Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-07 OrdinanceRECORD OF ORDINANCES Dayton Legal Blank, Inc. Form No. 30043 I Ordinance No. 01 -07 Passed 20. AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 18 ACRES, LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF WEST DUBLIN GRANVILLE ROAD AND SHAMROCK BOULEVARD FROM SO, SUBURBAN OFFICE AND INSTITUTIONAL, R -1, RESTRICTED SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND R -4, SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (SHAMROCK CROSSING — CASE NO. 06 -076Z) . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, of the elected members concurring: Section 1. That the following described real estate (see attached map marked Exhibit "A ") 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. That application, Exhibit "B ", including the list of contiguous and affected property owners, and the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Exhibit "C ", are all incorporated into and made an official part of this Ordinance and said real estate shall be developed and used in accordance therewith. Section 3. That this Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after the earliest period allowed by law. Passed this day of Y , 2007. Mayor - Presiding Officer Attest: Clerk of Council J ORDINANCE 01 -07 (SHAMROCK CROSSING) ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS APPENDED BY COUNCIL ON 1/22/07 1. That all center identification signage in all subareas be subject to review and approval by the Planning & Zoning Commission in regard to location and size. 2. That the lighting in all the parking areas be reduced by 50 percent during non - operating hours. Land Use and Long Range Planning 5800 Land Shi er Ring L Road Dublin, Ohio 43016 Phone: 6144104600 Fax 6144164]4] �m6Pb�Gr� Memo To Members of Qty Council From Jane S. Brautigam Qty Manager Date: January 1],200] IniGated By Steve Langworrhy,Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning Re: Ordinance 01 -07 (Shamrock Crossing — West Dublin Granville Road — Case No. 06476Z) SUMMARY Ordinance 01 -0], a request for a rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development District of 18 acres located at the intersection of West Dublin Granville Road and Shamrock Boulevard, was introduced at the January 9, 2007 Council meeting. Members of City Council discussed the importance of high quality architecture for the proposed carwash in Subarea D and suggested a refinement of the language proposed for the carwash use In addition, it was suggested that the proposed list of uses for all Subareas be refined and refer to uses listed in the Zoning Code. The applicant has submitted a rendering of the proposed carwash, which matches the auto service facility in design and materials_ An excerpt of the revised development text with the permitted use list referring to the uses listed in the Zoning Code is attached N this memo, Planning supports the carwash elevation and the revision to the development text RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 01 -0] at the second reading /public hearing on January 22 , 2007 . OOSO'691'/I9 'I 005('69 'd f IL[Y °!'p '^9"'°I•] YOU 'N 591 3)NVI11V MR)UHAV lQ Z O 7 3 Z 79W am � sd - - py alpdueLg uggnd'M S86£ UIND DIAa3S N119na 10 SOX31 - LO'S I rno►wa�� W r 4 N O 4 O 5 a 0 x. 1 s 5 0 Z_ Z �`-- Z z Q� =i � © m g MNo- t+•`�] CO O Z M'D �ga� Z O r� U z O O 0 B-- Z 0 t W :T] � S: � f� DEVELOPMENT TEXT SHAMROCK CROSSING Development Text January 17, 2007 General Overview Shamrock Crossing is a mixed -use development containing approximately 18± acres. The focus of the project will be to provide highly functional and aesthetically pleasing office, retail, and service - oriented development along the West Dublin - Granville Road Corridor. The development is intended to compliment the existing and future planned uses along West Dublin - Granville Road between Sawmill Road and Riverside Drive and shall consist of high quality design, materials, lighting, and signage which will reinforce the nature and sense of place of the development. Basic development standards are compiled regarding proposed density, site issues, traffic, circulation, landscaping and architectural standards to ensure consistency and quality throughout the development. There will be four subareas: Subarea `A' containing 1.6± acres, Subarea `B' containing 4.0± acres, Subarea `C' containing 3.8± acres, and Subarea `D' containing 8.6± acres (See Exhibit A). The subareas, although different in their uses, will all share a common architectural theme that evokes the character of traditional Irish towns. A preliminary development plan is attached to give the general development patterns that may emerge as part of the final development (See Exhibit B). SUBAREA A Subarea A is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Sharp Lane and Shamrock Boulevard. It consists of 1.6::L acres. I. Permitted Uses: a. The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea A: 1. Those uses listed in City of Dublin Zoning Code Section 153.027(A), Neighborhood Commercial District, and Section 153.028(A), Community Commercial District. 2. Those uses listed in City of Dublin Zoning Code Section 153.026(A), Suburban Office and Institutional District. b. The following uses shall be excepted from the permitted uses above and shall not be permitted anywhere within Subarea A: (1) auto service (2) auto repair (3) gas stations (4) tire and/or automobile battery stores .v � r �� UJ 1/ 71 t 1117OR k! / ;�Z/D "/ SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Grossing, LLC. DEVELOPMENT TEXT (5) muffler or brake shops (6) automobile dealers (7) lumber and other building materials dealers (8) heating and plumbing equipment dealers (9) electrical supply stores (10) farm equipment stores (11) miscellaneous aircraft, marine, and automotive dealers (12) hotels and motels (13) rooming and boarding houses (14) funeral service (15) sexually oriented business establishments c. The following uses shall be allowed as conditional uses in Subarea A, provided that they are approved in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 153.236(C): (1) Exterior dining patios in association with a permitted use. II. Density: Subarea A shall contain one (1) building that shall not exceed twelve thousand (12,000) square feet of gross floor area, to be distributed as set forth in the Final Development Plan for this subarea. Additional square footage shall be permitted for exterior patios to the extent that parking for these uses can be accommodated within this subarea. III. Yard and Setback Requirements: a. Building and pavement setbacks from adjacent rights -of -way shall be as follows: 1. Sharp Lane: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of ten (10) feet from Sharp Lane. 2. Stoneridge Lane: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of fifteen (15) feet from Stoneridge Lane. 3. Shamrock Boulevard: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of twenty (20) feet from Shamrock Boulevard. b. There shall be a minimum setback from the western boundary line of Subarea A equal to fifteen (15) feet for pavement and buildings. In the event that a property owner within Subarea A enters into a cross access and /or joint parking agreement with the owner of the property located immediately to the west, then there shall be no minimum pavement setback from the western boundary line of this subarea. Owners of property within Subarea A shall use commercially reasonable efforts to reach an agreement on cross access with the owner of this adjacent property in the event of its future development /redevelopment. SHAMROCK CROSSING ■ Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 10 DEVELOPMENT TEXT IV. Parking and Loading: Size, ratio, and type of parking and loading facilities shall be regulated by Dublin Code Chapter 153.200, et seq. V. Lighting: Lighting shall comply with the City of Dublin exterior lighting guidelines and shall utilize decorative light fixtures with pole heights not greater than twenty -eight (28) feet from grade of the parking lot. Painted concrete bases shall be utilized and shall be at least six (6) inches in height above finished grade. VI. Circulation: Circulation within Subarea A and access to and from adjacent publicly- dedicated streets shall be via Shamrock Boulevard to the east and from Stoneridge Lane to the south, as depicted on the attached Preliminary Development Plan. Vehicular access between Subarea A and Shamrock Boulevard shall be limited to "right -in" only turn movements. VII. Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be contained and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code. VIII. Fences: Fencing shall be permitted in accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Code as approved as a part of the Final Development Plan. IX. Storage and Equipment: No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of a parcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground, or buildings shall be screened from public view unless prohibited by a public utility, using landscaping and /or materials that are harmonious with the building as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code. X. Landscaping / Patios: a. All landscaping shall meet the minimum requirements set forth in the City of Dublin Zoning Code. An illustrative landscape exhibit is included as part of this text (Exhibit C) to describe the gateway landscape concept at the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin - Granville Road. This concept incorporates a series of plantings in a "four- corners" manner that is representative of a village or market center of a town. This planting scheme includes a variety of deciduous and evergreen shrubs as well as deciduous trees. Entry features consisting of walls and gate features made of natural materials will be incorporated at corners of the intersection to coordinate with the SHAMROCK CROSSING m Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 11 DEVELOPMENT TEXT proposed architecture. Walkways are also proposed from the intersection to the adjacent proposed development to access adjacent patio areas. As proposed, this concept may require a right -of- way and minimum setback encroachment for West Dublin - Granville Road for the proposed entry features. This text is intended to serve as a request for such encroachment. Maintenance easements will be executed to maintain the signage, landscaping, and entry features within the right -of -way. A landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for this subarea. Landscaping shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. b. Exterior patios shall be encouraged when practicable along Sharp Lane, Shamrock Boulevard, and Stoneridge Lane. These patios shall be allowed in addition to the permitted square footage in this subarea, provided that the developer of such a use shall be required to meet the associated parking requirements for that use within Subarea A. XI. Architecture a. The architectural design of all buildings within Subarea A shall be traditional in look and feel and shall establish proper relationships between the buildings in this subarea and adjacent developments. Architecture shall be of a high quality with a consistent look and feel that fits with the architectural character of the PUD. The attached Exhibit D illustrates the architectural design standards. The final architecture for this subarea shall be similar in form and look to that which is illustrated in Exhibit F. b. The maximum building height may not exceed thirty -five (35) feet. c. All exterior colors shall be selected from a historic color palette. d. Permitted exterior materials in Subarea A shall include brick, stone /synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, stucco /synthetic stucco, and engineered wood composite material (e.g. Hardi -plank or Smartside siding and trim), or any combination thereof. Exterior finish materials must be used to complete massing elements. The application of brick or stone veneer to a single building fagade shall be prohibited. e. Roofs: A material portion of all buildings shall have a pitched or sloped roof (whether hipped or gabled, full or appropriately affixed to a parapet wall). Roofs may provide open areas to house and permit the functionality of mechanical and other typical rooftop equipment. Parapet walls shall be encouraged to screen mechanical units and shall be consistent with the overall architectural theme. 2. All structures shall contain roofing material consisting of dimensional asphalt shingles, cedar shakes or shingles, prefinished standing seam metal, or slate (whether synthetic or authentic slate), all of which shall be in a color and style that are complimentary SHAMROCK C R O S S T N G ■ Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC 12 DEVELOPMENT TEXT to and /or compatible with the neighboring buildings. The use of dormers, vertical vents, and other architectural treatments is encouraged. f. Wall Articulation / Fenestration: Individual walls must be articulated with fenestration, pattern, or structural expression equally on all sides of each structure. 2. With the exception of enclosed service corridors, all buildings shall generally have a similar degree of exterior finish on all sides. Other than for necessary service areas, blank facades on the rear of any building shall not be permitted, but the articulation of such facades with recesses, fenestration, fences, pilasters, etc. shall be encouraged. 3. The amount of fenestration should be balanced with the amount of solid fagade. XII. Signage and Graphics: a. Unless otherwise detailed hereinafter, all signage shall comply with the City of Dublin Sign Code — Sections 153.150, et seq. In the event of a conflict between the City of Dublin Sign Code and this text, this text shall control. b. A signage and graphics plan with exhibits conforming to these guidelines shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for each subarea. All signage shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. c. Location and Type: 1. Signage on public street frontage in Subarea A shall be limited to either (A) ground- mounted signage in accordance with this text, or (B) wall signage on each of these frontages in accordance with this text. 2. If ground signs are utilized, then one such sign may be permitted within the right -of -way along West Dublin - Granville Road only if it is approved by City Council in a separate action in accordance with Section 153.050, et seq. of the City of Dublin Zoning Code. If such a request is approved, then the approved sign shall be counted when evaluating conformance with the sign requirements of this text. Otherwise, ground signs shall be permitted in locations that conform with the City of Dublin Sign Code. d. Building /Tenant Signs - Wall Signage: Wall signs, when utilized, shall be subject to the following requirements: SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Crossing LLC. 13 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Each tenant shall be permitted one (1) wall sign on its storefront, which shall be defined as that facade which faces a public right -of -way or private drive. Each wall sign plaque shall be 2' -6" in height and 16' in width so that the total area of each wall sign plaque is 40 square feet and consistent in size. An illustrative building wall plaque sign exhibit is included as part of this text (Exhibit E). 2. One (1) wall sign shall be permitted at each tenant's parking area (rear) entrance for purposes of identifying the tenant or user. Each tenant's rear wall sign plaque shall be 2' -0" in height and 12'in width so that the total area of each rear wall sign plaque is 24 square feet. 3. All wall signage shall be located on a standard wall plaque of a consistent size and profile and shall be constructed of high- density urethane plaques that are rectangular in shape with a three -inch radius quarter round at each corner. Each sign plaque shall have a raised border and raised text. Plaques shall be mounted three eights of one inch (3/8 ") off the face of the exterior wall to permit drainage. 4. A total of three (3) sign plaque colors shall be permitted. Plaque colors shall be low - chroma, subdued colors. 5. Text on the plaques shall be limited to white, black, or gold lettering. Scheduled copy height shall be 20 ", except the maximum height of the upper case letters at the beginning of each word(s) may be 22 ". All lettering is to be centered in relation to height and width of the plaque. 6. All wall mounted signs shall be externally illuminated using the same or similar gooseneck light fixtures throughout the subarea. 7. All wall mounted signs shall be integrated into the building facades in order to compliment the architectural character of the building. e. Ground Signage: Ground signs, when utilized, shall be subject to the following requirements: 1. If the building in Subarea A has only a single user or tenant, then ground signs shall be permitted to identify said single user or tenant. If there are multiple users or tenants of the building in Subarea A, the ground signs shall be permitted to identify only the commercial center found therein. 2. All ground signs shall have landscaping around the base of the sign as required by Dublin Code. The maximum aggregate graphic area of ground signs in this subarea shall not exceed a total of sixty -six and one half (66' -6 ") square feet per sign face, provided however, that any single ground sign shall not exceed fifty (50) square feet in graphic area per sign face. There shall SHAMROCK CROSSING ■ Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC 14 DEVELOPMENT TEXT be a limit of no more than two (2) faces per sign. 4. The area of each ground sign base (if any) shall not exceed the area of its sign face. The base shall not be included in the overall area permitted for the sign face. 5. The maximum overall height of each ground sign shall be eight (8) feet above top of adjacent street curb. 6. All ground signs shall be externally illuminated with ground- mounted fixtures. 7. Except as otherwise described above, the setback for all ground signage shall be no less than eight (8) feet from the right -of -way consistent with the City of Dublin Code. SUBAREA B Subarea B is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin - Granville Road. It consists of 4.0± acres. I. Permitted Uses: a. The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea B: 1. Those uses listed in City of Dublin Zoning Code Section 153.027(A), Neighborhood Commercial District, and Section 153.028(A), Community Commercial District. 2. Those uses listed in City of Dublin Zoning Code Section 153.026(A), Suburban Office and Institutional District. b. The following uses shall be excepted from the permitted uses above and shall not be permitted anywhere within Subarea B at any time: (1) auto service (2) auto repair (3) gas stations (4) tire and/or automobile battery stores (5) muffler or brake shops (6) automobile dealers (7) lumber and other building materials dealers (8) heating and plumbing equipment dealers (9) electrical supply stores (10) farm equipment stores (11) miscellaneous aircraft, marine, and automotive dealers (12) hotels and motels SHAMROCK CROSSING m Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 15 DEVELOPMENT TEXT (13) rooming and boarding houses (14) funeral service (15) sexually oriented business establishments c. The following uses shall be allowed as conditional uses in Subarea B, provided that they are approved in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 153.236(C): (1) Exterior dining patios in association with a permitted use. (2) A maximum of one (1) drive -thru shall be allowed as a conditional use in this subarea so long as it exists in association with a permitted use (other than an eating or drinking establishment) and there is not an approved drive -thru use in Subarea C. All drive -thrus shall be designed in a manner to integrate with the overall urban streetscape (e.g. internal to the site) to minimize any negative impact on pedestrian movement(s). II. Density: Subarea B shall allow for a maximum of up to three (3) buildings that shall not exceed forty -two thousand (42,000) square feet of gross floor area in the aggregate, to be distributed as set forth in the Final Development Plan for this subarea. Additional square footage shall be permitted for exterior patios to the extent that parking for these uses can be accommodated within this subarea. III. Yard and Setback Requirements: a. Building and pavement setbacks from adjacent rights -of -way shall be as follows: West Dublin - Granville Road: Buildings with their primary frontage on West Dublin - Granville Road should have a build -to line that is within a relatively close proximity of that right -of -way. In determining the suitable distance for the build -to line, the goal should be to encourage pedestrian activity and the development of usable outdoor spaces (e.g., dining patios) to the front of these buildings at a distance from the right -of -way that is both safe and aesthetically appropriate. The build -to line should also be located so as not to impair the developer's ability to meet applicable parking requirements. The above concerns should be considered at the time of final development plan when more specific information is available regarding the uses that are to be found in this subarea. Therefore, building and pavement build -to and /or setback requirements from the West- Dublin/Granville Road right -of -way shall be in accordance with that which is approved by the Planning Commission at the time of final development plan. 2. Shamrock Boulevard: Buildings with their primary frontage on Shamrock Boulevard shall be required to have a significant portion of the structure located at a build -to -line that is twenty (20) feet from the right -of -way. Subject to this requirement, the final locations of the buildings from the Shamrock Boulevard right -of -way shall be approved by the Planning Commission at the time of final development plan with the exception that patios and outdoor SHAMROCK CROSSING ■ Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 16 DEVELOPMENT TEXT spaces are encouraged to be located in front of buildings. There shall be a minimum pavement setback of twenty (20) feet from the Shamrock Boulevard right -of -way. 3. Stoneridge Lane: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of fifteen (15) feet from Stoneridge Lane b. Interior lot lines shall have a zero (0) setback for parking and buildings. c. There shall be a minimum setback from the eastern boundary line of Subarea B equal to fifteen (15) feet for pavement and buildings. In the event that a property owner within Subarea B enters into a cross access and /or joint parking agreement with the owner of the property located immediately to the east, then there shall be no minimum pavement setback from the eastern boundary line of this subarea. Owners of property within Subarea B shall use commercially reasonable efforts to reach an agreement on cross access with the owner of this adjacent property in the event of its future development /redevelopment. IV. Parking and Loading: Based on the nature of this commercial area and the formal arrangement of the buildings, the parking and service areas are to be shared between uses and separate buildings (through the use of cross - easements, if necessary). As such, strict compliance to the Dublin Zoning Code parking requirements by use is not required. Irrespective of use, parking shall be provided at a minimum rate of five (5.0) spaces per one thousand (1,000) square feet of development in this subarea. b. Any drive thru that is approved as a conditional use in this subarea shall provide stacking in accordance with the following rates per drive -thru lane: Bank -6, Pharmacy -4, Dry Cleaner -2, ATM - 2, Photo Processing -2, Other -6. V. Lighting: Lighting shall comply with the City of Dublin exterior lighting guidelines and shall utilize decorative light fixtures with pole heights not greater than twenty -eight (28) feet from grade of the parking lot. Painted concrete bases shall be utilized and shall be at least six (6) inches in height above finished grade. VI. Circulation: Circulation within Subarea B and access to and from adjacent publicly- dedicated streets shall be via Shamrock Boulevard to the west and from the proposed extension of Stoneridge Lane to the south, as depicted on the attached Preliminary Development Plan. VII. Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be contained and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code. SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Crossing LLC. 17 DEVELOPMENT TEXT VIII. Fences: Fencing shall be permitted in accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Code as approved as a part of the Final Development Plan. IX. Storage and Equipment No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of a parcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground, or buildings shall be screened from public view unless prohibited by a public utility, using materials that are harmonious with the building as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code and/or landscaping. X. Landscaping / Patios All landscaping shall meet the minimum requirements set forth in the City of Dublin Zoning Code. An illustrative landscape exhibit is included as part of this text (Exhibit C) to describe the gateway landscape concept at the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin - Granville Road. This concept incorporates a series of plantings in a "four- corners" manner that is representative of a village or market center of a town. This planting scheme includes a variety of deciduous and evergreen shrubs as well as deciduous trees. Entry features consisting of walls and gate features made of natural materials will be incorporated at corners of the intersection to coordinate with the proposed architecture. Walkways are also proposed from the intersection to the adjacent proposed development to access adjacent patio areas. As proposed, this concept may require a right -of- way and minimum setback encroachment for West Dublin - Granville Road for the proposed entry features. This text is intended to serve as a request for such encroachment. Maintenance easements will be executed to maintain the signage, landscaping, and entry features within the right -of -way. A landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for this subarea. Landscaping shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. b. Exterior commercial dining patios shall be encouraged when practicable along West Dublin - Granville Road, Shamrock Boulevard, and Stoneridge Lane. These patios shall be allowed in addition to the permitted square footage in this subarea, provided that the developer of such a use shall be required to meet the associated parking requirements for that use within Subarea B. XI. Architecture a. The architectural design of all buildings within Subarea B shall be traditional in look and feel and shall evoke the character of traditional Irish towns. Architecture shall be of a high quality with a consistent look and feel that fits with the architectural character of the PUD. The attached Exhibit D illustrates the architectural design standards. The final architecture for this subarea shall be similar in form and look to that which is illustrated in Exhibit(s) F & G. SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 18 DEVELOPMENT TEXT b. The maximum building height may not exceed thirty -five (35) feet. c. All exterior colors shall be selected from a historic color palette. d. Permitted exterior materials in Subarea B shall include brick, stone /synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, stucco /synthetic stucco, and engineered wood composite material (e.g. Hardi -plank or Smartside siding and trim), or any combination thereof. Exterior finish materials must be used to complete massing elements. The application of brick or stone veneer to a single building facade shall be prohibited. e. Roofs: A material portion of all buildings shall have a pitched or sloped roof (whether hipped or gabled, full or appropriately affixed to a parapet wall). Roofs may provide open areas to house and permit the functionality of mechanical and other typical rooftop equipment. Parapet walls shall be encouraged to screen mechanical units and shall be consistent with the overall architectural theme. 2. All structures shall contain roofing material consisting of dimensional asphalt shingles, cedar shakes or shingles, prefinished standing seam metal, or slate (whether synthetic or authentic slate), all of which shall be in a color or style that is complimentary to and /or compatible with neighboring buildings. 3. The use of dormers, vertical vents, and other architectural treatments are encouraged. f. Wall Articulation / Fenestration: 1. Individual walls must be articulated with fenestration, pattern, or structural expression equally on all sides of each structure. 2. With the exception of enclosed service corridors, all buildings shall generally have a similar degree of exterior finish on all sides. Other than for necessary service areas, blank facades on the rear of any building shall not be permitted, but the articulation of such facades with recesses, fenestration, fences, pilasters, etc. shall be encouraged. 3. The amount of fenestration should be balanced with the amount of solid facade. XII. Signage and Graphics: a. Unless otherwise detailed hereinafter, all signage shall comply with the City of Dublin Sign Code — Sections 153.150, et seq. In the event of a conflict between the City of Dublin Sign Code and this SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 19 DEVELOPMENT TEXT text, this text shall control. b. A signage and graphics plan with exhibits conforming to these guidelines shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for each subarea. All signage shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. Building /Tenant Signs - Wall Signage: The following sign standards recognize the unique configuration of the buildings and parking within this subarea and seek to promote effective means for the identification of uses to vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Vehicular traffic will view the front facades of buildings in this subarea from public streets but in most cases will be required to park behind these buildings. The ability to utilize wall signage on the front facades of buildings will enable passing traffic to identify a particular use, while wall signage on the rear facades of these same buildings will allow traffic to identify tenants from the parking areas to the rear of the buildings. One (1) wall sign shall be permitted on each tenant or user storefront that fronts onto a public street (e.g., Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin - Granville Road). Each tenant's wall sign plaque shall be 2' -6" in height and 16' in width so that the total area of each wall sign plaque is 40 square feet and consistent in size. An illustrative building wall plaque sign exhibit is included as part of this text (Exhibit E). 2. One (1) wall sign shall be permitted at each tenant's or user's parking area (rear) entrance for purposes of identifying the tenant or user. Each tenant's rear wall sign plaque shall be 2' -0" in height and 12' in width so that the total area of each wall sign plaque is 24 square feet and consistent in size. 3. All wall signage shall be located on a standard wall plaque of a consistent size and profile and shall be constructed of high - density urethane plaques that are rectangular in shape with a three -inch radius quarter round at each corner. Each sign plaque shall have a raised border and raised text. Plaques shall be mounted three eights of one inch (3/8 ") off the face of the exterior wall to permit drainage. 4. A total of three (3) sign plaque colors shall be permitted. Plaque colors shall be low- chroma, subdued colors. Text on the plaques shall be limited to white, black, or gold lettering. Scheduled copy height shall be 20 ", except the maximum height of the upper case letters at the beginning of each word(s) may be 22 ". All lettering is to be centered in relation to height and width of the plaque. 6. All wall mounted signs shall be externally illuminated using the same or similar gooseneck light fixtures throughout the subarea. 7. All wall mounted signs shall be integrated into the building facades in order to compliment SHAMROCK CROSS 111 G n Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 20 DEVELOPMENT TEXT the architectural character of the building. d. Ground Signage: 1. One (1) ground monument joint identification sign identifying the commercial center shall be permitted along each of the public rights -of -way on West Road and Shamrock Boulevard. 2. All ground signs shall have landscaping around the base of the sign as required by Dublin Code. 3. A maximum graphic area of fifty (50) square feet per sign face shall be permitted on each ground sign face in this subarea identifying the commercial center, with a limit of no more than two (2) faces per sign. 4. The area of each sign base (if any) shall not exceed the area of its sign face. The base shall not be included in the overall area permitted for the sign face. The maximum overall height of each ground sign shall be eight (8) feet above top of adjacent street curb. 6. All ground signs shall be externally illuminated with ground- mounted fixtures. 7. Except as otherwise described above, the setback for all ground signage shall be no less than eight (8) feet from the right -of -way consistent with the City of Dublin Code. SUBAREA C Subarea C is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin- Granville Road. It consists of 3.81 acres. I. Permitted Uses: a. The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea C: 1. Those uses listed in City of Dublin Zoning Code Section 153.027(A), Neighborhood Commercial District, and Section 153.028(A), Community Commercial District. 2. Those uses listed in City of Dublin Zoning Code Section 153.026(A), Suburban Office and Institutional District. SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Crossin LLC. 21 DEVELOPMENT TEXT b. The following uses shall be excepted from the permitted uses above and shall not be permitted anywhere within Subarea C at any time: (2) auto service (3) auto repair (4) gas stations (5) tire and /or automobile battery stores (6) muffler or brake shops (7) automobile dealers (8) lumber and other building materials dealers (9) heating and plumbing equipment dealers (10) electrical supply stores (11) farm equipment stores (12) miscellaneous aircraft, marine, and automotive dealers (13) hotels and motels (14) rooming and boarding houses (15) funeral service (16) sexually oriented business establishments c. The following uses shall be allowed as conditional uses in Subarea C, provided that they are approved in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 153.236(C): (1) Exterior dining patios in association with a permitted use. (2) A maximum of one drive -thru shall be allowed as a conditional use in this subarea so long as it exists in association with a permitted use (other than an eating or drinking establishment) and there is not an approved drive -thru use in Subarea B. All drive -thrus shall be designed in a manner to integrate with the overall urban streetscape (e.g. interior to the site) to minimize any negative impact on pedestrian movement(s). II. Density: Subarea C shall allow for a maximum of up to three (3) buildings that shall not exceed thirty -two (32,000) square feet of gross floor area in the aggregate, to be distributed as set forth in the Final Development Plan for this subarea. Additional square footage shall be permitted for exterior patios to the extent that parking for these uses can be accommodated within this subarea. III. Yard and Setback Requirements: a. Building and pavement setbacks from adjacent rights -of -way shall be as follows: 1. West Dublin - Granville Road: Buildings with their primary frontage on West Dublin - Granville Road should have a build -to line that is within a relatively close proximity of that right -of -way. In determining the suitable distance for the build -to line, the goal should be SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 22 DEVELOPMENT TEXT to encourage pedestrian activity and the development of usable outdoor spaces (e.g., dining patios) to the front of these buildings at a distance from the right -of -way that is both safe and aesthetically appropriate. The build -to line should also be located so as not to impair the developer's ability to meet applicable parking requirements. The above concerns should be considered at the time of final development plan when more specific information is available regarding the uses that are to be found in this subarea. Therefore, building and pavement build -to and /or setback requirements from the West- Dublin/Granville Road right -of -way shall be in accordance with that which is approved by the Planning Commission at the time of final development plan. 2. Shamrock Boulevard: Buildings with their primary frontage on Shamrock Boulevard shall be required to have a significant portion of the structure located at a build -to -line that is twenty (20) feet from the right -of -way. Subject to this requirement, the final locations of the buildings from the Shamrock Boulevard right -of -way shall be approved by the Planning Commission at the time of final development plan with the exception that patios and outdoor spaces are encouraged to be located in front of buildings. There shall be a minimum pavement setback of twenty (20) feet from the Shamrock Boulevard right -of -way 3. Banker Drive: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of fifteen (15) feet from Stoneridge Lane. b. Interior lot lines shall have a zero (0) setback for parking and buildings. c. There shall be a minimum setback from the eastern boundary line of Subarea C equal to fifteen (15) feet for pavement and buildings. In the event that a property owner within Subarea C enters into a cross access and /or joint parking agreement with the owner of the property located immediately to the east, then there shall be no minimum pavement setback from the eastern boundary line of this subarea. Owners of property within Subarea C shall use commercially reasonable efforts to reach an agreement on cross access with the owner of this adjacent property in the event of its future development /redevelopment. IV. Parking and Loading: a. Based on the nature of this commercial area and the formal arrangement of the buildings, the parking and service areas are to be shared between uses and separate buildings (through the use of cross - easements, if necessary). As such, strict compliance to the Dublin Zoning Code parking requirements by use is not required. Irrespective of use, parking shall be provided at a minimum rate of five (5.0) spaces per one thousand (1,000) square feet of development in this subarea. b. Any drive thru that is approved as a conditional use in this subarea shall provide stacking in accordance with the following rates per drive -thru lane: Bank -6, Pharmacy -4, Dry Cleaner -2, ATM - 2, Photo Processing -2, Other -6. V. Lighting: SHAMROCK CROSSING a Prepared For Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 23 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Lighting shall comply with the City of Dublin exterior lighting guidelines and shall utilize decorative light fixtures with pole heights not greater than twenty -eight (28) feet from grade of the parking lot. Painted concrete bases shall be utilized and shall be at least six inches in height above finished grade. VI. Circulation: Circulation within Subarea C and access to and from adjacent publicly- dedicated streets shall be from West Dublin - Granville Road on the south and via two (2) access points on Banker Drive (and the proposed extension of Banker Drive), as depicted on the attached Preliminary Development Plan. Access to and from West Dublin Granville Road shall be provided at the David Road and West Dublin- Granville Road intersection which is to remain in place to serve this development. VII. Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be contained and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code. VIII. Fences: Fencing shall be permitted in accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Code as approved as a part of the Final Development Plan. IX. Storage and Equipment: No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of a parcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground, or buildings shall be screened from public view unless prohibited by a public utility, using materials that are harmonious with the building as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code and /or landscaping. X. Landscaping / Patios: a. All landscaping shall meet the minimum requirements set forth in the City of Dublin Zoning Code. An illustrative landscape exhibit is included as part of this text (Exhibit C) to describe the gateway landscape concept at the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin - Granville Road. This concept incorporates a series of plantings in a "four- corners" manner that is representative of a village or market center of a town. This planting scheme includes a variety of deciduous and evergreen shrubs as well as deciduous trees. Entry features consisting of walls and gate features made of natural materials will be incorporated at corners of the intersection to coordinate with the proposed architecture. Walkways are also proposed from the intersection to the adjacent proposed development to access adjacent patio areas. As proposed, this concept may require aright-of- way and minimum setback encroachment for West Dublin - Granville Road for the proposed entry features. This text is intended to serve as a request for such encroachment. Maintenance easements will be executed to maintain the signage, landscaping, and entry features within the right -of -way. A S HAM. RO C K CROSSING ■ Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 24 DEVELOPMENT TEXT landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for this subarea. Landscaping shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. b. Exterior commercial dining patios shall be encouraged when practicable along West Dublin - Granville Road, Shamrock Boulevard, and Banker Drive to the north. These patios shall be allowed in addition to the permitted square footage in this subarea, provided that the developer of such a use shall be required to meet the associated parking requirements for that use within Subarea C. XI. Architecture a. The architectural design of all buildings within Subarea C shall be traditional in look and feel and shall evoke the character of traditional Irish towns. Architecture shall be of a high quality with a consistent look and feel that fits with the architectural character of the PUD. The attached Exhibit D illustrates the architectural design standards. The final architecture for this subarea shall be similar in form and look to that which is illustrated in Exhibit F. b. The maximum building height may not exceed thirty -five (35) feet. c. All exterior colors shall be selected from a historic color palette. d. Permitted exterior materials in Subarea C shall include brick, stone /synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, stucco /synthetic stucco, and engineered wood composite material (e.g. Hardi -plank or Smartside siding and trim), or any combination thereof. Exterior finish materials must be used to complete massing elements. The application of brick or stone veneer to a single building facade shall be prohibited. e. Roofs: 1. A material portion of all buildings shall have a pitched or sloped roof (whether hipped or gabled, full or appropriately affixed to a parapet wall). Roofs may provide open areas to house and permit the functionality of mechanical and other typical rooftop equipment. Parapet walls shall be encouraged to screen mechanical units and shall be consistent with the overall architectural theme. 2. All structures shall contain roofing material consisting of dimensional asphalt shingles, cedar shakes or shingles, prefinished standing seam metal, or slate (whether synthetic or authentic slate), all of which shall be in a color or style that is complimentary to and /or compatible with the neighboring buildings. 3. The use of dormers, vertical vents, and other architectural treatments is encouraged. f. Wall Articulation / Fenestration: SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 25 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Individual walls must be articulated with fenestration, pattern, or structural expression equally on all sides of each structure. 2. With the exception of enclosed service corridors, all buildings shall generally have a similar degree of exterior finish on all sides. Other than for necessary service areas, blank facades on the rear of any building shall not be permitted, but the articulation of such facades with recesses, fenestration, fences, pilasters, etc. shall be encouraged. 3. The amount of fenestration should be balanced with the amount of solid facade. X11. Signage and Graphics: a. Unless otherwise detailed hereinafter, all signage shall comply with the City of Dublin Sign Code — Sections 153.150, et seq. In the event of a conflict between the City of Dublin Sign Code and this text, this text shall control. b. A signage and graphics plan with exhibits conforming to these guidelines shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for each subarea. All signage shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. c. Building /Tenant Signs - Wall Signage: The following sign standards recognize the unique configuration of the buildings and parking within this subarea and seek to promote effective means for the identification of uses to vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Vehicular traffic will view the front facades of buildings in this subarea from public streets but in most cases will be required to park behind these buildings. The ability to utilize wall signage on the front facades of buildings will enable passing traffic to identify a particular use, while blade signs on the rear facades of these same buildings will allow traffic to identify tenants from the parking areas to the rear of the buildings. One (1) wall sign shall be permitted on each tenant or user storefront that fronts onto a public street (e.g., Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin - Granville Road). Each tenant's wall sign plaque shall be 2' -6" in height and 16' in width so that the total area of each wall sign plaque is 40 square feet and consistent in size. An illustrative building wall plaque sign exhibit is included as part of this text (Exhibit E). 2. One (1) wall sign shall be permitted at each tenant's or user's parking area (rear) entrance for purposes of identifying the tenant or user. Each tenant's rear wall sign plaque shall be 2' -0" in height and 12' in width so that the total area of each wall sign plaque is 24 square feet and consistent in size. 3. All wall signage shall be located on a standard wall plaque of a consistent size and profile SHAMROCK CROSSING ■ Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 26 DEVELOPMENT TEXT and shall be constructed of high - density urethane plaques that are rectangular in shape with a three -inch radius quarter round at each corner. Each sign plaque shall have a raised border and raised text. Plaques shall be mounted three eights of one inch (3/8 ") off the face of the exterior wall to permit drainage. 4. A total of three (3) sign plaque colors shall be permitted. Plaque colors shall be low- chroma, subdued colors. 5. Text on the plaques shall be limited to white, black, or gold lettering. Scheduled copy height shall be 20 ", except the maximum height of the upper case letters at the beginning of each word(s) may be 22 ". All lettering is to be centered in relation to height and width of the plaque. 6. All wall mounted signs shall be externally illuminated using the same or similar gooseneck light fixtures throughout the subarea. 7. All wall mounted signs shall be integrated into the building facades in order to compliment the architectural character of the building. d. Ground Signage: One (1) ground monument joint identification sign identifying the commercial center shall be permitted along each of the public right -of -ways on West Dublin - Granville Road and Shamrock Boulevard. 2. All ground signs shall have landscaping around the base of the sign as required by Dublin Code. A maximum graphic area of fifty (50) square feet per sign face shall be permitted on each ground sign face in this subarea identifying the commercial center, with a limit of no more than two (2) faces per sign. 4. The area of each sign base (if any) shall not exceed the area of its sign face. The base shall not be included in the overall area permitted for the sign face. 5. The maximum overall height of each ground sign shall be eight (8) feet above top of adjacent street curb. 6. All ground signs shall be externally illuminated with ground- mounted fixtures. 7. Except as otherwise described above, the setback for all ground signage shall be no less than SHAMROCK CROSSING ■ Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 27 DEVELOPMENT TEXT eight (8) feet from the right -of -way consistent with the City of Dublin Code. SUBAREA D Subarea D is located east of and adjacent to Shamrock Boulevard and north of and adjacent to Subarea C. It consists of 8.61 acres. I. Permitted Uses: a. Each individual permitted use in Subarea D is intended to include similar uses that are not necessarily listed. When considering whether a proposed use fits within one of the permitted use categories listed below, a liberal interpretation should be applied. The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea D: Automobile service facilities contained within the interior of a building Attached or detached non - retail car wash operated for the sole purpose of serving the users and/ or customers of a permitted automobile service facility located in this subarea (or the users and/ or customers of an automobile dealership associated with such a facility) Storage of new and used automobiles; no automobile sales shall be permitted Hotels and motels Financial services institutions including, without limitation, banks, credit institutions, securities brokers and dealers, and related uses Medical and dental offices General office and service uses such as (but not limited to) legal services, insurance, real estate, engineering, architecture, accounting, tax services, and other professional or charitable organizations Health and allied services II. Density / Lot Coverage: Subarea D shall allow for a maximum of up to two (2) buildings that shall not exceed fifty thousand (50,000) square feet of gross floor area. III. Yard and Setback Requirements: a. Building and pavement setbacks from adjacent rights -of -way shall be as follows: 1. Shamrock Boulevard: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of ten (10) feet from Shamrock Boulevard. 2. Banker Drive: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of fifteen (15) feet from Banker Drive. SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 28 DEVELOPMENT TEXT b. Unless otherwise set forth herein, side yard and rear yard setbacks from subarea perimeter boundaries shall be fifteen (15) feet for pavement and buildings. IV. Parking and Loading: If Subarea D is used as an automobile service center, Subarea D shall be permitted three hundred fifty (350) parking spaces. One hundred fifty (150) of such parking spaces shall be utilized as needed for future expansion as indicated on the attached Preliminary Development Plan. The balance of the site shall be limited to a maximum of two hundred (200) parking spaces as depicted on the attached Preliminary Development Plan Parking and loading facilities shall otherwise be regulated by Dublin Code Chapter 153.200, et seq. V. Lighting: Lighting shall comply with the City of Dublin exterior lighting guidelines and shall utilize decorative light fixtures with pole heights not greater than twenty -eight (28) feet from grade of the parking lot. Painted concrete bases shall be utilized and shall be at least six inches in height above finished grade. VI. Circulation: Circulation within Subarea D and access to and from adjacent publicly- dedicated streets shall be from Shamrock Boulevard on the north, and via two (2) access points on Banker Drive to the south of this subarea, as depicted on the attached Preliminary Development Plan. Additional access to and from West Dublin Granville Road shall be provided at the David Road and West Dublin - Granville Road intersection which is to remain in place to serve this development. VII. Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be contained and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence as required by the Dublin Code. VIII. Fences: Fencing shall be permitted in accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Code as approved as a part of the Final Development Plan. IX. Storage and Equipment: No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of a parcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground, or buildings shall be screened from public view unless prohibited by a public utility, using materials that are harmonious with the building as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code and /or landscaping. X. Landscaping: SHAMROCK CRC► 5 S I N G ■ Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 29 DEVELOPMENT TEXT All landscaping shall meet the minimum requirements set forth in the City of Dublin Zoning Code. A landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for this subarea. Landscaping shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. XI. Architecture a. The architectural design of all buildings within Subarea D shall be traditional in look and feel and shall establish proper relationships between the buildings in this subarea and adjacent developments. Architecture shall be of a high quality with a consistent look and feel that fits with the architectural character of the PUD. The attached Exhibit D illustrates the architectural design standards. The final architecture for this subarea shall be similar in form and look to that which is illustrated in Exhibit H. b. The maximum building height may not exceed thirty -five (35) feet. c. All exterior colors shall be selected from a historic color palette. d. Permitted exterior materials in Subarea D shall include brick, stone /synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, stucco /synthetic stucco, and engineered wood composite material (e.g. Hardi -plank or Smartside siding and trim), or any combination thereof. Exterior finish materials must be used to complete massing elements. The application of brick or stone veneer to a single building fagade shall be prohibited. e. Roofs: A material portion of all buildings shall have a pitched or sloped roof (whether hipped or gabled, full or appropriately affixed). Roofs may provide open areas to house and permit the functionality of mechanical and other typical rooftop equipment. Parapet walls shall be encouraged to screen mechanical units and shall be consistent with the overall architectural theme. 2. All structures shall contain roofing material consisting of dimensional asphalt shingles, cedar shakes or shingles, prefinished standing seam metal, or slate (whether synthetic or authentic slate), all of which shall be in a color or style that is complimentary to and /or compatible with the neighboring buildings. 3. The use of dormers, vertical vents, and other architectural treatments are encouraged. f. Wall Articulation / Fenestration: SHANIROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 30 DEVELOPMENT TEXT 1. Individual walls must be articulated with fenestration, pattern, or structural expression equally on all sides of each structure. 2. With the exception of enclosed service corridors, all buildings shall generally have a similar degree of exterior finish on all sides. Other than for necessary service areas, blank facades on the rear of any building shall not be permitted, but the articulation of such facades with recesses, fenestration, fences, pilasters, etc. shall be encouraged. 3. The amount of fenestration should be balanced with the amount of solid fagade. XII. Signage and Graphics: b. Unless otherwise detailed hereinafter, all signage shall comply with the City of Dublin Sign Code — Sections 153.150, et seq. In the event of a conflict between the City of Dublin Sign Code and this text, this text shall control. c. A signage and graphics plan with exhibits conforming to these guidelines shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for each subarea. All signage shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. c. Building /Tenant Signs - Wall Signage: 2. One (1) wall sign shall be permitted on one of the tenant or user storefronts that fronts onto a public street. 3. Wall signage for an automobile service center and associated uses shall be the same or similar as shown on the rendered drawings and attached Exhibit H. Wall signage for all other permitted users shall be in accordance with the City of Dublin Sign Code. d. Ground signage: One (1) ground monument sign shall be permitted near the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and Banker Drive in the location shown on the attached development plan. If the building in Subarea D has only a single user or tenant, then this ground sign shall be permitted to identify said single user or tenant. If there are multiple users or tenants of the building in Subarea D, the ground sign shall be permitted to identify only the commercial center found therein. 2. All ground signs shall have landscaping around the base of the sign as required by Dublin Code. 3. The maximum graphic area of the permitted ground sign shall be as approved by the SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Sharn rock Crossing, LLC 31 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Planning Commission as a part of the final development plan for this subarea. 4. The area of the ground sign base (if any) shall not exceed the area of its sign face. The base shall not be included in the overall area permitted for the sign face. 5. The maximum overall height of the ground sign shall be eight (8) feet above top of adjacent street curb. 6. All ground signs shall be externally illuminated with ground- mounted fixtures. 7. Except as otherwise described above, the setback for all ground signage shall be no less than eight (8) feet from the right -of -way consistent with the City of Dublin Code. SHAMROCK CROSSING ■ Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 32 Land Use and Long Range Planning 5800 Shier -Rings Road • Dublin, Ohio 43016 Phone: 614 - 410 -4600 • Fax: 614 - 410 -4747 CITY OF DUBLIN,. To: Members of City Council ��-- _M e m o From: Jane S. Brautigam, City ManageA_ a.,-., 6 Q U R-„•.J Date: January 3, 2007 Initiated By: Steve Langworthy, Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning Re: Ordinance 01 -07 (Shamrock Crossing — West Dublin Granville Road — Case No. 06 -076Z) SUMMARY Rezoning application 06 -076Z is for 18 acres, located at the intersection of West Dublin Granville Road and Shamrock Boulevard. This application requests a change in zoning from SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District, R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential District, and R -4, Suburban Residential District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District. The proposed PUD zoning allows for a 136,000- square -foot development comprised of retail, office, and service- oriented uses. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this rezoning on December 7, 2006 with 12 conditions, which can be found in the attached Record of Action. The applicant has addressed conditions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 12. Conditions 4 and 7 will be addressed at the time of final development plan approval and conditions 8 through 11 will be monitored as the site develops. Additional information regarding this case is available for public viewing at 5800 Shier - Rings Road in the offices of Land Use and Long Range Planning. The public hearing (second reading) on the requested zoning change is scheduled for January 22, 2007. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 01 -07. CDH .s✓rv�� e 1':L' 'v 1.�QUI) tAL PUD cc PUD PUD PUD I I CC cc cc CC cc cc cc cc CC PUD cc cc cc PUD PUD 6� d,F N Cord -Drive R -12 ` SO R -12 SO PUD R-2 R -2 R -2 PUD R -2 — billy- Mar -C -t PUD R -2 R -2 R -2 PUD cc PUD I 06 -0762 N City of Dublin Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan A Land Use and Shamrock Crossing Feet Long Range Planning West Dublin- Granville Road 0 250 500 MW i O' �✓/.n PROPOSED PRELIMNARY SITE LAYOUT 1 i j I I p I TJ k-- -- -t- r I I j ' I I ' - -_ __j s pa -_� ,— } I lt�U*rT li U V c i - TI f 1v — cam l ss I I + i I n Y A i Mill S I T'- -=- - � t - - -- -- - - -- -- r = / ���AS��U$l1ljTjEDTOCOUNCIL I LFOR MEETING ON J4,bj 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road APPLICATION CFT} OF DCRLIN tma In. ose Lon save rtaa+as sego snr.wr xooa Nb& Ono riot 6lZ Pane / 10IY. bl Hlbbele roc blaalbOU web SIe: wv"rth.Wn.M.v� TO EXPIRE ORDINANCE NUMBER nV - 0 CITY COUNCIL (FIRST READING) LA - 07 CITY COUNCIL (PUBLIC HEARING) CITY COUNCIL ACTION NOTE: Applicants are highly encouraged to contact Land Use and Long Range Planning for assistance and to discuss the Rezoning process prior to submitting a formal application. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Property Address: Amount Recd �A pplication 2140- No: I o6- 076 a P Size: P&Z DaWs): (2 - 1 - ofo P&Z Ammon: A teed 60 Receipt No: MIS Fee No: tatdeve Date Reodved: Received Blo y � tA 11.� R PAta1!CAT� Off1Ce indoor �� t0 .SerVIC __� - - - - -- - -- _ _ G Requested Zoning District: Total Aues to be Rezoned. Type of Request Z ' In Tink 1 8 + /_ • Ih �/� CIV "'fit VVV 09 E. W (Circle) Side of. W Distance from Nearest Intersection: i Nearest Intersection: �rV r I. PLEASE CHECK THE TYPE OF APPLICATION: FEET, N. S, @ j� (Circle) from Nearest Intersection EN1 PD Preliminary Development Plan (Section I53 053) Other (Please Describe) EXHIBIT "B" REZONING APPLICATION (Code Section 153.234) SHAMROCK CROSSING is Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. AS SUBMWMDTO COUNCIL 9 1 /9 /07 FOR MEETING ON I ° C57 Property Address: 4021 Wesi -Dub Lin- GranYille_.&Qad_— -- T. x ID /Parcel Numbef(s). P Size: 273 - 008252, et al. (see attached)_ 1 ' Acres) -- Existing Land Use Development. � tatdeve -- - - -� Proposed Land Use Development: y � tA 11.� R PAta1!CAT� Off1Ce indoor �� t0 .SerVIC __� - - - - -- - -- Existing Zoning District Requested Zoning District: Total Aues to be Rezoned. Tink 1 8 + /_ EXHIBIT "B" REZONING APPLICATION (Code Section 153.234) SHAMROCK CROSSING is Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. AS SUBMWMDTO COUNCIL 9 1 /9 /07 FOR MEETING ON I ° C57 APPLICATION m. State Miefty how Mme ptopdsed zoning and deve(apment reiama to the auisdng and potential future and use character of the vianity: The applicant is proposing a mixed use development with office, retail, rest- aurant, and indoor auto service facility components in accordance with the Community Plan. Existing land uses in the surrounding area include retail, office, restaurant, and residential, while the Greystone News residential community and the Shoppes at River Ridge I.ifestyle Center are to be developed in the near future. Approval of this application will provide a compliment to existing and contemplated development in the vicinity and will conform to the character of the area. Sswa onefty how the proposed zoning and devolopment relates to me Dublin Community Plan and, d appik:xbta, tow the PMPnsed rezoning meet, the plena fm PlwvW psbkts ISecem 153 0521811 The Community Plan calls for "mixed- use - employment emphasis" development in this area of the city. 'rhe uses being proposed in this application clearly relate to this recommendation by promoting a combination of uses that will generate a variety of employment opportunities and a diversity of uses. This diversity of uses and the planning issues that are addressed in this application are best served by the creation of a PUD and clearly meet the criteria for creating such a district. I tAS A PREVMS APPI.iCATFON I'O RFZ<N IF niE PROPERTY BEEN DLNIFD aY GjY CDUNC4. yAU4IN THE UtST TWELVE MONtH87 -1 YES A W) d yas. tea .,het and stale the oases for recontedetaean as noted by Section 153 234(AR3): « „ PLANNED [;{S fR'Ci IS RE OUESTU) IS A PRELIMINARY DEVFLOPh1ENT PLAN ATTACtiED7 & A `LANNFD DISTRICT IS RF.OUESfED, IS THE PROPOSW DEVFI.OPMFNr TEX T AT I'AGHED'r I$YES i , rh) Pnga a of 5 SHAMROCK CROSSING a Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 10 APPLICATION N. PLEASE SUBMT THE FOLLOWING FOR INITIAL STAFF REVIEW: Pars a "ll "'" (24x3') and amaN f I Ix17) Sees of pens SWR _ . _ .. , _.._ __�_ _ W c..- ... v.. � � �� .A.b.nnY c.wrse rf rawiirl xlAnTalalS afe fbtxared rIX fr10 Pill' nN1q BIYd L) III V. TWO (2) ORIGINAL SIGNED ANO NOTARIZED APPLICATIONS AND THIRTEEN113) COPIESPlease rxNanle agent Mail !Trocessary . FOURTEEN 114) COPIES OF A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY FOURTEEN (14) TAX PARCEL ID MAPS adt ampg property ovmas a prcol numbors for as ParcelS wtdHn 000 roof of the SIM TEN 1101 SCALED. SITFJSTANING PLANS SHOWING: a Nome avow and bar aCasa tr LOC3ban, sue and Mnermox +a M as exxtt°'N ant Moil coed" s and xhocllues (sxpphcaM ruMal %"a". Lwwftcap"l struaures. &oAkn w, dec". acres ways. pa "t -- OWcsed us" (Ragwxut trumoommiri system, deruales.. ntxriw Of dwel"S, www gnarl womfa "me footages, l>a open space. etc. ) d Size of *0 %" m aaeursware feet. s Al prop" Ixwe, 64404UlS. tone) c6nMtines, rlgrax ot-way. eaeemehfa, and Whet m10rma"I fe0.Med In Ow ane. f Fdsing and INoposW loping district houdiam. g Use of land ad local of strUfbnea on adjacere properllee IF APPLICABLE, TEN (10) COMES OF THE FOLLOWING SCALED PLANE: a Gramm Wan. n LandXSPWV Pan r, LIghling Wan d Ural andlnt Sfansvatm Wan Tfee Survey TM Presavnbon ant Tree ReptaramaM P1anf IF APPLCABLE, TEN 1101 COMES OF SCALED, ARCHfTEMPAL ELEVATIONS Wait proposed C Aom snd mahMats now IF APPLICABLE, FOUR (4) COMES OF SCALED DRAWINGS INOICATNiG: a LO IWn Of spas and Sign I" (W AN. ground. Pro)ecorq, or waxfow) tt SW da0E WOWS. inchxfxq At" 91265 and VQPotwd die ldl from 91911 to grade. Copy layad and aawgtg slytes (fords) of signage. d Materials and rtwrarfa 1wer to be used in fabrication e Total ar" of win face (nCJudmg ftana). r Type of Nannatron. MATERUUlCOLOfI SAMPLES AwMtdtes. photo+, papa. or 1104W apeaecaean) 10" We ma"And" ar nanwt ant raxrrba It s d+a poacy at Ore Guy of DIIDIMI W i Wbly Maroradatg Prey owtwn d pendng appK.adWnb under puDSC fevNat t rot as , wNhOaxnT poPm7 rx awe want, 300 tM of the pdhmttar of the wop" based on OM Candy AudO«b CW*em tax ns1. EMCaaxc copes a aus Pro encaxa0w. PROPERTY OWNER .... I MAILING ADDRESS CITYrSTATEJZIP CODE Ina Modgage Compony of Tax Sor*A) see attached Itst nman 3 ar 5 ,SHAMROCK CROSSING e 11,epared for ehamro, ;k Crnssing, LIX 11 APPLICATION L in VN. UTTLff Y DISCLAIMER: T rw Crt'r M OWas» wil make every etTOn to provide saaeMW ssMCea to tM goperty at naW w1. rb.r+rwr. re r" growth at the CM M DUDM ono naraaW my vldnkies bas sueedrod du OWS caMWAY to Prnvbs "W" ae'Am to the Wit As mM, ero Gay of GAMrW moY De tnaab to make aM a pw1 oI saW laoYtlea sysdaDb to dWS appkcsM add sane IurtlWer dale. TfW pwW1ApPkWA ackno0Medgee Iha approval of d:e repueat to msa,ktg by the Dublin P'IWaung and Zm-*V Conmssom Podia OuE1ki City Cou dl does not constktle a okw anbe m Wx%V comrritmeM mm to CM of OLban wWs to able to ptovdo essmobal W40m SLOW of wabf are Bawer lacssles wh0n naeded by "ba srd 0wn*dAppbraM. 01, Tatl P nae koldings. Ltd laa�wq�oddrs 3473 Mil�{r� Drve i5ada C]q. S[ste, zip C,odul a 8 torch, [taytlmd iegtphdM' Finad a Ane,nalO Canlact inhvmatron: Owner /Applicant: Shamrock Crossing, LLC VA 22042 565 Metro P1, Ste. 480 — -- - -. -- .- lynb - M, - OR 430Tf_ - -. raY' (614) 764 -9981 (GI4)- 764 - 2.207 (fax) Owner: Charles U. Warner. .lr, 6 Edvard E. Belz 2226 Atlee Ct. Page 4 of Columbus, ON 43220 SHAMROCK CROSSING o Prepared for Sbzmroek Crossing, LAO. 12 AUTHORtZAT10N TO VOT THE PROPERTY: SN verb to dM WWI? by City 00s" O"W" Po prataaa In atsm"mon. The O,wmdAppkoar t, as ndtSRXW WOW hOObY eutronzes C1tY repressMWWes to vqa, Oaa W a a WW Post a rmum an to property dosatmd n tea appomtIon APPLICATION t2FPRESEN fATI Ban W. Hale, Jr. or Aaron L. Underhill $7 W. Broad St., Ste. 725, Colu bum. OH 43215 (614) 221-4409 (6L41 221-,4255 — Ben W. Hale, Jr.,,or Aaron L. UndrhS 1p I% /t RY N ._T oofe4ETSAGi�c �f T i3O9M III lie rk 1)" ty I'vi $A r" elf 0 OWn 11'r See also attached authoriZations kilVU,,,AW S AWFOAV! Aaron Underhill attorney C *"= = S HAMROCK CROSS I N G • Prepared f, Shamrock Gri,ssii),' LIX 13 APPLICATION Ix. X. - — , x 0 � � Representative o^w«:*, CC"vu^x. 1.4&11� AddreS% ( Street u*State :,o**l �o^*m./,�w°^° ** cillall or AAmiWe COMICA OfWYlAb |nwo*/n, PRIMARY CONTACT p�nyowww."6mv*w*o' .W j du a% my repaserdative(s) n all ~ ^ � � pinyo , \/ \ I»"*' MAY / � �/ my* /// /I-,/ Notary ;,,v C, 4L w�u*� vm°* cotaltyof m NOTP THE PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON WILL RECEIVE A FACSIM CONFIRMING RECEIPT OF THIS APPLICATION pve 5*5 14 APPLICATION 1 X. z Rowfesanlauoe (Tenant. Nchdect. L"esignot, Contfacfor etc) ManinT Address (smeel' :Ay $tale. Zip Gcoe) DAYNI , Tolepholte Fax Ern ad or Allw,,Me Contact Information Who,%the PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON to( (his appflcitmnA the ovnwr. here0y autnonie �1L6 lam) ..f4 IJ 3 �(.� to act as my representanvG(s) in an manors pc j to the ptocess'N and awoval r1 INS application. ncnnbhg I'l fy+ng the project I a9(ee to be bouts by all mprosvNabom alai ayteemenls made by the des gila:ed rep(esentalive $lenatl ro f Gurrcnt Pmparty Qvne' Da@ m / '46, it,[;ecr.bed and 5aOm to be!ae me III* _ � ...__. day OI I � n; Notury v,.Lw :., y X. APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT: the wmc +r er auV)orvud MPM%Wativo. harm read All ).ndsrstal 1 _. __...__._.�..� —_ ...... ....�._. ..__._. _.. __, n :ht c,o 'nt's e! Ilze a(Ailcetlp) Ow t tom,atlCn Mntamld In ti Vs applkal w atfa0fu�f e,,NWs arb ollwt mlGt ai�On xvOmllifl<7 �s: rvnpiata arA In all re VAMS tr . and coned Ip 1 @5 bell Of mY i,mWed9e mid belief _ Stpoawu of Ownar or paten. AYth..R.d R., M.619: $ulsrnbed'I" x,aom In Wofe n* Ih., _. _- day of _ 20 swe Of ;ounty of hotaq Vuda: , 'WE THE PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON Will RECEWE A FACSIMILE CONFIRMING RECEIPT OF THIS APPLICATION Pape 5 of 5 SHAMROCK CROSSING • lareparetl f,), SLamTnck Crowing, LIe. 15 APPLICATION Owner Charles W. Warner, Jr. & Edward E. Belz Donnabelle Scott Linda Berg & Jerry Berg Mary Warner Ima Moore Virgil Schnell, Jr. & Margie Schnell Shamrocks Crossing, LLC SHAMROCK CROSSING PARCELS SUBJECT TO REZONING Number 273 - 008375 273 - 008304 273 - 008303 273 - 008308 273 - 008312 273 - 008285 273 - 008252 273 - 008265* 273 - 008302* 273 - 008300* 273 - 008299* 273 - 008298* 273 - 008297* *Only certain portions of these parcels are being rezoned, as indicated on the preliminary development plan SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared fnr Shain,ock Crossing, L,L.C. 16 APPLICATION It Rezoning Authorization Form CM OF DUBLIN. ur er 4w Terry and Linda Berg UN tow 91. , 8 $709 W Alo wdria Road 9m WW400" Middletown, pbio 45042 UkOVO MI.1216 F%61441 WO I6A53cwwAAih" Tim uodcrsigaed hereby autttorizcs the City of Dublin to process a tezooing apptication for the property located at 6583 David Road, labeled Parcel 293 - 008303, from R-4, Suburban Residential to PUD, Planned Unit DotmloPMWL Thr City. of Dablin,wW notify me by mail of any upcoming public hearing8 related to this matter. 6/1 Vo w i3 4�016/ s �,�� .� Date SubsmW and swum to before me this — �rnf 20 — State Not4 ORDVA 104% rewyw>�c,saroaoroo My Cam Eadros DbOBU SHAMROCK CROSSING ■ Prepared fur sh.n,ock Crossing, LIe. 17 XFPtLBCATION Rezoning Authorization Form cffy OF DUBLIN.. L4W U" ow Mary Warner Un Rap FW" 6595 David Road M SWAmpW Dublin, Ohio 43017 Oak 06o 43016.1236 It m 614419.4600 fm 6144104147 Web tx aw.du koh.uc cation The undersigned hereby authorizes the City of Dublin to process a rezoning application for the property located at 6595 David Road, labeled parcel 273 - 008308, from R-4, Suburban Residential to PUD, Planned Unit Development. The City of Dublin will notify me by mail of any upcoming public hearings related to this matter. Signature FAA Subscribed and sworn to before me this /5 day of State of x! tt = . County of Notary Public Kude .IV PI*' sl* Of No '00 EW83 SUM Z4, 2w SHAMROCK CROSSING • llrep.,ed f,,, Shamrock C,os,in LLC. 78 TPF"CATION Rezoning Authorization Form CITY OF DUBI.IN- LdwWewi Ima Moore taw top Wow: 7055 Shier Ring s oshr-wstea Dublin, Ohio 43016 D46, 060 43010216 Am 6144104600 Fm 614410.4747 1t6Sk rnwt mAm cation The undersigned hereby authorizes the City of Dublin to process a rezoning application for the property located at 6599 David Road, labeled parcel 273 - 008312, from R -4, Suburban Residential to PUD, Planned Unit Development. The City of Dublin will notify me by mail of any upcoming public hearings related to this matter. /7-US� Date Subscribed and sworn to before me this rLl ay of 20. State of n o County of�� IGYIM.J.WW 1j"P kswdo6b to0WnWmb*wJab1?, SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepar,ed for Shamrock Crossing, LLC_ 19 XPMRCATION Rezoning Authorization Form CM OF DOBLIN- tw u""a Virgil Schnell I" lop rmwi" 839 Liverpool Place St0 %wrAp tad Westerville, Ohio 43081 DAk U 430461236 ttaw 614410.4600 tar: 614 410-4147 WA Sin. W.duhkAut The undersigned hereby authorizes the City of Dublin to process a rezoning application for the property located at 6629 David Road, labeled parcel 273 - 00828.5, from R -4, Suburban Residential to PUD, Planned Unit Development. The City of Dublin will notify me by mail of any upcoming public hearings related to this matter. Subscribed and sworn to before me this l_ _day of 'r[ /,(�E - . 20�. State of fibs .[L County of� f e� Notary Public 7J X-1 — �"� .. SHARON LEEfEfMW * *i MY CO ;1 IMO ot�YJ i? DFM SHAMROCK CROSSING ■ 11,e aced f.,, Shamrovk Crossing, SIX. 20 XVF"C 71 Rezoning Authorization Form CITY OP DIJUM W um W Donnabelle Scott toy Rap "Maims PO Box 191 SWShW42P ba Dublin, Ohio 43017 -0191 Mk 0 1 it 43016.1736 MW 614.410.4600 fm 6144104147 Neb W rn.Ahh.*VS The undersigned hereby authorizes the City of Dublin to process a rezoning application for the property located at 4070 Dublin - Granville Road, labeled parcel 273- 008304, from R-4, Suburban Residential to PUD, Planned Unit Development. The City of Dublin will notify me by mail of any upcoming public hearings related to this matter. Date Subscribed and sworn to before me this L� day of 1 20 ,19 . State of 0s County of Notary Public �/' f S PATSY B. PRICEp�q ay .t 02b-07 SHAMROCK CROSSING • prepsr�d for Shumruak Qrossine, LLC. 21 LEGAL DESCRIPTION ZONING DESCRIPTION SUB -AREA A 1.60 ACRES Situated in the State of Ohio, County of Franklin, City of Dublin, Section 3, Township 2, Range 19, United States Military District and being parts of the remainders of Tracts V, VI and VII as shown in the deeds to Tall Pines Holdings, Ltd. of record in Instrument Numbers 199906090147217, 199906090147216 and 199906090147220 and described as follows. Beginning, for reference, at a southwest comer of said Tract VII, the same being a southeast comer of that 3.148 acre tract conveyed to Ciotola Family LP Il of record in Instrument Number 200310080324148, in the north line of "Sunny Dale Estates" as recorded in Plat Book 24, Page 110; thence North 03 40" East with the west line of said Tract VII and the west terminus of Shamrock Boulevard (Instrument Number 199910220267012), 388.26 feet to • southwest comer of said Tract VII, the True Point of Beginning; thence North 03 15' 40" East with the west line of said Parcel 5, 367.93 feet to • northwest comer thereof, in the south right-of-way line for Dublin - Granville Road (S.R. 161); thence with said south right -of -way line and with the west and north right -of -way tine for said Shamrock Boulevard, the followings courses; South 86 41 East, 25.75 feet to a point of curvature; with a curve to die right, having a central angle of 59 10'09", a radius of 7550 feet and an are length of 77.97 feet, a chord bearing and chord distance of South 57 06' 14" East, 74.55 feet to a point of tangency; South 27 31' 09" East, 23.21 feet to a point of curvature; with a curve to the left, having a central angle of 58 58' 56 a radius of 12450 feet and an are length of 128.17 feet, a chord bearing and chord distance of South 57 00' 33" East, 122.58 feet to a point of reverse curvature; with a curve to the right, having a central angle of 91 09' 49 ", a radius of 25.00 feet and an arc length of 31.82 feet, a chord bearing and chord distance of South 42 16 1 00" East 28.57 feet to a point of tangency; South 03 41" West, 205.50 feet to a point of curvature; with a curve to the right, having a central angle of 89 20' 11 ", a radius of 25.00 feet and an arc length of 38.98 feet, a chord bearing and chord distance of South 47 58' 48" West, 35.15 feet to a point of tangency; North 86 41' 19" West, 204.35 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 1.60 acres, more or less. Ohio. All references refer to the records of the Recorder's Office, Franklin County, This description was prepared for zoning purposes and is not to be used for transfer. ADVANCED CIVIL DESIGN, INC. 1CM05/06 06 M468:1.60K SHAMROCK CROSSING I„� Shamrock crossing, LLC. 22 LEGAL DESCRIPTION ZONING DESCRIPTION SUB -AREA B ZONING OF 4.0 ACRES SITUATE IN THE STATE OF OHIO, COUNTY OF FRANKLIN, CITY OF DUBLIN, LYING IN QUARTER TOWNSHIP 3, TOWNSHIP 2, RANGE 19, UNITED STATES MILITARY LANDS, BEING PART OF THE TRACTS CONVEYED TO TALL PINES HOLDINGS LTD. BY DEEDS OF RECORD IN INSTRUMENT NUMBERS 199906090147218, 199906090147219, 199906090147222 AND 199906090147221, (ALL REFERENCES REFER TO TI4E RECORDS OF THE RECORDER'S OFFICE, FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO) BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING IN THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF DUBLIN - GRANVILLE ROAD AT THE COMMON CORNER OF SAID 'FALL PINES HOLDINGS LTD. TRACT (199906090147221) AND THE TRACT CONVEYED TO PIIELE INVESTMENT BY DEED OF RECORD IN INSTRUMENT NUMBER 200402270042396; THENCE SOUTH 04 58' 00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 397.21 FEET, WITII THE LINE COMMON TO SAID TALL PINES HOLDINGS LTD. TRACT AND SAID PHELE INVESTMENT TRACT, TO A POINT IN THE PROPOSED NORTHERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF THE EXTENSION OF STONFRIDGE LANE, THENCE NORTH 88 22' 54" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 399.50 FEET, WITH SAID PROPOSED NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF -WAY LINE AND ACROSS SAID TALL PINES HOLDINGS LTD. TRACTS, TO A POINT OF CURVATURE AT THE NORTHEASTERLY TERMINUS OF STONERIDGE LANE; THENCE WITH THE RIGHT -OF -WAY LINES OF STONERIDGE LANE, SHAMROCK BOULEVARD AND DUBLIN- GRANVILLE ROAD, THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: WITH SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 9I° 37'24", A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 39.98 FEET, AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 42° 34' 12" WEST, A CHORD DISTANCE OF 35.85 FELT, TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; NORTH 03 14'30" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 358.93 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVATURE, WITH SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 89° 59' 59 ", A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 39.27 FEET, AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 48° 14'30" EAST, A CHORD DISTANCE OF 35.36 FEET, TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; SOUTH 86 45' 30" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 411.36 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 4.0 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. THIS DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED FROM INFORMATION OF RECORD AND IS NOT TO BE USED FOR TRANSFER, SHAMROCK CROSSING m Prepa.aa r,,, Shamrock crossing, L,LC. 23 L.ECAL DESCRIPTION ZONING DESCRIPTION SUB -AREA C ZONING OF 3.8 ACRES SITUNIT IN THE STATE OF 01110, COUNTY OF FRANKLIN, CITY OF DUBLIN, LYING IN QUARTERTOWNSHIP .3, TOWNSHIP 2, RANGE. 19, UNITED STATES MILI'T'ARY LANDS, BEING PART OF THE TRACT CONVEYED 7'O SHAMROCK CROSSING LLC BY DEED OF RECORD IN INSTRUMENT NUMBER 200508220170414, PART OF THE TRACT CONV EYED TO CHARLBS W. WARNER JR. AND EDWARD E. BELZ BY DIED OF RECORD IN DEED BOOK 2984, PAGE 608, PART OF'TIIA'T'1'RACI' CONVEYED TO DONNABELLI; SCOTT, TRUSTEE BY DEED OF RECORD IN OFFICIAL RECORD 18003BIO AND PART OF THAI "TRACT CONVEYED TO LINDA A. MYERS BY DEED OP R17CORD IN DEED BOOK 3688, PAGE 70 (ALL REFERENCES REFER 'TO THE RECORDS OF'I'HE RECORDER'S OFFICE, FRANKLIN COUNTY OHIO) BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING IN THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF DUBLIN- GRANVILLE ROAD AT THE COMMON CORNER OF SAID SC017 TRACT AND THAT TRACT CONVEYED'TO S.L. PIERCE ENTERPRISES LTD. 13Y DEED OF RECORD N OFFICIAL RECORD 33968101; "I'HE-NCE WII'H'I TIE RI(IH'1'- 01'•WAY LINES OF DU131,IN- ORANVII.I.E ROAD AND SHAMROCK BOULEVARD, TI IF FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: NORTH 86 39'02" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 452.69 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; W ITTI SAID CURVE TO'HIE RRiH'I', HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLH OF 89 20' 54 ", A RADIUS OI' 25.00 Pula', AN ARC LFNG'I'11 OF 38.99 FEET, AND A CI IORD WIITCH BEARS NOR'T'H 41 58' 35" W EST, A C T ORD DISTANCE OF 35.15 FEF I', TO A POINT OF'TANGENCY; NORTH 02 41'52" EAST', A DISTANCE. OF 327.87 FEET, "1'O A POINT IN THE CEN'T'ERLINE 01 A PROPOSED ROAD; II HENCE WI'1'II TT IL CENTERLINE OF SAID PROPOSED ROAD AND ACROSS SAID SHAMROCK, WERNER AND BELT. AND MYERS TRACTS, THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES; SOUTH 87 52'43" EAST, A DISTANCE 01; 221.45 FEET, TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; WI 111 SAID CURVE TO TI IE RIGI I I', I IAV ING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30 47 A RADIUS OF 300.00 FEET, AN ARC LF.NGI "11 OF 161.24 FEET, AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 72 28'53" EAST, A Cl IORD DISTANCE 01; 159.10 FEIN', TO A POINT IN HIE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID WARNER AND BELZ TRACT; SOUTH 57 05'03" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 21.40 FEET - , TO A POINT ON IT Ili ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, WIHIT III; ARC OF SAID CURVE, HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30 40'36", A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEE 1% AN ARC LENGTH Oh 107,08 FEET', AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 72 25' 21" EAST, A Cl IORD DISTANCli 01: 105.81 FEET, '1'O A POINT OF "TANGENCY SOUTH 87 45' 39" FAS "I', A DISTANCE 01; 79.49 FEET, TO A POINT ON'H IF WESTERLY RICH F-OF -WAY LINE OF DAVID ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 02 16'55 WEST, A DISTANCE OF 49.60 FEET WITH SAID WESTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE TO A POINT IN ['HE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID MYERS TRACT; 'THENCE SOUTH 86 31' 05" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 100.49 FEEr , WITH SAID SOUTHERLY I.NE TO A POINT' BEING A NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID SCO`lT 1'RACI'; THENCE NORTH 02 15' 16' WEST, A DISTANCE OP 233.91 FEE 1', TO T'HE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 3.8 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. THIS DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED FROM INFORMATION Oil RECORD AND IS NOT TO 13F USED I'OR TRANSFER. EVANS, MECIIWAWr, IIAMBLE'TON & TILTON, INC. IILK40MAYNI l_UI AC 61(n?ZN SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Crossing. LLC. 24 LEGAL, DESCRIPTION ZONING DESCRWnON SUB -AREA D ZONING OF 8.6 ACRES SI "I "UA'IT IN THE, HE, STATE OF OHIO, COUNTY OF FRANKLIN, CITY OF DUBLIN, LYING IN QUARTER TOWNSHIP 3, TOWNSHIP 2, RANGE 19, UNITED STATES MILITARY LANDS, BEING PART OF'n mr TRACT CONVEYED TO SHAMROCK CROSSING LLC BY DEED OF RECORD IN INSTRUMENT NUMBER 200508220170414, PART OF T'HA'I' TRACI' CONVEYED TO CHARLES W. WARNER 1R. AND EDWARD E. BELZ BY DEED OF RECORD IN DEED BOOK 2984, PAGE 608, PART OF'1'IIAT TRACI' CONV EYED'rO VIRGIL S. SCIWELL BY DEEDS OF RECORD IN INSTRUMENT NUMBER 200309240305406 AND INS "I'RUMENT NUMBER 200312080389585, PART OF THAT TRACI' CONVEYED TO IMA MOORE BY DIiEDS 01l RECORD IN DEED BOOK 3429 PAGE 648 AND INS'T'RUMENT NUMBER 200006260125913, PART OF THNI' TRACT CONVEYED TO MARY M. WARNER BY DEEDS OF RECORD IN OFFICIAL RECORD 20403EI5 AND DEED 1300K 3398, PAGE 161, AND PART OF THAT TRAC "1' CONVEYED TO LINDA A. MYERS BY DEED OF RECORD IN DEED 1300K 3688, PAGE 70 (ALL REFERENCES RIFER TO THE RECORDS OF THE RFCORDER'S OFFICE, FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO) BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING, FOR REFERENCE, IN THE NORTHERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF DUBLIN- GRANV ILLS ROAD xr T'HE COMMON CORNER OF THE TRACT CONVEYED TO DONNABELLE SCOTI','I'RUSTEE BY DEED OF RECORD M OFFICIAL RECORD 19003B I o AND'rHAT' T'RACr CONVEYED T'O S.L. PIERCE 8N1'FRPRISES L I'D BY DEED OF RECORD IN OFFICIAL RECORD 33968FOI: THENCE NORTH or 15' 16" HASP, A DIS'I R Oh 23391 FE•E'l', WITH 11113 EASTERLY LINE OF SAID SCOTT'rRACI','rO A I'OIN'I' IN'1'1IF SOU'1'IIFRLY LINE OF SAID MY1 TRACI'; '1'I ll::NCI; NORTH 86 31' M" BAST, A DISTANCE OF 100.49 FEET, WITH SAID SOUTHERLY LINE TO A POINT' IN THE WESTERLY RIONT -OF WAY LINE OF DAVID ROAD; 'I'Ifl:NCIi NOICr1102 16' 55" FAST', A DIS'rANCH OF 49.60 FEIZT WITH SAID W ES'rF.RLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE TO TI IF TRUF POINT' 01; BEGINNING, BFINO TI IF CENTERLINE OF A PROPOSED ROAD; THENCE WITH SAID PROPOSED CEN'T'ERLINE AND ACROSS SAID MYERS TRACT, SAID WERNER AND BF,LZ TRACI' AND SAID SHAMROCK TRACT, THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: NORTH 87'45'39" WEST, A DIS'T'ANCE OP 79,49 FFET, TO A POINT ON THE ARC OI' A CURVE'1'O RIGHT; Wrl'H THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30 40' 36", A RADIUS OP 200.00 FEET, AN ARC LENG'III OF 107.08 Ff:EI', AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 72° 25' 21" WEST, A CHORD DIS "I'ANCF OF 105.81 FEEI', TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; NORTH 57'05'03" WEST, A DIS'T'ANCE 01: 21.40 FFFT, TO A POINT ON'I'[iE ARC Oil A CURVE "I'O THE LEFT; W rI'li THE ARC Oh SAID CURVE, HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30° 47'39", A RADIUS OF 300.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 161.24 FEET, AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 72 53' WEST. A CHORD DISTANCE OF 159.30 FEET, "I'0 A POINT OF TANGENCY; AND NOR'T'H 87'52' 43" WEST, A DIS'T'ANCE OF 221.45 FEI:I','f0 A POINT IN THE EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF SHAMROCK BOULEVARD; 'rHFNCE NORTH 02 12' 52" EAST, A DISTANCE 01: 57.46 FEET, WITH SAID EASTERLY RIGHT- OF-WAY LING TO A POINT AT 1 HE NORTHFASTERLY'1'IiRMINUS OF SAID SHAMROCK BOULEVARD; THENCE NORTH 87 18' 23" WFST, A DISTANCE OF 46.27 FEET', WITH SAID NORTHERLY TERMINUS, TO A POINT IN'IIIE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID SHAMROCK CROSSING LLC I'RACI'; THENCE NORTH 02° 12' 52" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 659.13 FEE r, WI'1'11 rull WESTERLY LINE OF SAID SHAMROCK CROSSING LLC TRAC"I', TO A POINT AT TIM NORTIIWESTE•RLY CORNER THEREOF: SHAMROCK CROSSING. a Prepared for Shamrock Croasiug, LLC. 25 LEGAL DESCRIPTION ZONING OF 8.6 ACRES -2- THENCE SOUTH 86 21' 16' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 421.08 FEET, WITH - 1'11E NOWHIERLY LINES OF SAID SHAMROCK CROSSING LLC TRACT AND SAID WARNER AND HELZ TRACT, TO A POINT AT THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER THEREOF; 'TIIIiNC' SOUTH 02 10'54" WES "1', A DISTANCE OF 401.16 FEET, WI'ITI THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID WARNIiR AND BF-LZ'I'RACr'10 A POINT BEING T 111 NORT'ITWESTFRLY CORNER OF SAID SCHN FI -L TRACr; 'I HENCE SOUTH 86 42'56" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 200.60 FE 1', WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SCHNELL TRACT T'O A POINT IN THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF -WAY OF DAVID ROAD; "rl ILNCE SOUTH 02 16'55" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 782.24 FEET, WITH SAID WESTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE, BEING T'HH EASTERLY LINES OP SAID SCHNELL TRACT, MOORE TRACT, WARNER TRACT AND MYERS'TRACI" I'O THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING C6 ACRES. MORE OR LESS. THIS DFSCRB''I'ION WAS PREPARED FROM INFORMA'T'ION OF RECORD AND IS NOT TO BE USED FOR TRANSFER. EVANS, MECITWART, HAMBLETON & TIL'TON, INC. 116K1JIIMpt'Ikr SHAMROCK CROSSING • PrcPnrecl for Shumroek Crossing, LLC. 26 LEGAL DESCRIPTION ZONING EXHIBIT QUARTER TOWNSHIP 3, TOWNSHIP 2, RANGE 19 UNITED STATES MILITARY LANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO AN' r o -m�/� aw �cuvMa/u� sm7/'reY`�„ p me - aeo 9• sae aobbr I I_ t r $kl j a n .� SYD -Arw I na:ruor'w uzea' � M1 I tl I � OUB GRANN((E RO (SR. I6!) - ro T I Kd y q N g i' s/e 8' z g A � /.6 A• 1 k R I AC j l Y V 114 IN � Sy4 I E ` S1CW(AA(X (NI p &� yy yyy Oryyryyryy C�Q3l' C y}'F ® .r9 /. TIgB Y M1 j yS I 4} � &n �YS j 4 ^A I C� I x4 rar 1 � I T� `f ^SS I �x4 I Y Y` i C I sewsons _ SHAMROCK CROSSING * e /epuroa F. >f si /( % / „r..ck c,'/,5,i/,a, i.I c. 27 ��fl.(%lRQ}YIIDF�S� m� s s�vua<a�ssncsa . . c. 27 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS APPLICANT /OWNER: PROPERTY OWNERS Shamrock Crossing LLC Tall Pines Holdings Ltd. Charles W. Warner, Jr. 565 Metro Place, Ste. 480 3473 Mildred Drive & Edward E. Belz Dublin, OH 43017 Falls Church, VA 22042 2226 Atlee Ct. Columbus, OH 43220 Virgil S. Schell, Jr. Linda A. Myers ATTORNEY 839 Liverpool PI 6583 David Rd Westerville, OH 43081 Dublin, OH 43017 Ben W. Hale, Jr. Scott Donnabelle Mary M. Warner Smith & Hale P.O. Box 191 6595 David Rd 37 W. Broad St., Suite 725 Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017 Columbus, OH 43215 Ima Moore 7055 Shier Rings Rd Dublin, OH 43016 SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS Phele Investment Properties City of Dublin Ciotola Family LP 4051 W. Dublin Granville Rd 5200 Emerald Pkwy 4199 W. Dublin Granville Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017 -1066 Dublin, OH 43017 AEP Communications LLC S L Pierce Enterprises, LTD Lois Harkness 7356 MacBeth Dr 2455 Timers Edge Ln I Ri verside Plaza Tom Johnson Dublin, OH 43016 Columbus, OH 43235 R Columbus, OH 43215 -2373 SHAMROCK CROSSING • Pre.p.,ed for Shamrock cro. sing, LLC. 28 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS T & R Properties Ron Sabatino — I" Mr. 3895 Stoneridge Ln Dublin, OH 43017 Dara & Andreas Schuster 3100 Lilly Mar Ct. Dublin, OH 43017 Patsy R. Martin 3154 Lilly Mar Ct. Dublin, OH 43017 Steve Masonbrink 3168 Lilly Mar Ct. Dublin, OH 43017 Louise E. & Paul B. Wolfe 3200 Lilly Mar Ct Dublin, OH 43017 Wendys International Inc. Attn: Tax Dept. P.O. Box 256 Dublin, OH 43017 -0256 RP Chelsea LTD 6800 Lauffer Rd Columbus, OH 43231 Lowes Home Centers, Inc P.O. Box 1111 N. Wilkesboro, NC 28659 Benchmark Development Corp. 4053 Maple Road Amberst, NY 14226 Amy & Nicholas Price 3186 Lilly Mar Ct. Dublin, OH 43017 Harvey L. Shaw, Jr. 3248 Lilly Mar Ct. Dublin, OH 43017 Capstone Realty Advisors Attn: Tax Dept. 1120 Chester Ave #300 Cleveland, OH 44114 Developers Diversified 3300 Enterprise Blvd P.O. Box 228042 Beachwood, OH 44122 Susan Sharp 3140 Lilly Mar Ct. Dublin, OH 43017 Aaron Rents, Inc. 309 East Paces Ferry Road NE Atlanta, GA 30305 Elbon H. Weese Martha A Co 3200 Lilly Mar Ct. Dublin, OH 43017 Catherine M. & Brett T. McQuade 3260 Lilly Mar Ct. Dublin, OH 43017 National Church Residences of Dublin II 2335 N. Bank Dr. Columbus, OH 43220 -5423 M/I Homes of Central Ohio LLC 3 Easton Oval, Ste. 500 Columbus, OH 43219 Shamrock Auto Spa LLC 12100 Tallgate Drive Pickerington, OH 43147 SHAMROCK CROSSING v Pr e tared r � r 8h.mrnr.k Crossing, LLC. 29 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION DECEMBER 7, 2006 CITY OF DUBLIN- Fond Use and Fong Range Planning AS SUBMIT I TO COUNCIL 5800 Shier Rings Rood Dublin, Ohio 430161236 O 1 _ RAA uFmmn AN Phone: 614410 -4600 Fax 614 -410 -4747 Web Site: wwn- dublin.ahm The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 2. Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan 06 -076Z — Shamrock Crossing — West Dublin Granville Road Location: 18 acres located at the intersection of West Dublin Granville Road and Shamrock Boulevard. Existing Zoning: SO, Suburban Office and Institutional, R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential District and R -4, Suburban Residential District. Request: Review and approval of a rezoning for 24.12 acres to Planned Unit Development District, under the provisions of Code Sections 153.050 and 153.234. Proposed Use: A 136,000- square -foot development comprised of retail, office, and service- oriented uses. Applicant: Tall Pines Holdings, Ltd., 3473 Mildred Drive, Falls Church, Virginia 22042, Charles W. Warner and Edward E. Betz, 2226 Atlee Court, Columbus, Ohio 43220; Jerry and Linda Berg, 5709 West Alexandria Road, Middletown, Ohio 45042, Mary Warner, 6595 David Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017, [ma Moore, 7055 Shier Rings, Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016, Virgil Schnell, 839 Liverpool Place, Westerville, Ohio 43081, Donnabelle Scott, PO Box 191, Dublin, Ohio 43017 -0191; represented by Ben W. Hale and Aaron L. Underhill, Smith and Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Suite 725, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner. Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675 /Email: chusak @dublin.oh.us. MOTION: To approve this Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan because this proposal addresses the desire for a more identifiable streetscape, includes interesting architectural components and appropriate uses, the high -level of development quality desired in this corridor is likely to be established and furthered by this development, and the proposed zoning and subsequent development will provide appropriate development standards for the site and will advance the general planning intent of this area, with 12 conditions: 1) That the text be revised to accommodate future connectivity along all property lines; 2) That the applicant work with staff to eliminate the provision for signage in the right -of- way and clarify the signage provision in the development text; 3) That drive -thrus be limited to a maximum of one drive -thru in either Subarea B or C and not be allowed to serve an eating or drinking establishment and that the stacking requirement language be revised; Page I of 2 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION DECEMBER 7, 2006 2. Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan 06 -076Z — Shamrock Crossing — West Dublin Granville Road (Continued) 4) That the alternate layout for Subarea D be pursued for the final development plan and that the text be modified to clearly define the association of a detached car wash with the service facility; 5) That the development text provisions remain allowing a combination of wall and ground signs for a single tenant in Subarea D with the maximum square footage of the ground sign subject to review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the filial development plan stage; 6) That the text be modified to include a requirement for buildings to be of two- to three - story design similar to the architectural renderings for Subareas B and C; 7) That the applicant continue to work with staff to finalize the traffic study prior to submitting for filial development plan and that the recommendations required by the study be completed; 8) That the design of private drive pavement meet the approval of the City Engineer; 9) That the rights -of -way and any necessary easements be dedicated by a plat prior to the issuance of any building permits; 10) That stormwater management is in compliance with the current Stonnwater Regulations, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and 11) That, as outlined in the Tax Increment Financing Agreement, the applicant participate financially in the Shamrock Boulevard Roadway network, and the Banker Drive and Stoneridge Lane extensions to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and 12) That the development text be modified to eliminate the setback requirements along West Dublin Granville Road. *Ben Hale, Jr., agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 6 - 0. RESULT: This Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan was approved. STAFF CERTIFICATION Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner Page 2of2 Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 Page 5 of 31 2. Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan 06 -076Z — Shamrock Crossing — West Dublin Granville Road Claudia Husak said this request is for review and approval of a rezoning/preliminary development plan to PUD, Planned Unit Development District for a proposed 136,000- square- foot commercial development located north and south of West Dublin - Granville Road along Shamrock Boulevard. She said this application was tabled at the October 5, 2006 meeting, and the applicants have continued to work with the Planning and Engineering Divisions in order for the proposal to achieve the character envisioned during the Community Plan Update meetings. She said that the plans have been revised to address comments previously discussed and additional acreage has been included in this application, consisting of 2.5 acres. She said the staff report erroroneously stated that 8.5 acres had been added, however a total of 18 acres are to be rezoned. Ms. Husak presented slides of this case, stating that the site consists of several parcels divided by West Dublin - Granville Road with Shamrock Boulevard running north/south along and through the site and portions of the site also having frontage along Sharp Lane, Stoneridge Lane, and David Road. Ms. Husak said the site contains four proposed subareas: Subareas A, B, C, and D. Subareas A and B are located to the south of West Dublin - Granville Road with Subareas C and D to the north of that roadway. She said the proposed preliminary development plan indicates the locations of building envelopes and parking. She said more detailed site plans will be reviewed at the final development plan stage. Ms. Husak presented a slide of the preliminary layout of Subarea A, located south of West Dublin - Granville Road, with frontage along Sharp Lane, Shamrock Boulevard, and Stoneridge Lane to the south. She said an office retail building is shown oriented toward Sharp Lane with parking areas to the south and east of this building. She said to address the Tuller Road Area Plan and the vision for the West Dublin - Granville Corridor, the development text has been modified to reduce the minimum building and pavement setback requirements. She said that the access point on Shamrock Boulevard was limited to a right -in only to address previous concerns. Ms. Husak said the plan shows and the text states that ground signage along West Dublin - Granville Road shall be permitted within the right -of -way which is indicated on the preliminary plan for this Subarea. She said that signs proposed in the right -of -way require the consent of the City Engineer and approval by City Council, and that while staff recognizes that this proposed sign location is due to the alignment of Sharp Lane, Planning does not support the proposed location in the right -of -way. Ms. Husak presented a slide showing the preliminary layout of Subarea B, located at the south of West Dublin - Granville Road, with frontage along Shamrock Boulevard to the west and a proposed extension of Stoneridge Lane to the south. She said that the preliminary plans have been revised to indicate a building facing West Dublin- Granville Road with head -in parking located behind the building. Ms. Husak said a smaller building is shown facing Shamrock Boulevard with parking located to the east and south of that building. She said as stated previously, the development text has been modified to specify a built -to -line to which a significant portion of the buildings will have to adhere to. She said patios and outdoor spaces are Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 Page 6 of 31 CRAFT encouraged to be located in front of buildings, and the final location of buildings and patios will be determined at the final development plan stage. Ms. Husak said that parking is located interior to the site with landscape islands accommodating existing trees. She said the text lists drive -thrus as conditional uses in this Subarea, provided that they are integrated and designed to minimize the negative impact on pedestrian movements. She said drive -thrus do not contribute to a pedestrian - friendly environment, however, the significance of this use for certain tenants and the positive impact a drive -thru may make to the sustainability of this development are important factors to consider. Ms. Husak said the drive -thrus envisioned in this area are generally to serve banks, dry cleaners, or a pharmacy, therefore Planning recommends that drive - thrus be limited to a maximum of one drive -thru in either Subarea B or C, and not be allowed to serve an eating or drinking establishment. Ms. Husak presented a slide of the layout for Subarea C, located north of West Dublin - Granville Road with the extension of Banker Drive as the northern boundary. She said access for the subarea will be provided by the extension of Banker Drive which has been revised to extend from Shamrock Boulevard all the way to David Road. She said the preliminary plans have also been revised to eliminate a previous curb cut along West Dublin - Granville Road, as David Road will now function as the right - in/right -out access point. Ms. Husak said the City will consider vacating David Road north of Banker Drive as part of the final development plan for this project, which will require action by City Council. She said the plans and the text have also been revised in regard to the building and pavement setbacks as previously discussed for Subarea B, and the text lists drive -thrus as conditional uses in this subarea, and the recommendation regarding this provision is the same as for Subarea B. Ms. Husak showed a slide of the preliminary plans for Subarea D, located north of Subarea C which has been revised to include additional parcels to the east. She said the subarea fronts the Banker Drive extension to the south, as well as the proposed extension of Shamrock Boulevard to the west and north. She said the plans indicate an auto - service facility located in the center of the site with the majority of the parking interior to the site behind the building. Ms. Husak said the proposed use is appropriate for this area, adjacent to the existing AEP substation. She said the text proposes both wall and ground signs for the subarea, and Code does not allow the proposed signs for a single tenant, and the text should be modified accordingly. Ms. Husak showed an alternative layout for Subarea D, which was included as an exhibit in the development text. She said the layout shows the car wash detached fi•orn the main facility located along the eastern property line, utilizing the newly acquired parcels. She said this alternative layout is appropriate for the site as the location of the car wash is south of the existing AEP substation. She said the layout also utilizes improved site design and successfully screens the intensely used portions of this facility, such as overhead doors. Ms. Husak said staff supports this alternative layout, however, the text should be modified to clearly define the association of a detached car wash with the service facility. Mr. Gerber confirmed that the text modification regarding the detached car was included as a condition. Ms. Husak said the development text requires that structures have a common architectural theme which is described as a traditional Irish town with common building materials throughout the development. She said that the development text specifies that the maximum height of the Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 DRAFT Page 7 of 31 buildings in all four subareas will be 35 feet and the architectural elevations submitted by the applicant indicated a variety of one- and two -story buildings will be constructed on site. She said the buildings for this site should be two stories or more in height to create the massing needed for an identifiable streetscape and the text should be modified to include this requirement. Ms. Husak said the applicants have worked with Planning to revise elevations for the auto- service facility in Subarea D to achieve the same quality architecture shown for the other subareas. Ms. Husak said the applicant has continued to work with staff regarding the issues previously associated with this development and revisions have been made to the text, preliminary plans, and the architectural renderings to successfully address the previous concerns. She said this proposal strives to address the desire for a more identifiable streetscape with buildings and pedestrian spaces oriented along the road. She said the proposal includes interesting architectural components and appropriate uses and the high level of development quality desired in this corridor is likely to be established and furthered by this development. Ms. Husak said the proposed zoning and subsequent development will provide appropriate development standards for the site and will advance the general planning intent of this area. She said approval of this preliminary development plan/rezoning application is recommended with the 12 conditions as listed in the staff report: 1) That the text be revised to accommodate future connectivity along all property lines; 2) That the applicant work with staff to eliminate the provision for signage in the right -of- way and clarify the signage provision in the development text; 3) That drive -thrus be limited to a maximum of one drive -thin in either Subarea B or C and not be allowed to serve an eating or drinking establishment and that the stacking requirement language be revised; 4) That the alternate layout for Subarea D be pursued for the final development plan and that the text be modified to clearly define the association of a detached car wash with the service facility; 5) That the provision for a combination of wall and ground signs for a single tenant in Subarea D be eliminated from the development text; 6) That the text be modified to include a requirement for buildings to be of two- to three - story design similar to the architectural renderings; 7) That the applicant continue to work with staff to finalize the traffic study prior to submitting for final development plan and that the recommendations required by the study be completed; 8) That the design of private drive pavement meet the approval of the City Engineer; 9) That the rights -of -way and any necessary easements be dedicated by a plat prior to the issuance of any building permits; 10) That stormwater management is in compliance with the current Stormwater Regulations, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and 11) That the applicant participate financially in the Shamrock Boulevard Roadway network; and 12) That the applicant build the Banker Drive and Stoneridge Lane extensions to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Mr. Gerber asked that Condition 11 be explained. Ms. Husak said the applicant was working with the Finance Department on a TIF, and the TIF will most likely take care of all the road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 Page 8 of 31 a wl network issues, but the details have not been finalized, so the condition was to take care of that. Mr. Gerber thanked Ms. Husak and said it was a good report. Ben W. Hale, Jr., the attorney representing the applicant, said they have agreed to bring these buildings forward. Mr. Hale said they agreed with Conditions 1, 4, and 7 through 10. He said they believed that Conditions 11 and 12 should be combined to read "That the applicant participate financially in the Shamrock Boulevard, Banker Drive, and Stoneridge Lane extensions," because the arrangement they believed they had with the City was that the City will build all those. He said Condition 12 did not accurately reflect the arrangement made. He said they are going to participate, but they thought most of these roadways will be built by the City. Subarea D Mr. Hale said that Lexus has allowed the applicant to deviate substantially from the branding they typically require. He said the architecture is going to be consistent with the other architecture. He said the service facility and the other buildings will come back to the Commission as part of a Corridor Review Application maybe with the Final Development Plan and with those, the dealership will also be remodeled in conformance with the overall architecture. John Oney, architect for Subarea D, representing the applicant, said the plans presented on October 5 were approved by Lexus and they have worked with the exterior elevations to bring them more in harmony with the Shoppes at River Ridge. He said they are anticipating Lexus will approve the architecture and exterior modifications. Mr. Oney said they now have additional acres with the David Road properties, which allowed several site improvements. He said they maintained the proximity of their structure to Shamrock Lane, pushing it up as far as they could, consistent with the other buildings. He said they were able to begin to take the congestion away from traffic areas in the back of the building and put the service doors to the eastern side, away from Shamrock Lane, which was a high priority. Mr. Oney said it enabled them to handle the parking more efficiently and also separate the car wash functions from the service facility. He said this remote facility is part of the Lexus facility and there would not be any independent operation. Mr. Oney said in regards to Condition 5, he said this facility was a service center, and it has to perform and function in that way. Mr. Hale demonstrated on plan boards where signs could be located on the building. He said they could get two signs on the building legally. He said one of their problems was identifying the drop off entrance /exit area. He said the entry is going to be signed with the Germain/Lexus logo, but they did not want the same thing at the exit. He said someone coming from the north cannot see that sign. He said they thought this was a very unusual situation where there is a justification for allowing them a combination of wall and ground signs. Mr. Hale said they thought it was very important that they have a sign at the corner of Shamrock Boulevard and Banker Drive and also very important to have a sign over the entry so that people know how to get in and out. He repeated that they thought this was a very unusual situation where truly the public would not be served properly if just the Sign Code were followed. Mr. Oney said the ground sign on the corner really cemented that this is the Lexus service center and this is the entry point you have to go down Bankers Drive. Mr. Walter recalled that at the last meeting, they discussed incorporating the same village feel with the architecture. He said he could see the elements from a coloring perspective and some Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 Page 9of31 D'i'fAF similar use of the stone, but he did not pick up an old village feel. He said it still appeared very Mediterranean, and he suggested it was because it had a flat roof or it was the curve over the windows. Mr. Gerber said he liked the architecture. Mr. Walter he said he clearly liked it better than what they saw before from an architectural side, but he did not think it looked integrated. Mr. Oney said they added materials to the fagade and another material, brick and two types of roof shapes with a hip and a gable, wainscoting, and different window details. He said they are working with Lexus to leave the horizontal band on the building and integrating it with ribbing. Mr. Walter asked if something could be done at the most prominent corner of the building to tie it together more. Mr. Saneholtz said he had the same initial reaction to the service center. Mr. Oney said the scale of this building was different and he said there may be the opportunity to raise the buildings at least in height. Mr. Saneholtz asked if it was a situation that if the elevation was raised, it had to be done across the entire building. Mr. Oney said if there was an opportunity with Lexus where at least that line could be changed somewhat, it may solve the issues. He said they have not received a response from Lexus. Mr. Gerber said although he was not at the last meeting, he had read the report and felt that a remarkable job had been done. He said he saw that a lot of the characteristics with the matching stone and the banding were consistent with what they were trying to accomplish for this area. He said he feared that when elevation is added to some of the buildings, they will stick out more than what is wanted. Mr. Gerber said some of the renderings do not give the full affect. Ms. Jones agreed and said that if it was on SR 161 where they were hying to create some mass, she would agree, but considering where it is and the placement on that property, she thought it was a terrific - looking building and it captures some of the elements. She said it was a very progressive high -end looking building and she liked it as proposed. Mr. Fishman pointed out that every Lexus dealership did not have the band. He suggested that if the band was removed, it would make a substantial change. Mr. Oney agreed that there are branding variations on Lexus dealerships. He said Lexus has allowed them to basically take everything away except the banding and the ribbing. Mr. Walter said this was not an unattractive building; however he said that one main focal point that will be seen from SR 161 seemed understated. Mr. Oney said they would be more successful with Lexus if they kept incorporating some of the banding and maybe tried to deal with a little more height or possibly a little variation. Mr. Saneholtz asked if there was a two -story portion of this building in the parts section. Mr. Oney said the rear portion is not two - story, but there are lifts and there is service activity which requires a height of 16 feet and space above for mechanicals. He said this facility will be 20 to 24 feet high in the rear. Mr. Saneholtz said he was suggesting a three- or four -foot change in the elevation at prominent points just to attract attention. Mr. Oney said this was probably for a service facility, the furthest away from any piece of branding Lexus has done. He said it was by far their most high -end looking building, Mr. Zimmerman said this was a vast improvement of what the Commission had seen a month ago. He said for an auto - service building, this was nice. He said he thought they had done what the Commission had asked them to do. Mr. Gerber agreed. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes – December 7, 2006 Page 10 of 31 [ r-, I r— Mr. Saneholtz said he was okay with pushing the buildings forward, but he was curious about the landscaping, and the breakup of that immense expanse of parking lot that will now be on the left and right, and as soon as he is past Lowe's, that is what opens up in front of him. He asked if others had concerns about the mounding, and landscaping to break it up visually. Mr. Saneholtz suggested it be a higher mounding than that in front of the Sawmill Kroger Center because this was a beautiful facility and it would be even more beautiful to the residents if they did not have to see the expanse of the parking lot from the street. Mr. Gerber confirmed that the landscaping package will be seen at the final development plan stage. Mr. Saneholtz said he wanted to discuss it now, before it is too late. Ms. Jones asked if the Commission was amenable to the ground sign for way finding inside the Lexus site. Mr. Gerber said that was an issue for the final development plan stage as well. Mr. Hale said it had to be at the preliminary stage as there were options and this was exceptionally important. Ms. Husak said the text allows what the elevations show and the condition either has fulfilled or be eliminated. Ms. Jones confirmed that the Commission was to decide if they wanted to keep Condition 5 or eliminate it. Ms. Husak said if the Commission agrees with the recommendation in Condition 5, then they would not be allowed to have a combination of a ground and a wall sign and the text would have to be revised to take that provision out. Ms. Jones said she was open to having both types of signs because due to the curvature of the road, some way finding would be helpful. Mr. Saneholtz said they all wanted the same goal – maximum visibility for the ground sign to help drivers find the right entrance to the facility. Mr. Fishman asked if the sign details could be dealt with during the final development stage. Ms. Husak said it could be. Mr. Gerber asked if they would be supporting Condition 5. Mr. Walter said they would not support the condition because it said they could not have a mix of signs. Mr. Hale said the Commission would still have the right to review the sign package. Mr. Gerber asked how the Commissioners wanted to change Condition 5. The Commissioners indicated that they wanted it eliminated. Mr. Hale said then, the text would rule which meant they would get a ground sign up to 50 square feet. Mr. Fishman suggested Condition 5 be replaced. Mr. Gerber suggested that a ground sign up to 50 square feet be allowed and then when it comes back at the final development plan, the Commission can detennine then if it too big. Mr. Fishman said he was afraid that the sign would be the maximum 50 square feet. He suggested instead they eliminate 50 square feet, and say "as approved by the Commission." Steve Langworthy said he did not think they needed to nail down a size, but they had to nail down an idea. He said the idea is the applicant wants the sign to be visible, and the Commission wants the sign to be as minimal as possible – the applicant needs to work on what size they can get below 50 square feet that still meets their needs, then bring that back to the Commission at the final to see what works. Mr. Oney agreed. Mr. Gerber said they were changing Condition 5 to read: That the text be amended to eliminate the maximum square footage of the ground sign in Subarea D, subject to staff approval and final plan approval. There being no further discussion regarding this subarea, Mr. Gerber asked to move on to the next subarea. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 Page 11 of 31 Subarea A Mr. Hale said they understood that the Commission can not approve the sign in the right- of-way and that Council had to approve it. He said they wanted the sign there because there are buildings in front and they wanted to communicate to the public traveling the road that this building is here and what its use is. He said their intent is to ask Council to allow them to have the sign and they do not want anything in the text that would prevent them from getting that. He said to the extent that they are going to eliminate that from the text, that is okay, but they do not want anybody to think that they will not ask for it. Mr. Gerber said the Commission could address the street that had not been discussed with staff thus far. He said they had to address it now, at the preliminary. He asked what Mr. Hale was requesting. Mr. Hale said they had moved the building as far forward as they could possibly get it. He said there was no issue, except when the building next door comes back, he wanted the Commission to pay attention to where the building comes in terms of that location. Ms. Husak said there was Condition 2 to consider: That applicant work with staff to eliminate the provision for signage in the right -of -way and clarify the signage provisions in the development text. Mr. Gerber said they had already discussed that they would have to go to Council on that issue anyway. Subareas B and C Mr. Hale then discussed the other two subareas. He said the buildings had been moved forward. Mr. Gerber asked what the setback was. Ms. Husak said the way that staff has envisioned the setback to work would be that not the entire fagade of the building would be up to the 12 -foot build -to -line, but there would be recesses that could accommodate public spaces. Mr. Hale asked if they could go back to 20 feet. Ms. Husak said staff was not concerned about the difference between 18 and 20 feet. Mr. Hale said they wanted some flexibility to be able to have enough room to make things work. Mr. Gerber asked if the setback was going to be between 18 and 20 feet from the roadway. Ms. Husak said it would be between 12 and 20 feet from the right -of -way. Mr. Gerber said that was real close. He asked what the planning objective was. Ms. Husak presented an illustration done by staff showing how build -to -lines with the building and entire streetscape would look like. She said the previous proposal was shown on the top illustration with parking in front of buildings and a 30 -foot setback off West Dublin- Granville Road. She said on the bottom of the illustration was the build -to -line indicated at between 12 and 18 feet. She said 12 feet is actually indicated. She said the objective is to create something similar to Historic Dublin where the buildings are located close to the sidewalk. Ms. Husak said she agreed that the Starbucks Coffee patio was located directly on the sidewalk, but staff would want that to be accommodated during the final development plan where the public spaces could be incorporated into the building footprint. Mr. Gerber said he understood about eliminating the parking up front, but he asked if staff was comfortable with it the buildings so close up. Ms. Husak said they were. She said the final development will take care of the building location details. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 Page 12 of 31 Mr. Saneholtz said some of the activity up front, from his understanding, is going to be accommodated by relief off of that potential 20 -foot line, but then relief back from that is also possible. He said the main wall of the building does not have to be dead straight across. He said there could be a five- or ten -foot step back. Mr. Hale said it was a build -to -line so if it is set at 20 feet, they can not go beyond 20 feet. He said they could not shove a building back 30 feet to accommodate a patio. Mr. Walter said he thought they were fooling themselves when they looked at the illustrations that showed people walking along the front of the building. He said it just was not going to happen, and he was not comfortable. He said this is different than Historic Dublin; it is a median road and speeds are higher, He said he thought there was a huge difference by having those buildings pulled back a little. Mr. Gerber said it was unrealistic to think that there was going to be a walkway people will use on SR 161. He said he liked the idea of eliminating the parking up front because it was an eyesore. However, he said 18 feet is not much. Ms. Jones said she agreed with Mr. Walter and Mr. Gerber. However, she said in some of the discussion groups in the last few months, staff had been given different direction or they had talked different sentiments, so she did not want to go contrary to those. Mr. Walter said he did not think they had. He asked if when they said "pulling it up to the road," meant pulling it up the road or did it mean to move it forward. Mr. Gerber said it was subject to interpretation. He said they were trying to get rid of parking and some asphalt, and as a result, it would be moved up a little. Ms. Jones said she agreed. Mr. Gerber said staff had done a wonderful job working on this, and he hoped his comments were in no way meant to be contrary to that whatsoever. He said the good thing with a preliminary is it is going to go to City Council and they will decide this. He said he thought the buildings were too close. Mr. Walter said he also felt that the back of the buildings were being abandoned by doing that. He said they had Stoneridge Lane there, and the same is going to happen here on the north side with Banker Drive — they are going to end up with the back of these buildings looking like a much larger sea of parking. Mr. Hale said they thought there should be a little parking in front, and last time they agreed to work with staff and when they saw that would not work his client said they will put it on the street. Mr. Saneholtz confirmed that the signage will be placard only with no vertical. Ms. Husak said there was a shopping center identification sign proposed that would identify the name of the center, not any individual tenant. Mr. Saneholtz said 12 feet was illustrated, and the text talks about 18 feet, and now we are okay with 20 feet, because it was two feet. Ms. Husak agreed. Mr. Saneholtz said part of the concept the Commission heard professed was to give the people the feeling of closeness where actually they are trying to create a visual. He said he did not want to lose sight of the fact that the 20 feet is not where the entire building is going to be stopping, but there are going to be setbacks as much as 30 feet. He said 40 percent of this building could be back 30 to 35 feet. He said it was difficult to understand what this is going to look like until the final development plan and footprints are seen. He said he was envisioning the ability to have some of these storefronts up at 20 feet to create a feel, but there is not going to be anything else there except a small stoop, a couple steps. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 Page 13 of 31 Mr. Gerber said he agreed with the concept of changing the streetscape where they eliminated parking up front. He said it would be a prettier image for the whole area. However, he questioned how close to the road it should be. Mr. Saneholtz agreed, and said especially on SR 161. Mr. Gerber said when the text states that a majority has to be at the 18- or 20 -foot line that is 50.1 percent. Mr. Hale read the actual text language: Buildings with their primary frontage on West Dublin - Granville Road shall be required to have a significant portion of the structure located at the build -to -line that will be established between 12 feet and 18,feet from the right -of- -way. Subject to this requirement, the final location of buildings Dublin - Granville Road right -of- -way shall be approved by the Planning Commission at the time of final development plan with the exceptions that patios and outdoor spaces are encouraged to be located in front of the buildings. Mr. Saneholtz noted that it said "significant portion," not majority, although significant was not ten percent either. However, he asked if this was backed up to 30 feet, would it really make the front of these buildings anymore attractive. Mr. Gerber said it might make it a little more usable and maybe a little safer. Mr. Walter said he also thought it would tie together better. Mr. Zimmerman said when they were at the Community Plan work sessions working on the SR 161 Corridor, he did realize they had this much discussion about it. He said now, this is the key. Mr. Saneholtz said for many of the visuals presented at the work session, the conversation was that this was not going to happen overnight, but they had to start somewhere. He said lie was not wed to the idea that it has to be 18, 12, or 20 feet. He said he agreed that you have to take into account what is already there and what is likely to be there for a while, but you also have to anticipate that we can eventually do this, but it is going to take a lot of redevelopment. Mr. Zimmerman said he thought they needed to get it right now where this is going to be because once that line begins,it can not keep going. Mr. Saneholtz said not to back it up so much that if the City gets an opportunity in the future to actually fill it in, that they do not lose the effect entirely. He said he thought they all were saying the same thing. He said perhaps there is some room in here — 5 or 10 feet, that aesthetically seems more compatible with what is there but also could be compatible with what could be there 60 years from now. Mr. Gerber agreed with the streetscape concept, however he questioned how close the buildings should be. He said he did not want to be back 90 yards. He asked if 18 feet was safe, because it was not Historic Dublin Road where traffic went 20 mph. Brian Jones, Brian Kent Jones Architect, representing the applicant, said he did not think that the 12 -foot line needed to be increased. He said if they gave some leniency to allow for some variation from 12 to 30 feet, it is going to allow for steps in and out of the building, which are going to help. He said it is not 12 feet from the front face of the building to the curb. Mr. Jones said there is a considerable amount of space that occurs between the right -of -way line and the curb itself. He said he thought an investigation would result in something that is responsive to the issue. Mr. Saneholtz said some Commissioners were envisioning something very similar to Starbucks in Historic Dublin, and here, they were not in an area where the speed limit was reduced to 25 or 30 mph. He asked how far back from the curb are the buildings in Historic Dublin and if some were right to the right -of -way. Mr. Gunderman said some were at the right -of -way and others Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 Page 14 of 31 were not. He said Town Center I on the corner would probably be right at the right -of -way line. He said about 30 percent of the buildings down the street were the same way. He said the rest are set back from two feet to ten feet. Mr. Fishman suggested that the developer be given some flexibility. Mr. Walter said he thought the problem was staff s direction to the applicant. Mr. Fishman said that at 20 feet, they had two more feet and staff said that was fine. He confirmed where the 20 -feet begin. Mr. Phillabaum clarified that the 12 feet staff has shown as the build -to -line is to the right -of- way. I-Ie said at a minimum, from the edge of pavement of SR 161 to the closest face of a building would be 27 feet. He said it could increase from there another eight to 35 feet. Mr. Fishman said that was assuming another lane was not added to SR 161. Mr. Gerber asked if the State could add another lane in the right -of -way. Mr. Phillabaum said yes, in theory. Mr. Walter asked about the southern line of Sharp Lane which Mr. Jones indicated is probably eight to 12 feet again past that. He asked if the building could be oriented so that from Sharp Lane, all the way to east, those buildings would set at the same level. He said it gives a visual corridor that is similar, and it is far enough away from the street. He said if a lane were added, it would not go on top of Sharp Lane, so it would provide a good visual appeal all the way down, without the parking in front. Mr. Jones said it appeared to be about 40 feet, taking the right -of -way on Sharp Lane and projecting it. Mr. Hale said he was not sure they wanted to push the building back that far. He said maybe 30 feet. Mr. Walter said 30 feet would give variation and ten feet on the other side. Mr. Hale said they were happy at 30 feet. He agreed to work with staff to make sure it works right. He said 40 feet would impede too much on the parking. Mr. Gerber said this would go next to City Council and they could change what the Commission recommends. He said he thought 12 feet was too short. He said it was unsafe and if there are patios there, it was very unsafe and too close. He asked for an expert opinion about safety, aside fi•om politics, etc. Steve Langworthy said he told staff that they were talking about the wrong things. He said in his view, he looked at the other side of the building and he put himself on the ground and said what is the difference between this and any other suburban shopping center he had ever seen - other than maybe some nice looking buildings which you get anyway - nothing. Mr. Langworthy said the first question he asked staff was if Dublin was not supposed to be a special place that builds special places where people want to go, or does it build suburban shopping centers that happen to look like some nice buildings. He said the second question he asked staff was why we are putting the buildings up to the street. He said staff replied that the consultant told them they should do that. Mr. Langworthy said he used to be a consultant, and that was probably the worst person to listen to. He said the idea was that you cannot do these things in singularity. He said what the Commissioners saw on their field trip was buildings up to the street, but they also saw a street that was in scale to buildings up to the street. He said these things had to be done in combination. Mr. Langworthy said he thought they could find another way to create a place where people will actually want to go as opposed to just another suburban shopping center along the highway. Mr. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 Page 15 of 31 Fishman asked where to go from here. Mr. Langworthy said his non - political honest answer was that they should scrap this plan. However, he said he was corning in late in the game, so it was not fair for him to say that. Mr. Gerber said he appreciated very much Mr. Langworthy's honest answer. Mr. Fishman suggested that this be tabled to let the applicant work with staff and come back with something that staff and the Commission can live with. Mr. Langworthy said that was really unfair to the applicants now because they had gone so far down the road - unless they are completely in agreement to rework the plan. Mr. Gerber said he very much appreciated that too. He said there were many aspects of this that he liked. However, he said he had two concerns. He said he was concerned how close these buildings are to the road. He said he thought they were dreaming and it was poor planning. He said although he was not an expert in planning, he was a resident and stakeholder and he knew what he liked when he saw it. Mr. Gerber said this was something he thought would be inherently very dangerous and will not be very functional that close to the road. Mr. Saneholtz said he would like to understand how far this concept can back up before running out of parking spaces. Ms. Husak said the intention is that the uses would offset parking needs and in general, the Code does have very suburban, auto - oriented parking standards. However, she said, there are office, restaurant, and retail uses of varying intensities envisioned here, so parking use would be offset at peak times. Mr. Walter said he was concerned that these were strip centers on both sides of SR 161. He said while he liked the architecture, style, and placement of the Lexus service center which was absolutely appropriate and worked well on the site. Mr. Walter said he was not convinced that this is the best thing to do for this part of the area and he also was not convinced that a drive -thru in Subarea B would fit in at all. Mr. Fishman said he did not think this could be designed tonight, and he was in the favor of a tabling so that the applicant can get with staff and Mr. Langworthy who seemed to have some new, fresh ideas. Mr. Saneholtz said he would support a tabling. He said they were not quite ready to deal with this yet because more information was needed. Mr. Walter said there was a mix of opinions amongst staff to be resolved before they can direct the applicant on a major project. Mr. Langworthy said staff was trying to follow the Commission's earlier direction. Mr. Saneholtz said he thought there was a mix of opinion between what staff interpreted from the Joint City Council /Planning Commission work sessions. Mr. Hale said they first took this to the Commission in September 2005, and they were encouraged to improve the architecture, they were encouraged to bring these buildings up to the street, and to get involved on the other side of the street. He said then they were encouraged to work with the other owners. He said they had done everythin g anybody had asked them to do and they had spent $250,000 doing that. He said this was a great project in terms of everything they have heard. He said he was just flabbergasted. Mr. Gerber said he was not inclined to table this case for those reasons. He said the City had been leading the applicant down the road for a long time. He said he thought they needed to decide where the setback was to be. Mr. Gerber said it is going to City Council and to let them Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 Page 16 of 31 decide this issue. He said this had been brought up by their consultant, and in the joint work sessions. However, he said in order for him to support or make a recommendation to City Council, he thought the setback needed to be back a little more. He said he thought it was too close. He told Mr. Hale if they could come up with language to facilitate that, to take his case to Council. Mr. Saneholtz asked how much further back. Mr. Gerber said he sensed it would be that 40 feet was too much, perhaps 30 feet which is ten yards from the back of the curb. He said if he had it to do over, he agreed with what Mr. Langworthy said. He said he had been a proponent of gateway features and he envisioned nice fences, etc. Mr. Saneholtz said he wanted everyone to understand what he thought he heard. Mr. Langworthy suggested not worrying too much about the numbers and maybe the Commission could tell staff what they wanted to occur in that space between the street pavement and the actual front of this building. Mr. Gerber said his objective was that he did not want to see a tunnel all the way down. He said he wanted to see vistas. Mr. Gerber said he wanted to preserve the fact that this City was proud of its open space and at the same time, he was very concerned about safety, and the utility of the shopkeepers, should they chose to put a patio out there, that they would have enough room to do that in an aesthetic and safe way. Mr. Langworthy confirmed that Mr. Gerber wanted room for some outdoor activity to occur in the front that was a safe distance from the edge of the pavement of the roadway. Mr. Gerber said he wanted it mixed a little. He said the parking in front took away from the vista. Mr. Gerber asked what kind of language could be put in here. He asked if this could be done as a condition. Mr. Hale said yes, and that he thought they could say that the build -to -lines will not exceed 30 feet, they will work with staff at the final development plan to bring a building design back to the Commission. He agreed that Mr. Langworthy had a point that they were all worried about this adjacency, and perhaps they will talk about the right kind of wall in there to make it feel more separated. He said that might be a good thing to do so that when you are on that busy street, if there is something that separates you from the street. Mr. Hale said they would do some mock- ups so they can see what they look like and feel like on the street. Mr. Gunderman said if all the Commissioners were feeling comfortable enough of essentially addressing these issues at the final development plan stage and if the things they are willing to consider are broad enough, then he thought they could simply eliminate the numbers from the paragraph that talks about the setback in the text for Subareas B and C where it discusses building pavement setbacks from the adjacent right -of -way. He said it could read: Buildings with their primary frontage on West Dublin - Granville Road shall be required to have a significant portion of the structures located at a build -to line... Mr. Gerber confirmed that a period should be placed after that sentence. He asked to make that a new Condition 12. Mr. Hale agreed. Ms. Husak suggested a general: That the text be modified. Mr. Gunderman agreed and said the new Condition 12 should be: That the text be modified under yard and setback requirements for Subareas B and C to eliminate the phrase "between 12 feet and 18 feet from the right -of- way." Mr. Gerber asked if Mr. Fishman advocated that. Mr. Fishman agreed and added that the decision would be made at the final development plan stage when the Commission sees the details. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 Page 17 of 31 Mr. Gerber, Mr. Fishman, and Mr. Walter wanted to discuss Condition 3. Mr. Fishman said it should remain as it was and Mr. Walter did not. Mr. Hale said they were okay with Condition 3. Mr. Fishman confirmed that Condition 3 should be left alone and that only one non -food, drive - thru would be permitted. Mr. Fishman confirmed with Mr. Hale that all these buildings would have four -sided architecture. Mr. Hale said they would have the same quality and materials. I-Ie said the only other issue was Condition 6 regarding the predominately two- and three -story buildings which would be similar to the architectural renderings. Mr. Jones said the hierarchy at the corner, the town center piece, where these two are really facing the intersection is where the highest elements are proposed. He said because what is occurring through the corridor, they think that trying to build up to this hierarchy at the center is probably the most rationale way to try to mimic what might have occurred 100 years ago or more. He said they thought it was really important to maintain some of the 1 components along with the two- story, as well as along with some of three -story tower and some of the references even get above the 2%2 -story framework. Mr. Walter said he did not think the condition made sense with Subarea D, because it does not talk about two- or three -story buildings. Mr. Hale said it only applied to Subareas B and C (buildings along SR 161). Mr. Walter said that was not how Condition 6 read. Mr. Hale said they wanted to make it clear that they are going to bring back architecture very consistent with what was seen in the renderings with the same quality. Mr. Gerber asked for Ms. Husak's reply regarding the purpose of Condition 6. Ms. Husak said the concern was that these architectural elevations are part of the preliminary development plan and staff did not want to see the buildings decreasing in height from what is shown on these plans. Mr. Gerber asked if the concern was just Subareas B and C. Ms. Husak said yes. Mr. Fishman suggested that Subareas B and C be added to Condition 6. Mr. Hale agreed. He said they would not come back with something radically different. Motion and Vote: Mr. Gerber made a motion to approve this Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan because this proposal addresses the desire for a more identifiable streetscape, includes interesting architectural components and appropriate uses, the high -level of development quality desired in this corridor is likely to be established and furthered by this development, and the proposed zoning and subsequent development will provide appropriate development standards for the site and will advance the general planning intent of this area with 12 conditions: 1) That the text be revised to accommodate future connectivity along all property lines; 2) That the applicant work with staff to eliminate the provision for signage in the right -of -way and clarify the signage provision in the development text; 3) That drive -thrus be limited to a maximum of one drive -thru in either Subarea B or C and not be allowed to serve an eating or drinking establishment and that the stacking requirement language be revised; 4) That the alternate layout for Subarea D be pursued for the final development plan and that the text be modified to clearly define the association of a detached car wash with the service facility; 5) That the development text provisions remain allowing a combination of wall and ground signs for a single tenant in Subarea D with the maximum square footage of the ground sign Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — December 7, 2006 Page 18 of 31 subject to review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the final development plan stage; 6) That the text be modified to include a requirement for buildings to be of two- to three -story design similar to the architectural renderings for Subareas B and C; 7) That the applicant continue to work with staff to finalize the traffic study prior to submitting for final development plan and that the recommendations required by the study be completed; 8) That the design of private drive pavement meet the approval of the City Engineer; 9) That the rights -of -way and any necessary easements be dedicated by a plat prior to the issuance of any building permits; 10) That stormwater management is in compliance with the current Stormwater Regulations, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and 11) That, as outlined in the Tax Increment Financing Agreement, the applicant participate financially in the Shamrock Boulevard Roadway network, and the Banker Drive and Stoneridge Lane extensions to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and 12)That the development text be modified to eliminate the setback requirements along West Dublin Granville Road. Mr. Hale agreed to the above conditions. Mr. Fishman seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ms. Jones, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Walter, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Approved 6 — 0.) (Mr. McCash recused himself at the beginning of the meeting from this case due to a business association conflict.) CITY OF DUBLIN- I =d Use and long R®ge Pimerng 5800 Shier -Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 Phone. 614 -410 -4600 Fax: 614 -410 -4741 Web Site: www-debkoh.us STAFF REPORT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 7, 2006 2. Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan 06 -076Z — Shamrock Crossing West Dublin Granville Road Location: 24.12 acres located at the intersection of West Dublin Granville Road and Shamrock Boulevard. Existing Zoning: SO, Suburban Office and Institutional, R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential District and R =4, Suburban Residential District. Request: Review and approval of a rezoning for 24 -12 acres to Planned Unit Development District, under the provisions of Code Sections 153.050 and 153.234. Proposed Use: A 136,000- square -foot development comprised of retail, office, and service- oriented uses. Applicant: Tall Pines Holdings, Ltd., 3473 Mildred Drive, Falls Church, Virginia 22042, Charles W. Warner and Edward E. Belz, 2226 Atlee Court, Columbus, Ohio 43220; Jerry and Linda Berg, 5709 West Alexandria Road, Middletown, Ohio 45042, Mary Warner, 6595 David Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017, Ima Moore, 7055 Shier Rings, Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016, Virgil Schnell, 839 Liverpool Place, Westerville, Ohio 43081, Donnabelle Scott, PO Box 191, Dublin, Ohio 43017 -0191; represented by Ben W. Hale and Aaron L_ Underhill, Smith and Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Suite 725, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Claudia D_ Husak, AICP, Planner. Contact Information: .(614) 410- 4675/Email: chusak @dublin.oh.us. UPDATE: This case was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission on October 5, 2006. The Commissioners expressed concerns about the proposed siting of the buildings and instructed the applicant to work with staff in order to achieve the character envisioned during the Community Plan Update meetings. The Commission generally favored the proposed architecture, but expressed a desire for the auto - service facility to harmonize with the rest of the development. The case was tabled at the request of the applicants. The applicants have revised the development text and the preliminary plans to address the concerns outlined by staff and discussed by the Commission. In addition, the revised preliminary plans include an additional 8.5 acres along the north side of West Dublin - Granville Road and the west side of David Road. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report — December 7, 2006 Case No. 06 -076Z — Page 2 of 13 BACKGROUND: Case Summary: This is a request for review and approval of a rezoning (preliminary development plan) to PUD, Planned Unit Development District for a proposed 136,000- square -foot commercial development. The site consists of 24.12 acres located north and south of West Dublin - Granville Road along the east side of Shamrock Boulevard. The vision for the West Dublin - Granville Road corridor was discussed at various Joint Work Sessions of City Council and Planning Commission as part of the Community Plan Update process. The direction from these work sessions addressed the overall character of the West Dublin - Granville Road streetscape, which included placement of buildings at the street, the incorporation of mixed, higher - intensity land uses, the creation of a significant entryway, and a more pedestrian friendly environment. Staff believes that the revisions made to this proposal address the desire for a more identifiable streetscape with buildings or pedestrian spaces oriented along the road. Staff recommends approval of this rezoning request with conditions. Site History: A concept plan for the southern portion of this site was presented to City Council on December 12, 2005 and to the Planning and Zoning Commission on September 1, 2005 (See history for Case 05- 114CP)_ Council members and Commissioners stated concerns as to whether the proposal fit the concept for the West Dublin - Granville Road corridor discussed at a Community Plan Joint Work Session, and whether this area overemphasized retail uses. Concerns were also expressed by both groups about a desire to protect the existing tree rows, and the mix of uses proposed with particular emphasis on drive -thru restaurants. Parcels in this development were also included in area rezonings in 2004 and 2003 that established Dublin zoning on the properties where township zoning remained or records were not clear as to the establishment of Dublin zoning. A preliminary plat for office uses and the extension of Stoneridge Lane was approved for the southern portion of the proposal in 2002. In 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission disapproved a concept plan for an auto dealership and office use development on the south side of West Dublin- Granville Road, as well as, reviewed and tabled a rezoning application for the northern portion of this proposal and the adjacent David Road area .(see attached case history). These applications were not pursued further and will be closed by staff if this application proceeds. Adopted Land Use Principles: On August 21, 2006 City Council established ten Land Use Principles to be utilized as development guidelines in conjunction with the existing Community Plan in the evaluation of pending development applications. The ten Land Use Principles are to be consulted in order to adequately address policies and decision - making processes that may arise during the Community Plan update process. The ten Land Use Principles are listed below: 1) High quality design for all uses, recognizing density has important economic implications, but is essentially an outcome not a determinant of creating a quality place. 2) Creating places to live that have a stronger pedestrian environment, connections to convenient services, and are conducive to multi - generational living and social interaction. 3) Creating places with integrated uses that are distinctive, sustainable and contribute to increasing the City's overall vitality. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report — December 7, 2006 Case No. 06 -076Z — Page 3 of 13 4) Providing some retail services in closer proximity to residential areas as an important amenity to residents. The design considerations are very important. 5) Creating a wider range of housing choice in the community, as well as in new neighborhoods. 6) Preserving the rural character of certain areas of the community, including the appearance of roads, as well as the landscape. 7) Developing streets that create an attractive public realm and .make exceptional places for people. 8) Creating better connected places, in part, to improve the function of the street network and also to better serve neighborhoods. 9) Creating streets that contribute to the character of the community and move a more reasonable level of traffic. 10) Providing opportunities to walk and bike throughout the community. Case Procedure: The purpose of the PUD process is to encourage appropriate architectural design and proper site planning in a coordinated and comprehensive manner, consistent with accepted land planning, landscape architecture, and engineering principles. The PUD process can consist of up to three basic stages: 1) Concept Plan (Staff, Commission, and/or City Council review and comment); 2) Zoning Amendment Request (Preliminary Development Plan; Commission recommends and City Council approves /denies); and 3) Final Development Plan (Commission approves /denies). The general intent of the preliminary development plan (rezoning) stage .is to determine the general layout and specific zoning standards that will guide development. The Planning and Zoning Commission must review and make a recommendation on this preliminary development plan (rezoning) request. The application will then be returned to City Council for a public hearing and final vote. A two- thirds vote of City Council is required to override a negative recommendation by the Commission. If approved, the rezoning will become effective 30 days following the Council vote. Additionally, all portions of the development will require final development plan approval by the Commission prior to construction. Review Criteria: In accordance with Section 153.055(A) Plan Approval Criteria, Code sets out the following criteria of approval for a preliminary development plan (rezoning): 1) The proposed development is consistent with the purpose, intent and applicable standards of the Dublin Zoning Code; 2) The proposed development is in conformity with the 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; 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; 4) The proposed uses are appropriately located the City so that the use and value of property within and adjacent to the area will be safeguarded; Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report — December 7, 2006 Case No. 06 -076Z — Page 4 of 13 5) Proposed residential development will have sufficient open space areas that meet the objectives of the Community Plan; 6) The proposed development respects the unique characteristic of the natural features and protects the natural resources of the site; 7) Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, retention and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided; 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 so that the proposed development provides for a safe, convenient and non - conflicting circulation system for motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians; 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, 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 plan's contribution to the orderly development of land within the City; 11) Adequate provision is made for storm drainage within and through the site so as to maintain, as far as practicable, usual and normal swales, water courses and drainage areas; 12) The design, site arrangement, and anticipated benefits of the proposed development justify any deviation from the standard development regulations included in the Dublin Zoning Code or Subdivision Regulation, and that any such deviations are consistent with the intent of the Planned Development District regulations; 13) The proposed building design meets or exceeds the quality of the building designs in the surrounding area and all appiicable appearance standards of the City; 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; 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; and 16) The applicant's contributions to the public infrastructure are consistent with the Thoroughfare Plan and are sufficient to service the new development. CONSIDERATIONS Site Characteristics: • Site Description. The 24.12 -acre site consists of several parcels divided by West Dublin - Granville Road. Land to the south has 430 feet of frontage along West Dublin - Granville Road and 400 feet of frontage along Shamrock Boulevard. The land to the north has 390 feet of frontage along West Dublin - Granville Road and 425 feet of frontage along Shamrock Boulevard. A majority of the site is currently undeveloped with several large tree rows located throughout the site. Five parcels along David Road and West Dublin - Granville Road are developed with ranch - style, single - family residences. • Zoning. The southern portion of the site is currently zoned SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District and the northern portion is zoned R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential District and R -4, Suburban Residential District_ The current zoning districts Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report — December 7, 2006 Case No. 06 -076Z — Page 5 of 13 permit medical office, professional office, institutional facilities, and residential uses. The proposed development for a mix of office, retail, and restaurant uses is not entirely permitted within these districts and therefore a rezoning is necessary. • Surrounding Zoning. To the north is the Greystone Mews condominium development, which is zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District. A single- family home and two lots at the intersection of David Road and West Dublin- Granville Road are zoned R -4, Suburban Residential District. Further north along David Road is the AEP substation, zoned PCD, Planned Commerce District. The Stoneridge Medical complex, zoned PUD is located to the east and to the south is undeveloped land, which is zoned SO and was included in the concept plan stage for the proposal. To the west are the Wendy's International headquarters and the La Scala restaurant, zoned CC, Community Commercial District. Community Plan: • Joint Work Session. At the August 2, 2006 Joint Work Session, the participants indicated their support for a more urban streetscape with buildings located along the street and the creation of a more pedestrian friendly environment within this part of the West Dublin - Granville Road corridor. A unified character is envisioned in this area between Sawmill Road and Riverside Drive, which is identified by a distinct streetscape created through architectural placement and pedestrian corridors. Staff believes that the modifications to the proposed development create this desired streetscape. • Future Land Use. The Future Land Use Map in the Community Plan indicates this sites preferred land use is "Mixed -Use Employment Emphasis." This land use classification calls for primarily non - residential uses such as office, research and development, and light industry, with other uses, such as residential and retail uses, as secondary support uses. Land use designations were assigned based on comprehensive analysis and traffic studies for the City. In addition, Land Use Principle 3 states that places should be created with integrated uses that are distinctive, sustainable and contribute to increasing the City's overall vitality. Staff believes that the proposed uses of office, retail, restaurant, and auto repair generally comply with the Future Land Use designation and that the modifications to the plan based on the comments by the Commission and staff meet the intent of Principle 3. • Tuller Road Area Plan. This site is part of the Tuller Road Area Plan within the Community Plan (page 97) that encourages "buildings to be oriented to the street" with new "linkages between uses." The revised preliminary plans indicate buildings located along West Dublin-Granville Road with a landscaped entrance area at the intersection of West Dublin - Granville Road and Shamrock Boulevard. Parking is proposed to the rear of the buildings and staff believes that the revised building locations have the proper orientation and massing to provide an architectural edge and an identifiable urban streetscape within the West Dublin - Granville Road corridor. Site Layout: • General Layout. The site contains four proposed Subareas (A, B, C, and D). Subareas A and B are located to the south of West Dublin - Granville Road with Subareas C and D located to the north of this roadway. While the proposed preliminary development plan indicates building envelopes along West Dublin - Granville Road, Sharp Lane, Shamrock Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report — December 7, 2006 Case No. 06 -076Z — Page 6 of 13 Boulevard and the Banker Drive extension, detailed site plans including revisions to the preliminary plan will be reviewed at the final development plan stage. Subarea A: • Proposed Uses. The proposed development text outlines the permitted uses of the site, which consist of retail, office, and service uses. Various intense commercial uses, such as auto service, farm machinery sales, and sexually- oriented businesses are prohibited within the Subarea. • Layout. This Subarea is located south of West Dublin- Granville Road and has frontage along Sharp Lane, Shamrock Boulevard, and Stoneridge Lane to the south. The development text allows a maximum building square footage of 12,000 for this Subarea and the plans indicate a 5,184 - square -foot office /retail building oriented toward Sharp Lane with parking areas to the south and east of the building. The preliminary plans have been revised to address staff concerns regarding an access point on Shamrock Boulevard by limiting the access to right - in only. Full access is proposed to the south off Stoneridge Lane. • Setbacks. To address the Tuller Road Area Plan and the vision for the West Dublin - Granville Road corridor, the development text has been modified to reduce the minimum building and pavement setback requirements along Shamrock Boulevard to 20 feet, and along Sharp Lane to 10 feet. A 15 -foot building and pavement setback is proposed along Stoneridge Lane and the adjacent property to the west of the Subarea. The preliminary plans adhere to the specified setbacks. In order to accommodate future connectivity to the west, staff believes that no pavement setback should be specified along the west property line. • Parking. Code requires a parking ratio of one space per 150 square feet for most commercial uses, including shopping centers. The text states that parking will be provided per Code in Subarea A. • Signage. Code permits a single tenant parcel with frontage along two rights -of- way either two ground- mounted signs that total 66.6 square feet, or two wall - mounted signs with a maximum area of 80 square feet. The text provides for either two ground signs or two wall signs for a single tenant or a center identification sign and wall sings for a multi - tenant building. Staff believes that the text requires minor revisions to the layout and wording of the signage section in order to clarify the proposed provisions. Ground Signs. The text states that the maximum area of the ground signs shall not exceed a total of 66.6 square feet per sign face, provided that the maximum area of any single ground sign not exceed 50 square feet. Staff believes that the intent of this provision is to meet Code; however, the wording is not clear and should be revised. The text also states that the ground sign along West Dublin - Granville Road shall be permitted within the right -of -way. Signage proposed in the right -of -way requires the consent of the City Engineer and approval by City Council. While staff recognizes that this proposed sign location is due to the alignment of Sharp Lane, staff does not support the proposed location in the right-of- way. Staff recommends that the provision for signage in the right -of -way be eliminated from the text. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report — December 7, 2006 Case No. 06 -076Z — Page 7 of 13 • Wall Signs. The applicant is proposing wall signs on both sides of the buildings, not to exceed the permitted sign area. Staff believes allowing wall signs on both sides of the building is appropriate considering the building location. As proposed, signs facing the street would be 30 inches high and 16 feet in width while those facing the parking lot would be 24 inches high and 12 feet in width. Subarea B: • Proposed Uses. The proposed development text outlines the permitted uses of this Subarea, which are consistent with the uses in Subarea A. • Proposed Conditional Uses. In order to create a more pedestrian environment, the text provides for the option of outdoor dining patios, which are considered a conditional use within the proposed development text. The text also lists drive- thrus as conditional uses in this Subarea provided that they are integrated and designed to minimize any negative impact on pedestrian movement. In general, staff does not believe that drive -thrus contribute to a pedestrian friendly environment; however staff also understands the significance of this use for certain tenants and the positive impact a drive -thru may make to the sustainability of this development. Therefore, staff recommends that drive -thrus be limited to a maximum of one in either Subarea B or C and not be allowed to serve an eating or drinking establishment. Additionally, the text language regarding stacking requirements should be revised to eliminate the word "approved." • Layout. This Subarea is located to the south of West Dublin - Granville Road and has frontage along Shamrock Lane to the west. The preliminary plans show a proposed extension of Stoneridge Lane to the south of this Subarea. The text permits a maximum of three buildings in this Subarea, not to exceed 42,000 square feet. The preliminary plans have been revised to indicate a 24,000- square- foot building facing West Dublin- Granville Road with head -in parking located directly behind building. An 8,400- square -foot building is shown facing Shamrock Boulevard with parking located to the east and south of this building. Parking is also located interior to the site with landscape islands providing space for existing trees. Access to this Subarea is provided via a drive off Shamrock Boulevard, opposite Sharp Lane to the west. An additional access point is indicated to the south off the proposed extension of Stoneridge Lane. • Setbacks. As recommended by staff, the development text has been modified to specify a build -to -line between 12 and 18 feet to which a significant portion of buildings facing West Dublin - Granville Road have to adhere. Patios and outdoor spaces are encouraged to be located in front of buildings and the final location of buildings and patios will be determined at the final development plan stage. Building and pavement setbacks along Shamrock Boulevard are proposed at 20 feet and at 15 feet for Stoneridge Lane. Again, pavement setbacks are proposed along the adjacent property line and staff believes that no pavement setback should be specified along the east property line to accommodate future connectivity. This revised layout is consistent with staff comments, the vision discussed during Joint Work Sessions, and the concepts contained within the Tuller Road Area Plan. This issue was also discussed at the October S, 2006 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, where four Commissioners Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report — December 7, 2006 Case No. 06 -076Z — Page 8 of 13 participated in this discussion and the views regarding building setbacks were split evenly. Parking. Code requires a parking ratio of one space per 150 square feet for most commercial uses, including shopping centers. The development text indicates that the parking ratio within Subareas B will be provided at one space per 200 square feet, which is less than outlined by Code. However, staff believes that a reduced number in parking spaces may be appropriate as peak hours of operation vary, allowing shared parking between uses. • Signage. Code allows joint identification signs that identify the name of shopping centers with at least three individual occupants. The maximum area of a center identification sign is restricted to 80 square feet, which also applies to two signs on a corner development. ■ Ground Signs. The text states that the ground signs for the Subarea. will be located along the right -of -way for West Dublin- Granville Road and Shamrock Boulevard and meet all setback requirements. The permitted size shall be a maximum of 50 square feet per sign face and a height not to exceed eight feet. ■ Wall Signs. Wall signage is permitted on each tenant storefront fronting onto a public street as well as at the rear entrance. The text permits the same wall signage standards as Subarea A. Staff believes that wall signs on both sides of the building are appropriate as the buildings are placed close to the street. Subarea C: • Proposed uses. The proposed development text outlines the permitted uses of the site, which are consistent with the uses in Subarea A and B. • Proposed Conditional Uses. The text provides for the option of outdoor- dining patios; which are considered conditional uses within the proposed development text. The text also lists drive -thrus as conditional uses in this Subarea provided that they are integrated and designed to minimize any negative impact on pedestrian movement. In general, staff does not believe that drive -thrus contribute to a pedestrian friendly environment; however staff also understands the significance of this use for certain tenants and the positive impact a drive -thru may make to the sustainability of this development. Therefore, staff recommends that drive -thrus be limited to a maximum of one in either Subarea B or C and not be allowed to serve an eating or drinking establishment. Additionally, the text language regarding stacking requirements should be revised to eliminate the word "approved." • Layout. An additional parcel of land has been added to this Subarea, which is located to the north of West Dublin- Granville Road and east of Shamrock Boulevard. The extension of Banker Drive is the northern boundary of Subarea C. The text permits a maximum of three buildings in this Subarea, not to exceed 32,000 square feet. The preliminary plans indicate two 16,000- square -foot buildings facing West Dublin - Granville Road with parking located behind the buildings as previously recommended. Access for this Subarea will be provided by the extension of Banker Drive, which has been revised to extend from Shamrock Boulevard to David Road. The preliminary plans have also been Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report — December 7, 2006 Case No. 06 -076Z — Page 9 of 13 revised to eliminate the previous curb cut along West Dublin - Granville Road as David Road will now function as a right - in/right -out access point. Plans indicate two access points along the Banker Drive extension. • Setbacks. As recommended by staff, the development text has been modified to specify a build -to -line between 12 and 18 feet to which a significant portion of buildings facing West Dublin - Granville Road have to adhere. Patios and outdoor spaces are encouraged to be located in front of buildings and the final location of buildings and patios will be determined at the final development plan stage. Building and pavement setbacks along Shamrock Boulevard are proposed at 20 feet and at 15 feet for Banker Drive. Again, pavement setbacks are proposed along the adjacent property line and staff believes that no pavement setback should be specified along the east property line to accommodate future connectivity. This revised layout is consistent with staff comments, the vision discussed during Joint Work Sessions, and the concepts contained within the Tuller Road Area Plan. • Parking. Code requires a parking ratio of one space per 150 square feet for most commercial uses, including shopping centers. The development text indicates that the parking ratio within Subareas C will be provided at one space per 200 square feet, which is less than outlined by Code. However, staff believes that a reduced number in parking spaces may be appropriate as peak hours of operation vary, allowing shared parking between uses. • Signage. Please refer to Subarea B for the Code requirements, proposed development text for Signage and associated staff comments, as they are the same for this Subarea. • Remaining Parcels. The applicant was not able to include three parcels, located \ east and west of the intersection of West Dublin- Granville Road with David Road. The lot on the east, currently containing a ranch -style single - family residence, will be immediately adjacent to the proposed development and the extension of Banker Drive. Should the owners want to develop these parcels in the future a, rezoning will be required. The City has previously committed to sponsor a rezoning for all parcels along David Road and will use this proposal as a guideline, if approved. Staff believes that these properties have development potential as a use harmonious and integrated with - the proposed Shamrock Crossing development. Subarea D: • Proposed Uses. In Subarea D, the proposed uses include auto repair, hotel, financial, and some office -type establishments. In general, staff believes that the proposed uses are appropriate for the area, as site is located adjacent to the existing AEP substation and approximately 480 feet north of West Dublin- Granville Road. The preliminary plans show an auto - service facility located in Subarea D and staff believes that approval of this use depends on the architectural design of the building and the site design. • Layout. The preliminary plans for Subarea D, located to the north of Subarea C have been revised to include additional parcels to the east. This Subarea has frontage along the Banker Drive extension to the south, as well as the proposed extension of Shamrock Boulevard to the north and east. The text permits two Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report — December 7, 2006 Case No. 06 -076Z — Page 10 of 13 buildings not to exceed 50,000 square feet and the plans indicate a 44,141- square- foot of auto service facility with an attached car wash located in the western portion of this Subarea with the majority of parking located to the east, behind the building. The addition of the land to the east is indicated as future parking on the preliminary plan. Two access points are proposed for this Subarea, one off the Banker Drive extension opposite an access point to Subarea C and the second off the proposed Shamrock Boulevard extension in the northern portion of the site. • Alternate Layout. The development text includes an exhibit at the back of the document showing an alternate layout for Subarea D. This layout shows the car wash detached from the main facility, located along the eastern property line. An additional access point off Banker Drive is proposed to serve the car wash facility. Staff believes that this alternate layout is appropriate for the site as the location of the car wash is south of the existing AEP substation and adjacent to the retention basin for Lowe's. The alternate layout utilizes improved site design and successfully screens the intensely used portions of this facility. Therefore, staff supports this alternate layout. However, the text should be modified to clearly define the association of a detached car wash with the service facility. • Setbacks. The development text has been revised to specify a minimum 10 -foot building and pavement setback along Shamrock Boulevard and a 15 -foot building and pavement setback along the Banker Drive extension and the-adjacent AEP substation to the east of the Subarea. While the use of this Subarea as an auto service center will require vehicle access to the building with overhead doors, staff believes that - these elements should be sited so as to minimize the visual impact to surrounding users. • Parking. Code requires a parking ratio of one space per 100 square feet or three spaces per service bay for auto service, whichever is greater. The text states that if an automotive service center is located within Subarea D; parking will be permitted at 350 spaces. Staff is supportive of this reduced number of parking spaces because the Code requirement will create an undue amount of pavement. • Signage. The development text proposes both wall and ground signage for this Subarea. The text states that in the event that the sole user of Subarea D is an automotive service center, a ground sign as well as one wall sign shall be permitted on the tenant fagade that fronts on Banker Drive extension. The maximum square footage for wall signs shall not exceed 80 square feet and the maximum area for the proposed ground sign is 50 square feet per sign face. Staff does not support the proposed combination of wall and ground signs for a single tenant this Subarea and requests that the text be modified accordingly. Landscaping/Tree Removal: • Tree Preservation. The site contains a large number of existing trees located mainly along fencerows. Based upon the preliminary plans submitted, the development of the site will include the removal of a number of trees over six caliper inches in diameter. While the exact number of trees to be removed has not yet been determined by the applicant, a tree survey is included within the attached materials. The need to preserve existing trees was discussed at the concept plan stage and the applicant has revised the plans to site the buildings and parking areas to integrate existing trees, particularly in the Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report — December 7, 2006 Case No. 06 -076Z —Page 1 I of 13 southern portion of the development. The exact number of caliper inches removed will need to be provided at the time of Final Development Plan submittal A landscape plan will also be required as part of the final development plan. Engineering Standards: • Right -of -way. Several public roads are to be built with this project, for which the applicant is required to dedicate the necessary right -of -way via a plat for Stoneridge Lane, Banker Drive and Shamrock Boulevard. The applicant will be required to dedicate a minimum of 50 feet of right -of -way for the completion of Stoneridge Lane and a minimum of 60 feet of right -of -way for Banker Drive. The applicant will also be required to dedicate the right -of -way necessary to widen Shamrock Boulevard at West Dublin - Granville Road, which will be determined as the applicant continues to work to . satisfy City requirements for the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) approval. Additionally, the applicant will be required to dedicate the right -of -way necessary for the extension of Shamrock Boulevard, with the 'exception of approximately 1.67 acres that will be reimbursed by the City. • Traffic Study. The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) on May 30 2006, with an updated version addressing initial staff comments submitted on July 28, 2006- The applicant must continue to work with staff to finalize the TIS. In addition to any other improvements outlined in the TIS, the applicant will be responsible for the following road improvements: 1. Extending Shamrock Boulevard from the existing northern terminus to the north and east to the site's easternmost property line. 2. Connecting Stoneridge Lane between Shamrock Boulevard and the easternmost property line_ 3. Providing exclusive left and right turn lanes and one through lane on Shamrock Boulevard at West Dublin - Granville Road in both the northbound and southbound directions while maintaining at least a four -foot median. 4. Designing and building Banker Drive as a public roadway between Subareas C and D and shown on the associated preliminary site plans. • Access Management. Access shall be provided as stated in the text if confirmed by the TIS. All existing curb cuts not utilized must be restored to match existing curb and tree lawn. Staff recommends that all proposed access points comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles. • Cross - Access. The text provides for possible cross- access easements within this development and states that the parking is intended to be shared among users. Staff believes that cross,access is important with other adjacent developments and recommends that access be provided with adjacent sites when they develop. • Pedestrian Paths. The Bikeway Plan within the Community Plan indicates that bikepaths will be included along West Dublin- Granville Road and the portion of Shamrock Boulevard south of West Dublin - Granville Road (bikepath does not exist). The planned west extension of Stoneridge Lane shall include an 8 -foot bikepath in accordance with the bikeway plan. The construction plans for the extension of Shamrock Boulevard to the north and east, show a five -foot walk on the west and north sides of the road and an eight -foot bikepath on the east and south sides of the road. The applicant will be responsible for installing all required pedestrian paths. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report — December 7, 2006 Case No. 06 -076Z — Page 12 of 13 • Vacating David Road. The City will consider vacating David Road as a part of the final development plan for this project. The vacation will require action by City Council. ' Utilities: • Water Supply_ A 24 -inch water line exists along the south side of West Dublin - Granville Road and an eight -inch water line along the north side of Stoneridge Lane. These lines should be extended and connected as necessary to create a loop in the water system. Additional lines may need to be extended as part of the other public road extensions. All utility connections and/or extensions must meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Engineering Division. Open cutting of the public roads will not allowed without permission from the City Engineer. • Sanitary Sewer Service. A 10 -inch sanitary sewer line exists on the north side of West Dublin- Granville Road. This line is close to capacity with the existing zoning of these parcels. Sewer lines may need to be extended as part of the other public road extensions. • Stormwater Management. The project will be required to meet the requirements of the current Stormwater Regulations. This site is located in the east unconsolidated watershed of the Master Plan. Although preliminary stormwater calculations have not been submitted for review, the plans indicate several locations of underground detention around the site. Architecture: • General Comments. The development text requires that structures have a common architectural theme (a traditional Irish town) with common building materials throughout the development. Staff believes that the proposed architecture provides for interesting and appropriate building types; and the elevations for Subarea D has been revised to achieve the same quality architecture shown for the other Subareas. This development, along with the Shoppes at River Ridge, will provide a style for future commercial architecture in the area. Staff believes that the appearance of two- to three -story buildings as depicted in portions of the architectural renderings is important to achieve the envisioned urban environment. • Building Materials and Colors. The plans indicate the use of brick, stone /synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, stucco /synthetic stucco, and Hardi -plank or Smartside siding and trim. The text states that all exterior colors will be selected from a historic color palette earth and staff supports muted colors that blend with the Shoppes at River Ridge and the Historic. District. The applicant is proposing to use roofing materials similar to those that exist in the area. • Height Requirements. The development text specifies that the maximum height of the buildings in all four Subareas will be 35 feet. The architectural elevations submitted by the applicant indicate that a variety of one and two story buildings will be constructed on site. Staff believes that the buildings proposed for this site should be two stories (or more) in height to create the massing needed for an identifiable streetscape and recommends that the text be modified to include this requirement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff has worked extensively with the applicant regarding the issues previously associated with this development and believes that the revisions to the text, preliminary plans, and architectural Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report — December 7, 2006 Case No. 06 -076Z — Page 13 of 13 rendering successfully address the previous concerns. Staff also believes that this proposal strives to address the desire for a more identifiable streetscape with buildings or pedestrian spaces oriented along the road and includes interesting architectural components and appropriate uses. The high -level of development quality desired in this corridor is likely to be established and furthered by this development. The proposed zoning and subsequent development will provide appropriate development standards for the site and will advance the general planning intent of this area and staff recommends approval of this preliminary development plan/rezoning with 12 conditions. Conditions: 1) That the text be revised to accommodate future connectivity along all property lines; 2) That the applicant work with staff to eliminate the provision for signage in the right -of- way and clarify the signage provision in the development text; 3) That drive -thrus be limited to a maximum of one drive -thru in either Subarea B or C and not be allowed to serve an eating or drinking establishment and that the stacking requirement language be revised; 4) That the alternate layout for Subarea D be pursued for the final development plan and that the text be modified to clearly define the association of a detached car wash with the service facility; 5) That the provision for a combination of wall and ground signs for a single tenant in Subarea D be eliminated from the development text; 6) That the text be modified to include a requirement for buildings to be of two- to three- story design similar to the architectural renderings; 7) That the applicant continue to work with staff to finalize the traffic study prior to submitting for final development plan and that the recommendations required by the study be completed; 8) That the design of private drive pavement meet the approval of the City Engineer; 9) That the rights -of -way and any necessary easements be dedicated by a plat prior to the issuance of any building permits; 10) That stormwater management is in compliance with the current Stormwater Regulations, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and 11) That the applicant participate financially in the Shamrock Boulevard Roadway network; 12) That the applicant build the Banker Drive and Stoneridge Lane extensions to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Bases: 1) The proposal strives to achieve the vision stated at Community Plan Update Joint Work Session and the goals envisioned by the Tuller Road Area Plan. 2) The proposal establishes and furthers the high -level of development quality desired in this area. 3) The proposed development will be adequately served and provide a harmonious use that will provide benefit to surrounding uses. 4) The proposed development will meet ongoing planning efforts for the City of Dublin, and will blend with surrounding land uses and promote orderly development of the surrounding area. 5) The development conforms to Zoning Code Section 153.055(A). DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT AND APPROVED OR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLANS 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road INCLUDES EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED SUBAREAS If T All �q4 t �-� 'r �� t - ------------ -F- 06-076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing PROPOSED ELEVATIONS �rc�.ncnyr. 1";., w..m I— (:.e... -jte 14 1 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road PROPOSED ELEVATIONS 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION OCTOBER 5, 2006 CITY OF DUBLIN_ Land Use and L" Ramie wag 5800 Skier -Rings Road M6, Ohio 43016 -1236 !'bone_ 614 -410 -4600 fax: 614-410 -4747 Web Site: wxw_dubrw." The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 1. Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan -06-076Z Shamrock Crossing — West Dublin Granville Road Location: 15.56 acres located at the intersection of West Dublin Granville Road and Shamrock Boulevard. Existing Zoning: SO, Suburban Office and Institutional and R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential District. Request: Review and approval of a rezoning for 15.56 acres to Planned Unit Development District, under the provisions of Code Sections 153.053(D)(b) and153.234. Proposed Use: A 1 10,000 -square-foot development comprised of retail, office, and service- oriented uses_ Applicant: Tall Pines Holdings, Ltd., 3473 Mildred Drive, Falls Church, Virginia 22042, and Charles W. Warner and Edward E. Belz, 2226 Atlee Court, Columbus, Ohio 43220; represented by Ben W_ Hale and Aaron L_ Underhill, Smith and Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Suite 725, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Claudia D. Husak, Planner. Contact Information: (614) 410- 4675/Email: chusak @dublin.oh.us. MOTION: To table this Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan at the request of the applicant_ VOTE: 4-0. RESULT: This Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan was tabled. STAFF CERTIFICATION Claudia D. Husak Planner 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development PIan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — October 5, 2006 Page 2 of 8 Xman noted that ase 3 had request to be tabled and e 2 was oX ent one asked t ull the Consent A nda case. Mr. Zi erman annouder cases: C 3, 2, and 1. [The utes are in the ord of the published 1. Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan 06 -076Z — Shamrock Crossing — West Dublin Granville Road Claudia Husak presented this case and said it is a request for review and approval of a rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development District for a proposed 110,000 square foot commercial development, located north and south of West Dublin- Granville Road at Shamrock Boulevard. She said this case was tabled August 17, 2006 at the request of the applicant. Ms_ Husak said the southern portion of this site is zoned SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District and the northern portion is zoned Rl, Restricted Suburban Residential. District. The current zoning districts permit medical office, professional office, institutional facilities and residential uses and the proposed development which includes mixed office, retail and restaurant uses is not permitted. Ms. Husak reviewed the preceding zoning applications for this site and said regarding a 2005 Concept Plan for the undeveloped land to the south, members of City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission expressed concerns regarding a desire to protect the existing tree rows, and the mix of uses proposed with particular emphasis on drive -thru restaurants. She said additional concerns included whether the proposal fits with the concept of the West Dublin- Granville Corridor discussed at recent Community Plan Update work sessions. Ms. Husak said Subarea A and B are south of West Dublin- Granville Road and Subarea C and D are located north of the roadway. The preliminary development plan indicates building envelopes and parking areas along West Dublin - Granville Road in each of the subareas and along Sharp Lane and Shamrock Boulevard. Ms. Husak said Subarea A has frontage along Sharp Lane and Stoneridge Lane to the south. The plan indicates an office retail building oriented toward Sharp Lane with parking areas to the south and east of the buildings. She said an access point is proposed off Shamrock Boulevard to the east, which staff does not support and will require that this access be moved to the north to Sharp Lane. Ms. Husak said Subarea B depicts the extension of Stoneridge Lane westward to meet Shamrock Boulevard. The plan shows a retail building facing West Dublin - Granville Road with two aisles of parking located in front of the building, and a smaller office building facing Shamrock Boulevard, to the southwest of the retail building. She said the development text states that parking within this subarea will be provided at a ratio one space per 200 square feet which is less than outlined by Code, but which staff believes may be appropriate as peak hours of the different uses proposed may differ allowing for shared parking_ Ms. Husak said ground signs are depicted within the right -of -way along West Dublin - Granville Road, and noted that signage within the right -of -way requires the consent of the City Engineer as 06 -076Z Rezoning/PreIiminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — October 5, 2006 Page 3 of 8 well as City Council. Staff recognizes that the proposed sign location is due to the alignment of Sharp Lane, however staff does not support the proposed location of signage within the right-of- way- Ms. Husak said Subarea C shows the westward extension of Banker Drive as the northern boundary of this subarea. The plans indicate a retail building facing West Dublin - Granville Road with parking in front of the building. A restaurant building with a drive -thru is shown facing Shamrock Boulevard to the west. She said staff does not believe that the drive -thru use as depicted is appropriate in this context as it fails to promote the pedestrian environment envisioned throughout the Joint Work Sessions. Ms. Husak said however, if the drive -thru were designed properly as part of an urban streetscape and located interior to the site, staff may support the use. The plan indicates a curb cut access point along West Dublin- Granville Road which is not supported by staff and should be eliminated. Ms. Husak said Subarea D is located north of Subarea C with frontage along the extensions of Banker Drive and Shamrock Boulevard. She said the plans indicate an auto service facility located in the center of the site with parking located around the building to the north, east, and south. Ms. Husak said staff believes that the use is appropriate for the site because the site is located adjacent to the AEP Substation, however staffs ultimate approval of this use will be dependent on the architectural design of the building and location of the proposed parking. Ms. Husak said staff does not support the combination of wall and ground signs. Ms. Husak said that staff believes that the overall proposed site layout does not address the creation of an urban and pedestrian friendly environment envisioned for this area. To create an identifiable streetscape the buildings should be placed at a build -to line closer to West Dublin - Granvilie Road with the parking located behind. Revising the layout in this manner would be consistent with the comments made during Joint Work Sessions, the concept contained in the Area Plan, and the previous conceptual submittal for a portion of the development. Ms. Husak said that staff believes that the proposed architecture provides for interesting and appropriate building types_ She said the development text specifies that the maximum height in all four subareas will be 35 feet. She said the architectural elevations indicated a variety of one and two -story buildings will be constructed on site. Ms. Husak said staff recommends that the buildings be two -story or more in height in order to create the spatial dynamics and massing needed for the desired streetscape. She said the auto service facility does not achieve the same architectural character for the subareas and staff believes that the architecture should more closely match the standards for the other areas and that this development will set a style for future commercial architecture in this area. Ms. Husak said the site contains a large number of existing trees located mainly along the fence rows, and the development of the site will remove a number of these trees six inches in caliber and over. She said the need to preserve the existing trees was discussed at the Concept Plan stage, and staff recommends that the final layout of the site integrate as many existing trees as possible. 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — October 5, 2006 Page 4 of 8 Ms. Husak said that staff has worked extensively with the applicant regarding the issues associated with this development and believes this project contains interesting architectural components and appropriate land uses for this area. She said however, several significant planning matters are still outstanding that are integral to the creation of an urban and pedestrian- friendly environment, and until such modifications are made, staff can not support this application and respectfully recommends disapproval of this request. Ben W. Hale Jr., Smith and Hale, representing the applicant, said there were a number of issues within the staff report that they are willing to concede to, but did not expect a vote tonight. He said many people were interested in this case at the Concept Plan stage. He said the main issue was with the architecture of the center. He said they hired a new architect, Brian Jones. Mr. Hale said they are working on a TIF with the City for the extension of Shamrock Boulevard to the north. He said another issue was with moving Lexus' service center to this site, and picking up the overall architecture of the center to make it look unified. Mr. Hale said another goal was to finish Banker Drive and to include properties from David Road into this development. Mr. Hale said the remaining houses on David Road are difficult to sell because of the detention areas. He said they are working with the property owners and think with the help of the City, they can make them work. Mr. Hale said they propose a fast food use on the corner next to Wendy's International which they would only make a Wendy's. He said if it is not a Wendy's, it will be an attached building and will not be fast food with a drive thru. Mr. Hale said for the buildings on the south side of West Dublin- Granville Road, they are trying to make a uniform setback with parking off Sharp Lane in front of the building. He said they believe that it was a mistake not to extend Sharp Lane with a pedestrian- friendly street. He said they need a small amount of parking in front of the building with most of the parking behind the building. He said if they pull the building all the way, up it would be a false front and believed pedestrians would not use the front doors. They want to bring life onto the street by creating a corner patio area at the southeast corner of Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin - Granville Road. Mr. Hale said the other issue is with City engineers regarding Shamrock Boulevard and access points. and in order to do that they have to move the building. They want to keep the building up in line with the existing La Scala restaurant and have right -in right -out only access along Shamrock Boulevard. He said that they are going to work with the parcels on David Road to complete Banker Drive, fix the architecture, eliminate the drive -thru unless it is a Wendy's, and move the buildings forward appropriately but not have them as fake fronts. Brian Jones, architect, said that the architectural style based on that of Irish Towns. They are trying to capture the "Hill Town" concept at this intersection, and to make this central node an introduction into Dublin. He said the overall plan is trying to get a relationship along the streetscape where certain buildings are pulled very close to the street. He said compared to the other approved shops further to the west, the scale of the architecture which is one to one and a 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — October 5, 2006 Page 5 of 8 half story architecture, is drastically different than anything else in the corridor. They feet strongly that a mix of building heights from one and half to three or three and half stories, with elements that really pull into the intersection will develop a hierarchy that will accentuate that corner and give a sense of vitality and urbanism at this intersection. Linda Merchant- Masonbrink, 3168 Lilly Mar Court, said they had met with the developer to discuss concerns and the developer made revisions based on their comments. She said they are still concerned that the small parcel left with suburban office zoning will eventually be re -zoned to retail. She said they are concerned about the noise from the patio associated with the proposed restaurant with their outdoor speakers and bands as they currently hear announcements on speakers from Germain. They are concerned with the excessive amount of retail in the area and the impact on Historic Dublin. She said retail development between .161 and their quiet community would adversely impact their neighborhood, with frequent turnover, which is the usual for retail in this area, they are not assured that future retail uses will be protective of their neighborhood. The proposal will adversely impact wildlife and the serenity they enjoy. She said the current office zoning would add variety to an otherwise overpopulated retail base. It would also be a less intense use of the land, with less blacktop needed for parking. This would allow for more green space to maintain a more appealing upscale suburbanized, "Dublinized ", feel with preserving the green trees. She asked that they protect their neighborhood by saying "no" to retail on Shamrock Crossing parcel to the south of SR 161. Steve Masonbrink, 3168 Lilly Mar Court, said he enjoys the area that he lives in and the developers have listened to their concerns and they have been told that development of this parcel of land is going to be retail. He said the developers have changed their plan not to rezone all of the parcels to retail, however he is fearful that the remaining portion would be open to rezone to retail in the future. He stated the areas of retail that are currently just empty blacktop sites, such as Dublin Village Center. He said that dealerships should not be close to neighborhoods, the light pollution and outdoor speakers are bad and they should move to Dublin Village Center. He said the wildlife will be affected and he would hate to see that happen and affect their serenity. He said the development is trying to look like the hills of Ireland and they should make sure the fire hydrants stay green because it will be the only green left, and all there will be left is blacktop and the retail. He said they need a parking buffer in front of the building and he does not want parking in the back because it will disturb the neighborhood behind it. Deno Duros, Stoneridge Medical Center, said his main concern is with the placement of the building adjacent to his site and that it should be no further forward than their existing building. Mr. Hale said there had been a number of discussions about this property and they all know that someday this would be developed, but there are private ways to make sure that the parcel of concern will remain and change to retail in the future. He said they will make sure there will not be outside speakers and bands at the restaurant site and they will do everything they can to alleviate their fears. Rick Germain said they do plan to move their service operation to deal with their facility requirements and they are satisfied with the options that Mr. Jones has presented and it is important to them to tie the two buildings together and make them similar to what they have 06 -076Z Rezoning/Prelinunary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — October 5, 2006 Page 6 of 8 done at Easton, because it is a cleaner and neater retail environment and more like a jewelry store than automobile dealership. Mr. Germain said they were to use silent pagers at their current location and for some reason they have gotten away from that. He said they would not be using an outdoor speaker at their new site and would not have outdoor paging at either location. Ms. Jones asked about the architecture with the existing building and the new facility. Mr. Germain said they will have a common look and identity for the two buildings. Mr. Zimmerman said during Community Plan Update work sessions, Council and the Commission agreed to bring the buildings forward as the vision for future developments. Ms. Jones said she agrees that the north side should be brought forward, but because Sharp Lane exists on the south side she believed it was okay to have the buildings on the south side back behind Sharp Lane. Mr. Walter said that he agrees with the applicant on the south side to have the buildings back for pedestrian use of the front. Ms. Jones said she would agree with one row of parking on the south side. Mr. Fishman agreed that staff and the applicant should work this out so that the applicant has the approval of staff prior to the Commission making a decision. Mr. Jones said they have learned that bringing a retail environment up to the road system that exists with a 45 mile per hour speed limit is a drastic mistake without a buffer of the parking either by head in parking or parallel parking which will provide a security to the pedestrian environment. Mr. Gunderman said staff has had that discussion with the applicant and that they understand what the position of staff is. The applicant's points are valid and reasonable and the issue is that this is the urban image that was agreed upon at the joint meetings. The question to the Commission is whether there can be a compromise in achieving this objective. He said the issue is they are looking for the appearance of an urbanized area and not the suburban feel. He said they are looking at Shamrock Crossing as setting the precedent for the redevelopment of the West Dublin - Granville Road corridor. Mr. Zimmerman said they worked on the work sessions of the Community Plan and they have talked about it and they agreed this is the direction for the future and it has to start here. Mr. Walter said during the work session he did not appreciate the configuration and did not think they would be so rigid. Mr. Fishman asked if the argument of the applicant is valid that bringing the buildings forward would make the front of the building worthless_ Mr. Gunderman said they are not insisting that the entire front edge of each building be set up to the property line, but that the building fagade can be varied creating open spaces that can be made into the types of pedestrian oriented environment that they are looking for. Mr. Zimmerman said he agrees with staff and asked for other comments Ms_ Jones said the only way she would be in favor of the parking in front of the buildings is if staff supported the proposal Mr. Fishman said they would need to work it out with staff, however he does agree 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes – October 5, 2006 Page 7 of 8 with the applicants' comments and prefers parallel parking. Mr. Walter said he would have a hard time if the buildings were pushed up to the build line. Mr. Zimmerman asked for feedback on the architecture for the auto dealership and whether it should blend with the rest of the development. Mss Jones said it has to come close. Mr. Fishman said it does not match now and it needs the Old Irish Theme. Mr. Zimmerman said they all agree that the architecture has to match with regards to the dealership. '[Everyone agreed.] Mr. Zimmerman said they now need a consensus of the building heights —two to three story buildings. Mr. Fishman said with regards to density if they go higher they will have more room for green space and he would like to see two to three story buildings and have more green space, walking space and patios. Ms. Jones agreed that in the section east of Shamrock would like to see the buildings taller. Mr. Walter said he likes what he sees and recognized that it is not what , is perceived and it should have an overriding look and would like to see the same style continued with the renderings and they should see what they look like coming up. Mr. Zimmerman said he agreed with the taller buildings. Ms. Jones said she really liked the proposed architecture and supports the connectivity and agrees with staff on the curb cuts and the urban streetscape and is not supportive of fast food on this site. Mr. Fishman agreed with Ms. Jones comments and said this site will be upscale and he would like to see a Wendy's without a drive -thru and thinks that it would fit within the buildings. Dan Carducci, representing Wendy's International, said they would not build a store without a pickup window. Mr. Fishman said there are lots of places to build stores and that he did not think it had to be here. Mr. Carducci understood. Mr. Walter said he does not think that a drive -thru is appropriate on this site. Vote and Motion: Mr. Zimmerman made a motion to table this Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan at the request of the applicant. Mr. Fishman seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Ms. Jones, yes; Mr. Walter, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; and Mr. Zimmerman, yes. (Approved 4 – 0.) 2. Amen Final Developm t Plan 06 -130 Cra well Village Gar a Additions – Peri FtcZecture,whoth erman asked if yone in the audien being none, h swore in the ap ican agreed to the two c dition s Vote and Mot* n• Mr. Zimme an made the motio o approve this modific ions will provide an ditional amenity to are ap opriately located o e site and match AF – Perimeter C r, Subarea G1 – ter Drive was present to spe in regards to this is representati , Randall Reger, eleca as listed in staff report. Ame ed Final Develop t Plan because the e residents of the d elopment, the garag existing on the site, th two conditions 06-076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION AUGUST 17, 2006 CITY OF DUBLIN_ toad Use aad to" Rogge ph- i" 5800 Bier -Riup Read Dubt , Ohio 43016 -1236 Place: 6144104 Fax 614410 -4747 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: Wet Site www_&A&.ah.us 10. Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan 06 -076Z - Shamrock Crossing — West Dublin Granville Road Location: 15.56 acres located at the intersection of West Dublin Granville Road and Shamrock Boulevard. Existing Zoning: SO, Suburban Office and Institutional and R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential District - Request: Review and approval of a rezoning for 15.56 acres to Planned Unit Development District, under the provisions of Section 153.053(D)(b) and Section 153.234. Proposed Use: A 110,000- square -foot development comprised of retail, office, and service - oriented uses. Applicant: Tall Pines Holdings, Ltd., 3473 Mildred Drive, Fall Church, Virginia 22042, and Charles W. Warner and Edward E. Belz, 2226 Atlee Court, Columbus, Ohio 43220; represented by Ben W. Hale and Aaron L. Underhill, Smith and Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Suite 725, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Todd Corwin, Senior Planner- Contact Information: (614) 410- 4600 /Email: tcorwin@dublin.oh.us. MOTION: To table this Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan application at the request of the applicant. VOTE: 5-0-1 RESULT: This Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan application was tabled. STAFF CERTIFICATION Todd Corwin Senior Planner 06-076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS tylinutes of Dublin City Counci __Mee - -.. — — December 12.2005 - - - Page 11 -- il Held 20 1 INTRODOCTt NIPUBLIC HEARING - blKSOLUTIONS I REQUEST O COUNTY AUDITORS 0K Reso tut - n 81 -05 Requ ling the Delaware and F anklin County Auditors Draw and the Oefawar an ranklirnCounty Treasu rs to Issue a Draft to th irector of Finance of t 1 i t; } C y of Dublin for any Mo that may be in the Co ty.Treasury to the Acc of of 1! he City of Dublin- '. Ms. Salay introduced resolution- Ms. Grigsby stated t s allows the City to req the dollars from propert ax payments three to four wee earlier than the county d nbution- �! Vote on the Re ution Ms. Salay, yes. V e Mayor Lecklider, yes: Reiner- yes- Mr_ iI Keenan, yes r. McCash, yes: Mrs_ 8 yes- BID AW RD Reso tion 82 -05 t Ac pting the Lowest/Best id for the Avery Park P se One Ball Diamond novation Project_ t. i 1 (� Ms- Salay introduced th esolution Mc Hahn stated this i hase one of the anticipa three phases of the re anon of !{ Avery Park_ Vice Mayor Lec er noted his understandi is the renovation will pr ent fly balls trom straying onto ery Road j Mr_ Hahn re nded this is part of the oject as well as replacin deteriorating electrical l+ is wire and round_ This field was or finally designed for adult ]ball and will be reduced �I in size little league play- Vice ayor Lecklider asked a t any potential impact of new lighting on the i { n boring properties_ Hahn responded then ill be less light trespass nth the new fighting than - h the existing fighting_ Vote on the Resoluti - Ms_ Salay. yes: Mr- R J r, yes: Mr. Keenan, yes McCash" , l yes, Mrs. Boring. s; Vice Mayor Lecklider, s- BID AWARD t Resolutto 3-05 ' Accepti the Lowest/Best Bid f the Glacier Ridge Ele ntary Offsite Sanitary Sewe roject_ Ms alay introduced the reso tion. Hammersmith noted th is part of a cooperative e rt with Dublin City Sch to ti �! extend the offsite sanita sewer and utilities to the w elementary school. T sewer I tine will also serve the antry Greene subdivisi roposed by Mfl. The ea g -inch line ?� come from Tartan st and will extend due a ha cross McKitrick- con - in g to the school site itself_ he George J. Igel Comp y bid of approximately 5 _790 is the l 14 recommended id- The engineer's estim a for the project was $35 . 00 Mrs_ Boring oled this extension will b efit other areas in the fut a Is there a way" the City can arge back the costs or s e other pro -rated fee to t other areas that t benefit i' Mrension- mmersmith responded ft's intent is to make eve effort to recoup costs on e i t i �eenan asked if a re ursement district has be established lot this pure e Mr Hammersmith slat that is the intent. Ms_ Salay comment that the school property eds this extension belor he development occ which would bring the s er tine to the site ( Vote on the Re ution: Mrs. Boring yes: r- Keenan_ ves. Vice Ma r Lecklider. yes. i; Mr McCash es: Mr_ Reiner. yes. Ms. lay, yes li (' OTHER i s Concept Plan - Shamrock Crossing - West Dublin- Granville Road (Case No 05- 114CP) 1: (Mr. McCash recused himself at this time• noting that he has a potential business interest in -`' this matter } i I ji Ms Wanner stated the concept plan was reviewed by the Commission on September 1 1t 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dubljn- Granville Road RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meeting 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road — - - i1 December 12, 2005 Page 12 Held _ -0 j • The Commission expressed concerns about the impact and intensity of retail and restaurant uses on the surrounding area, stressing that a mix of uses with sit down restaurants is desirable_ • The applicant has indicated that the project is not feasible without the retail l component included and requests specific feedback on that portion of the proposal. ii The Commission also indicated their preference for ground signage versus wall signage along W_ Dublin Granville Road. and the applicant is requesting feedback : f i from Council and direction on this item as wen- She then showed aerial slides of the site, noting the major adjacent roadways are W Dublin�ranville Road. Shamrock Boulevard which terminates into this sit e = Stoner idge Lane would be completed with this proposal. It currently stubs on the south side of the Stoneridge Medical Facility. There are two large tree rows existing on the site and staff is working with the applicant on preservation of some of those trees. The site is currently zoned Suburban Office or SO, which permits a variety of office 1 uses. Restaurants are considered conditional uses_ The proposed use for a mix of office. restaurant and retail with a possibility for residential uses is not permitted in SO and therefore a rezoning is necessary. ' • She reviewed an enlarged slide of the Tuner Road Area Plan which indicates that new buildings should be oriented to the street and that there should be linkages j between the uses. 1 j; The proposed concept plan has addressed the issue of street frontage with the retail ' l buildings. but staff recommends the applicant further address the concept within the office/residential portion as well_ ll - The applicant proposes an office/residential use on the south side, and the Commission noted the importance and uniqueness of an elderly housing component This use was well received_ ; • During the font Council and Commission meeting. the Community Plan consultant r showed a slide containing a future vision of W. Dublin- Granville Road. indicating the 1 �G area could be redeveloped with a more urban development pattern. The feedback r ;! on this concept was generally positive. It could determine the development pattern t� along the roadway and ultimately, the outcome of this concept proposal_ Conceptual architectural elevations include more detail than generally received at this 1i 1` stage and convey the proposed character of the development. Staff and the ! Commission concurred that a common architectural theme should be conveyed j throughout the development and that a high level of architectural detail should be utilized_ • The proposed use generally complies with the future land use designation for the site. i has adequate services and will connect an important roadway system. . • Staff will continue to work with the applicant through the rezoning process to refine all ti of the uses, architecture and signage_ However staff and the applicant seek jj Council's comments regarding the concept plan, as well as some of the land use and 'l t1 signage issues raised by the Conunissm and by staff. �• Ms. Satay asked if the largest building fronting along W. Dublin - Granville Road is to be retail Ms_ Wanner responded this building is to be all retail use 4` Vice Mayor Lecktider asked about the existing tree line and whether it would be preserved? i Ms. Wanner responded those on the southern portion of the property tine would be preserved by a larger setback_ The property line is adjacent to some residential homes. and =_ both staff and the Conunissioners desire a larger setback Vice Mayor Lecklider asked for more detail about the discussion regarding the percentage of square footage allocated for restaurant use. Ms. Wanner responded staff has learned from experience with past applications that restaurants Have a high demand for parking and outdoor seating and therefore, a limitation on restaurant uses should be included in the text There was also discussion about sit down l' restaurants versus drive -through restaurants. Vice Mayor Lecktider noted this proposal is for a mixed use including 3.000 square feet of restaurant_ That doesn't seem to be a large amount of restaurant use Ms. Wanner responded that absent any provision in the text. the entire building could become a series of restaurants with a high parking and outdoor seating demand The language. - a rnnix of retail and restaurant isn't always adequate and a closer review is 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of _ Dublin City Council December 12, 2005 Meetin ___ Page 13 it needed_ Vce Mayor Leckfider asked if 3,000 square feet is not then a firm number, but rather an estimation_ �! Ms. Wanner responded affirmatively_ J Vice Mayor Lecklider summarized the concern with restaurant use is primarily related to parking impacts and conditions associated with outside patio use_ Mrs_ Boring commented in regard to the 161 entryway concept plan the consultant shared at the joint meeting_ If this concept is endorsed by Council and the Commission. the Shamrock i Crossing concept plan does not fit with that image_ ! Ms. Wanner responded that is correct_ The consultant showed a drawing of two and three ! story udd s for this road, and the applicant tonight is one and p ossibly orY o9 PPI kJ proposing P Y two - story buildings. Mrs. Boring commented if Council wants to pursue the vision presented by the Plan f consultant, it would be important to provide this feedback to the applicant tonight_ There was also an extensive discussion at the joint meeting about the amount of retail the City can support in terms of percentages_ It the entire percentage is located in one area, that is not desirable either_ Has consideration been given to this? t Ms_ Wanner responded there has not been such consideration to this point. Ms_ Salay stated that in terms of working with the applicant on preserving the tree row, it appears the parking requirements will result in the loss of many of those trees. Ms_ Wanner agreed_ Staff has discussed with the applicant the potential of enlarging the islands to save some of the larger trees_ The drawings are more detailed than those submitted with concept plans. Ms_ Salay added the root systems are delicate and may not survive_ Ms_ Salay asked if the detention ponds are to be wet or dry. Ms_ Wanner responded they are indicated as wet ponds at this time_ it would be addressed in the rezoning at the final development plan stage_ i Vice Mayor Leddider asked in follow -up to Mrs_ Boring's comments. how can the City l achieve the look it wants; in view of the existing development in the area immediately west of t� Shamrock Boulevard? Ms_ Wanner responded that the Community Plan shows the view projected for 2030 It world rely upon the redevelopment of current projects_ There is some vacant land that could j be developed in this pattern, but much would require redevelopment_ j• jI t Ben Hale_ Jr_, 37 W_ Broad Street stated that he represents the applicant He noted that j much has occurred since this application was fled and reviewed by Planning Commission in September. They are anxious to receive feedback from Council. They had tried to replicate t what was shown on the current Community Plan in their site plan. to terms of the market, i the Stoneridge OSU facility will be vacated in 2008 and so there will not be a need for 1 medical office buildings_ There has also been some residential development to the west and i there was discussion of some senior horsing on a portion of the site. They have pulled the �= building out to the street, creating an urban edge. Since the Commission met, they have reviewed the tree locations and have widened the medians in an effort to save the lees_ j They have widened out the setback somewhat to preserve existing trees. They have had some meetings with the neighborhood and, depending upon the ultimate use, will try to accommodate them as well as they can. They are seeking some. identification for tenants to j Dublin- Granville Road and have therefore proposed on the north side of the building individual tenant signs with gooseneck fixtures externally illuminated and blade signs on the other side of the building_ They are flexible in tents of the appearance of the building. The i�- proposal is for brick and stone, consistent with the neighborhood. They are not asking for 'r #i excess signage in comparison to other centers in the City. It is a matter of tow the sgnage i is used to communicate to the driving public who is in the building. To be successful, this is 1: necessary. For the south side, blade signs will be adequate_ They wiN do unified �E architecture for alt of the buildings, unified landscaping and signage_ In regard to a restaurant, they had considered the possibility of taking the Wendy's off the corner at 161 where tlnere is poor access and relocating it onto this site_ This has not moved forward to any �. f degree. however_ He summarized they are proposing a unified development of high quality } materials. With Shamrock Boulevard going through and with the surrounding uses, this is a 1 low impact commercial center which provides an opportunity for uses other than office. 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of _ _ Dublin City Co uncil _ _ - - December 12. 2005 — - - Meeting - _ Page 14 Held 20 Mr. Keenan commented it regard to the need for more substantial signage on the front of the building and the blade signage on the south side. There is a similar identification problem that exists for the Daimler project at Avery and Post- It is important to have identification signage for the tenants_ He would support such signage with the provision that it is subdued and in good taste- Ms- Satay noted site appreciates the work of the architect_ but is not impressed with this plan. It is similar to many others proposed to the City and she hopes for something more special- The entry feature concept shared at the joint meeting is attractive, but she is not certain that consensus has yet been obtained abort the desired future look along 161. She would prefer wet ponds versus dry detention basins on this site. She advocates preserving as many trees as possible and is concerned about the narrow islands and the survival of the large mature trees- There was a 75 -foot buffer established between -the conmemal development and the residential homes with the Thomas Kohler rezoning- It provided the existing tree line a lot of protection and an opportunity to plant more trees to buffer the development- That has been extremely helpful and has made the development more j palatable to the neighborhood. Adequate setback is needed to protect those existing trees. She is personally not supportive of more retail along Dublin - Granville Road- She is not interested in any type of drive - through restaurant in this location and could not support it. She tavors ground signage but concurs with Mr- Keenan that identification is important She j does not know how a large number of tenants can be identified with a ground sign other than by naming the center. She would like to see uniform graphics- With regard to the offices. they are fine, but she would prefer senior housing abutting the neighborhood. She could support office on the back potion. but not retail_ Mr- Reiner staled that the project concept is so vague that it is hard to render a judgment. He agrees with the suggested buffering and with preset ving the existing trees as much as possible_ He is totally ambivalent about this entire proposal. It does not meet any ideal - This is riot what he wants 161 to look hike_ This concept is essentially a strip commercial l l center with offices in the back. There is nothing exciting in the plan. He wonders if the vision shown at the joint meeting can be created over tirme. It would be great to achieve that j; concept The forests are not maintained with this plan. and there is not good buffering I II included - ii Mr- Hate commented the entire street is already developed. other than the David Road pieces and this piece- To achieve such a future vision would require tearing down restaurants and car dealerships. r, f F Mrs - Boring noted she agrees with Mr. Reiner - the ; ng ag proposed plan is not exciting. On the tr other hand, the idea of creating an entryway as suggested by the Plan consultant is very intriguing_ If the City doesn t begin somewhere. it will never happen. Her other concern is with the retail component and what the City is doing to protect the current businesses that are zoned retail. She does.not support drive - through restaurants. Banks have different hours of operation and do not create odors that impact the neighborhood- For her, it is a matter of scale of buildings a" 161 and this does not work. The project also encroaches too much on the neighborhood. Vice Mayo Leddider asked Mr. Hate to comment on how the City could absorb more retail in this area. given the surrounding Dublin Village Center and Sawmill Road retail. ii Mr. Hale responded Dublin Village Center is a different situation- The Sun Center across Sawmill thrives because of Dublin demographics_ There were some fundamental and serious mistakes made with the Dublin Village Center- fie is working with the owner of the Dublin Village Center and they will soon file a preliminary development plan for a mixed -use project- When Shamrock Boulevard is brought through, it wilt bring more traffic to this roadway. He envisions this area as specialty retail with destination uses. not heavy impact commercial uses. There is a real architectural and vision challenge with this proposal. based on Council's expectations- In the Daimler project, there was a demonstrated need for those uses and they are working. The question becomes what is the appropriate mix of uses and it ;i how should they be framed- This is the challenge they will address. Vice Mayor Lecktider noted he agrees with the suggestions about signage to purposes of } identification_ His concern would be with tree preservation. He is adamantly opposed to any drive - through restaurant. as it would not tend to the character and quality to be created here 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of _ _ Dublin City Council _ _ Nieeim December 12, 2005 - -- - Page 15 Based on tonight's comments. H appears the applicant has a lot of work before hirrr There is a need for buffering the neighborhood to the south- He will need to convince Council that this witl work and how it will complement the larger area. Linda Merchant- Masonbnnk, 3168 Lilymar Court noted that she and her husband live imniedtately behind this parcel. She sent two letters to Council - one on October 12 and one on December 6 in opposition to this proposed rezoning. in addition, letters were submitted from other residents of their neighborhood who are opposed to this rezoning. Her husband_ Stephen was unable to attend tonight and she read into the record a statement from him and submitted it for the record- His desire for this parcel is to leave it as greenspace or parkland. If more retail is needed. the existing Dublin Village Center can be utilized- If this parcel must be developed. it should be developed under its existing zoning of Institutional and Office use which is less destructive and more predictable. Changing to a use which allows retail and restaurant creates opportunities for car lots, filling stations, outdoor patios. etc. Excessive lighting, noise and traffic will impact then quiet neighborhood and will diminish property values- He urged Council to protect the value of their property by not permitting this rezoning- She highlighted points from their second letter- They are concerned that it appears the W- Dublin-Granville Road corridor. immediately east of the Scioto River is becoming a restaurant retail sprawl zone_ Without controlled development guided by the Community Plan, an opportunity for a well- planned, grand entry into the heart of Historic Dublin is eliminated. The corridor is being developed in a piecemeal fashion without a vision or without any unity of purpose. They are also concerned the staff report indicates the proposal was generally well received at the Commission meeting. However, as pointed out later in the report, the Commission had concerns about the retailhestaurant components- Mr- Saneholtz noted he would not support retail on this site_ and Mrs - Boring indicated she was not convinced this was an appropriate site tot retail and restaurant uses and questioned the appropriateness of the land use- to regard to relocating Wendy's on this site. they believed would be more desirable to locate the restaurant on the Wendy's property across the street. away from the neighborhood_ Further, the Corrimissioners requested the developer work with the neighborhood. but it appears the developer contacted only them about this rezorung and not the rest of the neighborhood. None of the neighbors impacted by this project were contacted regarding the last Council meeting where this plan was scheduled for review, nor were they contacted about tonghrs meeting- They learned about this informally. She asked that the neighborhood be officially notified of these meetirigs in a timely fashion so that they have an opportunity to prepare comments and arrange their schedules to attend the meeting_ The entire neighborhood opposes this rezoning, and she presented a petition to Council signed by the residents who were home at the time of their survey- Vice Mayor Lecklider asked the Clerk about what type of notification is provided regarding concept plans. The Clerk responded that official written notice is provided to adjacent property owners of rezoning hearings. but notice is not provided of informal concept plan reviews. These items are fisted on the Council agenda which is published in the local newspapers and on the City's web site_ Mrs- Boring suggested that the neighborhood provide a contact name for such notification by the Planning division - Ms, Merchant- Masonbunk responded that she would be willing to serve as the contact person - Vice Mayor Lec bider added that if the applicant does decide to pursue a rezoning. the adjacent property owners would be provided with written notification of the hearings. The neighborhood residents can certainly contact the Clerk's office or the Planning division to stay apprised of the scheduled items in which they have an interest. Mr. Hate clarified that when the applicant learned this item was scheduled with Council. they called Ms. Merchant- Masorbrink to let her know this item was scheduled for Monday. December 12 and offered to meet with her anytime prior to the hearing _ Z • C ept Plan - Erickson Re - ement Commur:uly Z irigs Road (Case No. 0 � 18tCP) Pais. annex stated that this pr e0 was identified by staonths ago as a ne iness that could build up and enhance the City's base. With this mind. t 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minute of -- Dublin City Council -- page I - — develop nt- She is concerned wi the potential traf tic a the developer will to impr�the infrastructure in t general area for those work and live there at li. they n have egress and ac s within a reasonable t The potential succes of the re d is dependent upon the x included- Ad ecisio st be made about r their # is to reduce the nee or people to travel outsi the area for their need , and if so, V what does that dictate erms of types of retail- would also draw lraffic om Tartan West and future de nt in the area. not envision a large. s station in this location, but there likely be a smaller pe suitable. She likes setbacks - it It boles good. Sh rkes the mixed housing pes as proposed_ The ch always is obtaining wha a City is looking for in ms of architecture and lily, yet at a f, reasonable ice so that a diversity o sing tends itself to ating people wit a diversit of economic status. It s ms that the price paint the end of construction often n what is predicted of th tset of a project- She mmarized that Council l� gem Ny supportive of the din Tian, with some addit work needed. ii i t Concept Plan - Shamrock Crossing - West Dublin - Granville Road Mr- Hate rued that they represent applicant. and due to the late hour, he suggests �f this be held over to another time_ Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher noted that a resident had signed in to testify on this matter and she invited her to make comment at this time Linda Merchant- Masonbrink. 3168 Lilymar Court noted that the subject property is i immediately north of their home_ The current proposal for rezoning will adversely impact their property value as well as their enjoyment of their property - She has forwarded a i copy of a letter dated October 12 which outlines their involvement in reviewing this project and their attendance at the Planning Commission meeting and meeting with the �1 developer. When they met with the developer. they were told that they would be notified - of any future meeting with the Council- However, they were not notified by the City - they !` learned of tonight's hearing in a different way_ They have not seen any changes to the proposal, based on the concerns expressed to the developer. They have not had further � t discussion with the developer so she is interested in knowing the date on which this will ! be rescheduled_ Mayor Chinnici- Zuercher noticed that this notice is provided by staff- ' Ms. Wanner confirmed that propefties within 150 feet of the proposed rezoning are provided with notice. Staff will check on this- Ms - Merchant- Masonbrink noted their concerns that the development is very close to their. 11 property Changing this to retail use will result In noise. light problems. adverse impacts to 1 wildlife. and More pavement- They will return to testify when this item is rescheduled- Mayor Chiuiici- Zuercher asked that staff ensure that notification is provided regarding the next hearing. She suggested that the developer meet with the residents to share the updated plans. /Wa Plat - Tartan West Sec 6 noted the subarea fs all the requirements d am endments made a unission- Staffr matends approval. y oved approval conded the (ion. motion. Ma Chinnia- Zuercher. ye , Mrs - Salay. yes: Mr. Le lider. yes. Mrs- Boring, yes: Mf- inev yes- Mr. McCash_ es: Mr_ Keenan, yes- 1i N.E. Qua afk Naming + Ms Brault ated that the Kids Vote rocess has selected - E nald Park for the N.E. quad park. an is recommending dying this slightly to, - E aid Fields in order to denote th this is an active park hk Darree Fields_ and to el inate confusion with Ernes arkway. Mr- an moved approval of name - Emerald Field . Mr - Boring seconded the Ion - le on the motion_ Mr. R i et. yes. Mr. Keenan_ y . Mrs. Boting_ yes: Ms. ay, yes /Mr. Lecklider, yes May Chinnia- Zoercher_ yes_ Presentat re Community Authority Greg Stype, Squire. Due to the late the presentation was tponed until the Dea f its & Dempsey 12 meeting. due Ij �f -t 1� i� I t .j 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road Crff OF DUBUN- toed Use Ad t-9 It-V sm si a4m9s rood Oa61ie, 066 43616 -1236 11me_ 614-4104M fmc 614 -416-4747 Web Sim vAm JA6 o6_es PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION SEPTEMBER 1, 2005 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting 3. Concept Plan— 05 -114CP — Shamrock Crossing — West Dublin - Granville Road Location: 11.7 acres located on the south side of West Dublin - Granville Road, at the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard, approximately 1,650 feet west of Dublin Center Drive_ Existing Zoning: SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District_ Request: Review and feedback for a Concept Plan under the provisions of Code Section 153.053(C)_ Proposed Use: A 123,800- square -foot mixed -use development_ Applicant: Tall Pines Holdings, 3473 Mildred Drive, Falls Church, VA .22042; represented by Ben W_ Hale, Jr_, Smith & Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Suite 725, Columbus, Ohio 43215_ Staff Contact: Jamie E_ Adkins, Planner_ Contact Information_ (614) 410- 464/EmaiL jadkins a@dublin_oh_us_ RESULT: Ben W_ Hale, Jr_, Smith and Hale and Mark Ford, Ford and Associates, representing the applicant presented this Concept Plan_ The Concept Plan and the architecture proposed were generally well received_ Commission issues discussed included locations of the retail, restaurant and residential uses, signage, gateway features, tree preservation, and pedestrian path connectivity_ There was no vote taken on this Concept Plan_ STAFF CERTIFICATION Jam" Planner 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — September 1, 2005 Page I 1 Mr_ Gerbe id not like this appl t coming to the mmission before th ARB. He said it was no one this way in the t_ However, he sal felt comfortable a condition that i the came up with so thing that affected s, then the Commi n needs to look at a nd time_ He also petted that staff wo include in the DI r or's Report, the of what happened so ih if the Commission have a question, t somehow that con ion can be evoked and b it back_ Ms. Jones d her preference w o follow procedure t emain consistent, b she saw it might put the licant at a disadvan a because it was backwards_ Gerber wanted it to on record that previ s protocol needed to kept_ / Mr_ Picciano acceXd the tabling to the 96tober 6 Commissi Mr_ teho made the motion to le this Amended F I Development Pla o the October 6, 200e tng; waiving the 15- ay Rule_ Ms_ Jones onded the motion, d the vote was as folio es-_ Ms_ Reiss, yes; M erber, no; Mr_ Zi erman , yes; Ms_ Bo g, yes; Mr_ Messine , fo , Jones, yes; and Saneholtz, yes_ 3. Concept Plan — 05 -114CP — Shamrock Crossing — West Dublin - Granville Road Jamie Adkins presented this case and slides_ The site is located in the southeast portion of Dublin, south of West Dublin - Granville Road, east of Stoneridge Lane, at the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard_ The site is currently zoned SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District Permitted uses include administrative and medical offices, and institutional uses- Subarea A on the conceptual site plan indicates a restaurant -type use, Subarea B has two retail buildings fronting on West Dublin- Granville Road, and Subarea C includes a group of office buildings and the possibility of residential uses_ Ms_ Adkins said the Future Land Use Map for this site indicates mixed -use employment emphasis, which staff generally believes is mostly office with a mix of ancillary retail/restaurant uses and could include the uses proposed. The site will include the extension of Shamrock Boulevard from the existing stub on the eastern portion of the site to the existing stub at Shamrock Boulevard_ Improvements shown include gateway features. Ms_ Adkins said at the rezoning stage, the uses will be refined in the text, the signage, architecture and landscaping will be defined, and a traffic study will be required. Ms_ Adkins said staff supports this concept plan and is recommending that the applicant move forward with the rezoning process_ Additional slides were shown of the site and the conceptual retail and office elevations_ Glen Dugger, Smith and Hale, representing the applicant briefly gave the history of planning on this project_ He said the staff had suggested that the building be moved closer to SR 161, but it presented issues with the arrangement they proposed_ Mr. Dugger pointed out that staff suggested there be no signage on the north side of the building_ He said the building was orientated towards West Dublin- Granville Road. He said they are 06-076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — September 1, 2005 Page 12 proposing wall - mounted signage with exterior illuminated gooseneck lighting_ He said staff suggested ground - mounted sign and that would not work for their tenant mix_ Mr_ Dugger said when the retail building was moved to the north and the restaurant building was moved it provided a relationship from restaurant to restaurant, and because of Sharp Lane the building is pushed further back_ He said they propose to match the existing gateway feature on the southwest comer on the east side_ He said the proposed ground mounted sign for the next building would be in the right -of -way and would need to be approved_ Mark Ford, Ford and Associates, presented the proposed architecture_ He said they are looking at the location of the existing stand of trees in order to preserve as may as possible_ He said symmetry had been added to the back portion of the site for the frontage as you enter through the space_ He showed a rendering of the retail elevations_ He said on the south side, towards the parking lot, individual blade signs are proposed for each of the storefronts_ He said the number of tenants is unknown at this time_ A combination of brick and stone materials and dimensional shingles are proposed_ Mr_ Ford said the office buildings proposed in the rear would be very similar in terms of materials; however a different window configuration may be used for the offices_ He said the same type of pitch roof and detail will be used on the office buildings so that the development will look like one continuous project_ Mr_ Dugger said the southern subarea shown as five office buildings, could be three office buildings with an elderly residential use as well_ However, he said it might end up as one large building_ He said it would be determined at the rezoning and preliminary development plan stage_ Linda and Steve Masonbrink, 3158 Lilymar Court, expressed their concerns about this concept plan_ Mrs_ Masonbrink said the residential area immediately south of this development has a fencerow around it that serves as a buffer and serves as a habitat for deer and they would like to see it preserved and evergreen screening added_ She also requested that the runoff from this development be directed away from the residential development_ Ms_ Masonbrink said it would be nice if sidewalks connected the neighborhoods and retail area_ She said cut -off lighting was important, as well as no outside speakers or music at restaurants or dumpsters next to the property fine_ Mr_ Gerber informed the Masonbrinks that this was at the concept phase and the development will come back to the Commission as a rezoning/prelimmary development plan and there will be tune to review it_ He said after the Commission reviews it, it would go to Council_ Mr_ Gerber asked if staff and/or the applicant had contacted the Masonbrinks about this proposed development_ Mrs_ Masonbrink said they had only received a notice regarding this meeting and had not been involved with any planning meetings with the applicant or staff_ Mr_ Gerber said in the future, the Masonbrinks should be involved in the planning of this project_ It was suggested that the Northwest Civic Association might become involved. Mr_ Dugger agreed to work with the residents- 06-076Z Rezoning/PreIiminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin-Granville Rnnd Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — September 1, 2005 Page 13 Mr. Messineo said the concept plan looked as though the southern tree line would be removed_ Mr. Ford said a tree survey had just been completed and it had been overlaid- He said trees will be lost where the building sits, but within the south parking area, islands can be adjusted around the drip lines. He said buildings have been moved to protect the large 60 -inch tree on the site_ He said they would work to maintain as many trees as possible_ Mr. Gerber said it had been the Commission's practice that if there is any encroachment on neighbors landscaping or buffers will be necessary_ He said the applicant would have to convince the Commissioners that it could successfully be accomplished_ Mr. Messsmeo said he preferred the freestanding signs to the wall signage Ms_ Jones said the proposed location of the restaurants away from the homes was a positive. She concurred with Mr. Messineo that she would not like to see wall signage along West Dublin - Granville Road and preferred ground - mounted signs_ Mr_ Zimmerman referred to the restaurant subarea and asked if there was a drive -thru planned_ Mr_ Dugger indicated a drive -thru was planned_ Mr. Zimmerman was concerned about speaker noise from the drive -thru_ He noted there were three restaurant patios shown on the layout. He said he liked the building pushed forward and the way the two smaller restaurants come down into to the complex. He said the proposed opening of the Stoneridge Lane extension would provide a better traffic flow. He liked the proposed entry location of the detention basins. Mr. Zimmerman emphasized that the applicants should get the area homeowners' feedback and work with staff_ Ms_ Boring asked about the square footage and the density of the proposed buildings. Ms. Adkins said the large retail building was shown on the plan to be 20,200 square feet. She said density would be defined in the zoning text at the preliminary development plan stage_ Ms. Boring said there was a tremendous concern about maintaining the integrity of West Dublin- Granville Road and how the balance of uses is mixed_ She said retail already existed at the comer of West Dublin - Granville Road and Riverside Drive. She wanted it to be ensured that a mixed -use is created in this area and was not sure how the retail would work_ Ms_ Boring was very concerned that the building layout totally encroached on the well - established, beautiful neighborhood_ She said something needed to be changed in that area because there was not enough setback or buffering_ She was not convinced, looking at the total West Dublin - Granville Road area that this is a good site for another stretch of retail and restaurant uses. Ms. Boring noted that several restaurants were not successful in this SR 161 area. She questioned that this was an appropriate land use_ She said the buildings were great. Ms_ Boring referred to the March 21, 2002 meeting minutes where it stated that the preliminary plat expired if not used within two years_ Ms. Wanner said that preliminary plat was never approved by City Council- 06-076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — September 1, 2005 Page 14 Mr_ Saneholtz said he could not imagine that a drive -thru fast food restaurant would be an attractive addition to this property_ He suggested some part of the architectural feature of the River Ridge development such as a parapet be incorporated into this development to tie them together_ Ms. Adkins said staff would look at that and bring it back to the Commission for review_ He agreed that the retail buildings on the south edge seemed to encroach on the existing residences_ He said the elderly residential use on the south edge of the property was interesting_ He said it would be a nice complement to the southern and eastern neighborhoods_ Ms_ Jones echoed Mrs_ Masonbrink's comment that there should be a pedestrian connection and perhaps even within the site pedestrian connections among the buildings_ She liked the architecture_ Ms. Jones agreed with the other Commissioners that the southern buildings were too close to the southern boundary, as well as the parking lot facing the residential to the south_ She did not like signs in the right -of -way. She said she was intrigued about the elderly residential uses, which sounded like a good use, and suggested replacing the retail with office use and turning the southern part into the elderly residential use_ Ms_ Reiss said another small proposed retail building ended up being almost all restaurant uses_ She agreed that the number of patios appeared as though the building was going to be a multi - restaurant building_ She did not want to see that happen_ She thought a restaurant in Subarea A was good, but she was not thrilled about fast food being there and a family style sit down restaurant would be preferable_ Mr: Gerber said with respect to the southernmost buildings, the adjoining neighbors would have to be insulated as it had been done many times_ He said it should be a partnership between the applicant and the restaurants to accomplish that end_ He said the ponds needed to be jazzed up a little. He said it would be a challenge to consider signage in the right -of -way. Mr_ Gerber said he liked gateway features_ Mr_ Gerber said the Community Plan provided for mixed uses in this location, but there should be some creativity. He did not want this to appear Iike a strip center_ He said overall, he thought the architecture was good and the general concept was fine_ He repeated that the residents should be included_ Mr. Dugger agreed to meet with the residents and work with them on the edge issues. Mr. Dugger said he heard concern about the retail component of this development_ He said this would not work without the retail component_ He said the site is currently zoned Suburban Office and the restaurant and office could be done, as the zoning exists. He said the point of bringing this concept forward was the idea that the retail component of it was important_ He said they would work with staff on the use package within that so that it is not 100 percent restaurants. However, he said if the Commission thinks this is not a retail /restaurant location, they need to know now to avoid working with staff and the neighbors only to return to find out that the Commission thinks that doing this retail building on this street is a terrible idea. Mr. Gerber asked Mr. Dugger to keep in mind that the site is segregated and buffered somewhat_ His concern was good traffic flow. 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — September 1, 2005 Page 15 Ms_ Boring asked that they contact the East Dublin Civic Association president, Bob McKnight so they could review this concept plan_ Ms_ Boring said she would like to see the total area to see how the retail fits into it_ She said it could generate positive activity on the north side of West Dublin - Granville Road_ However, she said it was very critical that the development is very walkable_ Ms- Reiss confirmed that there was a residential use being considered_ Mr_ Dugger said the southern half of the site had two uses, suburban office and elderly based residential_ He said at this point, it is impossible which one it will be_ Mr_ Gerber clan fied that the applicant had asked for direction regarding the retail component of this development_ Mr_ Saneholtz wanted to understand Mr_ Dugger's statement further that this project will not work without the retail. Mr_ Dugger said without the retail component, they should not spend the next three months working with staff and the neighbors. He repeated that the project could not be done without it_ Mr_ Messineo asked where the residential component was located. Mr_ Dugger said the text identified the southernmost half of the site was identified as potentially being able to be used as elderly residential_ He said it would not be configured as shown if there was an elderly residential use_ Mr_ Saneholtz said he would not support retail on this site to the extent shown on the concept plan- Ms- Jones said she was open to the retail use, depending upon traffic and the walkability_ Mr_ Gerber agreed. He said he did not want to see a lot of drive -thru restaurants_ Mr_ Messineo said he would have to be sold on the retail component_ Ms_ Reiss said she was intrigued by the concept presented tonight, but she was more intrigued about the elder housing_ Mr_ Gerber said he appreciated the presentation_ [No vote was taken on this Concept Plan-] A short recess was called_ 4_ C ridor Developme District OS -087 D — Immke xpansion and Si g evisions — 6707 t ough 6777 Sawc r_ Gerber swore in ose who intended t estify in regards to e Group - Parki Lot �oad case- 06-076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville. RnnA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION JANUARY 8, 2004 CITY OF DUBLIN- sm Slwff4V S Rood M6. 43016 -1236 PlwneJlW 614- 410-4600 • F=-6144104747 web sire_ WWWA kokus The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 1_ Area Rezoning 03 -08OZ - CDD Residential Area Rezoning Location: 82 parcels comprising an area of approximately 142 acres as annexed from ' Perry Township in 1961 and 1972, south of 1 -270, west of Sawmill Road and east of the Scioto River. Request: Review and approval of' an ordinance to establish Dublin R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential, R -2, Limited Suburban Residential and R -4, Suburban Residential Districts Property Owners: (To the R -1 district) Thomas Family L P; 7780 Brock Road, Plain City, Ohio 43064; Jack and Aileen Vogel, 1098 E. State Street, Suite C, Salem, Ohio_ 44460; City of Columbus Attorney Office c% E_ Reese, 109 N_ Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215-9000; Charles Warner and Edward.Belz, 2226 Atlee Court, Columbus, Ohio 43220; City of Dublin, c/o Jane Brautigam, City Manager, 5200 Emerald Parkway; Allen Freck, 3379 Martin Road Gsp Dunsinane LLC, 513 Re Capital Markets Md # 1090yd 38 Fountain Square Plaza, Cincinnati, Ohio 45263_ (To the R -2 District) Dorothy Ekstrom, 3281 Lilly Mar Court Charles and Donna Calhoun, 3185 Martin Road; John Fair and Jill Thomas, 3173 Martin Road; Richard and Lola Dowaker, 3151 Martin Road; Michael and Bernadette Demos, 3141 Martin Road Dublin Christian Church, 2900 Martin Road; Delbert and Omega Berk, 3289 Lilly Mar Court; Robert and Laura Rapp, 6401 Braxmar Court Richard and Marilyn Termeer, 6400 Braxmar Court Dane Ford, 3185 Lilly Mar Court; Wilma Adams, 3165 Lilly Mar Court Andrew and Sharon Jones, 3155 Lilly Mar Court; Thomas and Diane Doyle, 3141 Lilly Mar Court Ala and Ayser Hamoudi, 3I25 Lilly Mar Court; Andreas and Dara Schuster, 3100 Lilly Mar Court Susan Sharp, 3140 Lilly Mar Court; Patsy Martin, 3154 Lilly Mar Court; Joseph and Joan Pearson, 3168 Lilly Mar Court, Harold McCray, 3186 Lilly Mar Court Elbon and Martha Weese, 3200 Lilly Mar Court, Paul and Louise Wolfe, 3220 Lilly Mar Court Harvey and Wynette Shaw, 3248 Lilly Mar Court; Brett and Catherine McQuade, 3260 Lilly Mar Court; Irene Ross and Gleneta Locke, 3274 Lilly Mar Court, Scott and Suzanne Haring, 3280 Lilly Mar Court; Beatrice Roth, 3288 Lilly Mar Court Robert and Laura Rapp, 6401 Braxmar Court, Timothy Middleditch and Chan Park - Miller, 3275 Lilly Mar Court; Jeanne Dellner, 3279 Lilly Mar Court; Kevin and Cynthia Coughlin, 3191 Martin Road; Clifford Farrell and Mary Moore, 3199 Martin Road; SNB Development Co, 3133 Martin Road; Page I of 2 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION JANUARY 8, 2004 I_ Area Rezoning 03 -08OZ - CDD Residential Area Rezoning (Continued) SNB Development Co, 3125 Martin Road; Charles and Michelle Bunn, 3117 Martin Road; .terry Behling, 3289 Martin Road; David and Elizabeth Price, 3207 Martin Road; Mary Holley, 3259 Martin Road; Timothy Bischoff and Freda Ashbaugh, 3271 Martin Road; James and Cathleen Mehl, 3301 Martin Road; Milissa Wojta, 3285 Martin Road; Mark Riggs and Cheryl Bowman 3245 Martin Road; Dublin Christian Church, 2900 Martin Road; Walter Wiebe, 3410 Martin Rd; Dorothy Herbert, 6421 Martin Place; James and Mary Wood, 6449 Martin Place; Donn and Gayle Griffith, 6465 Martin Place; Gregory Stevenson, 6476 Martin Place; Thomas and Dana Kromer, 6450 Martin Place; Emilie and Neal Cook, 6400 Martin Place, and Wesley and Debra Dyer, 6424 Martin Place_ (To the R -4 District) Fion Funding Ltd_, 269 National Road_ S_E_, Hebron, Ohio 43025; Cheryl Campbell, 3330 Kendelmane Way, Kathy Potts, 3346 Kendelmane Way; William and Susan Hamilton, 3370 Kendelmane Way, William and Rebecca Klosterman, 3374 Kendelmane Way; GTS Homes, c/o David Clay, 3354 Kendelmarie Way; Patrick Hitesman, 6350 Riverside Dr_; Lowes Home Centers Inc_, 6630 David Rd_; Bob and Virgil Schnell, 6629 David Rd_; Linda Myers, 6583 David Rd_; Donnabelle Scott, P.O_ Box 191; Pierce S L Enterprises Ltd, 4056 Dublin Granville Rd_; James And Lois Harkness, 4012 W_ Dublin Granville Rd_; Mary Warner, 6595 David Rd_; Lowe's Home Centers Inc, PO Box I t 11, N_ Wilkesboro, North Carolina 28659; lira Moore, 7055 Shier -Rings Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016; Joseph and Diane Cartolano, 6300 Riverside Drive, Dublin, Ohio 43016; Brad Liston, 6310 Riverside Dr; Patrick Hitesman, 6332 Riverside Dr; Michele Dennis, 3390 Martin Road; City of Columbus, Attorney Office, c/o E_ Reese, 109 N_ Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215 - 9000, Unless otherwise noted, all addresses are in Dublin, Ohio 43017_ Applicant: City of Dublin, c/o Jane S_ Brautigam, City Manager, 5200 Emerald Parkway, Dublin, Ohio 43017_ Staff Contact: Anne Wanner, Planner_ MOTION: To approve this area rezoning because it will apply an appropriate Dublin zoning classification, provide for effective development administration, maintain the established development pattern, and is consistent with the Community Plan with the condition that if the Warner /Vogel office rezoning application (Application No_ 03 -1042) is approved by City Council prior to this area rezoning moving forward, that the site will be deleted from this rezoning_ VOTE: 7 -0_ RESULT: This area rezoning was approved_ It will be forwarded to City Council with a positive recommendation_ STAFF CERTIFICATION Frank A_ Ciarochi Acting Planning Director 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — January 8, 2004 Page 2 [The aces were heard in a following order_ ases 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, , and 6_ The min reflect thlished agenda c e order_] 1_ Area Rezoning 03 -080Z - CDD Residential Area Rezoning Anne Wanner said this case was tabled on November 6, 2003, to allow property owners an additional opportunity to meet with staff to discuss concerns_ Since that time, a second meeting was held on November 25, 2003- She said the attendance was good with approximately 25 residents attending_ As a result of that meeting and discussions, staff has changed some of the zoning districts on the map, mainly due to existing uses_ A memo was issued after the meeting that discussed some other concerns that residents had regarding some annexation histories, bikepath questions, Martin Road speed bumps, and a small roadway connection along Welland Street_ She showed several slides_ She said this area is located in the southeast area of Dublin in the CDD, Corridor Development District_ Two parcels have been removed from this application due to the fact that they were rezoned separately_ She said 4444 Tuller Road was rezoned to SO, Suburban Office District, and the Dublin Commons project was rezoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District_ Properties with single - family homes were originally proposed by staff to be R -4- Consistent with the residents' concerns, staff has changed them to R -2 to match the single- family homes, as well as another large lot single- family home to R -1_ The Villages of Scioto will remain R -4- Dublin Christian Church, Martin Place, and both Lilymar Courts are included in this area rezoning_ Ms_ Wanner said staff is recommending approval with following the condition_ That if the WarnerNogel office (Application No_ 03 -104Z) rezoning application is approved by City Council prior to this area rezoning moving forward, that the site will be deleted from this rezoning_ Ms_ Boring asked why the Villages of Scioto development was being rezoned so soon after the Commission had approved their case_ Ms_ Wanner said no City rezoning records indicated that it was zoned other than R -4_ Mr_ Gunderman guessed that if the staff thought it was R -4 all along, he suspected that what would have come in would have been something that would have needed a Commission review because it was in the CDD, not because it was being rezoned_ Pat Hitesman, a Riverside Drive resident, said at onetime an office building was preferred at that site, but there was an adjustment made and the condominiums were built. Behind the R -t is higher density apartments in Columbus and the R-4 is an excellent transitional zoning_ He thought the residents of Martin Road were more concerned for their own properties and a similar density was desired_ He speculated that they wanted to match the south side of the street. The Martin Road residents wanted what had been R-4 to be R -2_ Mr_ Hitesman said he thought the greatest concern of David Road residents went back to when Dublin promised to buy their properties, but this gives them good transitional use_ He said the R -1 also provides a transition_ Ms_ Bonn, said a commitment had been made to David Road residents, and the Commission reviewed it, but it was tabled- She asked if there was a rehearing timeframe_ Ms_ Wanner said 06 -076Z Rezoning/Prelinunary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing Wect nvihlin_C:rnmrilla Rnarl Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - January 8, 2004 Page 3 the case is still pending_ She said if direction was given to staff to pursue it again, another meeting with the residents would be necessary_ She said some property ownership had changed_ Ms_ Boring said she would Iike to see that meeting reinitiated by the Commission. She was appreciative of Ms_ Warner's patience in meeting with the residents again for this case_ It was obvious she had worked hard to explain to the residents what the City was doing_ Ms_ Reiss asked about the two large properties along Tuller Road that she thought were both vacant_ She asked since the City is going through the effort of rezoning, why wouldn't these properties be rezoned to what the City would like to see_ She did not think they were envisioned to be developed as R- i _ Ms. Wanner said the purpose of these area wide rezonings was to establish Dublin zoning where none had existed before_ This property was reflected on the zoning map as R -L There is an extensive Tuller Road area plan that calls for mixed use along Tuller Road, however there is not a true site plan to use_ She said it was premature at this point to zone the property to a commercial or office use because a mixed may be wanted later (a planned district)_ Mr. Gerber explained that as part of this general housekeeping project, the perceived zoning has been kept as opposed to some other zoning_ Mr_ Banchefsky agreed that this was just a housekeeping item_ i_e_ these types of zonings should have happened as soon as practicable following annexation and that it would receive the closest Dublin zoning district_ Based on research, that may or may not have happened_ However, there was a court case that was problematic, and the recommendation from the Law Director's office was . that the entire City be studied_ For any areas where there was no absolutely clear documentation as to the zoning history, an area wide rezoning would be done. The purpose of this project was to create a formal documentation on rezonings_ He thought it would be premature to try to rezone these properties to a planned district because it would be based on land use speculation and property rights would be changed. Mr_ Banchefsky said rezoning according the Community Plan recommendations would create lots of "taking" arguments and concerns. A wholesale change argument will not hold up in court in terms of why Dublin is doing it. This procedure is attempting to encapsulate the history of what everybody thought had been there for many years_ Mr. Hitesman, speaking as a Trustee of the East Dublin Civic Association, said one of the concerns with rezoning the large farm to commercial today and the other R -1, was that it was not easy to go backwards_ He said that area has been slow to develop, but that the R -I could be developed in some sort of eastern village fashion center as the shopping center is reworked. If it is office%ommercial, it will be rezoned as such and no one will ever do houses_ He said a village pattern could be set instead of residential_ He said the Association members would want him to request that the City slow down and keep the concerns of the East Dublin Civic Association in mind_ Mr_ Gerber made a motion to approve this area rezoning because it will apply an appropriate Dublin zoning classification, provide for effective development administration, maintain the established development pattern, and is consistent with the Community Plan with one condition_ 06 -076Z Rezonin&reliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — January 8, 2004 Page d That if the WarnerNogel office rezoning application (Application No_ 03 -1042) is approved by City Council prior to this area rezoning moving forward, that the site will be deleted from this rezoning. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows_ Ms_ Reiss, yes Ms_ Boring, yes; Mr_ Sprague, yes; Mr_ Saneholtz, yes; Mr. Messineo, yes Mr_ Zimmerman, yes and Mr- Gerber, yes- (Approved 7 -0_) 2. Area R oning 03 -098Z Inner Circle 1- 0, Residential ld Dublin Are Area Rezon' g Anne W nner said this are rezoning was loc ed on the inside [ -270_ She sho ed slides of the si _ It incorporates several neighbor ds along Mario Street, Dublin ad, Monterey Dn , and Longview rive. There are 19 parcels (appro imately 69 acres Classifications p posed include R- and a small are of R -4. These a the zoning distr is that have be effected on the blin zoning ma for approximate 15 years_ Ms_ anner said staf is recommending proval of this rez ping_ Robert Wo d, speaking for and 72 Monter Drive, said he trended the net orhood meeting_ a said there are rcels at the north est corner zoned -2, a single -famtl restdential district ut they are twin- mgles. He asked it would not be dent at this tim a keep them as th are, rather than wing to come bac later and correct t is_ r_ Gerber asked hat would happe if something ha pened to these t in- singles and th wanted to get a p it to rebuild the Ms. Wanner aid these are leg y non- conformin because they are wo- family dwellt g units, which are of permitted in th -2 District as sh n on the existin zoning map_ If t y were to be destr ed by an act of G or fire, etc_, the could only be de v loped as single- f ily units in actor nce with the R -2 ring_ Wood said if th a are eight units d one of them s uld burn down, o one will want t wild a single -fam y residence amon twin singles_ It s emed since these ere built in the e y 1950s,_ that the should be zon as twin singles er than trying t convert it_ Late , the property own s would have to a them rezoned_ e realized the Ci wanted to correc all the zoning, but ggested that it s uld be done now. Mr- G er asked if ther was an argume now that this w a non - conform g use_ Ms. Wa r said it was lega y non- eonformin r_ Gerber asked i hey wanted to re ild, would they h e to submit a va nce application a go through the p ess to rebuild. r_ Banchefsky'sa it would have t e over 50 perce of the fair market alue. Mr- Gerbe asked if one side as not habitable a result of a fire, ould the other re dent have to live xt door to a vac unit_ Ms_ Wa r thought the val e of the entire st cture before and of r the damage wo d need to be eval ted by an apprats _ 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION OCTOBER 2, 2003 CITY OF DUBLIN Division of Yta mims SM %eu -Rage Rand M6, Whin 43016 -1236 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: oae/MA14410- M t- Area Rezoning 03 -081Z — CDD Commercial Area Rezoning For 614 - 141 -4566 Location: 25 parcels comprising an area of approximately 87 acres as annexed from etaSiie_WWAALA It -as Perry Township in 1961 and 1972, south of 1 -270, west of Sawmill Road and east of the Scioto River_ Request: Review and approval of ordinance to establish Dublin CC, Community Commercial and SO, Suburban Office and Institutional Districts. Property Owners: (For CC, Community Commercial District) Bancohio National Bank Tr_ Et. Al_, 6436 Riverside Drive Iacono Family LP, 5590 Dublin Road; Stacio Associates LLC, 4269 W_ Dublin - Granville Road; Ciotola Family LP, C/O Richard Correa, 4199 W_ Dublin - Granville Road; Ronald Nims and Elaine Beed; 3755 W_ Dublin- Granville Road; Hardage Hotels I LLC, 4130 Tuller Road Capital Equities Management, 6241 Riverside Drive, Suite 1S; City of Dublin, 5200 Emerald Parkway; Wendy's International, Inc, 4288 W_ Dublin - Granville Road; Riverpark Group LLC, 6400 Riverside Drive, Unit B_ The above addresses are all located in Dublin, Ohio 43017; and Plaza Properties, P_O_ Box 9601, Columbus, Ohio 43209 -0601; Robert and Donald Butts, 9790 Columbus Pike, Lewis Center, Ohio 43035; Schottenstein Management FKA Frebis Realty, 1798 Frebis Ave, Columbus, Ohio 43206 -3729; and Franklin County Commissioners, 373 S. High Street 26th Floor, Columbus, Ohio 43215-4591. (For SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District) Tall Pines Holdings Ltd, 3473 Mildred Drive, Falls Church, Virginia 22042_ Applicant: City of Dublin, c/o Jane S_ Brautigam, City Manager, 5200 Emerald Parkway, Dublin, Ohio 43017_ Staff Contact: Anne Wanner, Planner_ MOTION: To approve this area rezoning because it will apply an appropriate Dublin zoning classification, will provide for effective development administration, will maintain the established development pattern, and is consistent with the Community .Plan_ VOTE: 7 -0_ RESULT: This area rezoning was approved positive recommendation- It will be forwarded to City Council with a STAFF CERTIFICATION Barbara M_ Clarke Planning Director 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — October 2, 2003 Page 4 Mr_ /,. ky said this was the and meeting since F approval, and all t is needed is a maj to reconsider. said a reconsiderat motion can happen y once: He said one he whole case, t three votes on the mponents would be eded_ Gerber did not three separate vot were necessary. Mr anehefsky said one ote on the application as hole would be suff tent_ Mr_ Hale - a Commission de ton to reconsider thi ould kill this deal. Boring said that see to be what the citiz s want_ She asked, i peedway, for exam could re -apply for a sit ar use, and what pr s would need to mployed_ Mr- Ban efsky said they wou e to come before the ommission with a fi development plan a use the sam e proces _ Mr_ Saneholtz as d if there would be a mit on the number pumps for any new plication_ Mr_ Banchefs said no limitation w to the zoning text_ r_ Gerber said the nu r of pumps at a gas s i n will be determined n the size of the are d functionally wha its on the site. Mr. tchie said if there issues that the Co ission has not It that would impact t ision, he understood considering the apph tion. He needed to what those might Mr_ Saneholtz as d if he could lega , with no indicatto of any new facts or ange of circumstances upport reconsidera " n_ Mr_ Banchefs replied affirmative) . They will consider w facts might be ch ed at a subsequent h ng_ Mr_ erber made the mot that the Commissi reconsider_ D 1 ent Plan/Conditio 01- MDPICU - T mas Kohler PCD, area E - United D Farmers/Mobil as — 565 Woerner -Te a Road, and Mr: Zi rma . seconded- Boring asked if second had to be on the revailing side also_ Banchefsky said it ould be preferable_ r_ Ritchie then substitut in providing the sec d to the reconsiderati motion_. Mr_ G r said this was tro ing because residen lieve they were n properly heard, and he pectively disagreed that_ Also, this app t worked diligent on solutions_ He s was not a fun time sit as a Commissio If there is someth g that will provide a tier product for the app) t and this communi , the Commission is at forum for that. Mr_ Gerber ed for the vote on a motion to recons r. The vote was as ollows: Mr_ Messineo o; Mr_ Saneholtz, no . Sprague, no; M _ immerman, yes; M onng, no; Mr_ Ritchi , yes; and Mr_ Gerber, s_ (Motion to reco er failed 3-4_) r_ Gerber left the too at this point and Vic hair Zimmerman p r ded over the first ca / 1_ Area Rezoning 03 -081Z — CDD Commercial Area. Rezoning Anne Wanner showed several slides_ This area rezoning involves the Corridor Development District in the southeast portion of Dublin_ She said it includes 26 parcels totaling 85 acres_ These areas were annexed to Dublin between 1961 and 1972" There are several commercial sites including the eastern half of Wendy's Headquarters, Woodfrn Suites, Frank's Nursery, L,aScala Restaurant, and Dublin Sawmill Centre_ This rezoning is to establish the CC or SO zoning- 06-076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — October 2, 2003 Page S Ms_ Wanner said one parcel that is owned by Columbus was deleted from this application_ It is leased by Dublin as parkland along the river for the boardwalk_ The historical maps indicate commercial zoning, but representatives of the City of Columbus thought R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential District zoning would be more appropriate for park land_ It has since been placed in the CDD residential application_ She said three property owners attended the informational meeting, and several called on the phone_ This action is a housekeeping effort to avoid any future Code enforcement problems ansing from township or county zoning_ Staff recommends approval of this rezoning_ Mr_ Saneholtz made a motion to approve this amended area rezoning because it will apply an appropriate Dublin classification, provide for effective development administration, maintain the established development pattern, and is consistent with the Community Plan_ Ms_ Boring seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows= Mr_ Ritchie, yes; Mc Zimmerman, yes, Mr_ Sprague, yes; Mr_ Messmeo, yes; Ms_ Boring, yes; and Mr_ Saneholtz, yes_ [Mr_ Gerber, upon return to the meeting voted affirmatively_] (Approved 7 -0_) 2. Area Rezonin 03 -082Z — Deer Run Anne Wanner owed several slides_ a said this area rezo - ng includes 14 parcel otalmg 26 acres locat tween Dublin Road d the Scioto River' elaware County_ T ee parcels are on Dubf Road, and the remai - g parcels are with r Run Estates, o finally platted in 1984 ere are two homes i eer Run Estates o eer Run Drive, whi is private_ She sal D in R_ 1, Restricted Su roan Residential Di ct is proposed_ Lan - ediately to the th as rezoned to a PUD, anned Unit Develo ent District last year ich changed the a ce of Deer Run Drive, proximately 1,600 t to the south_ As pa of that rezoning, th plicant was to file a revi d plat, but it has not et been received_ She said s has spoken with ew property owners_ he informational eting was sparsel attende . Ms. Wanner said is was a housekeepi effort and is inten d to avoid any re enf ement problems an ing from township or unty zoning_ It wil tablish the R -1 strict, d staff recommends proval of this rezoni [Mr_ Gerber re ed to the meeting at is time_] Mr_ Sane tz made a motto to approve this area rezoni because it will appl an appropriate Du in zoning classif Lion, provide for effective evelopment adminis tion, maintain the stablished develo ent pattern, a Is consi nt with the Commu Plan_ Mr_ Ritc seconded them on, and the vote as _ fo wss Mr_ Messineo, es; Mr_ Sprague, y Mr_ Zimmerma , yes; Ms_ Borin; Mr_ erber, yes, Mr_ Ritc yes; a g, es and Mr_ Sane tz, yes_ (Approv 7 -0_) 3. Area R 03 -083Z — Be ire Area Rezoni Anne W er showed several des_ She said this ea rezoning includ 76 parcels within fi subdi signs_ There are t estate lots at the h end of Bellaire rive and the east si of D in Road_ The to ereage is 133 acre _ Streets within t ubdivisions include ellaire venue, Manor Co and West, Li Brick Lane, and B afire Court_ The to genera}!y range in size fro ne t: �ast three acres- 06-076Z Rezoning(Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION March 21, 2002 t7 r } U } 1ii 1sl.1 W"isim of rMnin4 58004 - u*Road Mlip, 06 43016 -1236 6ae/M- 614- 410-4600 fm- 614- 1614SU NAue wiwAu6kA_ss The Planning an d Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 4_ Preliminary Plat 02 -025PP — Sharp Property — Tall Pines Subdivision Location: 11-78 acres located on the south side of West Dublin- Granville Road (SR- 161), at the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard- Existing Zoning: SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District- Request: Review and approval of a preliminary plat application under the provisions of Section 152.018_ Proposed Use: The reconfiguration of seven lots into three larger lots and the extension of Stoneridge Lane_ Applicant: Tall Pines Holdings, LTD_, c/o James Sharp, 3473 Mildred Drive, Falls Church, Virginia 22042_ Staff Contact: Corey Theuerkauf. Planner_ MOTION: To approve this preliminary plat because it adheres to the Community Plan including the Thoroughfare Plan, provides an orderly development to the area, supercedes the seven narrow lots not conducive to commercial development, and provides for the completion of Stoneridge Lane, with 16 conditions: 1) That detailed construction plans be prepared in accordance with City standards and have approval prior to the issuance of building permits; 2) That construction of the roadway extension occur concurrently with building construction and be complete prior a final site plan compliance inspection and approval to use the property 3) That there be parking restrictions on Stonendge Lane, SR 16t, frontage road, and Shamrock Boulevard identified on the preliminary plat, 4) That any additional access points be prohibited, and that proper notation be identified on the preliminary plat; 5) That a bikepath or sidewalk location be investigated by staff, with the location to be determined at a later date 6) That the tree survey be revised to incorporate the tree row on Lot 2 and that a tree preservation and replacement plan be submitted for the area around Stoneridge Lane Page 1-of 2 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION March 2t, 2002 4. Preliminary Plat 02 -025PP - Sharp Property - Tall Pines Subdivision (Continued) 7) That the existing tree rows along the property lines be protected, preserved, and enhanced and that a perimeter buffer plan be submitted with any future development plan for Lot 3 along the southern, we-stem, and eastern property lines, with the planting design and species being sensitive to the existing vegetation, subject to staff approval; 8) That a similar stone feature at the corner of Lot 2, median planting plan, and similar entry landscape features plans be submitted as part of the CDD applications for Lots 1, 2, and 3, subject to staff approval; 9) That street trees be planted 45 -50 feet on center along Stoneridge Lane; 10) That the landmark trees on site be incorporated into the future site designs; 11) That there be an increased pavement setback, with a minimum 25 -foot no- build zone along the southern property line on Lot 3; 12) That any tapping into or extending of Dublink be coordinated with the City of Dublin's Service Director; 13) That Lots I and 2 incorporate the goals and strategies of the Tuller Road Area Plan; 14) That the storm water management plan be revised to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and that the applicant extend the water and sanitary lines as identified in the staff report, subject to City Engineer approval; 45) That minor modifications be made to the preliminary plat before scheduling for City Council; and 16) That the preliminary plat establish a no -build zone to the rear of Lot 3, matching the established no -build zones of the commercial properties to the east, if possible- [This no -build zone will be 25 feet_] # Greg Land, CMC Properties, 10925 Reed Hartman Highway, Suite 200, Cincinnati, Ohio, representing the applicants, agreed to the above conditions_ VOTE: 7 -0_ RESULT: This preliminary plat was approved_ It will be forwarded to City Council with a positive recommendation- STAFF CERTIFICATION Barbara M_ Clarke Planning Director Page 2 of 2 06 -076Z RezoninglPrelitninary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin-Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - March 21, 2002 Page 12 Mr_ Anderso asked Mr_ 71e nd Mr_ Fishman for eir service to Mr_ S gue called a short 4- Preliminary Plat 02 -025PP - Sharp Property - Tall Pines Subdivision Corey Theuerkauf said a retail/auto sales concept plan for this site was disapproved in 2000 by the Commission and City Council_ This is an office request and involves a preliminary plat for new lots and road construction_ The site contains seven narrow parcels that total over I I acres, currently zoned SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District_ He showed several slides_ Mr_ Theuerkauf said the SR 161 widening project extended Shamrock Boulevard southward into the center of this site_ There is a new service road into the northwest quadrant of the site_ The site is square shaped_ Portions of the site are wooded, particularly in the eastern half of the site and along the southern property line_ He said the parcels are being combined to create three office sites_ There are retail and residential uses in the area_ Mr_ Theuerkauf said the applicant is proposing to extend the last segment of Stoneridge Lane (430 feet) within a 60 -foot right -of -way to the east property line at a Iater date. Access points are requested to the south of Lots I and 2 on Stoneridge Lane, on Lot 3 lining up with the terminus of Shamrock Boulevard, and rising with the proposed location for the curbcut for Lot 2_ The site has three landmark trees_ Mr. Theuerkauf said no setbacks are identified on this preliminary I plat_ He said the preliminary plat should show on- street parking restrictions and have strict language prohibiting future access points_ He said Lot 2 has the same issue_ He said staff also recommends prohibiting access onto SR 161, and limiting it to what is currently proposed_ He said there are six homes on Lilymar Court, and their rear yards abut Lot 3_ The frontage road meanders along Lot 1, which does not have any trees_ Lots i and 2 are located in the Tuller Road Area Plan from the Community Plan. It sets out many goals and objectives €or this area to tie into the existing development, and to provide a nice approach into Old Dublin_ Future development on for Lots 1 and 2 should incorporate some of these goals and strategies_ Mr_ Theuerkauf said staff recommends approval with IS conditions, with Condition 5 modified: I ) That detailed public improvement construction plans be prepared in accordance with City standards and have approval prior to the issuance of building permits; 2) That construction of the roadway extension occur concurrently with building construction and be complete prior a final site plan compliance inspection and approval to use the Property; 3) That there be parking restrictions on Stoneridge Lane, SR 161, frontage road, and Shamrock Boulevard identified on the preliminary plat; 4) That any additional access points be prohibited, and that proper notation be identified on the preliminary plat; S) That a bikepath or sidewalk location be investigated by staff, with the location to be determined at a later date; 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — March 21, 2002 Page 13 6) That the tree survey be revised to incorporate the tree row on Lot 2 and that a tree preservation and replacement plan be submitted for the area around Stoneridge Lane, 7) That the existing tree rows along the property lines be protected, preserved, and enhanced and that a perimeter buffer plan be submitted with any future development plan for Lot 3 along the southern, western, and eastern property lines, with the planting design and species being sensitive to the existing vegetation, subject to staff approval; 8) That a similar stone feature at the corner of Lot 2, median planting plan, and similar entry landscape features plans be submitted as part of the CDD applications for Lots 1, 2, and 3, subject to staff approval; 9) That street trees be planted 45 -50 feet on center along Stoneridge Lane; 10) That the landmark trees on site be incorporated into the future site designs; 11) That there be an increased pavement setback along the southern property line on Lot 3; 12) That any tapping into or extending of Dublink be coordinated with the City of Dublin's Service Director; 13) That Lots 1 and 2 incorporate the goals and strategies of the Tulier Road Area Plan; 14) That the storm water management plan be revised to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, and that the applicant extend the water and sanitary lines as identified in the staff report, subject to City Engineer approval; and 15) That minor modifications be made to the preliminary plat before scheduling for City Council- He said the bikeway plan indicates a bikepath on the south side of Stoneridge Lane, but the senior housing directly to the east has only 50 feet of right -of -way_ The placemet of the bikepath was moved to the rear of the site to access to the Martin Road park area_ He said Fred Hahn would like to investigate some alternative locations after a field check_ Greg Land, CMC Properties, for the applicant, Tall Pines and the Sharps said they agreed to the above conditions_ He said Mr_ Sharp wants continued access to the land through historical flares until development occurs. His access would then be limited to the access shown_ A tree survey was done for Lot 3 which will most likely be developed first_ He said Mr_ Sharp would like to delay the tree survey for Lot 2 until there is a development plan_ Mr_ Sprague asked if retaining the access to the Sharp property until development is a problem_ Ms_ Clarke said no, the concern is for the long term development of this site_ It could be dealt with in the CDD application_ Mr_ Land accepted this clanfrcation of Condition 4_ Mr_ Theuerkauf said the applicant was requesting to delay the master tree survey for the entire 1 i -plus acres until the CDD stage_ The tree survey submitted indicates caliper inches, location, and species on Lot 3 and in the right -of -way for Stonendge Lane_ it does not include Lot 2_ The master survey is a good reference document to compare with the CDD applications_ He would like to have it at an earlier stage_ Mr_ Hammersmith noted that the two accesses shown on SR 161 are only 12 -foot driveways_ Ms_ Clarke said they would not be reused for commercial development_ Access is part of the CDD review. A plat should indicate access restrictions before it gets recorded_ A plat could be recorded before the development is designed_ She said staff would work out the problem- 06-076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing WPCt Diihlin -(ter nvillp RnArl Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - March 21, 2002 Page 14 Mr_ Hammersmith said there are actually three accesses_ One is shown as a 10 -foot residential drive, and the other two are 12 -foot field drives_ Mr_ Fishman asked about the maximum density_ He feared that technically, there could be three giant buildings, and they would be totally out of character_ Ms_ Clarke said there are height restrictions, but they do not affect density_ She said square foot per acre restrictions, as typically used in planned districts, are not contained in the SO_ Mr_ Theuerkauf said the parking standards and setback would limit building sizes_ Lots I and 2 have additional Tuller Road Area Plan goals and strategies to follow_ Mr_ Fishman said Stoneridge had created a nice character here, and something too large would spoil it A large office could be hard for the Commission to deny in the SO_ Mr_ Banchefsky said the building coverage on the lot can only be 50 percent in SO Districts_ The maximum lot coverage was 70 percent in SO Districts Mr. Messineo asked if the parking requirement was tied to building square footage_ Ms_ Clarke said for office use, one parking space per 250 square feet of gross floor area is required_ Medical office requires one parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area_ Retail use requires one parking space per 150 square feet of gross floor area. Ms_ Clarke said on small sites Iike this, she would be surprised if the yield exceeded 12,000 square feet per acre_ She did not think more than a two -story building would be possible_ Mr_ Eastep asked if the user was known at present_ Mr_ Land said the applicant had a contract with his company to build executive office suites on the southern five -acre site_ He did not know if it would be one- or two-story- Ms- Boning asked if the Lilymar Court residents were aware of the SO zoning_ Mr_ Theuerkauf did not know_ Ms_ Boring asked if no -build zones could be used on a preliminary plat in a straight zoning_ Ms_ Clarke said yes_ Mr_ Theuerkauf said there was a required buffer between specified .uses_ At the CDD stage, any required buffer would be added along the south property line_ Ms_ Boring suggested 200 feet- Mr_ Theuerkauf said the site was only 300 feet wide_ Mr_ Theuerkauf said the applicant indicated that there is a 25 -foot no -build zone along the rear property line of the senior facility_ He said staff could research it_ He said the detention area was moved to the western property line_ Ms_ Newcomb said there was existing vegetation_ Mr_ Messineo asked if a 50 -foot no -build zone were created there, would a very large building become impossible_ Mr_ Theuerkauf said it would definitely limit the square footage_ Mr_ Theuerkauf asked if the Commission would be satisfied with staff researching what current no- build zone existed along the senior housing facility_ That would provide enough for an easement and supplement the tree row to buffer the homeowners_ Ms_ Boning agreed- 06-076Z Rezoning/PreIiminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -March 2I, 2002 Page 15 Mr_ Land said a 25 -foot no -build zone would be fair_ It could be enhanced at the CDD stage_ Mr_ Eastep preferred a no- disturb one for a mature tree stand_ Mr_ Theuerkauf said the majority of the trees were on the residential property_ Only a few straddled the property line. Ms_ Clarke asked for a clarification after explaining the Code language on rear yards_ After some discussion, it was agreed that a 25 -foot no -build or no- disturb zone is the absolute minimum and should be shown on the plat_ Based on the actual building proposed, a rear yard calculation should be done, which might require a greater distance between the building and the property line_ The no -build zone and rear yard might overlap_ Mr_ Theuerkauf reconfirmed that the Commission is requesting a note on the preliminary plat that all setbacks will adhere to the zoning classification. An additional area on the southern property line would be identified on the plat as a 25 -foot no -build zone- Mr- Land agreed_ He said he would like it to be a no -build zone, not a no- disturb zone, because of the necessary grading required and also because the overwhelming amount of landscaping necessary for tree replacement in that same area_ Mr. Messineo thought this no -build zone should match the depth of adjoining properties_ Ms_ Boring agreed_ (Staff researched the adjoining property to the east (senior housing). That development contains a 68 -foot rear yard, not a no -build zone, based on the mass of the building_ This preliminary plat should reflect a 25 -foot no -build zone, the minimum distance discussed_] Dino Duros, co-owner of Stoneridge Medical Center, said one of their main concerns was the continuation of Stoneridge Lane_ He said they are in the process of starting the approved medical building_ They are concerned about the dedications they made to the City of Dublin for the road, and when it would be completed- Mr- Theuerkauf said the CDD approval would be tied to construction of the road, as will the recording of the plat- Mr- Fishman asked if a time limit could be placed on that as part of this platting: Ms_ Clarke said a preliminary plat expires if not used within two years_ Ted Leakas, co -owner of Stonendge Medical Center, said there was always a question of what triggered the construction of Stonendge Lane_ Ms_ Clarke said the City would require it to be built when there is construction either north or south of it_ Typically, the roads need to be in, the water line needs to be extended, the sewer, etc_ Mr_ Leakas said they had been involved with the continuation of Stonendge Lane since 1988_ He said they dedicated those rights -of -way and also posted a bond_ They fought against building the road because it wasn't going anywhere_ He said he would like to see the dedication of this right -of -way so that they know the alignment and that it will be bonded- 06-076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - March 21, 2002 Page 16 Mr_ Theuerkauf said that would be done at the time of the final plat_ Mr- Land agreed_ Mr_ Hammersmith agreed and said the trigger for road construction is in Conditions I and 2 Ms_ Boning suggested a Condition 16 to read= That the preliminary plat establish a no -build zone to the rear of Lot 3 to match, at a minimum, the established no -build zones of the adjoining commercial properties_ Mr_ Gerber made the motion To approve this preliminary plat because it adheres to the Community Plan including the Thoroughfare Plan, provides an orderly development to the area, supercedes the seven narrow lots not conducive to commercial development, and provides for the completion of Stonendge Lane, with 16 conditions_ 1) That detailed construction plans be prepared in accordance with City standards and have approval prior to the issuance of building permits; 2) That construction of the roadway extension occur concurrently with building construction and be complete prior a final site plan compliance inspection and approval to use the Property; 3) That there be parking restrictions on Stonerdge Lane, SR 161, frontage road, and Shamrock Boulevard identified on the preliminary plat; 4) That any additional access points be prohibited, and that proper notation be identified on the preliminary plat; 5) That a bikepath or sidewalk location be investigated by staff, with the location to be determined at a later date 6) That the tree survey be revised to incorporate the tree row on Lot 2 and that a tree preservation and replacement plan be submitted for the area around Stonendge Lane; 7) That the existing tree rows along the property lines be protected, preserved, and enhanced and that a perimeter buffer plan be submitted with any future development plan for Lot 3 along the southern, western, and eastern property lines, with the planting design and species being sensitive to the existing vegetation, subject to staff approval; 8) That a similar stone feature at the corner of Lot 2, median planting plan, and similar entry landscape features plans be submitted as part of the CDD applications for Lots 1, 2, and 3, subject to staff approval; 9) That street trees be planted 45 -50 feet on center along Stonendge Lane; 10) That the landmark trees on site be incorporated into the future site designs; 11) That there be an increased pavement setback, with a minimum 25 -foot no -build zone along the southern property line on Lot 3; 12) That any tapping into or extending of Dublink be coordinated with the City of Dublin's Service Director; 13) That Lots 1 and 2 incorporate the goals and strategies of the Tuller Road Area plan; 14) That the storm water management plan be revised to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and that the applicant extend the water and sanitary lines as identified in the staff report, subject to City Engineer approval; 15) That minor modifications be made to the preliminary plat before scheduling for City Council; and 16) That the preliminary plat establish a no -build zone to the rear of Lot 3, matching the established no -build zones of the commercial properties to the east, if possible. [This no- build zone will be 25 feet] 06 -076Z Rezoning/Prelirrinary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — March 21, 2002 Page 17 Mr_ Land agreed to the conditions as listed_ Mr_ Zimmerman seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows= Mr_ Eastep, yes Ms_ Boring, yes Mr_ Messineo, yes; Mr_ Sprague, yes; Mr- Fishman, yes; Mr_ Zimmerman, yes, and Mr- Gerber, yes_ (Approved 7 -0-) Ms_ Boring said she hoped this would open the area up to office development_ It was nice to see it happening_ She wished them luck_ Mr_ Sprague announced the I 1 o'clock rule again, and that Case 6 was tabled S_ Final Develop ent Plan 00 -027F — Perimeter Cen , Subareas B -2 an B-3 — Homestead ommunities Warren Ca it presented the f development plan f this 22 acres_ He sa the approved prelimin development plan luded 70 residentia nits and eight live%w units_ He said the ei t live/work units ha en dropped from t - proposal_ He showe several slides_ This si is zoned PUD, and i n Subareas B -2 and -3 of the Perimeter C ter plan_ Properties ees sides are zoned CD, with residential operties along Post R Mr_ Campbell aid more single -fa y footprints now r ace the hve/work ts_ The swimming i was relocated_ T ost Road frontages r ain_ Instead of the r access alleys previo shown, there is a fu ervice curbcut to give tter traffic flow thro h the site_ Campbell said Con - ion 1 referred to two its at the northwest mer of the site_ Ther ad been a larger g nspace with a pond apping around it_ H said that staff recomm dropping two un near the openspace_ is will restore the a feature appearance was shown on the elimmary developmen lan_ Mr_ C pbell said there wou be a curbcuE on atec Boulevard and and pillar trey ent along Walt Street_ a said *the inoundin and plantings between a Laser Eye Center d Metatec Boulevard ' be removed and re ced with the pond and rfall treatment_ Mr_ Campbell sai Eaff recommends ap val of this final develo ent plan with t2 condit I ) That the o units closest to the etatec entrance be rem ed and the pond and I ping treatm t approved at the pre - Mary plat be mcorpo ed 2) Th a plan showing th exact location of building envelope, by oordinates or istances, be provided the time building pe is are requested, - subject staff approval; 3 That open space one graded, seeded, dedicated to the City, or to the issuance of the first buildi permit; 4) That all I aping comments con fined in this staff report met, to the satisfac - n of staff 5) That to lighting meet the D in Lighting Guidelines 6) t protective tree fen - g be utilized throug t all phases of con tion, to the satisfaction of staff That new street es for Clondalkin L Clondalkin Court, d Tallaght Court approved prior submission for buildin rmits; 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION January 20, 2000 CI" V OF 01 - UM wvis .1 n..i g 51110 SINK409s Rand Wk Okla 13016 -1236 Phma~Al* 614-761 -6550 fa c 614 - 161-6566 web sAa vWdu6Gs_ MS The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 3- Concept Plan " -127CP - Sharp Property - 4100 West Dublin- Granville Road Location: 14.683 acres (involving seven existing parcels) located on the south side of Dublin- Granville Road (SR 161) immediately opposite Shamrock Boulevard_ Existing Zoning: SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District_ Request: Review and approval of a concept plan under the PUD, Planned Unit Development Dist: ict provisions of Section 153.056 - Proposed Use: A mixed -use commercial development including an auto dealership and offices_ Applicant: Tall Pines Holding, Ltd, 3473 Mildred Drive, Falls Church, Virginia 22042; do Jeff Roby, 7100 Muizfield Drive, Dublin, Ohio 43017. MOTION: To approve this concept plan because the land uses are generally consistent with the Community Plan, and - it completes a segment of Stoneridge Lane, will, six conditions: 1) That the office lots (Subarea B) be reconfigured to a larger size; 2) That uses within Subarea B (adjacent to residential property) be limited to pennitted uses within the SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District; 3) That the ODOT SR 161 widening plan be properly reflected on future plans; 4) That architectural character and residential buffers be of high quality and be defined in the . preliminary development plan; 5) That the service road construction. commitment be determined at the preliminary development plan (rezoning) stage; and 6) That the applicant coordinate the preliminary stormwater management and the design of all public roads, private drives, and public and private utilities for the site with the City, prior to scheduling the rezoning on a future Planning Commission agenda _ * Jeff Roby agreed to the above conditions- Page I of 2 06 -076Z Rezoning/PreIiminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION January 20, 2000 3_ Concept Plan " -127CP - Sharp Property - 4100 West Dublin- Granville Road (Continued) VOTE: 3 - 4_ RESULT: The motion for approval failed_ The result is a negative recommendation from the Commission_ This concept plan will be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation of disapproval_ STAFF CERTIFICATION Chad Gibson Planner Page 2 of 2 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - January 20, 2000 Page 10 b) Brick tr ments on the north a ation oZKinko's a north and east McD aid's elev 'ons t o simulate wind s, c) nd vents or brick ar es on the gable north elevatio d) inko's building he t to be 30 feet as Window tinting match Bob Evans at resta nts in Subarea A 1, f �tebt i 9) Tha 1 signs comply with t ign Code and text, ept that the menu bo I approved -)5 feet in area as subm ed; 10 That lighting comply ith the Dublin Lighti uidelines including t off fixtures; That the dumpster closure be construct of brick to match the ildings; and 12) That revised p s incorporating the a ve comments be sub ted within two weeks_ Mr_ Harlan onded the motion_ Hale agreed to the onditions above_ The to was as follows: r_ Fishman, yes; Mr_ tep, yes; Mr_ Sprag , yes; Mr_ Peplow yes r_ Lecklider, yes; Harlan, yes; and Mr_ cCash, yes_ (Approv 7 -0_) [ 10:30 p_m_, there a consensus that th ommission would not aive the I I o'cloc rule to hear the full ale a_ 3- Concept Plan 99 -127CP -Sharp Property -4100 West Dublin - Granville Road Mr_ Gibson presented this concept plan for a mix of commercial uses including an auto dealership_ He noted this is a non - binding review_ He said the site contains 14.7 acres on the south side of S_R_ 161 at Shamrock Boulevard_ The site is undeveloped except for an abandoned house and is currently zoned SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District_ He showed several slides_ Mr_ Gibson said there wilt be two subareas_ The southern area will be used for SO uses, and the retail subarea will be along the S_R_ 161 frontage_ He noted an appropriate buffer will be needed abutting residential properties_ Mr_ Gibson said the site is seven tong narrow parcels to the east of the LaScala restaurant_ There are trees around the house_ This applicant will complete Stoneridge Lane, but the timing is unresolved_ Shamrock Boulevard and a service road wilt be constructed with the ODOT widening of S_R_ 161_ This intersection will be signalized_ He said the text should limit the uses, especially along the residential area_ Display limits are needed for an auto dealership, and architectural commitments will be needed for the whole site_ The office parcels seem too small_ He said staff is recommending approval with six conditions: I ) That the office lots (Subarea B) be reconfigured to a larger size; 2) That uses within Subarea B (adjacent to residential property) be limited to permitted uses within the SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District; 3) That the ODOT S_R_ 161 widening plan be property reflected on future plans; 4) That architectural character and residential buffers be of high quality and be defined in the preliminary development plan; 5) That the service road construction commitment be determined at the preliminary development plan (rezoning) stage; and 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - January 20, 2000 Page t 1 6) That the applicant coordinate the preliminary stormwater management and the design of all public roads, private drives, and public and private utilities for the site with the City, prior to scheduling the rezoning on a future Planning Commission agenda_ Mr_ Gibson said there are currently no architectural controls, but the Commission would review the application under the CDD provisions_ Ms_ Clarke said the Commission's discretion is more limited in the CDD than in a planned district_ There are no density requirements beyond lot coverage, the Parking Code, etc_ Mr_ Gibson said the Community Plan recommends "mixed use -- employment emphasis", and a density of 8,700 square feet per acre was tested, yielding 128,000 square feet_ He noted this is a non - specific category, and it could even include some multi - family_ The Community Plan does not limit the site to office use_ Regarding tree preservation the site will need to comply with the current ordinance_ Mr_ McCash expected more specifics in this concept plan_ It seems to be a request for complete freedom in land use, etc_ Mr_ Gibson said limitations are needed, especially along the residential edges_ He said staff recommends approval because it fits the Community Plan_ Additionally, an auto dealership has a very small effect on peak hour traffic_ Mr_ McCash felt this is a broad deviation from the Community Plan_ He was unhappy with the - retail and other uses in Subarea A along S_R_ 161 _ Jeff Roby, applicant, said the uses are not known_ The Iand is for sale, and a restaurant outparcel is expected_ There can be some limitations_ The second area along S_R_ 161 will be a car dealership_ The site is too big just for the dealership: The area along the south will still be SO uses_ He can address the concerns along the southern area and the 1.6 -acre outparcel_ He did not know if a liquor license was available_ Mr_ Roby said he met with Barb Cox on stormwater and utilities_ Larger lots of 1.5 acres were suggested to him_ Detention in the rear for all five lots would be possible_ He said they will work this - out with the Engineering Division_ Ms_ Cox said no specific lot size was suggested for the office parcels_ She said the regional pond might be the best approach to stormwater control_ She thought it could be resolved_ Mr_ Roby said this will be a nice, high quality facility_ He said their construction of Stoneridge Lane will trigger the missing piece to the east_ He said a Mitsubishi dealership is proposed, and a dealership needs 3.5 acres_ A building of 15,000 square feet is recommended_ Four acres for the dealership will be adequate for everything, based on the Mitsubishi data_ Mr_ McCash said there is no compelling reason to vary from the Community Plan_ It is now zoned for offices, and that is the preferred use_ He did not want all of S_R_ 161 to become retail_ Mr_ Roby said his use reduces the peak hour traffic_ Mr_ McCash responded that this would be true if the site were developed at the maximum density, but this is a lower density area. It was noted that the southern five acres will have office uses_ Mr_ Roby said there is a shortage of small, one to (.S -acre office sites. He thinks it will develop quickly 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - January 20, 2000 Page 12 Dino Duros, part owner of the Stoneridge PUD complex to the east, said he agrees with the basic proposal_ He requested establishing a diagonal building setback from the LaScala restaurant to the Stoneridge building, to assure his building will not be totally blocked_ He supports office on the southern area, to match his Phele Development (Stoneridge) site_ if it becomes a dealership, he would like a good buffer along the property line and would like a continuation of their stone wall along the frontage_ Mr_ Duros said the James Cancer Clinic is a major tenant, and they need to protect the $8.5M investment_ They want to know the proposed use_ A dealership would be fine, but they. would not like a retail outlet_ The Commission said this is not yet in the text, and the proposal is not well defined at this point_ There was discussion of the size of the auto dealership site as the site seems to be too small for two dealerships_ Mr_ Gibson said there is a master landscape plan for the S_R_ 161 project, but he did not know if it includes any stone walls_ He said the utilities are currently being moved, and construction should start in the spring, probably ending in two years_ Mr_ Gibson said future uses, beyond the dealership or the restaurant, could be treated as conditional uses, if desired_ Ms_ Cox explained the service road connection to the rear_ She noted that the - access to the rear apartments will be through the Shamrock Boulevard_ The improvement plans are finalized, and changes are not feasible at this late date_ Mr_ Peplow said one plan says "future dealership"; the other says "future building-" He cautioned that special signage and display will be difficult to get approved_ Mr_ Eastep said a dealership is reasonable to him_ Dublin has many better office sites_ He wanted the text to be much tighter. He said having architectural approval will be important, but he generally favors it_ Mr_ Peplow agreed_ He believes that the widening of S_R_ 161 will improve the site, however, as an office site_ He also wants much tighter controls_ Mr_ Sprague said this site should be a PUD for offices_ He said the road improvements planned could make this a prime office site_ He cannot support the dealership_ It is a good site for suburban offices_ Mr_ Harlan said there are several dealerships on this road, and it is reasonably consistent with the Community Plan_ The applicant's challenge is to make the buildings and site look good_ Mr_ Fishman said he does not support this land use change; it will not add value to the area: He said the Stonendge office complex sets an excellent example, and he does not see a reason to vary from the Community Plan_ Small office sites would be fine, and the James Clinic may attract other uses_ A grouping of auto dealerships is not necessarily a good thing, as he sees it_ Mr_ Roby said the land costs $350,000 per acre, based on what ODOT bought for road widening_ That is beyond office land prices_ 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - January 20, 2000 Page 13 Mr_ McCash said this is a drastic deviation from the Community Plan, and few controls are being offered_ The development standards proposed meet, but do not exceed, the Code. He said there is no design component and no compelling reason to support this_ Mr_ Lecklider said the lower traffic volume from a dealership is fairly compelling, but he cannot support the dealership_ He sees potential for small offices_ The area does not present a clean slate, but he sees this as deviating from the Community Plan_ He does not support it_ Mr_ Eastep said this is a mixed use with an employment emphasis, in his opinion_ it seems perfectly consistent with the Plan to him_ Mr_ McCash said the uses proposed are too broad_ The purpose of the concept plan is to give frank feedback to the applicant_ He does not want to create the illusion that this proposal would be approved at the next step, the preliminary development plan_ Mr_ Roby said he would amend the full concept to include just an auto dealership, a restaurant, and offices in the rear_ He will delete the other uses if needed_ He said he will not be the restaurant developer- Mr- Lecklider said he can not support a concept that includes an auto dealership_ Mr_ Fishman agreed, and said the Community Plan does not recommend retail uses_ Without a liquor license, this would be a fast -food restaurant site_ The signage and activity for these uses is not consistent with the quality of the lames Clinic_ Mr. Roby said *here are three dealerships very close to this site, and one of them will- expend soon. Mr. Sprague said this was factored into the Community Plan_ Mr_ Gibson said the staff believes these uses are included in the Community Plan designation_ The Plan is non - specific_ This is a mix of uses as recommended_ Mr_ Lecklider said the land uses approved for this site will be extended to he David Road_ Mr_ Banchefsky said the concept plan is non - binding, and the Commission is making a recommendation to City Council on the proposal- City Council can override a negative recommendation_ The applicant can go forward now or ask for it to be tabled_ Tabling would permit him the opportunity to revamp the proposal Mr- Eastep said he is permitted to reapply at any time with a new application_ Mr_ Fishman said the developer should not invest more money in an unsuccessful concept_ Several Commissioners said they cannot support any concept that involves a dealership- Mr- Eastep made a motion to approve tit concept plan because the land uses are generally consistent with the Community Plan, and it completes a segment of Stoneridge Lane, with six conditions: 1) That the office lots (Subarea B) be reconfigured to a larger size; 2) That uses within Subarea B (adjacent to residential property) be limited to permitted uses within the SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District; 3) That the ODOT SR 161 widening plan be properly reflected on future clans. 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - January 20, 2000 Page 14 4) That architectural character and residential buffers be of high quality and be defined in the preliminary development plan; 5) That the service road construction commitment be determined at the preliminary development plan (rezoning) stage; and 6) That the applicant coordinate the preliminary stormwater management and the design of all public roads, private drives, and public and private utilities for the site with the City, prior to scheduling the rezoning on a future Planning Commission agenda_ Mr_ Harlan seconded, and the vote was as follows: Mr_ Fishman, no; Mr_ McCash, no; Mr_ Lecklider, no; Mr_ Sprague, no; Mr_ Peplow, yes; Mr_ Harlan, yes: and Mr_ Eastep, yes_ (Motion failed 3 -4_) 4_ RezZan - Composite Plan 99?/052Z - Z edevelopme Due to tcase was postponed_ ere was vote taken_ 5. FinPlan 99 -11 DP - Kendall Ri ums Due to case w stponed_ There no discussion or vot aken_ 6_ Code Amendmen 9 - 022ADM - Acc sory Structures and imming Pools Chad Gibson said t e was one minor ange to this ordinance he Commissioners formed Zcons idere - a dy after 11 o'cto Mr_ Gibson said Ci Council tabled this January 6, ys_ it relates ont to the size of a gara Mr_ McCash sai is should be is a brief item_ uested a aximum siz e restrict n for residential sto ge structures, includi s don me research on oche odes, and staff rec mends a maximum ar of 720 square feet_ is is about the area ne ed for athree -car ga Pe_ Regarding lay structure, it is a buildi permit_ " under thp code and dXees not require [ McCash asked abo igger garages for - -acre parcels or larger Ms_ Clarke said s requests would be h ed by Z ning Appeals as vanan s_ Mr_ Eastep ma a motion tode amendment and Mr_ Sp €ague s nded_ Mr_ Ha€ - an, yes r_ Fishman, yh, yes, Mr- Wider, yes; Mr- P low, yes; Mr- Sprague es; and Mr_ Eastep 7 -0_) 7_ Informal - Cod Amendment 99 -122A - Zappropriate Co SiX Ms_ Clarke said ere is strong interest in ennitti copy sioots, and some genera uidance from the Com is is r o €dinanafted; this was forty ded from City Council the Commiseral con expressed confi ce that the Commissio will handle this riate maommunity cCash said this could included in the gen e revisio s_ Clar(�C 06 -076Z Rezoning/Prel iminary Development Ptan Shamrock. Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION February 3, 2000 CITY (if DMIN _ &via" of rAMC 5 5800 -Rims toad Ddk Obis 43016 -1236 PhoajW -614 -161 -550 Fmc614- 7614566 WehSik_www.deb6 AkVS The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 1. Rezoning Application - Composite Plan 99 -052Z - David Road Redevelopment Location: 172 acres located on the north side of SR 161 between Shamrock Boulevard and Dublin Center Drive_ Existing Zoning: R -1, Restricted Suburban Residential District, and R-4, Suburban Residential District_ Request: Review and approval of a composite plan under the PCD provisions of Section 153-058- Proposed Use: Office and retail development_ Applicant: City of Dublin, c/o Timothy Hanley, 5200 Emerald Parkway, Dublin, Ohio 43017; for owners: James and Lois Harkness, 1820 Upper Valley Drive, West Jefferson, Ohio 43162; Lowe's Companies, Inc., P-0-Box 1111, North Wilkesboro, N-C_ 28656 -0001; Ima Moore, 7055 Shier -Rings Road; Dublin, Ohio 43016: Linda Ann Berg, 5709 West Alexandria Road, Middletown, Ohio 45042; Samuel Pierce, 7356 MacBeth Drive, Dublin, Ohio 43017; Kenneth and Donnabelle Scott, P.0-Box 191,, Dublin, Ohio 43017; Charles Warner and Edward Belz, 5900 Sawmill Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017; Mary Warner, 6595 David Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017; and Jack K_ Vogel, 1098 East State Street, Salem, Ohio 44460_ MOTION_ To table this composite plan_ VOTE: 5 -2_ RESULT: After discussion regarding the elimination of a number of permitted and conditional uses, requiring a higher percentage brick or stone on the facade, and requesting the removal of the fence surrounding the Lowe's detention pond, this application was tabled. NOTE: Fred Vogel, representing Jack K_ Vogel, requested that his parcel be excluded from this application_ STAFF CERTIFICATION Chad Gibson Planner 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 3, 2000 Page 2 McCash, e/ved yes; Mr. Easte , yes; Mr Peplo , yes_ ) Sprague al of the Ian ry 6, 2000 minund the vote_ Mr_ Ha an, yes; Mr_ Fis Mr_ LecklidEastep, es; Mr. Peplow yes (Approved 7 yes; and Mr. Mr_ Peplow sec nded, an, yes; Mr_ Mc96h, yes; and Mr_ SDAgue, yes. Chris C , representing th applicant, request tabling oyCase Mr_ Eas/made a mo t n to table, and _Fishman second The vote lows: Mrelhmman, r_ McCash, yes r_ Lecklider, y Mr_ Sprague, Peplow, yes; and Eastep, yes_ (Ap ptoved 7 -0_) The Board disc ssed the order of a agenda_ Mr_ Lyklider announced at the order of the cases ould be 2, 1, 4, b , and then Case 7 (The minutes re ct the order of the public agenda, not the der in which the c ses were heard_) 1. Rezoning Application - Composite Plan " -052Z - David Road Redevelopment Chad Gibson presented this rezoning application for 17.2 acres on the. north side of SR 161 from R -1 and R-4, Residential Districts, to PCD, Planned Commerce District_ He said the City is a co-applicant with the landowners_ Mr_ Gibson said staff has been directed by City Council to assist in finding a development solution for David Road_. There have been many meetings between staff and the residents over several years_ Staffs goal is to facilitate redevelopment in order to help the residents wishing to relocate, to do so_ Schmidt Land Design has been hired to help with design elements. He showed several slides of the area_ He said four houses on the east side of David Road had been demolished for the Lowe's detention basin and the extension of Banker Drive to the west to Banker Drive_ He noted that American Electric Power located. a substation to the north on a site comprised of six former homes. Mr_ Gibson said only six of the original homes still remain_ This application also includes two parcels totaling 11 acres to the west of the David Road subdivision. Mr_ Gibson said the site is to be divided into four subareas: Subarea A (Harkness property on SR 161); Subarea B (Pierce, Scott, and the southern part of the Warner, Belz and Vogel properties); Subarea C (north of Banker Drive extension) with office and retail uses; and Subarea D ( Lowe's detention pond). When SR 161 is widened later this year, access to this site will be limited to right- in/right -out from David Road, but Dublin Center Drive and Shamrock Boulevard will be signalized_ Mr_ Gibson said the Schnell property is not part of this application at her request- 06-076Z Rezoning/Prehminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 3, 2000 Page 3 Permitted uses in the text include office, retail, institutional, hotel, fitness center, health care, restaurant, and stormwater facilities_ Conditional uses include auto dealerships, drive -thru uses, car washes, gas stations., and temporary commercial reuse of existing homes. The proposed maximum lot coverage is 65 percent, and the density is 10,000 square feet per acre_ The maximum signage height permitted is six feet with a 50 square foot maximum area_ No wall signs are permitted_ The architectural section of the text emphasizes brick and stone, especially along SR 161 where there is a 75 percent requirement_ The remaining three facades are to be 50 percent brick or stone_ Mr- Gibson said staff appreciates the patience of the owners during this long process_ He said staff supports this application with two conditions: 1) That consideration of regional stormwater retention be explored; and 2) That right -of -way for Shamrock Boulevard and Village Parkway be dedicated to the City at the time of redevelopment or applicable road construction, whichever Gary Schmidt, Schmidt Landscape Design, said this is an opportunity for Dublin to create a redevelopment plan to facilitate the successful commercial rezoning. This area is amid buitt -out commercial_ Due to the area activity, this is a good time to rezone_ Mr_ Schmidt said the plan goats were flexibility, so the land can be developed privately, identity, and sensitivity to the remaining residents_ He said it is difficult to envision exactly how the transition from residential to commercial will be made_ Mr_ Eastep asked why the brick was dropped to 50 percent some areas_ He said the Commission strives for 70 -75 percent masonry for commercial uses_ Mr_ Gibson said this should be a high quality development, and also be attractive to a developer. Mr_ McCash said Wendy's and Lowe's are all brick, and this should be consistent_ He said Stoneridge was all stone - with cedar siding on the back elevation_ Ms. Clarke noted the Lexus dealership and Gordon Foods were predominately stucco_ Mr_ Eastep asked why Lowe's detention pond is in this rezoning_ Mr_ Gibson said it retains the R -1 zoning_ Mr_ Eastep said the fence around Lowe's detention pond is unattractive_ He noted the Commission had not approved it and asked for the fence to be removed. Mr_ Gibson said it was a liability issue for Lowe's, and it was handled administratively_ . The original request was for a tall chain link fence, and this was the compromise design. Mr_ McCash and Mr_ Eastep noted there are unfenced detention ponds in parks and play areas_ Mr_ Eastep said fences should not be permitted around detention ponds_ Mr_ Fishman suggested a condition requiring its removal_ Ms. Clarke said this rezoning. was initiated by staff_ The Lowe's site is included because it fronts on David 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 3, 2000 Page 4 Road_ Lowe's does not need the rezoning for its stormwater facilities_ Staff would like to clean up the zoning to indicate that it is no longer residential property_ Regarding the fence, she thought the property owner was entitled to be reimbursed for expenses_ Mr. Banchefsky said the fence has no connection with this rezoning_ He said staff could explore having the fence removed_ He said the Law Director's office had several issues they were sorting out with Lowe's and it will look into the fence_ He said Lowe's was a co- applicant in this .rezoning only because Dublin so requested. He did not think it was appropriate, as part of the rezoning, to address the pond fence issue_ Mr_ Lecklider also expressed dissatisfaction with the fence_ Mr_ Eastep asked that there be some kind of venue to remove the fence_ Mr_ Eastep asked why the pond was not rezoned with Lowe's in the beginning_ Ms. Clarke said Lowe's did not need the David Road parcels, and the original design showed the detention on the CC area. Dublin had road issues to resolve with the straightening and extension of Village Parkway, and Dublin needed to move things around_ Staff encouraged Lowe's to acquire more property behind the building_ Mr_ Lecklider said Lowe's, after the Commission's approval, had come back for sign and setback variances, and-he recollected that the discussion in the Lowe's project was to make sure that the building was designed so that no variances were needed_ He was not sympathetic to Lowe's at this point_ Mr_ Peplow thought the density should be around 8,500 square feet per acre, not 10,000, because of traffic studies_ Mr_ Gibson said the Community Plan indicated this site should be mixed use with employment emphasis. Density was based upon the Community Plan testing_ Ms_ Clarke said the Community .Plan assumed that this would be an extension of Dublin Village Center (a huge retail component), and that the retail component on the south side was much smaller with a lower density_ Mr_ Peplow noted the text says that "ground signs are encouraged," but wail signs are not permitted_ Mr_ Peplow asked about the two -year maximum temporary re-use of existing homes being renewed_ Mr_ Gibson said this requires permission of the Commission_ Mr_ Sprague was not in favor of auto, motorcycle, equipment sales or services, gas sales, car washes, commercial re -use of existing homes, or hotel /motel uses_ Mr_ Lecklider and Mr_ Harlan agreed_ Mr_ Harlan said asked if a 90,000 square foot building could be built in Subarea C_ Mr_ Gibson said yes_ Mr. McCash said cross parking in Subarea B would be permitted 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development PIan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - February 3, 2000 Page 5 as the text is written with a big box in Subarea C_ Mr_ Harian was concerned about a big box use in Subarea C_ Mr_ Gibson said that could be added to the excluded column_ Mr_ Harian suggested not excluding retail in Subarea C, but controlling size_ Mr. L.ecklider preferred excluding it_ Mr. McCash opposed large size retail uses stretching from Sawmill Road toward Riverside Drive_ Mr. Fishman agreed. Mr_ Eastep tatted the high vacancies at Dublin Village Center and Village Square and empty big box stores. Mr_ Fishman could not support the conditional uses, especially the commercial re -use of the homes. Any retail should be the high -end type, and no big boxes_ Restaurants should not be fast -food type: Mr_ Gibson said drive -thrus would be conditional uses_ Mr_ Fishman did not want to see any drive- thrus_ Banks and dry cleaners were uses that several Commissioners thought might be appropriate for drive -thru facilities_ Mr. Schmidt doubted a Circuit City type of retailer with parking would fit on Subarea C. Mr_ Fishman said Subarea C should be high -end office use. Mr_ McCash said Subarea C could easily be worked into small lots for offices_ Mr_ Schmidt said that is permitted under the text, but the text provides more options_ His goal is to create a redevelopment that has some incentives for a private developer to assemble this land_ Mr_ McCash said the Commission was willing to provide some flexibility, but this request is too broad_ Rezoning the land to office use increases its value_ He said if someone comes in and wants retail uses, then a rezoning can be submitted at that time_ Mr_ Sprague said the SR 161 widening will make the land much more valuable_ Mr_ Fishman said the best use was for nice- looking offices_ There will be a median strip and limited turns_ It is a gateway corridor into Dublin and not appropriate for car lots_ Mr_ McCash said he could see restaurant uses in Subareas A and B, and perhaps some small scale retail_ Mr_ Schmidt said retail use is needed at least as a conditional use_ Mr_ McCash said the majority of Subarea C is now empty_ There is no demolition cost_ Mr_ McCash said Subarea B had four property owners_ He asked what written agreement had been made by the co- owners to buy land_ Mr. Schmidt said the road extension was partly designed to help force the issue, but there was nothing forcing the owners to cooperate_ Mr. McCash asked about the Schnell property which is not being rezoned_ It is too small for an office and it is hidden away from the road_ He did not want to see it become like the boarded house on Sawmill Road_ Mr. Gibson said staff wanted to include the Schnell property in this application. Their lawyer submitted a written 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin- Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 3, 2000 Page 6 request that the Schnell property be exempted from this rezoning application_ The Schnells have attended most of the meetings throughout the process. Mr_ McCash said if it is excluded, its property value will diminish greatly_ Ms_ Clarke said staff hoped this would be an application for the entire neighborhood. Residents were surveyed on their individual desires_ She said there has been talk about redevelopment of David Road for over ten years_ The AEP and Lowe's projects solved the redevelopment problem for the most difficult, recessed land. There is no doubt that the land along SR 161 has retail value; the issue was always the lots without exposure_ Ms_ Clarke said staff had talked to Mrs. Schnell and her sons many times. Mrs. Schnell wants to live there and for rest of the houses to stay, but she has decided not to oppose her neighbors who want to leave_ The goal has been to reach a consensus for the neighborhood, and to assist those who wanted to relocate_ It was not to force this plan upon anyone_ Staff believes that parcel will ultimately be commercial property. Mr_ McCash said the Schnell lot is not viable for development on its own. Ms. Clarke said the vacant land farther to the west is a lower priority_ Staff thinks the David Road neighborhood is a problem as it sits because the residents say it is_ Ms. Clarke asked the Commission to eliminate objectionable uses and to take a vote_ Mr_ Lecklider asked why the building setback on Banker Drive is 65 feet and the setback on SR 161 is just 56 feet_ Mr. Gibson said the intent is to keep most of the parking along Banker Drive with the buildings closer to the road_ Mc Schmidt said Bankers Drive is proposed as a private road, with setbacks measured from street centerline_ The goal was to "max -out" the back of the property along Bankers Drive and get the buildings up to SR 161 _ Mr. Lecklider said he liked that idea_ Mr_ McCash said retail use needs parking in the front. Mr. Schmidt said low -end retail will not go there because of the text standards. Mr. McCash said a 6,000 square foot retail use could go in Subareas A or B and have parking in the front_ Mr_ Schmidt said the standards preclude that. Virgil Schnell, 839 Liverpool Place, Westerville, thanked Dublin for installing a street light at the end of his mother's street. His mother, who is 85, is very attached to the house which his father built in 1955_ He said sentiment is the issue, not the money_ Fred Vogel, for Jack Vogel, who owns the five -acre parcel at the west end, said he attended all the meetings_ He has not discussed the staff report with Mr_ Gibson_ He said several things were never discussed that negatively impact their rear 26 acres_ He 06 -076Z Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 3, 2000 Page 7 said staff denied several scenarios on their property_ He said the densities are set too low and will destroy the economics_ The density should be at least 12,000 square feet per acre to meet the architectural requirements_ He believed David Road should disappear and the rezoning is positive. The requirement for the right -of -way to extend Shamrock Drive and Village Parkway will have a negative impact - There will not be much of their five -acre property left_ His attorney advised trim to state his objections. Mr_ Vogel said the roads and park around his northern 26 acres nearly constitute a taking_ Mr_ McCash noted the Vogel 26 acres is not in this rezoning_ Mr_ Vogel agreed, but he disagrees with the densities and dedication of the rights-of-way. The planned road system is the problem_ He wants to oppose the rezoning_, Mr. Banchefsky asked if Mr. Vogel wanted to withdraw from the rezoning. He said yes_ Mr_ Gibson suggested a review of the permitted conditional uses_ He said Mr. Vogel's withdrawal did not change the goal_ Mr. McCash said this could change the roads_ Ms_ Clarke disagreed, the road structure is in the Thoroughfare Plan and is necessary as advised by Dublin's consultant on this plan_ If Mr_ Vogel withdraws, Dublin may need to participate at a higher level in order for everyone to get left turns_ Mr_ Fishman suggested tabling this application after the Commission eliminates some of the uses_ He said permitted uses t, 2, 3, and 4, as a conditional use for Subarea C would be okay. He wanted to eliminate all the other uses except stortnwater. He wanted use 5 to be conditional also. He wanted to get rid of all the other conditional uses_ Mr- Fishman did not want any drive- thrus, ever, except for banks_ Mr_ Eastep said outdoor display or seating for a sit down restaurant should be a conditional use_ He said use 5 should still maintain "retail commercial, financial services, full service restaurants (no drive- thrus). Conditional uses might include drive -thru commercial uses (except restaurants), outdoor display and seating. Mr_ Fishman agreed and said all remaining conditional uses for auto, gasoline, car washes, and the commercial reuse of houses should be eliminated_ Mr_ Harian could support a transitional two years to use the existing structures commercially without any expansion_ Mr_ Lecklider said this temporary use could be continued over an extended period of time_ Ms_ Clarke said that could happen_ She said the real key to a time limit was making sure no more money is invested into the site: no expansion, no improvements, and keeping parking to an absolute minimum_ The more money invested, the less likely it is that the house will ever be razed_ She thought that was the mistake made on Sawmill 06 -0762 Rezomng/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 3, 2000 Page 8 Road, and one building was permitted to expand several times. It is now so valuable as a converted house and it may never be razed_ Mr- Eastep said meeting the Building Code to convert a house is not cost - effective_ Mr_ McCash disagreed and thought a variance would be granted for a hardship. Mr- Sprague suggested commercial reuse of a residence be made a permitted use, limited to two years only_ Mr_ McCash said regarding storm water, it is shown on the Vogel property- Mr- Gibson said Condition 1 addresses this_ Mr. McCash did not think this wilt work with individual owners; one ownership is needed. Mr_ Schmidt agreed, but said it will need to be assembled in the future_ Rezoning speeds up the process as requested. Ms_ Clarke said 12 years ago, the David Road neighbors, without Dublin's assistance, had their neighborhood packaged together for a car dealership. In the end, the deal fell apart_ Since then, the problem is being solved a little at a time_ She said the zoning will create value and widen the arena of developers who might be interested in it_ Mr- Fishman made a motion to table this rezoning app li ca ti on /composite plan, and Mr. Eastep seconded_ The vote was as follows: Mr_ Sprague, no; Mr_ Harlan, yes; Mr_ McCash, no; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr_ Lecklider, yes; Mr_ Eastep, yes; and Mr. Fishman, yes. (Tabled 5 -2.) Mr- Lecktider called a five- minute recess_ InmWa ction Development P 99- 118FDP - endall Ridge Co dominiXtape entino present this final deve pment plan_ ere was ording during t staff and apptic t presentations this case_ ding is most of t e questions toThe ext few parave been from st ff notes-] Mr- Talenti said this site co tains 8.2 acres o the west side of Avery Road and / zoned PU The proposal is a condominiu development o 22 units. The tan includes' itwo- family d Clings. There i also a 7,500 sq re foot office Wing along a frontage_ Th e is a detention rea set aside bet een the office a condo are _ He showed sev at slides of the s a and adjacent ar e said the entry road is called T swell Drive_ T e condo buildin are laid out around a 0.5 a e open space serve" _ The s them side of it nctudes Kendall Ridge Drive - he plan for the r serve shows it - g steeply mou d_ 06 -076Z Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Shamrock Crossing West Dublin - Granville Road S CROSSING act 4L i s '' � _` I N At L__j 411 (7 Ili of lot 7�k t 49& AO A. -Z ", I o" *17, 12 A Its, , r 7j 11160 o f tee 1#0 " , 1;6 I I QJ Jt�a i s '' � _` I N At L__j 411 (7 Ili of lot 7�k t 49& AO A. -Z ", I o" *17, 12 A Its, , r SHAMROCK CROSSING Preliminary Development Plan Prepared for: Shamrock Crossing, LLC. December 29, 2006 SHAMROCK CROSSING TEAM TABLE OF CONTENTS Stavroff 565 Metro Place South - Suite 480 Dublin, Ohio 43017 www,stavroff.com Smith and Hale 37 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43215 614.221.4255 The EDGE Group 1400 Goodale Boulevard - Suite 100 Columbus, Ohio 43212 www.edgela.com Brian Kent Jones Architects 150 East Broad Street - Suite 600 Columbus, Ohio 43215 614.358.3729 E.M.H. &T., Inc. 5500 New Albany Road Columbus, Ohio 4.3054 www.emht.com PWK Design 6371 Riverside Drive- Suite 130 Dublin, Oh. 43017 www.pwkdesign.com Section I - Executive Summary Project Overview ............................... ............................... 1 Section II - The Site LocationMap .................................... ..............................2 Aerial Photograph .............................. ..............................3 Section III- The Plan Illustrative Preliminary Plan .............. ..............................4 SubareaPlan ..................................... ..............................5 Architecture Renderings .................... ............................... 6 -8 Section IV - The Development Text Development Text .............................................. .- ............. 9 -40 Development Text Exhibits ................ ............................... 41 -48 Section V - The Exhibits Germain Alternative Layout .................. ............................E -1 Engineering Set Conceptual Site Plan ...................... ............................E -2 Conceptual Site Plan (Area with in 500 ft) ................... E -3 Sanitary Sewer Analysis .................. ............................E -4 Stormwater Management Plan ......... ............................E -5 Conceptual Site Grading & Utility Plan ....................... E -6 Tree Survey (1 of 2) ........................ ............................E -7 Tree Survey (2 of 2) .......................... ............................E -8 TreeSurvey ..... ............................... ............................E -9 Ford & Associates 1500 W 1st Ave Columbus, OH 43212 www.fordarchitects.com Section I Executive Summary PROJECT OVERVIEW Genus Loci a term embraced by planners and architects to describe the distinctive atmosphere or pervading spirit of a place. Intuitively people are aware that sites and places are never simply locations but have a certain spirit and character based on local culture , history and design. People often describe a place in terms of its sense of identity or how it makes them feel. In the 1997 Dublin Community Plan the Tuller Road Area was cited as lacking its Genus loci. In response, the Community Plan went on to make specific recommendations that would help the Tuller Road Area create a stronger sense of place. They included the following: • Use future road improvements to create a focal point Dublin and recent development projects approved in the Area. 6. Strengthening the north south visual and physical linkages to the original focal point of the Tuller Road Plan. Ultimately, a ease of place'(Genus Lod) makes a area special, unique and s memo rable. Through high quality architecture, planning and landscape design and the completion ofthe necessary physical and visual linkages in the area, Shamrock Crossing will help define the Genus Lod for the Tuller Road Area and will lay a framework of excellence for future development along the corridor. • Terminate views with buildings and orient buildings to the steet; • Create linkages (both physical and visual) between uses; • Minimize the number of rear elevations that front onto significant streets • Create internal relationship among buildings where relationships to the street are not feasible Conceptual plans created for this portion of the Community Plan indicated a very dynamic focal point west of the existing Dublin Village Center . While the development ultimately approved for this area (Dublin Village) conforms to the relative prescriptions of the Community Plan its overall reduction of size from that shown in the Community Plan and the subsequent relocation of Village Parkway, which eliminated the strong north south ax s to West Dublin Granville Road resulted in no real focal point for the Tuner Road Area However, recently approved projects in the area have begun to create an architectural vernacular that ties to Historic Dublin and a development pattern that compliments existing development. Our Shamrock Crossing proposal not only continues this area development but strengthens character and identity, thus creating a Genus Loa for the Tuner Road Area The Shamrock Crossing proposal creates sense of place by: 1 Incorporating strong architecture and landscape design at the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublk Granville Road, so that the intersection becomes the -focal point for the Area and the new western gateway into th City of Dublin 2 Orienting memorable architecture and buildings closer t r oadways with a majority of parking to the at to evok the experience of a market or village at the crest of a hill 3 Integrating enhanced plantings along West Dubl Granville to tie disparate roadway sections together, 4. Finalizing the roadway linkages of Shamrock Boulevard with Village Parkway as well as ompleting the final connection of Stoneriage Lane to link the area together 6. Providing a village character that ties to both Historic J. u u I s a I e I =_ • i l ' _ \ SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prcparoa for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 1 SHAMROCK CROSSING Section II The Site LOCATION MAP SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. ` ::. } � 6 .4 � ! + J :1 / •.�._. f= Vii. �:. d VL 1. E S IWO ifca -41.i ►`. SHAMROCK CROSSING Section III The Plan ILLUSTRATIVE PRELIMINARY PLAN PARKING I I l i I I I BUILDING ENVELOPE - -I �Ia L _ 1 I s s au,gn„�� s.mw 1 e I 1 � 1 i — —� -- SIDEWALKS / BIKEPATH BUILDING ENVELOPE PARKING ENVELOPE 1 \ 1 � — L --- 1 i - - -- BUILDING rl ' I I I I I i f II II 1 - - 1 -- I 1 JI I 1 ll ��� Ilia h i I i t W I Is I � I .I I c II I I L L -J L_ _� ----- - - - - -- - - - - I I I l I I II I I I I I� -- / _1 I / / I I L I I III I I r I I I y EX. DAVID RD I_ L__� r - - -- i - - -J L______ - __ r I I I I I i I - LL -�7— ----- - - - - -- -------- ______� I II I I I I T — I I I 1— � I I r I I I BUILDING ENVELOPE SPARKING ENVELOPE BUILDING ENVELOPE 1 I PARKING ENVELOPE I I I I , FUTURE SUBAREAD PARKING r. PLEASE SEE DEVELOPMENT i"u EXHIBIT C I I I GRAPHIC SCALE I I I I 1 n ll L SHAMROCK CROSSING 0 Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 4 SUBAREA PLAN — } L PINES HOLDINGS LTD I Ig :N. 1999 06090147221 N P/D.• 27-T-008297 NA 7701VAL CHURCH I I I PHELE /NVESTIUENT P /D: 273 - 009090 LN. 200402270042396 P/D.- 273 - 008296 11ENDYS INTERNA770NAL, INC. IN fOOR11 11-- SHAMROCK BL VD DA M RD O O C FAM 11 vp On N. 200 /.N. 200 3071702, 21 B0 4T C/OTIXA FAMILY LIM17FD P /O: 273 - 008872 I PAR7NERSH /P 11 V 20 0310080324151 - - _ - P /D: 273 - 008280 TALL PINES HOLDINGS L 7 = q NQ37T292' X7 /.N. 199906090147220 H 2 73 - 008265 fi t! C PINES 60901472 1 5 I p N. � p :n 0 4, A' 3 � , 27309014726 P /O.� 273 - 008302 I � Sub —Area / 1.6 Ac. y 0 : Z! , � ES HOLDINGS L7D I c r 50374;30 W 20550' 1 090147217 273 273- 00830, — — — SHAMROCK BL VD %NES HOLDINGS LTD 1999 06090147218 V. 273 Cl NO374302' - 008300 35@34• 9LL PINES HOLDI L 7D /.N. 1999060 147 79 - -- P10. 273 - 008299 08299 2 # ILL PINES HOLDI 7D LN. g — )9990609011 47222 11 PID: 273 - 008298 I Sub —Area B' 4.0 Ac. } L PINES HOLDINGS LTD I Ig :N. 1999 06090147221 N P/D.• 27-T-008297 NA 7701VAL CHURCH I I I PHELE /NVESTIUENT P /D: 273 - 009090 LN. 200402270042396 P/D.- 273 - 008296 11ENDYS INTERNA770NAL, INC. IN fOOR11 11-- SHAMROCK BL VD DA M RD - I I SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 5 O O bt vp On w� 4T M A �^ - I I SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 5 ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS 11. II , VL Streetscape looking north from Dublin- Granville Road. �i i Streetscape looking south from Dublin- Granville Road. . c Ttr Streetscape looking south from Dublin - Granville Road. Streetscape looking north from Stoneridge L W E SHAMROCK CROSSING 0 Prepared for Shamrock crossing, LLC. 6 Streetscape looking east from Shamrock Boulevard. ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS A A s. 1 ' .. .�. Perspective view looking southeast. SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 7 ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS A lt W. -'- 7 RII iiN %� IIE4Er[4E N'Ti J OKRA 1 �- {� w0t M M � Lr— as r ® o T / W . . _ " m � ,.+, �✓ Perspective view looking noutheast. a S.ti. LM ri O SHAMROCK CROSSING 0 Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 8 SHAMROCK CROSSING Section IV The Development Text DEVELOPMENT TEXT SHAMROCK CROSSING Development Text December 18, 2006 General Overview Shamrock Crossing is a mixed -use development containing approximately 18f acres. The focus of the project will be to provide highly functional and aesthetically pleasing office, retail, and service- oriented development along the West Dublin - Granville Road Corridor. The development is intended to compliment the existing and future planned uses along West Dublin - Granville Road between Sawmill Road and Riverside Drive and shall consist of high quality design, materials, lighting, and signage which will reinforce the nature and sense of place of the development. Basic development standards are compiled regarding proposed density, site issues, traffic, circulation, landscaping and architectural standards to ensure consistency and quality throughout the development. There will be four subareas: Subarea `A' containing 1.6f acres, Subarea `B' containing 4.0± acres, Subarea `C' containing 3.8f acres, and Subarea `D' containing 8.6f acres (See Exhibit A). The subareas, although different in their uses, will all share a common architectural theme that evokes the character of traditional Irish towns. Apreliminary development plan is attached to give the general development patterns that may emerge as part of the final development (See Exhibit B). SUBAREA A Subarea A is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Sharp Lane and Shamrock Boulevard. It consists of 1.6f acres. L Permitted Uses: a. The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea A: Jewelry stores Hardware stores Grocery stores Meat and fish (sea food) markets Fruit stores and vegetable markets Candy, nut and confectionery stores Dairy products stores Retail bakeries Miscellaneous food stores Drug stores and proprietary stores Florists Eating and drinking places Beauty shops SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. DEVELOPMENT TEXT Barber shops Shoe repair shops, shoe shine parlors and hat cleaning shops Pressing, alteration and garment repair Commercial and stock savings banks Credit agencies other than banks Personal credit institutions Insurance agents, brokers and service Real estate agents, brokers and managers Combinations of real estate, insurance, loans, law offices Offices of physicians and surgeons Offices of dentists and dental surgeons Offices of osteopathic physicians Offices of chiropractors Legal services Department stores Mail order houses Limited price variety stores Miscellaneous general merchandise stores Men's and boys' clothing and furnishings stores Women's accessory and specialty stores Women's ready -to -wear stores Children's and infants' wear stores Family clothing stores Shoe stores Custom tailors Furriers and fur shops Miscellaneous apparel and accessory stores Furniture, home furnishings and equipment stores Household appliance stores Radio, television and music stores Antique stores and secondhand stores Book and stationery stores Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops Cigar stores and stands Dews dealers and news stands Camera and photographic supply stores Gift, novelty and souvenir shops Optical goods stores Miscellaneous retail stores, not elsewhere classified Mutual savings banks Trust companies not engaged in deposit banking Establishments performing functions closely related to banking Savings and loan associations Agricultural credit institutions SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 10 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Business credit institutions Loan correspondents and brokers Holding companies Investment companies Trusts Rediscount and financing institutions for credit agencies other than banks Security brokers, dealers and flotation companies Commodity contracts brokers and dealers Security and commodity exchanges Services allied with the exchange of securities or commodities Miscellaneous investing institutions Services (professional) not elsewhere classified Life insurance Accident and health insurance Fire, marine and casualty insurance Surety insurance Title insurance Insurance carriers not elsewhere classified Real estate operators (except developers) and lessors Agents, brokers and managers Title abstract companies Subdividers and developers Operative builders Advertising Duplicating, addressing, blueprinting, photocopying, mailing, mailing list, and stenographic services Services to dwellings and other buildings Business services not elsewhere classified Electrical repair shops Watch, clock and jewelry repair Reupholstery and furniture repair Miscellaneous repair shops and related services Medical and dental laboratories Health and allied services not elsewhere classified Engineering and architectural services Accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services Photographic studios, including commercial photography Funeral service Miscellaneous personal services Consumer credit reporting agencies, mercantile reporting agencies, and adjustment and collecting agencies Dews syndicates Private employment Elementary and secondary schools SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 11 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Libraries Museums and art galleries Religious organizations Business associations Professional membership organizations Labor unions and similar labor organizations Civic, social and fraternal associations Political organizations Charitable organizations Nonprofit membership organizations, not elsewhere classified b. For purposes of clarification, in addition to any other use not listed as a permitted use in this subarea, the following uses shall not be permitted anywhere within Subarea A: (1) auto service (2) auto repair (3) gas stations (4) tire and /or automobile battery stores (5) muffler or brake shops (6) automobile dealers (7) lumber and other building materials dealers (8) heating and plumbing equipment dealers (9) electrical supply stores (10) farm equipment stores (11) sexually oriented business establishments c. The following uses shall be allowed as conditional uses in Subarea A, provided that they are approved in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 153.236(C): (1) Exterior commercial dining patios in association with a permitted use. IL Density: Subarea A shall contain one (1) building that shall not exceed twelve thousand (12,000) square feet of gross floor area, to be distributed as set forth in the Final Development Plan for this subarea. Additional square footage shall be permitted for exterior patios to the extent that parking for these uses can be accommodated within this subarea. III. Yard and Setback Requirements: a. Building and pavement setbacks from adjacent rights -of -way shall be as follows: 1. Sharp Lane: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback often (10) feet from Sharp Lane. SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 12 DEVELOPMENT TEXT 2. Stoneridge Lane: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of fifteen (15) feet from Stoneridge Lane. 3. Shamrock Boulevard: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of twenty (20) feet from Shamrock Boulevard. b. There shall be aminimum setback from the western boundary line of Subarea A equal to fifteen (15) feet for pavement and buildings. In the event that a property owner within Subarea A enters into a cross access and /or joint parking agreement with the owner of the property located immediately to the west, then there shall be no minimum pavement setback from the western boundary line of this subarea. Owners of property within Subarea A shall use commercially reasonable efforts to reach an agreement on cross access with the owner of this adjacent property in the event of its future development /redevelopment. IV. Parking and Loading: Size, ratio, and type of parking and loading facilities shall be regulated by Dublin Code Chapter 153.200, et seq. V. Lighting: Lighting shall comply with the City of Dublin exterior lighting guidelines and shall utilize decorative light fixtures with pole heights not greater than twenty -eight (28) feet from grade of the parking lot. Painted concrete bases shall be utilized and shall be at least six (6) inches in height above finished grade. VI. Circulation: Circulation within Subarea A and access to and from adjacent publicly - dedicated streets shall be via Shamrock Boulevard to the east and from Stoneridge Lane to the south, as depicted on the attached Preliminary Development Plan. Vehicular access between Subarea A and Shamrock Boulevard shall be limited to "right -in" only turn movements. VII. Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be contained and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code. VIII. Fences: Fencing shall be permitted in accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Code as approved as a part of the Final Development Plan. IX. Storage and Equipment: SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 13 DEVELOPMENT TEXT No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of aparcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground, or buildings shall be screened from public view unless prohibited by a public utility, using landscaping and/or materials that are harmonious with the building as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code. X. Landscaping / Patios: a. All landscaping shall meet the minimum requirements set forth in the City of Dublin Zoning Code. An illustrative landscape exhibit is included as part of this text (Exhibit C) to describe the gateway landscape concept at the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin - Granville Road. This concept incorporates a series of plantings in a "four- corners" manner that is representative of avillage or market center of atown. This planting scheme includes avariety of deciduous and evergreen shrubs as well as deciduous trees. Entry features consisting of walls and gate features made of natural materials will be incorporated at corners of the intersection to coordinate with the proposed architecture. Walkways are also proposed from the intersection to the adjacent proposed development to access adjacent patio areas. As proposed, this concept may require a right -of- way and minimum setback encroachment for West Dublin - Granville Road for the proposed entry features. This text is intended to serve as a request for such encroachment. Maintenance easements will be executed to maintain the signage, landscaping, and entry features within the right -of -way. A landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for this subarea Landscaping shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. b. Exterior patios shall be encouraged when practicable along Sharp Lane, Shamrock Boulevard, and Stoneridge Lane. These patios shall be allowed in addition to the permitted square footage in this subarea, provided that the developer of such a use shall be required to meet the associated parking requirements for that use within Subarea A. XL Architecture a. The architectural design of all buildings within Subarea A shall be traditional in look and feel and shall establish proper relationships between the buildings in this subarea and adjacent developments. Architecture shall be of a high quality with a consistent look and feel that fits with the architectural character of the PUD. The attached Exhibit D illustrates the architectural design standards. The final architecture for this subarea shall be similar in form and look to that which is illustrated in Exhibit F. b. The maximum building height may not exceed thirty -five (35) feet. c. All exterior colors shall be selected from a historic color palette. d. Permitted exterior materials in Subarea A shall include brick, stone /synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, stucco /synthetic stucco, and engineered wood composite material (e.g. Hardi -plank or Smartside siding and trim), or any combination thereof. Exterior finish SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 14 DEVELOPMENT TEXT materials must be used to complete massing elements. The application of brick or stone veneer to a single building fagade shall be prohibited. e. Roofs: 1. A material portion of all buildings shall have a pitched or sloped roof (whether hipped or gabled, full or appropriately affixed to a parapet wall). Roofs may provide open areas to house and permit the functionality of mechanical and other typical rooftop equipment. Parapet walls shall be encouraged to screen mechanical units and shall be consistent with the overall architectural theme. 2. All structures shall contain roofing material consisting of dimensional asphalt shingles, cedar shakes or shingles, prefinished standing seam metal, or slate (whether synthetic or authentic slate), all of which shall be in a color and style that are complimentary to and/or compatible with the neighboring buildings. 3. The use of dormers, vertical vents, and other architectural treatments is encouraged. f Wall Articulation / Fenestration: 1. Individual walls must be articulated with fenestration, pattern, or structural expression equally on all sides of each structure. 2. With the exception of enclosed service corridors, all buildings shall generally have a similar degree of exterior finish on all sides. Other than for necessary service areas, blank facades on the rear of any building shall not be permitted, but the articulation of such facades with recesses, fenestration, fences, pilasters, etc. shall be encouraged. 3. The amount of fenestration should be balanced with the amount of solid fagade. XIL Signage and Graphics: a. Unless otherwise detailed hereinafter, all signage shall comply with the City of Dublin Sign Code — Sections 153.150, et seq. In the event of a conflict between the City of Dublin Sign Code and this text, this text shall control. b. A signage and graphics plan with exhibits conforming to these guidelines shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for each subarea. All signage shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. c. Location and Type: SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 15 DEVELOPMENT TEXT 1. Signage on public street frontage in Subarea A shall be limited to either (A) ground- mounted signage in accordance with this text, or (B) wall signage on each of these frontages in accordance with this text. 2. If ground signs are utilized, then one such sign may be permitted within the right -of -way along West Dublin - Granville Road only if it is approved by City Council in a separate action in accordance with Section 153.050, et seq. of the City of Dublin Zoning Code. If such a request is approved, then the approved sign shall be counted when evaluating conformance with the sign requirements of this text. Otherwise, ground signs shall be permitted in locations that conform with the City of Dublin Sign Code. d. Building/Tenant Signs - Wall Signage: Wall signs, when utilized, shall be subject to the following requirements: 1. Each tenant shall be permitted one (1) wall sign on its storefront, which shall be defined as that fagade which faces a public right -of -way or private drive. Each wall sign plaque shall be 2' -6" in height and Win width so that the total area of each wall sign plaque is 40 square feet and consistent in size. An illustrative building wall plaque sign exhibit is included as part of this text (Exhibit E). 2. One (1) wall sign shall be permitted at each tenant's parking area (rear) entrance for purposes of identifying the tenant or user. Each tenant's rear wall sign plaque shall be 2' -0" in height and 12'in width so that the total area of each rear wall sign plaque is 24 square feet. 3. All wall signage shall be located on a standard wall plaque of a consistent size and profile and shall be constructed of high - density urethane plaques that are rectangular in shape with a three -inch radius quarter round at each corner. Each sign plaque shall have a raised border and raised text. Plaques shall be mounted three eights of one inch (3/8 ") off the face of the exterior wall to permit drainage. 4. Atotal of three (3) sign plaque colors shall be permitted. Plaque colors shall be low- chroma, subdued colors. 5. Text on the plaques shall be limited to white, black, or gold lettering. Scheduled copy height shall be 20 ", except the maximum height of the upper case letters at the beginning of each word(s) may be 22 ". All lettering is to be centered in relation to height and width of the plaque. 6. All wall mounted signs shall be externally illuminated using the same or similar gooseneck light fixtures throughout the subarea. 7. All wall mounted signs shall be integrated into the building facades in order to compliment the architectural character of the building. SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 16 DEVELOPMENT TEXT e. Ground Signage: Ground signs, when utilized, shall be subject to the following requirements: 1. If the building in Subarea A has only a single user or tenant, then ground signs shall be permitted to identify said single user or tenant. If there are multiple users or tenants of the building in Subarea A, the ground signs shall be permitted to identify only the commercial center found therein. 2. All ground signs shall have landscaping around the base of the sign as required by Dublin Code. 3. The maximum aggregate graphic area of ground signs in this subarea shall not exceed a total of sixty -six and one half (66' -6') square feet per sign face, provided however, that any single ground sign shall not exceed fifty (50) square feet in graphic area per sign face. There shall be a limit of no more than two (2) faces per sign. 4. The area of each ground sign base (if any) shall not exceed the area of its sign face. The base shall not be included in the overall area permitted for the sign face. 5. The maximum overall height of each ground sign shall be eight (8) feet above top of adjacent street curb. 6. All ground signs shall be externally illuminated with ground - mounted fixtures. 7. Except as otherwise described above, the setback for all ground signage shall be no less than eight (8) feet from the right -of -way consistent with the City of Dublin Code. SUBAREA B Subarea B is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin- Granville Road. It consists of 4.0± acres. L Permitted Uses: a. The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea B: Hardware stores Grocery stores Meat and fish (sea food) markets Fruit stores and vegetable markets Candy, nut and confectionery stores Dairy products stores Retail bakeries Miscellaneous food stores Drug stores and proprietary stores SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 17 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Eating and drinking places Beauty shops Barber shops Shoe repair shops, shoe shine parlors and hat cleaning shops Pressing, alteration and garment repair Commercial and stock savings banks Credit agencies other than banks Personal credit institutions Insurance agents, brokers and service Real estate agents, brokers and managers Combinations of real estate, insurance, loans, law offices Offices of physicians and surgeons Offices of dentists and dental surgeons Offices of osteopathic physicians Offices of chiropractors Legal services Department stores Mail order houses Limited price variety stores Miscellaneous general merchandise stores Men's and boys' clothing and furnishings stores Women's accessory and specialty stores Women's ready -to -wear stores Children's and infants' wear stores Family clothing stores Shoe stores Custom tailors Furriers and fur shops Miscellaneous apparel and accessory stores Furniture, home furnishings and equipment stores Household appliance stores Radio, television and music stores Antique stores and secondhand stores Book and stationery stores Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops Florists Cigar stores and stands Dews dealers and news stands Camera and photographic supply stores Gift, novelty and souvenir shops Jewelry stores Optical goods stores Miscellaneous retail stores, not elsewhere classified Hotels and motels SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 18 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Rooming and boarding houses Mutual savings banks Trust companies not engaged in deposit banking Establishments performing functions closely related to banking Savings and loan associations Agricultural credit institutions Business credit institutions Loan correspondents and brokers Holding companies Investment companies Trusts Miscellaneous investing institutions Rediscount and financing institutions for credit agencies other than banks Security brokers, dealers and flotation companies Commodity contracts brokers and dealers Security and commodity exchanges Services allied with the exchange of securities or commodities Services (professional) not elsewhere classified Life insurance Accident and health insurance Fire, marine and casualty insurance Surety insurance Title insurance Insurance carriers not elsewhere classified Real estate operators (except developers) and lessors Agents, brokers and managers Title abstract companies Subdividers and developers Operative builders Advertising Duplicating, addressing, blueprinting, photocopying, mailing, mailing list, and stenographic services Services to dwellings and other buildings Business services not elsewhere classified Electrical repair shops Watch, clock and jewelry repair Reupholstery and furniture repair Miscellaneous repair shops and related services Medical and dental laboratories Health and allied services not elsewhere classified Engineering and architectural services Accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services Photographic studios, including commercial photography SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 19 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Funeral service Miscellaneous personal services Consumer credit reporting agencies, mercantile reporting agencies, and adjustment and collecting agencies Duplicating, addressing, blueprinting, photocopying, mailing, mailing list and stenographic services News syndicates Private employment Elementary and secondary schools Libraries Museums and art galleries Religious organizations Business associations Professional membership organizations Labor unions and similar labor organizations Civic, social and fraternal associations Political organizations Charitable organizations Nonprofit membership organizations, not elsewhere classified b. For purposes of clarification, in addition to any other use not listed as apermitted use in this subarea, the following uses shall not be permitted anywhere within Subarea B: (1) auto service (2) auto repair (3) gas stations (4) tire and/or automobile battery stores (5) muffler or brake shops (6) lumber and other building materials dealers (7) heating and plumbing equipment dealers (8) electrical supply stores (9) farm equipment stores (10) sexually oriented business establishments c. The following uses shall be allowed as conditional uses in Subarea B, provided that they are approved in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 153.236(C): (1) Exterior commercial dining patios in association with a permitted use. (2) A maximum of one (1) drive -thru shall be allowed as a conditional use in this subarea so long as it exists in association with apermitted use (other than an eating or drinking establishment) and there is not an approved drive -thru use in Subarea C. All drive -thrus shall be designed in a manner to integrate with the overall urban streetscape (e.g. internal to the site) to minimize any negative impact on pedestrian movement(s). SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 20 DEVELOPMENT TEXT IL Density: Subarea B shall allow for a maximum of up to three (3) buildings that shall not exceed forty -two thousand (42,000) square feet of gross floor area in the aggregate, to be distributed as set forth in the Final Development Plan for this subarea. Additional square footage shall be permitted for exterior patios to the extent that parking for these uses can be accommodated within this subarea. III. Yard and Setback Requirements: a. Building and pavement setbacks from adjacent rights -of -way shall be as follows: 1. West Dublin - Granville Road: Buildings with their primary frontage on West Dublin - Granville Road should have a build -to line that is within a relatively close proximity of that right -of -way. In determining the suitable distance for the build -to line, the goal should be to encourage pedestrian activity and the development of usable outdoor spaces (e.g., dining patios) to the front of these buildings at a distance from the right -of -way that is both safe and aesthetically appropriate. The build -to line should also be located so as not to impair the developer's ability to meet applicable parking requirements. The above concerns should be considered at the time of final development plan when more specific information is available regarding the uses that are to be found in this subarea. Therefore, building and pavement build -to and /or setback requirements from the West- Dublin/Granville Road right -of -way shall be in accordance with that which is approved by the Planning Commission at the time of final development plan. 2. Shamrock Boulevard: Buildings with their primary frontage on Shamrock Boulevard shall be required to have a significant portion of the structure located at a build -to -line that is twenty (20) feet from the right -of -way. Subject to this requirement, the final locations of the buildings from the Shamrock Boulevard right -of -way shall be approved by the Planning Commission at the time of final development plan with the exception that patios and outdoor spaces are encouraged to be located in front of buildings. There shall be a minimum pavement setback of twenty (20) feet from the Shamrock Boulevard right -of -way. 3. Stoneridge Lane: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of fifteen (15) feet from Stoneridge Lane b. Interior lot lines shall have a zero (0) setback for parking and buildings. c. There shall be a minimum setback from the eastern boundary line of SubareaB equal to fifteen (15) feet for pavement and buildings. In the event that a property owner within Subarea B enters into a cross access and/or joint parking agreement with the owner of the property located immediately to the east, then there shall be no minimum pavement setback from the eastern boundary line of this SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 21 DEVELOPMENT TEXT subarea. Owners of property within Subarea B shall use commercially reasonable efforts to reach an agreement on cross access with the owner of this adjacent property in the event of its future development/redevelopment. IV. Parking and Loading: a. Based on the nature of this commercial area and the formal arrangement of the buildings, the parking and service areas are to be shared between uses and separate buildings (through the use of cross - easements, if necessary). As such, strict compliance to the Dublin Zoning Code parking requirements by use is not required. Irrespective of use, parking shall be provided at a minimum rate of five (5.0) spaces per one thousand (1,000) square feet of development in this subarea b. Any drive thru that is approved as a conditional use in this subarea shall provide stacking in accordance with the following rates per drive -thru lane: Bank -6, Pharmacy -4, Dry Cleaner -2, ATM - 2, Photo Processing -2, Other -6. V. Lighting: Lighting shall comply with the City of Dublin exterior lighting guidelines and shall utilize decorative light fixtures with pole heights not greater than twenty -eight (28) feet from grade of the parking lot. Painted concrete bases shall be utilized and shall be at least six (6) inches in height above finished grade. VI. Circulation: Circulation within Subarea B and access to and from adjacent publicly- dedicated streets shall be via Shamrock Boulevard to the west and from the proposed extension of Stoneridge Lane to the south, as depicted on the attached Preliminary Development Plan. VII. Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be contained and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code. VIII. Fences: Fencing shall be permitted in accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Code as approved as a part of the Final Development Plan. IX. Storage and Equipment No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of aparcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground, or buildings shall be screened from public view unless prohibited by a public utility, using materials that are harmonious with the building as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code and/or landscaping. SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 22 DEVELOPMENT TEXT X. Landscaping / Patios a. All landscaping shall meet the minimum requirements set forth in the City of Dublin Zoning Code. An illustrative landscape exhibit is included as part of this text (Exhibit C) to describe the gateway landscape concept at the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin - Granville Road. This concept incorporates a series of plantings in a "four- corners" manner that is representative of avillage or market center of atown. This planting scheme includes avariety of deciduous and evergreen shrubs as well as deciduous trees. Entry features consisting of walls and gate features made of natural materials will be incorporated at corners of the intersection to coordinate with the proposed architecture. Walkways are also proposed from the intersection to the adjacent proposed development to access adjacent patio areas. As proposed, this concept may require a right -of- way and minimum setback encroachment for West Dublin - Granville Road for the proposed entry features. This text is intended to serve as a request for such encroachment. Maintenance easements will be executed to maintain the signage, landscaping, and entry features within the right -of -way. A landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for this subarea Landscaping shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. b. Exterior commercial dining patios shall be encouraged when practicable along West Dublin - Granville Road, Shamrock Boulevard, and Stoneridge Lane. These patios shall be allowed in addition to the permitted square footage in this subarea, provided that the developer of such a use shall be required to meet the associated parking requirements for that use within Subarea B. XL Architecture a. The architectural design of all buildings within Subarea B shall be traditional in look and feel and shall evoke the character of traditional Irish towns. Architecture shall be of a high quality with a consistent look and feel that fits with the architectural character of the PUD. The attached Exhibit D illustrates the architectural design standards. The final architecture for this subarea shall be similar in form and look to that which is illustrated in Exhibit(s) F & G. b. The maximum building height may not exceed thirty -five (35) feet. c. All exterior colors shall be selected from a historic color palette. d. Permitted exterior materials in Subarea B shall include brick, stone /synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, stucco /synthetic stucco, and engineered wood composite material (e.g. Hardi -plank or Smartside siding and trim), or any combination thereof. Exterior finish materials must be used to complete massing elements. The application of brick or stone veneer to a single building fagade shall be prohibited. e. Roofs: SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 23 DEVELOPMENT TEXT 1. A material portion of all buildings shall have a pitched or sloped roof (whether hipped or gabled, full or appropriately affixed to a parapet wall). Roofs may provide open areas to house and permit the functionality of mechanical and other typical rooftop equipment. Parapet walls shall be encouraged to screen mechanical units and shall be consistent with the overall architectural theme. 2. All structures shall contain roofing material consisting of dimensional asphalt shingles, cedar shakes or shingles, prefinished standing seam metal, or slate (whether synthetic or authentic slate), all of which shall be in a color or style that is complimentary to and /or compatible with neighboring buildings. 3. The use of dormers, vertical vents, and other architectural treatments are encouraged. f Wall Articulation / Fenestration: 1. Individual walls must be articulated with fenestration, pattern, or structural expression equally on all sides of each structure. 2. With the exception of enclosed service corridors, all buildings shall generally have a similar degree of exterior finish on all sides. Other than for necessary service areas, blank facades on the rear of any building shall not be permitted, but the articulation of such facades with recesses, fenestration, fences, pilasters, etc. shall be encouraged. 3. The amount of fenestration should be balanced with the amount of solid fagade. XIL Signage and Graphics: a. Unless otherwise detailed hereinafter, all signage shall comply with the City of Dublin Sign Code — Sections 153.150, et seq. In the event of a conflict between the City of Dublin Sign Code and this text, this text shall control. b. A signage and graphics plan with exhibits conforming to these guidelines shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for each subarea. All signage shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. c. Building/Tenant Signs - Wall Signage: The following sign standards recognize the unique configuration of the buildings and parking within this subarea and seek to promote effective means for the identification of uses to vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Vehicular traffic will view the front facades of buildings in this subarea from public streets but in most cases will be required to park behind these buildings. The ability to utilize wall signage on the front facades of buildings will enable passing traffic to identify a particular use, while wall signage on the rear facades of these same buildings will allow traffic to identify tenants from the parking areas to the rear of the SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 24 DEVELOPMENT TEXT buildings. 1. One (1) wall sign shall be permitted on each tenant or user storefront that fronts onto a public street (e.g., Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin - Granville Road). Each tenant's wall sign plaque shall be 2' -6" in height and Win width so that the total area of each wall sign plaque is 40 square feet and consistent in size. An illustrative building wall plaque sign exhibit is included as part of this text (Exhibit E). 2. One (1) wall sign shall be permitted at each tenant's or user's parking area (rear) entrance for purposes of identifying the tenant or user. Each tenant's rear wall sign plaque shall be 2' -0" in height and 12' in width so that the total area of each wall sign plaque is 24 square feet and consistent in size. 3. All wall signage shall be located on a standard wall plaque of a consistent size and profile and shall be constructed of high - density urethane plaques that are rectangular in shape with a three -inch radius quarter round at each corner. Each sign plaque shall have a raised border and raised text. Plaques shall be mounted three eights of one inch (3/8 ") off the face of the exterior wall to permit drainage. 4. A total of three (3) sign plaque colors shall be permitted. Plaque colors shall be low- chroma, subdued colors. 5. Text on the plaques shall be limited to white, black, or gold lettering. Scheduled copy height shall be 20 ", except the maximum height of the upper case letters at the beginning of each word(s) may be 22 ". All lettering is to be centered in relation to height and width of the plaque. 6. All wall mounted signs shall be externally illuminated using the same or similar gooseneck light fixtures throughout the subarea. 7. All wall mounted signs shall be integrated into the building facades in order to compliment the architectural character of the building. d. Ground Signage: 1. One (1) ground monument joint identification sign identifying the commercial center shall be permitted along each of the public rights-of-way on West Road and Shamrock Boulevard. 2. All ground signs shall have landscaping around the base of the sign as required by Dublin Code. 3. A maximum graphic area of fifty (50) square feet per sign face shall be permitted on each ground sign face in this subarea identifying the commercial center, with a limit of no more SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 25 DEVELOPMENT TEXT than two (2) faces per sign. 4. The area of each sign base (if any) shall not exceed the area of its sign face. The base shall not be included in the overall area permitted for the sign face. 5. The maximum overall height of each ground sign shall be eight (8) feet above top of adjacent street curb. 6. All ground signs shall be externally illuminated with ground - mounted fixtures. 7. Except as otherwise described above, the setback for all ground signage shall be no less than eight (8) feet from the right -of -way consistent with the City of Dublin Code. SUBAREA C Subarea C is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin- Granville Road. It consists of 3.8f acres. L Permitted Uses: a. The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea C Hardware stores Grocery stores Meat and fish (sea food) markets Fruit stores and vegetable markets Candy, nut and confectionery stores Dairy products stores Retail bakeries Miscellaneous food stores Drug stores and proprietary stores Eating and drinking places Beauty shops Barber shops Shoe repair shops, shoe shine parlors and hat cleaning shops Pressing, alteration and garment repair Commercial and stock savings banks Credit agencies other than banks Personal credit institutions Insurance agents, brokers and service Real estate agents, brokers and managers SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 26 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Combinations of real estate, insurance, loans, law offices Offices of physicians and surgeons Offices of dentists and dental surgeons Offices of osteopathic physicians Offices of chiropractors Legal services Department stores Mail order houses Limited price variety stores Miscellaneous general merchandise stores Men's and boys' clothing and furnishings stores Women's accessory and specialty stores Women's ready -to -wear stores Children's and infants' wear stores Family clothing stores Shoe stores Custom tailors Furriers and fur shops Miscellaneous apparel and accessory stores Furniture, home furnishings and equipment stores Household appliance stores Radio, television and music stores Antique stores and secondhand stores Book and stationery stores Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops Florists Cigar stores and stands Dews dealers and news stands Camera and photographic supply stores Gift, novelty and souvenir shops Jewelry stores Optical goods stores Miscellaneous retail stores, not elsewhere classified Hotels and motels Rooming and boarding houses Mutual savings banks Trust companies not engaged in deposit banking Establishments performing functions closely related to banking Savings and loan associations Agricultural credit institutions Business credit institutions SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 27 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Loan correspondents and brokers Holding companies Investment companies Trusts Miscellaneous investing institutions Rediscount and financing institutions for credit agencies other than banks Security brokers, dealers and flotation companies Commodity contracts brokers and dealers Security and commodity exchanges Services allied with the exchange of securities or commodities Services (professional) not elsewhere classified Life insurance Accident and health insurance Fire, marine and casualty insurance Surety insurance Title insurance Insurance carriers not elsewhere classified Real estate operators (except developers) and lessors Agents, brokers and managers Title abstract companies Subdividers and developers Operative builders Advertising Duplicating, addressing, blueprinting, photocopying, mailing, mailing list, and stenographic services Services to dwellings and other buildings Business services not elsewhere classified Electrical repair shops Watch, clock and jewelry repair Reupholstery and furniture repair Miscellaneous repair shops and related services Medical and dental laboratories Health and allied services not elsewhere classified Engineering and architectural services Accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services Photographic studios, including commercial photography Funeral service Miscellaneous personal services Consumer credit reporting agencies, mercantile reporting agencies, and adjustment and collecting agencies Duplicating, addressing, blueprinting, photocopying, mailing, mailing list and stenographic services Dews syndicates Private employment SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 28 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Elementary and secondary schools Libraries Museums and art galleries Religious organizations Business associations Professional membership organizations Labor unions and similar labor organizations Civic, social and fraternal associations Political organizations Charitable organizations Nonprofit membership organizations, not elsewhere classified b. For purposes of clarification, in addition to any other use not listed as apermitted use in this subarea, the following uses shall not be permitted anywhere within Subarea C: (1) auto service (2) auto repair (3) gas stations (4) tire and/or automobile battery stores (5) muffler or brake shops (6) lumber and other building materials dealers (7) heating and plumbing equipment dealers (8) electrical supply stores (9) farm equipment stores (10) sexually oriented business establishments c. The following uses shall be allowed as conditional uses in Subarea C, provided that they are approved in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 153.236(C): (1) Exterior commercial dining patios in association with a permitted use. (2) A maximum of one drive -thru shall be allowed as a conditional use in this subarea so long as it exists in association with a permitted use (other than an eating or drinking establishment) and there is not an approved drive -thru use in Subarea B. All drive -thrus shall be designed in a manner to integrate with the overall urban streetscape (e.g. interior to the site) to minimize any negative impact on pedestrian movement(s). IL Density: Subarea C shall allow for a maximum of up to three (3) buildings that shall not exceed thirty -two (32,000) square feet of gross floor area in the aggregate, to be distributed as set forth in the Final Development Plan for this subarea. Additional square footage shall be permitted for exterior patios to the extent that parking for these uses can be accommodated within this subarea. SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 29 DEVELOPMENT TEXT III. Yard and Setback Requirements: a. Building and pavement setbacks from adjacent rights -of -way shall be as follows: 1. West Dublin - Granville Road: Buildings with their primary frontage on West Dublin - Granville Road should have a build -to line that is within a relatively close proximity of that right -of -way. In determining the suitable distance for the build -to line, the goal should be to encourage pedestrian activity and the development of usable outdoor spaces (e.g., dining patios) to the front of these buildings at a distance from the right -of -way that is both safe and aesthetically appropriate. The build -to line should also be located so as not to impair the developer's ability to meet applicable parking requirements. The above concerns should be considered at the time of final development plan when more specific information is available regarding the uses that are to be found in this subarea. Therefore, building and pavement build -to and /or setback requirements from the West- Dublin/Granville Road right -of -way shall be in accordance with that which is approved by the Planning Commission at the time of final development plan. 2. Shamrock Boulevard: Buildings with their primary frontage on Shamrock Boulevard shall be required to have a significant portion of the structure located at a build -to -line that is twenty (20) feet from the right -of -way. Subject to this requirement, the final locations of the buildings from the Shamrock Boulevard right -of -way shall be approved by the Planning Commission at the time of final development plan with the exception that patios and outdoor spaces are encouraged to be located in front of buildings. There shall be a minimum pavement setback of twenty (20) feet from the Shamrock Boulevard right -of -way 3. Banker Drive: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of fifteen (15) feet from Stoneridge Lane. b. Interior lot lines shall have a zero (0) setback for parking and buildings. c. There shall be a minimum setback from the eastern boundary line of Subarea C equal to fifteen (15) feet for pavement and buildings. In the event that a property owner within Subarea C enters into a cross access and/or joint parking agreement with the owner of the property located immediately to the east, then there shall be no minimum pavement setback from the eastern boundary line of this subarea. Owners of property within Subarea C shall use commercially reasonable efforts to reach an agreement on cross access with the owner of this adjacent property in the event of its future development/redevelopment. IV. Parking and Loading: SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 30 DEVELOPMENT TEXT a. Based on the nature of this commercial area and the formal arrangement of the buildings, the parking and service areas are to be shared between uses and separate buildings (through the use of cross - easements, if necessary). As such, strict compliance to the Dublin Zoning Code parking requirements by use is not required. Irrespective of use, parking shall be provided at a minimum rate of five (5.0) spaces per one thousand (1,000) square feet of development in this subarea b. Any drive thru that is approved as a conditional use in this subarea shall provide stacking in accordance with the following rates per drive -thru lane: Bank -6, Pharmacy -4, Dry Cleaner -2, ATM - 2, Photo Processing -2, Other -6. V. Lighting: Lighting shall comply with the City of Dublin exterior lighting guidelines and shall utilize decorative light fixtures with pole heights not greater than twenty -eight (28) feet from grade of the parking lot. Painted concrete bases shall be utilized and shall be at least six inches in height above finished grade. VL Circulation: Circulation within Subarea C and access to and from adjacent publicly- dedicated streets shall be from West Dublin - Granville Road on the south and via two (2) access points on Banker Drive (and the proposed extension of Banker Drive), as depicted on the attached Preliminary Development Plan. Access to and from West Dublin Granville Road shall be provided at the David Road and West Dublin - Granville Road intersection which is to remain in place to serve this development. VII. Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be contained and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code. VIII. Fences: Fencing shall be permitted in accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Code as approved as a part of the Final Development Plan. IX. Storage and Equipment: No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of aparcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground, or buildings shall be screened from public view unless prohibited by a public utility, using materials that are harmonious with the building as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code and/or landscaping. X. Landscaping / Patios: a. All landscaping shall meet the minimum requirements set forth in the City of Dublin Zoning Code. SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 31 DEVELOPMENT TEXT An illustrative landscape exhibit is included as part of this text (Exhibit C) to describe the gateway landscape concept at the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin - Granville Road. This concept incorporates a series of plantings in a "four- corners" manner that is representative of avillage or market center of atown. This planting scheme includes avariety of deciduous and evergreen shrubs as well as deciduous trees. Entry features consisting of walls and gate features made of natural materials will be incorporated at corners of the intersection to coordinate with the proposed architecture. Walkways are also proposed from the intersection to the adjacent proposed development to access adjacent patio areas. As proposed, this concept may require a right -of- way and minimum setback encroachment for West Dublin - Granville Road for the proposed entry features. This text is intended to serve as a request for such encroachment. Maintenance easements will be executed to maintain the signage, landscaping, and entry features within the right -of -way. A landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for this subarea Landscaping shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. b. Exterior commercial dining patios shall be encouraged when practicable along West Dublin - Granville Road, Shamrock Boulevard, and Banker Drive to the north. These patios shall be allowed in addition to the permitted square footage in this subarea, provided that the developer of such a use shall be required to meet the associated parking requirements for that use within Subarea C. XL Architecture a. The architectural design of all buildings within Subarea C shall be traditional in look and feel and shall evoke the character of traditional Irish towns. Architecture shall be of a high quality with a consistent look and feel that fits with the architectural character of the PUD. The attached Exhibit D illustrates the architectural design standards. The final architecture for this subarea shall be similar in form and look to that which is illustrated in Exhibit F. b. The maximum building height may not exceed thirty -five (35) feet. c. All exterior colors shall be selected from a historic color palette. d. Permitted exterior materials in Subarea C shall include brick, stone /synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, stucco /synthetic stucco, and engineered wood composite material (e.g. Hardi -plank or Smartside siding and trim), or any combination thereof. Exterior finish materials must be used to complete massing elements. The application of brick or stone veneer to a single building fagade shall be prohibited. e. Roofs: 1. A material portion of all buildings shall have a pitched or sloped roof (whether hipped or gabled, full or appropriately affixed to a parapet wall). Roofs may provide open areas to house and permit the functionality of mechanical and other typical rooftop equipment. Parapet walls shall be encouraged to screen mechanical units and shall be consistent with the SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 32 DEVELOPMENT TEXT overall architectural theme. 2. All structures shall contain roofing material consisting of dimensional asphalt shingles, cedar shakes or shingles, prefinished standing seam metal, or slate (whether synthetic or authentic slate), all of which shall be in a color or style that is complimentary to and /or compatible with the neighboring buildings. 3. The use of dormers, vertical vents, and other architectural treatments is encouraged. f. Wall Articulation /Fenestration: 1. Individual walls must be articulated with fenestration, pattern, or structural expression equally on all sides of each structure. 2. With the exception of enclosed service corridors, all buildings shall generally have a similar degree of exterior finish on all sides. Other than for necessary service areas, blank facades on the rear of any building shall not be permitted, but the articulation of such facades with recesses, fenestration, fences, pilasters, etc. shall be encouraged. 3. The amount of fenestration should be balanced with the amount of solid fagade. XIL Signage and Graphics: a. Unless otherwise detailed hereinafter, all signage shall comply with the City of Dublin Sign Code — Sections 153.150, et seq. In the event of a conflict between the City of Dublin Sign Code and this text, this text shall control. b. A signage and graphics plan with exhibits conforming to these guidelines shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for each subarea. All signage shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. c. Building/Tenant Signs - Wall Signage: The following sign standards recognize the unique configuration of the buildings and parking within this subarea and seek to promote effective means for the identification of uses to vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Vehicular traffic will view the front facades of buildings in this subarea from public streets but in most cases will be required to park behind these buildings. The ability to utilize wall signage on the front facades of buildings will enable passing traffic to identify aparticular use, while blade signs on the rear facades of these same buildings will allow traffic to identify tenants from the parking areas to the rear of the buildings. 1. One (1) wall sign shall be permitted on each tenant or user storefront that fronts onto a public street (e.g., Shamrock Boulevard and West Dublin - Granville Road). Each tenant's wall sign SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 33 DEVELOPMENT TEXT plaque shall be 2' -6" in height and Win width so that the total area of each wall sign plaque is 40 square feet and consistent in size. An illustrative building wall plaque sign exhibit is included as part of this text (Exhibit E). 2. One (1) wall sign shall be permitted at each tenant's or user's parking area (rear) entrance for purposes of identifying the tenant or user. Each tenant's rear wall sign plaque shall be 2' -0" in height and 12' in width so that the total area of each wall sign plaque is 24 square feet and consistent in size. 3. All wall signage shall be located on a standard wall plaque of a consistent size and profile and shall be constructed of high - density urethane plaques that are rectangular in shape with a three -inch radius quarter round at each corner. Each sign plaque shall have a raised border and raised text. Plaques shall be mounted three eights of one inch (3/8 ") off the face of the exterior wall to permit drainage. 4. A total of three (3) sign plaque colors shall be permitted. Plaque colors shall be low- chroma, subdued colors. 5. Text on the plaques shall be limited to white, black, or gold lettering. Scheduled copy height shall be 20 ", except the maximum height of the upper case letters at the beginning of each word(s) may be 22 ". All lettering is to be centered in relation to height and width of the plaque. 6. All wall mounted signs shall be externally illuminated using the same or similar gooseneck light fixtures throughout the subarea. 7. All wall mounted signs shall be integrated into the building facades in order to compliment the architectural character of the building. d. Ground Signage: 1. One (1) ground monument joint identification sign identifying the commercial center shall be permitted along each of the public right -of -ways on West Dublin - Granville Road and Shamrock Boulevard. 2. All ground signs shall have landscaping around the base of the sign as required by Dublin Code. 3. A maximum graphic area of fifty (50) square feet per sign face shall be permitted on each ground sign face in this subarea identifying the commercial center, with a limit of no more than two (2) faces per sign. 4. The area of each sign base (if any) shall not exceed the area of its sign face. The base shall not be included in the overall area permitted for the sign face. SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 34 DEVELOPMENT TEXT 5. The maximum overall height of each ground sign shall be eight (8) feet above top of adjacent street curb. 6. All ground signs shall be externally illuminated with ground - mounted fixtures. 7. Except as otherwise described above, the setback for all ground signage shall be no less than eight (8) feet from the right -of -way consistent with the City of Dublin Code. SUBAREA D Subarea D is located east of and adjacent to Shamrock Boulevard and north of and adjacent to Subarea C. It consists of 8.6f acres. L Permitted Uses: The following uses shall be permitted within Subarea D: Automobile service facilities contained within the interior of a building Attached or detached non - retail car wash operated in association with an automobile service facility located in this subarea Storage of new and used automobiles; no automobile sales shall be permitted Hotels and Motels. Commercial and stock savings banks Mutual savings banks Trust companies not engaged in deposit banking Establishments performing functions closely related to banking Rediscount and financing institutions for credit agencies other than banks Savings and loan associations Agricultural credit institutions Personal credit institutions Business credit institutions Loan correspondents and brokers Security brokers, dealers and flotation companies Commodity contracts brokers and dealers Security and commodity exchanges Services allied with the exchange of securities or commodities Life insurance Accident and health insurance Fire, marine and casualty insurance Surety insurance Title insurance Insurance carriers, not elsewhere classified Insurance agents, brokers and service SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 35 DEVELOPMENT TEXT Real estate operators (except developers) and lessors Agents, brokers and managers Title abstract companies Subdividers and developers Operative builders Combinations of real estate, insurance, loans, law offices Holding companies Investment companies Trusts Miscellaneous investing institutions Offices of physicians and surgeons Offices of dentists and dental surgeons Offices of osteopathic physicians Offices of chiropractors Medical and dental laboratories Health and allied services Legal services Engineering and architectural services Accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services Services (professional) not elsewhere classified Elementary and secondary schools Libraries Business associations Professional membership organizations Labor unions and similar labor organizations Civic, social and fraternal associations Political organizations Charitable organizations Nonprofit membership organizations, not elsewhere classified IL Density / Lot Coverage: Subarea D shall allow for a maximum of up to two (2) buildings that shall not exceed fifty thousand (50,000) square feet of gross floor area III. Yard and Setback Requirements: a. Building and pavement setbacks from adjacent rights -of -way shall be as follows: 1. Shamrock Boulevard: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback often (10) feet from Shamrock Boulevard. 2. Banker Drive: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of fifteen (15) feet from Banker Drive. SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 36 DEVELOPMENT TEXT b. Unless otherwise set forth herein, side yard and rear yard setbacks from subarea perimeter boundaries shall be fifteen (15) feet for pavement and buildings. IV. Parking and Loading: If Subarea D is used as an automobile service center, Subarea D shall be permitted three hundred fifty (350) parking spaces. One hundred fifty (150) of such parking spaces shall be utilized as needed for future expansion as indicated on the attached Preliminary Development Plan. The balance of the site shall be limited to a maximum of two hundred (200) parking spaces as depicted on the attached Preliminary Development Plan Parking and loading facilities shall otherwise be regulated by Dublin Code Chapter 153.200, et seq. V. Lighting: Lighting shall comply with the City of Dublin exterior lighting guidelines and shall utilize decorative light fixtures with pole heights not greater than twenty -eight (28) feet from grade of the parking lot. Painted concrete bases shall be utilized and shall be at least six inches in height above finished grade. VI. Circulation: Circulation within Subarea D and access to and from adjacent publicly - dedicated streets shall be from Shamrock Boulevard on the north, and via two (2) access points on Banker Drive to the south of this subarea, as depicted on the attached Preliminary Development Plan. Additional access to and from West Dublin Granville Road shall be provided at the David Road and West Dublin - Granville Road intersection which is to remain in place to serve this development. VII. Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be contained and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence as required by the Dublin Code. VIII. Fences: Fencing shall be permitted in accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Code as approved as a part of the Final Development Plan. LX. Storage and Equipment: No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of aparcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground, or buildings shall be screened from public view unless prohibited by a public utility, using materials that are harmonious with the building as required by the City of Dublin Zoning Code and/or landscaping. X. Landscaping: SHAMROCK CROSSING n Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 37 DEVELOPMENT TEXT All landscaping shall meet the minimum requirements set forth in the City of Dublin Zoning Code. A landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for this subarea. Landscaping shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. XL Architecture a. The architectural design of all buildings within Subarea D shall be traditional in look and feel and shall establish proper relationships between the buildings in this subarea and adjacent developments. Architecture shall be of a high quality with a consistent look and feel that fits with the architectural character of the PUD. The attached Exhibit D illustrates the architectural design standards. The final architecture for this subarea shall be similar in form and look to that which is illustrated in Exhibit H. b. The maximum building height may not exceed thirty -five (35) feet. c. All exterior colors shall be selected from a historic color palette. d. Permitted exterior materials in Subarea D shall include brick, stone /synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, stucco /synthetic stucco, and engineered wood composite material (e.g. Hardi -plank or Smartside siding and trim), or any combination thereof. Exterior finish materials must be used to complete massing elements. The application of brick or stone veneer to a single building fagade shall be prohibited. e. Roofs: 1. A material portion of all buildings shall have a pitched or sloped roof (whether hipped or gabled, full or appropriately affixed). Roofs may provide open areas to house and permit the functionality of mechanical and other typical rooftop equipment. Parapet walls shall be encouraged to screen mechanical units and shall be consistent with the overall architectural theme. 2. All structures shall contain roofing material consisting of dimensional asphalt shingles, cedar shakes or shingles, prefinished standing seam metal, or slate (whether synthetic or authentic slate), all of which shall be in a color or style that is complimentary to and /or compatible with the neighboring buildings. 3. The use of dormers, vertical vents, and other architectural treatments are encouraged. f Wall Articulation /Fenestration: 1. Individual walls must be articulated with fenestration, pattern, or structural expression equally on all sides of each structure. SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 38 DEVELOPMENT TEXT 2. With the exception of enclosed service corridors, all buildings shall generally have a similar degree of exterior finish on all sides. Other than for necessary service areas, blank facades on the rear of any building shall not be permitted, but the articulation of such facades with recesses, fenestration, fences, pilasters, etc. shall be encouraged. 3. The amount of fenestration should be balanced with the amount of solid fagade. XIL Signage and Graphics: b. Unless otherwise detailed hereinafter, all signage shall comply with the City of Dublin Sign Code — Sections 153.150, et seq. In the event of a conflict between the City of Dublin Sign Code and this text, this text shall control. c. A signage and graphics plan with exhibits conforming to these guidelines shall be submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the Final Development Plan for each subarea. All signage shall be in conformance with that which is approved as part of the Final Development Plan. c. Building/Tenant Signs - Wall Signage: 2. One (1) wall sign shall be permitted on one of the tenant or user storefronts that fronts onto a public street. 3. Wall signage for an automobile service center and associated uses shall be the same or similar as shown on the rendered drawings and attached Exhibit H. Wall signage for all other permitted users shall be in accordance with the City of Dublin Sign Code. d. Ground signage: 1. One (1) ground monument sign shall be permitted near the intersection of Shamrock Boulevard and Banker Drive in the location shown on the attached development plan. If the building in Subarea D has only a single user or tenant, then this ground sign shall be permitted to identify said single user or tenant. If there are multiple users or tenants of the building in Subarea D, the ground sign shall be permitted to identify only the commercial center found therein. 2. All ground signs shall have landscaping around the base of the sign as required by Dublin Code. 3. The maximum graphic area of the permitted ground sign shall be as approved by the Planning Commission as a part of the final development plan for this subarea. SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 39 DEVELOPMENT TEXT 4. The area of the ground sign base (if any) shall not exceed the area of its sign face. The base shall not be included in the overall area permitted for the sign face. 5. The maximum overall height of the ground sign shall be eight (8) feet above top of adjacent street curb. 6. All ground signs shall be externally illuminated with ground- mounted fixtures. 7. Except as otherwise described above, the setback for all ground signage shall be no less than eight (8) feet from the right -of -way consistent with the City of Dublin Code. SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for shamrock Crossing, LLC. 40 DEVELOPMENT TEXT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A - SUBAREA PLAN NA R -o zai aao I °cw L car waam Pm' zu -egvn ��, �YYUV9US 9W]J2R/� � POMER / CYe Po5� IHERN I Pl0' STS- Ca9T8] 4 CIXU/.18U{ yYY�1MRA• a, 2 0.MJI4 N '��d u $ Q ; F$ � �o se9 ''�� ,'y jK � �" tl y tl m y S K `3 ��^ J l I Pas' 2iW a�.J -omlia O.& J(}g p b �.. 3 .RYM WARAZR j P.. alJ- NX� I ARR 6J/bg SAD' Q O Ayf( 2 4 I� p M1 ytl �J J SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 41 2�„ a e �g� 4 S g � a, 0 N '��d u $ Q ; F$ � �o I � ''�� ,'y jK � �" tl y tl m y S K `3 ��^ J l I q Q� tl �.. B URL /N r+RgNNL(E RD (3 R. 161) 6J/bg SAD' Q O Ayf( 2 4 I� p M1 ytl �J J SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 41 DEVELOPMENT TEXT EXHIBITS EX HIBIT a - PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN J ¥ ( ` � \ >�# 4 w; !>K SHAMROCK c R o i i! > G. Prepared for ,:,:rock r.,,,,:,. : :r. 42 DEVELOPMENT TEXT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT C - PRELIMINARY CORRIDOR LANDSCAPE PLAN ANNUALS EVERGREEN /DECIDUOUSPLANTIN DECIDUOUS. TREES r + +r WALKWAY e SIGNAGE LIMESTONE WALL ENTRY MARKER - SIGNAGEINCORPORAT: INTO HEDGE /PIER TREATMENT EVERGREEN HEDGE IT LIMESTONE PIER (TYP) SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 43 DEVELOPMENT TEXT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT D - ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STANDARDS DESIGN STANDARDS I. Roofs: roofsmaybenaturalorsyntheticslate, woodshakeorwoodshingle, metalstandingseam , oranarchitecturalgrade dimensional asphalt shingle. 2. GuttersandDownspouts: traditionalhalf- roundand/ orogeeguttersshallbeused .Guttersshallbepaintedorpre- finished metal that matches the cornice. Downspouts and collection boxes shall be designed to integrate with the architecture. 3. Wall Finish Materials: the exterior cladding of allstructures, including thefoundation, shall be finished using brick, stone /symbeticstone, cedarsiding and trim, stucco /syntheticstucco, engineeredwoodcomposite material (i.e., hardi- plankorsmartsidesidingand trim) , oranycombinationthereof. Exteriorwallfinishmaterialsmustbeused tocomplete massing elements. The application of brick or stone veneer to a single building facade is prohibited. 4. WindowandDoorTypeStraditionaldomesticarchitecturalfenestrationthemesshallbeusedonallelevations .Simulated Divided Lites in windows and swinging doors shall be used. Vertically oriented life patterns are required. NOTE: All exterior colors are required to be from a historic color palette. All exterior trim and windows shall be "white to off-white" in color unless otherwise specified and approved. Accent colors doors shall be selected from a historic color palette. All exterior colors shall be submitted for approval. SHAMROCK CROSSING • Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 44 DEVELOPMENT TEXT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT E - WALL SIGN STANDARDS PROPOSED SISNASE DETAIL (STREET FRONT 6C.". NTd am Ram PROPOSED SIONA&E DETAIL @C,*a. NTd FOxD & ASSOCIATES A R C H I T E C T S S.R. 161 RETAIL SHOPS DUBLIN, OH LOT SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 45 DEVELOPMENT TEXT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT F - ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS �— — .-s— --d SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 46 DEVELOPMENT TEXT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT G - ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS �l Perspective view looking southeast. SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for Shamrock Crossing, LLC. 47 DEVELOPMENT TEXT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT H - ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS I A � � y SHAMROCK CROSSING z Prepared for Shamrock Crossin LLC. 48 Perspecti view looking nou heast. SHAMROCK CROSSING Section V Exhibits I - l ROPENN LINE PARTS c3m 1 et L - - - - �MSIW DR arr PR cm zv, ---- y- ------ cn --------------------------------------------- C- Lull � - I m A6051 E-1 I 1 j l l it r I I I I ____ I L J ; -� l suewel14511E °uA USUwnoxs saMeUY OAMA $AresnpXi fueY3A CSnf al5A AS1aMPIl af11 la1MfA911 MSA Af1YMI110N5 �Sr _ r us+eW wf/N ww Y.oA. .4n ` " —1 f— '� "` -7 }. r` 1 i rlr I ,......... n.... swe. �.+.m -_. ..w...:� +.+.. .x.. �.�...+. n..— •T° I I • I - I �r - r 3' I I .w.. L -il ...« , .vr.® ...., a.. smn mo .... w. ~ •..rte r-.P «. •+n.wP V — ':G" ✓L :_. I 1 I L _1 f I I I i i I I 1 I _ II .. 1 I I fff111 ��I ORICV9ETYl i I \ 1 � y ICY 63L v \ I 11 Ply. _ • �J J L "_______- ____- - w � 'A' �'•' w � i A= ti r � I i i �- �A � IAt ACRES 1F cP4vmc seal[ Y Z I W I ------- Us I--- CdQg6 _ — ff B j WXt Ie3 3f. •e.' IJ� l.'I •"x^a2nrl -� - -- 111111 l RI$rAVRANS' jr .. 1 _ I Lf 1{.0001 AR a bueMFA'G' ,.•`\' e f� l `-{. RAAII .- I Y -M: SUTASG Y' B E O AV u Ip 3f1Y_Kp I I I I N S3. f - s I At Ao ` MA i. it it Ti7T1TiTfff6 7 _ _ l l _ - o _ _ J r ° 1e.00w Sf. 5 r L— 2a A ' ' i i :> C "�1' � i 1 � ncx aas -ucr - l j I f; • 1 I 1 C� L I rSJ 1 1 r -- - -____ — I I-- _ _ �� _ M PARK! tif. _ _ J h Y 1 • �t IJ I 1 1 I I I r I I I 1 I , sam/x: sPxp I erm, 1 r r ^\I r E I I 1 _ v J� y ll l ._•^ I 1 css xo r i +�.j l Note: This pion is demonstrative of possible build —out conditions for — ` - - 11 I l I I 1 I I 1 purposes of capacity and ld calc s and Is conceptual 1 ;; 3:.1�cr iw T .�� _ T 1 only. Sites and locations of f the the buildings and and parking shop be � L � i l i I 1 �:e. �:.' �'°° - lames t i determined at the time of Final Development Pion but snWl tr I 1 r I v ; n f .,,�, a `� -'�^' ° r' =- o x:•�:,eesi I �I generally conform with the b u i ldi n g be permitted wi M1m each e wborea shall v J the ilu � strotive site on. Additional) uses shown are illustrative In -- I q nature and the uses that 1 1 1 a- _ I"_i�} l be governed by the Development Text. j I r O JF L-- -Jlr]u ED cI r= /" P Note: Me plan is demonstrative of possible build —out m conditions for 0 •— purposes of capacity and storwaler colculalions antl Is conceptual 1 I ! only. Sizes and locations of the buildings and parking shall be I determined at the time of Final Development Plan but shall ! generally conform with the building and parking envelopes shown on / the illustrative site plan. Additionally, uses shown are illustrative In / f'•.� nature and the uses that will be permitted within each subarea shall I , ,, be governed by the Development Text. .. r'J 11 ; " If it i I IL\ l e • If r • I 1 6 z i , ,i l v n r J u r I V 4 c> U ._ aij Ix— mm ax w 'I � � 7 -z s.sess_� _ 'I S I ' Ir l I T e 5d ,F F L` ``7 E -3 I - - - - � I r?�__�#_ n v n r J u r I V 4 c> U ._ aij Ix— mm ax w 'I � � 7 -z s.sess_� _ 'I S I ' Ir l I T e 5d ,F F L` ``7 E -3 c> U ._ aij Ix— mm ax w 'I � � 7 -z s.sess_� _ 'I S I ' Ir l I T e 5d ,F F L` ``7 E -3 I 2 C „r o QQ N ,.,. 'Opa `� Fc gr Oa o Q� `£ H u Q yFN� gy x' CZ wr S � 2� otl e {3tl wruvwwr �ura� I Note: This plan is demoostro6w of possible build -out conditions for purposes of capacity and stormwater calculations and is conceptual only. Sizes and locations of the buildings and parking shall be determined at the Gme of Final Development Plan but shall generally conform with the building and parking envelopes shown on the illustrative site plan. Additionally. uses shown ore illustrative in nature and the uses that will be permitted within each subarea shall be governed by the Development Text. E -4 INAMUS L_ QWMC WAX e Y Y ? 55 B" 88i h n.r �SY O Kiixa'+yvnr[Fp � ,eM1�wW - y E a � rNr �v d �e r I 2 C „r o QQ N ,.,. 'Opa `� Fc gr Oa o Q� `£ H u Q yFN� gy x' CZ wr S � 2� otl e {3tl wruvwwr �ura� I Note: This plan is demoostro6w of possible build -out conditions for purposes of capacity and stormwater calculations and is conceptual only. Sizes and locations of the buildings and parking shall be determined at the Gme of Final Development Plan but shall generally conform with the building and parking envelopes shown on the illustrative site plan. Additionally. uses shown ore illustrative in nature and the uses that will be permitted within each subarea shall be governed by the Development Text. E -4 INAMUS I 1 cL '-7 , � S IN 1 I °fWGE/lEfAit �,-- "• 1 s.l Y.F. t � - - i �! SUWM'A'MM1WAM DATA f u I ' I I I spn..w7 Y� I i �S II I I I III e'I � w �w... r � error. I I II ,I .?. j ry SUWM - W MMIWAM MM el ly.. exmuu wnl� I. W h wr"wr— wauah vw.a..wu re_.w fmn n—wn. I I wf rm�— Aw fs�bM /i r I ' —� •� I� I I�bY A�ClB �rw I I � I $ ------- S , 1 I CS1 FF] • • I I I l 1 r' / y n /'r `J`/ rJ — _wet acs � , ___ z r I Note: This plan is demonstrotive of possible build —out conditions for purposes of capacity and stormwater calculations and is conceptual only. Sizes and locatlons of the buildings and parking sholl be determined at the time of Final Development Plan but shall generally conform with the building and parking envelopes shown on the illustrative site Plan. Additionally, uses shown are illustrative in nature and the uses that will be permitted within each subarea shall be governed by the Development Text. 1 rI• �d r III I NL MWD la 1 rp I I I I I I wMFFAS c a 1 S,OM elf MTA wl�n.o�w. �nww M1. rw � . w u._.w eal •w.e• swan. . waw NMe ORIWTYM1 pMrurMe ! ds 3 = 8 s N e iw Y w �IOq I __ - h- - 1 I I I �bFL aAYA , I I I I I I I f ---- -t--- -Tt!I1 i E -5 I I I I I II ,II I 1 N 1 I \, 1 - --- -- - - - - --- I 1 I 1 ` 1 I I I Mq4 2seel I 1 111 O — I,�,�j�Trn I I' wl NflAll 16.OpY S1 o I III I nZ SUWM - W MMIWAM MM el ly.. exmuu wnl� I. W h wr"wr— wauah vw.a..wu re_.w fmn n—wn. I I wf rm�— Aw fs�bM /i r I ' —� •� I� I I�bY A�ClB �rw I I � I $ ------- S , 1 I CS1 FF] • • I I I l 1 r' / y n /'r `J`/ rJ — _wet acs � , ___ z r I Note: This plan is demonstrotive of possible build —out conditions for purposes of capacity and stormwater calculations and is conceptual only. Sizes and locatlons of the buildings and parking sholl be determined at the time of Final Development Plan but shall generally conform with the building and parking envelopes shown on the illustrative site Plan. Additionally, uses shown are illustrative in nature and the uses that will be permitted within each subarea shall be governed by the Development Text. 1 rI• �d r III I NL MWD la 1 rp I I I I I I wMFFAS c a 1 S,OM elf MTA wl�n.o�w. �nww M1. rw � . w u._.w eal •w.e• swan. . waw NMe ORIWTYM1 pMrurMe ! ds 3 = 8 s N e iw Y w �IOq I __ - h- - 1 I I I �bFL aAYA , I I I I I I I f ---- -t--- -Tt!I1 i E -5 I I I I I II ,II I 1 N 1 I \, 1 - --- -- - - - - --- I 1 I 1 ` 1 I I I Mq4 2seel I 1 111 O — I,�,�j�Trn I I' wl NflAll 16.OpY S1 o I III I nZ I I wf rm�— Aw fs�bM /i r I ' —� •� I� I I�bY A�ClB �rw I I � I $ ------- S , 1 I CS1 FF] • • I I I l 1 r' / y n /'r `J`/ rJ — _wet acs � , ___ z r I Note: This plan is demonstrotive of possible build —out conditions for purposes of capacity and stormwater calculations and is conceptual only. Sizes and locatlons of the buildings and parking sholl be determined at the time of Final Development Plan but shall generally conform with the building and parking envelopes shown on the illustrative site Plan. Additionally, uses shown are illustrative in nature and the uses that will be permitted within each subarea shall be governed by the Development Text. 1 rI• �d r III I NL MWD la 1 rp I I I I I I wMFFAS c a 1 S,OM elf MTA wl�n.o�w. �nww M1. rw � . w u._.w eal •w.e• swan. . waw NMe ORIWTYM1 pMrurMe ! ds 3 = 8 s N e iw Y w �IOq I __ - h- - 1 I I I �bFL aAYA , I I I I I I I f ---- -t--- -Tt!I1 i E -5 I I I I I II ,II I 1 N 1 I \, 1 - --- -- - - - - --- I 1 I 1 ` 1 I I I Mq4 2seel I 1 111 O — I,�,�j�Trn I I' wl NflAll 16.OpY S1 o I III I nZ wMFFAS c a 1 S,OM elf MTA wl�n.o�w. �nww M1. rw � . w u._.w eal •w.e• swan. . waw NMe ORIWTYM1 pMrurMe ! ds 3 = 8 s N e iw Y w �IOq I __ - h- - 1 I I I �bFL aAYA , I I I I I I I f ---- -t--- -Tt!I1 i E -5 I I I I I II ,II I 1 N 1 I \, 1 - --- -- - - - - --- I 1 I 1 ` 1 I I I Mq4 2seel I 1 111 O — I,�,�j�Trn I I' wl NflAll 16.OpY S1 o I III I nZ ! ds 3 = 8 s N e iw Y w �IOq I __ - h- - 1 I I I �bFL aAYA , I I I I I I I f ---- -t--- -Tt!I1 i E -5 I I I I I II ,II I 1 N 1 I \, 1 - --- -- - - - - --- I 1 I 1 ` 1 I I I Mq4 2seel I 1 111 O — I,�,�j�Trn I I' wl NflAll 16.OpY S1 o I III I nZ L_i ' _ i i -___ _ I , —_— lyyF ~ _ f I `e, .. ,_._°i.�.»•..... ,,..«�..... .w. ro._.w..z ..mow",,,. ,. i" ! 3 L_z_ JI 11 ri I l O ♦v I L }/-- T Ir ���� \ 1 I ill,. s ome ■S I , et ACRE sV■A " G 2@0 I 11 I �`- —� I �_ �•�rr�ta�ravc _ � 'E_ � __ 1. g �"u 1 i �' , r:.—�e r• — —'° '� -- I I _ -_ �DO$�iYCgV6 _ — � __ - -_ OPT EETUt III r 1 < _ R fi ll 1 , l l f i i Awr ® I I _ r RfS �. j-- ills• N A M-10, „�;. J`r I l , i , fiIIL_ cll ` 0 T — �--� \ a >, � r- 1 a 1 tp I J I I I - ----- --- C� L _ L J1r r r 1 I L j 'i �U J y .� i / I � 1 1 1 � i r✓• - dal - -_ _� . YYIkNG i ___ __ _ — � 1 i sF • , IJI r f �T� j J hez r i'14`.` _ j' E% DAVIDM ' n r i L- - r n c• \ii "'T- I ( 1 r —�,_ I T x wv Note: Thb plan Is demo stratix of possible build out condltiona for __ - - -- purpoxs of capacity and slwmwater colculo Cans and is conceptual L` I I �' ig A only. Sizes Parking 1 I I / h, L---- 7x, 1 and locations of the buildings 9 and g shall be I I I determ at the time of Final Dewicomenl Pion but Moll tr I I� _- e i a -1 generally conform with the building and parking en elopes shown on •r - -- JI 1 1 I the dlvelrotive site plan. Additionally, uses shown are illustrative M ' - _ - - -� LLLLLL I —{II I 1I t1 I'i nature and the uses that will be permitted within each suboreo shall '. I i, - I I J I I I I I c . E -O f be governed by the Development Text. 1 ; i Cm OF DUBLIN CM OF DUBLIN .120 pRES 2h P 29r0 ACRES i 1 PPRCEL .NI -m N PRCEI. WY ^��— IHST. IB.. 1p026J1 I9D 19891 0 32036]013 I/ / rzQ 1 I I em>�.✓' n I [^� 1 en✓ I tea^ RFIT I IiNt PINES XoLgxcs, Lm. ( . I 1.96 MREB (OflIGINLL) �y\ � IH4: 19900600014Yb9 � \ 1 I � 1.828 ACRES CIMOIA fOMILY UMNEN P0.GMERSHIER 1/2 INTEREST 1.. MOB. ID ..)) 1 I I T/LL IgxEE xDILINC9. L11 INI 2coc0113D FE] I I = (O ., ) I I 1 i IUSr: I9B9060BO1e7z23 I I RI 'XPRD C. COfl1U I 1 I I.B34 MRFS /2 1 LO E E 1 I I 1 (REWINDER) ��"A"' IGR F 9 N COR A-1 9 I I 1 nii OMC RED 9120. 6 -1 I I fSICW. RECORD I5B09. 0 -I9 I I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 Ijl I I q t I I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 I I 3 I I 1 I I 1 I I I " Rip 1 pOiOU GM1RY LLVRN PMTNEPSXIP is mwCT 2: 1 �a72 AOIE5 (oRICIxAL) I I I j IHBf: RCpl01 5000968E I I flICINAB C. CORNA I 1 I 6.472 ACR6ILINM) 4 1 Of£1CV1 RECORD 012.0 A -10 DFPICML eEWlm 158 . 0 -19 L 1 °° mre 1 I P° s4tX✓ ERE, FIN. HOIDIHDS. Lm. 1 I 9n r'M CXNpA .11 L.M. P.1R1'NERSHIP xtoa ncRES (oRI01W1) I TB LL PINES HELOWS. LWU 1 TIM PINES FOOONCS. Lm. i TNL PINES HOLDINGS. LTM 1RMi 1R I J.239 E ACRES Ilia: Ia990609014]22t i 195E .. (ORIGINM) 1955 ROPER (Ofl161XI1) ) 1.951 WRES (OFlG11V:1) I IN4: 2 ..ACR INSI: 199006080147311 I NET 1998000901031] i INSf: 19990FWO1 1218 1.688 ACRES I I zo (RPWNOER) 1.381 MREa I OA62 ACREB 1.577 ACRES to 1 RIC / MO IY — � ; NDER) I (REMNNDER) 1 (REWVnoEa I 1:259 MxE9 I (REMP pi}1CV1 R. R 9120. P -18 r -- AI I I 1 OmclV. R.B 13609. D-IF P —anJ r j I I I xm � l l w °'R G, RLB mU o- ��WCrtCR'S 1 ILOITORY i WDIIOR's WPCUMNOS 1 AUDROWS PLRCEL NVMBFR PIRCE . L NO. 1 BRILL, NUMBER 1 NUMBER I pppCE1 NUMBEfi 1 V•Y 3]] -OW302 1 273 -MNOI 1 P 3JJ- OOB300 I 273.. I 1 1 I T/3 -0.U399 I s% C BOF i 1 1 I a CI41 1 I I QWIMTORS I 1 I I I Putca xuuBEx I I 1 mN f K /_'mi � i I I AMG ld 27}p1gp9� A --�t ®o d -Rd L LOT Is LOT H SUNNY LET IS LOL 1z 301 LAS NNY NNY DALE ESTATES 24, PAGE )1 LET 11 CDY OF OUBpN 0.199 .. PMCEL 31yry MBP. 19991@p28J020 TRUE PNES xI LTO. 2,817 ACRES (OFFORA] INSI: 199906090L]221 2.6H MffB (REMVNPW) u " Corm UMTOR'9 P]RCEL BOMBER 2]3 -00029] I NNE .. PROPS . 83 ACRES L RECORD 12056, D -06 = TG NERIDG E L ANE I O PXFl£ INrE51MEM P.BE. ® 2486 ACRfS (ORCINM) OUF— NECORD 26820, 8-11 1521 ACRES (REWYxOER) 0 O 0 0 0 N1S 6fTVAOFP VbNnmE CORP. S65 Metro Pha SOUth Sta 9R^ [IUb11ry M P. .Pf/ 6y.36ggB9t PH 64.26¢WU310L Conncc lEevin McC uley ^.O 1"e'1 L1 cn 2 A cn R I--1 1 O �U RD.Z=de FJ &Associate; Inc u.aa«.M.a�.me6� m 9 fLl : ��� 1 e ' n E- -.. LOi 10 LOT 9 TREE S U A V H It Y I 6fTVAOFP VbNnmE CORP. S65 Metro Pha SOUth Sta 9R^ [IUb11ry M P. .Pf/ 6y.36ggB9t PH 64.26¢WU310L Conncc lEevin McC uley ^.O 1"e'1 L1 cn 2 A cn R I--1 1 O �U RD.Z=de FJ &Associate; Inc u.aa«.M.a�.me6� m 9 fLl : ��� 1 e ' n E- m�oom�m IT EW Is GI Trte PrenrvoDen 153.141 DefinNOn. 2107 w WI SO FNP nmla ". al iM aentm . iM bunk 210 2P WAINw N G" MOL 210 IT MIMBERRY IF FNR ve7.nM Fmurg 2110 IT ASH M M o mannue rrom \M CFM hunk I fentl in , un that, qu.Yt min. ual . a t a min imum \M 2111 ST EW ST III T EDi 2112 N ASH 28 GWD 2119 1? ASH 15 PX*'! 2114 1T EW tY PWR 2115 @ ASH 1tl PWfl ®' 0 ®m0— 1D PGCR '®00m @ EW 1tl FAR 2119 IT EW 2tl FAR 2110 2P EW 20 FWR ®000" 1@ EW GWD 2121 1@ KAGOERRY 16 GWD 2122 IT EW @ EW 1tl FWR 24 IT EW 1Y FWR 25 @ EW 1tl QCSSD �o @ ®mom 1@ PWR �0®" 2P EW m0— FAR n @ EW 10 WDD ®' 000' ASH LEAD b @ EW 1@ GGOD 81 @ EW 1 PCOR M @ EW 10 GWO �o @ ®mom 10 FAR ]4 IT EW 20 FAR NTI 0 @ P R 0 1P El' 1r POOR �OmmO— @ EW 10 PWR 28 @ EW 10 PWR N j 22 1@ EW N FAIR P EW 10 PWR 1 P EW 1D PDOR — 2 1P HACKBERRY IP GWD P ERN IS GWD oo @ ®mom IQ GWD 0 @ HA MERRY 10 GI ®o�mo @ Hi0(BEPAY IP GI= ©0mm0� IT HYMgw Ie GWD . P EW 10 GWO 40 @ ASH 10 GWD M @ EW DEAD 00' 1@ ®m 20 ®— ©0�mm� @ H000ERRY 10 GWD 50 P INCKBERRY 1D GWD ©0' rr © ®®" GOOD 0O In ©m0� ID GcnD 210 IT wAwUr IV GWD 21U IV wAINUP 16 GWD 210 P HACKBERRY IT GOOD ®o .�E- P , •a mo� ttl GC(A) 21M 15 HEKCRY 1tl D 21F 1P W.CKBERRY 1T GOOK) 0o r ©mom EiM ®o P ©mom 10 Ci4' D ®0omo� @ IN CKSERRY 10 0 I IT ASH DEAD 2167 IT ASK IV GWD 2167 IT Wi 15 0000 210 IT EW DEAD �0000— @ ASH I0 GWD 21M IT ASx Is o0 1r ®m�� WW TRIPLE :172 IT mmu,ul I GI 2178 @ HADRS RY IV GWD 2174 IT H1tl0ERRY If GWD 'Q0' @ K1CI0ERRY 1P GWD 21M 1P wA1.M17 If GWD ma�mm�� @ wALVl7 1P GWD ima�m�11:7� IT VI IV GOOD 2170 @ EW 10 GWO 21M @ HADOERRY 19 GWO 21&' @ ASH iP GOOD 2183 @ ASH 10 GM 2184 IT HAUSTRRT N WLO 21M P W1D®ERPY 40 W.CO 21M @ H4CKBERRY 1P WW 210 @ HACKBERRY 10 Gd_'D 21% 1P -1@ EW N FAR �ROFI m0 @ ®m00 10 CACO TWN 2101 @ EW I0 GM 2102 @ H4f:NPERRY 1tl GCCO =1 P ASH 16 WCO DAN M B' ASH 10 GOCO �0000— @ ASH 10 WOD �0®00— 1S Siam" IF WCO KIM @ Haakbum, IY CgCD 5102 @ HictateV 16 GOOD RW ®gym Haini IB u '0" 5674 r Mwu IY GOOD 6675 IT 9M.MefM IF GWD ©o @ ®mom 16 WW 6727 P &Iw MaOa 1Y WCD My @ SIM.M1 1Y M 21M IT EW Is GI Trte PrenrvoDen 153.141 DefinNOn. 2107 w WI SO FNP nmla ". al iM aentm . iM bunk 210 2P WAINw N G" MOL 210 IT MIMBERRY IF FNR ve7.nM Fmurg 2110 IT ASH M M o mannue rrom \M CFM hunk I fentl in , un that, qu.Yt min. ual . a t a min imum \M 2111 ST EW ST III T EDi 2112 N ASH 28 GWD 2119 1? ASH 15 PX*'! 2114 1T EW tY PWR 2115 @ ASH 1tl PWfl I P ASH 1D PGCR 2117 @ EW 1tl FAR 2119 IT EW 2tl FAR 2110 2P EW 20 FWR HP 1@ EW GWD 2121 1@ KAGOERRY 16 GWD 2122 IT EW @ EW 1tl FWR 24 IT EW 1Y FWR 25 @ EW 1tl QCSSD M @ EW 1@ PWR U 2P EW FAR n @ EW 10 WDD @ ASH LEAD b @ EW 1@ GGOD 81 @ EW 1 PCOR M @ EW 10 GWO M @ EW 10 FAR ]4 IT EW 20 FAR NTI 0 @ P R 0 1P El' 1r POOR V @ EW 10 PWR 28 @ EW 10 PWR N j 22 1@ EW N FAIR P EW 10 PWR 1 P EW 1D PDOR — 2 1P HACKBERRY IP GWD P ERN IS GWD @ EW IQ GWD 0 @ HA MERRY 10 GI 67 @ Hi0(BEPAY IP GI= 47 IT HYMgw Ie GWD . P EW 10 GWO 40 @ ASH 10 GWD M @ EW DEAD 51 1@ WNRUt 20 PAR M @ H000ERRY 10 GWD 50 P INCKBERRY 1D GWD D rr WAWHP 10 GOOD 21. In iNGl6ERRr ID GcnD 210 IT wAwUr IV GWD 21U IV wAINUP 16 GWD 210 P HACKBERRY IT GOOD 21M P EW ttl GC(A) 21M 15 HEKCRY 1tl D 21F 1P W.CKBERRY 1T GOOK) 21M r EW EiM P HGCK9ERRY 10 Ci4' D 2 167 @ IN CKSERRY 10 0 I IT ASH DEAD 2167 IT ASK IV GWD 2167 IT Wi 15 0000 210 IT EW DEAD 21M @ ASH I0 GWD 21M IT ASx Is 2171 1r WI WW TRIPLE :172 IT mmu,ul I GI 2178 @ HADRS RY IV GWD 2174 IT H1tl0ERRY If GWD 2176 @ K1CI0ERRY 1P GWD 21M 1P wA1.M17 If GWD TV @ wALVl7 1P GWD 2178 IT VI IV GOOD 2170 @ EW 10 GWO 21M @ HADOERRY 19 GWO 21&' @ ASH iP GOOD 2183 @ ASH 10 GM 2184 IT HAUSTRRT N WLO 21M P W1D®ERPY 40 W.CO 21M @ H4CKBERRY 1P WW 210 @ HACKBERRY 10 Gd_'D 21% 1P -1@ EW N FAR �ROFI 210 @ EW 10 CACO TWN 2101 @ EW I0 GM 2102 @ H4f:NPERRY 1tl GCCO =1 P ASH 16 WCO DAN M B' ASH 10 GOCO M @ ASH 10 WOD &N 1S Siam" IF WCO KIM @ Haakbum, IY CgCD 5102 @ HictateV 16 GOOD RW 1P Haini IB W.uD 5674 r Mwu IY GOOD 6675 IT 9M.MefM IF GWD 5008 @ 91w Maps 16 WW 6727 P &Iw MaOa 1Y WCD My @ SIM.M1 1Y M MH @ SIN.Mege 18 WW T R E E S U R V E Y seas 3. Dro I. I. man. In rouu. rm1. STAVROFP MSM CORP. 5b Metro Plax South SHH[eg8o wmm, ohw um> 6e+15q 9EV1 P% ca-aa ReNn . 0 W �1 P4 P4 W Q cn �w W QI 0 CU RD.Zaade ,I 4R Asso082CS Inc. lmrmpAdb®eIDWB Ima, mAT JZZf span 1 C RITICAL ROOT ZO (DRIP U NE) 1 me ciFj m DuM n Cea.. 153 I Um. Trte PrenrvoDen 153.141 DefinNOn. In. em Imam. R, an ImaWnvry "a. Mn 9muna Eemnln a hm ., Pe nmla ". al iM aentm . iM bunk or u, bn, and nwiq or EameNml to I ne lest rw I Ines MOL 2....4 of Wb4n .1, 1St IqM Uee. G ehualbn MM n., 15 }1A5 (A) NOTES: ve7.nM Fmurg iM e. oNx w Mrvie. HD 11EE WPS USIXD M M o mannue rrom \M . 1XE FOIIL'.. PoIMS hunk I fentl in , un that, qu.Yt min. ual . a t a min imum \M E l mt iann a. 201 5 1.. i m in I$ bet xni in SD2{ a th. Pl nn unlm lnmvlu opptm Inn PMAg Dllealor a. emgna. e . .1 501 00 QIIImO— ®' OruLU1m '®” �O�II�mO— '0" 0�m0— oo �0Om0— �0 �27�'1 ® m0— "®" — ®O�m e'0" ®�LU1m DO�.YIlmO— 00C�S.7mm� D ©gym®" ©omm� 00E�"Camm� - mo .:- n -�• mm� 0� r'n'r'D.a� mm� '0 om�mo� �0�m0 0O�m0— DO R'IT'^� 1 m m0- 0®®' m0— �0®m0— Q �8 „ a. '1 m0— �OmmO- 0� o0mmo� T R E E S U R V E Y seas 3. Dro I. I. man. In rouu. rm1. STAVROFP MSM CORP. 5b Metro Plax South SHH[eg8o wmm, ohw um> 6e+15q 9EV1 P% ca-aa ReNn . 0 W �1 P4 P4 W Q cn �w W QI 0 CU RD.Zaade ,I 4R Asso082CS Inc. lmrmpAdb®eIDWB Ima, mAT JZZf span 1 C RITICAL ROOT ZO (DRIP U NE) 1 me ciFj m DuM n Cea.. 153 I Um. Trte PrenrvoDen 153.141 DefinNOn. In. em Imam. R, an ImaWnvry "a. Mn 9muna Eemnln a hm ., Pe nmla ". al iM aentm . iM bunk or u, bn, and nwiq or EameNml to I ne lest rw I Ines MOL 2....4 of Wb4n .1, 1St IqM Uee. G ehualbn MM n., 15 }1A5 (A) NOTES: ve7.nM Fmurg iM e. oNx w Mrvie. HD 11EE WPS USIXD M M o mannue rrom \M . 1XE FOIIL'.. PoIMS hunk I fentl in , un that, qu.Yt min. ual . a t a min imum \M E l mt iann a. 201 5 1.. i m in I$ bet xni in SD2{ a th. Pl nn unlm lnmvlu opptm Inn PMAg Dllealor a. emgna. e . .1 501 QIIImO— ®' OruLU1m '®” �O�II�mO— ®` �0Om0— m0— ®�LU1m ©omm� T R E E S U R V E Y seas 3. Dro I. I. man. In rouu. rm1. STAVROFP MSM CORP. 5b Metro Plax South SHH[eg8o wmm, ohw um> 6e+15q 9EV1 P% ca-aa ReNn . 0 W �1 P4 P4 W Q cn �w W QI 0 CU RD.Zaade ,I 4R Asso082CS Inc. lmrmpAdb®eIDWB Ima, mAT JZZf span 1 C RITICAL ROOT ZO (DRIP U NE) 1 me ciFj m DuM n Cea.. 153 I Um. Trte PrenrvoDen 153.141 DefinNOn. In. em Imam. R, an ImaWnvry "a. Mn 9muna Eemnln a hm ., Pe nmla ". al iM aentm . iM bunk or u, bn, and nwiq or EameNml to I ne lest rw I Ines MOL 2....4 of Wb4n .1, 1St IqM Uee. G ehualbn MM n., 15 }1A5 (A) NOTES: ve7.nM Fmurg iM e. oNx w Mrvie. HD 11EE WPS USIXD M M o mannue rrom \M . 1XE FOIIL'.. PoIMS hunk I fentl in , un that, qu.Yt min. ual . a t a min imum \M E l mt iann a. 201 5 1.. i m in I$ bet xni in SD2{ a th. Pl nn unlm lnmvlu opptm Inn PMAg Dllealor a. emgna. e . .1 501 T R E E S U R V E Y seas 3. Dro I. I. man. In rouu. rm1. STAVROFP MSM CORP. 5b Metro Plax South SHH[eg8o wmm, ohw um> 6e+15q 9EV1 P% ca-aa ReNn . 0 W �1 P4 P4 W Q cn �w W QI 0 CU RD.Zaade ,I 4R Asso082CS Inc. lmrmpAdb®eIDWB Ima, mAT JZZf span 1 SHAMROCK BOULEVARD gg§ pao 3` p �a 2 Shamrock Crossing LLC �' ° mb x 6�� IN. 200508220170414 $ x'+ a o 0 O\�t 4I ~ Nb"•7,Nb flu+, X ' w °o : � M ° ° m nave &S `S* `' u., w ° a o /l yyyyyy c, V ` a v av m &7✓,,f }} p n q iS)A Z omO F N. Q 00 2 zN =a ~ O �1 -O ao a 2 " "'� +., Scott OannabN /e, 2� �C ,.r �"pO ' Tiusfee F � ` Jo ,:' ° 0.......... Sj ", O 0.541 Ae m 2 2 ' 5''... m O a 18 O.R. 003 B10 an -"a a `� Oc n'ZI r m a G'p F ;,SL .•. i05 O .' \'r N v N l a yn i� I m O n � 0b ma b O m ° N 4v Oa ' Oa , I 400'0W f Oa�N Obm n 'baoi ba gyp° O ONn �qa Zr Y� "2 O n 1 b ��-`.' brtb m — RAM DA WD _ ROAD # ° PB 5 — P G 93 — — Mom Oir NN°4N r Nv tih+ -0 Nq ON'bm0000 OvNN O�m `°Ny aP`aN "ovv" NobN o b0 000. N�.pN� °N �"O Na�am °m ON ?00 004NNti^`04NM N Nm N y b�u0o04 N O O a it 6 ^1 0 II 3 0 66 n maa $ sgb °� s a9aa¢s a » 4os as>ana s a.w n 3s y a' ^'ax o,� m. ab E-9