
envisioned for the neighborhood. Entry gardens with foundation plantings, hedges, walls/piers,
fencing segments and other devices are proposed to match the character of the home. At FDP,
specific front yard planting requirements must be provided. A diverse mix of naturalistically planted
street trees is appropriate to the site’s character. A 5-foot-wide tree lawn is noted as standard
throughout the development. The applicant will determine whether to restore or remove the
existing fencing along Bright Road, which will be considered by PZC at FDP. No entry feature is
proposed for the development. Per NDG, transitional arrival and entry spaces located in relation to
the street are recommended. However, given the development’s intent to maintain Bright Road’s
rural character, the tree buffer with no additional entry features is sufficient.
Open Space
The Subdivision Regulations require land dedication for open space and recreational facilities. The
applicant is required to provide a minimum of 0.88 acres of open space for the site based on the
area and number of single-family lots. The proposal is for 5.8 acres of open space, all of which is
to be dedicated to the City. Four reserves of open space are proposed to be established. Details
are as follows:
Memo re. Ord. 04-25 Bright Road Reserve
March 11, 2025
Page 7 of 9
Proposed Ownership and Maintenance of Public Open Spaces
Space Ownership Maintenance
Reserve A: West Wood City of Dublin HOA*
*City of Dublin will maintain the
stormwater functionality of the
detention basin
Reserve B: Billingsley Run City of Dublin HOA**
**City of Dublin will maintain the
waterway
Reserve C: Central Court City of Dublin HOA
Reserve D: East Court City of Dublin HOA
Reserve A, also named “West Wood,” is 2.40 acres and is primarily comprised of volunteer tree
growth. Reserve A will be developed as a passive community open space and will include necessary
stormwater management facilities to accommodate the development. The HOA will be responsible
for the maintenance of Reserve A, with the exception of the stormwater functionality of the detention
basin. The City will maintain the stormwater functionality of the detention basin, which includes the
storage volume capacity of the basin, inlet and outlet storm sewer, headwalls, outlet control
structure, underdrain, and aggregate surrounding the underdrain and headwalls. The detention
basin is defined within Reserve A from the top of bank into the basin. The HOA will maintain the
landscaping within the detention basin. The HOA will also be responsible for mowing the detention
basin. The City of Dublin is best suited to maintain the proposed residential detention basin to ensure
it is properly maintained and in good working order. The practice of the City of Dublin maintaining
residential stormwater management basins for proposed subdivisions has been applied to previously
approved subdivisions which include Hyland Glen, the Overlook at Tartan Ridge, Ayrshire Farms,
Autumn Rose Woods and Riviera.
Reserve B, which includes a portion of Billingsley Creek, is 3.11 acres and is primarily comprised of
a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) designated Special Flood Hazard Area. Reserve
B will be preserved in its natural state. The proposed development complies with Flood Control
requirements in accordance with Chapter 151 of the City of Dublin Codified Ordinances. The HOA
will be responsible for the maintenance of Reserve B, with the exception of the portion of
Billingsley Creek on the parcel. Staff recommends the developer correct any waterway deficiencies
within Reserve B, identified by the City through inspections, to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. The City of Dublin is best suited to maintain the waterways on Reserve B to ensure it is
properly maintained and in good working order. The proper operation of waterways is critical to
ensuring the appropriate conveyance of stormwater runoff and the reduction of the occurrence of
flooding and damage to infrastructure due to channel erosion. Reducing areas of erosion can
improve the sediment loading on a waterway, improving aquatic habitat and reducing turbidity in
the water. The City of Dublin implements a Waterways Maintenance Program that provides for the
maintenance of waterways, open channels, and streams located in City-owned areas.
The 0.28-acre Central Court (Reserve C) and 0.027-acre East Court (Reserve D) are designed to
provide open space connections. The HOA will be required to maintain Reserves C and D. Reserve
C is proposed in the central portion of the lot surrounded by streets with homes facing the open
space. It is intended to be a gathering space for residents and is supplemented by an open space
connection to Reserve A. The preliminary design includes a perimeter flush curb, clusters of birch
trees and a location of a clustered mailbox facility.
Memo re. Ord. 04-25 Bright Road Reserve
March 11, 2025
Page 8 of 9
Existing tree rows lining the north property boundary (“North Buffer”) and Bright Road (“South
Buffer”) are proposed as No-Build Zones on individual lots.
Transportation & Mobility
Traffic Impact Study
As the property is requesting rezoning for the proposed land uses, the applicant is required to have
a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) performed by a qualified professional engineer. The TIS models the
traffic on the existing roadways, evaluates the impacts of the additional traffic on the surrounding
roadway network and recommends mitigation measures for these impacts. The applicant submitted
a traffic impact study, which was considered prior to the February 2025 Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting. The study provided an analysis of the anticipated traffic generated by the
proposed development, which due to the low traffic volume on this section of Bright Road and the
relatively low number of trips generated by the proposed site, shows no required improvements for
the surrounding roadway network.
Access
The proposed streets within the development will be public. ‘Street A’ is a 50-foot-wide right-of-
way (26-foot-wide pavement) extending from the Bright Road intersection to the first internal
intersection. The remainder of this street, as well as ‘Street B’, is a 40-foot-wide right-of-way (24-
foot-wide pavement). While the City recommends a 60-foot-wide right-of-way, the subdivision
regulations allow a minimum of 50 feet. Due to the size and isolated nature of the proposed
neighborhood, the proposed street hierarchy is limited to these street widths.
Pedestrian Connectivity
Bright Road Connections
The City is currently working to extend the shared use path along the south side of Bright Road
which would cross Billingsley Creek and terminate at Grandee Cliffs Drive to align with the Bikeway
Plan. Envision Dublin recommends that pedestrian and bicycle facilities be included on both sides
of the road. However, given the rural character of Bright Road, which features natural elements
such as the creek’s mature trees and low traffic volumes, City staff is satisfied with a one-sided
shared use path on the south side of Bright Road. To ensure connectivity of the development to
the future shared use path, a crosswalk is proposed at the intersection of Bright Road and Grandee
Cliffs Drive, allowing access to the shared use path.
Internal Sidewalks
The proposal includes five-foot wide sidewalks along the eastern side of Street A and the southern
and western sides of Street B and around Central Court. The remainder of the neighborhood is
proposed to include ADA-accessible driveways to accommodate access to the sidewalk on the
opposite side of the street and the Central Court. Per the recently adopted City standards, 6-foot
sidewalks are required on both sides of the street with any development. The applicant is
requesting to intentionally depart from the required standards to preserve green spaces and
maintain the rural character of the proposal. To meet the current City standards, staff
recommended a conditional of approval that “the applicant provide a 6-foot wide sidewalk on both
sides of streets in the subdivision and revise the development text accordingly, prior to City Council
submittal”. At the PZC meeting, given the rural character of the neighborhood and the number of
single-family homes, the Commission supported the sidewalks on one side of the street and the
condition was removed.
Memo re. Ord. 04-25 Bright Road Reserve
March 11, 2025
Page 9 of 9
Reserve Access Drives
A compacted aggregate drive from Bright Road to the detention basin are proposed within Reserve
A to provide access for maintenance of the detention basin. Concrete drive apron adjacent to Bright
Road is also proposed to minimize the potential for the aggregate material to track onto the public
streets. The access drive, including the associated drive subgrades, will be designed to withstand
the loading of maintenance vehicles and will accommodate safe and traversable access to the
detention basin to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Stormwater Management and Utilities
The proposal will meet the requirements of the City of Dublin Chapter 53, Stormwater
Management and Stream Protection Code of Ordinances by constructing a stormwater
management detention basin, storm sewer pipes, and associated structures. The applicant has
located and sized these facilities based on a stormwater management report that analyzed the
existing and anticipated drainage for the area and has provided calculations for the sizing of the
detention basin. A graded maintenance berm will be provided around the detention basin in
accordance with the City of Dublin’s Stormwater Management Design Manual to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer. The applicant will need to continue to work with the Division of Engineering to
demonstrate stormwater management compliance in accordance with Chapter 53 of the City of
Dublin Code of Ordinances to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
A FEMA designated Special Flood Hazard Area is located near the eastern portion of the site within
Reserve B. This area has been delineated and has been kept free of proposed buildings,
stormwater management facilities and other prohibited uses in this area.
The construction of a new public water main from Bright Road will provide access to public water
for domestic and fire protection use. A new public sanitary sewer is proposed with this
development to provide service for the proposed lots.
Recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission
At its February 6, 2025 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval to
City Council with nine conditions.
Preliminary Development Plan/Rezoning Conditions:
1) The applicant provide a connected shared use path in Reserve A, per the City’s
maintenance standards and revise the development text as required, prior to City Council
submittal. (Not Met)
2) The applicant make adjustments to Lot 2, Lot 5 and Lot 13 to provide a minimum lot width
of 40 feet to achieve more flexibility in driveway location and provide landscaping
opportunities for a cohesive residential appearance and revise the development text to
require the minimum lot width of 40 feet, prior to City Council submittal. (Met)
3) The applicant provide a uniform tree lawn within the entire development without any
discrepancies between the drawings prior to City Council submittal. (Met)
4) The applicant revise the development text to address the discrepancies between the rear
yard setbacks, primary structure setback and minimum private open spaces on Lots 1- 10
prior to City Council submittal. (Met)
5) The applicant revise the development text to require minimum side yard dimension of 6
feet on one side and 14 feet total prior to City Council submittal. (Met)
Memo re. Ord. 04-25 Bright Road Reserve
March 11, 2025
Page 10 of 9
6) The applicant revise the development text to provide minimum setbacks for the front-
loaded and side-loaded garages, prior to City Council submittal. (Met)
7) The applicant revise the development text to address lots along Bright Road (Lots 1,2,13
and 20) to be given extra attention and maintain relationship with Bright Road, prior to City
Council submittal.(Met)
8) The applicant show conceptual building envelopes with the submittal of the Final
Development Plan. (Met)
9) The applicant remove redundant development requirements that match the requirements
of the Zoning Code, prior to City Council submittal. (Met)
The applicant has addressed all the above conditions except Condition 1. Based on Council’s
feedback, staff recommends revising Condition 1 to the following:
1) The applicant provide a compacted aggregate drive and concrete apron, designed to
withstand loading of maintenance vehicles and accommodate safe and traversable access
to the detention basin for maintenance from Bright Road to the detention basin within
Reserve A to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
City Council Recommendation
Approval of Ordinance 04-25 with the following revised Condition 1 and additional conditions:
1) The applicant provide a compacted aggregate drive and concrete apron, designed to
withstand loading of maintenance vehicles and accommodate safe and traversable access
to the detention basin for maintenance from Bright Road to the detention basin within
Reserve A to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
10) The applicant will need to continue to work with the Division of Engineering to
demonstrate stormwater management compliance in accordance with Chapter 53 of the
Dublin Code of Ordinances to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
11) The applicant correct any waterway deficiencies within Reserve B, identified by the City
through inspections, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
12) The applicant update the Preliminary Development Plan and Development Text
accordingly to ensure the documents are consistent.
Page 1 of 19
Bright Road Reserve
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
CITY OF DUBLIN, OHIO
January 17, 2025
February 13, 2025 (revised)
Landowner: Developer:
DNS Trust, Sally S. Haimbaugh, Trustee
9449 Cape Wrath Drive
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Phone: 614.499.4466
Contact: Sally S Haimbaugh
4338 Bright Road Partners, LLC
8824 Dunsinane Drive
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Phone: 614.286.5753
Contact: William H. Adams, Managing Partner
Legal:
Engineering:
Plank Law Firm, LPA
411 East Town Street
Columbus Ohio 43215
Phone: 614.221.4255
Contact: Don Plank
Advanced Civil Design
781 Science Blvd, Suite 100
Gahanna, Ohio 43230
Phone: 614.793.8777
Contact: Thomas M. Warner
Land Planning/Landscape Architecture:
Architecture:
MKSK
462 South Ludlow Alley
Columbus, Ohio 43215
Phone: 614.621.2796
Contact: Brian P. Kinzelman
The Jones Studio
503 City Park Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43215
Phone: 614.358.3729
Contact: Brian Kent Jones
Page 2 of 19
CONTENTS Page
Section A : Project Narrative
……………………………………………………………………………………… 4
Section B: Site Description
1. Property Location and Size ......................................................................................... 7
2. Character & Surrounding Uses ................................................................................... 7
3. Land Uses ................................................................................................................... 7
4. Open Space & Natural Features ................................................................................. 8
5. Provision of Utilities ..................................................................................................... 8
6. Access and Circulation ................................................................................................ 9
7. Architecture ................................................................................................................. 9
Section C: Development Standards
1. Permitted Uses .......................................................................................................... 10
2. Density ...................................................................................................................... 10
3. Lot Standards ............................................................................................................ 10
4. Streets, Access, and Connectivity ............................................................................ 13
5. Utilities ....................................................................................................................... 14
6. Open Space .............................................................................................................. 15
7. Tree Preservation, Removal and Replacement ........................................................ 16
8. Architecture ............................................................................................................... 17
9. Landscape ................................................................................................................. 19
10. Homeowners’ Association ......................................................................................... 19
11. Ownership & Maintenance ........................................................................................ 20
Page 3 of 19
SECTION A: PROJECT NARRATIVE
The City of Dublin has become one of the finest communities in the country in which to live, work and
socialize. Central Ohio as a whole is experiencing a significant demand for all levels of housing and
Dublin is not immune to these needs. This development, though modest in size, looks to satisfy the desire
of many to join in to the Dublin community and, those that have been here for years, to remain here as a
vital part of the community that they helped to build.
This development will be a unique and distinct offering within the City of Dublin with the combination of a
high-quality site and custom architecture to enhance that position. The quiet nature of this segment of
Bright Road (west of the Hopewell Elementary School) and its disconnection from Riverside Drive for
vehicular traffic makes this site well suited for a hamlet/enclave of architecturally controlled residences,
not a conventional subdivision. It must and will provide for all of the safety, security and mobility needs of
the community but should not be evaluated the same as much larger developments in very different
settings. Its modest size and limited development site ensure a small number of homesites with a small
population. This development is surrounded by established neighborhoods with no through connections
to those adjacent neighborhoods by motor vehicle, bicycle or on foot. As such, wide streets are
unnecessary since no through-traffic exists. Dual wide sidewalks and multi-use trails are unnecessary
since no through- connections for bicycles or pedestrians exist outside of the main street connection to
Bright Road. This “dead end” infill site makes it the perfect opportunity for the quiet, intimate character
community that is envisioned. It is to be a planned development, designed to fit the site it is to occupy.
This community will likely cater to the empty-nester buyer at one end of the age continuum and the dual
professional income young family at the other, each looking for the conveniences and amenities of
Dublin, including adjacent Bridge Park restaurants and schools/parks respectively, among many others.
This proposed development looks to embrace the Dublin reputation as a premier community and build
upon the foundational elements of the Community Plan through addressing many specific elements of the
“Dublin Character” applicable to this neighborhood.
Natural Features - Preservation and celebration for resident enjoyment of the watercourse on
the east portion of the site and woodlot to the west portion of the site.
Rural Landscape – Respect and preserve the character of Bright Road and the overall
landscape.
Historic Dublin – Connection to the Scioto River (the single most important natural element
that facilitated the original settlement of Dublin) and the Historic Downtown, just a short walk
away.
Cultural Heritage - Connect to/celebrate the Holder-Wright Earthworks Park, the Leatherlips
sculpture/Scioto Park, the other parks and riverfront offerings.
Roadway Character and Streetscapes – Provide for interior streetscapes with front-facing
homes along the line streets segments, minimal R/W width allowing for more intimate corridor
dimensions, less pavements, less walkways while insuring connectivity of all, robust street
trees and manicured entry spaces, intentionally deviated from conventional subdivision
character/scale and showcasing high-quality architectural style and landscapes. “More green,
less gray.”
Parks, Reserves, Open Space – Preserved watercourses and woods, public spaces, wooded
perimeter buffers, residential courts, private landscapes.
Environmental Stewardship and Sensitivity – Minimize land disturbance through
Conservation Design, naturally manage stormwater, revegetate the site with indigenous
plantings.
Page 4 of 19
Quality of Life – Provide unique homes, fine living space, spectacular outdoor environments
and help satisfy community housing needs.
High quality residential development – Fine quality materials, stunning architecture, tailored
outdoor private spaces/amenities.
Neighborhood Design - This development will respect the Conservation Design Ordinance and the
Neighborhood Design Guidelines of the city. Much of this site has been used in the past for agricultural
and “rural residential” purposes and, as a result, a significant portion has been previously cleared and
was recently occupied by a single dwelling, since demolished. This development assumes that the
previously cleared land would be used for housing in a way that minimizes disturbance and construction
activity. Homesites are to be clustered in such a way that the existing watercourse (Billingsley Run and
tributary) is preserved/enhanced and its surrounding woods preserved.
Streets are considered more as “mews” and less as “subdivision roads” with attention to details. The
streetscape is intended to have an intimate feeling with indigenous street trees, possibly masonry piers
for space definition, coordinated signage and other specialty details as approved by the City of Dublin
Engineer. Open space connections are to be identified/accentuated by more detailed and intentional
landscape at the entry points from the public domain. The Central Court on the west and the East Court
on the east will provide for homesite driveway entries as well as meaningful public open space. The
Central Court will include a flush edge and low up-lighted masonry piers, and tree plantings. Well-tailored
landscapes for the “civic” side of home fronts will include entry zones, drives, walks and gardens in
contrast to the naturalized “native” green areas of stream corridor, West Wood, buffers and
drainageways. This community looks to be welcoming and inclusive with connection to the surrounding
community at the Bright Road entry.
Specialty paved sidewalks are to be considered and walks to be provided on one side of each street
providing for pedestrian connection to/from every homesite, public space and postal facility
Open Space Framework - Two major public open spaces are proposed, including the Billingsley Run and
West Wood areas. The Billingsley creek bed itself and all existing woods surrounding it are to remain in
protected Reserve form. The West Wood will accommodate stormwater management, being at the lower
end of the watershed of the site and is defined by preserved trees along its entire perimeter. This area will
be enhanced by plantings to create outdoor space for the enjoyment of residents and neighbors alike.
The stormwater storage is to be accommodated in a sensitively graded “dry basin” with well selected
groundcovers that allow for the usage of this basin in dry conditions.
Public Realm - All homes are to address their frontage street/court with prominence. Driveway access to
garages is not to dominate the character of this statement but will provide that access way for residents
and visitors to enter the homesites in an intentional way with proper detailing of this more public portion of
the drive and provide for an attractive and meaningful walkway connection to the home entry. Driveways
and entry walkways may be constructed partially or wholly of concrete, brick, or stone, dependent upon
the individual home design and materials palette. Each home is custom leading to possible variation of
materials, home to home. Each homesite will have a well detailed front yard that may include an entry
garden that defines the semi-private space of the yard through foundation plantings, hedges, walls/piers,
fencing segments and other devices to add to the character of the home, all in keeping with the
materials/detailing of that home. Locations of possible front yard Improvements to be as described in
Section C: Development Standards. Character images are included herein to aid in communicating
design intent of these custom and uniquely designed homes and landscapes. Certain “outside corner” lots
of irregular geometry may have homes sited further setback from the frontage street to take better
advantage of lot dimensions, adjacent natural/green areas, increased privacy of outdoor spaces. Lots on
the “perimeter” of the site, adjacent to existing neighborhoods are to have a protected landscape
easement to preserve existing trees, allow sufficient space to augment that area with additional planting
and restricts homeowners from adversely affecting this buffer, all for sake of the privacy of residents on
Page 5 of 19
BOTH sides of the property line. The protection of these easements is to be managed and enforced by
the HOA.
Private Realm - Rear yards and appropriate portions of certain side yards are meant to be an extension of
the interior “living space” of the homes. It is envisioned that each home will have well-articulated outdoor
terrace/dining space, gathering areas with possible pool and/or spa, architecturally correct overhead
structures such as trellises or pergolas. Manicured lawns and gardens (formal, cutting, vegetable, herb)
are also anticipated, as may be desired by the individual homeowners. Certain “perimeter” lots will take
advantage of the topography of the site and the natural features in visually “blending” these yard spaces
into this existing environment without the conventional “backyard” feel. Auxiliary structures may also be
considered, all within keeping of setbacks and architectural character of the home, for cabana/pool
house, dining gazebo, secondary garage, depending on the desires of the individual homeowner.
Page 6 of 19
SECTION B: SITE DESCRIPTION
1. Property Location and Size
The site is located completely within the City of Dublin and Franklin County, Ohio.
14.17 acre site consisting of two contiguous parcels, Franklin County Tax Parcel #273-
008618 containing 10.606 ac & Parcel #273-011149 containing 3.568 ac. located at 4338
Bright Road with existing access drive for previous single-family dwelling (since demolished)
at the intersection of Grandee Cliffs Drive. The property is the only remaining privately held
developable parcel on the north side of Bright Road in this area.
The property is surrounded on all sides by existing single-family residential development with
the exception of its western flag portion being directly north of the Holder-Wright Earthworks
Park.
The combined Bright Road frontage dimension is 689.33 LF. No access or improvements
proposed by this project includes the S-curve portion of Bright Road.
2. Character & Surrounding Uses
The site is bound on the east by the Billingsley Run and the wooded area to the east of that
watercourse. The west is bound by a volunteer-growth woods that contains the drainage
swale that drains the major western ¾ of the site.
The majority of the site and that area proposed for development was most recently occupied
by a single residence and a swimming pool, both since demolished. A small garage structure
is presently the only structure that exists on-site, is in poor condition and is to be demolished
as a part of this development proposal. The supporting driveway to the former residence is
also in poor condition and is to be demolished as well. The cleared site is thought to have
been previously cultivated but in its more recent past was mown lawn and served as the yard
space for the residence. This cleared area is to be used for homesite and roadway
development.
The topography of the site is slightly rolling and gently falls to its east and west edges. The
site layout reflects this form of the land. The roadway system is proposed to lay largely “at
grade” with very little earthwork needed. The homesites are not anticipated requiring over-lot
grading (ie: clearing/grubbing, earthmoving, etc.) but will be developed/graded individually to
insure optimum placement in all dimensions and proper drainage of the sites. What trees that
exist in this cleared area and that are in established “good” condition will be considered in
building placement, orientation, and grading in an effort to preserve them as possible.
The property is located south and outside of the Bright Road Area Plan and is surrounded by
existing single-family housing (with the exception of the park referenced above) that was
generally built in the 1970’s and forward.
3. Land Uses
Currently this project site is zoned R-1 Restricted Suburban Residential District, and the
proposed rezoning is to Planned Development. This site is presently vacant. Surrounding
areas are residential uses, R-1 zoning with the exception of the public park south of Bright
Road at the SW corner of this development site.
The Dublin Community Plan - Existing Land Use Map designates the site as “undeveloped”.
The Dublin Community Plan – Future Land Use Map designates the site as “Residential Low
Density (0.5-1 dwelling unit per acre)
Proposed use is single-family residential.
Page 7 of 19
The proposed development embraces the tenets of “conservation design”, clustered home
sites with “Reserve” areas for open space, tree preservation, habitat conservation,
reforestation and localized stormwater management.
4. Open Space & Natural Features
West Wood, consisting largely of volunteer tree growth, will further provide for community
open space and accommodate the stormwater management necessary for the development.
This reserve, as defined by perimeter boundaries and proposed lot lines, consists of 2.40
acres and occupies the western portion of the site.
Billingsley Run, its tributary, floodway and surrounding woods are to be reserved as public
open space and in its current condition. This reserve, as defined by perimeter boundaries and
proposed lot lines, consists of 3.11 acres, and occupies the eastern portion of the site.
Generous and dense perimeter buffer areas, mostly on the north and south boundaries, are
to be reserved and provide for visual separation from adjacent homesites. These perimeter
preservation areas consist of various species of mature plants, to be augmented by new
plantings as may be needed. These preservation areas are to be placed in perpetual
landscape easements that allow for consistency in the landscaped edges and consist of 0.62
acres.
5. Provision of Utilities
General
Both public sanitary sewer and water utility systems exist adjacent to the site along Bright
Road. These utility systems will be utilized for service to the development. The capacity and
condition have been determined while the exact locations are to be determined as part of the
Final Development Plan.
Stormwater management for the development is to be provided to meet the City of Dublin
Engineer requirements and design criteria.
All private utilities, including communications, internet/cable, electric, and gas are available to
this site. Commitment correspondence to be provided at Final Development Plan.
All utilities are to be designed and constructed to meet the standards established by the City
of Dublin Engineer.
Sanitary Sewer
Sanitary sewer service to the development will be provided from one (1) location.
The proposed development will be serviced from an existing 8-inch line located adjacent in
the Bright Road R/W south of the site.
Water
An existing 8-inch water main along the south side of Bright Road is adequate to provide
service to this site.
Stormwater – Existing
The current site is divided into two watersheds, roughly along the ridge line of the existing
driveway, with the major watershed draining to the west into an open swale leading to the
Scioto River. Portions of the residential neighborhood to the north (Hanna Hills) drain to and
through the site to the open swale described above. The minor watershed drains east into
Billingsley Run, its north tributary and on to the Scioto River as well.
Page 8 of 19
This development lies within the Little East Watershed and the Billingsley Creek Watershed,
requiring more stringent storage and release rates, as determined by the City of Dublin
Engineer.
The predominate soil type is Blount Silt Loam, End Moraine (Ble1B1), a Type D soil.
6. Access and Circulation
Vehicular access to the site from the public R/W will be from a single access point on Bright
Road at the intersection of Grandee Cliffs Drive. No public transit facilities exist to this site.
No multi-use trail or sidewalks from the public right-of-way currently exist to this site.
7. Architecture
One building exists on-site, a dilapidated garage in very poor condition and is proposed to be
demolished by this development.
No prevailing architectural style is evident in the surrounding neighborhoods. A wide range of
styles, masses, materials, colors, and orientations is observed, leaving no precedent of
character to be emulated. The quality of home architecture and site development is the
standard to be reflected and even exceeded by this development.
Page 9 of 19
SECTION C: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Development to be in accordance with the City of Dublin Code at the time of development. Unless
specifically modified by these Development Standards, the standard City of Dublin Code
provisions shall apply. Where conflicts occur between the City of Dublin Code and these
Development Standards, the Development Standards shall apply and supersede the Code.
1. Permitted Uses
Permitted uses shall include the following:
Single-family detached dwellings.
Accessory Structures or Buildings
Construction Trailers/Offices
Parks and Open Spaces
Stormwater Management Facilities, publicly and/or privately-owned open spaces, stormwater
facilities and related features.
Home occupation uses in accordance with City of Dublin Code Section 153.073(B).
2. Density
A maximum of 20 lots consisting of single-family dwellings on a gross site area of 14.17 acres
and a resultant density of 1.4 dwelling units per acre.
3. Lot Standards
Single-family dwelling units in this development will be constructed on traditional lots with fee
simple ownership. Each dwelling proposed is to be custom designed and built in response to
its lot. Existing site conditions and the desire to preserve as much of the natural environment
as is practical have dictated the lots’ configurations. As such, each lot is somewhat unique in
shape requiring detailed setback standards as stated below. Lots #1, 2, 13 & 20 abut Bright
Road and have limited visibility to the lots and dwellings from Bright Road. These lots will
receive consideration relative to siting, architecture, and landscape to appropriately address
Bright Road.
Lot Size
Lot Area: 9,960 square feet, minimum (smallest, Lot #19)
21,443 square feet (largest, Lot #10)
13,731 square feet (average)
Lot Width: 40’ minimum width (R/W frontage), Lot # 5
Lot Depth: 107’ minimum (side property line), Lot # 19
Maximum Lot Coverage: Not-to-exceed 45%.
Side yard setback areas as described herein are to be clear of
ground-mounted mechanical devices. Pedestrian pavements,
landscape and HOA-approved fencing may be permitted.
Page 10 of 19
Side yard setback minimum dimensions for either side of a lot
are as described with a total combined side yard setback no less
than 14” per each lot.
Private Open Spaces to include lawns, terraces, decks, patios,
fireplaces, open air garden structures, swimming
pools/decks/barriers, ornamental fountains, gardens and seating
areas.
Lot Setbacks
Lot #1 (Corner Lot)
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
15’ Corner Side Build-to-Zone (east side)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
20’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
6’ Minimum Side Yard (west side)
20’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #2
15’ Minimum Front Setback (no Build-to limit, inside corner lot)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
20’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
6’ Minimum Side Yard (east side)
20’ Side Yard/Landscape Easement (west side)
20’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #3&4
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
30’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space
6’ Minimum Side Yard, 14’ Minimum Total both sides combined
15’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot # 5
15’ Minimum Front Setback (no Build-to limit, inside corner lot)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
20’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
6’ Minimum Side Yard (east side)
20’ Side Yard/Landscape Easement (west side)
20’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #6-9
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
20’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
6’ Minimum Side Yard, 14’ Minimum Total both sides combined
20’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #10
15’ Minimum Front Setback (no Build-to limit, inside corner lot)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure (north Rear)
20’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
(north Rear)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure (east Rear)
Page 11 of 19
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space (east Rear)
6’ Minimum Side Yard,14’ Minimum Total both sides combined
20’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #11
15’ Minimum Front Setback (no Build-to limit, inside corner lot)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space
6’ Minimum Side Yard, 14’ Minimum Total both sides combined
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #12 (Corner Lot)
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
15’-20’ Corner Side Build-to-Zone
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space
6’ Minimum Side Yard (north side)
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #13
15’ Minimum Front Setback (no Build-to limit)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure (west Rear)
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space (west Rear)
6’ Minimum Side Yard (north side)
20’ Minimum Side Yard Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
(south side)
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #14,15,18,19
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space
6’ Minimum Side Yard, 14’ Minimum Total both sides combined
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #16 &17 (Corner Lots)
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
15’-20’ Corner Side Build-to-Zone
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space
6’ Minimum Side Yard, 14’ Minimum Total both sides combined
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #20 (Corner Lot)
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
15’-20’ Corner Side Build-to-Zone
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space
6’ Minimum Side Yard (north side)
20’ Minimum Side Yard Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
(south side)
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
4. Streets, Access, and Connectivity
Page 12 of 19
Single point of access from Bright Road at the current intersection of Grandee Cliffs Drive.
Street names to be determined at Final Plat, identified as Street A and Street B on
Preliminary Plat. This access to and through the site is proposed to be public R/W and
meeting the requirements of the City of Dublin Engineer.
Curb radius at Street A entry, 30.’
All lots are to be accessed from the internal street system with no lots permitted direct
vehicular access to Bright Road.
Public Streets Standards:
a. Right-of-Way: 50’ (Street A from Bright Road to 1st intersection with Street B)
40’ (all other streets)
b. Pavement Width: 26’ asphalt pavement (Bright Road to 1st intersection with
Street B)
24’ asphalt pavement (all other streets)
c. Drive Lanes: Two (2)
d. Parking Lanes: Parking shall be allowed on one side of the public streets
internal to the development.
e. Tree Lawn: 5’ minimum width
f. Sidewalk: Pedestrian circulation through the site is to be provided by a 5’
wide walk of cast-in-place concrete as the minimum level of
quality with the possibly of brick pavement at the sole
discretion of the Developer, on one side of the street providing
access to all homesites, open spaces and destinations in the
development. If the Developer chooses brick pavement,
maintenance of these walks to be the responsibility of the
individual homeowners as administered through the HOA.
ADA-compliant driveways for homes that do not have a
sidewalk (Lots 1-12) are to be provided to establish full
connectivity. Walkway to be provided at the perimeter of the
Central Court to provide access to the CBU mailboxes.
Developer to provide painted crosswalks across Street A at
Bright Road and across Bright Road west of Street A,
including curb ramps and receiving concrete-paved corner
walk pads at all three corners, per City of Dublin standard. All
crosswalk construction is to be coordinated with the Dublin
City Engineer relative to timing for installation with City-
provided trail construction along Bright Road.
g. Curbs: Combination concrete curb and gutter throughout the
development.
h. Access Drive: Compacted aggregate drive and concrete apron, designed to
withstand the loading of maintenance vehicles, and
accommodate safe and traversable access to the detention
basin for maintenance from Bright Road to the detention basin
within Reserve A, will be provided to the satisfaction of the
City of Dublin Engineer. Additionally, a casual seating area in
West Wood will be provided. Revegetation in this West Wood
Page 13 of 19
area as replacements for the cleared trees is to be provided
per Landscape Plans, Section D: Exhibits, with no further
amenities/improvements proposed.
5. Utilities
Design and Construction:
All utilities shall be designed and constructed to meet the standards established by the City of
Dublin Engineer.
Location:
All utilities shall be placed in appropriate locations on the individual homesites that will best
preserve the existing trees in good condition. See Utilities Plan, Section D: Exhibits
A comprehensive stormwater management system to be developed, following the City of
Dublin stormwater management policies to the satisfaction of the City of Dublin Engineer.
See Grading & Drainage Plan, Section D. This development lies within the Little East
Watershed and the Billingsley Creek Watershed, requiring more stringent storage and
release rates, as determined by the City of Dublin Engineer. Given the proximity of the project
site to the Scioto River and the convergence of the two on-site watersheds at the river, a
stormwater management detention basin and restricted outlet structure in the west of the site
will accommodate all stormwater storage requirements of the project while the much smaller
eastern watershed will direct drain into Billingsley Run.
The discharge point and release rate for the western portion of the site will be located and
designed to the satisfaction of the City of Dublin Engineer. The west watershed currently
drains through a swale channel to the west and ultimately to the Scioto River. The smaller
east watershed free drains into Billingsley Run and ultimately to the Scioto River as well. In
the post-development condition, the site drainage will be managed by one (1) stormwater
management system consisting of a dry detention basin with controlled outlet, storm sewer
pipes, and associated storm structures. The system will accept drainage from pervious areas
such as rear yards, side yards, and the off-site 0.46 acres mentioned above, and impervious
areas such as roadways, roofs, and sidewalks. A graded maintenance berm will be provided
around the perimeter of the detention basin in accordance with the City of Dublin’s
Stormwater Management Design Manual to the satisfaction of the City of Dublin Engineer.
Compacted aggregate drive and concrete apron, designed to withstand loading of
maintenance vehicles and accommodate safe and traversable access to the detention basin
for maintenance from Bright Road to the detention basin within Reserve A, will be provided to
the satisfaction of the City of Dublin Engineer. This drive will be graded to properly drain and
will provide for any culvert crossings as necessary to not interrupt existing drainage flow.
Rear yard drainage system is to be provided to ensure positive drainage in these rear yard
areas and conveyance to the proposed stormwater management system.
Impervious surfaces will drain to storm structures in the roadway.
Portions of Lots #10, 11, 12, 13 will free drain into the adjacent Billingsley Run or its north
tributary.
Billingsley Run and its north tributary are to be protected by a Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) designated Special Flood Hazard Area as calculated and
scribed as shown herein in conformance with the practices provided by the City of Dublin
Engineer. The swale on the west portion of the site has been exempted by the City of Dublin
Engineer from Stream Corridor Protection Zone requirements.
Page 14 of 19
6. Open Space
The required provision of open space shall be satisfied by the Reserves and Landscape
Easements described herein, and as depicted on the Final Development Plan. Based on the
location of the development and best practices, the proposed open space reserves are to be
owned by the City of Dublin and maintained by the City of Dublin and/or the Homeowners’
Association as described below and in Paragraph 11- Ownership & Maintenance.
Reserve A: Approximately 2.40 acres of open space, the West Wood, is to be deeded to the City
of Dublin with agreed-to restrictions on use. Given its location in the watershed and topography,
this area is to contain a dry detention basin for stormwater management, yet is to be shaped,
planted and protected as an open space Reserve. In light of its location relative to existing
surrounding neighbors who abut this Reserve, it is the intent of this development proposal that
Reserve A (as with Reserve B described below) is to remain passive in use and nature with no
additional programming, paved-surface trails, park apparatus, etc. for the entire neighborhood’s
continued quiet enjoyment of the greenspace. Within the City of Dublin, there is precedent for
such passive public open space, namely Thaddeus Kosciuszko Park and Wellington Reserve.
Reserve A is to be maintained by the HOA, with the exception of the stormwater functionality of
the detention basin. The City will maintain the stormwater functionality of the detention basin,
which includes the storage volume capacity of the basin, inlet and outlet storm sewer, headwalls,
outlet control structure, underdrain, and aggregate surrounding the underdrain and headwalls.
The detention basin is defined within Reserve A from the top of bank into the basin. The HOA will
maintain the landscaping within the detention basin. The HOA will also be responsible for mowing
the detention basin.
This area’s natural environment will be enhanced through thoughtful grading for stormwater
management, reforestation with environmentally correct indigenous plants and a naturalized
landscape. Revegetation in this West Wood area as replacements for the cleared trees is to be
provided per Landscape Plans, Section D: Exhibits. An access drive shall be sensitively sited with
respect to existing trees to allow for maintenance of the basin by the City of Dublin. No further
amenities/improvements are proposed in this area.
Reserve B: Billingsley Run, approximately 3.11 acres, is to be deeded to the City of Dublin with
agreed-to restrictions on use as public open space. It is intended to be left in its current and
natural state with no intentional intervention into it. Reserve B is to be maintained by the HOA,
with the exception of the waterway.
Reserve C: The Central Court, 0.28 acres, is open space described and enclosed by the public
street R/W in a prominent, intentional central location to the residents of the development for their
non-exclusive use as a communal gathering area. Open lawn and edge tree plantings are
intended to provide a sense of place while remaining visually open for natural surveillance and
public safety. Reserve C is to be maintained by the HOA.
Reserve D: The East Court Island, 0.027 acres, is open space for landscape purposes to
eliminate areas of unnecessary pavement and provide visual enhancement. Reserve D is to be
maintained by the HOA.
Landscape Easements, predominantly on the north and south edges of the development, are
intended to preserve existing trees there through deed restrictions on development, provide
space for augmenting these existing tree stands with new plantings and allowing for the long-term
protection of these greenspaces from encroachment or development. These open space areas
are to contain a mixture of trees and shrubs to enhance the rural character of the area and will be
a part of the Landscape Plan in the Final Development Plan.
Page 15 of 19
In summary, dedicated open space total 6.40 acres of this 14.17 acre site (or 45%) and is to be
maintained as open space post-development, the level of which is to be determined in
conjunction with the City of Dublin and as currently described in 6. Open Space and in 11.
Ownership and Maintenance.
No Entry Feature is anticipated as a part of this development in an effort to create a seamless
physical and practical connection to the surrounding neighborhood. Existing Bright Road frontage
is anticipated to remain in its current condition with exceptions for repairs and limited removal of
the existing wood fencing and plant additions and/or pruning as described herein. Current entry
gates and masonry piers are to be removed to accommodate new Street A construction.
7. Tree Preservation, Removal and Replacement
Tree Preservation:
It is the intent to preserve as many good condition trees as possible on the site. A good faith effort
will be made to preserve these existing trees where appropriate. High quality trees required to be
removed for sake of infrastructure are to be accounted for on the Tree Replacement Plan as a
part of the Final Development Plan.
Tree Preservation Zone:
Development is not anticipated in the wooded perimeter along Bright Road, the northern
property line, the southwestern “flag” connecting to Bright Road (excepting maintenance
path) and the entire area east of Billingsley Run. Existing trees there are to be preserved
with the possible exception of trimming/removal based on individual plant condition and
sound arboriculture practices.
Billingsley Run Reserve including Billingsley, its north tributary, the wooded area east of
these watercourses and existing trees west of the watercourses within the FEMA
designated Special Flood Hazard Area are to be preserved, and these areas be left in
their current undisturbed state with no further intervention or development.
The West Wood is to be utilized for the stormwater management of the development and
is to be revegetated to include the introduction of plantings in ecologically correct varieties.
See Section D, Landscape Plan
Tree preservation zone is established to protect these stands of existing plants. See
Section D, Landscape Plan. Temporary construction fence, minimum 4’ in height, to be
installed around the perimeter of the tree preservation zone prior to any construction
activities.
No building, structure, patio, recreational or athletic facility, or any other improvement to
be placed temporarily or permanently upon, in or under the area designated herein as a
“Tree Preservation Zone” nor shall any work be performed therein which would alter the
natural state of the zone or damage trees or vegetation therein.
Disturbance of any part of the zone by maintenance is to be restored as nearly as
practicable to the original condition. No tree or vegetation is to be removed from the zone
except for the removal of dead, diseased, decayed, structurally dangerous or noxious
trees or other vegetation, in keeping with sound arboriculture practices and is to be
managed by the HOA.
Tree Reforestation:
Upon completion of any removal of trees as described above, a tree reforestation program
is proposed. Good quality trees being necessarily removed to accommodate needed
infrastructure are to be replaced in accordance with City of Dublin tree replacement policy.
Page 16 of 19
A mixture of largely deciduous trees of various sizes will be installed where appropriate in
order to augment, re-establish or create a reinforced buffer between the development and
surrounding neighborhoods. This reforestation buffer will have an unmaintained natural
understory (no manicured turfgrass).
On an as-needed basis, trees or other vegetation may be removed from any buffer area in
order to maintain mandated drainage facilities.
Plantings in Reserves and Landscape Easements are to be a mix of varieties and sizes of
indigenous and/or improved varieties of indigenous plants. “Ornamental” plantings are to
be considered in limited shrub/perennial planting areas only. Street tree specifications are
to be determined by the City Forester.
8. Architecture
General Character:
The character of the development is to be 1.5 and 2 story single-family, high-quality homes with 2
or 3 car garages with possible accessory structures that complement the quality of the
surrounding homes in adjacent neighborhoods and will adhere to the City of Dublin Residential
Appearance Standards and Neighborhood Design Guidelines, as applicable. The architectural
vocabulary set forth shall align with that of Midwestern Vernacular and European Country to keep
consistent within the surrounding context.
Midwestern Vernacular architecture developed over the mid- to late 19th and early 20th centuries,
drawing inspiration from a variety of styles. Greek Revival elements emphasize simplicity,
permanence, and adaptability, while "farmhouse vernacular" showcases Gothic influences and
vertical proportions typical of early Victorian designs. This architectural style reflects regional
traditions, with notable examples found in Dublin as well as in communities like Bexley and Upper
Arlington.
European Country – The European Country style is defined by its use of stone and stucco
cladding, along with deep-set doors and windows, steep roof pitches, and flared eaves. Its forms
are typically simple and rectangular, featuring tall, well-proportioned windows that create a clean
and elegant aesthetic. The 1.5 to 2-story adaptation of this style to this development is
thoughtfully designed to meet the demand for first-floor master living while harmonizing with the
surrounding architectural character.
Conceptual depictions of the representative architectural schemes are included herein. See
Section D, sheets 13 &14 for benchmark photographic images of both architectural
character/quality of design and that of the streetscape/public domain. Below describes general
understanding of materials, colors, forms, and scale of the housing to be developed.
Development to be recognized as a holistic place, a complete neighborhood but will not be
monochromatic in form, materials, and colors. The common thread will be the quality of the
designed architecture, the similarity in roof pitch and a palette of high-quality materials.
Each home to be distinguished by its own massing composition, front façade design, mixture
of material types, and public realm landscape.
Garage orientation is to be determined in the context of individual site topography,
configuration, existing preserved trees, jurisdictional restrictions, and platted setbacks.
Lot configurations and topography may provide for non-traditional building siting including
garage massing and orientation.
Exterior Materials & Elements:
Page 17 of 19
Cladding: Natural materials including full-depth brick, thin brick, stone, manufactured stone,
wood, stucco, cementitious board, or a combination of these.
Trim: Wood, cementitious board, aluminum (for gutters & downspouts only).
Color Selections: White, earth tones and other muted colors, paint and/or stain.
Roofing Materials, windows, chimneys and other architectural elements are to be as listed in
the Residential Appearance Standards.
Garages: Garage doors are to be decorative, architecturally consistent, and complementary
to the overall architectural character of the home. Garage orientation to be determined in the
context of individual site topography, configuration, existing preserved trees, jurisdictional
restrictions, and platted setbacks. Front-facing garages to be set back a minimum of 20’ from
the front façade with the exception of the use of architectural elements of the primary
structure, architectural walls as visual extensions of the dwelling and landscape treatments
that serve to screen views to auto parking areas in front of garages. Side loaded garage
doors are to be set back 10’ from the front façade with the principal entrance. Accessory
detached garages are permitted as freestanding structures if consistent with the overall
character of the home it serves.
Lighting: No more than one (1) approved yard post light is permitted near the entry walk to
the front door.
Architectural Diversity:
The same or similar front elevations shall not be repeated within:
Two lots on either side of subject lot.
Three lots directly across the street from the subject lot.
Any lot on the cul-de-sac.
A themed or monochromatic development is not intended but adherence to architectural diversity
(stated above), materials standards and design quality will be reviewed/approved by the HOA
based on the standards herein approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Plan Approval:
The Homeowners’ Association will retain the right of individual plan approval for all single-family
homes within the development. The Homeowners’ Association established declarant will form an
Architectural Review Board (ARB) to review all architecture in ensure compliance with or exceed
the architectural standards set forth in the Development Standards. See Paragraph 10.
Homeowners’ Association below for additional detail.
9. Landscape
Street Trees:
Street Trees will be in accordance with the City of Dublin Code.
Fencing:
Existing fencing along Bright Road may be repaired in-place, removed in select areas or in
total. Long-term maintenance, repair, or replacement to be the responsibility of the HOA.
All fences are to be less than 4’ in height and the appearance of all fences shall be as
approved by the HOA.
Front yard fences, where so chosen by the homeowner, may be constructed of ornamental
metal, painted/stained wood, stone, or a combination thereof in keeping with the character of
Page 18 of 19
the house design for the purpose of describing but not enclosing the “semi-public” space that
is the home entry area. Front yard fencing to be placed no less than 3’ and no more than 5’
behind the public sidewalk where provided and no less than 1’ and no more than 3’ behind
the R/W line where no public walk is provided and is not to return along the side yards.
Fencing is not to be placed within easements.
See Section D, Sheets 13 & 14 for benchmark photographic images representative of the
character & quality of design envisioned for the public domain. All architecture of the
development is to be custom with each their own distinct expression and materials palette. As
such, elements defining the public domain frontage of each lot, including fencing, paving,
landscape, etc. are to be coordinated as a cohesive composition.
Cul-de-sac:
The cul-de-sac island planting to be initially planted as a part of the project development and
maintained by the HOA.
10. Homeowners’ Association
All residential property owners located within this Planned Development will be required to join
and maintain membership in the Homeowners’ Association (HOA) to be established by the
Developer at Final Plat. HOA responsibilities are to be detailed within the Covenants and
Restrictions that run with the land. Disposition of all Reserves within this Planned Development
relative to ownership and maintenance responsibilities will be described as a part of the Final
Development Plan and Development Text.
The HOA will establish an Architectural Review Board (ARB) to evaluate each homesite and
building plan in the development for compliance with the Development Standards put forth by the
Final Development Plan. The Developer, as the sole builder of these custom homes, will serve as
the ARB and retain control of individual homesite plan approval within the development until such
time that all lots are constructed. At that time, the review/approval of modifications to existing
structures and homesites will be by the ARB established by the HOA.
Unless otherwise provided by Ohio law, control of the Homeowners’ Association will be ceded to
the residents at a time determined by the Developer. Until such time, the Developer will pay dues
and fees on the property owned by the Developer and subsidize budget shortfalls. Budgets will
include line items for maintenance, reserves for repairs and replacements under the HOA.
11. Ownership & Maintenance
The following matrix describes spaces as currently identified, their anticipated ownership post-
development and the maintenance of these spaces and their facilities. Reserve open spaces
(including the stormwater management basin) are intended for public use and/or environmental
protection, Landscape Easements are intended for the preservation of existing vegetation.
Space Ownership Maintenance
Streets (Right-of-Way) City of Dublin City of Dublin
West Wood (Reserve A) City of Dublin HOA*
Billingsley Run (Reserve B) City of Dublin HOA**
Central Court (Reserve C) City of Dublin HOA
East Court (Reserve D) City of Dublin HOA
Landscape Easements (Preservation Areas) Privately held HOA
* The City of Dublin will maintain the stormwater functionality of the detention basin, which
includes the storage volume capacity of the basin, inlet and outlet storm sewer, headwalls,
outlet control structure, underdrain, and aggregate surrounding the underdrain and
Page 19 of 19
headwalls. The detention basin is defined within Reserve A from the top of bank into the
basin. The HOA will maintain the landscaping within the detention basin. The HOA will also
be responsible for mowing the detention basin.
**The City of Dublin will maintain the waterway.
4338 BRIGHT ROAD PARTNERS,LLC
8824 Dunsinane Drive
Dublin, OH 43017
February 13, 2025
Rati Singh, Assoc. AIA, Planner
City of Dublin, Ohio
Community Planning and Development
5200 Emerald Parkway | Dublin, Ohio 43017
RE: Bright Road Reserve
Revised Preliminary Development Plan/Preliminary Plat
Dear Ms. Singh:
Please find, under separate cover, our revised application information for the above-referenced project
based on our recent PZC Hearing and subsequent Staff conversations and comments. We are
anxious to keep this process moving forward through acceptance by City Council and appreciate
Staff’s efforts to that end.
We appreciate the Recommendation for Approval with Conditions by Staff and the Recommendation
for Approval by Planning and Zoning Commission with Conditions and in unanimous fashion, 7-0 on
February 6, 2025. We have reviewed the nine (9) Conditions of Approval for the Preliminary
Development Plan and the two (2) Conditions of Approval for the Preliminary Plat. We have addressed
those Conditions with further written clarification, corrections, refinements and modifications to
drawings excepting one. We continue with our original position relative to further intrusion of the West
Wood and therefore respectfully disagree with the directive of Condition #1, which states “The
Applicant provide a connected shared use path in Reserve A, per the City’s maintenance standards
and revise the development text as required, prior to City Council submittal”. There is no disagreement
over the need for maintenance access (which is being provided for) but only with the through-
connection of a Shared Use Path (SUP) which is unnecessary for that maintenance. As reasoned in
the Development Text of this submittal and reiterated here in summary form, our rationale for
disagreement with this condition is as follows:
1. The basic premise behind this development has been to consolidate and preserve the
significant woodlots, at both the east and west sides of the site to the extent possible as the
“signature” of the development, the West Wood and Billingsley Run being those major areas.
2. The West Wood is an existing stand of mixed variety trees and shrubs that we wish to
preserve as-is while addressing the storm water management required by its
topography/drainage patterns AND enhance this area through reforestation/landscape
plantings in its post-development condition resulting in a higher-quality environment that that
which exists today.
3. The West Wood lies directly adjacent to the rear yards of existing neighborhood homes and
has been available for the quiet enjoyment of the adjacent community without the introduction
of the through connection of a SUP and the users it would accommodate.
4. In conversations with various neighborhood groups during the planning stage of this
development, there has been virtually unanimous support of this development, the respect
shown to the natural environment of the site and the consideration of the existing
neighborhood for their continued enjoyment
5. The West Wood lies directly adjacent to the yards of several homesites of this proposed
development.
6. Understanding the need for maintenance access to the stormwater detention facility and its
outflow structure, the Applicant continues to propose a maintenance path from Bright Road to
the basin of sufficient structural quality and alignment to meet the needs of the City for periodic
access. Further intrusion in the woods is unnecessary.
7. Bicycle and pedestrian connectivity is provided through the proposed development of sufficient
size and alignment allowing for access to all homes and destinations within the development
and to Bright Road with commitment to connect to any future SUP that may be constructed
along Bright Road for improved community connectivity, diminishing any perceived need for
SUP connection to Bright Road through the West Wood and any associated crosswalk.
8. Precedent exists within the City of Dublin for such “reserves” that remain as passive open
space without SUP intervention, namely Thaddeus Kosciuszko Park and Wellington Reserve.
While the vote by the PZC for Approval with Conditions was unanimous, the issue at hand regarding
the SUP through the West Wood was not unanimously embraced by the members of the Commission,
as evidenced by their discussions during deliberations.
In closing, we respectfully ask that City Council, in their deliberations of this highly popular pro ject,
consider the position of the Applicant by waiving Condition #1 and approve this pro posal for
continuation through process to full approval. We appreciate your thoughtful review of this proposal
and await Council action.
Respectfully submitted,
4338 Bright Road Partners, LLC.
William H. Adams, Managing Partner
cc: Donald Plank
Brian Kinzelman
5200 Emerald Parkway
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Community Planning and Development
Sustainable | Connected | Resilient 614.410.4600
dublinohiousa.gov
DRAFT RECORD OF ACTION
Planning and Zoning Commission
Thursday, February 6, 2025 | 6:30 p.m.
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
1.Bright Road Reserve
24-135Z-PDP Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan
Proposal: Rezoning 14.2-acre from R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District
to a Planned Unit Development District (PUD).
Location: North of the intersection of Grandee Cliffs Drive and Bright Road.
Request: Review and recommendation of approval of rezoning a 14.2-acre site
from R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District to PUD, Planned
Unit Development District, and a Preliminary Development Plan for the
construction of 20 single-family estate lots and associated site
improvements.
Applicant: Bill Adams
Planning Contact: Rati Singh, Assoc. AIA, Planner I
Contact Information: 614.410.4533, rsingh@dublin.oh.us
Case Information: www.dublinohiousa.gov/pzc/24-135
MOTION: Mr. Way moved, Mr. Alexander seconded to recommend to City Council
approval of the Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan with 9
conditions:
1)The applicant provide a connected shared use path in Reserve A, per the City’s
maintenance standards and revise the development text as required, prior to City
Council submittal.
2)The applicant make adjustments to Lot 2, Lot 5 and Lot 13 to provide a minimum
lot width of 40 feet to achieve more flexibility in driveway location and provide
landscaping opportunities for a cohesive residential appearance and revise the
development text to require the minimum lot width of 40 feet, prior to City
Council submittal.
3)The applicant provide a uniform tree lawn within the entire development without
any discrepancies between the drawings prior to City Council submittal.
4)The applicant revise the development text to address the discrepancies between
the rear yard setbacks, primary structure setback and minimum private open
spaces on Lots 1-10 prior to City Council submittal.
5200 Emerald Parkway
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Community Planning and Development
Sustainable | Connected | Resilient 614.410.4600
dublinohiousa.gov
5) The applicant revise the development text to require minimum side yard
dimension of 6 feet on one side and 14 feet total prior to City Council submittal.
6) The applicant revise the development text to provide minimum setbacks for the
front-loaded and side-loaded garages, prior to City Council submittal.
7) The applicant revise the development text to address lots along Bright Road, prior
to City Council submittal.
8) The applicant show conceptual building envelopes with the submittal of the Final
Development Plan.
9) The applicant remove redundant development requirements that match the
requirements of the Zoning Code, prior to City Council submittal.
VOTE: 7-0
RESULT: The rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan were recommended for
approval and forwarded to City Council.
VOTE:
Rebecca Call Yes
Kim Way Yes
Kathy Harter Yes
Jamey Chinnock Yes
Gary Alexander Yes
Jason Deschler Yes
Dan Garvin Yes
STAFF CERTIFICATION
Rati Singh, Assoc. AIA
Planner I
MEETING MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Commission
Thursday, February 6, 2025
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Call called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in Council Chamber and welcomed everyone to
the February 6, 2025 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: Rebecca Call, Jason Deschler, Kathy Harter, Dan Garvin,
Jamey Chinnock, Kim Way, Gary Alexander
Staff members present: Thaddeus Boggs, Bassem Bitar, Rati Singh, Josh Reinicke, Zach
Hounshell
ACCEPTANCE OF MEETING DOCUMENTS
Mr. Way moved, Mr. Garvin seconded acceptance of the documents into the record and approval
of the 01-23-25 meeting minutes.
Vote: Mr. Chinnock, yes; Mr. Way, yes; Ms. Harter, yes; Ms. Call, yes; Mr. Alexander, yes; Mr.
Garvin, yes; Mr. Deschler, yes.
[Motion carried 7-0.]
Ms. Call stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) 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 and make the decision. In other cases, the
Commission has the final decision-making responsibility. The Rules and Regulations of the Planning
and Zoning Commission state that no new agenda items are to be introduced after 10:30 p.m.
Anyone who intends to address the Commission on administrative cases must be sworn in. Ms. Call
explained the hearing process that would be followed.
Ms. Call swore in staff and audience members who anticipated providing testimony.
CASE REVIEW
Case #24-135Z-PDP
Bright Road Reserve - Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 2 of 16
Request for review and recommendation of approval of rezoning a 14.2-acre site
from R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District to PUD, Planned Unit Development
District, and a Preliminary Development Plan for the construction of 20 single-family
estate lots and associated site improvements. The site is located north of the
intersection of Grandee Cliffs Drive and Bright Road.
and
Case #24-151PP
Bright Road Reserve - Preliminary Plat
Request for review and recommendation of approval of a Preliminary Plat for 20
single-family lots. The 14.2 acre site is zoned R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential
District, and is located north of the intersection of Bright Road and Grandee Cliffs
Drive.
As they pertain to the same project and property, Case #24-135Z-PDP and Case#24-151PP will
be presented and considered together.
Applicant Presentation
Bill Adams, Managing Member, 4338 Bright Road Partners, LLC, 8824 Dunning Drive, Dublin, stated
that also present this evening is the landowner, legal counsel, engineering consultant, land planning
and architectural consultant, and the builder, Corinthian Fine Homes.
Mr. Adams stated that the inspiration for this project is Session Village in Bexley, Ohio, which began
development in the 1920s. It represents one of the most intimate and architecturally controlled
small developments in Columbus, Ohio. While this is a unique project for Dublin, it showcases very
sensitive land planning, controlled architecture, along with an elevated price point for the executive
housing market. They are seeking a recommendation for approval with conditions to move forward
to City Council.
Brian Kinzelman, Senior Principal, MKSK, 462 Ludlow Alley, Columbus, stated that the inspiration
for this development is an intimate hamlet of high-end single-family residences. This is not a gated
community but they will be big homes on smaller lots with a collection of beautiful open spaces.
The open spaces are virtually undevelopable due to major water courses, but they provide great
character to the neighbors and neighborhood. This project will not negatively affect the existing
character of Bright Road. The streetscape character internal to this site is one of intimacy. The
homes will be close to the street with a well-tailored public realm and a compact streetscape. The
development has a wood lot on the west and Billingsley Run on the east. One of those will be used
for stormwater management. An illustration of the site was displayed. There is one access on Bright
Road where the current driveway is, across from Grandee Cliffs. There are interior plantings from
the previous home as well as existing screen plantings along Bright Road (Norway Spruce). The
north property line is all volunteer growth. Those screening areas will need bolstered for health of
the wood lot. There is a significant 20-foot landscape easement on the north and south property
lines for the preservation of those fence rows. The intent is to augment those fence rows to ensure
there are multiple generations of plant growth in those areas. There are reserves on the east and
west and a central court, which is accessible public open space for neighborhood use. The central
court is connected to the west wood through a casual walkway. The applicant’s preferred street
section has a five-foot wide sidewalk on one side of the street with ADA compliant driveway aprons
and connecting walkways at strategic places allowing everyone to have access to every home,
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 3 of 16
mailbox and the Bright Road entrance. The homes are being brought up to the streetscape with
15-feet setbacks and a 5-foot build-to line. The Dublin standard is six-foot sidewalks on both sides
of the street. This would increase the right-of-way and push homes away from the street. This site
has a small population and is not connected to other neighborhoods. The requirement for that level
of pedestrian passage is too much. The Dublin standard would decrease the greenspace that is the
central court and shorten the lots along the north edge of the property.
Mr. Kinzelman addressed open spaces. The west wood is where they intend to hold stormwater.
The east boundary (Billingsley Run) is staying as is with two watercourses passing through it and
a culvert under Bright Road. Reserve C is the central gathering place for residents. There are also
preservation areas around the boundary landscape. They are trying to be judicious with existing
trees but will need to remove some to provide for stormwater management in the west wood. They
will follow Dublin’s guidelines for tree replacement. The plan calls for a mix of hardwoods for street
tree plantings. They will augment fence rows and wood lots.
Mr. Kinzelman stated that the utilities are simple thanks to their civil engineers. There is drainage
in the backyards of interior lots going to the basin to the west. A portion of the site is being drained
directly into Billingsley Run, but they are overcompensating for that from a stormwater
management standpoint on the west. It will net no change downstream.
Mr. Kinzelman stated that the central court has been made public use. It will be a passive activity
lawn and will be tastefully planted along the perimeter. Lots two and four have been pulled apart
to allow a central spine through the middle of those. That is being called a casual specialty paved
walk. It is a pedestrian path to get residents down to and into the wooded lot. In the wood lot is
a space akin to a residential patio in scale, giving residents and neighbors a chance to enjoy the
wood lot without walking through it. The stormwater basin will be surgically graded. They will try
to grade this to miss significant trees. The bottom of the basin will be landscaped with the approval
of engineering so that it does not need to look like a commercial detention basin. The goal is to
not recognize it as stormwater management. Staff has asked for a paved ten-foot path to the
discharge device. There is no paved circulation through the west wood. Staff has asked that the
stormwater basin be dedicated to the City of Dublin and the City will maintain that. Billingsley Run
is considered to be deeded to Dublin for maintenance. The central court and east court will be
owned by Dublin but maintained by the homeowners’ association (HOA). Landscape easements
will be privately held.
Taylor Dennis, The Jones Studio, 503 City Park Avenue, Columbus, stated that Brian Jones could
not attend this evening but wanted to express his enthusiasm for the project. The Jones Studio
was hired to set the architectural vocabulary for the project. They are showing midwestern
vernacular architecture with European country to align with the context of Dublin’s architecture
and to show the European hamlet style. The focus is on three main categories: massing,
fenestration and materiality. The forms will be kept simple with one and a half to two story houses.
They would like to keep consistent roof pitches but bring in a mix of hip and gable roofs to provide
some variety. Regarding fenestration, they will keep proportional light cuts, proportional sizing,
and consistent patterns throughout. Brick, stucco and stone will be the primary materials. They
intend to keep a consistent palette throughout while giving each home some variety. Images
showing character, size, scale and materiality were shared.
Staff Presentation
Ms. Singh stated that the application before the Commission tonight is a combined Rezoning,
Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) and Preliminary Plat. PDP/rezoning is a second step in a three-
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 4 of 16
step process for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and is heard by both Planning and Zoning
Commission and City Council. Considerations for the Commission are land use and densities,
general site layout, streets and circulation, open space framework and integration with the
surrounding areas. Recommendation to City Council is requested. The platting process is required
for any new subdivision and considerations are lot sizes, open space size, and street and easement
locations.
The site is a combination of two parcels and is zoned R1, Restricted Suburban Residential, and is
surrounded by residential developments. Hopewell Elementary School is located across Bright Road
towards the southeast and Ferris-Wright Park to the southwest across Bright Road. Bright Road
has a rural character with no curbs, a ditch, trees, and homes with large setbacks from the road.
It is a cul-de-sac and a low traffic volume road. The Community Plan Future Land Use recommends
residential, low-density and envisions large lot residential developments that consider
environmentally sensitive areas and integrate the existing natural features within the development.
The goal is to create a transition from a rural setting to suburban single-family neighborhoods. The
principal uses that are permitted are single-family homes on half-acre lots with a permanent density
of 0.5 to 2 development units per acre. The density for this proposal is 1.4 development units per
acre.
A traffic impact analysis was provided by the applicant highlighting traffic impacts of the
development on the surrounding roadway network and identifying any mitigation measures
necessary. There is no eastbound traffic expected, and hence no dedicated left turn is required. A
small amount of traffic is generated on Bright Road and per the analysis, the traffic volumes do
not meet the minimums for advancing traffic on Ohio Department of Transportation right turn lane
warrants so no right turn lane is required. Based on the Mount Carmel and Beacon traffic impact
studies, the Bright Road and Emerald Parkway intersection operates at an acceptable level of
service.
The Bikeway Plan recommends a shared use trail along the south side of Bright Road. The City is
currently working on extending the shared use path. The path will cross Billingsley Creek and
terminate at Grandee Cliffs Drive. Envision Dublin recommends that pedestrian and bike facilities
be included on both sides of the road. Given the rural character of Bright Road, staff is satisfied
with one shared use path. To ensure connectivity to the future shared use path, two crosswalks
are proposed by the developer. One at the intersection of Bright Road and Grandee Cliffs Drive
and the other at the southwest corner of the site across from Ferris-Wright Park. The applicant will
coordinate with staff regarding timing of these pedestrian crossings.
In 2004, City Council amended a resolution that established guidelines for Conservation Design
Development. The purpose and intent of these guidelines is to create visually appealing and vibrant
neighborhoods, while safeguarding the environmentally sensitive areas. This is achieved by
promoting sensitive site planning and allowing deviations from standard development regulations
as well as conventional subdivision regulations. The most prominent natural features present on
the site include Billingsley Creek, the west wood area, and the trees along the north and south of
the property. It was acknowledged at the Concept Plan step that the proposal meets the
conservation design resolution.
The City adopted Neighborhood Design Guidelines (NDG) in 2023 to ensure that the residential
PUDs achieve the expectations outlined by the Code and produce more creative and sustainable
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 5 of 16
neighborhoods. The NDG only considered a dry stormwater detention facility as a contributing open
space when the area achieves a superior and interactive design as usable open space. The proposal
shows pedestrian paths to the stormwater facility. However, additional interventions are required
to ensure that the west wood is a usable space. The development text notes a five-foot tree lawn
as a standard throughout the development, but the drawings indicated a 5.5’ wide tree lawn, which
further narrows. The Code requires a minimum of five-foot tree lawn and Envision Dublin
recommends an eight-foot tree lawn. The applicant must ensure that the uniform tree lawn is noted
in the development text and aligns with the drawings. Minimum setbacks should be included in the
development text for the side-loaded garages. The NDG recommend that the side yard must be six
feet on one side and a total of fourteen feet for lots one through ten. Based on the information
provided, the minimum depth of the private open space is not accurate and there are
inconsistencies in the numerical standards. Revisions to the development text will be required.
The proposed development is an infill project, which is surrounded by single-family residential
neighborhoods and is only accessed via Bright Road. No additional road connections are planned
for this development. To facilitate maintenance of the detention basin, a ten-foot-wide shared use
path is proposed from the southwest corner, which leads to the detention basin. The developer is
proposing an eight-foot-wide specialty paved path from the central court to the detention basin.
Staff recommends a continuous shared use path from Bright Road to the neighborhood, ensuring
pedestrian connectivity throughout the proposed development from the southwest portion of the
site connecting through the neighborhood. The proposed street will be public with a 50-foot right
of way extending from Bright Road to the first intersection. The remainder of the street will be 40
feet wide. While the City recommends a 60-foot right of way, subdivision regulations require 50
feet. Five-foot sidewalks are proposed along the eastern side of the street. Recently adopted City
standards require a six-foot sidewalk on both sides of the street with any development. Staff has
requested that the applicant provide factual details and implications of providing these sidewalks
on both sides of the street and its impact on the proposed development. The applicant provided a
cross section; however, no drawings were presented to staff to determine if the sidewalk would
impact the development standards and the proposed layout. Lots 2, 5, 10 and 13 are the inside
corner lots with a narrow width varying from 29 to 43 feet. Staff recommends a minimum of 40
feet for each lot with to ensure that there are enough landscaping opportunities in the front.
Ms. Singh shared the PDP and Preliminary Plat Criteria. Staff recommends a recommendation to
City Council for approval of the rezoning and PDP with the following Conditions:
1) The applicant provide a 6-foot wide sidewalk on both sides of streets in the subdivision and
revise the development text accordingly, prior to City Council submittal.
2) The applicant provide a connected shared use path in Reserve A, per the City’s maintenance
standards and revise the development text as required, prior to City Council submittal.
3) The applicant make adjustments to Lot 2, Lot 5 and Lot 13 to provide a minimum lot width
of 40 feet to achieve more flexibility in driveway location and provide landscaping
opportunities for a cohesive residential appearance and revise the development text to
require the minimum lot width of 40 feet, prior to City Council submittal.
4) The applicant provide a uniform tree lawn within the entire development without any
discrepancies between the drawings prior to City Council submittal.
5) The applicant revise the development text to address the discrepancies between the rear
yard setbacks, primary structure setback and minimum private open spaces on Lots 1-10
prior to City Council submittal.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 6 of 16
6) The applicant revise the development text to require minimum side yard dimension as 6
feet on one side and 14 feet total prior to City Council submittal.
7) The applicant revise the development text to provide minimum setbacks for the front-loaded
and side-loaded garages, prior to City Council submittal.
Staff recommends a recommendation of approval of the Preliminary Plat with the following
conditions:
1) The applicant ensure that the site survey, easements, grading, and engineering comments
are shown on the plat prior to City Council submittal, and
2) The applicant address any other technical adjustments as needed.
Commission Questions
Mr. Garvin stated that the updated proposal does not show a connection through the detention
basin. He asked if there is a way to put a path through there. Mr. Kinzelman stated that it can be
done but it will cost trees and will change the character of the west wood. He respectfully
disagrees that the requested maintenance path needs to be ten feet wide and asphalt-paved for
periodic maintenance. There is also concern that that will invite people to think it is a bike path.
Engineering has also asked them to put in a painted crosswalk across Bright Road. The
maintenance path is not meant to encourage pedestrian traffic. The connecting path from the
central court is more of a garden path to allow people to enter the woods without going through
it. They have neighbors at Hannah Woods and to the west where that west wood is in the
backyards of their lots. This should be a passive wood lot not open to any recreation.
Mr. Garvin asked how it would be accessed by neighbors. Mr. Kinzelman stated that the central
court is their community’s living room. There is a sidewalk on Bright Road and that is the way
people will enter and exit this development. There are no walkway connections with the other
neighborhoods. They would suggest to those that want to enjoy those woods, to do so passively
and enter through the interior of the site. It is a reserve and not a public park.
Mr. Garvin asked if the City has any plans to make the gravel pathway at Ferris Wright Park part
of the shared use path. Ms. Singh stated that she is unaware of any plans for the path within the
park but the City does have plans for the shared use path which extends to the end of Bright
Road.
Mr. Chinnock asked how the residents of this neighborhood will get to Ferris Wright Park if they
do not take that path. Mr. Kinzelman stated that residents can go down their sidewalk along
Road A and across Bright Road at a crosswalk.
Mr. Garvin asked what the difference would be to the project between five feet and six feet of
sidewalk on one side. Mr. Kinzelman stated that they originally planned a single four-foot
sidewalk but after conversations with staff, they bolstered that to five feet. They wanted to do a
four-foot brick path. Five feet would have to be concrete. Six feet of sidewalk on both sides
requires 40 feet of right of way and will cost open space on the court and developable space to
the north. There is not much developable ground to begin with, every foot counts. The character
of the streetscape is important and six-foot sidewalks call for way too much concrete for a
development of 20 single-family residences. This is why they are proposing a PUD – so they can
set the standards and the Commission can adjudicate them.
Mr. Garvin asked if roads are expected to be asphalt. Mr. Kinzelman answered affirmatively.
Detailed conversations with City Engineering staff will happen at the time of Final Development
Plan. This is an enclave and not a subdivision.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 7 of 16
Mr. Garvin asked about staff’s recommended conditions. Mr. Kinzelman stated that there are
three of them that they do not want. The six-foot sidewalks condition is one. They do not want a
trail through the west wood. That is a reserve and not a park. The other condition they do not
agree with is the 14-foot side yard requirement. They increased side yard setbacks to six feet
from five. For custom homes, the 14 feet starts to restrict the lots. Many of the lots have
topographical considerations.
Mr. Deschler asked for more information on the masonry piers and uplighting mentioned in the
applicants’ narrative. Mr. Kinzelman stated that the intent is to set the tone with the public
domain. That is part of the landscape plan and will give a sense of place. Along Street A off of
Bright Road, there may be a series of masonry piers to give intimacy and put architecture on the
street. At the terminus of Street A, that view may have some masonry element. The idea is for a
streetscape ornament with a strong connection to architecture.
Mr. Deschler asked if there will be an entry feature. Mr. Kinzelman stated that the character of
Bright Road is attractive now. There is an existing board rail fence underneath a canopy of
Norway Spruce. A tasteful street sign is as bold as they want to go. They are looking to fit into
the neighborhood, not be an exclusive place on Bright Road.
Mr. Deschler asked for information on ownership of Reserve C and D by the City of Dublin. Mr.
Kinzelman stated it is the applicant’s preference for the HOA to own and maintain them. It was
suggested by staff to be City owned since it is surrounded by public right of way. Mr. Deschler
asked for input from the City. Ms. Singh stated that since it is classified as a reserve, it was
considered that it be owned by the City but it is a continued discussion between the City and the
applicant. Ms. Call stated that this will go before City Council as well.
Mr. Way stated that the architectural plan shows a gatehouse. Mr. Kinzelman stated there was
original consideration of a proverbial guard house, but it was determined to be too bold in later
analyses. The design of the two homes on lots 1 and 20 need to address that intersection and
create an entrance feel without doing a subdivision sign wall. Ms. Call quoted the development
text, “No entry feature is anticipated as part of this development in an effort to create a seamless
physical and practical connection to the surrounding neighborhood.”
Mr. Deschler asked if the homes with no sidewalks will have a walk to the curb. Mr. Kinzelman
stated that they will have an entrance walk from their driveway or auto court to their front door.
They will have access down their driveway. If the sidewalk is on the other side of the street, they
have walkways planned that allow people to cross the street and be on the sidewalk. They
anticipate very little pedestrian or vehicular traffic.
Mr. Deschler referenced the access road and asked how many times per year the City would have
to access the site. Mr. Reinicke stated that the City has a bare minimum requirement of
inspections on all detention basins in the City of once per year. Given the dry nature of the pond,
the need for maintenance will be higher. The outlet structure will be more likely to clog with
debris from vegetation. That would be accessed multiple times per year. The time that
maintenance is typically required is right after it has rained. If maintenance vehicles need to
access the site and the path is not paved, the ground could be wet and there is a significant
chance they would rut the ground. There is also the drainage swale that the detention basin is
discharging into that will need some sort of culverted path to get across it. With the nature of
maintenance vehicles that might need to get back there, the idea of having anything other than a
hard surface is not ideal. Mr. Deschler stated that a paved path would provide an additional
route for bicyclists or a car. He asked what kind of safety measures would be put in place to
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 8 of 16
prevent others from using the access. Mr. Reinicke stated that those are ongoing discussions
between staff and the applicant. Mr. Deschler asked if there is any other option than asphalt. Mr.
Reinicke stated that staff is recommending asphalt as the surface. City Parks and Recreation staff
will also be maintaining the reserve and their preference is also to have asphalt. Mr. Deschler
asked about the width. Mr. Reinicke stated that the width is necessary to get a maintenance
vehicle back there. Maintenance vehicles can vary in size based on the maintenance needs.
Ms. Call asked if the City is requesting anything of this development that they would not ask of
any other development. Mr. Reinicke answered that they are not.
Mr. Deschler asked the applicant if they had ideas for alternate materials for the paved path. Mr.
Kinzelman stated that they have proposed to surgically align a path through the trees. They
propose to compact the subgrade and put in a 304 aggregate base course of sufficient width and
of sufficient structural integrity to hold a vehicle and grade it such that it drains appropriately.
They will also put in the culvert pipe, extend its ends and put the paved aggregate surface over
the top of it. That provides the same level of vehicle access and does not look like a multi-use
trail. It would not invite cyclists or motor vehicles to go back into the space. Mr. Reinicke stated
that additional discussion could be had. Mr. Kinzelman stated that engineering has been helpful
and collaborative and he looks forward to continued discussion.
Mr. Deschler asked for clarification on staff’s recommendations regarding the frontage width on
lots 2, 5, 10 and 13. Ms. Singh stated that they are all inside corner lots. Lot 10 (43 feet) is of an
acceptable width. Staff is recommending they be at least 40 feet in width to allow for flexibility
for landscaping features. Mr. Kinzelman stated that they are willing to alter lot lines but it is not
necessary. The design is prescriptive as to where the driveway comes in. The width will not
provide more flexibility with driveway locations. It will make no practical difference.
Mr. Alexander stated that the lot width requirement is so that the houses can face the street. Ms.
Singh confirmed that is correct and that it allows for consistent frontage.
Mr. Alexander stated that the six-foot sidewalk width requirement is to facilitate clear passage of
two people. He asked if the City evaluates Code based on the size and scale of a particular
development. Mr. Bitar stated that it is a standard for all developments.
Mr. Alexander asked if staff is willing to reduce the tree lawn as long as it is consistent
throughout the development. Ms. Singh stated that the Code requires a five-foot tree lawn width,
even though Envision Dublin recommends eight feet. Staff is comfortable with five feet as long as
it is consistent throughout.
Mr. Alexander stated that an earlier proposal showed a path from the cul-de-sac into the reserve
to the east. He asked if that is still contemplated. Mr. Kinzelman stated that at one time, there
was thought of having soft surface paths matching the dirt paths that people have created in
those woods. However, they did not want to encourage that because those areas are people’s
backyards.
Mr. Alexander asked for more details regarding the central court. Mr. Kinzelman stated that will
be usable public open space. They thought it was important to give those lots that touch the
central court the luxury of having that green space in their front yards. That design will continue
to be fine-tuned as the project progresses.
Mr. Alexander asked for more details regarding the end of the terminus. Mr. Kinzelman stated
that because they do not need that interior circumference, they wanted to create some small
garden. It is not useable but ornamental space with indigenous plants.
Mr. Way asked for the status on the buffer to the north. Mr. Kinzelman stated that they met with
neighbors north of lot 10 and would be happy to meet again when they get to planting detail.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 9 of 16
There are some holes in that fencerow. The applicant intends to plant indigenous material. They
want to satisfy the neighbors.
Mr. Way asked about the floodplain as identified on the drawings near the cul-de-sac. Mr.
Kinzelman stated that the cul-de-sac is not in the floodplain. Mr. Reinicke stated that the 500-
year floodplain may be shown. FEMA does designate a 100- and 500-year floodplain.
Ms. Call requested that be clarified at the next review phase.
Mr. Way asked if there is any kind of riparian edge requirements along the stream. Mr. Kinzelman
stated that they have spoken with engineering and there will be some erosion protection as they
discharge into that creek. It is a swale with not much definition. Billingsley Run as it crosses
under the bridge and goes south is a true creek bed.
Mr. Way asked about vegetation in the detention basin. Mr. Kinzelman stated that it is not a
wetland. The basin will drain. They have the opportunity to sculpt the edge horizontally and
vertically and vegetate the bottom. Plants will need to withstand wet conditions and very dry
conditions. They want to put in some canopy to provide shade as it is now and also use middle
and low scale shrub plantings and ornamental trees.
Ms. Harter sought confirmation that the City will be in charge of maintaining the basin. Ms. Singh
answered in the affirmative.
Ms. Harter asked about the maintenance of brick sidewalks. Ms. Singh stated that will be
discussed prior to Final Development Plan review. Ms. Harter asked if City maintains brick
sidewalks anywhere else. Ms. Singh stated that the City maintains brick sidewalks in Historic
Dublin.
Mr. Chinnock asked about the thought behind the lack of connection to the community and the
exclusivity of the development. Mr. Kinzelman stated that the fact that this is an infill site that is
wooded on the perimeter makes it inherently exclusive. This development will have a low
population. Anyone that has a bike or scooter is likely going to use the street because there will
be very little vehicular traffic. A bike trail will go on the south side of Bright Road someday and
they are committed to providing crosswalks to get to the future trail. The wood lot is in people’s
backyards and they do not want to put circulation in people’s backyards. There is precedent for
non-activated reserves in Dublin.
Mr. Chinnock asked if the architecture fits in with the Bright Road character. Mr. Kinzelman stated
that this is a multi-generational neighborhood. There is some 1960s housing stock, 1980s and
1990s housing stock. There is no prevailing architectural style in this district. This development
will be the next generation. Whatever they do will be high quality. It is meant to blend in and
complement the neighborhood.
Mr. Chinnock asked the applicant to provide a sense of scale. Mr. Kinzelman stated that the
smallest lot within the restrictions of the setbacks, is laid out with a three-car garage, required
open space and a 5,000 square foot home. Some lots are more modest than others. On the other
larger lots, some homes may sit back from the roadway and will be large. The homes are truly
custom. There are no prescriptive homes for these lots.
Ms. Call stated that a ]PUD has a different approach. She asked staff to explain at what stage the
Commission is recommending adoption of a development text. Ms. Singh stated that the
development text is finalized at this step as long as the listed conditions are met. There will be no
additional changes at the Final Development Plan stage.
Ms. Call stated that the opening statement of the development text states, “Where conflict occurs
between the City of Dublin Code and these development standards, the development standards
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 10 of 16
shall apply and supersede the Code.” She asked if this means that when there is a conflict
between the Code and the text, that the development text supersedes. Mr. Boggs answered
affirmatively and stated that where there are items on which the text is silent, Code comes in and
fills in the gap.
Ms. Call asked to what degree the Planning and Zoning Commission ought to verbalize any
concerns with the development text at this PDP phase. Ms. Singh stated that if the development
text does not align with the NDG, now is the point to address it.
Ms. Call asked if accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are permitted in the City of Dublin. The
development text is not clear on ADUs. She asked if the applicant envisions ADUs as part of the
development. Mr. Kinzelman stated that he does not. Mr. Boggs stated that there are zoning
districts where ADUs are contemplated as conditional uses – the Bridge Street District and the
Historic District.
Ms. Call asked if the applicant would be willing to remove language from the text where the Code
already accomplishes the same thing. Mr. Kinzelman stated that they would be willing to remove
duplicate language on a case by case basis. They have no intent to slip something by the City.
Ms. Call asked how the applicant would accomplish allowing parking on one side of the street.
Mr. Kinzelman stated that they would work with engineering staff on that but it may be as simple
as signage indicating no parking on the south side of the street. This is a small community with
small streets but there is sufficient off-street parking.
Ms. Call asked if the City allows thin brick in residential neighborhoods without a PUD. Ms. Singh
stated that she does not believe so.
Ms. Call asked if there is a standard for the garage plane. Mr. Kinzelman stated that they have
had many conversations with staff and they are happy to work with staff to get clarity and add
that to the text.
In response to staff’s conditions of approval, Mr. Kinzelman stated that they are looking to the
Commission to adjudicate conditions #1, #2 and #6. They will work with staff on the remainder.
Mr. Deschler asked staff to elaborate on Condition #5. “The applicant revise the development
text to address the discrepancies between the rear yard setbacks, primary structure setback and
minimum private open spaces on Lots 1-10 prior to City Council submittal.” Ms. Singh stated that
the development text lists the rear yard setbacks, the primary structure setbacks, and the
minimum private open spaces. Currently, the mathematical calculations are not accurate. Mr.
Kinzelman stated that they have been emailing with staff about it and need to work it out with a
map.
Public Comment
John Rahm, 4273 Hannah Hills Drive, Dublin, stated that they have been in contact with the
developer who was very amiable and took into consideration items with which they had issues.
Their neighborhood does not have sidewalks at all. They all like having no sidewalks. It is a tight
community because of this. He is against a requirement for more concrete. The entrance into
Ferris Wright Park is a stone driveway. They are looking forward to new neighbors. The area is
starting to see new builds and remodels. It is not cookie cutter. He closed by thanking the
Commission for their time.
Lauren Ranalli, 4760 Bright Road, Dublin, stated that she lives west of the proposed development
and she disagrees with the comment about sidewalks. She has a one-year-old and walks Bright
Road and it would be nice to have more safe paths to walk on. She does not feel strongly about
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 11 of 16
both sides of the street but it would be nice to have somewhere safe to go. Limiting this too
greatly would be a disservice, especially with the elementary school nearby. There are way more
kids on bikes on Bright Right and there is nowhere for them to go. The ess curve just past this
neighborhood is very dangerous. She has encountered the cross country team on the street and
they take up the entire width. She is in favor of more safe, distinguished walking paths.
Commission Discussion
The Commission discussed the City’s recommended conditions of approval.
1) The applicant provide a 6-foot wide sidewalk on both sides of streets in the subdivision and
revise the development text accordingly, prior to City Council submittal.
2) The applicant provide a connected shared use path in Reserve A, per the City’s maintenance
standards and revise the development text as required, prior to City Council submittal.
3) The applicant make adjustments to Lot 2, Lot 5 and Lot 13 to provide a minimum lot width
of 40 feet to achieve more flexibility in driveway location and provide landscaping
opportunities for a cohesive residential appearance and revise the development text to
require the minimum lot width of 40 feet, prior to City Council submittal.
4) The applicant provide a uniform tree lawn within the entire development without any
discrepancies between the drawings prior to City Council submittal.
5) The applicant revise the development text to address the discrepancies between the rear
yard setbacks, primary structure setback and minimum private open spaces on Lots 1-10
prior to City Council submittal.
6) The applicant revise the development text to require minimum side yard dimension as 6
feet on one side and 14 feet total prior to City Council submittal.
7) The applicant revise the development text to provide minimum setbacks for the front-loaded
and side-loaded garages, prior to City Council submittal.
Mr. Alexander agreed with the applicant that six-foot sidewalks on two sides does not make
sense with the size of this development and the size of the streets. He is comfortable with five
feet as proposed. He is ambivalent on Condition #2. He thinks Condition #3 is very important.
This development is similar to but different than Sessions in that this must be rationalized to a
Code. Being able to have homes front on the street and define the public realm is important. His
preference would be to keep Condition #6 because it is consistent with other Codes and there is
a logical benefit.
Mr. Deschler stated that he would like Reserves C and D owned and maintained by the HOA. He
agreed with Mr. Alexander on Condition #1 and added that sidewalks should be four feet and be
paver or brick. Based on this community, he feels it would be appropriate with no sidewalks. He
does not agree with Condition #2. He does not believe there should be a continuous path from
Bright Road. He is supportive of the applicant’s position on Condition #3. He would like to see
differentiation with the lot sizes and allocation of the homes. He does not believe there is a need
for Condition #6.
Mr. Garvin stated that the sidewalk is not necessary on both sides. He is more supportive of brick
or paver and a width of at least five feet. He does support staff’s position that there should be a
shared mixed-use path to connect those two other paths. A great feature of Dublin is that as
neighborhoods are developed there is the addition of puzzle pieces to this network of paths. He
is ambivalent regarding Condition #3. Conditions #4 and #5 should stay. Regarding Condition
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 12 of 16
#6, he does not see the need for the additional foot on either side. He would like to see
Condition #7 stay. Mr. Garvin added that connecting the paths adds value to Ferris Wright Park.
If there is a solution to support vehicles that is not asphalt, he would be supportive of that.
Mr. Chinnock complimented the development. He referenced Conditions #1, #2, and #6. He
does not think the size of this development warrants that much sidewalk. He agrees with four or
five feet and on only one side of the street. Connectivity is very important in this community, and
he does not see how we do not require a path that connects. He would be supportive if an
alternative material could be determined to meet engineering’s standards. The path needs to
connect to the community. In the spirit of Dublin, we need paths that connect and support the
community. He agrees with staff on #6. There is a reason there is a minimum.
Ms. Harter appreciates the applicant working with the community. She agrees that Condition #1
is not necessary. She is in support of staff’s position on the rest. She asked for details on the
mailboxes when this comes back before the Commission.
Mr. Way stated this is a special and unique development and he is supportive of it as a concept.
The fact that it follows the City’s Conservation and Neighborhood Design Guidelines is
commendable. The woodland preserves are something that makes this unique and he supports
the notion of preserving those as much as possible. They are wooded and private and not
something to invite the public into. In this particular case, he does not think the path mentioned
by Condition #2 needs to connect all the way through. He would like to see the material of the
maintenance drive be something that is more natural and still meet the requirements of the City.
This is a development where he sees the need to be very careful with how much we mess with
nature. Mr. Way stated that the Commission’s responsibility is to follow the City’s codes and
standards. This is a unique enough development and it goes above and beyond with
conservation, design and low density to consider not making it look like every other subdivision in
Dublin. He was a proponent of six-foot sidewalk on both sides of the street as they worked on
the Community Plan, however, in this particular development, he is open to the sidewalk being
on one side of the street. He does have an issue wrapping it around Reserve C. He would rather
see the sidewalk wrap around the edge and tie into the other one. Brick would be great. Mr. Way
stated that this will be unique enough that the 40-foot lot standard can be overlooked. The
conformity of the tree lawns is important. He would like to keep the 14-foot side yard
requirement.
Mr. Way stated that he would like to add a condition for the Commission to consider. Lots 1, 2,
13, and 20 relate uniquely to Bright Road. He would like see the applicant do more formal four-
sided architecture on Bright Road. He would like to see language about the lots fronting onto
Bright Road having a positive relationship.
Ms. Call stated that PZC considers applications in isolation as well as what they could be. There
are many areas in the City undergoing redevelopment. This current application is great, but it
may at some point become part of larger redevelopment. They have to consider future
implications of current decisions. There are reasons for a six-foot sidewalk requirement and the
side yard setback requirement. The standards are compounding and contribute to the public feel.
She is willing to consider a six-foot sidewalk on one side of the street. She supports staff’s
position of the 14-foot side yard setbacks. The City has to maintain the detention basin so we
need to provide employees with tools to do their job. Ms. Call expressed appreciation for the
diligence and thoughtfulness that went into the plan. There are opportunities for clarification with
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 13 of 16
the next phase. She suggested a visual representation of the building envelope be provided at
the next step. She is not in favor of thin brick as an approved material. She is ambivalent on
ownership of the reserves and will defer to the City. The development text becomes the code for
the site, so we want to make sure we get that right. There is some duplicate development text
(pages 10, 13, 18 and 19). She referenced page 13 regarding crosswalks and suggested
language be added on timing and location or remove the reference. Because the development
text relates to the conditions, it will need to be amended to match. She is willing to sacrifice one
side of the sidewalk but that affects the right of way and that will need to be reflected in the
build envelope. PUDs are a give and take. There is higher quality in one area for sacrifice in
another area.
Ms. Call summarized the list of additional conditions for consideration as follows:
• The development text address homes adjacent to Bright Road (4 lots).
• Removal of redundant Code items from Development Text.
• Removal of thin brick as a permitted material.
• Visual build zone translation at next phase.
• Removal or clarification of subjective items from development text.
Commission consensus was to remove Condition #1.
Regarding sidewalk materials, Mr. Hounshell stated that because this is a public sidewalk, it will
have to be maintained to a public standard. Planning and Engineering staff will work together
and take the Commission’s comments into consideration.
With no objection from the Commission, the meeting was adjourned for a brief recess. Ms. Call
reconvened the meeting at 9:21 will all members returning to the dais.
Mr. Kinzelman stated that Mr. Way mentioned the sidewalk around the perimeter of the central
court and Ms. Harer mentioned the mailboxes. The mailboxes will be located on the south edge of
the central court. That walkway is meant to gather people.
Mr. Kinzelman stated that they would like leeway on thin brick as a permitted material. He has seen
it used successfully as trim material on custom homes. Ms. Call asked if full brick would be feasible.
Mr. Kinzelman stated that it depends on the wall section and construction methods. Mr. Alexander
stated that another common use of thin brick is on non-masonry chimneys. It is not unusual in
houses of this value. Ms. Call stated that it is not permitted in most of the City. To make an
exception in such a unique and high-quality development seems contrary. Mr. Garvin stated that
he would be in support of the requirements matching the non-PUD specifications. Mr. Hounshell
stated that the residential appearance standards name brick as a permitted finish material but it
does not distinguish between full depth and thin brick. Mr. Deschler expressed concern with vinyl
being a permitted finish material.
Mr. Kinzelman stated that lots 1 and 20 already have a relationship to each other because that is
the corridor opening for the roadway. Lots 2 and 13 will likely not be visible from Bright Road with
the existing Norway Spruce and augmented plantings. Ms. Call clarified that the text would just
address those lots. If the text stated that there will be vegetative screening, then it would be
compliant.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 14 of 16
Mr. Kinzelman stated that they would like to have continued conversations with engineering staff
regarding the shared use and the maintenance portion of that path.
Mr. Way clarified that the development text does not commit the applicant to brick. Mr. Kinzelman
stated that the dimension is important to them and the material can be decided upon later.
Mr. Way moved, Mr. Alexander seconded to recommend to City Council approval of the Rezoning
and Preliminary Development Plan with the following conditions:
1) The applicant provide a connected shared use path in Reserve A, per the City’s
maintenance standards and revise the development text as required, prior to City
Council submittal.
2) The applicant make adjustments to Lot 2, Lot 5 and Lot 13 to provide a minimum lot
width of 40 feet to achieve more flexibility in driveway location and provide
landscaping opportunities for a cohesive residential appearance and revise the
development text to require the minimum lot width of 40 feet, prior to City Council
submittal.
3) The applicant provide a uniform tree lawn within the entire development without any
discrepancies between the drawings prior to City Council submittal.
4) The applicant revise the development text to address the discrepancies between the
rear yard setbacks, primary structure setback and minimum private open spaces on
Lots 1- 10 prior to City Council submittal.
5) The applicant revise the development text to require minimum side yard dimension of
6 feet on one side and 14 feet total prior to City Council submittal.
6) The applicant revise the development text to provide minimum setbacks for the front-
loaded and side-loaded garages, prior to City Council submittal.
7) The applicant revise the development text to address lots along Bright Road (Lots
1,2,13 and 20) to be given extra attention and maintain relationship with Bright Road,
prior to City Council submittal.
8) The applicant show conceptual building envelopes with the submittal of the Final
Development Plan.
9) The applicant remove redundant development requirements that match the
requirements of the Zoning Code, prior to City Council submittal.
Vote: Ms. Harter, yes; Mr. Deschler, yes; Mr. Alexander, yes; Mr. Chinnock, yes; Ms. Call, yes; Mr.
Way, yes; Mr. Garvin, yes.
[Motion carried: 7-0]
Mr. Deschler stated that he is in support of the project moving forward to City Council but he does
not believe Conditions #2, #3, and #6 should be included.
Mr. Deschler moved, Mr. Way seconded to recommend to City Council approval of the Preliminary
Plat with the following conditions:
1) The applicant ensure that the site survey, easements, grading, and engineering comments
are shown on the plat prior to City Council submittal.
2) The applicant address any other technical adjustment as needed.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – February 6, 2025
Page 15 of 16
Vote: Ms. Call, yes; Mr. Garvin, yes; Mr. Alexander, yes; Mr. Way, yes; Mr. Chinnock, yes; Mr.
Deschler, yes; Ms. Harter, yes.
[Motion carred: 7-0]
Case #25-005ADMC - Code Amendments
Review and recommendation of approval for Zoning Code Amendments to Sections
153.002, 153.048, 153.066, 153.176 regarding the Concept Plan review process,
153.037-153.042 and 153.236 regarding the West Innovation District, 153.158
regarding temporary signs for Special Events, and 153.076 regarding Property
Nuisance regulations.
Staff Presentation
Mr. Hounshell stated that this was before the Commission in November of 2024. This request
focuses on Concept Plans, the West Innovation District uses, and Temporary Signage. These
amendments are being proposed in order to achieve the goals of the Economic Development
Strategy, which is to make Dublin’s development processes more transparent and predictable.
This is derived from feedback that has been received internally from different City departments
as well as from development partners bringing projects forward. Staff initiated a development
review process through which six major action items were identified. Tonight’s request focuses
on the “Requirements and Review Process” action item.
Staff has worked to determine how the Concept Plan works within the City. This proposed
amendment went to the Architectural Review Board in January for recommendation because it
does impact the Historic District. Currently, everywhere in the City except for the Bridge Street
District, the Historic District, and the Mixed-Use Regional District, the Concept Plan is a required
step with no determination. It operates like an Informal Review but is a required step. In the
three districts named above, it is currently a determination. That has created some challenges in
terms of consistency of the review process. The goals of this proposed amendment are to provide
consistency, allow for an applicant to gain feedback without being locked in, and potentially cut
out a step with the Informal Review. Staff is proposing to keep the Concept Plan a required step,
but offer non-binding feedback. In applications where a recommendation to City Council is made,
the Concept Plan will no longer go to City Council because they already review a development
agreement.
Mr. Hounshell stated that the next amendment involves the West Innovation District (WID).
Planning staff has worked with economic development partners and kicked off a new strategic
implementation plan. Through those efforts, staff is trying to identify barriers. Several users in
contract for properties in the ID2 District have found that the Assembly and Manufacturing Use
as conditional uses is a barrier in terms of Dublin’s competitiveness with other districts
throughout Central Ohio. The purpose of this amendment is to make Assembly and
Manufacturing permitted uses. It does not change the character and intent of this area but allows
the City to achieve the goals of the Envision Dublin Plan. The only change would be to make
Assembly and Manufacturing permitted uses in the ID2 District. No other districts are changing at
this point. There is also an update to a definition for wholesale and distribution that will add
clarity.
Mr. Hounshell explained the amendments regarding Temporary Signs. This is specific to the City’s
special events and community activities. It is to align with current practices. The definition of
Special Events has been updated to provide clarity. Those permits go directly through Community
Engagement team and Event staff.
5200 Emerald Parkway
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Community Planning and Development
Sustainable | Connected | Resilient 614.410.4600
dublinohiousa.gov
PLANNING REPORT
Planning and Zoning Commission
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Bright Road Reserve
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP
https://dublinohiousa.gov/pzc/24-135/ | https://dublinohiousa.gov/pzc/24-151/
Case Summary
Address
4338 Bright Rd. & PID: 273-011149
Proposal Rezoning 14.2-acre from R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District to a
Planned Unit Development District (PUD) and a Preliminary Plat for 20 single-
family lots and associated site improvements.
Request
Review and recommendation of Rezoning/Preliminary Developmen Plan (PDP),
and Preliminary Plat (PP).
Zoning
R-1 – Restricted Suburban Residential District
Planning
Recommendation
Recommendation to City Council of approval of a Rezoning and Preliminary
Development Plan with Conditions
Recommendation to City Council of approval of a Preliminary Plat with
Conditions
Next Steps
Upon review and a recommendation of approval of the Rezoning, PDP and PP
by the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC), the applicant will be eligible to
move forward with the request to City Council.
Applicant
Bill Adams
Case Manager
Rati Singh, Assoc. AIA, Planner I
(614) 410-4533
rsingh@dublin.oh.us
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 2 of 17
Site Location Map
1 Wright Run (Billingsley
Creek)
2 Existing asphalt entrance
3 West Wood
1
2
3
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 3 of 17
Request and Process
Request
The applicant is requesting review and recommendation to City Council of approval of a
Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) and a Preliminary Plat (PP) for a new residential
subdivision. The following points contain key information:
20 single family homes on a 14.2-acre site.
New public streets with one access point off of Bright Road at the same location as an
existing curb cut.
Four reserves, including the preservation of natural features and Billingsley Creek.
Application Type and Process
As outlined below, after the Concept Plan consideration, Rezoning/PDP is the second step in
a three-step process for a PUD and is heard by both PZC and City Council (CC). The PP is
also considered by both at this stage. The final determinations on the Rezoning/PDP and PP
are made by City Council.
1. Concept Plan (CP)
2. Rezoning/PDP and PP (PZC Recommendation, CC Determination)
3. Final Development Plan (FDP) and Final Plat (FP) (PZC Recommendation, CC
Determination)
Site Plan
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 4 of 17
1. Background
Site Summary
The 14.2-acre site is zoned R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District and is located north of
the intersection of Grandee Cliffs Drive and Bright Road. The site contains two parcels: PID
273-008618 (the eastern parcel) is 10.60 acres and PID 273-0111149 (the western parcel) is
3.56 acres in area.
The eastern parcel includes a steep, wooded ravine and a FEMA identified detailed floodplain
(Zone AE), with floodway that follows Wright Run (Billingsley Creek) and a branch tributary. A
single-family home located within this parcel was demolished in 2018 and the remaining
structures include a small barn built in the 1970s. The barn does not appear to possess any
historic or architectural significance. There is a grove of mature trees near the former home-
site, and an asphalt driveway that provides access to Bright Road at the intersection with
Grandee Cliffs Drive. The western parcel contains a swale and a wooded area referred to as
West Wood. According to the City Engineer, the Stream Corridor Protection Zone does not apply
to the swale on the western parcel.
The site is bordered by single-family residential neighborhoods, which include members of the
East Dublin Neighborhood Association. Hopewell Elementary School is located across Bright
Road to the southeast, while the Holder-Wright Earthworks and Ferris-Wright Park are to the
southwest, also across Bright Road. Bright Road has a rural character with no curbs, a ditch,
many trees, and homes with large setbacks from the road. It has a low traffic volume, and was
cul-de-sac'd by the City in 2020. A sensitive approach is essential to preserve the notable
natural features of the site while maintaining the rural character of Bright Road, ensuring the
preservation of Dublin’s overall character.
Case History
June 2024 - 24-073CP
The Commission reviewed a concept plan and provided feedback for 20 single-family estate lots
and site improvements. Commission members expressed support for the proposal, finding it
responsive to the natural features with the clustered layout. The members recommended
adding connectivity with the surrounding area, that open space be a focal point of the
neighborhood and that the applicant address resident concerns.
Neighborhood Engagement
The applicant first provided an overview of the project during an East Dublin Civic Association
(EDCA) meeting on May 15, 2024. Based on Commission’s feedback at the concept plan stage,
the applicant attended another EDCA meeting to address the residents’ concerns resident
concerns related to buffering of existing residential uses on October 29, 2024.
2. City Plans and Policies
Community Plan
The Community Plan is a key policy document used to guide decision-making for the future of
the natural and built environment within Dublin. The Community Plan assists in the evaluation
of development proposals and helps ensure that proposed development supports the
community’s long-term objectives.
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 5 of 17
Future Land Use Plan
The recommended future land use (FLU) for this site is
Residential Low Density. This designation envisions
large-lot residential development that takes into
account environmentally sensitive areas and integrates
existing natural features. The goal is to create a
transition from a rural setting to suburban single-family
residential neighborhoods. The FLU recommends
single-family homes on at least 0.50 acre lots and a
density of 0.5 to 2 du/acre.
Bikeway Plan
The City is currently working to extend the shared-use path along the south side of Bright Road.
This path will cross Billingsley Creek and terminate at Grandee Cliffs Drive. Envision Dublin
recommends that pedestrian and bicycle facilities be included on both sides of the road.
However, given the rural character of Bright Road, which features natural elements such as the
creek and mature trees and low traffic volumes, City staff is satisfied with a one-sided shared-
use path on the south side of Bright Road. To ensure connectivity to the future shared-use
path, crosswalks are proposed at two locations. A pedestrian crossing will be provided at the
intersection of Bright Road and Grandee Cliffs Drive, allowing access to the shared-use path, as
well as at the southwest corner of the site across from Ferris-Wright Park. The applicant will
coordinate with staff regarding the timing of these pedestrian access connections.
The site is not located within a Special Area Plan nor have new connections or widening of
thoroughfares through the site been identified in the Thoroughfare Plan.
Neighborhood Design Guidelines
The City adopted the Neighborhood Design Guidelines (NDG) in March of 2023 to ensure that
residential PUD developments are achieving the expectations outlined by Code. To that end, a
number of analysis topics are included below. The intent of the NDG is to preserve the natural
features. The site has natural features which restricts the development of the site to ensure
that they are preserved. The details regarding the proposed preservation areas and new open
space zones have been thoroughly outlined, including specific information about their locations
and total acreage, along with the areas of the site conducive to residential development.
Community Theme
NDG aims to give each new neighborhoods a distinct sense of place by recognizing its unique
features and safeguarding cultural and historical resources. The proposed layout prioritizes the
preservation of the natural environment, with the circulation network and home sites designed
to respect the existing topography. Vegetation along Bright Road, Billingsley Creek, West Wood,
and the tree buffer along the northern and southern property lines are preserved to maintain
the rural character of the site.
Future Land Use Plan
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 6 of 17
Conservation Design Resolution (CDR)/Open Space Framework Analysis
In 2004, the City Council amended a resolution that established guidelines for Conservation
Design development. The purpose of these Conservation Design guidelines is to create visually
appealing and vibrant neighborhoods while safeguarding environmentally sensitive areas. This
is achieved by promoting innovative site planning and allowing deviations from standard
development regulations and conventional subdivision designs.
The preservation of existing natural features is given the highest priority as dedicated open
space in the layout of the neighborhood and are addressed as public focal points of the
neighborhood. The open spaces are conveniently accessed from all the lots.
3. Project
Layout
The entrance to the proposed subdivision will be via Bright Road, utilizing the existing access
point that aligns with the intersection of Bright Road and Grandee Cliffs Drive. This design limits
the need for any additional access points to Bright Road. The subdivision layout features two
new curvilinear streets, designated as Streets A and B, with Street B ending in a cul-de-sac
(“East Court”). The lots are oriented internally toward these streets and are clustered in the
central part of the subdivision to preserve the existing natural features of the site with minimal
impact to the surroundings.
Design of Preservation & Open Space Areas
The proposal maintains the Billingsley Creek corridor and the “West Wood” area as the two
main public open spaces. Existing tree row lining the north property boundary (“North Buffer”)
and Bright Road (“South Buffer”) are proposed as No-Build Zones.
Reserve B
Billingsley Run
Public Open Space
Reserve A
West Wood
Public Open Space
Open Spaces Areas
Reserve C
Central Court
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 7 of 17
The 2.40-acre West Wood area, primarily consisting of volunteer tree growth, will be developed
as a community open space and will include necessary stormwater management facilities. The
NDG only consider dry stormwater detention facilities as contributing open space when these
areas achieve a superior and interactive design as useable open space. The proposal exhibits
pedestrian paths leading to the stormwater facility from the Allee open space as well as from
Bright Road at the southwest corner of the site. As described later in the report, additional
interventions are required to ensure that the West Wood (Reserve A) is a usable open space,
which are described further in the report.
The 3.11-acre Billingsley Run (Reserve B) will be preserved in its natural state. The Central
Court and East Court are designed to provide open space connections. The Central Court is a
proposed reserve in the central portion of the lot surrounded by streets with homes facing the
open space. It is intended to be a gathering space for residents and is supplemented by an
open space connection to the West Wood reserve. The preliminary design includes a perimeter
flush curb, clusters of birch trees and a location of a clustered mailbox facility.
Proposed Ownership and Maintenance of Public Open Spaces
Space Ownership Maintenance
Reserve A: West Wood City of Dublin City of Dublin
Reserve B: Billingsley Run City of Dublin City of Dublin
Reserve C: Central Court City of Dublin HOA
Reserve D: East Court City of Dublin HOA
Connections to City Networks
The proposed development is an infill project surrounded by single-family residential
neighborhoods and is accessed only via Bright Road, which is a cul-de-sac. No additional road
connections are planned for this development. A small portion of the site borders Bright Road
across Ferris-Wright Park. To facilitate maintenance of the detention basin, a 10-foot wide
shared use path will be provided as an access corridor from Bright Road. A crosswalk is
provided at the south terminus of the shared use path, connecting the development to the
existing Ferris Wright Park preservation area. The developer is also proposing an 8-foot wide
specialty pavement path, approximately 140 feet long, to be constructed from Central Court to
the east side of the detention basin, giving residents access to the West Wood and community
open space. Staff recommends a continuous shared-use path from Bright Road to the
neighborhood, ensuring pedestrian and ADA connectivity throughout the proposed development
from the southwestern portion of the site. The shared use paths are recommended to be
constructed per the City’s standards. If the applicant intends a specialty path to align with the
development character, the maintenance responsibilities of the path should be described in the
development plan.
Streetscape Network
The portion of the streetscape between the sidewalk and the front façades of the homes is one
of the most prominent, character defining elements of the neighborhood. The NDG
recommends landscape design, architectural design, architectural materials, and the initial
impression the space creates for both pedestrian and vehicular movement.
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 8 of 17
The narrow streetscape is proposed with indigenous street trees and a concrete or a specialty
paved sidewalk on one side of the street with several access points from the sidewalk to Street
B. All homes are front-facing homes along the street segments allowing for more intimate
corridor dimensions emphasizing the community theme.
The proposed streets will be public. ‘Street A’ is a 50-foot-wide right-of-way (26-foot-wide
pavement) extending from the Bright Road intersection to the first internal intersection. The
remainder of this street as well as ‘Street B’ would have a 40-foot-wide right-of-way (24-foot-
wide pavement). While the City recommends a 60 foot wide right-of-way, subdivision
regulations require a minimum of 50 feet. Due to the size and isolated nature of the proposed
neighborhood, the proposed street hierarchy is limited to these street widths. When vehicles
are parked on one side of these streets, the overall travel width decreases to between 15 and
17 feet, which may necessitate one vehicle yielding to an oncoming one. The streets are
designed to provide an intimate streetscape with minimal through-traffic, the limited number of
lots, and the low travel speeds.
5-foot sidewalks, are proposed along the eastern side of Street A (Lots 17-20), and then the
southern (lots 16 and 17) and western sides (lot 13-16) of Street B. The remainder of the
neighborhood are proposed with ADA-accessible driveways to accommodate access to the
sidewalk on the opposite side of the street and provide access to the Central Court. This design
intentionally departs from the required standards to preserve green spaces and maintain the
rural character of the proposal. However, per the recently adopted City standards, 6-foot
sidewalks are required on both sides of the street with any development.
Staff has requested that the applicant provide factual details and implications of providing
sidewalks on both side of the street and their impact on the proposed development. The
applicant has provided a cross- section to show the required sidewalk on both sides and its
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 9 of 17
impact to the intended street character of the proposed development. However, no drawings
are presented for staff to determine if the sidewalks would impact the development standards
and the proposed layout and if they would deviate from the current layout and the intended
theme of the proposal.
Front yard Character and Landscape
The front yard character is intended to provide a village streetscape. Each home is to be custom
designed with variation of materials home to home and a well detailed front yard is envisioned
for the neighborhood. Entry gardens with foundation plantings, hedges, walls/piers, fencing
segments and other devices are proposed to match the character of the home. At FDP, specific
front yard planting requirements must be provided.
A diverse mix of naturalistically planted street trees is appropriate to the character of the site.
The development text notes a 5-foot-wide tree lawn noted as standard throughout the
development, but the drawings indicate 5.5-foot wide tree lawn, which tapers down to a
narrower tree lawn, not adequate for a tree plantation. Code requires a minimum of 5-foottree
lawn, and Envision Dublin recommends an 8-foot tree lawn. The applicant must ensure that a
uniform tree lawn is noted on the development plan and there are no discrepancies between
the development text and the PDP drawings. Additionally, the landscape plan does not match
the lot layout, and the submitted development drawings have discrepancies
Restoration or removal of the existing fencing along Bright Road is to be determined by the
applicant at FDP, no entry feature is proposed for the development. Per NDG, transitional arrival
and entry spaces located in relation to the street are recommended. Given the nature of the
development and intent, the proposed tree buffer maintains the rural character of Bright Road.
Development Standards
The applicant has indicated that the development is intended to be sensitive to the established
character of the surrounding single-family neighborhoods, while conserving the existing natural
features on the site. In order to align with the community theme, the development standards
differentiate between the Perimeter Lots and Interior Lots. The Lot Type Example exhibits
effectively depict a range of conceptually developed lots, as recommended by the NDG.
Front Yard Character Images
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 10 of 17
NDG Elements – Public Realm Macro Comments
Open Space Framework A site inventory, narrative analysis of the various site features
provided describing the significance and potential influence of
the existing conditions
Location and acreage of proposed preservation areas and new
open space is provided
Additional details required regarding the proposed recreational
path through the West Wood
Preservation of Significant Features Preservation of Billingsley Run floodway and West Woods
Preservation of existing northern and southern tree buffer
Objectives for Open Space Central Court: Newly created open space in the central portion
for residents
Formal open space between Lots 4 and 5 linking the Central
Court and the West Wood.
Both spaces meet the design objectives of the NDG
Stormwater Facilities Detention basin within the West Wood, planted and protected
as an open space Reserve.
Further details and clarifications are needed as to the degree
of pedestrian access within Reserve A
NDG Elements – Public Realm Micro Comments
Streetscape Diverse mix of naturalistically planted street trees proposed
Space available in the proposed tree lawns does not meet Code
requirements
Pedestrian Experience Pedestrian facilities not incorporated on both sides of
neighborhood streets
Front Yard Landscaping/Arrival Incorporation of fences, walls, and piers is consistent with the
NDG for homes where short setbacks are proposed.
No specific front yard planting requirements are proposed at
PDP, detailed requirements must be provided at the FDP
More flexibility in the siting of driveways and home (Lot 2,5
and 13)
Architectural Diversity All homes are to be custom designed to conform to the
conditions, topography, configuration and restrictions of its lot.
No specific architectural plans provided
High quality, 1.5 to 2 stories in height with 2 to 3 car garages
Garage Mitigation 18 feet wide garages
To ensure that the objectives of the NDG, minimum setbacks
should be included in the Development Text for front and side
loaded garages relative to the front façade of the home.
NDG Elements – Private Realm Comments
Block Vignettes Required now, including corner and side-loaded vignettes; not
provided
Front Setback 15’-20’
Side Yards 6’ shown each side;
The NDG recommends 6 feet on one side and 14 feet total
Rear Yard/Private Open Space There are a number of inconsistencies in the numeric
standards proposed for several of the lots for these element
Lot Coverage 45%
Includes primary structure, enclosed auxiliary structure,
driveways, entry walks, paved terraces/patios, decks, masonry
terraces/patios (excludes open trellises and pergolas)
Lot Area 9,960 Square feet (Minimum), 21,443 Square feet
(Maximum)
Minimum Lot Width 29 feet (minimum)
Minimum Lot Depth 107 feet
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 11 of 17
The lot sizes are typically larger along Bright Road and along the northern parcel line, to align
with the adjacent lot sizes. The mix of lot sizes aligns with the Community Plan
recommendations, however the minimum lot size does not align with the minimum lot
requirements of 0.5-acre. Given the sensitive approach to preserve the existing natural
features, staff is supportive of the proposed lot sizes which vary from 0.22-acre to 0.49-acre.
Lot sizes and setbacks vary throughout the development with varying lot widths. Lots 2, 5, 10,
and 13 are the inside corner lots with narrow widths varying from 29 feet at Lot 5 to 43.1 feet
at Lot 10. Staff recommends that a minimum of 40-foot lot width be maintained at all the inside
corner lots to ensure flexibility in the driveway and front yard landscaping opportunities, which
is an essential component of the neighborhood.
The lots sizes and locations dictate the side and rear yard setbacks. The minimum side yard
setback is 6 feet. The NDG recommend that in no case shall the side yards be less than 6 feet
on one side and 14 feet total. The Development Text proposes a range of dimensional
requirements for rear yards and private open space areas which are unique to lots based on the
lot configuration. For lots 1-10, based on the information provided, the minimum depth of
private open spaces is not accurate and there are a number of inconsistencies in the numeric
standards proposed for several of the lots for these elements, such that the numbers do not
add up correctly. This information was requested multiple times, but not properly addressed by
the applicant. Revisions will be required to the Development Text to ensure that adequate
depth is available for both the buildable area of the house and private open space while
maintaining a minimum rear yard buffer to the adjacent lot.
To ensure that the objectives of the NDG are met, minimum setbacks should be included in the
Development Text for front and side loaded garages relative to the front façade of the home.
The proposed lot coverage is 45% and is consistent with other similar sized lots within the City
and the NDG recommendations
Architecture and Building Materials
The development will consist of custom build, high-quality, single-family 1.5 to 2 stories tall
homes, featuring 2 or 3 car garages. The homes will be designed with a theme that will reflect
the Midwestern Vernacular and European Country styles homes along with some Gothic
elements from farmhouse designs, a style prevalent in Dublin and nearby communities.
Building Materials
The applicant is proposing to permit a variety of primary cladding materials including: full-depth
brick, thin brick, stone, manufactured stone, wood, stucco, cementitious siding, or any
Architectural Character
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 12 of 17
combination thereof. The proposed development text also defines permitted trim materials that
include: wood, cementitious board, and aluminum (for gutters and downspouts only). Permitted
roof materials are dimensional asphalt shingles (25 years or 240lbs/sq weight), wood slate,
copper, standing seam metal and/or tile. Windows and Door will incorporate trim that is
architecturally appropriate. Architectural elements include specialty shaped windows, louvers,
shutters, entry coverings, and other features. Chimneys are permitted with exterior portions to
be finished in brick, stone or manufactured stone. Garages are to be consistent with the main
building façade with decorative garage doors and a maximum width of 18 feet. Per the
development text, garage orientation may be determined based on the individual site
topography. No more than one yard post is permitted near the entry walk and properly
designed accent light is allowed and encouraged. Outdoor terraces, decks, pool and dining
areas are permitted as a part of the overall architectural character of home. All the ground
mechanical equipment is to be located and screened through architecture and/or landscape to
minimize visibility and noise. Maximum building height is 35 feet, as per Code.
Front yard fences include ornamental metal, painted/stained wood, stone, or a combination
thereof in keeping with the character of the house design and as approved by the HOA. The
fences are intended to define the “semi-public” space that is the home entry area and not
enclose the front yard.
The HOA will establish an Architectural Review Board (ARB) to evaluate each homesite and
building plan in the development for compliance with the Development Standards put forth by
the FDP. The Developer, as the sole builder of these custom homes, will serve as the ARB and
retain control of individual plan approval within the development until such time that all lots are
constructed.
Stormwater Management, Utilities & Easements
The proposal will meet the requirements of the City of Dublin Chapter 53, Stormwater
Management and Stream Protection Code by constructing multiple stormwater management
detention basins, storm sewer pipes, and associated structures. The applicant has located and
sized these facilities based on a stormwater management report that analyzed the existing and
anticipated drainage for the area and have provided calculations for the sizing of the detention
basins. The applicant will need to continue to work with Division of Engineering to demonstrate
compliance in accordance with Chapter 53 of the Dublin Code of Ordinances.
A stream corridor protection zone is located near the eastern portion of the site. This area has
been delineated and has been kept free of proposed buildings, stormwater management
facilities and other prohibited uses in this zone. Public water for domestic and fire protection
use will be available by the construction of new public water main from Bright Road. A new
public sanitary sewer is proposed with this development to provide service for the proposed
lots.
The West Wood will serve as a stormwater management area, located at the lower end of the
site's watershed and defined by preserved trees along its perimeter. Additional plantings will
enhance this space, creating an outdoor area for the enjoyment of residents and neighbors
alike. A 10-foot wide paved path for the periodic maintenance of the outflow structure of the
detention basin in West Wood is provided. An 8-foot wide specialty pavement path
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 13 of 17
approximately 140 feet in length is provided from Central Court to the east side of the detention
basin. The path must meet City standards.
It is important to note that there are discrepancies between the drawings and unresolved
comments. Addressing these items may impact the overall site layout as presented. These items
include the locations of sanitary sewer and storm sewer easements.
4. Preliminary Plat
Summary
This is a proposal for a Preliminary Plat for the subdivision of 14.2-acres of land and includes
the creation of 20 single-family lots, four open space reserves, and two public streets. The
Preliminary Plat shows existing conditions, proposed development sections, setback
requirements, lot depths and widths. The plat does not currently show easements as required.
The plat includes the open space acreages, ownership, and maintenance responsibilities. The
single-family lots range in size with the smallest lot at 9,960 square feet and the largest lot at
21,433 square feet. The minimum lot width is 29 feet (Lot 5), and the minimum lot depth is 107
feet (Lot 19). Single-family residential setbacks are not platted but rather are defined by the
development text.
Entrances to subdivisions typically require a dedicated left-turn lane. However, with Bright Road
being a cul-de-sac west of the site and the low traffic volumes, there is no need for dedicated
left-turn lanes in this case. The Traffic Impact Study (TIS) indicates minimal impact on the
surrounding roadway network, and no turn lanes are required for access to the site from either
direction. Street A is proposed to provide access from Bright Road with no other access point to
the subdivision.
The plat establishes a 15-foot front building line for each lot along the public right-of-way. A
20-foot landscape easement is on the northern and southern property lines. The associated
utility easements are not denoted on the plat as required. All proposed streets are public.
The Subdivision Regulations require land dedication for open space and for recreational
facilities. The applicant is required to provide a minimum of 0.88-acres for open space for the
site based on the area and number of single-family lots. The proposal is for 5.8-acres of open
space of which all is to be dedicated to the City.
Grading plans are expected to be shown on the Preliminary Plat, and the currently indicated
grading on the house pads may require significant work and could potentially impact the
floodplain.
5. Plan Review
Criteria Review
1. The proposed development is
consistent with the purpose, intent
and applicable standards of the
Zoning Code.
Criterion Met with Condition: This proposal is
generally consistent with the purpose, intent and
applicable development standards of the Zoning
Code requirements. Establishment of a Planned
Unit Development successfully addresses the
Preliminary Development Plan
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 14 of 17
unique conditions and location of the site. 6-foot
sidewalks on both sides of each street are
required per City’s current standards and this
condition must be addressed prior to City Council
Review.
2. The proposed development is in
conformity with Community Plan,
Thoroughfare Plan, Bikeway Plan,
and other adopted plans or portions
thereof as they may apply and will
not unreasonably burden the existing
street network.
Criterion Met with Conditions: The proposed
infill development largely meets the goals and
objectives defined in the Community Plan
including the Future Land Use designation for the
site. The development preserves the natural
character along Bright Road. A connected shared
use path within Reserve A is required to establish
the shared use path connection and must be
shown prior to City Council review. Additionally,
two-sided 6-foot sidewalks are required per City’s
current standards and this condition must be
addressed prior to City Council Review.
3. The proposed development advances
the general welfare of the city and
immediate vicinity and will not
impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of
the surrounding areas.
Criterion Met: The proposed development
promotes orderly development that is respectful
to the surrounding development character.
4. The proposed uses are appropriately
located in the city so that the use
and value of property within and
adjacent to the area will be
safeguarded.
Criterion Met: The Future Land Use Plan
identifies this location for Residential Low Density
that takes into account environmentally sensitive
areas and integrates natural features. The
proposed development safeguards the existing
rural setting along Bright Road and along the
Perimeter Lots.
5. Proposed residential development
will have sufficient open space areas
that meet the objectives of the
Community Plan.
Criterion Met: The required open space is
0.88acres and the applicant proposes 5.8 acres of
large open public spaces, satisfying and exceeding
the requirements. The applicant should work with
the City’s landscape inspector to ensure the tree
survey, tree preservation plan, tree
removal/replacement plan, and landscape plan
are provided with the Final Development Plan
submittal.
6. The proposed development respects
the unique characteristic of the
Criterion Met: Billingsley Creek has been kept
free of proposed buildings. The West Wood area
is envisioned to maintain its natural character.
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 15 of 17
natural features and protects the
natural resources of the site.
The proposal will have to adhere to Code for any
removal and replacement of the vegetation on
site, details of which are required at the Final
Development Plan.
7. Adequate utilities, access roads,
drainage, retention and/or necessary
facilities have been or are being
provided.
Criterion Met with Condition: The proposal
will meet the requirements of the City of Dublin
Chapter 53 Stormwater Management and Stream
Protection Code by constructing stormwater
management detention basin, storm sewer pipes,
and associated structures. The site survey and
grading must be provided and shown on the
drawings prior to City Council Review.
8. Adequate measures have been or will
be taken to provide ingress and
egress designed to minimize traffic
congestion on the surrounding public
streets and to maximize public safety
and to accommodate adequate
pedestrian and bike circulation
systems to that the proposed
development provides for a safe,
convenient and non-conflicting
circulation system for motorists,
bicyclists and pedestrians.
Criterion Met with Condition: The Traffic
Impact Study indicates minimal impact on the
surrounding roadway network, and no turn lanes
are required for access to the site from either
direction. A shared use path is required to
connect the south-west portion of the site to the
development.
9. The relationship of buildings and
structures to each other and to such
other facilities provides for the
coordination and integration of this
development within the PD and the
larger community and maintains the
image of Dublin as a quality
community.
Criterion Met with Condition The preservation
of natural features and integration with the
proposal maintains the image of Dublin as a
quality community. As mentioned above, a shared
use path is required to ensure that the pedestrian
connectivity is well established and integrated
with the neighborhood.
10. The density, building gross floor
area, building heights, setbacks,
distances between buildings and
structures, yard space, design and
layout of open space systems and
parking areas, traffic accessibility and
other elements having a bearing on
the overall acceptability of the
development plans contribute to the
orderly development of land within
the city.
Criterion Met with Condition: The proposed
density is compatible with surrounding
development, as are the lot and building
development standards. The applicant must
ensure that sidewalk are provided on both sides
of each street and the integration of the shared-
use path is shown prior to City Council Review.
11. Adequate provision is made for storm
drainage within and through the site
so as to maintain, as far as
Criterion Met: The proposal will meet the
requirements of the City of Dublin Chapter 53
Stormwater Management and Stream Protection
Code by constructing stormwater management
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 16 of 17
practicable, usual and normal swales,
water courses and drainage areas.
detention basin, storm sewer pipes, and
associated structures.
12. The design, site arrangement, and
anticipated benefits of the proposed
development justify any deviation
from the standard development
regulations included in the Zoning
Code or Subdivision Regulations and
that any such deviations are
consistent with the intent of the PUD
regulations.
Criterion Met: The proposed site layout is
responsive to surrounding context and in
accordance with the Community Plan. The
flexibility provided by the Planned Unit
Development process is necessary in this case to
address the unique natural features of the site
and maintain the significant natural features,
resulting in lot sizes less than 0.5-acre.
13. The proposed building design meets
or exceeds the quality of the building
designs in the surrounding area and
all applicable appearance standards
of the city.
Criterion Met: The development text includes
material and designs standards. The proposed
building materials are high-quality materials and
compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods.
Conceptual architectural elevations have been
provided by the applicant.
14. The proposed phasing of
development is appropriate for the
existing and proposed infrastructure
and is sufficiently coordinated among
the various phases to ultimately yield
the intended overall development.
Not Applicable: No phasing information has
been provided by the applicant.
15. The proposed development can be
adequately serviced by existing or
planned public improvements and
not impair the existing public service
system for the area.
Criterion Met: All public improvements in this
location are based on the construction of this
project; these improvements are otherwise not
planned.
16. The applicant’s contributions to the
public infrastructure are consistent
with the Multimodal Thoroughfare
Plan and are sufficient to service the
new development.
Criterion Met: The site is not located within a
Special Area Plan nor any Thoroughfares plan.
Criteria Review
1. Plat Information, Zoning Code, and
Construction Requirements.
Criterion Met with Conditions: The proposal is
largely consistent with the Subdivision
Regulations. Applicant must show the site survey,
easements, grading and make any technical
adjustments prior to City Council review.
2. Lots, Street, Sidewalk, and Bike Path
Standards
Criterion Met with Condition: The plat does
not provide sidewalk on both sides as per City
standards. Also, a connected shared use path
Preliminary Plat
City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
24-135Z-PDP & 24-151PP | Bright Road Reserve
Thursday, February 6, 2025
Page 17 of 17
within Reserve A is required. Applicant must make
revisions prior to City Council Review.
3. Utilities. Criterion Met: Stormwater management,
proposed and existing utilities are shown on the
plat.
4. Open Space Requirements Criterion Met with Condition: The proposed
open space provision meets the requirements.
Open space is required to be dedicated to the
City. The plat must accurately shows the
ownership and maintenance of specialty path of
Reserve A. Applicant must make these prior to
City Council Review.
Recommendation
Planning Recommendation: Recommendation to City Council of approval of Rezoning and
Preliminary Development Plan with the following conditions:
1) The applicant provide a 6-foot wide sidewalk on both sides of streets in the subdivision
and revise the development text accordingly, prior to City Council submittal.
2) The applicant provide a connected shared use path in Reserve A, per the City’s
maintenance standards and revise the development text as required, prior to City
Council submittal.
3) The applicant make adjustments to Lot 2, Lot 5 and Lot 13 to provide a minimum lot
width of 40 feet to achieve more flexibility in driveway location and provide landscaping
opportunities for a cohesive residential appearance and revise the development text to
require the minimum lot width of 40 feet, prior to City Council submittal.
4) The applicant provide a uniform tree lawn within the entire development without any
discrepancies between the drawings prior to City Council submittal.
5) The applicant revise the development text to address the discrepancies between the
rear yard setbacks, primary structure setback and minimum private open spaces on Lots
1- 10 prior to City Council submittal.
6) The applicant revise the development text to require minimum side yard dimension as 6
feet on one side and 14 feet total prior to City Council submittal.
7) The applicant revise the development text to provide minimum setbacks for the front-
loaded and side-loaded garages, prior to City Council submittal.
Planning Recommendation: Recommendation to City Council of approval of Preliminary Plat
with the following conditions.
1. The applicant ensure that the site survey, easements, grading, and engineering
comments are shown on the plat prior to City Council submittal.
2. The applicant address any other technical adjustment as needed.
BRIGHT ROADMACDUFF PLACEMACBET
H
DRIVEHANNA HILLS DRIVEBRIGHT ROADGRANDEE CLIFFS DRIVESTREET ASTREET B6321131914161718478910111252015Drawing Number:Project Number:Drawn By:Date:Scale:Checked By:PRELIMINARY NOTFOR CONSTRUCTION4338 BRIGHT ROADPARTNERS, LLC8824 DUNSINANE DRIVEDUBLIN, OHIO 43017PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANBRIGHT ROAD RESERVEVICINITY MAPPRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANFORBRIGHT ROAD RESERVECITY OF DUBLIN, FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIOINDEX MAPSHEET INDEXFLOODPLAINLEGALLANDOWNERDEVELOPERENGINEER & SURVEYORLAND PLANNING/LANDSCAPEARCHITECTUREARCHITECTURESITEGRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 100 feet20050 100TITLE SHEET/VICINITY MAP/REGIONAL CONTEXT MAPPREPARED BY:UTILITY & SERVICE CONTACTS
BRIGHT ROADBRIGHT ROADGRANDEE CLIFFS DRIVEGwd5C2Ble1B1Gwe5B2Ble1B1Ble1B1Ble1B1Ble1B1Gwd5C2MIC2MIC2MIC2CeBMkB10.606 Ac.3.568 Ac.Drawing Number:Project Number:Drawn By:Date:Scale:Checked By:PRELIMINARY NOTFOR CONSTRUCTION4338 BRIGHT ROADPARTNERS, LLC8824 DUNSINANE DRIVEDUBLIN, OHIO 43017PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANBRIGHT ROAD RESERVEEXISTING CONDITIONS PLANGRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 50 feet10025 50SOIL MAP UNIT LEGENDLEGEND
STREET
A
STREET BSTREET BSTREET BBRIGHT ROADGRANDEE CLIFFS DRIVEBRIGHT ROADDrawing Number:Project Number:Drawn By:Date:Scale:Checked By:PRELIMINARY NOTFOR CONSTRUCTION4338 BRIGHT ROADPARTNERS, LLC8824 DUNSINANE DRIVEDUBLIN, OHIO 43017PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANBRIGHT ROAD RESERVEPRELIMINARY PLAT/DEVELOPMENT PLANGRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 50 feet10025 50NOTES:SITE STATISTICS
STREET A
STREET BSTREET BSTREET BBRIGHT ROADGRANDEE CLIFFS DRIVE6321131914161718478910111252015Drawing Number:Project Number:Drawn By:Date:Scale:Checked By:PRELIMINARY NOTFOR CONSTRUCTION4338 BRIGHT ROADPARTNERS, LLC8824 DUNSINANE DRIVEDUBLIN, OHIO 43017PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANBRIGHT ROAD RESERVEUTILITY PLANGRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 50 feet10025 50NOTES:LEGEND
STREET
A
STREET BSTREET BSTREET BBRIGHT ROADGRANDEE CLIFFS DRIVE6321131914161718478910111252015Drawing Number:Project Number:Drawn By:Date:Scale:Checked By:PRELIMINARY NOTFOR CONSTRUCTION4338 BRIGHT ROADPARTNERS, LLC8824 DUNSINANE DRIVEDUBLIN, OHIO 43017PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANBRIGHT ROAD RESERVEGRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANGRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 50 feet10025 50LEGENDNOTES:
STREET
A
STREET BSTREET BSTREET BBRIGHT ROADGRANDEE CLIFFS DRIVEBRIGHT ROADDrawing Number:Project Number:Drawn By:Date:Scale:Checked By:PRELIMINARY NOTFOR CONSTRUCTION4338 BRIGHT ROADPARTNERS, LLC8824 DUNSINANE DRIVEDUBLIN, OHIO 43017PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANBRIGHT ROAD RESERVEVEHICLE TRACKING EXHIBITGRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 50 feet10025 50
150'50'25'0'SheetSheet TitleDatesRevisionsProject NumberProject ManagerDrawnCheckedClientProjectArchitectPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCivil Engineer / SurveyorStructural Engineer7OPEN SPACEFRAMEWORK PLANCONNECTIVITY24-0002.0CMVCMVBPKBright Road Reserve4338 Bright RoadDublin, OH 430824338 Bright RoadPartners, LLC8824 Dunsinane DriveDublin, OH 4301701.17.25NORTH
CENTRAL GREENWEST WOODBILLINGSLEYRUNBRIGHT ROAD 1234567891011121314151617181920MAINTENANCE PATHPEDESTRIAN PATHBRIGHT ROAD150'50'25'0'SheetSheet TitleDatesRevisionsProject NumberProject ManagerDrawnCheckedClientProjectArchitectPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCivil Engineer / SurveyorStructural Engineer8ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN24-0002.0CMVCMVBPKBright Road Reserve4338 Bright RoadDublin, OH 430824338 Bright RoadPartners, LLC8824 Dunsinane DriveDublin, OH 4301701.17.25NORTH
868889221919294879596971131811792012001992475855545372717078767779808112131130141628292726221831333441404547485150494668668283564318485223225215240232127615956657910875744373423244393537362513813914016616716914212812912610510423924624524124424324221118718517118916516414116317316116015813413313113014814915011912312212110610710811711611011111511411215315215114716817013713613212412513514414317218614514610910310210110099989320320218090220219218204205217216224222184182183154155156177178175174159157226229230227228202231233234235238213212206207208209210193192190188194191198197196195523815242321201917257606369676264120118162176AREAS OF TREEPRESERVATION, EXISTINGTREES NOT SURVEYED.150'50'25'0'SheetSheet TitleDatesRevisionsProject NumberProject ManagerDrawnCheckedClientProjectArchitectPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCivil Engineer / SurveyorStructural Engineer9TREE SURVEY24-0002.0CMVCMVBPKBright Road Reserve4338 Bright RoadDublin, OH 430824338 Bright RoadPartners, LLC8824 Dunsinane DriveDublin, OH 4301701.17.25NORTH
SheetSheet TitleDatesRevisionsProject NumberProject ManagerDrawnCheckedClientProjectArchitectPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCivil Engineer / SurveyorStructural Engineer10TREE DATA24-0002.0CMVCMVBPKBright Road Reserve4338 Bright RoadDublin, OH 430824338 Bright RoadPartners, LLC8824 Dunsinane DriveDublin, OH 4301701.17.25#COMMON NAME DBH CONDITION1 *FRUITING PEAR 17.0 FAIR# COMMON NAMECONDITION51 *FRUITING PEARDBH15.02RED MAPLE 6.0 FAIR52PIN OAK25.03 SUGAR MAPLE 17.0 POOR53 RED MULBERRY 8.04 SUGAR MAPLE 14.0 POOR54 BLUE SPRUCE 10.05RED MAPLE 9.0 FAIR55 WHITE SPRICE 9.06RED MAPLE 14.0 FAIR56 BLUE SPRUCE 12.07 RED MULBERRY 26.0 FAIR57 BLACK WALNUT 6.08RED MAPLE 11.0 FAIR58 BLACK WALNUT 8.09 BUTTERNUT 20.0 FAIR59 NORWAY SPRUCE 16.010 FRUITING PEAR 17.0 POOR6014.011 BUTTERNUT 26.0 GOOD6110.012 RED MAPLE 9.0 GOOD6212.013 AMERICAN SYCAMORE 28.0 GOOD6313.014 EASTERN HEMLOCK 8.0 GOOD649.015 BLUE SPRUCE 6 FAIR6513.016 RIVER BIRCH 13.0 FAIR6613.017 NORTHERN RED OAK 28.0 GOOD679.018 AUSTRIAN PINE 13.0 POOR6810.019 AUSTRIAN PINE 9.0 POOR696.020 AUSTRIAN PINE 8.0 POOR70 RED MAPLE 12.021 AUSTRIAN PINE 8.0 POOR71 SILVER MAPLE 19.022 HONEYLOCUST 15.0 GOOD72 EASTERN WHITE PINE 16.023 HONEYLOCUST 16.0 GOOD73 CALLERY PEAR 11.024 AUSTRIAN PINE 16.0 FAIR74 EASTERN WHITE PINE 18.025 HONEYLOCUST 16.0 GOOD7529.026 HONEYLOCUST 16.0 POOR76 RED MAPLE 9.027 HONEYLOCUST 35.0 FAIR77 RED MAPLE 12.028 HONEYLOCUST 14.0 FAIR78 FRUITING PEAR 10.029 HONEYLOCUST 13.0 FAIR79 RED MAPLE 10.030 RED MAPLE 9.0 FAIR8010.031 BALD CYPRESS 15.0 FAIR8110.032 AMERICAN SYCAMORE 44.0 GOOD8210.033 JAPANESE RED PINE 9.0 FAIR839.034 EASTERN REDBUD 30.0 FAIR8414.035 BLACK WALNUT 20.0 GOOD8511.036 BLACK WALNUT 18.0 GOOD86 BLACK WALNUT 16.037 HICKORY - SHAGBARK 10.0 GOOD87 EASTERN WHITE PINE 21.038 HICKORY - SHAGBARK 14.0 GOOD88 AMERICAN ELM 6.039 NORWAY SPRUCE 17.0 FAIR89 AMERICAN ELM 10.040 CHERRY SPECIES 10.0 POOR90 AMERICAN ELM 11.041 EASTERN COTTONWOOD 40.0 GOOD91 SUGAR MAPLE 6.042 AMERICAN SYCAMORE 30.0 FAIR92 AMERICAN ELM 8.043 SILVER MAPLE 41.093ASH19.044 AMERICAN SYCAMORE 30.094 KENTUCKY COFFEETREE 20.045 RED MAPLE 12.09518.046 RED MAPLE 10.096 BOXELDER 10.047 BLUE SPRUCE 10.097 SUGAR MAPLE 12.048 RED MAPLE 11.098 SUGAR MAPLE 8.049 BLACK CHERRY 10.099 BLACK WALNUT 18.050 FRUITING PEAR 8.0100 SUGAR MAPLE 6.0# COMMON NAMECONDITIONDBH101 SUGAR MAPLE 8.0102 AMERICAN ELM 10.0103 BLACK WALNUT 19.01047.010514.010619.010724.0108 AMERICAN ELM 20.0109 BLACK CHERRY 6.0110 SUGAR MAPLE 9.011115.011216.011320.011430.0115 SUGAR MAPLE 10.0116 BLACK WALNUT 15.0117 HONEYLOCUST 23.0118119 SUGAR MAPLE 9.0120 AMERICAN ELM 6.0121 BLACK WALNUT 20.0122 SUGAR MAPLE 11.0123 BLACK CHERRY 10.0124 SUGAR MAPLE 6.0125 AMERICAN ELM 9.0126 HONEYLOCUST 39.0127 HONEYLOCUST 10.0128 SUGAR MAPLE 6.0129 SUGAR MAPLE 12.0130 SUGAR MAPLE 10.0131ASH14.0132 SUGAR MAPLE 10.0133 SUGAR MAPLE 8.0134 SUGAR MAPLE 9.0135 BLACK WALNUT 23.0136 AMERICAN ELM 9.0137 BOXELDER 6.0138 AMERICAN ELM 7.0139 AMERICAN ELM 8.0141 AMERICAN ELM 17.01427.014310.01446.0145 SUGAR MAPLE 15.0146 BLACK WALNUT 18.0147 AMERICAN ELM 8.0148 SUGAR MAPLE 10.0149 SUGAR MAPLE 10.0150 BLACK CHERRY 9.0# COMMON NAMECONDITION151 AMERICAN ELMDBH9.0152 BLACK WALNUT 19.0153 BLACK CHERRY 7.0154 BLACK CHERRY 6.0155 AMERICAN ELM 6.0156 BLACK WALNUT 22.0157 AMERICAN ELM 8.0158 AMERICAN ELM 8.0159 BLACK WALNUT 16.0160 SUGAR MAPLE 8.0161 SUGAR MAPLE 7.0162 AMERICAN ELM 16.0163 BLACK WALNUT 17.0164 SUGAR MAPLE 8.0165 AMERICAN ELM 6.0166 AMERICAN ELM 9.0167 NORTHERN HACKBERRY 11.01686.0169 BLACK WALNUT 35.01707.017112.01727.01736.01748.017510.01768.0177 AMERICAN ELM 6.0178 SUGAR MAPLE 7.0179 BLACH CHERRY 10.0180 AMERICAN ELM 6.0181 BLACK CHERRY 8.0182 BLACK WALNUT 16.0183 AMERICAN ELM 12.0184 BLACK WALNUT 24.0185 BLACK WALNUT 20.0186 AMERICAN ELM 6.0187 BLACK WALNUT 8.0188 NORTHERN HACKBERRY 9.0189 NORTHERN HACKBERRY 8.0190 BLACK WALNUT 19.0191 BLACK WALNUT 17.0192 BLACK WALNUT 8.0193 BLACK WALNUT 12.0194 AMERICAN ELM 8.0195 BLACK WALNUT 27.0196 BLACK WALNUT 9.0197 BLACK WALNUT 9.0198 AMERICAN ELM 7.0199 BLACK WALNUT 18.0200 AMERICAN ELM 7.0# COMMON NAMECONDITIONDBH201 AMERICAN ELM 6.0202 AMERICAN ELM 8.0BLACK WALNUT 18.0AMERICAN ELM 8.0AMERICAN ELM 12.0HONEYLOCUST 21.0AMERICAN ELM 9.0SUGAR MAPLE 8.0HONEYLOCUST 18.0AMERICAN ELM 11.0AMERICAN ELM 11.0BLACK WALNUT 23.0BLACK WALNUT 20.0AMERICAN ELM 6.0AMERICAN ELM 6.0BLACK WALNUT 28.0KENTUCKY COFFEETREE 22.0AMERICAN ELM 15.0SUGAR MAPLE 15.0SUGAR MAPLE 15.0AMERICAN ELM 15.0SUGAR MAPLE 15.0AMERICAN ELM 15.0EASTERN WHITE PINE 13.012.018.015.015.08.022.020.013.016.014.017.0EASTERN WHITE PINE 10.0BLACK WALNUT 13.0RED MULBERRY 11.011.010.012.0AMERICAN ELM 7.0NORTHERN HACKBERRY 16.0BLACK WALNUT 11.0FLOWERING CRABAPPLE 72.0POORGOODGOODGOODGOODGOODDEADPOORFAIRGOODFAIRFAIRPOORFAIRFAIRFAIRGOODGOODGOODGOODGOODFAIRGOODFAIRFAIRGOODGOODFAIRPOORFAIRGOODFAIRFAIRDEADDEADFAIRGOODFAIRFAIRFAIRFAIRGOODFAIRPOORFAIRGOODFAIRFAIRFAIRFAIRPOORFAIRDEADFAIRGOODGOODGOODGOODGOODGOODGOODFAIRFAIRGOODFAIRGOODGOODFAIRFAIRFAIRPOORFAIRFAIRFAIRPOORPOORPOORGOODGOODDEADDEADFAIRGOODGOODDEADGOODFAIRPOORGOODGOODGOODFAIRGOODGOODGOODFAIRFAIRGOODFAIRPOORFAIRGOODDEADGOODGOODGOODFAIRFAIRPOORGOODPOORFAIRFAIRFAIRFAIRGOODGOODPOORFAIRFAIRFAIRGOODGOODGOODGOODGOODFAIRDEADGOODFAIRPOORGOODGOODDEADGOODGOODGOODGOODPOORFAIRPOORFAIRFAIRPOORPOORPOORPOORFAIRFAIRPOORGOODFAIRFAIRFAIRPOORFAIRPOORGOODFAIRPOORGOODFAIRFAIRFAIR FAIRFAIRFAIRFAIRFAIRFAIRGOODGOODDEADGOODFAIRFAIRPOORGOODGOODPOORFAIRFAIRGOODFAIRFAIRPOORFAIRPOORFAIRPOORPOORFAIRPOORFAIRFAIRFAIRPOORFAIRFAIRFAIRPOORNORWAY SPRUCENORWAY SPRUCENORWAY SPRUCENORWAY SPRUCENORWAY SPRUCENORWAY SPRUCENORWAY SPRUCENORWAY SPRUCENORWAY SPRUCENORWAY SPRUCEEASTERN WHITE PINERED MAPLERED MAPLERED MAPLERED MAPLERED MAPLERED MAPLEKENTUCKY COFFEETREEBLACK WALNUTBLACK WALNUTBLACK WALNUTBLACK WALNUTBLACK WALNUTBLACK WALNUTBLACK WALNUTBLACK WALNUTSUGAR MAPLE9.0FAIR140 AMERICAN ELM 8.0 FAIRSUGAR MAPLESUGAR MAPLESUGAR MAPLENORTHERN HACKBERRYNORTHERN HACKBERRYNORTHERN HACKBERRYAMERICAN ELMAMERICAN ELMAMERICAN ELMAMERICAN ELMAMERICAN ELM203204205206207208209210211213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247BLACK WALNUT 19.0 GOOD212KENTUCKY COFFEETREE 21.0 FAIREASTERN WHITE PINEEASTERN WHITE PINEEASTERN WHITE PINEEASTERN WHITE PINEEASTERN WHITE PINEEASTERN WHITE PINEEASTERN WHITE PINEEASTERN WHITE PINEEASTERN WHITE PINEEASTERN WHITE PINEBOXELDEREASTERN WHITE PINEEASTERN WHITE PINEEASTERN WHITE PINETREES TO BE REMOVED (FAIR & GOOD)1,063"SUMMARY - TREE REMOVAL311 - BUFFERS / RESERVE A & C (2.5" CAL AVE.)53 - STREET TREES (3.5" CAL)40 - CENTRAL RESERVE (2.5" CAL AVE)*TREES IN POOR CONDITION WILL NOT BE REPLACED.185.5"777.5"100"REMOVAL TOTAL: 324REMOVAL TOTAL: 164REMOVAL TOTAL: 180REMOVAL TOTAL: 32174*PEAR TREES IN POOR CONDITION WILL NOT BE REPLACED.SUMMARY - TREE REPLACEMENT1,063"17.4%73.2%9.4%
6321131914161718478910111252015TREES TO BE REMOVED FORINFRASTRUCTUREAREAS TO BE AUGMENTED WITH ADDITIONALPLANTINGS THROUGH REFORESTATION /REPLACEMENT PROGRAM. FINAL PLANTLOCATIONS TO BE DETERMINED DURING FINALDEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCESS TO ENSURECOORDINATION WITH SITE INFRASTRUCTUREAND GRADING. FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN TO BECOORDINATED WITH CITY FORESTER.TREE PRESERVATIONAREA (TYP.)AREAS TO BE AUGMENTED WITH ADDITIONALPLANTINGS THROUGH REFORESTATION /REPLACEMENT PROGRAM. FINAL PLANTLOCATIONS TO BE DETERMINED DURING FINALDEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCESS TO ENSURECOORDINATION WITH SITE INFRASTRUCTUREAND GRADING. FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN TO BECOORDINATED WITH CITY FORESTER.TREE PRESERVATIONAREA (TYP.)EXISTING TREE TOREMAIN (TYP.)TREES TO BE REMOVED FORINFRASTRUCTUREPROPOSED STREETTREE PLANTINGS (TYP.)BIRCH GROVE INCENTRAL COURT150'50'25'0'SheetSheet TitleDatesRevisionsProject NumberProject ManagerDrawnCheckedClientProjectArchitectPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCivil Engineer / SurveyorStructural Engineer11LANDSCAPE / TREEREPLACEMENT PLAN24-0002.0CMVCMVBPKBright Road Reserve4338 Bright RoadDublin, OH 430824338 Bright RoadPartners, LLC8824 Dunsinane DriveDublin, OH 4301701.17.25NORTHLEGENDNEW DECIDUOUS SHADE TREE - SIZES TO VARYEXISTING TREE - TREE PRESERVATION ZONEEXISTING TREE - TREE SURVEY INDEXPLANT LIST - TREE REPLACEMENTKEYCOMMON NAMEBOTANICAL NAMESIZECOND.TREESCER EASTERN REDBUDCERCIS CANADENSISB&BCEL AMERICAN HACKBERRYCELTIS OCCIDENTALISREMARKS--B&BNYS BLACK GUMNYSSA SYLVATICA-B&BB&BACER FREEMANII VARIETIES FREEMAN RED MAPLE 1"-3.5" CALAFMB&BQBI SWAMP WHITE OAKQUERCUS BICOLOR--PLA PLATANUS OCCIDENTALISB&B1"-2.5" CAL-B&BQUERCUS RUBRA RED OAK 1"-2.5" CALQUE-B&BACER RUBRUM 'OCTOBER GLORY' OCTOBER GLORY RED MAPLE 1"-3.5" CALAOG-B&BBET PAPERBARK BIRCHBETULA PAPYRIFERA-ULM ULMUS AMERICANAB&B1"-3.5" CAL-AMERICAN SYCAMORE1"-2.5" CAL10' HT.1"-2.5" CAL1"-3.5" CAL1"-2" CALAMERICAN ELMTREE PROTECTION FENCING 1N.T.S.EXISTING GROUNDPROTECTIVE FENCINGTO EDGE OF TREECRITICAL ROOT ZONE,ENCIRCLING THE TREEELEVATION*FINAL PLANT LIST TO BE COORDINATED WITH CITY FORESTER FOR VARIETIES AND SIZES.
PRIVATE REALMxOUTDOOR DININGxGARDENSxUSER PRIVACYxOPEN LAWNSxREAR LANDSCAPE DRAINAGEPUBLIC REALMxARRIVAL SPACExENTRY GARDENxINVITINGxARCHITECTURAL FACADExPOSSIBLE AUXILIARY STRUCTUREPRIVATE REALMxOUTDOOR DININGxGARDENS & POOLxVIEWS TO WOODSxDRAINAGE TO STREAMPUBLIC REALMxARRIVAL SPACExENTRY GARDENxINVITINGxARCHITECTURAL FACADEEAST COURTLOT SIZE: 12,634 SFBUILDABLE AREA: 7,130 SFMAX BUILD DEPTH: 98'LOT COVERAGE: 44%MAIN DRIVE
LOT SIZE: 9,801 SFBUILDABLE AREA: 5,4800 SFMAX BUILD DEPTH: 80'LOT COVERAGE: 43%BILLINGSLEY RUN (OPENSPACE)FLOOD LIMITSETBACK
MAIN DRIVESETBACK NOTE:ALL SETBACKS & RESTRICTIONSARE AS DESCRIBED IN THEDEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.NOTE:ALL IMAGES SHOWN ARE FORPROPOSED CHARACTERCOMMUNICATIONS ONLY. ALLHOMES ARE TO BE CUSTOM ANDBUILT CONDITIONS WILL VARY.SheetSheet TitleDatesRevisionsProject NumberProject ManagerDrawnCheckedClientProjectArchitectPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCivil Engineer / SurveyorStructural Engineer12TYPICAL LOTS STREET ELEVATION STREET SECTION24-0002.0CMVCMVBPKBright Road Reserve4338 Bright RoadDublin, OH 430824338 Bright RoadPartners, LLC8824 Dunsinane DriveDublin, OH 4301701.17.25SCALE: NTSLOT TYPE EXHIBIT (SMALL LOT #19) SCALE: NTSLOT TYPE EXHIBIT (WALK-OUT LOT #12) DEVELOPMENT CHARACTER IMAGERY
40' ROW24' STREET WIDTH - FACE TO FACEC5'15' SETBACKLDeveloper-Proposed Street Section5'BUILD-TO15' SETBACK5'BUILD-TOCURBCURB90' BUILDING TO BUILDING24' STREET WIDTH - FACE TO FACEC6'-6"15' SETBACKLCity-Proposed Street Section5'BUILD-TO15' SETBACK5'BUILD-TOCURBCURB6'6'-6"6'SheetSheet TitleDatesRevisionsProject NumberProject ManagerDrawnCheckedClientProjectArchitectPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCivil Engineer / SurveyorStructural Engineer13TYPICAL LOTS STREET ELEVATION STREET SECTION24-0002.0CMVCMVBPKBright Road Reserve4338 Bright RoadDublin, OH 430824338 Bright RoadPartners, LLC8824 Dunsinane DriveDublin, OH 4301701.17.25SCALE: NTSTYPICAL STREET ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"STREET SECTIONSBUILDING EXTERIOR MATERIALS - EXAMPLESNOTE:ALL SETBACKS & RESTRICTIONS ARE AS DESCRIBEDIN THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.NOTE:ALL IMAGES SHOWN ARE FOR PROPOSED CHARACTERCOMMUNICATIONS ONLY. ALL HOMES ARE TO BECUSTOM AND BUILT CONDITIONS WILL VARY.
ENTRYDRIVEWAY6' SETBACK40' SETBACKPRIMARY STRUCTURE20'SETBACK25' MIN.PRIVATEOPEN SPACE20'SETBACKTERRACEGARAGEBUILDINGENVELOPE+/-5000 SFENTRYBUILDING ENVELOPE2 STORY+/-5000 SFGARAGETERRACE15'SETBACKLOWERTERRACE25' MIN.
PRIVA
T
E
OPEN
S
P
A
C
E
40' SET
B
A
C
K
PRIMAR
Y
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
20'
SETBAC
KDRIVEWAYENTRYWALK
20'SETBACKSheetSheet TitleDatesRevisionsProject NumberProject ManagerDrawnCheckedClientProjectArchitectPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCivil Engineer / SurveyorStructural Engineer14LOT LAYOUTDIAGRAMS /CHARACTER IMAGES24-0002.0CMVCMVBPKBright Road Reserve4338 Bright RoadDublin, OH 430824338 Bright RoadPartners, LLC8824 Dunsinane DriveDublin, OH 4301701.17.25SCALE: 1" = 20'LOT #2 LAYOUT DIAGRAMCHARACTER IMAGERYSCALE: 1" = 20'LOT #5 LAYOUT DIAGRAMNORTHNORTHNOTE:PLAN DIAGRAMS ARE FOR INFORMATION ONLY TOGRAPHICALLY DEPICT TYPICAL LOT RESTRICTIONS,POSSIBLE PLACEMENT OF STRUCTURES (BUILDINGENVELOPE) AND SUPPORTING SITE FEATURE. ALL HOMESARE TO BE CUSTOM DESIGNED TO CONFORM TO THECONDITIONS, TOPOGRAPHY, CONFIGURATION ANDRESTRICTIONS OF ITS LOT.
WEST WOODxSTORMWATERxLANDSCAPED BASINxOVERLOOKxCASUAL SEATINGEXISTING TREESMAINTENANCEPATHEXISTING TREESTERMINUS FEATURECENTRAL COURTxSTONE ENTRIESxGANG MAILBOXxWHITE BIRCH GROVExOPEN LAWNEXISTING TREESCOMMUNITY GATHERING : SEATING AREABIRCH GROVESALLEE : PEDESTRIAN PATH5' PERIMETER WALKMAILBOXSheetSheet TitleDatesRevisionsProject NumberProject ManagerDrawnCheckedClientProjectArchitectPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCivil Engineer / SurveyorStructural Engineer15WEST WOOD /CENTRAL COURTENLARGEMENT24-0002.0CMVCMVBPKBright Road Reserve4338 Bright RoadDublin, OH 430824338 Bright RoadPartners, LLC8824 Dunsinane DriveDublin, OH 4301701.17.2575'30'15'0'NORTH
$4+)*6 41#& 4'5'48'%QPEGRV 2NCP 4GXKGY/C[$TKIJV4QCF&WDNKP1* 1YPGT &056TWUV5CNN[5*CKODCWIJ6TWUVGG%CRG9TCVJ&TKXG&WDNKP1JKQUJCKODCWIJ"[CJQQEQOÄÄ&GXGNQRGT $TKIJV4QCF2CTVPGTU..%/CPCIKPI2CTVPGT 9KNNKCO*#FCOU&WPUKPCPG&TKXG&WDNKP1JKQYJCFCOU"IOCKNEQO ÄÄ
05/15/240 25 50 100 200N4338 Bright Road : Project Vicinity MapPROJECTLOCATION
05/15/240 25 50 100 200N4338 Bright Road : Development NarrativeUnique CommunityThis development will be a unique and distinct offering within the City of Dublin with the combination of a high-quality site and custom architecture to enhance that position. The quiet nature of this segment of Bright Road (west of the Hopewell Elementary School) and its disconnection from Riverside Drive for vehicular traffic makes this site well located for a hamlet/enclave of architecturally-controlled residences catering to the empty-nester buyer at one end of the age continuum and the dual professional income young family at the other, each looking for the conveniences and amenities of Dublin, including adjacent Bridge Park restaurants and schools/parks respectively, among many others.PreambleThe City of Dublin has become one of the finest communities in the country in which to live, work and socialize. Central Ohio as a whole is experiencing a significant demand for all levels of housing and Dublin is not immune to these needs. This development, though modest in size, looks to satisfy the de-sire of many to join into the Dublin community and, those that have been here for years, to remain here as a vital part of the community that they helped to build.Bright Road Partners, LLC (Developer) proposes to develop this 14.2 ac site on Bright Road in Dublin, Ohio with a renowned and well-respected local builder partner. Developer is proposing a high-quality Planned Development that allows for “conservation design” in keeping with Dublin’s ordinance and its Neighborhood Design Guidelines all in an effort to preserve the natural character of the site for the ben-efit of the future homeowners and the surrounding neighborhoods. The residential product is anticipated to be at the higher end of the single-family residential market in this community. Community Plan VisionThis proposal looks to embrace the Dublin reputation as a premier community and build upon the foun-dational elements of the Community Plan through addressing many specific elements of the “Dublin Character” applicable to this neighborhood.Natural Features -preservation and celebration for resident use the stream corridor on the east and woodlot to the westRural Landscape – Respect for the character of Bright Road and the overall landscapeHistoric Dublin – Connection to the Scioto River (the single most important natural element that facilitat-ed the original settlement of Dublin) and the Historic Downtown, just a short walk away.Cultural Heritage - Connect to/celebrate the Hopewell Mound, the Leatherlips sculpture, the parks and riverfront.Roadway Character and Streetscapes – Preserve the Bright Road frontage character while providing for intimate interior streets, finely appointed corridors and auto courts.Parks, Reserves, Open Space – Preserved stream corridor, woodlot, wooded perimeter buffers, resi-dential courts, private landscapesEnvironmental Stewardship and Sensitivity – Minimize land disturbance thru Conservation Design, natu-rally manage stormwater, revegetate the site with strictly indigenous plantings.Quality of Life – provide for unique homes, fine living space, spectacular outdoor environments.High quality residential development – fine quality materials, stunning exterior expressions, tailored out-door private spaces/amenities. ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚEĂƌƌĂƟǀĞNeighborhood Design This proposal looks to respect the Conservation Design Ordinance and the Neighborhood design Guidelines of the city. As identified in the Community Plan, much of this site has been used in the past for agricultural and “rural residential” purposes and, as a result, a significant portion has been previously cleared and was recently occupied by a single dwelling, since demolished. This proposal assumes that the previously cleared land would be used for housing development in a way that minimizes disturbance and construction activity, speaking directly to very definition of “sustainability” in development. Home-sites are to be clustered in such a way that the existing stream corridor (Billingsley Ditch) is preserved and enhanced and its surrounding woods reserved as a natural “village park”, with soft-surface paths and casual seating areas. Further, the Western Wood, consisting largely of volunteer tree growth, will further provide for community open space and accommodate the majority of stormwater management necessary for the development. This area’s natural environment will be enhanced through thoughtful grading for stormwater management, soft-surface trail for resident daily use, reforestation with environ-mentally correct indigenous plants and a naturalized landscape. Generous and dense perimeter buf-fer areas from adjacent homesites are largely existing with stands of various mature plants and will be augmented by new native plantings. Certain of these reserves are to be placed in perpetual landscape easements that allow for connection to the street/walkway system, Billingsley Ditch corridor and the Western Wood for strolling, dog-walking, relaxing. Additionally, this casual soft-surface path system will provide for direct pedestrian connection to the Holder-Wright Earthworks and public park, access along Bright Road to Riverside Drive and the incredible parks and retail offerings there.Non-conventional streets developed are considered more as mews and less as “subdivision” streets with attention to gutters/curb details and sidewalks. Centralized auto courts clustering homesite drive-way entries, are more “piazza” than “cul-de-sac”, possibly with specialty pavement/edging. Lush, well-tailored landscape for the “civic” side of home fronts, entry, drives, walks surrounded by naturalized “na-tive” green areas of stream corridor, Western Wood, buffers, drainage ways. This community looks to be an important part of the Dublin community with a welcoming, inclusive connection to the neighborhood that blends well with the surrounding community. Development Theme As described above in different language, this new community is being planned to “fit” the site as you see it today. Circulation network and homesites are planned with respect on the existing topography with minimal earthwork anticipated. Homes will “sit upon” their site with only minimal local grading and take advantage of sloping grade to expose lower-level living spaces where practical. Considerable pe-rimeter and groupings of standing vegetation are to be preserved/enhanced to create a “park-like” char-acter of the overall community.The architecture of the site is presently thought to be classic, “nouveau-traditional” of highly detailed elevations and roofs, building elements (roof metal, chimneys, doors, wall details) in a mix of materi-als (stone, stucco, brick, board and baton, lap, slate, etc.), all as part of a “themed” yet eclectic mix of homes common by their relative sizes, roof pitch, mix of massing (garages to body to side rooms), de-fined entry with wooded Bright Road frontage. Individual homesite may include gardens, possible pool/entertainment terrace, formal entryway, garden shed/cabana, as may be desired by end buyer.It is further assumed that this development will be sold fee simple with public roads. Open spaces and landscape easements are to be controlled and enforced by an association with all that infers from a maintenance, operations and ownership standpoint. The association is to be established with al the necessary powers to enforce policies to be set forth in general terms in future stages of this plan ap-proval and thereby ensure the long-term quality described herein. It will become a destination location through its uniqueness and carry a moniker that is recognized in the community. This community has a long and rich history and culture dating back far beyond European settlement of the area. The develop-ment’s future name is to be authentically reminiscent of that.Pedestrian Realm – Specialty paved sidewalks are to be considered and walks to be provided for in one side of each street providing for pedestrian connection to/from every homesite and mail facility. The Central Court will not include a walkway since its entire installation is intended to be pedestrian accommodating given its lack of extensive vehicle traffic. Further, this court is proposed to be curb-less on its inside edge allowing for direct draining into its stormwater management devise. Addition-ally, this flush edge is proposed to be specialty paved for visitor parking street side and defines by low up-lighted masonry piers and street tree plantings. The center of the Court is to be engineered to capture/hold stormwater following rain events yet usable open space in dry conditions. The East Court is proposed to be entirely paved with “porous” paver system allowing for possible subsurface stormwater storage and controlled discharge. It too is considered for up lighted masonry piers and street tree plantings for definition.Semi-Private Space – two major semi-private open spaces are proposed within this development. First the Billingsley Run area. The creek bed itself and all existing wooded east of it are to remain in protected, reserve form. Improvements are as follows:1. limited to soft-surface trail, flat-rock crossings for foot traffic, 2. casual seating areas/furnishings in select areas and connection to the public domain of the street/walk systems thru the East Court. 3. With the possible exception of trees in dangerous condition and subject to damaging falls, this woodlot is to remain as-is and provide for the natural flora and fauna that is currently there.Second, is the West Wood. Though consisting of volunteer tree growth of a lesser quality than the Billingsley Run area, the perimeter tree and ground cover is to remain in this area. Being at the low-er end of the watershed of the site, portions of this area are to be regrading and greatly enhanced to:1. Provide for needed stormwater management, 2. Control downstream drainage discharge, 3. Selective removal of certain poor quality trees, 4. Enhance the landscape thru an intentional planting design/installation for the creation of a more manicured and usable outdoor space for the residents and neighbors alike. The storm water storage is to be accommodated in a properly and sensitively graded “dry basin” with well selected groundcovers that allow for the usage of this basin in its dry conditions, 5. Intentionally route a soft-surface trail to and through this space with connections to the devel- opment to tis east through landscape easements containing trail connections, to the southwest to Bright Road, public park, Bridge Street, riverfront and surrounding neighborhoodDevelopment AreasThis development will be a unique and distinct offering within the City of Dublin with the combination of a high-quality site and custom architecture to enhance that position. The quiet nature of this segment of Bright Road (west of the Hopewell Elementary School) and its disconnection from Riverside Drive for vehicular traffic makes this site well located for a hamlet/enclave of architecturally-controlled residences catering to the empty-nester buyer at one end of the age continuum and the dual professional income young family at the other, each looking for the conveniences and amenities of Dublin, including adjacent Bridge Park restaurants and schools/parks respectively, among many others.Public RealmStreetscape– Street Right-of Way are currently proposed to be 50’ for primary street accessing Bright Road and 40’ for the secondary local street. All turning radii are to be in compliance with Engineering and Fire Chief standards. The entire system is proposed to hold an intimate feeling with indigenous street trees, masonry piers for space definition, coordinated signage and possible specialty curb/gutter detail as approved by the City Engineer. Public open space connections are to be identified/accentuated by more detailed landscaping at the entry points from the public domain. Mostly mown lawn tree edge is anticipated with the possibility of other low shrubs/groundcovers, flowering plants in areas of special recognition (ie: intersections, court edges). This street system contains two significant spaces, including the Central Court on the west and the East Court on the east. Both are to accommodate vehicle circula-tion and homesite access but are also to be developed as meaningful public open space while serving a “showcased” function as a part of the storm drainage system . A single point of entry is proposed at Bright Road, nominally at the current driveway entrance but will create a fully functional cross intersec-tion with Grandee Cliffs Drive. The existing stand of evergreen trees is proposed to remain and to be enhanced through additional plantings and frontage board rail fence is to be repaired or replaced all with the intent of protecting/reinforcing the character of this portion of Bright Road. The entry street is to have sufficient and safe sight lines and turning radii all in keeping with Engineering standards. The entry is not thought to be conventionally designed with sign panels and exotic landscape but more authenti-cally defined but the architecture of the two “gateway” lots through elements of the house architecture as illustrated herein. This arrangement is meant to portray a sense of style to the community by show-casing the development character so immediately yet providing a sense of welcome to the public.ArchitectureSee Architectural character plan, and images herein which serve to communicate the current think-ing of the overall character of the development. While this development will be “themed” and recog-nized as a holistic place, is will not be monochromatic in from and color. The common thread with be the quality of the designed architecture, the similarity in roof pitch, a palette of high-quality mate-rials, but each home being distinguished by its own massing composition, mixture of material types, and public realm landscape. Garages are meant to be side-loading for sake of diminishing the visu-al impact of their doors, but ancillary “third car” garages may be provided but utilizing the palette of house materials and complementary massing with doors set back from the home face, should they be “front loaded”.
05/15/240 25 50 100 200N4338 Bright Road : Development Narrative (cont.)ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚEĂƌƌĂƟǀĞ;ĐŽŶƚ͘ͿOpen Space FrameworkSite Analysis/Existing Development InventoryThe existing site consists of two separate parcels both totaling 14.2 acres. The site is bound on the east by the Billingsley Run and the wooded area largely to the east of that watercourse. The west is bound by a volunteer-growth woods that contains the drainage swale that drains the major western ¾ of the site. The majority of the site and that area proposed for development is the former site of a single residence and a swimming pool, both since demolished. A small garage structure is presently the only structure that exists on-site, is in poor condition and is to be demolished. The supporting driveway to the former residence is also in poor shape and is to be demolished. The cleared site is thought to have been previously cultivated but in its more recent past was mown lawn and served as the yard space for the residence. This cleared area is to be used for homesite development.The topography of the site is slightly rolling as its’ east and west edges and the site layout reflects this lay of the land. The roadway system is proposed to lay largely “at grade” with very little earthwork need-ed. The home sites are not anticipated for over-lot grading (ie: clearing/grubbing, earth moving, etc.) but will be developed/graded individually to insure structure placement in all dimensions and proper drain-age of the sites. What existing trees that exist in this cleared area and that are in established “good” condition will be considered in building placement, orientation and grading in an effort to preserve them. Private RealmSetbacksFront Yard setbacks are set at 20’-25’ minimum dependent on street location (primary or secondary). Corner lots are to assume the front yard setbacks of each of their adjacent streets (25’setback for 50 R/W and 20’ setback for 40’ R/W). Side Yard setbacks are 7.5’ minimum with rear yards at 50’. Lots on the “perimeter” of the site, adjacent to surrounding existing neighborhoods are to have a described and protected no-build landscape easement that protects the existing plant material, allows sufficient space to augment that planting zone and restricts any homeowner from adversely affecting this zone, all for sake of privacy for residents on BOTH sides of the property line and tree preservation. The protection of these easements are to be enforced by the HOA and established through land title.Entry and ArrivalAll homes are to address their frontage street/court with prominence. Driveway access to garages are not to dominate the character of this statement but will provide that access way for residents and visi-tors to enter the homesites in an intentional way with proper detailing of this more public portion of the drive and provide for an attractive and meaningful walkway connection to the home entry. Each home-site will have a well detailed front yard with entry garden that defines the semi-private space of the yard through plantings, walls/piers, fencing segments and other devised to add to the character of the home, all in keeping with the materials/detailing of that home. Private realmRear yards and appropriate portions of certain side yards are meant to be an extension of the interior “living space” of the homes. It is envisioned that each home will have well-articulated outdoor terrace/dining space, gathering areas with possible pool and/or spa, architecturally correct overhead structures such as trellises or pergolas. Manicured lawn and gardens (formal, cutting, Vegetable, herb) are also anticipated. Certain “perimeter” lots will take advantage of the topography of the site and the natural features in “blending” these yard spaces into this existing environment without the conventional “back-yard” feel. Auxiliary structures may also be considered, all within keeping of setbacks and architectural character of the home, for cabana/pool house, dining gazebo, secondary garage depending on the de-sires of the individual homeowner. Lot CoverageSee Conceptual Lot Plan. These lots are classified as “Manor lots” as described in the Neighborhood Design Guidelines. No lot is to more than 45% coverage throughout the development with most lots be-ing considerably less due to lot size, topography and landscape easements. The individual lot configu-rations are largely influenced by this topography and natural features. Setbacks are in keeping with the minimums stated herein, however each home is to be specifically sited and architectural massing, ma-terials, orientation, etc. to be strictly controlled by the builder. Lots will not be sold as “blanks” as in con-ventional subdivisions but will be sold with homes only, all custom built to reflect Owner’s preferences and sited in composition with the surroundings/neighboring homes.Existing Zoning and Land UseCurrently this project site is zoned R-1 and the proposed rezoning is to Planned Development. Currently this site is vacant, most recent past a single resident usage. Surrounding areas are residential uses, R-1 zoning with the exception of the public park south of Bright Road at the SW corner of this develop-ment site.Existing Vegetation InventorySee Tree Survey herein. The tree survey has been focused on the West Area (West Wood) and the East Area (Billingsley Run area west of the stream and the development area at the center of the proj-ect). Certain areas have not been surveyed since NO trees are proposed to be removed. Those areas include the wooded perimeter along Bright Road, the northern property line, the southwestern “flag” connecting to Bright Road and the entire area east of Billingsley Run where no development is pro-posed. As previously stated, the west area is largely comprised of volunteer growth and of limited qual-ity. Of the surveyed trees in that area (trees over 6” caliper, 162 trees in total this area) only 27% have been classified as “Good” by the arborist. Those surveyed in the East Area (trees over 6” caliper, 86 trees total this area), 39% have been classified as “Good”. Individual trees within this development zone are to be closely located for sake of preservation through the further planning stage.Topography and HydrologicBillingsley Run and its surrounding tree stand is the east boundary of the site. Floodway and Stream Corridor Protection Zone are shown in the plan attachments herein and are to be respected relative to building placement and grading operations. The site consists of two watersheds with their bound-ary roughly along the existing residential drive, however BOTH watersheds ultimately find themselves draining to a common outfall at the Scioto River. Preliminary Development Plan phase Engineering will further define the stormwater management of the overall site but the current proposal suggests that por-tions of the western woods be utilized for that management and that area post-construction to serve as a meaningful community open space. See further description of this space herein.Transportation & AccessAccess to the site from the public R/W is from bright Road and at the intersection of Bright and Gran-dee Cliffs Drive. This access to and through the site is proposed to be public R/W and appropriately designed to meet the requirements of the city. No public transit facilities exist to and directly adjacent to this site. Existing Public UtilitiesBoth public Sanitary Sewer and Water systems exist adjacent to the site along Bright Road. These two systems will be tapped for service to the development. The capacity, condition and exact locations are to be determined in the Engineering phase for the Preliminary development Plan. On-site stormwater management is to be provided for with exact discharge point(s) determined through further Engineer-ing study. There is limited evidence of a Storm Sewer in the Bright Road corridor at the SW corner of the development site that may serve as a connection point. Once again its exact location, condition and capacity is to be determined. Further, the west watershed currently drains through a swale channel to the west and ultimately to the Scioto River. The future of that channel as a designed drainage way for all or portions of this development’s drainage is to be determined but at no time will excess drainage be imparted to the downstream properties.Historic & Cultural AssetsWhile more research into the history of this site is forthcoming, no immediately known historic or cultur-ally significant aspects are known. It is broadly understood that this entire area (riverfront and Dublin area as a whole) was occupied by successive generations of Native peoples and early European set-tlers. Additional understandings are to be determined as this process moves forward. However, this development recognizes the significance of the adjacent publicly accessible park facilities on the Earth-works park, Scioto Park/Leatherlips Monuments that all are in short walking distance to/from this devel-opment and walking trails are to be provided on-site for their access.
171’359’PROJECT BOUNDARYPROJECT BOUNDARYPROPERTY LINE650’3333334445555505/15/240 25 50 100 200NBRIGHT ROADBRIGHT ROAD4338 Bright Road : Existing ConditionsUTILITY INDEX'.'%64+% 5#0+6#4; 5614/9#6'4 2HOLDER-WRIGHT EARTHWORKS - USE CODE 640HOPEWELL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - USE CODE 650STREAM CORRIDOR PROTECTION ZONE 14.2 ACRESEXISTINGHOUSES - R1EXISTINGHOUSES - R190’599’272’EXISTINGHOUSES - R1EXISTINGHOUSES - R1EXISTINGHOUSES - R1337’179’SWALE546’SWALE261’651’EXISTINGSTRUCTURE1333333444LEGEND ':+56+0) #52*#.6 &4+8'9#; #&,#%'06 *1/'5+6' Ä 4 ':+56+0) 64''.+0' 911&'& #4'# 12'0 )4#55 /'#&19 (.11&2.#+0 61 $' 2416'%6'&12345EXISTINGHOUSES - R1INVENTORIED TREES
111678905/15/240 25 50 100 200NBRIGHT ROADBRBBBBBBBBBBBBRIGBRIGBRIGBRIGBRIGBRIGBRIGBRIGBRIGBRIGBRIGBRIGBRIGBRIGHHHTHTHT HT RHT RHT RHT RHT RHT ROOOAD1111114338 Bright Road : Existing Conditions (Images)12233445578910610
05/15/240 25 50 100 200N4338 Bright Road : Existing Conditions (Tree Survey)EXISTINGTREES TO REMAINEXISTINGTREES TO REMAINEXISTINGTREES TO REMAINEXISTING TREES ALONG ROADWAY TO REMAINEXISTING TREES ALONG ROADWAY TO REMAINEXISTING TREES ALONG PROPERTY LINE TO REMAIN
05/15/240 25 50 100 200NBright RoadPRELIMINARY UTILITY EXHIBITPRELIMINARY UTILITY EXHIBIT4338 Bright RoadGRAPHIC SCALE01 inch = 60 feet12030 604338 Bright Road : Existing Conditions (Preliminary Utilities)
2222222222255444405/15/240 25 50 100 200N4338 Bright Road : Framework PlanSINGLE POINT OF ACCESSHOLDER-WRIGHT EARTHWORKS - USE CODE 640HOPEWELL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - USE CODE 650GREEN SPACE PRESERVEDCONNECTION TO PARK TO THE SOUTH HANNA HILLS DRIVEHANNA HILLS DRIVELEGEND 12'0 52#%' 4'5'48'& 5614/9#6'4 &'6'06+10 #4'# &'8'.12/'06 <10' .#0&5%#2' $7(('4 +06'40#. 564''6 #0& 5+&'9#.- %1746 5614/9#6'4 &'6'06+1012345EXISTINGHOUSES - R113333333
05/15/240 25 50 100 200N4338 Bright Road : Concept Plan40’ ROW40’ ROW50’ ROW40’ ROW100’90’90’90’90’90’100’140’100’100’90’120’120’145’103’105’
70’110’60’40’80’80’130’30’ EASEMENT30’ EASEMENT30’ LANDSCAPE BUFFER30’ LANDSCAPE BUFFER85’30’ EASEMENT140’30’80’30’ LANDSCAPE BUFFERBRIGHT ROADGRANDEE CLIFFS DRIVEHOLDER-WRIGHTEARTHWORKSHOPEWELL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL130’116’SITE DATA616#. 5+6' #% 12'0 52#%'
9'56 911&5 #% $+..+0)5.'; 470 #% %'064#. %1746 #% .#0&5%#2'$7(('45 #% &'6'06+10 $#5+0 #%
108’OPENSPACE CENTRAL COURTOPEN SPACE WEST WOOD W/ STORMWATER DETENTIONOPEN SPACE BILLINGSLEY RUN110’115’
DISCHARGEPOINTDISCHARGEPOINT05/15/240 25 50 100 200N4338 Bright Road : Concept Plan (Stormwater Drainage System)BRIGHT ROADBRIGHT ROADGRANDEE CLIFFS DRIVEHOLDER-WRIGHTEARTHWORKSHOPEWELL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLSTORAGESTORAGE6൹%6൹5)൵&൶6725൵*൶
05/15/240 25 50 100 200N4338 Bright Road : Concept Plan (Water Utilities)BRIGHT ROADBRIGHT ROADGRANDEE CLIFFS DRIVEHOLDER-WRIGHTEARTHWORKSHOPEWELL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLCONNECTIONTO MAINCONNECTIONTO MAINHOUSESERVICE (TYP)HYDRANT
05/15/240 25 50 100 200N4338 Bright Road : Concept Plan (Sanitary Utilities)BRIGHT ROADBRIGHT ROADGRANDEE CLIFFS DRIVEHOLDER-WRIGHTEARTHWORKSHOPEWELL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLCONNECTIONTO MAINCONNECTIONTO MAINHOUSESERVICE (TYP)MAIN LINE EXTENSION
BRIGHT ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD10 MAY 2024JONESROUGH DRAFTSTREETSCAPE & SITE PLAN
BRIGHT ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD10 MAY 2024JONESROUGH DRAFTEXTERIOR INSPIRATION THE ARCHITECTURAL AND STYLISTIC GOALS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE DERIVED FROM SOME OF OUR FAVORITE TOWNS IN THE REGION. WE HOPE TO CAPITALIZE ON THE DOMESTIC SCALE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS JUST A COUPLE DOZEN HOMES. WE THINK THE COMMUNITY CAN RETAIN A DELIGHTFUL SCALE WITH A MASSING STRATEGY THAT RETAINS ONE AND ONE-AND-A HALF STORY BUILDING ELEMENTS THAT UTILIZE CONSISTENT DETAILING OF ROOF PITCHES, WINDOW FENESTRATION, EAVE DETAILS, COLORS AND ENTRANCE PIECES. USING A LIMITED PALETTE OF MATERIALS, YET COMBINING THEM IN CREATIVE WAYS MIGHT PROVIDE THE BASIS FOR MIMICKING THE VILLAGES AND ENCLAVES OF AN EARLIER PERIOD WHERE THERE SIMPLY WEREN’T AS MANY VARIED CHOICES.THE REFERENCE IMAGES WE HAVE BEGUN TO COLLECT COME FROM SOME OF OUR OWN PROJECTS BUT ALSO ARE DRAWN FROM OTHER SOURCES. THESE ARE BY NO MEANS CONCLUSIVE, BUT RATHER BEGIN TO ESTABLISH A VOCABULARY FOR THE STYLISTIC DIRECTIONS WE MIGHT IMAGINE THE HOMES TAKING.
BRIGHT ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD10 MAY 2024JONESROUGH DRAFTEXTERIOR INSPIRATION
BRIGHT ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD10 MAY 2024JONESROUGH DRAFTEXTERIOR INSPIRATION THE GENERAL STRATEGY FOR OUR DESIGN DIRECTION IS FOUND IN LOCAL RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS FOUND IN OUR REGION A CENTURY AGO. FROM SUBURBAN EXAMPLES IN DUBLIN, TO UPPER ARLINGTON, BEXLEY, AND POCKETS OF THE CITY...WE SEE FORMS AND MASSING STRATEGIES THAT HAVE A FOCUS AND CLARITY OF ‘PARTS’. WE THINK FOCUSING STRONG ATTENTION ON THE DELICATE SCALE OF SOME OF THESE HISTORIC ANTECEDENTS COULD BE INFORMING AS WE ATTEMPT OR CREATE A NEW NEIGHBORHOOD WITH STYLISTIC CLARITY WHILE DEVELOPING CONTINUITY BUT AVOIDING MONOTONY. WHILE THE IDENTIFIED PROGRAM FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL BEGIN WITH A SIMPLE TYPOLOGY OF A FEW PLAN TYPES, IT IS ACKNOWLEDGED THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO VARY THE TYPES WITH GARAGE CONDITIONS, HOUSE ORIENTATION AND MATERIALITY. WE ENVISION A VARIETY OF MATERIALS, BUT WE ALSO IMAGINE SOME VERY CONSISTENT ROOF PITCHES AND EAVE CONDITIONS. THE HOMES WILL BE DESIGNED TO BE ‘4-SIDED ARCHITECTURE’ AND WILL AVOID BLANK FACADES ON ANY ELEVATION.
BRIGHT ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD10 MAY 2024JONESROUGH DRAFTEXTERIOR INSPIRATION AS REFERENCED IN SOME OF THE IMAGES WE ENVISION A MIX OF STONE, STUCCO, BRICK, AND SIDING(CEMENTIIOUS) USED IN TRADITIONAL METHODS. WE ENVISION A LIMITED PALETTE TENDING TOWARD LIGHT VALUES FOR THE WALL PLANES AND DARKER VALUES FOR WINDOWS, DOORS, AND ACCENT PIECES. ROOF- THE ROOFS WILL BE A 40-YEAR ARCHITECTURAL GRADE ASPHALT SHINGLE OF A CONSISTENT SPECIFICATION TO MIMIC A TRADITIONAL SLATE ROOF. WALLS- THE WALLS WILL BE THINSET BRICK OR STONE WITH A COLORED MORTAR, OR PAINTED BRICK OR CEMENT BOARD. GUTTERS/DOWNSPOUTS- WE ARE PLANNING ON UTILIZING 1/2 ROUND GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS TO REINFORCE THE HISTORIC INSPIRATIONS IN THE DETAILS. SHUTTERS- WHEN USED, SHUTTERS WILL BE SPECIFIED TO COVER THE OPENINGS IN WHICH THEY FLANK. DECORATIVE HARDWARE SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED TO HINT AT THE IDEA THEY COULD BE OPERABLE BUT IT IS NOT REQUIRED THEY OPERATE. EXTERIOR LIGHTING- IT IS OUR INTENT TO SPECIFY JUST A FEW FIXTURES THAT WILL SUPPORT THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE. THERE WILL BE AN ATTEMPT TO MANAGE THE USE OF ‘ECCENTRIC EXPRESSIONS’ IN THE LIGHTING STRATEGIES FOR THE PRIVATE RESIDENCES. SITE FEATURES WILL ALSO UTILIZE FIXTURES CONSISTENT WITH THE RESIDENCES.
BRIGHT ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD10 MAY 2024JONESROUGH DRAFTEXTERIOR INSPIRATION ONE OF THE GOALS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS THE SENSITIVE GRADING STRATEGY AND THE ‘LOW IMPACT’ TO REWORKING THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY. SOME OF OUR REFERENCE IMAGES SHARE NOTIONS ABOUT STREET SIDE FENCES, WALLS, HEDGES, AND WALLS. WE IMAGINE THIS EDGE-CONDITION TO THE PRIMARY STREET WILL BECOME A SPECIFICATION THAT MIGHT VARY FROM HOME TO HOME, BUT WOULD BE A CONTINUOUS THREAD THAT KNITS THE HOMES TOGETHER.
BRIGHT ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD10 MAY 2024JONESROUGH DRAFTEXTERIOR INSPIRATION
BRIGHT ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD10 MAY 2024JONESROUGH DRAFTEXTERIOR INSPIRATION THIS BOOK HAS BEEN AN INSPIRATION TO THE OWNERSHIP TEAM AND PROVIDES US AS ARCHITECTS WITH SOME OVER-ARCHING GOALS FOR SETTING AND DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SMALL-SCALE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT IS A VALUABLE REFERENCE FOR STRATEGIES OF PLANNING AND DESIGN, AS WELL AS THE ACTIVATION OF THE PUBLIC SPACES AND LINKAGES TO A LARGER CONTEXT. WE IMAGINE THE STYLISTIC EXPRESSION OF THE RESIDENT VOCABULARY MAKING IT’S WAY INTO ALL OF THE SITE INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE FORM OF PIERS, LIGHTS, PAVILIONS, PATHS, MAILBOXES, SIGNAGE AND THE LIKE.
Page 36 of 40
16. Concept Review Plans (for reference) The following information is a summary from the Concept Review phase of this project’s process, dated 5/15/24 and Planning & Zoning Commission Hearing dated 6/20/24. In addition to the narrative, plans and other supporting graphics submitted above for review, we are herein summarizing portions, in direct quotation and/or paraphrased summary of the Meeting Minutes prepared by Staff, of Commission comments, Public comments, Commission questions and discussions among Commission Members and with the Applicant. Additionally, Applicant is providing brief “responses” to each of these items, where appropriate, demonstrating understanding and consideration of all through written descriptions supported by the narratives, standards and descriptions submitted as a part of this Preliminary
Development Plan and Preliminary Plat. This summary information is provided as a convenience to the
Staff, Commission and the public as they consider the merits of this proposed development.
Staff Presentation
x Project site is currently located within the Suburban Rural Residential Land Use designation,
according to the current Community Plan.
o Agreed
x Project site is within the Residential, Low Density Future Land Use designation within the
Envision Dublin Community Plan that is now in the adoption process.
o Agreed
x Proposal will require rezoning to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) that includes 20 single-
family lots on the 14 acre site, 1.4 du/ac.
o Agreed
x There is a focal point with Lot #7 that may need to be addressed
o Current layout has modified lot layout in this area in response to Commission and
neighborhood comments. However, the “focal point” of the Main Drive alignment is to be
addressed by a landscape feature in keeping with the development character to terminate
the view.
x The development is eligible for the Conservation Design Resolution.
o Agreed and is being pursued
x The development will also need to follow the Neighborhood Design Guidelines
o Agreed and is being pursued
x The stormwater detention would result in the removal of some of the tree canopy
o Agreed, yet the detention area in the West Wood is being carefully and strategically located,
configured and graded to impact as FEW “Good” trees as possible with the majority of trees
being impacted/removed are of “Fair” or “Poor” quality.
Commission Questions
Mr. Way
Requesting additional description of the stormwater detention proposed in the West Wood area. Inquired if
the area would include intentional stormwater retention areas.
x This area will provide both stormwater management and public open space. The detention area will not
only satisfy the management needs of the entire development but will also over-compensate for storage
from the free-draining neighborhood to the north, which currently passes thru the development site. This
storage area will be in a “dry basin” with a controlled release devise discharging into the currently utilized
Page 37 of 40
outflow swale running west to the river. The basin is to be configured, graded and landscaped to be an integral part of this West Wood area, being developed at a publicly-used park, complete with amenities for users. See attached development plans for a graphic depiction of this space. Center Court to incorporate a roundabout drive or if it could have a road on only one side. It could be improved by having less concrete or asphalt. Intention of Center Court for stormwater detention. x The Central Court continues to have a publicly-dedicated drive on all sides. This condition, along with the internal roadway/walkway system, provides for pedestrian and bicycle user access to the functional community green space it provides. However, it is desired that the west leg of this court roadway system
be as modest in width (servicing only TWO homesites) as is practical for vehicle/safety vehicle usage. The
current proposal suggests a flush curb on the inside of this loop, paver parking “pads” for visitor parking
on this side (without having to increase road width unnecessarily), encouraging direct pedestrian access
to the open space but providing for proper radius dimensions of fire vehicle function. Agreed on the latter
point of less pavement! Always the goal! Furthermore, the Central Court is no longer to be used for
stormwater management, but strictly as public community open space.
x Perimeter trees in the West Wood (in Fair and Good condition) are intended as a landscape buffer and
will be protected at the drip line of those trees.
o Yes! The level of tree removal and the basin layout/grading will be dictated by storage
demands as required by Engineering. And the quality of trees to be considered in that effort,
part of Final Engineering of the storm system. No more trees than are necessary for this
system are proposed for removal and all remaining trees will be properly protected per
sound arboriculture practices.
Ms. Harter
If the detention area is to be usable greenspace, would the grasses be coarse and less friendly play area?
x Current thinking for the basin is that it would have a planted bottom/sides for erosion protection. Further,
there may be other plantings incorporated to help naturalize the area (ie: trees/shrubs that don’t
adversely effect storage volumes), diversify the plant community and add to the aesthetics of the entire
area. It is not anticipated that this area be manicured lawn requiring regular mowing due to its water
storage function which may leave the bottom wet for some period of time after a rain event. But, this area
will certainly be available to wildlife, pet usage, and general “passive” park functions, aesthetics and
amenities.
Sidewalk on one side of the interior street be wider than a typical walk?
x Presently, the sidewalk is proposed as 4’ wide and built of specialty pavement (brick, precast concrete)
to better blend with the intent and character of the development (intimate streetscapes, homes closer to
the street, rich materials, “hamlet” character vs “subdivision”). This provides for more green areas in the
streetscapes vs pavement that is unnecessary. Given the modest scope of the development (only 20
homesites), a single sidewalk will provide pedestrian access from/to every lot and destination, especially
given the extremely low traffic volumes in and around the development making casual street crossing
very easy. This system of roads/walks is not interconnected to other surrounding developments
(surrounded by built-out neighborhoods), thereby eliminating any off-site traffic. If additional width
and/or walks are to be required, pavement materials will likely revert to cast-in-place concrete, due to
project budget.
Page 38 of 40
Will garages be 3-car and side-loaded? x Attached or detached garages will be 2, 2.5 and 3-car in size are intended to be side loaded as the preferred orientation and/or will be oriented to minimize garage door exposure to/from adjacent streets. Lot layout of this development is unconventional due to natural areas being preserved, drainage/floodway, existing trees and site topography dictating that house/garage layout, placement, orientation will be customized and sensitive to all of those conditions on a per-lot basis. Additionally, some homesites may contain auxiliary, additional-car free-standing garages as well. Development Standards to dictate placements and orientation.
Homes to have individualized landscape, a type of green architecture?
x Yes. The public realm of this development os paramount to its character. The streetscape, home
placement, front yard/entry zone are all to work in concert to create the intimate village feel.
Development Standards speak to the front entry zone, yard landscape, lighting, semi-private enclosure
(low hedge, wall, fence). Each house to have landscape design reflective/supportive of the architecture
and vice versa.
Mr Alexander
Some traditional rear-yard recreation space is being sacrificed to have more frontage
x No. The front setback is proposed to be 15’ and R/W throughout most of the development to be 40’ for
sake of 1. Intimacy of streetscape (see above) and 2. Provide for more rear yard for recreation/social life,
gardens, drainage, screening if desired. Typical Lot diagrams herein illustrate the special qualities of
those areas.
Mr Chinnock
A bikepath is indicated in the Billingsley Run area.
x No. At Concept Review stage, a soft-surface trail was considered through this area. But, given the
environmental sensitivity of this area, its flood prone conditions and desire to preserve every tree in this
street corridor and along the north side of Bright Road, even this soft-surface trail is being eliminated and
the entire area is to be left in its current condition.
Agreed, no need to provide connection from soft-surface trial. Similar trail indicated in the West Wood.
x Agreed that soft-surface trail on the east side of the development is no longer proposed. The trail in the
West Wood, an intentional passive park space by this proposal, will have that trail lead to Bright Road for
direct access to the Wright- Holder Park on the south side of Bright Road. It is important to note that
Bright Road is NO LONGER connected to Riverside Drive, there are only SEVEN single family homes west
of Grandee Cliffs Drive that utilize Bright Road for access to their homes and a 25 MPH post speed
resulting in a very low traffic volume which allows for ease of safe crossing access to the Wright-Holder
Park.
Mr Deschler
Central Court to be a mowed areas or include some stormwater management?
Page 39 of 40
x The current proposal eliminates stormwater management from this area and reserves it as more manicured and usable public open space. Possible for Central Court to be manicured space? x Yes! See above. It is preferable to avoid need for homeowner variances later to add rear yard structures. x Agreed. Development Standards accommodate such structures and the Typical Lot diagrams included
herein demonstrate this private space layout.
Why 20 homesites vs 14?
x This proposal preserves naturalized open spaces as is possible, trees on edges,
accommodates/manages on and off-site drainage and embeds public-use space within the
development. Further, homesites proposed are “estate” size, meeting the market demand for this
housing type. 20 homesites “fit” comfortably into this development zone and project economics require
this number of lots.
Ms Call
How will you treat Lot #7 at the terminus of street entry?
x Current layout has modified lot layout in this area in response to Commission and neighborhood
comments. However, the “focal point” of the Main Drive alignment is to be addressed by a landscape
feature in keeping with the development character to terminate the view.
Public Comment
John Rahm
Biggest concern are the 7 homesites along the north boundary “in a straight line”. Consider larger lots there
providing more greenspace.
x Agreed. Current plan has removed one lot along this line, increased depth of those lots remaining and
have reconfigured the street alignment and lot lines to eliminate the straight line geometry of the Concept
Plan. Further, the Applicant has met with Mr Rahm and other on his neighbors to address this and other
issue and have gained their support.
Randy Roth
Thanked the Applicant for meeting with the East Dublin Civic Association in May, 2024 and several times with
association officers. One concern was landscaping along the development’s north property line. Very happy
with proposed landscape and existing fence repair along Bright Road. Turning undevelopable areas into an
amenity for residents and neighbors is generous. He has seen much enthusiasm for this project.
x Agreed. Current plan has addressed the concerns of Mr Roth and the association. See above response.
Applicant appreciates the attention paid and great comments given by the association and neighbors.
The over-riding goal of this development is to fit into and elevate the neighborhood that it is to be a part of.
Page 40 of 40
Commission Discussion Mr Chinnock Very nice use of site. Appreciates Applicant meeting with neighbors, very good job in creating a plan that will fit the site, greenspace is great. Inspirational architecture is beautiful, wants to make sure it blends with surrounding area. Understands the economics that drive the ned for 20 lots, applicant’s vision makes sense of the space. Mr Deschler
Supportive of the proposed use and building materials. Believes Central Court open space should not be
used for stormwater detention purposes. Recommends to alleviate straight row of houses along north
perimeter. Perhaps some homes can have walk-out level, some variation to the look.
Mr Alexander
Very supportive, even enthusiastic about the plan. Less concerned about architecture matching the
surrounding neighborhood, which were built at a different time. Creating community is more valuable.
Central Court to be more about usable public space.
Mr Way
Very exciting proposal, great example of city’s Conservation Design Guidelines implemented, responsive to
sensitive nature of the site. Encouraged preservation of trees and sufficient setback on north edge of the site.
Hopeful that Applicant and neighbors can work out something to meet that intent. Applicant should look at
facing homes to Bright Road, not disengaging from it, creating an urban design feel to the development could
be spectacular.
Ms Harter
Supportive of the proposal, appreciates Applicant meeting with the association, encourage to keep the green
tree look along Bright Road, even the brown fence. Appreciates Applicants efforts to use landscape and
architecture to create outdoor living space.
Ms Call
Look for lot deletion on center section and along “back section” (north boundary?). This is a beautiful project-
not what we see everyday.
Page 1 of 40
Bright Road Reserve
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
CITY OF DUBLIN, OHIO
January 17, 2025
Landowner: Developer:
DNS Trust, Sally S. Haimbaugh, Trustee
9449 Cape Wrath Drive
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Phone: 614.499.4466
Contact: Sally S Haimbaugh
4338 Bright Road Partners, LLC
8824 Dunsinane Drive
Dublin, Ohio 43017
Phone: 614.286.5753
Contact: William H. Adams, Managing Partner
Legal:
Engineering:
Plank Law Firm, LPA
411 East Town Street
Columbus Ohio 43215
Phone: 614.221.4255
Contact: Don Plank
Advanced Civil Design
781 Science Blvd, Suite 100
Gahanna, Ohio 43230
Phone: 614.793.8777
Contact: Thomas M. Warner
Land Planning/Landscape Architecture:
Architecture:
MKSK
462 South Ludlow Alley
Columbus, Ohio 43215
Phone: 614.621.2796
Contact: Brian P. Kinzelman
The Jones Studio
503 City Park Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43215
Phone: 614.358.3729
Contact: Brian Kent Jones
Page 2 of 40
CONTENTS Page
Section A: Project Narrative ……………………………………………………………………………………… 4
Section B: Site Description
1. Property Location and Size ....................................................................................... 7
2. Character & Surrounding Uses .................................................................................. 7
3. Land Uses ............................................................................................................... 7
4. Open Space & Natural Features ................................................................................ 8
5. Provision of Utilities ................................................................................................. 8
6. Access and Circulation ............................................................................................ 9
7. Architecture ............................................................................................................ 9
Section C: Development Standards
1. Permitted Uses ...................................................................................................... 10
2. Density .................................................................................................................. 10
3. Lot Standards ........................................................................................................ 10
4. Streets, Access and Connectivity ............................................................................ 13
5. Utilities ................................................................................................................. 14
6. Open Space ........................................................................................................... 15
7. Tree Preservation, Removal and Replacement ......................................................... 16
8. Architecture .......................................................................................................... 17
9. Landscape ............................................................................................................ 19
10. Homeowners’ Association ...................................................................................... 20
11. Ownership & Maintenance ..................................................................................... 20
Page 3 of 40
Section D: Exhibits
1. Title Sheet/Vicinity Map/Regional Context Map ........................................................ 21
2. Existing Conditions Plan ......................................................................................... 22
3. Preliminary Plat/Development Plan ........................................................................ .23
4. Utility Plan .................................................................................................. …. …….24
5. Grading and Drainage Plan……………………………………………………….……………………....25
6. Vehicle Tracking Exhibit…………………………………………………………………………………….26
7. Open Space Framework & Connectivity Plan ............................................................. 27
8. Tree Survey .............................................................................................................. 28
9. Tree Data ................................................................................................................ 29
10. Landscape Plan ....................................................................................................... 30
11. Illustrative Plan ........................................................................................................ 31
12. Typical Lot Plans ..................................................................................................... 32
13. Street Section/Elevation ........................................................................................... 33
14. Lot Layout Diagrams/Character Images……………………………………………………………….34
15. Open Space Enlargement ......................................................................................... 35
16. Concept Review Plans (for reference) ........................................................................ 36
Page 4 of 40
SECTION A: PROJECT NARRATIVE
The City of Dublin has become one of the finest communities in the country in which to live, work and
socialize. Central Ohio as a whole is experiencing a significant demand for all levels of housing and Dublin is
not immune to these needs. This development, though modest in size, looks to satisfy the desire of many to
join in to the Dublin community and, those that have been here for years, to remain here as a vital part of the
community that they helped to build.
This development will be a unique and distinct offering within the City of Dublin with the combination of a
high-quality site and custom architecture to enhance that position. The quiet nature of this segment of Bright
Road (west of the Hopewell Elementary School) and its disconnection from Riverside Drive for vehicular
traffic makes this site well suited for a hamlet/enclave of architecturally-controlled residences, not a
conventional subdivision. It must and will provide for all of the safety, security and mobility needs of the
community but should not be evaluated the same as much larger developments in very different settings. Its
modest size and limited development site ensures a small number of homesites with a small population.
This development is surrounded by established neighborhoods with no through connections to those
adjacent neighborhoods by motor vehicle, bicycle or on foot. As such, wide streets are unnecessary since no
through-traffic exists. Dual wide sidewalks and multi-use trails are unnecessary since no through
connections for bicycles or pedestrians exist outside of the main street connection to Bright Road. This
“dead end” infill site makes it the perfect opportunity for the quiet, intimate character community that is
envisioned. It is to be a planned development, designed to fit the site it is to occupy.
This community will likely cater to the empty-nester buyer at one end of the age continuum and the dual
professional income young family at the other, each looking for the conveniences and amenities of Dublin,
including adjacent Bridge Park restaurants and schools/parks respectively, among many others. This
proposed development looks to embrace the Dublin reputation as a premier community and build upon the
foundational elements of the Community Plan through addressing many specific elements of the “Dublin
Character” applicable to this neighborhood.
• Natural Features - Preservation and celebration for resident enjoyment the stream corridor on
the east and woodlot to the west.
• Rural Landscape – Respect and preserve the character of Bright Road and the overall landscape.
• Historic Dublin – Connection to the Scioto River (the single most important natural element that
facilitated the original settlement of Dublin) and the Historic Downtown, just a short walk away.
• Cultural Heritage - Connect to/celebrate the Holder-Wright Earthworks Park, the Leatherlips
sculpture/Scioto Park, the other parks and riverfront offerings.
• Roadway Character and Streetscapes – Provide for intimate-scaled interior streetscapes with
front-facing homes along the line streets segments, minimal R/W width allowing for more
intimate corridor dimensions, less pavements, less walkways while insuring connectivity of all,
robust street trees and manicured entry spaces, intentionally deviated from conventional
subdivision character/scale and showcasing high-quality architectural style and landscapes.
“More green, less gray.”
• Parks, Reserves, Open Space – Preserved stream corridor and woods, public spaces, wooded
perimeter buffers, residential courts, private landscapes.
• Environmental Stewardship and Sensitivity – Minimize land disturbance through Conservation
Design, naturally manage stormwater, revegetate the site with indigenous plantings.
Page 5 of 40
• Quality of Life – Provide unique homes, fine living space, spectacular outdoor environments and
help satisfy community housing needs.
• High quality residential development – Fine quality materials, stunning architecture, tailored
outdoor private spaces/amenities.
Neighborhood Design - This development will respect the Conservation Design Ordinance and the
Neighborhood Design Guidelines of the city. Much of this site has been used in the past for agricultural and
“rural residential” purposes and, as a result, a significant portion has been previously cleared and was
recently occupied by a single dwelling, since demolished. This development assumes that the previously
cleared land would be used for housing in a way that minimizes disturbance and construction activity.
Homesites are to be clustered in such a way that the existing stream corridor (Billingsley Run and tributary) is
preserved/enhanced and its surrounding woods preserved.
Streets are considered more as “mews” and less as “subdivision roads” with attention to details. The
streetscape is intended to have an intimate feeling with indigenous street trees, possibly masonry piers for
space definition, coordinated signage and other specialty details as approved by the City of Dublin Engineer.
Open space connections are to be identified/accentuated by more detailed and intentional landscape at the
entry points from the public domain. The Central Court on the west and the East Court on the east will
provide for homesite driveway entries as well as meaningful public open space. The Central Court will
include a flush edge and low up-lighted masonry piers, and tree plantings. Well-tailored landscapes for the
“civic” side of home fronts will include entry zones, drives, walks and gardens in contrast to the naturalized
“native” green areas of stream corridor, West Wood, buffers and drainageways. This community looks to be
welcoming and inclusive with connection to the surrounding community at the Bright Road entry.
Specialty paved sidewalks are to be considered and walks to be provided on one side of each street providing
for pedestrian connection to/from every homesite, public space and postal facility
Open Space Framework - Two major public open spaces are proposed, including the Billingsley Run and
West Wood areas. The Billingsley creek bed itself and all existing woods surrounding it are to remain in
protected Reserve form. The West Wood will provide for stormwater management, being at the lower end of
the watershed of the site and is defined by preserved trees along its entire perimeter. This area will be
enhanced by plantings to create outdoor space for the enjoyment of residents and neighbors alike. The
stormwater storage is to be accommodated in a sensitively graded “dry basin” with well selected
groundcovers that allow for the usage of this basin in dry conditions.
Public Realm - All homes are to address their frontage street/court with prominence. Driveway access to
garages is not to dominate the character of this statement but will provide that access way for residents and
visitors to enter the homesites in an intentional way with proper detailing of this more public portion of the
drive and provide for an attractive and meaningful walkway connection to the home entry. Driveways and
entry walkways may be constructed partially or wholly of concrete, brick or stone, dependent upon the
individual home design and materials palette. Each home is custom leading to possible variation of materials
home to home. Each homesite will have a well detailed front yard that may include an entry garden that
defines the semi-private space of the yard through foundation plantings, hedges, walls/piers, fencing
segments and other devices to add to the character of the home, all in keeping with the materials/detailing of
that home. Locations of possible front yard Improvements to be as described in Section C: Development
Standards. Character images are included herein to aid in communicating design intent of these custom and
uniquely designed homes and landscapes. Certain “outside corner” lots of irregular geometry may have
homes sited further setback from the frontage street to take better advantage of lot dimensions, adjacent
natural/green areas, increased privacy of outdoor spaces. Lots on the “perimeter” of the site, adjacent to
existing neighborhoods are to have a protected landscape easement to preserve existing trees, allow
Page 6 of 40
sufficient space to augment that area with additional planting and restricts homeowners from adversely
affecting this buffer, all for sake of the privacy of residents on BOTH sides of the property line. The protection
of these easements is to be managed and enforced by the HOA.
Private Realm - Rear yards and appropriate portions of certain side yards are meant to be an extension of the
interior “living space” of the homes. It is envisioned that each home will have well-articulated outdoor
terrace/dining space, gathering areas with possible pool and/or spa, architecturally correct overhead
structures such as trellises or pergolas. Manicured lawns and gardens (formal, cutting, vegetable, herb) are
also anticipated, as may be desired by the individual homeowners. Certain “perimeter” lots will take
advantage of the topography of the site and the natural features in visually “blending” these yard spaces into
this existing environment without the conventional “backyard” feel. Auxiliary structures may also be
considered, all within keeping of setbacks and architectural character of the home, for cabana/pool house,
dining gazebo, secondary garage, depending on the desires of the individual homeowner.
Page 7 of 40
SECTION B: SITE DESCRIPTION
1. Property Location and Size
• The site is located completely within the City of Dublin and Franklin County, Ohio.
• 14.17 acre site consisting of two contiguous parcels, Franklin County Tax Parcel #273-008618
containing 10.606 ac & #273-011149 containing 3.568 ac. located at 4338 Bright Road with
existing access drive for previous single family dwelling (since demolished) at the intersection of
Grandee Cliffs Drive. The property is the only remaining privately held developable parcel on the
north side of Bright Road in this area.
• The property is surrounded on all sides by existing single-family residential development with the
exception of its western flag portion being directly north of the Holder-Wright Earthworks Park.
• The combined Bright Road frontage dimension is 689.33 LF. No access or improvements
proposed by this project includes the S-curve portion of Bright Road.
2. Character & Surrounding Uses
• The site is bound on the east by the Billingsley Run and the wooded area to the east of that
watercourse. The west is bound by a volunteer-growth woods that contains the drainage swale
that drains the major western ¾ of the site.
• The majority of the site and that area proposed for development was most recently occupied by
a single residence and a swimming pool, both since demolished. A small garage structure is
presently the only structure that exists on-site, is in poor condition and is to be demolished as a
part of this development proposal. The supporting driveway to the former residence is also in
poor condition and is to be demolished as well. The cleared site is thought to have been
previously cultivated but in its more recent past was mown lawn and served as the yard space
for the residence. This cleared area is to be used for homesite and roadway development.
• The topography of the site is slightly rolling and gently falls to its east and west edges. The site
layout reflects this form of the land. The roadway system is proposed to lay largely “at grade”
with very little earthwork needed. The homesites are not anticipated requiring over-lot grading
(ie: clearing/grubbing, earthmoving, etc.) but will be developed/graded individually to insure
optimum placement in all dimensions and proper drainage of the sites. What trees that exist in
this cleared area and that are in established “good” condition will be considered in building
placement, orientation and grading in an effort to preserve them as possible.
• The property is located south and outside of the Bright Road Area Plan and is surrounded by
existing single-family housing (with the exception of the park referenced above) that was
generally built in the 1970’s and forward.
3. Land Uses
• Currently this project site is zoned R-1 Restricted Suburban Residential District and the
proposed rezoning is to Planned Development. This site is presently vacant. Surrounding areas
are residential uses, R-1 zoning with the exception of the public park south of Bright Road at the
SW corner of this development site.
• The Dublin Community Plan - Existing Land Use Map designates the site as “undeveloped”.
• The Dublin Community Plan – Future Land Use Map designates the site as “Residential Low
Density (0.5-1 dwelling unit per acre)
• Proposed use is single-family residential.
Page 8 of 40
• The proposed development embraces the tenets of “conservation design”, clustered home sites
with “Reserve” areas for open space, tree preservation, habitat conservation, reforestation and
localized storm water management.
4. Open Space & Natural Features
• The West Wood, consisting largely of volunteer tree growth, will further provide for community
open space and accommodate the stormwater management necessary for the development.
This reserve, as defined by perimeter boundaries and proposed lot lines, consists of 2.40 acres
and occupies the western portion of the site.
• Billingsley Run, its tributary, floodway and surrounding woods are to be reserved as public open
space and in its current condition. This reserve, as defined by perimeter boundaries and
proposed lot lines, consists of 3.11 acres and occupies the eastern portion of the site.
• Generous and dense perimeter buffer areas, mostly on the north and south boundaries, are to
be reserved and provide for visual separation from adjacent homesites. These perimeter
preservation areas consist of various species of mature plants, to be augmented by new
plantings as may be needed. These preservation areas are to be placed in perpetual landscape
easements that allow for consistency in the landscaped edges and consists of 0.62 acres.
5. Provision of Utilities
General
• Both public Sanitary Sewer and Water systems exist adjacent to the site along Bright Road.
These two systems will be utilized for service to the development. The capacity and condition
have been determined while the exact locations are to be determined in the Engineering phase
following the Preliminary Development Plan.
• On-site stormwater management is to be provided meeting the City of Dublin Engineer
requirements and design criteria.
• All private utilities, including communications, internet/cable, electric, and gas are available to
this site. Commitment correspondence to be provided at Final Development Plan.
• All utilities are to be designed and constructed to meet the standards established by the City of
Dublin Engineer.
Sanitary Sewer
• Sanitary sewer service to the development will be provided from one (1) location.
• The proposed development will be serviced from an existing 8-inch line located adjacent in the
Bright Road R/W south of the site.
Water
• An existing 8-inch water main along the south side of Bright Road is adequate to provide service
to this site.
Storm Water – Existing
• The current site is divided into two watersheds, roughly along the ridge line of the existing
driveway, with the major watershed draining to the west into an open swale leading to the Scioto
River. Portions of the residential neighborhood to the north (Hanna Hills) drain to and through
Page 9 of 40
the site to the open swale described above. The minor watershed drains east into Billingsley
Run, its north tributary and on to the Scioto River as well.
• This development lies within the Little East Watershed and the Billingsley Creek Watershed,
requiring more stringent storage and release rates, as determined by the City of Dublin Engineer.
• The predominately soil type is Blount Silt Loam, End Moraine (Ble1B1), a Type D soil,
corresponding to the pre-developed run-off coefficient of 0.52.
6. Access and Circulation
• Vehicular access to the site from the public R/W will be from a single access point on Bright
Road at the intersection of Grandee Cliffs Drive. No public transit facilities exist to this site.
• No multi-use trail or sidewalks from the public right-of-way currently exist to this site.
7. Architecture
• One building exists on-site, a dilapidated garage in very poor condition and is proposed to be
demolished by this development.
• No prevailing architectural style is evident in the surrounding neighborhoods. A wide range of
styles, masses, materials, colors and orientations is observed, leaving no precedent of
character to be emulated. The quality of home architecture and site development is the
standard to be reflected and even exceeded by this development.
Page 10 of 40
SECTION C: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Development to be in accordance with the City of Dublin Code at the time of development unless
otherwise noted. Where conflicts occur between the City of Dublin Code and these Development
Standards, the Development Standards shall apply and supersede the Code. Unless otherwise
specified in this Preliminary Development Plan drawings/text, the development standards of
Chapter 152 and 153 of the City of Dublin Code, City of Dublin Neighborhood Design Guidelines and
Conservation Design Development standards shall apply.
1. Permitted Uses
Permitted uses shall include the following:
• Single-family detached residences.
• Publicly and/or privately-owned open spaces, stormwater facilities and related park features.
• Home occupation uses in accordance with City of Dublin Code Section 153.073(B).
2. Density
A maximum of 20 residential lots consisting of single-family residences on a gross site area of 14.17
acres and a resultant density of 1.4 dwelling units per acre.
3. Lot Standards
Single-family homes in this development will be constructed on traditional lots with fee simple
ownership. Each home proposed is to be custom designed and built in response to its lot. Existing
site conditions and the desire to preserve as much of the natural environment as is practical have
dictated the lots’ configurations. As such, each lot is somewhat unique in shape requiring detailed
setback standards as stated below.
Lot Size
Lot Area: 9,960 square feet, minimum (smallest, Lot #19)
21,443 square feet (largest, Lot #10)
13,731 square feet (average)
Lot Width: 29’ minimum width (R/W frontage), Lot #5
Lot Depth: 107’ minimum (side property line), Lot # 19
Maximum Lot Coverage: Not-to-exceed 45%
Elements to be considered as lot coverage include primary
structure, enclosed auxiliary structures, driveways, entry walks,
paved terraces/patios. Open joint decks, dry-laid masonry
terraces/patios, open trellises/pergolas are not considered in Lot
Coverage.
Side yard setback areas as described herein are to be clear of
ground-mounted mechanical devices. Pedestrian pavements,
landscape and HOA-approved fencing may be permitted.
Page 11 of 40
Private Open Spaces to include lawns, terraces, decks, patios,
fireplaces, open air garden structures, swimming
pools/decks/barriers, ornamental fountains, gardens and seating
areas.
Lot Setbacks
Lot #1 (Corner Lot)
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
15’ Corner Side Build-to-Zone (east side)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
20’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
6’ Minimum Side Yard (west side)
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #2
15’ Minimum Front Setback (no Build-to limit, inside corner lot)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
20’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
6’ Minimum Side Yard (east side)
20’ Side Yard/Landscape Easement (west side)
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #3&4
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
30’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space
6’ Minimum Side Yard, 12’ Minimum Total both sided
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot # 5
15’ Minimum Front Setback (no Build-to limit, inside corner lot)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
20’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
6’ Minimum Side Yard (east side)
20’ Side Yard/Landscape Easement (west side)
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #6-9
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
20’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
6’ Minimum Side Yard, 12’ Minimum Total both sided
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #10
15’ Minimum Front Setback (no Build-to limit, inside corner lot)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure (north Rear)
20’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement (north
Rear)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure (east Rear)
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space (east Rear)
Page 12 of 40
6’ Minimum Side Yard, 12’ Minimum Total both sided
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #11
15’ Minimum Front Setback (no Build-to limit, inside corner lot)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space
6’ Minimum Side Yard, 12’ Minimum Total both sided
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #12 (Corner Lot)
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
15’-20’ Corner Side Build-to-Zone
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space
6’ Minimum Side Yard (north side)
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #13
15’ Minimum Front Setback (no Build-to limit)
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure (west Rear)
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space (west Rear)
6’ Minimum Side Yard (north side)
20’ Minimum Side Yard Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
(south side)
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #14,15,18,19
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space
6’ Minimum Side Yard, 12’ Minimum Total both sided
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #16 &17 (Corner Lots)
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
15’-20’ Corner Side Build-to-Zone
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space
6’ Minimum Side Yard, 12’ Minimum Total both sided
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Lot #20 (Corner Lot)
15’-20’ Front Build-to-Zone
15’-20’ Corner Side Build-to-Zone
40’ Minimum Rear Setback to Principal Structure
15’ Minimum Rear Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space
6’ Minimum Side Yard (north side)
20’ Minimum Side Yard Setback/No-Build Zone to Private Open Space/Landscape Easement
(south side)
25’ Minimum Depth Private Open Space
Page 13 of 40
4. Streets, Access and Connectivity
• Single point of access from Bright Road at the current intersection of Grandee Cliffs Drive. Street
name to be determined at Final Plat, identified as Street A on Preliminary Plat. This access to
and through the site is proposed to be public R/W and meeting the requirements of the City of
Dublin Engineer.
• Curb radius at Street A entry, 30’
• The new road into and through the site is to be renamed as part of the Final Plat.
• All lots are to access from internal street system with no direct lot vehicular access to Bright
Road.
• Public Streets Standards:
a. Right-of-Way: 50’ (Street A from Bright Road to 1st intersection with Street B)
40’ (all other streets)
b. Pavement Width: 26’ asphalt pavement (Bright Road to 1st intersection with Street
B)
24’ asphalt pavement (all other streets)
c. Drive Lanes: Two (2)
d. Parking Lanes: Parking shall be allowed on one side of the public streets
internal to the development.
e. Tree Lawn: 5’ minimum width
f. Sidewalk: Pedestrian circulation through the site is to be provided by a 5’
wide walk of cast-in-place concrete as the minimum level of
quality with the possibly of brick pavement at the sole discretion
of the Developer, on one side of the street providing access to
all homesites, open spaces and destinations in the
development. ADA-compliant driveways for homes that do not
have a sidewalk (Lots 1-12) are to be provided to establish full
connectivity. Walkway to be provided at the perimeter of the
Central Court to provide access to the CBU mailboxes.
Developer to provide painted crosswalks across Street A at
Bright Road and across Bright Road west of Street A, including
curb ramps and receiving concrete-paved corner walk pads at
all three corners, per City of Dublin standard. Developer to
provide painted crosswalk across Bright Road at west end of
development connecting proposed maintenance path
(described herein) to the south to the Holder-Wright Earthworks
Park. All crosswalk construction is to be coordinated with the
Dublin City Engineer relative to timing for installation with City-
provided trail construction along Bright Road.
g. Curbs: 6” concrete straight curb, flush curb on external edge of Central
Court.
Page 14 of 40
h. Trails: 8’ width specialty pavement path approximately 140’ in length is
to be provided from Central Court to the east side of the
detention basin, and possibly a casual seating area in the West
Wood at the discretion of the Developer, providing pedestrian
access to this area. This is not a shared use path, is not
proposed to be developed to that city standard and is not
intended for maintenance access to the detention facilities (to
be provided elsewhere). Revegetation in this West Wood area as
replacements for the cleared trees is to be provided per
Landscape Plans, Section D: Exhibits, with no further
amenities/improvements proposed.
5. Utilities
a. Design and Construction:
All utilities shall be designed and constructed to meet the standards established by the City of
Dublin Engineer.
b. Location:
All utilities shall be placed in appropriate locations on the individual homesites that will best
preserve the existing trees in good condition. See Utilities Plan, Section D: Exhibits
• A comprehensive stormwater management system to be developed, following the City of Dublin
stormwater management policies. See Grading & Drainage Plan, Section D. This development
lies within the Little East Watershed and the Billingsley Creek Watershed, requiring more
stringent storage and release rates, as determined by the City of Dublin Engineer. Given the
proximity of the project site to the Scioto River and the convergence of the two on-site
watersheds at the river, a single oversized basin and restricted outlet structure in the west of the
site will accommodate all stormwater storage requirements of the project while the much
smaller eastern watershed will direct drain into Billingsley Run.
• The exact discharge point and release rate for the western portion of the site is as determined
acceptable to the City of Dublin Engineer. The west watershed currently drains through a swale
channel to the west and ultimately to the Scioto River. The smaller east watershed free drains
into Billingsley Run and ultimately to the Scioto River as well. In the post-development condition,
the site drainage will be handled by one (1) stormwater management system consisting of a dry
basin with controlled outlet. The system will accept drainage from pervious areas such as rear
yards, side yards, and the off-site 0.46 acres mentioned above, and impervious areas such as
roadways, roofs, and sidewalks.
• Developer to provide a 10’ wide paved path for the periodic maintenance of the outflow
structure of the detention basin in the West Wood, currently designed to be at the southwest
end of the basin. This path will be from Bright Road routed north approximately 400’ to the
outflow structure vicinity as generally shown on Utility Plan and is to be field located to avoid any
unnecessary damage to the existing vegetation.
• Rear yard drainage system is to be provided to ensure positive drainage in these rear yard areas
and conveyance to the proposed stormwater management system.
Page 15 of 40
• Impervious surfaces will drain to catch basins in the roadway. The storage basin will have a
forebay collection pool that is meant to filter out heavy debris before entering the discharge
swale.
• Portions of Lots #10, 11, 12, 13 will free drain into the adjacent Billingsley Run or its north
tributary.
• Billingsley Run and its north tributary are to be protected by a Stream Corridor Protection Zone
(SCPZ) as calculated and scribed as shown herein in conformance with the practices provided
by the City of Dublin Engineer. West swale has been exempted by the City of Dublin Engineer
from SCPZ requirements.
6. Open Space
Based on the location of the development and best practices, the proposed open space reserves are
to be owned and maintained by the City of Dublin and/or the Homeowners’ Association as described
herein. Final disposition relative to ownership and maintenance responsibilities to be determined
through further conversations with the City of Dublin.
Reserve A: Approximately 2.40 acres of open space, including the West Wood and the Allee (0.11
acre area included in the West Wood acreage), which connects this open space to the Central Court
(Reserve C) is to be deeded to the City of Dublin with agreed-to restrictions on use. Given its location
in the watershed and topography, this area is to contain the utilitarian function of a “dry” basin for
stormwater management, yet is to be shaped, planted and protected as an open space Reserve. In
light of its location relative to existing surrounding neighbors who abut this Reserve, it is the intent of
this development proposal that Reserve A (as with Reserve B described below) is to remain passive
in use and nature with no additional programming, hard-surface trails, park apparatus, etc. for the
entire neighborhood’s continued quiet enjoyment of the greenspace. Within the City of Dublin, there
is precedent for such passive public open space, namely Thaddeus Kosciuszko Park and Wellington
Reserve.
Long-term maintenance of the basin landscape described above to be by the City of Dublin. This
area’s natural environment will be enhanced through thoughtful grading for stormwater
management, reforestation with environmentally correct indigenous plants and a naturalized
landscape. Revegetation in this West Wood area as replacements for the cleared trees is to be
provided per Landscape Plans, Section D: Exhibits, with no further amenities/improvements
proposed.
Reserve B: Billingsley Run, approximately 3.11 acres, is to be deeded to the City of Dublin with
agreed-to restrictions on use as public open space and for the city’s long-term maintenance. It is
intended to be left in its current and natural state with no intentional intervention into it.
Reserve C: The Central Court, 0.28 acres, is open space described and enclosed by the public street
R/W in a prominent, intentional central location to the residents of the development for their non-
exclusive use as a communal gathering area. Open lawn and edge tree plantings are intended to
provide a sense of place while remaining visually open for natural surveillance and public safety
Reserve D: The East Court Island, 0.027 acres, is open space for landscape purposes to eliminate
areas of unnecessary pavement and provide visual enhancement. This open space is to be
maintained by the HOA.
Landscape Easements, predominantly on the north and south edges of the development are
intended to preserve existing trees there through deed restrictions on development, provide space
Page 16 of 40
for augmenting these existing tree stands with new plantings and allowing for the long-term
protection of these greenspaces from encroachment or development. These open space areas are
to contain a mixture of trees and shrubs to enhance the rural character of the area and will be a part
of the Landscape Plan in the Final Development Plan.
In summary, dedicated, HOA maintained and easement-protected open spaces total 6.38 acres of
this 14.20 acre site (or 45%) and is to be maintained as open space post-development, the level of
which is to be determined in conjunction with the City of Dublin and as currently described in 11.
Ownership and Maintenance.
No Entry Feature is anticipated as a part of this development in an effort to create a seamless
physical and practical connection to the surrounding neighborhood. Existing Bright Road frontage is
anticipated to remain in its current condition with exceptions for repairs and limited removal of the
existing wood fencing and plant additions and/or pruning as described herein. Current entry gates
and masonry piers are to be removed to accommodate new Street A construction.
All of these Reserves and Landscape Easements are described and labeled on the Preliminary
Development Plan. In combination, this open space is to be considered to fulfill Subdivision
Regulation requirements for Open Space Requirements (152.086) and Land Dedication For
Municipality’s Portion of Recreational Facilities (152.087).
7. Tree Preservation, Removal and Replacement
a. Tree Preservation:
It is the intent to preserve as many good condition trees as possible on the site. A good faith
effort will be made to preserve these existing trees where appropriate. High quality trees
required to be removed for sake of infrastructure are to be accounted for on the Tree
Replacement Plan as a part of the Final Development Plan.
b. Tree Preservation Zone:
• Development is not anticipated in the wooded perimeter along Bright Road, the northern
property line, the southwestern “flag” connecting to Bright Road (excepting
maintenance path) and the entire area east of Billingsley Run. Existing trees there are to
be preserved with the possible exception of trimming/removal based on individual plant
condition and sound arboriculture practices.
• Billingsley Run Reserve including Billingsley, its north tributary, the wooded area east of
these watercourses and existing trees west of the watercourses within the Floodway or
SCPZ are to be preserved, and these areas be left in their current undisturbed state with
no further intervention or development.
• The West Wood is to be utilized for the stormwater management of the development
and is to be revegetated to include the introduction of plantings in ecologically correct
varieties. See Section D, Landscape Plan
• Tree preservation zone is established to protect these stands of existing plants. See
Section D, Landscape Plan. Temporary construction fence, minimum 4’ in height, to be
installed around the perimeter of the tree preservation zone prior to any construction
activities.
• No building, structure, patio, recreational or athletic facility, or any other improvement
to be placed temporarily or permanently upon, in or under the area designated herein as
Page 17 of 40
a “Tree Preservation Zone” nor shall any work be performed therein which would alter
the natural state of the zone or damage trees or vegetation therein.
• Disturbance of any part of the zone by maintenance is to be restored as nearly as
practicable to the original condition. No tree or vegetation is to be removed from the
zone except for the removal of dead, diseased, decayed, structurally dangerous or
noxious trees or other vegetation, in keeping with sound arboriculture practices and is
to be managed by the HOA.
c. Tree Reforestation:
• Upon completion of any removal of trees as described above, a tree reforestation
program is proposed. Good quality trees being necessarily removed to accommodate
needed infrastructure are to be replaced in accordance with City of Dublin tree
replacement policy.
• A mixture of largely deciduous trees of various sizes will be installed where appropriate
in order to augment, re-establish or create a reinforced buffer between the development
and surrounding neighborhoods. This reforestation buffer will have an unmaintained
natural understory (no manicured turfgrass).
1. On an as-needed basis, trees or other vegetation may be removed from any buffer area
in order to maintain mandated drainage facilities.
2. Street trees and other plantings in the public domain are to be a mix of varieties and
sizes of indigenous and/or improved varieties of indigenous plants. “Ornamental”
plantings are to be considered in limited shrub/perennial planting areas only.
8. Architecture
General Character:
The character of the development is to be 1.5 and 2 story single-family, high-quality homes with 2 or
3 car garages with possible auxiliary structures that complement the quality of the surrounding
homes in adjacent neighborhoods and will adhere to the City of Dublin Residential Appearance
Standards Code. The architectural vocabulary set forth shall align with that of Midwestern
Vernacular and European Country to keep consistent within the surrounding context.
Midwestern Vernacular architecture developed over the mid- to late 19th and early 20th centuries,
drawing inspiration from a variety of styles. Greek Revival elements emphasize simplicity,
permanence, and adaptability, while "farmhouse vernacular" showcases Gothic influences and
vertical proportions typical of early Victorian designs. This architectural style reflects regional
traditions, with notable examples found in Dublin as well as in communities like Bexley and Upper
Arlington.
European Country – The European Country style is defined by its use of stone and stucco cladding,
along with deep-set doors and windows, steep roof pitches, and flared eaves. Its forms are typically
simple and rectangular, featuring tall, well-proportioned windows that create a clean and elegant
aesthetic. The 1.5 to 2 story adaptation of this style to this developemnt is thoughtfully designed to
meet the demand for first-floor master living while harmonizing with the surrounding architectural
character.
Conceptual depictions of the representative architectural schemes are included herein. See Section
D, sheets 13 &14 for benchmark photographic images of both architectural character/quality of
Page 18 of 40
design and that of the streetscape/public domain. Below describes general understanding of
materials, colors, forms and scale of the housing to be developed.
• Development to be recognized as a holistic place, a complete neighborhood but will not be
monochromatic in form, materials and colors. The common thread will be the quality of the
designed architecture, the similarity in roof pitch and a palette of high-quality materials.
• Each home to be distinguished by its own massing composition, front façade design, mixture of
material types, and public realm landscape.
• Garage orientation is to be determined in the context of individual site topography,
configuration, existing preserved trees, jurisdictional restrictions and platted setbacks. Any
front-facing garages will be set back from the front face of the body of the home. Ancillary “third
car” garages may be provided, utilizing the palette of house materials and complementary
massing with doors set back from the front face.
• Lot configurations and topography may provide for non-traditional building siting including
garage massing and orientation.
Exterior Materials & Elements:
• Cladding: Natural materials including full-depth brick, thin brick, stone, manufactured stone,
wood, stucco, cementitious board or a combination of these.
• Trim: Wood, cementitious board, aluminum (for gutters & downspouts only).
• Color Selections: White, earth tones and other muted colors, paint and/or stain.
• Roofing Materials: 25 year or above dimensional asphalt shingle (240 lbs/square weight), wood,
slate, copper, standing seam metal and/or tile as architectural enhancements.
• Windows: windows and doors (all 4 sides) will incorporate trim that is architecturally
appropriate.
• Architectural Elements: additional and specialty-shaped windows, louvers, shutters, entry
coverings, and other architectural elements all in designed composition with the entirety of the
structure in terms of forms, proportions, colors and placement.
• Chimneys: exterior portions to be finished masonry of brick, stone or manufactured stone.
Cantilevered chimneys are not permitted.
• Garages: Architecturally consistent with the main building facade, decorative garage doors a
maximum 18’ wide, in keeping with the overall architectural character of the home. Garage
orientation to be determined in the context of individual site topography, configuration, existing
preserved trees, jurisdictional restrictions and platted setbacks. Any front-facing garages will be
set back from the front face of the body of the home. Auxiliary garages may be provided as
freestanding structures consistent with the overall character of the home it serves.
• Lighting: No more than one (1) approved yard post light is permitted near the entry walk to the
front door. Properly designed & placed landscape/accent lighting is allowed and encouraged.
• Patios: Outdoor terraces, decks, pool/dining areas are permitted as part of the overall
architectural and landscape character of the home.
• Mechanical Equipment: Ground-mounted equipment is to be located and screened through
architecture and/or landscape to minimize visibility and noise as would be experienced by
homeowner and neighboring homes.
• Permitted Building Height: Maximum height of 35’, as per the Dublin Code.
Page 19 of 40
Architectural Diversity:
The same or similar front elevations shall not be repeated within:
• Two lots on either side of subject lot.
• Three lots directly across the street from the subject lot.
• Any lot on the cul-de-sac.
A themed or monochromatic development is not intended but adherence to architectural diversity
(stated above), materials standards and design quality will be reviewed/approved by the
Homeowners Association based on the standards herein approved by the Planning and Zoning
Commission is dictated.
Plan Approval:
The Homeowners’ Association will retain the right of individual plan approval for all single-family
homes within the development. The Homeowners’ Association established declarant will form an
Architectural Review Board (ARB) to review all architecture in ensure compliance with or exceed the
architectural standards set forth in the Development Standards. See Paragraph 10. Homeowners’
Association below for additional detail.
9. Landscape
Street Trees:
Street Trees will be installed in accordance with the City of Dublin Code. Final locations and
varieties shall be as approved by the City Forester.
Fencing:
• Existing fencing along Bright Road may be repaired in-place, removed in select areas or in total.
Long-term maintenance, repair or replacement to be the responsibility of the HOA. No other
fencing is permitted unless decorative in nature and does not fully enclose an area, as approved
by the HOA.
• Pool Barriers shall be permitted and conform to the requirements of the governing building code.
Appearance of all such fences to be as approved by the HOA.
• Front yard fences, where so chosen by the homeowner, may be constructed of ornamental
metal, painted/stained wood, stone, or a combination thereof in keeping with the character of
the house design and as approved by the HOA for the purpose of describing but not enclosing
the “semi-public” space that is the home entry area. Front yard fencing to be placed no less than
3’ and no more than 5’ behind the public sidewalk where provided and no less than 1’ and no
more than 3’ behind the R/W line where no public walk is provided and is not to return along the
side yards.
• See Section D, Sheets 13 & 14 for benchmark photographic images representative of the
character & quality of design envisioned for the public domain. All architecture of the
development is to be custom with each their own distinct expression and materials palette. As
such, elements of the public domain including fencing, paving, landscape, etc. to be
coordinated as a cohesive composition.
Cul-de-sac:
The cul-de-sac island planting to be initially planted as a part of the project development and
maintained by the HOA.
Page 20 of 40
10. Homeowners’ Association
All residential property owners located within this Planned Development will be required to join and
maintain membership in the Homeowners’ Association (HOA) to be established by the Developer at
Final Plat. HOA responsibilities are to be detailed within the Covenants and Restrictions that run with
the land. Disposition of all Reserves within this Planned Development relative to ownership and
maintenance responsibilities will be described as a part of the Final Development Plan
The HOA will establish an Architectural Review Board (ARB) to evaluate each homesite and building
plan in the development for compliance with the Development Standards put forth by the Final
Development Plan. The Developer, as the sole builder of these custom homes, will serve as the ARB
and retain control of individual homesite plan approval within the development until such time that
all lots are constructed. At that time, the review/approval of modifications to existing structures and
homesites will be by the ARB established by the HOA.
Unless otherwise provided by Ohio law, control of the Homeowners’ Association will be ceded to the
residents at a time determined by the Developer. Until such time, the Developer will pay dues and
fees on the property owned by the Developer and subsidize budget shortfalls. Budgets will include
line items for maintenance, reserves for repairs and replacements under the HOA
11. Ownership & Maintenance
The following matrix describes spaces as currently identified, their anticipated ownership post-
development and the maintenance of these spaces and their facilities. Final disposition of
ownership including deed restrictions and identification of maintenance responsibilities, sole and
shared, are subject to further conversation with the City of Dublin in Final Development Plan
process. However, regardless of the results of those conversations, Reserve open spaces (including
the stormwater management basin) are intended for public use and/or environmental protection,
Landscape Easements are intended for the preservation of existing vegetation.
Space Ownership Maintenance
• Streets (Right-of-Way) City of Dublin City of Dublin
• Stormwater basin/Maintenance Path (in Reserve A) City of Dublin City of Dublin
• West Wood (Reserve A) City of Dublin City of Dublin
• Billingsley Run (Reserve B) City of Dublin City of Dublin
• Central Court (Reserve C) City of Dublin HOA
• East Court (Reserve D) City of Dublin HOA
• Landscape Easements (Preservation Areas) Privately held HOA
Page 36 of 40
16. Concept Review Plans (for reference)
The following information is a summary from the Concept Review phase of this project’s process, dated
5/15/24 and Planning & Zoning Commission Hearing dated 6/20/24. In addition to the narrative, plans
and other supporting graphics submitted above for review, we are herein summarizing portions, in direct
quotation and/or paraphrased summary of the Meeting Minutes prepared by Staff, of Commission
comments, Public comments, Commission questions and discussions among Commission Members
and with the Applicant. Additionally, Applicant is providing brief “responses” to each of these items,
where appropriate, demonstrating understanding and consideration of all through written descriptions
supported by the narratives, standards and descriptions submitted as a part of this Preliminary
Development Plan and Preliminary Plat. This summary information is provided as a convenience to the
Staff, Commission and the public as they consider the merits of this proposed development.
Staff Presentation
• Project site is currently located within the Suburban Rural Residential Land Use designation,
according to the current Community Plan.
o Agreed
• Project site is within the Residential, Low Density Future Land Use designation within the
Envision Dublin Community Plan that is now in the adoption process.
o Agreed
• Proposal will require rezoning to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) that includes 20 single-
family lots on the 14 acre site, 1.4 du/ac.
o Agreed
• There is a focal point with Lot #7 that may need to be addressed
o Current layout has modified lot layout in this area in response to Commission and
neighborhood comments. However, the “focal point” of the Main Drive alignment is to be
addressed by a landscape feature in keeping with the development character to terminate
the view.
• The development is eligible for the Conservation Design Resolution.
o Agreed and is being pursued
• The development will also need to follow the Neighborhood Design Guidelines
o Agreed and is being pursued
• The stormwater detention would result in the removal of some of the tree canopy
o Agreed, yet the detention area in the West Wood is being carefully and strategically located,
configured and graded to impact as FEW “Good” trees as possible with the majority of trees
being impacted/removed are of “Fair” or “Poor” quality.
Commission Questions
Mr. Way
Requesting additional description of the stormwater detention proposed in the West Wood area. Inquired if
the area would include intentional stormwater retention areas.
• This area will provide both stormwater management and public open space. The detention area will not
only satisfy the management needs of the entire development but will also over-compensate for storage
from the free-draining neighborhood to the north, which currently passes thru the development site. This
storage area will be in a “dry basin” with a controlled release devise discharging into the currently utilized
Page 37 of 40
outflow swale running west to the river. The basin is to be configured, graded and landscaped to be an
integral part of this West Wood area, being developed at a publicly-used park, complete with amenities
for users. See attached development plans for a graphic depiction of this space.
Center Court to incorporate a roundabout drive or if it could have a road on only one side. It could be
improved by having less concrete or asphalt. Intention of Center Court for stormwater detention.
• The Central Court continues to have a publicly-dedicated drive on all sides. This condition, along with the
internal roadway/walkway system, provides for pedestrian and bicycle user access to the functional
community green space it provides. However, it is desired that the west leg of this court roadway system
be as modest in width (servicing only TWO homesites) as is practical for vehicle/safety vehicle usage. The
current proposal suggests a flush curb on the inside of this loop, paver parking “pads” for visitor parking
on this side (without having to increase road width unnecessarily), encouraging direct pedestrian access
to the open space but providing for proper radius dimensions of fire vehicle function. Agreed on the latter
point of less pavement! Always the goal! Furthermore, the Central Court is no longer to be used for
stormwater management, but strictly as public community open space.
• Perimeter trees in the West Wood (in Fair and Good condition) are intended as a landscape buffer and
will be protected at the drip line of those trees.
o Yes! The level of tree removal and the basin layout/grading will be dictated by storage
demands as required by Engineering. And the quality of trees to be considered in that effort,
part of Final Engineering of the storm system. No more trees than are necessary for this
system are proposed for removal and all remaining trees will be properly protected per
sound arboriculture practices.
Ms. Harter
If the detention area is to be usable greenspace, would the grasses be coarse and less friendly play area?
• Current thinking for the basin is that it would have a planted bottom/sides for erosion protection. Further,
there may be other plantings incorporated to help naturalize the area (ie: trees/shrubs that don’t
adversely effect storage volumes), diversify the plant community and add to the aesthetics of the entire
area. It is not anticipated that this area be manicured lawn requiring regular mowing due to its water
storage function which may leave the bottom wet for some period of time after a rain event. But, this area
will certainly be available to wildlife, pet usage, and general “passive” park functions, aesthetics and
amenities.
Sidewalk on one side of the interior street be wider than a typical walk?
• Presently, the sidewalk is proposed as 4’ wide and built of specialty pavement (brick, precast concrete)
to better blend with the intent and character of the development (intimate streetscapes, homes closer to
the street, rich materials, “hamlet” character vs “subdivision”). This provides for more green areas in the
streetscapes vs pavement that is unnecessary. Given the modest scope of the development (only 20
homesites), a single sidewalk will provide pedestrian access from/to every lot and destination, especially
given the extremely low traffic volumes in and around the development making casual street crossing
very easy. This system of roads/walks is not interconnected to other surrounding developments
(surrounded by built-out neighborhoods), thereby eliminating any off-site traffic. If additional width
and/or walks are to be required, pavement materials will likely revert to cast-in-place concrete, due to
project budget.
Page 38 of 40
Will garages be 3-car and side-loaded?
• Attached or detached garages will be 2, 2.5 and 3-car in size are intended to be side loaded as the
preferred orientation and/or will be oriented to minimize garage door exposure to/from adjacent streets.
Lot layout of this development is unconventional due to natural areas being preserved,
drainage/floodway, existing trees and site topography dictating that house/garage layout, placement,
orientation will be customized and sensitive to all of those conditions on a per-lot basis. Additionally,
some homesites may contain auxiliary, additional-car free-standing garages as well. Development
Standards to dictate placements and orientation.
Homes to have individualized landscape, a type of green architecture?
• Yes. The public realm of this development os paramount to its character. The streetscape, home
placement, front yard/entry zone are all to work in concert to create the intimate village feel.
Development Standards speak to the front entry zone, yard landscape, lighting, semi-private enclosure
(low hedge, wall, fence). Each house to have landscape design reflective/supportive of the architecture
and vice versa.
Mr Alexander
Some traditional rear-yard recreation space is being sacrificed to have more frontage
• No. The front setback is proposed to be 15’ and R/W throughout most of the development to be 40’ for
sake of 1. Intimacy of streetscape (see above) and 2. Provide for more rear yard for recreation/social life,
gardens, drainage, screening if desired. Typical Lot diagrams herein illustrate the special qualities of
those areas.
Mr Chinnock
A bikepath is indicated in the Billingsley Run area.
• No. At Concept Review stage, a soft-surface trail was considered through this area. But, given the
environmental sensitivity of this area, its flood prone conditions and desire to preserve every tree in this
street corridor and along the north side of Bright Road, even this soft-surface trail is being eliminated and
the entire area is to be left in its current condition.
Agreed, no need to provide connection from soft-surface trial. Similar trail indicated in the West Wood.
• Agreed that soft-surface trail on the east side of the development is no longer proposed. The trail in the
West Wood, an intentional passive park space by this proposal, will have that trail lead to Bright Road for
direct access to the Wright- Holder Park on the south side of Bright Road. It is important to note that
Bright Road is NO LONGER connected to Riverside Drive, there are only SEVEN single family homes west
of Grandee Cliffs Drive that utilize Bright Road for access to their homes and a 25 MPH post speed
resulting in a very low traffic volume which allows for ease of safe crossing access to the Wright-Holder
Park.
Mr Deschler
Central Court to be a mowed areas or include some stormwater management?
Page 39 of 40
• The current proposal eliminates stormwater management from this area and reserves it as more
manicured and usable public open space.
Possible for Central Court to be manicured space?
• Yes! See above.
It is preferable to avoid need for homeowner variances later to add rear yard structures.
• Agreed. Development Standards accommodate such structures and the Typical Lot diagrams included
herein demonstrate this private space layout.
Why 20 homesites vs 14?
• This proposal preserves naturalized open spaces as is possible, trees on edges,
accommodates/manages on and off-site drainage and embeds public-use space within the
development. Further, homesites proposed are “estate” size, meeting the market demand for this
housing type. 20 homesites “fit” comfortably into this development zone and project economics require
this number of lots.
Ms Call
How will you treat Lot #7 at the terminus of street entry?
• Current layout has modified lot layout in this area in response to Commission and neighborhood
comments. However, the “focal point” of the Main Drive alignment is to be addressed by a landscape
feature in keeping with the development character to terminate the view.
Public Comment
John Rahm
Biggest concern are the 7 homesites along the north boundary “in a straight line”. Consider larger lots there
providing more greenspace.
• Agreed. Current plan has removed one lot along this line, increased depth of those lots remaining and
have reconfigured the street alignment and lot lines to eliminate the straight line geometry of the Concept
Plan. Further, the Applicant has met with Mr Rahm and other on his neighbors to address this and other
issue and have gained their support.
Randy Roth
Thanked the Applicant for meeting with the East Dublin Civic Association in May, 2024 and several times with
association officers. One concern was landscaping along the development’s north property line. Very happy
with proposed landscape and existing fence repair along Bright Road. Turning undevelopable areas into an
amenity for residents and neighbors is generous. He has seen much enthusiasm for this project.
• Agreed. Current plan has addressed the concerns of Mr Roth and the association. See above response.
Applicant appreciates the attention paid and great comments given by the association and neighbors.
The over-riding goal of this development is to fit into and elevate the neighborhood that it is to be a part of.
Page 40 of 40
Commission Discussion
Mr Chinnock
Very nice use of site. Appreciates Applicant meeting with neighbors, very good job in creating a plan that will
fit the site, greenspace is great. Inspirational architecture is beautiful, wants to make sure it blends with
surrounding area. Understands the economics that drive the ned for 20 lots, applicant’s vision makes sense
of the space.
Mr Deschler
Supportive of the proposed use and building materials. Believes Central Court open space should not be
used for stormwater detention purposes. Recommends to alleviate straight row of houses along north
perimeter. Perhaps some homes can have walk-out level, some variation to the look.
Mr Alexander
Very supportive, even enthusiastic about the plan. Less concerned about architecture matching the
surrounding neighborhood, which were built at a different time. Creating community is more valuable.
Central Court to be more about usable public space.
Mr Way
Very exciting proposal, great example of city’s Conservation Design Guidelines implemented, responsive to
sensitive nature of the site. Encouraged preservation of trees and sufficient setback on north edge of the site.
Hopeful that Applicant and neighbors can work out something to meet that intent. Applicant should look at
facing homes to Bright Road, not disengaging from it, creating an urban design feel to the development could
be spectacular.
Ms Harter
Supportive of the proposal, appreciates Applicant meeting with the association, encourage to keep the green
tree look along Bright Road, even the brown fence. Appreciates Applicants efforts to use landscape and
architecture to create outdoor living space.
Ms Call
Look for lot deletion on center section and along “back section” (north boundary?). This is a beautiful project-
not what we see everyday.
PLANNING ▪ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ▪ URBAN DESIGN
To: Rati Singh, Assoc. AIA
Planner, City of Dublin
From: Dan Phillabaum, AICP, RLA
Landplan Studios, LLC
Date: January 30, 2025
Re: 24-135Z-PDP—Bright Road Reserve Neighborhood Design Guidelines Analysis
Rati—
This memo provides a chapter-by-chapter comparative analysis of the proposed Bright Road
Reserve Preliminary Development Plan to the objectives and recommendations of the
Neighborhood Design Guidelines, as is applicable to all future residential PUD developments in
the City.
The objectives of the Guidelines pertinent to this PDP application have been summarized into the
following table, followed by my analysis and recommendations for the specific objectives,
provided in italic bullet points.
I. Public Realm—Macro Level Design Guidelines
A. Open Space Framework
1. Step One—Site Inventory and Analysis
The significant and pertinent existing features of the site are inventoried and analyzed.
The quantitative or qualitative outcomes of each step of the inventory and analysis are
overlayed to illustrate the interplay of these features and their impact on the site layout.
▫ A site inventory and narrative analysis of the various site features has been
provided through the combination of Exhibits and Project Narrative provided
which describes the significance, or potential influence, of each of the existing
conditions in the site planning process.
▫ An overlay exhibit of the site inventories has been provided which depicts the
interplay of the existing features that leads to Step Two—Identification of
Significant Features & Development Areas.
2. Step Two—Identification of Significant Features & Development Areas
Identify proposed areas to be preserved, including significant natural features, historic or
cultural resources and potential locations for new open spaces. Identify areas of the site
conducive to residential development and provide the acreages of development and
preservation areas.
▫ The location and acreage of proposed preservation areas and new open space
areas has been provided, along with the areas of the site conducive to residential
development.
3. Step Three—Conceptual Street and Path Network
Delineate the conceptual locations and hierarchy of streets through the neighborhood and
path network linking open spaces. At a site context level, depict path connections to
points of interest in the area.
The proposed street network has been fully delineated, along with the sidewalk
system along the street. The proposed path network into the preservation areas and
open spaces has been mostly depicted.
▫ There is no perceived street hierarchy based on the minimal difference between
the proposed street types. This is appropriate given the limited size of the
proposed neighborhood and lack of connectivity to other neighborhoods afforded
by the existing site conditions and context.
▫ Additional details should be provided regarding the proposed recreational path
system through the West Wood.
4. Step Four—Refine Development Areas with Lot Lines
Within the areas proposed for development, incorporate lot lines and other regulatory
boundaries necessary to convey the lot/dwelling types proposed.
▫ Lot lines have been incorporated along with proposed setbacks for the single
dwelling type proposed.
B. Design Objectives—Preservation of Significant Existing Features
The preservation of existing natural features should be given highest priority as dedicated
open space in the layout of the neighborhood. These should be embraced as public focal
points of the neighborhood and may serve as the basis for the neighborhood identity.
The predominant preservation areas are the Billingsly Run floodway and surrounding
woods at the east side of the site and the wooded area at the west side of the site—
the ‘West Woods.’ The location of these preservation areas focuses development sites
in the middle portion of the site, with homes backing up to the preservation areas.
▫ The overall open space network of preservation areas, newly created open
spaces, the streetscape and the open portion of the cul-de-sac right-of-way form
a connected open space network across the site, with relatively convenient access
to open space from all proposed lots.
C. Design Objectives—Creation of New Public Open Spaces
New open spaces should be coordinated with preservation areas to provide a series of opens
spaces strategically and equitably distributed through the neighborhood. Open spaces should
have public street frontage and homes facing the open space. New open spaces may be
formal or informal, have a variety of sizes, and programmed to respond to the recreational
needs of the neighborhood.
The Central Court is a newly created open space in the central portion of the lot
surrounded by street frontage and with homes facing the open space. The Central
Court is a gathering space for residents and provides an open space connection to the
West Wood natural preservation and stormwater detention area. The conceptual
design includes a perimeter sidewalk, clusters of birch trees and a central mail facility.
The Allee is a formal open space between Lots 4 and 5 linking the Central Court and
the West Wood. The design includes a recreational path lined with an allee of
ornamental trees. At the western terminus of the Allee a small gathering space is
proposed overlooking the stormwater detention area.
▫ The Central Court and Allee both meet the design objectives of the Neighborhood
Design Guidelines for the creation of new public open spaces.
D. Design Objectives—Stormwater Management Facilities
The Neighborhood Design Guidelines only consider dry stormwater detention facilities as
contributing open space when these areas achieve a superior and interactive design as
useable open space when they are not intermittently put into use for stormwater
management.
The proposed detention basin within the West Wood is described in the Development
Text as “a dry basin to be shaped, planted and protected as an open space Reserve. In
light of its location relative to existing surrounding neighbors who abut this Reserve, it
is the intent of this development proposal that Reserve A is to remain passive in use
and nature with no additional programming, hard-surface trails, park apparatus, etc.
for the entire neighborhood’s continued quiet enjoyment of the greenspace.”
The proposed Preliminary Development Plan exhibits depicts pedestrian paths leading
to the stormwater facility from the Allee open space as well as from Bright Road at the
southwest corner of the site across from the Ferris-Wright Park and Earthworks.
▫ Further details and clarifications are needed as to the degree of pedestrian access
proposed to and around the stormwater facility and larger Reserve. Thaddeus
Kosciuszko Park is cited as a precedent for the type of passive public open space
proposed with the West Wood, however the design of this existing park includes
parking for autos and bicycles, a gazebo and an extensive trail system.
E. Design Objectives—Perimeter Setbacks as Open Space
Only perimeter setbacks from external collectors or arterial roadways may be counted as open
space under the following conditions. Homes shall either front roadway setbacks that are
designed as linear, park-like environments with shared-use paths, or homes may back up to
the roadway setback with views of the rear of homes screened with landscaped, earthen
berms and meandering shared-use paths through the setback area.
Lots 1, 2, 13 and 20 back up to the Bright Road right-of-way and a minimum 20 foot
wide Rear Setback/Landscape Easement and No Build Zone to the Private Open Space
is proposed on these lots along the Bright Road frontage.
There is existing vegetation in this area of the site that is proposed to be preserved
and augmented within the 20’ Landscape Easement.
▫ The addition of mounding to screen the rear of the proposed homes cannot be
accommodated within this area, and the shared use path is located on the
opposite side of Bright Road. The existing vegetation, fencing and proposed
reforestation/augmentation of this landscape buffer will effectively screen the
rear of these homes from Bright Road.
▫ The Development Text should clearly state that vehicular access to these lots from
the Bright Road right-of-way is prohibited.
II. Public Realm—Micro Level Design Guidelines
A. Streetscape Elements
1. Design Objectives—Pedestrian Realm
The Neighborhood Design Guidelines seek to establish a hierarchy within the street
network using medians, variable tree lawn widths, and incorporation of a variety of
landscape materials in the streetscape. Existing tree stands and tree rows can be captured
within the right-of-way, and varying the planting scheme for street trees can create a
unique character for different parts of the neighborhood and further assist in wayfinding.
Monocultures of street trees are to be avoided.
Due to the size and isolated nature of the proposed neighborhood, the proposed
street hierarchy is limited to two street widths. ‘Street A’ is a 50-foot-wide right-of-
way extending from the Bright Road intersection to the first internal intersection,
transitioning to ‘Street B’, a 40-foot-wide right-of-way.
The ‘Street A’ design section features two travel lanes totaling 26 feet, and ‘Street B’
two travel lanes totaling 24 feet. On-street parking is proposed to be permitted on
one side of both street types.
▫ Where vehicles are parked on one side of these streets, the overall travel width is
reduced to 15 to 17 feet and may require one vehicle to yield to another
oncoming vehicle. Given the lack of through-traffic in the neighborhood and
limited number of lots, and low travel speed these street widths may be
appropriate.
A five-foot-wide sidewalk at the back of the right-of-way is proposed adjacent to a tree
lawn on the east/interior side of ‘Streets A and B’ and terminating at the cul-de-sac,
and around the perimeter of ‘Reserve C’ at the back of curb.
▫ Typically, pedestrian facilities are incorporated on both sides of neighborhood
streets to the benefit of all residents.
The proposed tree lawn width between the sidewalk and the curb varies from 6.5 feet
to 2.5 feet in width on the Preliminary Plat/Preliminary Development Plan exhibit.
The Development Text states that Street Trees will be installed in accordance with the
City of Dublin Code, and also notes that “Street Trees and other plantings in the public
domain are to be a mix of varieties…”.
▫ A diverse mix of naturalistically planted street trees is appropriate to the
character of the site. However, the space available in the proposed tree lawns
would not meet the minimum distance requirements of Code and is unlikely to be
sufficient to support the long-term health of the street trees.
B. Design Objectives—Semi-Private Realm
Front yards should function as both a transitional space between the sidewalk and the front
façade of the home and as contributing to the larger linear open space network within the
streetscape.
1. Front Yard Landscaping
Front yard landscaping should create a high-quality arrival experience unique and
complementary to the design of the home, with consistent thematic elements shared by
lots on the same street for a unified streetscape character. Where short setbacks are
proposed, hedges at the edge of the public sidewalk should be incorporated. Where
larger lots are proposed, attention should be given to the arrival experience between the
driveway and the front door created by the landscape design.
Per the proposed Development Text, “each is home to be distinguished by its own
public realm landscape”, “possibly including masonry piers for space definition”. “Each
homesite will have a well detailed front yard with entry garden that defines the semi-
private space of the yard through plantings, walls/piers, fencing segments and other
devised to add to the character of the home.”
Front yard fences are permitted by the Development Text to define, but not enclose,
the semi-public space of the home entrance. Fences are proposed to be permitted no
less than 3 feet and no more than 5 feet behind the public sidewalk, where sidewalks
are provided, and no less than 1 foot or more than 3 feet from the right-of-way
elsewhere. Front yard fences are not to return along the side yards.
▫ The incorporation of fences, walls, and piers is consistent with the Neighborhood
Design Guidelines recommendation for homes where short setbacks are
proposed. In this neighborhood, the minimum front setback is 15 feet.
▫ No specific front yard planting requirements are proposed by the Development
Text. Additional detailed requirements must be provided at the Final
Development Plan.
▫ To provide more flexibility in the siting of driveways and homes, and to provide a
larger area within which to establish a public realm landscape theme, Lots 2, 5,
and 13 should be slightly widened at the front property line, in coordination with
staff.
2. Transitional Arrival & Entry Spaces
Architectural extensions at the dwelling entrance should be included to provide a
transitional space between the public realm and the front door. These spaces must also
function as useable outdoor space for the residents. The design of these spaces should
highlight the primary entrance to the dwelling unit and be located at a comfortable
conversational distance from the public sidewalk.
Per the Preliminary Development Plan exhibits, all homes are to be custom designed
to conform to the conditions, topography, configuration and restrictions of its lot. No
specific architectural plans have been provided.
▫ To ensure that this objective of the Neighborhood Design Guidelines is met, it is
recommended that provisions be included in the Development Text to ensure that
the main entrances be designed as useable spaces that are prominently located
in relation to the street.
3. Architectural Composition, Diversity, and Materials
The facades of dwelling units are the most character defining element of the streetscape.
The dwellings should have a timeless, high-quality design, with massing and details at a
pedestrian-scale which contribute to the overall character of the streetscape. Where a
range of dwelling types are proposed, varying dwelling types along the same block face is
encouraged as a means to provide variety and visual interest. The massing and
articulation of dwellings, and a variety of exterior materials should provide architectural
diversity to the streetscape. Exterior cladding materials should be long-lasting, low-
maintenance and repairable over time.
Per the Preliminary Development Plan exhibits, all homes are to be custom designed
to conform to the conditions, topography, configuration and restrictions of its lot. No
specific architectural plans have been provided.
The proposed Development Text states that the single family detached homes will be
high quality, 1.5 to 2 stories in height with 2 to 3 car garages and with possible
auxiliary structures, and that the proposed homes will complement the quality of the
homes in surrounding neighborhoods and adhere to the Residential Appearance
Standards.
Architectural Diversity is proposed, limiting the repetition of the same or similar front
elevations throughout the neighborhood.
▫ The proposed intent to build custom homes designed in response to each lot, the
commitment to an architectural diversity matrix, together with the garage
location and orientation recommendations below meets the Neighborhood
Design Guidelines objective of facilitating a high-quality streetscape.
C. Design Objectives—Garages
The presence of front-loaded garages should be minimized to the maximum extent possible to
maintain high-quality pedestrian-oriented streetscapes.
1. Garage Location & Orientation
Attached, front-loaded garages should be located a minimum of 20 feet behind the
primary façade of the dwelling. Where side-loaded garages are proposed on lots narrower
than 85 feet, garage doors are recommended to be located at least 10 feet back from the
front façade of the dwelling to allow for landscape screening.
The Development Text states that “Garage orientation is to be determined in the
context of individual site topography, configuration, existing preserved trees,
jurisdictional restrictions and platted setbacks. Any front-facing garages will be set
back from the front face of the body of the home. Ancillary ‘third car’ garages may be
provided.”
▫ To ensure that the objectives of the Neighborhood Design Guidelines are met,
minimum setbacks should be included in the Development Text for front and side
loaded garages relative to the front façade of the home.
2. Garage Doors & Facades
The design of garage doors and the façade of the garage surrounding the door can reduce
the negative visual impact of front-loaded garages by reducing the size of doors, the
number of doors that may be on the same plane. The detailing of the garage doors and
elements surrounding the door can further diminish the visual impact of garages to the
streetscape.
The Development Text states that “Garages will be architecturally consistent with the
main building façade, with decorative garage doors a maximum of 18 feet wide.
▫ This is consistent with the Neighborhood Design Guidelines objectives.
III. Private Realm
A. Design Objectives for Lot Elements
1. Front Building Setback
Lots 60 feet and wider should generally implement the standard front building setback.
For all lot types, the front setbacks should be staggered along the block face to create
variety along the streetscape.
The standard front setbacks based on 50’ and 40’ wide rights-of-way are a minimum
of 30 feet based on the Subdivision Regulations. As proposed, Lots 2, 5, 10 and 13
have a minimum front building setback of 15 feet, based on the tapered configuration
of these lots toward the right-of-way. All remaining Lots have a Front Build-to-Zone of
15 to 20 feet.
▫ Homes on the four Lots featuring a 15-foot minimum setback will likely need to
be set back a distance greater than minimum required based on the narrow,
tapered configuration toward the front of the Lots, and the practicality of siting a
home on these Lots. To provide more flexibility in the siting of driveways and
homes Lots 2, 5, and 13 should be slightly widened at the front property line, in
coordination with staff.
▫ Although the 15-to-20-foot Front Build-to-Zone may result in staggered setbacks
among adjacent lots, there is no requirement in the Development Text to do so.
2. Side Yards
The appropriate side yard widths will vary based several factors--the overall lot width, the
width of the front facade of the dwelling relative to the lot width, and the prominence of
the garage in the design of the front façade. Side yards should be wide enough to allow
for positive drainage between adjacent dwelling units, and in no case should the minimum
side yard be less than six feet wide on one side and a total side yard width of 14 feet on
both side for detached dwelling units. Where six-foot side yards are used, AC units should
be located in the rear yard.
The proposed minimum side yard dimension as outlined in the Development Text is 6
feet on one side and 14 feet total. On the Preliminary Development Plan exhibit the
minimum side yard dimension depicted is 6 feet on both sides.
▫ The Neighborhood Design Guidelines recommend that in no case shall the side
yards be less than 6 feet on one side and 14 feet total. No information has been
provided about the typical width of the homes proposed to be constructed, but
lots of this width typically have greater minimum and total side yard dimensions
than proposed.
3. Maximum Buildable Depth/Buildable Area
The maximum buildable depth on each lot from the front building setback should be
provided to ensure that adequate space remains at the rear of the lot for private outdoor
space. The maximum buildable depth will vary based on the dwelling type proposed and
should be provided with each building type proposed as part of the Preliminary
Development Plan application.
4. Rear Yard
Minimum rear yards ensure that adequate space is reserved for private open space.
Private open space should be provided with each dwelling unit and is defined as the space
between the maximum buildable depth and the minimum rear yard.
5. Private Open Space Area
The private open space area defines the physical envelope of the lot where decks, patios,
hardscape, seat walls, pools, play equipment, and other outdoor improvements may be
constructed. To ensure that a minimum amount of private open space is provided with
each unit type proposed, the maximum buildable depth of the primary structure on the
lot must be indicated on the Lot Type Examples submittal. The typical minimum amount
of private open space on any lot should not be less than 150-square feet, with a minimum
dimension of 10 feet. The actual amount required will vary based on the dwelling type
and be determined by City of Dublin staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission.
The Development Text proposes a range of dimensional requirements for Maximum
Buildable Depth, Rear Yards, and Private Open Space Areas which are tailored to
specific lots based on the lot configuration.
▫ There are a number of inconsistencies in the numeric standards proposed for
several of the lots for these elements, such that the numbers do not add up
correctly. Revisions will be required to the Development Text to ensure that
adequate depth is available for both the buildable area of the house and private
open space while maintaining a minimum rear yard buffer to the adjacent lot.
6. Lot Coverage
Code requires that in residential Planned Unit Developments, lot coverage is not
permitted to exceed 45%. Higher lot coverage should be reserved for dwelling types not
presently available and which meet or exceed the high architectural quality of existing
housing stock in the city.
The maximum lot coverage proposed is 45%.
▫ The proposed lot coverage is consistent with other similar sized lots within the
City and the Neighborhood Design Guideline recommendations.
B. Lot Type Examples
Diagrammatic examples of all of the proposed lot/dwelling types proposed should be
provided. Lot Type Diagrams should not be depicted in isolation, but as a cluster of the
dwelling type to convey the larger development pattern that the dwelling type will create.
A single dwelling type is proposed—detached single-family residences, on lots with an
average area of 13,623 square feet. Conceptual Lot Diagrams have been included for
several lots in isolation, as well as a row of conceptually developed lots reflected as a
streetscape character elevation.
▫ The Lot Type Examples provided depict the smallest lot proposed (Lot 19) and a
walk-out lot (Lot 12) conceptually developed at the maximum lot coverage
permitted, as well as Lots 2 and 5 which are corner lots with minimal street
frontage.
▫ The Lot Type Example exhibits effectively depict a range of conceptually
developed lots, as recommended by the Neighborhood Design Guidelines. As
noted several of the dimensional discrepancies must be revised in the proposed
Development Text.
In reviewing the submitted application materials, it is my opinion that minor revisions are
required to both the proposed Development Text and Preliminary and/or Final Development
Plan exhibits to resolve discrepancies between these documents. Additionally, more specific
regulations should be provided in the Development Text as noted in the analysis and in
coordination with staff to ensure that various objectives of the Neighborhood Design Guidelines
are achieved. I would be pleased to discuss any of these items with you in greater detail at your
convenience. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Daniel Phillabaum, AICP, RLA
Owner | Landplan Studios, LLC
Office: 614.567.2000
Mobile: 614.327.5524
E-Mail: dan@landplanstudios.com
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS
Planning & Zoning Commission
Thursday, June 20, 2024, 6:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rebecca Call, Kathy Harter, Kim Way, Jamey Chinnock,
Gary Alexander, Jason Deschler
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dan Garvin
ACCEPTANCE OF DOCUMENTS/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION CARRIED 4-0 TO ACCEPT THE DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD AND
APPROVE THE PZC REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF 05-23-2024
(Mr. Alexander and Mr. Deschler abstained.)
CASE REVIEW
Case #24-075CU – Round Table
Request to allow an Entertainment and Recreation use in an existing tenant space. The 10.89-
acre site is zoned TF, Technology Flex and is located approximately 510 feet southwest of
the intersection of Shier Rings Road and Shamrock Court.
MOTION CARRIED 6-0 TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE
Case #24-054FDP – Lightbridge Academy
Request for review and approval of a daycare with associated site improvements. The 1.68-
acre site is zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District, The Corners, and is located
approximately 270 feet west of the intersection of Frantz Road and Blazer Parkway.
MOTION CARRIED 5-0 TO APPROVE THE TWO TEXT MODIFICATIONS
(Mr. Alexander was recused.)
MOTION CARRIED 5-0 TO APPROVE THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH CONDITIONS
(Mr. Alexander was recused.)
Public Comment: None
Next Steps: Submission of building permit.
Case #24-069CP – The Farms at Cosgray
Concept Plan review and feedback for 52 detached single-family lots and associated site
improvements. The approximately 30.6-acre site is zoned R, Rural District and is located
west of the intersection of Cosgray Road and Barronsmore Way.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Summary of Actions – June 20, 2024
Page 2 of 4
Commission members were not supportive of the proposed residential land use for this
parcel, as it does not align with the Interim Land Use principles and recommendations of
the Future Land Use designation and Special Area Plan for this parcel.
Public Comment: A resident expressed concern about the location of the proposed
residential development along the railroad tracks.
Next Steps: A Preliminary Development Plan/Rezoning would be the next step in the process
of creating a future Planned Unit Development.
Case #24-073CP – Bright Road Reserve
Concept Plan review and feedback for 20 single-family estate lots and associated site
improvements. The 13.94-acre site is zoned R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District
and is located north of the intersection of Grandee Cliffs Drive and Bright Road.
Commission members expressed support of the development proposal, finding it responsive
to the natural features with the clustered layout. The members supported the architectural
concept and recommended the architecture fit with the surrounding context and provide
continuity within the development. They were appreciative that the applicant met with the
neighborhood. The members recommended adding connectivity with the surrounding area,
including the adjacent school and park. The Commissioners indicated that the central green
space should be a focal point for the neighborhood and less about stormwater
management. The members requested the applicant work to address the resident concerns
related to provision of buffering adjacent to existing residential and look for opportunity to
reduce the density.
Public Comment: Several residents provided feedback about the proposal. The comments
focused on the proposed density, limited buffering next to existing residential development,
and current and future traffic challenges. The East Civic Association was represented and
expressed appreciation of the developer and owner meeting with them and keeping them
informed. The Civic Association expressed support for the proposed development and
enthusiasm for the proposal.
Next Steps: A Preliminary Development Plan/Rezoning would be the next step in process of
creating a future Planned Unit Development.
Case #24-055INF – Townes on Tuttle
Informal review and feedback of a development consisting of 126 attached single-family
units and associated site improvements. The 21.8-acre site is zoned R-1, Restricted
Suburban Residential District and is located southwest of the intersection of Tuttle Crossing
Boulevard and Hirth Road.
Commission members recognized the opportunity for development to occur on the site, but
expressed concerns about the proposal. They were not supportive of the proposed layout
MEETING MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Commission
Thursday, June 20, 2024
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Call called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in Council Chamber and welcomed everyone to
the June 20, 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: Rebecca Call, Jamey Chinnock, Kim Way, Kathy Harter, Jason
Deschler, Gary Alexander
Commission members absent: Dan Garvin
Staff members present: Jennifer Rauch, Bassem Bitar, Thaddeus Boggs, Daniel Klein,
Tina Wawszkiewicz
CHANGE TO AGENDA ORDER
Ms. Call stated that the agenda order would be revised to move Case 24-055INF – Townes on Tuttle,
to be heard second on the agenda.
ACCEPTANCE OF DOCUMENTS
Mr. Way moved, Ms. Harter seconded acceptance of the documents into the record and approval
of the May 23, 2024 meeting minutes.
Vote: Mr. Chinnock, yes; Ms. Call, yes; Ms. Harter, yes; Mr. Way, yes; Mr. Alexander, abstain; Mr.
Deschler, abstain.
[Motion carried 4-0 with 2 abstentions]
Ms. Call stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) 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 staff and audience members, who anticipated providing testimony.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – June 20, 2024
Page 9 of 29
Ms. Call stated that looking at the area comprehensively, there is some work needed on this plan.
Although MI Homes is proposing the residential component of the mixed use anticipated here,
there may be opportunity to look at a development text for a Master Plan for the entire parcel. MI
Homes could develop the residential component, and a commercial or retail developer could
develop the corner piece. Comprehensively, we could look at opportunities to plan and activate the
open space; bring amenities to the residents and the City as a whole; and address traffic and safety
concerns. The Commission is also challenged to look at the public realm. The City wants to protect
its green spaces and the wild life, but also have it be usable; it wants to encourage walkability.
Private roadways in developments are an issue. Because they are not built to the same standards
as public roads, the City cannot later assume responsibility for them. She inquired if the applicant
needed further clarification from the Commission.
Mr. Underhill responded that they appreciate the comprehensive comments offered.
Case #24-073CP – Bright Road Reserve
A Concept Plan review and feedback for 20 single-family estate lots and associated site
improvements. The 13.94-acre site is zoned R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District and is
located north of the intersection of Grandee Cliffs Drive and Bright Road.
Applicant Presentation
Bill Adams, 8824 Dunsinane Drive, Dublin stated that he has been a resident of Dublin for 30+
years, and his children graduated from Jerome High School. His real estate career began in Dublin
with Jim Pickett, who had an office in Metro Center. He has completed numerous projects
throughout Dublin. Specifically, in east Dublin, He was VP of Development for Dublin Village Center
and Campden Lakes, working with his father, Howard Adams. He stated that the development
team consists of Brian Kinzelman, MKSK, Planner and Landscape Architect; Joe Aleno, President,
Corinthian Builders; Tom Warner, Advanced Civil Design; and Brian Kent Jones, residential
architecture consultant.
Brian Kinzelman, 462 S. Ludlow Street, Columbus stated that he and Mr. Adams have been looking
at this site for 3-4 years. It is tailor made for the proposal they will show to the Commission tonight.
It is a beautiful site with challenges, but its natural features are wonderful. It is within a beautiful
neighborhood on a beautiful street that has very little traffic now that Bright Road does not go all
the way to Riverside Drive. It is a prime time to fit some beautiful residential development into a
beautiful neighborhood. The Billingsley Run woodlot is on the east side of the site, and the West
Wood lies on the west. The West Wood receives drainage from the residential development to the
north. In the center of the site, there was once a single-family home, which recently was
demolished. A swimming pool and garage remain on the site, as well as the driveway that led back
to the home site. The development will be placed in the center portion of the site, preserving the
two wooded areas and the perimeter greenspace. They have done a tree study, and the perimeter
tree stand is of high quality; the middle trees less so. The trees along Billingsley Run are
magnificent. They are in the floodway, the stream corridor protection zone, so will be preserved.
They were attracted to the site due to its natural features, the rural landscape of the surrounding
neighborhood, and the culture and history of Dublin next door to the site. The latter includes the
Mound Builders Park (Ferris-Wright Park) to the south, the riverfront to the west, and a short walk
away, Bridge Park. The site is very well positioned in terms of what Dublin has to offer. The Bright
Road street character is beautiful and quiet, once past the roundabout, as there is no through
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – June 20, 2024
Page 10 of 29
traffic. The quality of life they anticipate will be spectacular. They anticipate having only 20 lots
on this 14-acre site. The homes will be $1.5 - $2 million single-family homes, all developed in one
phase with public roadways and utilities. The architecture will be controlled. Corinthian Fine Homes
will develop the entire site with custom homes, themed as the Hamlet in the Park. Each home will
have some distinct character but a commonality of materials and architectural forms and shapes.
All of the homes will face the street with very well-tailored outdoor space, proverbial indoor-outdoor
living with dining terraces, probably some swimming pools, spas and gazebos. They are big lots
but are clustered. The home lots have frontages of 90-120 feet and lot depths of 110-140 feet.
This is a Concept Plan, so much more design work is anticipated. The perimeter trees will be
preserved. They do not anticipate this being a gated community or an encased community. It will
be part of the neighborhood, not exclusive of it, but will preserve everyone’s privacy. Part of the
West Wood will be used for stormwater management. They will extend the drainage from the
subdivision to the north through the backyards of the anticipated homes, perhaps moving it through
conduits to the Bright Road storm sewers. The central court of the development is an intentional
greenspace; it is not a wide cul de sac. Stormwater management may be included in that center
court, perhaps in a showcased manner. There are two watersheds on this site. The east court
may be used for stormwater management, as well, with porous pavement and subsurface lines.
There will be a gateway entrance at Bright Road, and they will incorporate an intimate streetscape
with sidewalk on one side only. The development will have such low density, that they prefer to
have greenspace on one side. That is not a cost issue, but a character issue. The greenspace
along the frontage will be large fir trees augmented with under-story plant materials. They will also
infill plants on the north property line, where there are gaps.
Staff Presentation
Mr. Bitar stated that this is a Concept Plan, so at this point, only nonbinding feedback is requested,
no decision. If the plan moves forward, there will be a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) and stormwater
and utility studies. The next step is a Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan, which is then
followed by a Final Development Plan. Mr. Kinzelman explained the site well, so he would not spend
time on that, other than to say that it is located within the Suburban Rural Residential Land Use
designation, according to the current Community Plan. It is within the Residential, Low Density
Future Land Use designation within the new Envision Dublin Community Plan that is now in the
adoption process. Both plans are generally similar with one-acre lots clustered to preserve
greenspace. The proposal will require a rezoning to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) that
includes 20 single-family lots on the 14-acre site, 1.4 du/acre. The entry drive will be in the same
location as the existing driveway, which is in line with the street to the south. The entry drive will
curve, allowing for natural views. There is a focal point with Lot 7 that may need to be addressed.
The main entry drive would have a 50-ft. right-of way; the rest of the drive would be 40 feet, with
sidewalk on one side of the drive. The preserves will be along the floodplain; Billingsley Run lies
on the east side and the West Woods on the west side. The development is eligible for the
Conservation Design Resolution. It also would need to follow the Neighborhood Design Guidelines.
Both documents provide guidance on open space preservation. They do not completely align, so
they will be looking for the solution that makes the most sense moving forward. For instance, the
center court technically does not meet the requirements for the Conservation Design Resolution,
so it will be looked at comprehensively. Similarly, the stormwater detention would result in the
removal of some of the tree canopy, but the Neighborhood Design Guidelines do allow for
stormwater within those conservation areas, as long as they are amenitized. The lot sizes will be
90-100 ft. x 110-140 ft. deep, so are smaller than the lots in the surrounding neighborhoods; most
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – June 20, 2024
Page 11 of 29
of those lots were developed some time ago in a more rural setting. The applicant is proposing
buffers along the site perimeter and Bright Road. The building materials are traditional – brick,
stone and cementious siding. Each home lot will be different, but there will be a unified theme.
The application mentioned thin brick, so that will be a future discussion point. Staff has provided
the following questions to guide the Commission’s discussion:
1)Is the Commission supportive of the proposed use, densities, and lot types?
2)Is the Commission supportive of the proposed open space framework?
3)Is the Commission supportive of the proposed layout?
4)Is the Commission supportive of the proposed neighborhood theme and architectural
inspiration?
5)Other considerations?
Commission Questions
Mr. Way requested additional description of the stormwater detention proposed in the West Woods
area.
Mr. Kinzelman responded that this area is the low end of the site, currently where the stormwater
runs. They have inventoried the wood lot, and the arborist indicates only 27% if the existing trees
are classified as good; the remainder are fair or poor. They believe they should be able to
implement some stormwater management there. Both of the greenspaces on the site will be
intentional, public park space, incorporating soft surface trails connecting to the sidewalk and street
system. There will be 3 green easements, which will provide access to the greenspace without
need to walk through backyards.
Mr. Way inquired if the area would include intentional stormwater retention areas.
Mr. Kinzelman responded affirmatively. They would like to incorporate a sunken basin that is
landscaped, not a wet detention basin full of water. It will be a usable open space, which could
include some casual seating areas. They do not intend to fence any of the site, not even the
frontage.
Mr. Way inquired if the center court would incorporate a roundabout drive or if it could have a road
on only one side.
Mr. Kinzelman responded that he believes that could be possible. This is the Concept Plan stage,
so the roadways will be developed further. Their intent is to have intentional, manicured open
space to serve as the central focus of the community. In the outer areas, there would be naturalized
open spaces. The contrast between the two would be outstanding.
Mr. Way noted that it could be improved by having less concrete or asphalt.
Mr. Kinzelman responded that they would be having those conversations with Engineering. They
are aware the street standards are being re-visited. They agree that more green is better than
more gray. He is hopeful the center court will be curb-less. It is preferable that it be more like a
parkway than a large cul-de-sac.
Mr. Way requested clarification of the intent for stormwater detention in the center court.
Mr. Kinzelman responded that the east court will have porous pavement; stormwater also may be
captured in subterranean facilities. This is a smaller watershed than the larger one to the west. He
will defer to Engineering on the matter. However, both drainage channels end up in the same
place.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – June 20, 2024
Page 12 of 29
Mr. Way stated that they have indicated the perimeter trees are nice and in good condition. Is the
landscape buffer intended to protect the drip line of those trees or more?
Mr. Kinzelman responded affirmatively. The property owner planted most of the trees in the
clearing and certainly on the perimeter to provide a level of privacy. Now, what started as shrub
are 20-ft. tall trees. The Spruce trees along the frontage have limbed themselves up over the years,
and the tree stands need to be both trimmed and augmented.
Ms. Harter stated if the detention area will be usable greenspace, would the grasses be coarse and
a less friendly play area.
Mr. Kinzelman responded that he does not believe the area will be manicured but will be low-lying
native grasses.
Ms. Harter inquired if the sidewalk will be on only one side of the interior roadway, it would be
wider than the typical sidewalk.
Mr. Kinzelman stated that they would defer to Engineering. If more sidewalk is indicated, they will
install it.
Ms. Harter inquired if the garages would be 3-car and side-loaded.
Mr. Kinzelman responded that most of the garages would be side-loaded. There are different ways
of orienting buildings on the outside corner lots. They will be 2-car garages, perhaps with an
auxiliary third car bay or a cabana area for a pool, outdoor kitchen or gazebo.
Ms. Harter inquired if the homes would have individualized landscaping, a type of green
architecture.
Mr. Kinzelman responded that there would be architectural and site design guidelines. Corinthian
Homes will build each of the homes, so there will be tight architectural and landscape controls. The
front yards are important, but the private space to the rear of the homes will be homeowner-
determined. Some homeowners will want pools; others will want large dining terraces. Due to the
topography, there may be some basement walkout opportunities.
Mr. Alexander stated that the architect’s rendering indicates some of the home footprints will
extend deep into the rear-yard setback. It looks like some of the traditional rear-yard recreation
space is being sacrificed to have more frontage.
Mr. Kinzelman responded that they have discussed that point, and are contemplating decreasing
the front yard setback to bring the home footprints up to the street frontage to alter that sense of
scale. That would provide more backyard space. He may need to alter the roadway system to
create more backyard areas. He believes the future homeowners will be primarily empty nesters,
dual-income, more interested in entertainment space than mown lawn areas.
Mr. Alexander noted that this is a different site condition that is being proposed than the traditional
neighborhood. He likes the wider lot widths. The garage need can be solved in different ways.
Mr. Chinnock stated that a bikepath is indicated in the Billingsley Run area. It would seem to be a
missed opportunity not to connect it to Hopewell Elementary School. Was that intentional?
Mr. Kinzelman responded that there will be a soft-surface trail along the frontage and through all
the greenspaces. At this juncture, they are not proposing any paved bike trail along the frontage
of Bright Road, as there is no connection point.
Mr. Chinnock agreed that there would be no need to provide a connection from the soft-surface
trail. On the West Wood side, there is a similar trail that dead-ends at Bright Road.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – June 20, 2024
Page 13 of 29
Mr. Kinzelman responded that they want to get the soft-surface trail down to Bright Road. Right
across the street is a park, which would be a great amenity for the future residents of this
development. The neighbors would also be able to pass through this development, as well as
potential users of the West Wood park area. He will defer to Engineering on the potential need
for a crosswalk.
Mr. Deschler inquired if the central court would be a mowed area or include some stormwater
management.
Mr. Kinzelman responded that in the Concept Stage, that is not yet determined, but he believes it
may include stormwater management. If so, it will be the proverbial sunken garden, a low fescue
grass area that could fill up with water after a thunderstorm.
Mr. Deschler inquired if due to the topography, it would not be possible to have the large central
court area be a manicured area.
Mr. Kinzelman responded that it might be possible, if they can locate all of the stormwater
management in the West Wood area, the low portion of the site. If that occurs, stormwater
management would not need to be incorporated in the central court area. For maintenance
purposes, it would be easier to have all of the stormwater facilities in one place versus two.
Mr. Deschler stated that he concurs with Mr. Alexander’s observance about the limited rear yard
space. It is preferable to avoid the need for homeowners to obtain variances later to add rear yard
structures.
Mr. Kinzelman concurred.
Mr. Deschler noted that staff has indicated 14 home sites would be the preferred number on this
site, rather than the 20 home sites currently proposed. Why does the applicant believe 20 home
lots would be no issue?
Mr. Kinzelman responded that the proposed lots are estate size. Their preference is to properly size
the lots to the homes that will be placed upon them, and then to consolidate as much open space
and preserve as much greenspace as possible. They would need to address specifically only the
center court area. Finally, for the development to be economically feasible, they need to have a
few more home sites on the site than the current zoning permits.
Ms. Call inquired if the applicant had considered how they would treat Lot #7 at the terminus of
the street entry.
Mr. Kinzelman responded that he anticipates a key piece of architecture. They may pull the east-
west road on the north side down somewhat and create more movement along the east-west
roadway. The terminus piece may contain a landscape feature, such as a Dublinesque low stone
wall. It is a great lot, and more thought will go into that element.
Public Comment
John Rahm, 4273 Hanna Hills Drive, Dublin stated that he lives directly behind this project. He has
polled some of his neighbors. The biggest concern they have is that there are 7 homes extended
across the back of the site in a straight line with a 20-ft. setback. The current condition he and his
neighbors have is very nice with the Scioto Park, Thaddeus Kosciuszko Park, etc. They are nicely
isolated. The developer is proposing to construct a row of houses across the back of the site. In
Riverside Woods, a section of that development has only 2 homes within 30 feet of the Hanna Hills
properties. Everything else extends at obtuse angles to the sides. They are asking that the
applicant consider placing smaller lots at the front and larger lots at the back in order to provide
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – June 20, 2024
Page 14 of 29
more greenspace between the properties.
Randy Roth, 6987 Grandee Cliffs Drive, Dublin stated that he is vice president of the East Dublin
Civic Association and is representing his neighborhood. The civic association was founded in 1987
as an umbrella organization to represent all of the residential neighborhoods east of the river that
are within the City of Dublin. He would like to thank Mr. Adams and the property owner for meeting
with the civic association officers several times and the entire membership last month. They have
kept them informed throughout, and they have been open to listening to the neighbors’ concerns.
As some of the older residents, they were excited to hear that Mr. Adams was interested in this
property, because they worked with his father, Howard Adams, in creating Campden Lakes several
years ago. The one concern of the neighbors, which they have shared with Mr. Adams, is the
landscaping along the existing homes in the north. The neighbors to the south are very happy with
the landscaping plan and restoration of the fence along Bright Road. The previous owners of this
site built a lovely home, but it sadly was destroyed in a fire. Other than the original use, what is
proposed is a nice use of the property, recognizing that much of the site is undevelopable. Turning
those undevelopable areas into an amenity for these anticipated residents, but also for the entire
neighborhood, is generous. They defer to the developer and staff’s experience on the architecture,
road design and the best lot configuration to address the concerns on the north side. He has seen
much enthusiasm for this project.
Ms. Call noted that additional public comments were received before the meeting and provided to
the Commission. [Commission members confirmed that they had read the public comments.]
Commission Discussion
Mr. Chinnock stated that he believes this is a very nice use of the site. The developers have come
up with a very attractive plan. Although some details need to be worked through with staff, it
sounds as though they are very willing to do so. The Commission appreciates their meeting with
the neighborhood. The applicant has done a very good job creating a plan that will fit the site in a
way that respects the conditions. The greenspace is great. His only comment is that while the
inspirational architecture is beautiful, he wants to make sure it blends with the surrounding area.
He understands the economics that drive the need for 20 lots, and the applicant’s vision makes
sense of the space.
Mr. Deschler stated that he is supportive of the proposed use and the proposed building materials.
He understands the stormwater management challenges but believes it would be nice if the center
court open space were not used for water detention purposes. If it is part of the design, however,
he appreciates that it will be hidden by trees. He would recommend efforts be made to alleviate
the straight row of houses along the north perimeter. Perhaps if some of those homes can have
walkout levels, it would add some variation to the look.
Mr. Alexander stated that he is very supportive, even enthused about the plan. He would have
enjoyed looking at more design details tonight. The landscape presentation was very impressive.
He is supportive of most of what has been proposed. He is less concerned about the architecture
matching the surrounding community, because these lots are quite a distance from the existing
homes, which were built at a different time. The market is different today, and the architecture of
the homes should reflect the time period in which they are built. Creating continuity within the
proposed community is more valuable that making linkages to homes that are significant distances
Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes – June 20, 2024
Page 15 of 29
away. The image provided is often used to show communities with shared public space. There is
a concern expressed that the center public space be less about stormwater management and more
about usable public space. This will be one of the most important components of the project. The
architecture should be subordinate to the design of the space. Essentially, that is occurring with
the landscape, as well. He likes the proposed theme for the architecture.
Mr. Way stated that this is a very exciting proposal, a great example of the City’s Conservation
Design Guidelines implemented. This is one of the first developments that has come before the
Commission that addresses those guidelines. It takes advantage of a site that is calling out for it.
He applauds the applicant for a proposal that is responsive to the sensitive nature of the site. It is
attempting to create something unique here through clustering the residential, as opposed to
spreading it out. The center greenspace is a valuable piece of this design. He agrees that if it gets
taken over by stormwater management, it could go the wrong way. Earlier, he made the
observation that if they could eliminate the roadway on one side, they could create more
greenspace. He would encourage them to explore that opportunity. The neighbors expressed their
concern tonight about the north edge of the site. He would encourage them to preserve those
trees and ensure sufficient setback not to impede those efforts. The neighbors have expressed a
desire to see more trees and more buffer added to the plan. He is hopeful that the applicant will
meet with the neighbors and work out something that will meet that intent. He heard positive
comments from the neighbors about the development in general. He believes if the buffer is the
only contention, there is opportunity to work that out. He realizes that there are evergreens along
Bright Road. Bright Road is about buildings fronting to it. He would hope that as they look at the
design of the buildings on the lots, including the garages, that the homes will appear to be fronting
Bright Road, not disengaging from it. He believes pulling the buildings to the street and creating
an urban design feel to the development could be spectacular.
Ms. Harter stated that she is supportive of the proposal, as well. She appreciates that the applicant
has met with the East Dublin Civic Association. She would encourage them to keep the green treed
look along Bright Road, even the brown fencing. She appreciates the applicant’s efforts to use
landscaping with the architecture to create outdoor living areas. The landscaping surprise is a
positive element.
Ms. Call stated that Dublin is patient. Residents in the Bright Road area have seen applications that
were not what was wanted in this particular area. She appreciates seeing an application that is
more of what we want in this particular area. She echoes the neighbors’ comments about lot size.
While economics are not a consideration of the Planning and Zoning Commission, they are the
developer’s reality. She would recommend the developer look for opportunity for lot deletion in the
center section (Lots 17-20) and across the back section when they are pulling the lots forward.
This is a beautiful project – not what we see every day. The Commission appreciates that!
She inquired if there is additional clarification the applicant is seeking.
Mr. Kinzelman responded that they appreciate the great comments, all of which are taken under
advisement.
Ms. Call noted that a vote is taken on some Concept Plans.
Mr. Boggs responded that votes are taken only on Concept Plans within the Bridge Street District.
Ms. Call stated that tonight’s comments were informal feedback. The Commission looks forward to
a future Preliminary Development Plan/Rezoning application for this parcel.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
BOARD ORDER
DECEMBER 16, 1999
CITY OF D[BLI\
Division of Planning
5800 Shier•Rings Road
Dublin, Ohio 43016-1136
Phone/TDD:614.761-6550
Fax: 614-161-6566
Web Site: www.dublin.oh.us
The Board of Zoning Appeals took the following action at this meeting.
1. Variance 99-1O5V - 4338 Bright Road
Location: 15.74 acres located on the north side of Bright Road, approximately 1,600
feet east of Riverside Drive (SR 257).
Existing Zoning: R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District.
Request: A variance to Section 153.074 to permit an increase in the permitted size of
an accessory structure from 25 percent of the livable area of the principal structure to
33 percent (from 1,819 square feet to 2,400 square feet).
Proposed Use: The construction of a 60' x 40' barn (2,400 square feet) to the rear of
an existing 7,274 square foot single-family residence.
Applicant: Anthony R. Weiher, 4338 Bright Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017.
MOTION: To approve this variance with seven conditions:
1) That the use of this accessory structure be clearly defined and limited to storage
of the resident's equipment and vehicles, a "hobby" workshop for this residence,
and that it cannot be used for living or business purposes, including without
limitation, the rehabilitation and sales of automobiles for profit under any
circumstances;
2) That water and sewer services not be extended to this building to limit
inappropriate reuse in the future;
3) That the two existing accessory buildings be removed from the site prior to
issuance of a building permit for the proposed structure;
4) That the accessory structure be screened on all sides by a minimum of 14
evergreen trees (five to six feet in height at installation), subject to staff
approval;
5) That if the parcel-would be reduced from 15.74 acres, the variance be rescinded
requiring that the approved barn structure be removed from the site;
6) That the variance and these conditions be recorded with the Franklin County
Auditor's office, and that the applicant show proof of the recording prior to
issuance of building permits; and
Page 1 of 2
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
BOARD ORDER
DECEMBER 16, 1999
1. Variance 99-1O5V - 4338 Bright Road (Cont.)
7) That the current attached garage of 650 square feet be converted into living space
within twelve months of building the new accessory structure.
Glen Aurelius, representing the owner, accepted the above conditions.
VOTE: 4-0-1
RESULT: This variance was approved.
RECORDED VOTES:
Brent Davis Yes
Chester Porembski Yes
Ruth Meeker Reiss Abstain
Amy Salay Yes
William Sherman Yes
STAFF CERTIFICATION
Barbara Clarke
Planning Director
Page 2 of 2
rr~~ uH~ ~~~ i~i.i~
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
BOARD ORDER
NOVEMBER 18,1999
The Board of Zoning Appeals took the following action at this meeting:
1. Variance 99-1O5V - 4338 Bright Road
Location: 15.74 acres located on the north side of Bright Road, approximately 1,600 feet east of
Riverside Drive (SR 257).
Existing Zoning: R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District.
Request: A variance to Section 153.074 to permit an increase in the permitted size of an accessory
structure from 25 percent of the livable area of the principal structure to 33 percent (from 1,819
square feet to 2,400 square feet).
Proposed Use: The construction of a 60' x 40' barn (2,400 square feet) to the rear of an existing
7,274 square foot single-family residence.
Applicant: Anthony R. Weiher, 4338 Bright Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017.
MOTION: To table this variance application for the purpose of 1) examining alternate building
materials, 2) submitting a revised landscape plan identifying species size, type, and
location, and 3) to notify adjacent property owners.
VOTE: 5 - 0
RESULT: This variance application was tabled.
RECORDED VOTES:
Brent Davis Yes
Chester Porembski Yes
Ruth Meeker Reiss Yes
Amy Salay Yes
William Sherman Yes
STAFF CERTIFICATION
Q~.~a.
Barbara Clarke
Planning Director
99-1O5V
Weiher Residence
4338 Bright Road
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
BOARD ORDER
OCTOBER 28, 1999
r~ ~~~~ i~~ iti.i~
The Board of Zoning Appeals took the following action at this meeting:
4. Variance 99-1O5V - 4338 Bright Road
Location: 15.74 acres located on the north side of Bright Road, approximately 1,600 feet east
of Riverside Drive (SR 257).
Existing Zoning: R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District.
Request: A variance to Section 153.074 to permit. an increase in the permitted size of an
accessory structure from 25 percent of the livable area of the principal structure to 57 percent
from 1,056 square feet to 2,400 square feet).
Proposed Use: The construction of a 60' x 40' barn (2,400 square feet) to the rear of an existing
4,227 square foot single-family residence.
Applicant: Anthony R. Weiher, 4338 Bright Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017.
MOTION: To table this variance application for the purpose of obtaining building permits for existing
expansions to the home, to obtain the exact dimensions of any accessory structures (including the pool)
to remain on the property, to obtain the accurate distances between accessory structures and property
lines, to identify the building materials of the new structure, and to submit a revised site plan.
VOTE: 5-0
RESULT: This variance application was tabled.
RECORDED VOTES:
Brent Davis Yes
Chester Porembski Yes
Ruth Meeker Reiss Yes
Amy Salay Yes
William Sherman Yes
STAFF CERTIFICATION
Barbara M. Clarke
Planning Director
1 of 2
EDCA Meeting
Tuesday October 29, 2024
Northwest Library, 2280 Hard Rd.
6:00-7:30pm
I. Brief welcome – Thank you to the residents in attendance
II. 4338 Bright Road Preliminary Development Plan – Presenter: Brian Kinzelman, MKSK
a. The plan is slightly reconfigured since last presented. The new configuration retains 20
lots but shifts the lots so there are only 6 (not 7) along the northern property line.
b. The eastern portion of the site along Billingsley Run will remain as-is in a natural state
without trails. The creek bed will be cleared of necessary debris, as needed, to allow
proper water flow.
c. The western portion of the site will be a dry basin retention area meant to temporarily
hold water during rain events and to capture run-off from the development and from
Hanna Hills.
d. Trees along the northern and southern property lines will remain intact and be
supplemented with additional plantings.
e. The fence along the southern property line will be repaired. But, this will not be a
fenced or gated community.
f. The developer will be finalizing a Planned Unit Development (PUD) text which will detail
the site and HOA requirements. This development text is part of the preliminary and
final development plan submissions to the City Planning & Zoning Commission.
g. See attached slides for the latest preliminary development plan which shall be
presented to the Planning & Zoning Commission hopefully at the Nov. 21, 2024 meeting
or possibly the December meeting.
h. The developer requests that if you have questions or concerns please get those to him
(or you can send them to the EDCA for forwarding) as soon as possible so they may be
considered before presenting to the Planning & Zoning Commission.
i. Prior to the Planning & Zoning meeting, the EDCA will send out the full planning
package/details for your review and comment.
III. 4163 Bright Road Update
a. The property sold at auction on 9/25/24 but not yet recorded on auditor website.
b. The winning bid was $407,000 (150 bids).
c. The property remains zoned R-1, and the community plan suggests large-lot residential.
IV. Bright Road Construction Update
a. The utility burial on Bright Rd. complete.
b. The Bright Rd. eastbound lanes are now open and handling 2-way traffic as westbound
lanes are constructed.
c. There will be Do Not Block signage and pavement markings for the entrance to
Inverness.
d. The Bright Rd. westbound lane construction expected to complete in November.
e. The entire project corridor (with improvements on Sawmill Rd.) is expected to complete
in fall of 2025.
f. The Emerald Parkway roundabout lane construction is complete.
g. On a semi-related note, the Mount Carmel landscaping plan includes naturalized areas
with no-mow turf and prairie and meadow grasses that will take a few seasons to fully
mature, please be patient during this intermediate time.
2 of 2
V. Bright Road Billingsley Bridge Update
a. The City is designing a new bridge for Bright Road over Billingsley Creek. The
replacement bridge will be wider and include room for pedestrian traffic.
b. Construction is planned for 2026.
VI. Hard Rd. & Riverside Drive Noise and Traffic Study
a. 1st collection of noise and traffic data occurred August 7-8, 2024
b. 2nd collection of noise and traffic data will occur soon (equipment is in place)
c. In December, the City will receive a summary of results.
d. Additional noise and traffic counts will be recorded in the winter and spring of 2025.
VII. Speed Management Program
a. The City’s recently approved Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) included more rotating
speed signs.
b. The City is now using speed warning cameras at three locations. These cameras capture
license plates. Starting Sept 16, 2024, the City will issue warning letters via mail to speed
violators captured on the cameras. The camera locations will rotate.
VIII. Utility Extension
a. The only project in the recently adopted 2025-2029 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)
includes water service in Area 3A which is along Riverside Drive from Hard Rd to
Wyandotte Woods Blvd.
b. Construction is planned for 2026 and will include extension of the shared use path from
where the existing pass stops at Tonti up to Wyandotte Woods Boulevard.
IX. AltaFiber
a. Currently work is wrapping up for the year along Riverside Drive, Orchard Crest/River
Knolls, Trails End, Summit View, Wyandotte Woods, Tonti, Hanna Hills, Campden Lakes,
Wedgewood Hills, Estates at Scioto Crossing, and the Reserve Condos at Scioto Crossing.
b. In 2025, work will occur in the remainder of neighborhoods east of the Scioto River and
north of I-270 (Bright Road, MacBeth, Grandee Cliffs, Bryson Cove)
c. In late 2025-2026, work will occur on the east side of the Scioto River south of I-270.
X. Crime Update – Vehicle Thefts
a. This summer, there were several cars stolen reported abandoned in the Conine Drive
are off Summit View Road.
b. On October 25, Dublin police arrested a 16-year old resident of Conine Drive who
confessed to stealing up to 75 vehicles from July 2024 through September 2024.
c. Dublin police are working with other jurisdictions to charge the individual.
XI. Columbus Fourth Water Plant Transmission Line
a. The City of Columbus has selected the preferred alignment which includes a segment
that crosses the river along Emerald Parkway and then continues east up Tuller Road,
along Dublin Center Drive, and then to Sawmill Road.
b. Construction is expected to occur in 2027-2029
XII. Emerald Connector
a. There was a public meeting held Sept 12 and the public comment period closed Oct 12,
2024.
b. The City has submitted for state and federal funding
XIII. Q& A and Conclusion – As always, feel free to reach out will any questions.