Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 31-11RECORD OF ORDINANCES Inc. Ordinance No. 31 -11 Passed 20 AN ORDINANCE REZONING FOUR PARCELS TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 17.98 ACRES FROM PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (EARLINGTON VILLAGE), TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (EARLINGTON VILLAGE PUD, SUBAREA D). (EARLINGTON VILLAGE PUD - CASE 11- 019Z/PDP/FDP) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, _ of its elected members concurring, that: Section 1. That the following described real estate (parcel numbers) 273 - 001799, 273 - 003145, 273 - 002922, 273 - 005367 (see attached map marked "Exhibit X'), situated in the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned PUD, Planned 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 effected 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 1 i-� day of 2011. ATTEST: Clerk of Council CITY OF DUBLIN_ Office of the City Manager 5200 Emerald Parkway • Dublin, OH 43017 -1090 Phone: 614 - 410 -4400 • Fax: 614 - 410 -4490 To: Dublin City Council �� From: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager ``k� Date: May 19, 2011 ll� Initiated By: Steve Langworthy, Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning Re: Ordinance 31 -11 —Rezoning Four Parcels Totaling Approximately 17.98 Acres from PUD, Planned Unit Development District ( Earlington Village), to PUD, Planned Unit Development District ( Earlington Village PUD, Subarea D). ( Earlington Village PUD - Case 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP) Summary Ordinance 31 -11 is a request for review and approval of a rezoning/preliminary development plan for 17.98 acres to PUD, Planned Unit Development District, modifying the development text to permit existing daycare and pre - school uses in a new subarea consisting of four parcels in the Earlington Village Planned Unit Development District. No site modifications are proposed. Background Earlington Village PUD City Council approved Ordinance 19 -80, rezoning 288 acres to PUD for the Earlington Village subdivision on May 6, 1980. The Earlington Village preliminary development plan included a mix of residential densities, including single - family and multiple - family apartment uses, parks, school, and three church sites. The three churches in the Earlington Village PUD, including the Dublin Baptist Church, the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church, and the Dublin Presbyterian Church, were originally constructed in 1982, 1985, and 1996. Classroom Space & Religious Facilities Classroom spaces for Sunday school, accessory to the use of churches and other places of worship, are required to meet the same Building Code requirements as commercial educational facilities. In some instances, church classrooms have been adapted for separate daycare and preschool uses without receiving prior zoning approval. The churches each have approved building permits for classroom spaces that are also currently used for daycares and preschools. According to the Ohio Department of Jobs and Family Services, the Dublin Baptist Church has been licensed for child care since 2003, the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church has been licensed since 2001, and the Dublin Presbyterian Church has been licensed since 2007. Fee Waiver Request Daycare and preschool uses are not permitted uses in the Earlington Village PUD. To make the existing facilities legal, the Earlington Village development text must be rezoned to add daycare and preschool uses to the permitted uses. The churches requested a fee waiver from City Council on March 28, 2011 for the filing fee for the rezoning/preliminary development plan and final development plan applications. Instead of granting the request, given the length of time that the Memo re. Ordinance 3 1 -11 Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Earlington Village PUD May 19, 2011 Page 2 of 2 daycare and preschool facilities had been operating, Council initiated this City- sponsored rezoning application. Description The three church sites in the Earlington Village PUD are located on four parcels totaling 17.98 acres and include the Dublin Baptist Church (8.91 acres), the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church (4.07 acres), and the Dublin Presbyterian Church (5.0 acres). The proposed development text establishes a new subarea, Subarea D, within the existing Earlington Village Planned Unit Development District for the existing church sites. All other Subareas are unchanged, and no site modifications are proposed. Development Text The permitted use table (Table 1) and the development standards table (Table 2) have been modified to include the proposed uses, including Religious or Public Assembly Uses; Adult or Child Day Care; and Educational Facility. These uses are consistent with the use categories proposed with recent Zoning Code amendments. The only substantive change is the addition of Subarea D (new text is shown in red). Recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this rezoning with preliminary development plan and final development plan at the May 5, 2011 meeting and recommended approval of the rezoning to City Council. Recommendation Planning recommends City Council approval of Ordinance 31 -11 at the second reading/public hearing on June 13, 2011. 11-01 D Development ^N City of Dublin Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan/ ,\ A Land Use and Final Development Plan Long Range Planning Earlington Village PUD Text Modification- Feet Day Care and Preschool Uses 0 500 1,000 CITY OF DUBLIN,. Land Use and Long Range Planning 5800 Shier -Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 Phone/ TDD: 614-410-4600 Fax: 614- 410 -4747 Web Site: www.dublin.oh.us February 2009 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPLICATION (Code Section 153.232) I. PLEASE CHECK THE TYPE OF APPLICATION: ❑ Informal Review ❑ Concept Plan (Section 153.056(A)(1)) Preliminary Development Plan I Rezoning (Section 153.053) Final Development Plan (Section 153.053(E)) ❑ Amended Final Development Plan (Section 153.053(E)) ❑ Standard District Rezoning (Section 153.018) ❑ Preliminary Plat (Section 152.015) ❑ Final Plat (Section 152.085) ❑ Conditional Use (Section 153.236) ❑ Corridor Development District (CDD) (Section 153.115) ❑ Corridor Development District (CDD) Sign (Section 153.115) ❑ Minor Subdivision ❑ Right -of -Way Encroachment ❑ Other (Please Specify): Please utilize the applicable Supplemental Application Requirements sheet for additional submittal requirements that will need to accompany this application form. II. PROPERTY INFORMATION: This section must be completed. Property Address(es): �(q rj C'Y" F4t ' 51 - 15 I4 Ot I r� 4 '5 � I Tax ID /Parcel Number(s): q Mailing Address: (Street, City, State, Zip Code) OkA; / t �y ant Parcel Size(s) (Acres): 00 Email or Alternate Contact Information: 0. Existing Land Use /Development: i 44 hJte' IF APPLICABLE, PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: Proposed Land UselDevelopment: k)v [✓ I Total acres affected by application: 1 q �_ at WX U(';;r ar- 111. CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER(S1: Please attach additional sheets if needed. Name (Individual or Organization): C u rr h O Mailing Address: (Street, City, State, Zip Code) OkA; / t �y ant Daytime Telephone: 01 L — lf' `� CJ _ 4 Fax: q 115 ! Email or Alternate Contact Information: Page 1 ofl H February 2009 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPLICATION (Code Section 153.232) Land Use and Long Range Planning 5800 Shier -Rings Rood Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 Phone/ TDD: 614 -410 -4600 Fax: 614 -410 -4747 Web Sile: www.dublin.oh.us I. PLEASE CHECK THE TYPE OF APPLICATION: ❑ Informal Review ❑ Concept Plan (Section 153.056(A)(1)) Preliminary Development Plan t Rezoning (Section 153.053) Final Development Plan (Section 153.053(E)) ❑ Amended Final Development Plan (Section 153.053(E)) ❑ Standard District Rezoning (Section 153.018) ❑ Preliminary Plat (Section 152.015) ❑ Final Plat (Section 152.085) ❑ Conditional Use (Section 153.236) ❑ Corridor Development District (CDD) (Section 153.115) ❑ Corridor Development District (CDD) Sign (Section 153.115) ❑ Minor Subdivision ❑ Right -of -Way Encroachment ❑ Other (Please Specify): Please utilize the applicable Supplemental Application Requirements sheet for additional submittal requirements that will need to accompany this application form. II. PROPERTY INFORMATION: This section must be completed. Property Address(es): Tax ID1Parcel Number(s): fig 5 0 0 1 1 Parcel Size(s) (Acres): 5. 00 53�v� S . Q a M .�. �, v Existing Land Use /Development: f vY rv�J IF APPLICABLE, PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: t Proposed Land UselDevelopment: �] � �� Ver - ibR Total acres affected by application: 1 9 q 7 OR C � III. CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER(5): Please attach additional sheets if needed Name (Individual or Organization): r` n I uct G�� Mailing Address: co; ( J K ` mvxk (Street, City, State, Zip Code) WJ&A` 5U flaytime Telephone: f 1� � � f _r — f Fax: Email or Alternate Contact Information: .A Page ya1 February 2009 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPLICATION (Code Section 153.232) Land Use and Long Range Planning 58M Shier -Rings Rood Dublin, Ohlo 43016-1236 Phone/ Too: 614 -410 -4600 Fax: 614-410-4747 W €fb Silm. w�AiAhlifwl i.tn 1. PLEASE CHECK THE TYPE OF APPLICATION: ❑ Informal Review ❑ Final Plat (Section 152.085) ❑ Concept Plan ❑ Conditional Use (Section 153,056(A)(1)) Preliminary Development Plan I Rezoning (Section 153.236) ❑ Corridor Development District (CDD) (Section 153.053) (Section 153.115) Final Development Plan (Section 153.053(E)) ❑ Corridor Development District (CDD) Sign (Section 153.115) ❑ Amended Final Development Plan (Section 153.053(E)) ❑ Standard District Rezoning (Section 153.018) ❑ Preliminary Plat (Section 152.015) ❑ Minor Subdivision ❑ Right -of -Way Encroachment ❑ Other (Please Specify): Please utilize the applicable Supplemental Application Requirements sheet for additional submittal requirements that will need to accompany this application form. II. PROPERTY INFORMATION: This section must be completed. Property Address(es): 4(q 5 ( ,�0 Tax ID /Parcel Number(s): p 9, 0D Existing Land Use /Development: F0 — 644vgJ t } ! l kf g Parcel Size(s) (Acres): 5 . Of "Ar I% Cj + MR IF APPLICABLE, PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWIN'G�r.� ,� ! Proposed Land UselDevolopment: ' y]I{ � �v ' / I T�' / �+te,,r-iDF Total acres affected by application: H. q4 ac y III. CURRENT PROP OWNERISI- PiRacP attach nriditinnai chnote if noadari QV. Name (Individual or Organization): Dy A ,,� 611. • 4 ,/ T k kah P Y + l v Malting Address: 5 ��5 W (Street, City, State, Zip Code) i i V k +W Daytime Telephon> : /� _ Ql Fax: Email or Alternate Contact Information: r6uwur Page,Yof,2' 1 5 q VIII. UTILITY DISCLAIMER: The OwnerlApplicant acknowledges the approval of this request for review by the Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission and /or Dublin City Council does not constitute a guarantee or binding commitment that the City of Dublin will be able to provide essential services such as water and sewer facilities when needed by said Owner /Applicant. I , the owner or authorized representative, acknowledge that approval of this request does not constitute a guarantee or binding commitment that the City of Dublin will be able to provide essential services such as water and sewer facilities when needed by said Owner /Applicant. Signature of applicant or authorized representative: oate: IX. APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT: This section must be completed and notarized I A. , the owner or authorized representative, have read and understand the contents of this app cation, The information contained in this application, attached exhibits and other information submitted is complete and in all respects true and correct, to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature of applicant or authorized representative: Date: 4 r_ '. V7 Subscribed and sworn to before me this L, - r "' day of _P YI I , 20 1 1 State of G U 1 0 J f County of _ I� �I�� �t �, I IV Notary Pub _ `%LAI �J .U� �t t, /�' FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Amount Received: Of Application No: 1I -iL �1� - PU Date(s): ' -I r ) 11,01L PFZ Action: Receipt No: tYpr Map Zone: � Date Received: 9j J7j /if Received By: City Council (First Reading): ��ti�i��,all City Council (Second Reading): City Council Action: I Ordinance Number: 31 M Type of Request: WtV"I PLAi 1 � N, S, E, W (Circle) Side of: N, S, E, W (Circle) Side of Nearest Intersection: Distance from Nearest Intersection: Existing Zoning District: Requested Zoning District: Page /of / 4 4 Earlington Village Planned Unit Development District Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Adopted by Dublin Village Council on June 16, 1980 Amended January 7, 1985 Amended June 4, 1990 Amended . 2011 Earlington Village - Preliminary Development Plan - Table 1 Site Data: Gross Acreage 336.46 Acres (Includes approximately 43 acres from Hemingway West) Use # Units Acreage Subarea A 3 3.88 Estate Lots Subareas Al & A 2 147.2 Single- Family Lots 318 (Includes 35 Acres of Open Space and 63 +1- Acres previously in Hemingway West) Subarea B 59 98 Single- Family Cluster Subarea B1 Single- Family Cluster 171 61.9 Subarea C Multiple- Family 538 95.7 Subarea D Religious or Public Assembly Uses; Adult or 17.98 Child Day Care; Educational Facility 336.46 Acres Density .78 du /acre 2.16 du /acre 6.0 du/acre 2.76 du /acre (Avg.) 5.62 du /acre (Avg.) Total Open Space Data Community Park /School Site Neighborhood Parks (2) Subarea C "Boulevard Lawn" Brand Road No -Build Zone Lake Area 1089 Units 26 +/- Acres 6 +/- Acres 17 +/- Acres 20 +/- Acres 6 +/- Acres 3.4 du /acre (Avg.) Total 75 +/-Acres Earlington Village - Preliminary Development Plan - Table 2 Open Min. Lot Min. Setbacks (Ft) Max. Min. Lot Subarea Space Width Total Height z Area (Ft) Front Each Side Rear (Acres) (Ft) Side (Ft) A 40,000 150 35 25 10 50 35 Ai +/-3 10,000 75 25 14 6 25 35 Az +/-3 8,500 65 25 12 5 25 35 4,500 (min. B area per unit 45 It (if lots) 10 10 5 15 35 if no platted lots Bi (Applicable standards include those as listed "Ai -B'� (Includes 37 50 feet from 25 feet from multi-family C Acres of N/A N/A Public ROW line 40 Open Space Per Code/ Per Code/ Per Code/ Per Code/ Per D N/A N/A NjA Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved FDP FDP FDP FDP FDP Additional Open Space/ +/ -26 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A School Site PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION CITY OF DUBLIN,. Land Use and MAY 5, 2011 Long Range Planning 5800 Shier -Rings Rand Dublin. Ohio 43016 -1236 Phone/ TDD: 614 - 410 -4600 Fax: 614- 4144747 Web Sile: www.dublin.oh.us creating a Legacy The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 5. Earlington Village PUD - Tent Modification - Daycare & Preschool Uses 11 -01 9Z/PDP/FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan Final Development Plan 5475 Brand Road, 7195 Coffman Road & 5775 Dublinshire Drive Proposal: Modifications to a development text to permit existing daycare and pre - school uses in a new subarea consisting of three parcels in the Earlington Village Planned Unit Development District. The proposal does not include any site modifications. Request: Review and approval of a rezoning with preliminary development plan and final development plan application under the provisions of Code Section 153.050. Applicant: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager, City of Dublin. Planning Contact: Rachel S. Ray, AICP, Planner I. Contact Information: (614) 410 -4656, rray @dublin.oh.us MOTION #1: To recommend to City Council approval of this Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan because this proposal complies with the rezoning /preliminary development plan criteria and the existing development standards within the area. VOTE: 7-0. RESULT: Approval of this Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan will be recommended to City Council. Page 1 of 2 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION MAY 5, 2011 5. Earlington Village PUD - Tent Modification - Daycare & Preschool Uses 11 -01 9Z/PDP/FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan Final Development Plan 5475 Brand Road, 7195 Coffman Road & 5775 Dublinshire Drive MOTION #2: To approve this Final Development Plan because this proposal complies with the proposed development text, the final development plan criteria and existing development in the area, with one condition: 1) That the property owners work with Planning to identify landscaping improvements that will be necessary to make the sites comply with the Zoning Code and the approved final development plans, and that the deficiencies be corrected within 60 days of the effective date of the rezoning. *Rachel Ray, representing the City of Dublin, agreed to the above condition. VOTE: 7-0. RESULT: This Final Development Plan was approved. STAFF CERTIFICATION Rachel S. Ray, AICP Planner I Page 2 of 2 Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission May 5, 2011 — Minutes Page 1 of2 DRAFT 5. Earlington Village PUD - Text Modification - Daycare & Preschool Uses 11 -01 9Z/PDP/FDP Rezoning/ Preliminary Development Plan Final Development Plan 5475 Brand Road, 7195 Coffman Road & 5775 Dublinshire Drive Chris Amorose Groomes introduced this application involving modifications to a development text to permit existing daycare and preschool uses in a new subarea consisting of three parcels in the Earlington Village Planned Unit Development District (PUD). She said that the Commission has to make two motions, a recommendation to City Council on the preliminary development plan and rezoning, and a final vote on the final development plan. Ms. Amorose Groomes swore in those intending to address the Commission on this case including the applicant's representative, Rachel Ray and other City representatives. Ms. Ray presented this application for the Earlington Village PUD. She said the rezoning was for a text amendment to add a new subarea for daycare and preschool uses for three churches. She said no site modifications are proposed. Ms. Ray presented an aerial photograph of the Earlington Village PUD. She explained that the existing development standards include requirements for the residential uses, but nothing is specified for the non - residential uses. She said that the site and architecture of the three churches were specifically reviewed by the Commission through the final development plan process. Ms. Ray described and provided construction dates for each of the existing three churches in the Earlington PUD. Ms. Ray said that City Council recently reviewed and approved the Zoning Code Amendments to add daycares and preschools as permitted and conditional uses in some residential zoning districts and the SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District to address similar situations for other existing daycares in church facilities elsewhere in the City. She explained that since these three churches are zoned PUD within the Earlington Village planned district, their only option was to file a text amendment to allow those uses specifically. Ms. Ray said earlier this year, the churches requested a Fee Waiver of City Council to file this application and instead of approving the Fee Waiver, City Council directed staff to pursue a City- sponsored rezoning to add these uses to the Earlington Village planned district. Ms. Ray said that this application includes a new subarea, Subarea D, with new permitted uses that include religious or public assembly, adult or child daycare, and educational facilities, all of which are consistent with some of the use categories the Commission was seen with recent Zoning Code amendments. Ms. Ray said for the development standards, since no site modifications are being proposed, Planning is recommending that future site modifications be approved by the Commission through the final development plan or amended final development plan process, or be deferred to the Zoning Code as appropriate. She said that Planning has reviewed this application, based on the review criteria for rezoning with preliminary development plan and final development plan, and recommends approval of the rezoning with preliminary development plan, and approval of the final development plan with one condition: 1) That the property owners work with Planning to identify landscaping improvements that will be necessary to make the sites comply with the Zoning Code and the approved final development plans, and that the deficiencies be corrected within 60 days of the effective date of the rezoning. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission May 5, 2011 — Minutes Page 2 of 2 DRAFT Ms. Amorose Groomes invited public comments in regard to this application. (There was none.) Amy Kramb confirmed that educational facilities were added to cover the preschools because they did not fall under a daycare. Ms. Kramb asked why the original 13 -acres allotted to churches had increased to 17.98 acres. Ms. Ray explained that it was difficult to tell because the original approved rezoning included a general area for the Dublin Presbyterian Church, but a later cluster home development was approved and some of the acreage shifted a little. Ms. Kramb confirmed that the 17.98 acres existed between the three churches and that did not allow them to build any more. Mr. Hardt noted that he did not see a playground shown for the Presbyterian Church and he asked if there were plans for one. Ms. Ray said there was nothing proposed at this time for a playground. Mr. Hardt asked if the Commission was able to vote on a final development plan before a final rezoning action was made by City Council. Jennifer Readler explained that if City Council did not approve the rezoning, then a final development plan approved by the Commission tonight would not be effective. MOTION #1 - Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan Mr. Taylor made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of this Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan because this proposal complies with the rezoning /preliminary development plan criteria and the existing development standards within the area. Mr. Hardt seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Budde, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 7 - 0.) MOTION #2- Final Development Plan Mr. Taylor made the motion to approve this Final Development Plan because this proposal complies with the proposed development text, the final development plan criteria and existing development in the area, with one condition: 1) That the property owners work with Planning to identify landscaping improvements that will be necessary to make the sites comply with the Zoning Code and the approved final development plans, and that the deficiencies be corrected within 60 days of the effective date of the rezoning. Ms. Ray, on behalf of the applicant agreed to the above condition. Mr. Fishman seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Budde, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 7 - 0.) City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission CITY OF DUBLIN. Planning Report an, `. n g .eonnn; Thursday, May 5, 2011 M shho,,ngs eootl Oubin. OFiad3T 61136 Phone/ MD 61 L416d]d] = FO Earlington Village PUD- Development Text Modification - Daycare 61 " S " " °°adi° ' "" & Preschool Uses Case Summary Agenda Item 5 Case Number 11 -0192 /PDP /FDP Site Location 5475 Brand Road, 7195 Coffman Road & 5775 Dublinshire Drive. Proposal Modifications to a development text to permit existing daycare and preschool uses in a new subarea consisting of three parcels in the Earlington Village Planned Unit Development District. The proposal has no site modifications. Applicant Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager, City of Dublin. Case Manager Rachel S. Ray, AICP, Planner l 1 (614) 4144656 1 rray @dublin.oh.us Requests Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan & Final Development Plan Review and recommendation to City Council under the Planned District provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050 for the rezoning with preliminary development plan Review and approval of a Anal development plan under the Planned District provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050. Planning Recommendation Recommendation of approval to City Council of the rezoning with preliminary development plan; approval of a final development plan with one condition. In Planning's opinion, this proposal complies with all applicable review criteria and the existing development standards within the area and approval with one condition is recommended. Condition - Final Development Plan That the property owners work with Planning to identify landscaping improvements that will be necessary to make the sites comply with the Zoning Code and the approved final development plans, and that the deficiencies be corrected within 60 days of the effective date of the rezoning. n4Ym I Ml and 1111 V cominlsA4o �DwFDP I ��ton Wa Pnn Preschool n Nes Thv " 20111 P(p2 R of 12 GH of Dublin x e:nOPOomre A in Pand and ° '^ ^ ell Loo9R 9e Ple ning E•n nVWil Po a. ., lest v 530 1,00o City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP I Earlington Village PUD Text Modification, Daycare & Preschool Uses Thursday, May 5, 2011 1 Page 3 of 12 Facts Application Site Area The three church sites are located on four parcels totaling 17.98 acres: • Dublin Baptist Church: 8.91 acres • Prince of Peace Lutheran Church: 4.07 acres . Dublin Presby terian Church: 5.0 acres Zonin All arcels are zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District. Surrounding Zoning PUD, Planned Unit Development District, including single- and multiple - and Uses family residences in Earlington Village, the Asherton of Dublin apartment community, and the Brandon neighborhood across Brand Road. Wyandot Elementary School is located to the north across Dublinshire Drive from Dublin Presbyterian Church, and large residential lots in Washington Township are located east of the Dublin Baptist Church across Coffman Road. Site Features . 65,000- square -foot church constructed in 1982 and expanded in 1995 and 2006. The church received approval for a 9,500- square -foot addition on the north side of the building that has not yet been constructed. . Playground on the northwest side of the building. . 421 parking spaces north and west of the church. .40 -foot building setback from Coffman Road and 30 -foot setback from Dublin Baptist Church (7195 Coffman Road) Earlington Parkway. One driveway on Coffman Road and one on Earlington Parkway. Mounding and landscaping along the western site boundary. 100 -year floodplain where the Bear Run stream crosses the site. Prince of Peace Lutheran Church (5475 Brand Road) • 25,332- square -foot church built in 1985 and expanded in 1996 and 2004. • Playground on the northwest side of the building. • 162 parking spaces in two lots on the east and west sides of the church. • 60 -foot building setback and 48 -foot pavement setback from Earlington Parkway and a scenic "River Character" road setback from Brand Road, recommended at between 60 and 100 feet; 30 -foot building setback from the north property line. • Two driveways on Earlington Parkway. • Mounding and mature landscaping buffer the existing residential lot north of the church property. • A large portion of the site, including the two parking areas, within the 100- year floodplain where the Bear Run stream crosses the site. Dublin Presbyterian Church (5775 Dublinshire Drive) • 13,274- square -foot church constructed in 1996. • 156 -space parking lot. • Required 30 -foot building and pavement setback from Dublinshire Drive; 30 -foot side and rear yard building setbacks; 15 -foot side and rear yard pavement setbacks. One driveway on Dublinshire Drive. Pedestrian path connecting to Wyandot Elementary School and adjacent City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP I Earlington Village PUD Text Modification, Daycare & Preschool Uses Thursday, May 5, 2011 1 Page 4 of 12 Facts Development Context Case Background Fee Waiver Application neighborhoods along the east and south portions of the lot. Mature trees are around the perimeter. The Bear Run waterway runs along the rear portion of the site, partially within the 100 -year floodplain and Stream Corridor Protection Zone. Undeveloped area south and west of the existing church and parking lot reserved for a future second phase of development for additional and parking areas. Earlington Village PUD The Earlington Village preliminary development plan includes a mix of residential densities, including single - family and multiple - family apartment uses, parks, school, and three church sites. Community Plan Future Land Use: Private Institutional, which includes land and facilities occupied by private uses and organizations such as hospitals, religious centers /activities, private schools, and other similar uses, with intensity of development to be determined based on use and location. Uses are consistent with the Future Land Use designation. Classroom Space & Religious Uses Classroom spaces for Sunday school, accessory to the use of churches and other places of worship, are required to meet the same Building Code requirements as commercial educational facilities. In some cases, classrooms were adapted for separate daycare and preschool uses without receiving prior zoning approval. The applicants have approved building permits for classroom spaces that are also used for daycares and preschools. the City of Dublin became aware of the daycares and preschools trom a building permit application to expand an existing preschool classroom at the Dublin Presbyterian Church. The other two daycare operations were identified through the licensing records of the Ohio Department of Jobs and Family Services. The Dublin Baptist Church has been licensed for child care since 2003, the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church since 2001, and the Dublin Presbyterian Church since 2007. Daycare and preschool uses are not permitted uses in the Earlington Village PUD, which includes specific uses permitted by subarea. The Earlington Village PUD development text must be rezoned to add daycare and preschool uses to the permitted uses. This is a City application by direction of City Council. The applicants requested a fee waiver from City Council on March 28, 2011. Instead of granting the request, and given the length of time that the daycare and preschool facilities had been operating, Council initiated a City- sponsored City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP I Earlington Village PUD Text Modification, Daycare 8 Preschool Uses Thursday, May 5, 2011 1 Page 5 of 12 Facts Case Background Earlington Village PUD Case Background Dublin Baptist Church Case Background Prince of Peace Lutheran Church Application 1980 City Council approved Ordinance 19 -80, rezoning 288 acres to PUD for the Earlington Village subdivision after a recommendation of approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission on May 6, 1980. 1982 PZC approved the final development plan and final plat for Section 1 of the Earlington Village subdivision. 1990 City Council approved a modification to the preliminary development plan for Earlington Village (the "Turnberry Refinement ") to add a third church site and provide 37 single - family lots instead of 50 single - family cluster lots on June 4, 1990, after a recommendation of approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission on May 10, 1990. 1994 PZC approved an amended final development plan on December 8, 1994 for a 32,426- square -foot expansion to the existing 20,390- square -foot church facility. 2006 PZC approved an amended final development plan for an addition and a 9,500- square -foot future expansion that has not been constructed to date. 1985 The Planning and Zoning Commission approved a final development plan for the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church. 1996 & 2004 PZC approved amended final development plan applications for an expansion to the existing church sanctuary and parking areas, and the addition of classrooms. Case Background 1995 Dublin Presbyterian PZC approved the final development plan for the first phase of a two -phase Church church development. To date, the church has not pursued the second phase, which must receive approval of an amended final development plan from the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to construction. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP I Earlington Village PUD Text Modification, Daycare & Preschool Uses Thursday, May 5, 2011 1 Page b of 12 Details Process Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Rezoning to a Planned Unit Development requires approval of a development text to serve as the zoning regulation; the Zoning Code covers all requirements not addressed in the development text. The proposed development text establishes a new subarea, Subarea D, within the existing Earlington Village Planned Unit Development District for the existing church sites. All other Subareas are unmodified. If the daycare and preschool uses are approved, final occupancy may be obtained for the building permit for the classroom expansion for the Dublin Presbyterian Church (the classroom expansion is internal to the existing building). The rezoning /preliminary development plan includes: • A new 17.98 -acre subarea (Subarea D), comprised of the three existing church sites. • Proposed permitted uses include Religious or Public Assembly Uses, Adult or Child Day Care; and Educational Facility. These uses are consistent with the use categories recently approved with recent Zoning Code amendments. • No site modifications are proposed with this application. rExisting The existing Earlington Village PUD text includes few specific development Development requirements for the non - residential subareas. Development details were Standards approved in the final development plan, including building and pavement setbacks, lot coverage, landscaping, lighting, signs, and architecture. Other regulations defer to the Zoning Code. Proposed The permitted use table (Table 1) and the development standards table Development (Table 2) have been modified to include the proposed uses. The only Text substantive change is the addition of Subarea D. New text is shown in red. Analysis Process Section 153.050 of the Zoning Code identifies criteria for the review and approval for a rezoning /preliminary development plan (full text of criteria attached). Following is an analysis by Planning based on those criteria. L Consistency with Dublin Zoning Code 2J Conformance with adopted Plans Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Criterion met: The addition of daycare and preschool uses is consistent with the purpose, intent and applicable standards of the Dublin Zoning Code. Criterion met: The Community Plan identifies the land use for these sites as Private Institutional. The proposed uses are consistent with the Future Land Use designation. Advancement of Criterion met: This proposal conforms to the Community Plan, and the general welfare & addition of daycare and preschool uses will provide an important service orderly to the community. development I Plan'Overvew I City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP I Earlington Village PUD Text Modification, Daycare & Preschool Uses Thursday, May 5, 2011 1 Page 7 of 12 4J Effects on adjacent uses 15) Adequacy of open space fc residential C J Protection of natural feature and resources 7J Adequate infrastructure Traffic and pedestrian saf 9J Coordination integration of building & site relationships rtOJ Development L layout and in tensity r1) Stormwater L management t2J Community benefit 3J Design and appearance � 4J Development phasing r5J Adequacy of L public service �6) Infrastructure contributions Recommendation Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Approval In Planning's analysis, this proposal complies with the rezoning /preliminary development plan criteria and the existing development standards within the area. Given the length of time that these uses have been in operation and the valuable service provided to the community, approval is recommend Criterion met: It is appropriate for preschool and daycare uses to be located in close proximity to residential areas and places of employment. The three churches are located in a primarily residential area, and the daycare and preschool uses are able to provide a desirable service to the surrounding neighborhoo r Not applicable. Criterion met: Existing natural features and resources on the site, including s the Bear Run and Indian Run stream corridors, will continue to be protected since no site modifications are proposed with this application. Criterion met: The sites continue to have access to adequate utilities, and vehicular and pedestrian access continues to be available. No improvements are required as a result of the addition of daycares and preschools to the permitted uses. Criterion met: A traffic analysis has not been required at this time. Criterion met: The proposal maintains the existing development patterns of the sites as originally approved. Criterion met: The proposed uses will not impede orderly site layout or development intensity. Not applicable, since no site modifications are proposed. Criterion met: No deviations from the approved development regulations are requested. The proposed uses will continue to provide high quality childcare in close proximity to existing residences, which will serve as a benefit to the surrounding community. Not applicable, since no site modifications are proposed. 1 Not applicable. Criterion met: There are adequate services for the proposed uses. Criterion met: No public infrastructure contributions are required. Recommendation Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Approval In Planning's analysis, this proposal complies with the rezoning /preliminary development plan criteria and the existing development standards within the area. Given the length of time that these uses have been in operation and the valuable service provided to the community, approval is recommend City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP I Earlington Village PUD Text Modification, Daycare & Preschool Uses Thursday, May 5, 2011 1 Page 8 of 12 Details Final Development Plan Process The final development plan is the final step in the Planned District process and requires approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission of all development details including layout, architecture, signs, landscaping, lighting and other site improvements. No site modifications are proposed and the final development plan is identical to the preliminary development plan, including the addition of a new subarea adding daycare and educational facilities as permitted uses. Planning recommends that the final development plan be approved for the sites as they exist. All requirements of the proposed development text are met. Zoning Compliance A zoning compliance inspection identified minor landscaping deficiencies, lighting bJ Signs consistent Criterion met: No modifications to the signs are proposed at this time. Should with preliminary the churches wish to install signs for the daycares and /or preschools, the development signs are required to meet the Zoning Code or approval of an amended plan final development plan from the Planning and Zoning Commission would be required. including screening of service structures. Planning will work with the property owners to ensure that all Code requirements are met and that compliance is achieved prior to the Dublin Presbyterian Church receiving final occupancy for their buildin permit for classroom expansion. Analysis Final Development Plan Process Section 153.050 of the Zoning Code identifies criteria for the review and approval for a final development plan (full text of criteria attached). L Following is an analysis by Planning based on those criteria. 1 J Consistency with Criterion met: This proposal is consistent with the requirements of the the approved approved preliminary development plan through the approval of the preliminary development text modification. development plan. 2J Traffic and Criterion met: No modifications are proposed to vehicular or pedestrian pedestrian safety circulation. 3J Adequate Criterion met: The site has adequate public services. No open space public services dedication is required. and o pen space 4) Protection of Criterion met: No modifications are proposed, and therefore natural natural features features will continue to be protected. and resources Criterion met: No modifications are proposed to the existing lighting. 5J Adequacy of lighting bJ Signs consistent Criterion met: No modifications to the signs are proposed at this time. Should with preliminary the churches wish to install signs for the daycares and /or preschools, the development signs are required to meet the Zoning Code or approval of an amended plan final development plan from the Planning and Zoning Commission would be required. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP I Earlington Village PUD Text Modification, Daycare & Preschool Uses Thursday, May 5, 2011 1 Page 9 of 12 [Analysis 7J Appropriate landscaping to enhance, buffer, & soften the building and site L Condition 1 [ Compliant Stormwater management All phases comply with the previous criteria. 10) Compliance with other laws & reg Fina Development Plan Criterion met with condition: Minor landscaping deficiencies were identified through a recent Zoning Compliance inspection. The property owners will need to work with Planning to identify landscaping improvements that will be necessary to bring the site into compliance with the Zoning Code and the approved final development plans for each church facility within 60 days of the effective date of the rezoning. Criterion modifications are propose managem Not applicable to this application. Criterion met: The proposal complies with all other known applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations. Recommendation Final Development Plan Approval In Planning's analysis, this proposal complies with the proposed development text, the final development plan criteria and existing L development in the area. Planning recommends approval of this request with one condition. I+ rCondition That the property owners work with Planning to identify landscaping improvements that will be necessary to make the sites comply with the Zoning Code and the approved final development plans, and that the deficiencies be corrected within 60 days of the effective date of the r ezoning. 11 City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP I Earlington Village PUD Text Modification, Daycare & Preschool Uses Thursday, May 5, 2011 I Page 10 of 12 REZONING /PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN CRITERIA The purpose of the PUD process is to encourage imaginative 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 forwarded to City Council for a first reading /introduction and a second reading /public hearing for a 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. In the case of a combined rezoning /preliminary development plan and final development plan, the final development plan is not valid unless the rezoning /preliminary development plan is approved by Council. Review Criteria Section 153.050 of the Zoning Code identifies criteria for the review and approval for a Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan. 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 in the City so that the use and value of property within and adjacent to the area will be safeguarded; 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; City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP I Earlington Village PUD Text Modification, Daycare & Preschool Uses Thursday, May 5, 2011 1 Page 11 of 12 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 applicable 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. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN CRITERIA The purpose of the Planned Unit Development process is to encourage imaginative 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 consists of up to three 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 intent of the final development plan is to show conformance with and provide a detailed refinement of the total aspects of the approved preliminary development plan (rezoning). The final development plan includes all of the final details of the proposed development and is the final stage of the PUD process. The Commission may approve as submitted, approve with modifications agreed to by the applicant, or disapprove and terminate the process. If the application is disapproved, the applicant may respond to Planning and Zoning Commission's concerns and resubmit the plan. This action will be considered a new application for review in all respects, including payment of the application fee. Appeal of any action taken by the Commission shall be to the Court of Common Pleas in the appropriate jurisdiction. Following approval by the Commission, the applicant may proceed with the building permit process. In the event that updated citywide standards are applicable, all subsequently approved final development plans shall comply with the updated standards if the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the updated standards would not cause undue hardship. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP I Earlington Village PUD Text Modification, Daycare & Preschool Uses Thursday, May 5, 2011 1 Page 12 of 12 Review Criteria In accordance with Section 153.055(B) Plan Approval Criteria, the Code sets out the following criteria of approval for a final development plan: 1) The plan conforms in all pertinent respects to the approved preliminary development plan provided, however, that the Planning and Zoning Commission may authorize plans as specified in § 153.053(E) (4); 2) Adequate provision is made for safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular circulation within the site and to adjacent property; 3) The development has adequate public services and open spaces; 4) The development preserves and is sensitive to the natural characteristics of the site in a manner that complies with the applicable regulations set forth in this Code; 5) The development provides adequate lighting for safe and convenient use of the streets, walkways, driveways, and parking areas without unnecessarily spilling or emitting light onto adjacent properties or the general vicinity; 6) The proposed signs, as indicated on the submitted sign plan, will be coordinated within the Planned Unit Development and with adjacent development; are of an appropriate size, scale, and design in relationship with the principal building, site, and surroundings; and are located so as to maintain safe and orderly pedestrian and vehicular circulation; 7) The landscape plan will adequately enhance the principal building and site; maintain existing trees to the extent possible; buffer adjacent incompatible uses; break up large expanses of pavement with natural material; and provide appropriate plant materials for the buildings, site, and climate; 8) Adequate provision is made for storm drainage within and through the site which complies with the applicable regulations in this Code and any other design criteria established by the City or any other governmental entity which may have jurisdiction over such matters; 9) If the project is to be carried out in progressive stages, each stage shall be so planned that the foregoing conditions are complied with at the completion of each stage; and 10) The Commission believes the project to be in compliance with all other local, state, and federal laws and regulations. EXISTING TEXT N W ro v N v W m N h ro d v W U 0 00 N N W W Q Q 1 1� O O o o0 ro ¢ ¢ O O ? v L ¢ L IE 3 W F ¢ ^ 7 3 • v Z ~ ' ,,, ._. W 0 ... I m N h v W U 0 00 N N W W Q Q 1 1� O O o o0 ro ¢ ¢ O O ? v v m m 3 W W � � 7 7 3 • •c a a` , ,,, oCO U U - T � � v � ¢ r � � G G O d d H C C U . M t .T MI M to 0 h h I O � Z Z N I O N Q Q L N CL C ¢ V +1 N � � y v . . M C CO 00 C C: w w w w C U ¢ ¢ 0 N N v v M+ h ¢ ¢ U U U U U U F F W W W U OW u u. � U. U U. L 4 v vi O � U LL. U U ¢ ¢ ti Q � �I F F W U . .J . .1 F F 4 4' ! ! Z W ¢ ¢ 0 0.5 0 0 U U . .-1 D D O W U F O C n iI ¢ ¢I +1 +1 +1 +1 + ' +1 W Z 0 Q W 1 .- Z � vi 2 m 1 1 O zV1a UJ ¢ W Q ¢ a.�Zw a F wQ ¢ 11 ama<0 Q 0w" :D0 O OWU moo; F U Z2 U(L 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification EXISTING TEXT S V x � y v� v1 M M M S M s .n v u v v o s W J+ ro E J v v Y w f C H X V ro E Y j v iL � N Y c a Y � � o w E g 'c a¢o O0 v H N O E C N 4 E D o :D r _ < 3 on 4 , EO ¢ N A 5 a r � cc � � ¢ t 3 Z c w c� tA ro CL A v Y 0 Z n ro Z ¢ Q o N V } O ro °— ¢ Ow Co v N o` n W I ^ �v n c v Y V) 0 -2W W t uui ¢Ur co Z¢`^ ° x Zz]Z W U ? o a O ~ O ~ �(L <0v Z 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan W Z Modification U v aOy o Ld v S (L v Z O_1p¢I ° ° °° CL 0 °° 10 o y H W a ° ° h` Z W �� Z ¢ m v 1 G C Y ¢ a �0 U Z ?UI w a U3 a +� +t ¢ w 0 a d Z O a N EL a N N Z a ¢ w W W ¢¢ ¢V ¢V Co mU Co U 4 ¢ Ln N Z Z w N w ,n W N S M s .n v u v v o s u p J+ ro E v v Y f C H X V ro E Y j v iL � N Y c a Y � � o w E g 'c O0 v H N O E C N 4 E D 0 3 on 4 , EO a N A t' U r � cc 3 Z c c� ro CL A v Y 0 Z n ro o V } O ro v N o` n 3 0 I ^ �v U- 0 c v Y ¢ -2W W t ¢Ur co Z¢`^ ° pv iC) may¢ W U ? o a O ~ O ~ �(L <0v Z 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification EXISTING TEXT ?2� &EP TABLE I E;aRLINGTON - PRELIHIN ?RY DEVELOP ENT PLAN Ac. fro:a ae.mllngway hest) SZT E DATA: Gross Acreage 331.4 Acres (Includes 43± ~DWELLING UNITS ACREAGE DENSITY USE 3 3.88 .78 £STATE LOTS (A) SINGLE F?1•1ILY (Al, P.2) 318 147.2 2.16 (Includes 35 Ac. of c=an space and 63g P.C. nrevicusiy in Hemitgaay West) SINGLE FAMILY CLUSTER (B) 59 9.8 6.0 SINGLE FXHILY CLUST =R (Bla)* 4'.113* (See note A) 38.536* 2.9* (Average) (North of Dubli. ^.shire) SINGLE F?1•IILY (Bib) * 37* 14.74 8* 2 . 5 * ) (Tvrnbury Subdivisicn) SINGLE F?19ILY (BIC)* 8* 3.616% 2.2* (?o Dublinshire Subdivision) 5.0* CHUF2CH SITE (Bid) (.East of Tur^ ^.bury) 13.0 C URCii SITES 538 95.7 5.62 (Average) , - tiITI- F ?14ILY (C) 1070* 1 331.48 3.23k (Average) TOTAL (See Note B) OPEN SPACE DATA: C=%UNITY ?AS-X /SC Si:3 26_ Ac. NE1G•r.BORFOOD ?ASKS (2) 6_ Ac. Y.F. XREA-'BOUL - •vrQ_RD1 ?. 1.v" 17—+ A.C. .. C:.1;3 A= E A /Bn=nD AD. NO BUILD 2ON3 20_ C. - PROPOSED LAN A. EA 6_ AC. TOTA 75_ AC. NOTE A: 171 D.U. allowed fbr B1 (as per 8/21184 Table I c: ?rel?m <_nary Dev. Plan) - 50 D.U. as ter T`.:rnbury cluster approved Final 9ev. ?tan 9 D.U. fer area scud of creek (assuming 2.2 density ca 3.616 ac.) 113 D.U. balance re- aining north of Dublinshire rive (Bla) )TOTE B: Average density of Bia - Bib 4 Bic - 2.78 DU/acre (2.0 -3.5 Allowed) _. nevised 8 -21 -84 • nevised 4 -27 -SO as relates to : efinemert of B1 area. i wxsum 6t1 o 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification EXISTING TEXT J er��Nt�?� h��Bn�nL A li Ii1 :�: ::h'�.. {-�ti,- ,— ..rs'C; i �,y���.�,{TI•. 7. ' l ' � , ,i O -L •�i•I III , {I { t ! i" I .' fi ` r - • ° i Ile q I 1 i' I I� ! l i i' E I I '' � �` f ' �.,. "' �`;;a..F`�'' :- • �: J` "; Z a` er� IJJ��� ��..1 <�T'^t e �„�L" tir11 . rt ,.� n ,�I ° I T. "�' \.�:J 1' 1 /I ,ice, � ( �y. � ' i �:(�. , • � 1 � w 1 � ) �u• • �tr'���.f� f J�*f.�+^]'� ., 1• \�• =' 1` j ! „ I AAA , A Pdo . + � C ..o.s : I♦• r�`w/J �+ �� (.1 1 '1 )�^ Y,!^ e-:' i W �ii9G,'Q;r�.�rtl �.��. � :: .':. •.�` ♦`\ �� A�•1i+ i(--.' { ~ I ��, . �•�� ��.IL ' j IA �yl^ ��l'/� � ~• ` • " .�• LL ^`I I � ( V .I I a� �•�� ���. \ \\ . . e. 1.. �. ..� �1� // . .. � ., ...1 . ' 1 1. � �{• EC - •' �� ' �,�� '" ^• .i .�- '--. "\ '• \ • __'I '- � .`, i ` ; : J'r �1` l; .: �`• i- ;-.:. ,�' \'• �• µ,_ye � =� _-. �..c. -•� �, E, v NJ.i� i `.�r tf r•" NO n •` jr I ; /'.$�' . t1, �'~' • I e 1.11 '/. {)' c } +I; n '` , '• 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP I• ° Rezoning/Preliminary Development � Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification Earlington Village Planned Unit Development District Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Adopted by Dublin Village Council on June 16, 1980 Amended January 7, 1985 Amended June 4, 1990 Amended . 2011 Earlington Village - Preliminary Development Plan - Table 1 Site Data: Gross Acreage 336.46 Acres (Includes approximately 43 acres from Hemingway West) Use # Units Acreage Subarea A 3 3.88 Estate Lots Subareas Al & A 2 147.2 Single- Family Lots 318 (Includes 35 Acres of Open Space and 63 +1- Acres previously in Hemingway West) Subarea B 59 98 Single- Family Cluster Subarea B1 Single- Family Cluster 171 61.9 Subarea C Multiple- Family 538 95.7 Subarea D Religious or Public Assembly Uses; Adult or 17.98 Child Day Care; Educational Facility 336.46 Acres Density .78 du /acre 2.16 du /acre 6.0 du/acre 2.76 du /acre (Avg.) 5.62 du /acre (Avg.) Total Open Space Data Community Park /School Site Neighborhood Parks (2) Subarea C "Boulevard Lawn" Brand Road No -Build Zone Lake Area 1089 Units 26 +/- Acres 6 +/- Acres 17 +/- Acres 20 +/- Acres 6 +/- Acres 3.4 du /acre (Avg.) Total 75 +/-Acres Earlington Village - Preliminary Development Plan - Table 2 Open Min. Lot Min. Setbacks (Ft) Max. Min. Lot Subarea Space Width Total Height z Area (Ft) Front Each Side Rear (Acres) (Ft) Side (Ft) A 40,000 150 35 25 10 50 35 Ai +/-3 10,000 75 25 14 6 25 35 Az +/-3 8,500 65 25 12 5 25 35 4,500 (min. B area per unit 45 It (if lots) 10 10 5 15 35 if no platted lots Bi (Applicable standards include those as listed "Ai -B'� (Includes 37 50 feet from 25 feet from multi-family C Acres of N/A N/A Public ROW line 40 Open Space Per Code/ Per Code/ Per Code/ Per Code/ Per D N/A N/A NjA Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved FDP FDP FDP FDP FDP Additional Open Space/ +/ -26 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A School Site Earlington Village PUD Proposed Subarea Map School/ — Community -r- Facility IL B1 B �\ �i \ D 1 �\0 � J D , y 0 600 1,200 Feet ; Map Updated on April 27, 2011 si Case History Table of Contents Fee Waiver Request— Dublin City Council —March 28, 2011 Dublin Baptist Church o Amended Final Development Plan —July 20, 2006 o Previous case history posted online Prince of Peace Lutheran Church Case History o Amended Final Development Plan — February 5, 2004 o Previous case history posted online Dublin Presbyterian Church Case History o Final Development Plan —April 6, 1995 Earlington Village PUD — Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan Case History o Case history posted online RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Mrs. Boring moved to cept the staff recommen ions presented, with the rovision that they follow up it Council about wheth a single or double ma arm will be installed. Ms. Chinnici- archer seconded the mo n. Vote on t motion: Ms. Chinnici -Zu cher, yes; Mr. Reiner, ye , rs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keen , yes; Mr, Gerber, yes; M or Lecklider, yes; Vice M r Salay, yes. • Fee Waiver Request for Rezoning Application - Earlington- Brandon PUD (Dublin Presbyterian Church, Prince of Peace Lutheran Church, Dublin Baptist Church) Mr. Langworthy noted that staff has been working with the various daycare operations operating in the City to bring them into compliance with the Zoning Code, as discussed earlier this evening. Three additional locations have been identified in the Earlington /Brandon PUD where daycare is being operated in three churches. The rezoning is necessary to bring them into compliance, as the existing development text does not permit daycare services. Staff has requested the churches apply for a rezoning to amend the development text to add daycare use to the allowable uses, bringing them into compliance. Staff is supportive of a fee waiver for this rezoning. All three of the operations are combined into a single request for a text amendment to the existing PUD. Vice Mayor Salay indicated she is supportive of this, but asked if the daycares are operated as non - profits or do the profits return to the church. She wants to ensure that a precedent is not set with this action in terms of a business operating daycares and fee waivers. Mr. Langworthy responded that the operations of two of the daycares were described in their letters, which were included in the packet. They indicate that they operate as not- for - profit. His understanding is that all three daycares operate as not - for - profits. Mrs. Boring noted she shares this concern. Is there an option for the City to sponsor the rezoning, based on the fact that these daycares have been in operation for a long time? Mr. Langworthy responded that staff did consider this option. However, a City - sponsored or applicant sponsored rezoning would bring the same compliance. Mrs. Boring pointed out that a City- initiated rezoning would not require that any fee be waived, however, and would not set a precedent. Mrs. Boring moved to have the City sponsor the rezoning for these three daycares, based on the fact that they have existed for a long period of time and the City is desirous of ensuring zoning compliance. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, yes. • t -of -Way Encroachment f alto — Piada Restaurant ase 10- 79CDD /CU) Ms. rtin stated this encroach nt request is associated w a patio for this new r aurant, to be constructed 6495 Sawmill Road. The to is Located on the southwest comer of Bank Drive and Sawmill Road. e Planning and Zoning Commission approve e site plan on February 1 , 2011. The City had aske e applicant to move building up toward the er intersection to create reef presence and t e more pedestrian friend) .The applicant is requesti approval of the right -of- y encroachment as show on the exhibit. The patio, do planters and patio fe 'ng will encroach into the ker Drive right -of -way ap oximately 5 feet 6 - inch It is Planning and Engin ring's recommendation th Council approve the : tbac ks. roachment. The applica s present to respond to a ional questions. s. Boring asked ho is site will relate to the B on Market restaurant in t s of 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP XZ Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION July 20, 2006 CITY OF DUBLIN.. Land Use and Long Range Planning 5800 Shier -Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 Phone: 614 -410 -4600 Fax: 614410 -4747 Web Site: w Auhlin.oh.os The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 2. Amended Final Development Plan 06- 099AFDP — Earlington Village — Dublin Baptist Church — 7195 Coffman Road Location: 8.9 acres located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Coffman Road and Earlington Parkway. Existing Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development (Earlington Village plan). Request: Review and approval of an amended final development plan under the provision of Code Section 153.053(E)(2)(b) and 153.055(B). Proposed Use: A 10,660- square -foot addition and a 9,500- square -foot future expansion to an existing church. Applicant: Dublin Baptist Church, 7195 Coffman Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017; represented by Richard Ritter, Phillip Markwood Architects, Inc., 240 North Fifth Street, Suite 140, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Jennifer M. Rauch, Planner. Contact Information: ( MOTION #1: To approve this amended final development plan because the proposal complies with the criteria set forth in the Dublin Zoning Code and the development is compatible with adjacent uses and proposed development in the area, with seven conditions: 1) That the applicant obtain all necessary building permits; 2) That a landscape plan reflecting existing conditions, including tree removal, and relocation be submitted prior to applying for building permits; 3) That the applicant to work with staff to ensure the site is in compliance with the Landscape Code and the comments in this staff report, subject to staff approval; 4) That protective tree fencing be installed and inspected prior to construction and remain through the duration of construction; 5) That any additions or changes in sight lighting meet Code and utilize cut -off fixtures; 6) That the stormwater management plan meet the requirements of the Stormwater Regulations to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and 7) That any impacts to the floodplain meet the requirements of the flood control ordinance to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. * Phillip Markwood agreed to the above conditions. Page 1 of 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION July 20, 2006 2. Amended Final Development Plan 06- 099AFDP — Earlington Village — Dublin Baptist Church — 7195 Coffman Road (Continued) VOTE: 5-0. RESULT: This amended final development plan was approved. MOTION #2: To reconsider this amended final development plan based on additional facts to consider and public input. VOTE: 5-0. RESULT: The application was reopened for public input. MOTION #3: To approve this amended final development plan because the proposal complies with the criteria set forth in the Dublin Zoning Code and the development is compatible with adjacent uses and proposed development in the area, with seven conditions: I ) That the applicant obtain all necessary building permits; 2) That a landscape plan reflecting existing conditions, including tree removal, and relocation be submitted prior to applying for building permits; 3) That the applicant to work with staff to ensure the site is in compliance with the Landscape Code and the comments in this staff report, subject to staff approval; 4) That protective tree fencing be installed and inspected prior to construction and remain through the duration of construction; 5) That any additions or changes in sight lighting meet Code and utilize cut -off fixtures; 6) That the stormwater management plan meet the requirements of the Stormwater Regulations to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and 7) That any impacts to the floodplain meet the requirements of the flood control ordinance to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. * Phillip Markwood agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 5-0. RESULT: This amended final development plan was approved. STAFF CERTIFICATION J eo����� Je tfer M. uch Planner 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Page 2 of 2 Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification Dublin Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — July 20, 2006 Page 2 of 5 they scuss /thataves prefer to have all c mission C e 6 will b Mr. Gerber swo cases and t are both consent Commission g t o pull co ent Case 2. [No one wished to pul3. [No on esponded.] / members pr9ent, and therefore He asked if there led.] He asked i. [The mi tes will reflect the or of the published age a.] 4. Amended Final D elopment Plan/Con ' inal Use 05 -08 Retail, Subare 5A — Kroger Cente ulti- Tenant Out Sawmill Ro [This case w ostponed prior to the eeting without discussion P — NE Quad Drive -Thru — or vote.] 2. Amended Final Development Plan 06- 099AFDP — Earlington Village — Dublin Baptist Church — 7195 Coffman Road Mr. Gerber asked for the applicant to come forward and he swore them in. He asked if the applicant agreed to the conditions as listed in the staff report. Mr. Phillip Markwood, Phillip Markwood Architects, agreed to the following conditions as contained in the staff report: Conditions: 1) That the applicant obtain all necessary building permits; 2) That a landscape plan reflecting existing conditions, including tree removal, and relocation be submitted prior to applying for building permits; 3) That the applicant to work with staff to ensure the site is in compliance with the Landscape Code and the comments in this staff report, subject to staff approval; 4) That protective tree fencing be installed and inspected prior to construction and remain through the duration of construction; 5) That any additions or changes in sight lighting meet Code and utilize cut -off fixtures; 6) That the stormwater management plan meet the requirements of the Stormwater Regulations to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and 7) That any impacts to the floodplain meet the requirements of the flood control ordinance to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Mr. Gerber moved for approval of this Amended Final Development Plan because the proposal complies with the criteria set forth in the Dublin Zoning Code and the development is compatible with adjacent uses and proposed development in the area, with the seven conditions. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ms. Jones, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Approved 5 — 0.) Mr. Markwood asked for clarification on mathematics mentioned in the background of the staff report. Mr. Gerber asked that it be worked with staff. Ms. Rauch said it was already covered and they will meet regarding the question. Mr. Gerber said if there is a correction needed to add to the next director's report. 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification Dublin Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — July 20, 2006 Page 3 of 5 2. Amended Final Development Plan 06- 099AFDP — Earlington Village — Dublin Baptist Church — 7195 Coffman Road (Reconsideration) Mr. Gerber made a motion for reconsideration of this amended final development based on additional facts to consider and pubic input. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Ms. Jones, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Approved 5 — 0.) Mr. Gerber swore in everyone wishing to give testimony. Beth Arnold, 7180 Blessington Court, said she lives south of the church and they have lived through the planning process 10 years ago and felt they have done a wonderful job in their addition. She said she wasn't notified until late this week and wanted to call attention that the parking situation because right now people are parking in the streets. She said it is not routinely every week, but on occasion it is a problem. She thought taking away so many parking spaces would cause a problem. She said they put a basketball court by her house and people are using the court at mid -night to play basketball and waking the neighbors. Jim Dobbs, Trustee of the Church, said that the basketball court is gone because the backboard has broken and will not be replaced. He said that he wasn't aware of any parking on the street and this is the first time he had heard of parking on the street, they have had several large funerals, one for a police officer and one for a fireman and there wasn't any problems. However they do have additional parking on the grass across the street. He said there is no reason for people to park on the street and they will monitor the situation and encourage people not to park on the street. He suggested no parking signs. He said the landscaping along that road would not be impacted in any way. Mr. Gerber asked that they keep an eye on the situation. Mr. Gunderman said the calculation for parking is based on the sanctuary as was done on the original approval, the addition does not change the parking calculation and they are still above the required ratio. He said that the church has purchased land across the street for additional parking. Mr. Gerber asked if it were illegal to park on the street. Ms. Rauch said it is permitted to park on the street. Ms. Rauch said that the notice was sent with the standard notification process, which is the two Fridays before this meeting and she didn't know what the delay would have been, but proper notice was given. Mr. Gerber asked for any questions. [No response.] Mr. Gerber said the basketball issue has been addressed and there is ample parking and asked that the church give a kind reminder. Mr. McCash asked that staff keep council informed of the parking situation along the street if it becomes an issue. 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — July 20, 2006 Page 4 of 5 Mr. Gerber moved for approval of this Amended Final Development Plan because the proposal complies with the criteria set forth in the Dublin Zoning Code and the development is compatible with adjacent uses and proposed development in the area, with the seven conditions. Conditions: 1) That the applicant obtain all necessary building permits; 2) That a landscape plan reflecting existing conditions, including tree removal, and relocation be submitted prior to applying for building permits; 3) That the applicant to work with staff to ensure the site is in compliance with the Landscape Code and the comments in this staff report, subject to staff approval; 4) That protective tree fencing be installed and inspected prior to construction and remain through the duration of construction; 5) That any additions or changes in sight lighting meet Code and utilize cut -off fixtures; 6) That the stormwater management plan meet the requirements of the Stormwater Regulations to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and 7) That any impacts to the floodplain meet the requirements of the flood control ordinance to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Mr. Phillip Markwood, Phillip Markwood Architects, agreed to the conditions. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ms. Jones, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Approved 5 — 0.) 3. rridor Development istriet ZReview 078C/Chas ank Signage — 3800 uller Road r. Gerber asked fo e applicant and n. He aske f the applicant agreed t he conditions as ff repoLitech Li ing and Mark Knisely, ase Bank, agreed to ns as 1 report. Mr. e s' t r moved for approva of this C r idor Dev opment District Sign eview application becau the proposal is con with the sign regul ons in the CDD ordi ce, and the signage is ro riate for the site rth the following fo conditions: 1) That the wi ow display signs loc ZBankl evati meet Code; 2) That the plicant use matte fi ' 3) That e applicant bring a sice with regard to dscaping by S ember 1, 2006; and 4) hat the applicant o in a sign Land Use and ng Range Planning Division prior to i allation. Joe Marek, Litech hting and Mark Kni agree to the conditions. Mr. Zimme an seconded the mo n and the vote was s follows: Mr. Fis an, yes; Mr. McCash, s; Ms Jones yes; Mr immerman, yes; an r. Gerber, yes. (Ap oved 5 — 0.) 4 1 Conditionainal Develo ment Plan /Corridor evelonment Distric OY 6- 084CU /AFMontan rill Patio — 6195 Sa mi 11- 0192 /PDP /FDP [This case was the ting without discuss or v. Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION FEBRUARY 5, 2004 CITY OF DUBLIN_ Division of PkuWng 5800 Shier -Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016.1236 Phone/rDD: 614 -410 -4600 kx:614-410.47A7 Web Site: www.dublin.oh.us The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 3. Revised Final Development Plan 04- 002RFDP — Prince Of Peace Expansion — 5475 Brand Road Location: 4.71 acres located on the southwest comer of Brand Road and Earlington Parkway. Existing Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Earlington/Brandon plan). Request: Review and approval of a revised final development plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.056. Proposed Use: An 8,932 square -foot building expansion to an existing 16,400 square -foot church. Applicant: Prince of Peace Lutheran Church, c/o Shervin Richie, 5475 Brand Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017; represented by Yanitza Marrero Cruz, Wandell & Schnell Architects, 130 East Chestnut Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Jamie E. Adkins, Planner. MOTION: To approve this final development plan because the proposed addition is consistent with the approved zoning and applicable standards, it improves the general welfare of the neighborhood and municipality, and the benefits of the arrangement and design of the proposed development justify a deviation from the standards for this development, with 16 conditions: 1) That the landscape plan be revised to incorporate comments in this report, subject to staff approval; 2) That the applicant identify floodplain on engineering plans and secure and provide proof of floodplain activity approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; 3) That site plans show all adjacent and opposing curb cuts, both existing and proposed; 4) That the site design comply with Stormwater Regulations to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 5) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; Page 1 of 2 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION FEBRUARY 5, 2004 14 A 3. Revised Final Development Plan 04- 002RFDP — Prince Of Peace Expansion — 5475 Brand Road (Continued) 6) That the design of parking lot pavement meet the approval of the City Engineer; 7) That there be no open cutting of the existing pavement to access the existing waterline; 8) That the dumpster enclosure utilize an offset design and a gate height to match the stonewall and include standard signage regarding closure of doors, subject to staff approval; 9) That all handicap parking areas meet ADA accessibility standards including signage; 10) That the lighting plan address issues noted in this report, subject to staff approval; 11) That building permits from the Division of building Standards be obtained prior to construction; 12) That any signage modifications comply with Code, subject to staff approval; 13) That existing siding be painted to match the proposed addition; 14) That all construction comply with the requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance; 15) That the applicant provide additional landscaping or other screening methods to screen the Hahn property from headlight trespass, subject to staff approval; and 16) That sump pump water be directed toward Earlington Parkway, subject to staff approval. * Tim Kelton, representing the applicant, agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 6 -0. RESULT: This final development plan was approved. STAFF CERTIFICATION ",/ 4 /'4 Gar P. Gunderman, AICP Acting Planning Director Page 2 of 2 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 5, 2004 Page 13 �y 3. Revised Final Development Plan 04- 002RFDP — Prince Of Peace Expansion — 5475 Brand Road Mr. Gerber swore in those who wished to speak before the Commission in regards to this case. Mr. Gerber apologized because he did not realize that there were so many present for this application. He might have moved the case forward on the agenda so as not to keep families away from home so late, and said everyone wishing to speak would be allowed five minutes. Jamie Adkins showed slides of the L- shaped site at the intersection of Earlington Parkway and Brand Road. A single - family house is located to the north, apartments to the south, and a condominium development to the west. The site is zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District, as part of the Earlington/Brandon plan. She showed a slide of the site plan with the proposed extension on the east side of the existing building. She said it took up a portion of the existing parking lot and so the lot was reconfigured with 60 degree parking. To the west, the approved parking expansion area is utilized with this building expansion. Several trees will be removed and replaced on the site. The addition will be two stories with stucco and stone to match the building, and the siding for the existing church will be painted tan to match the addition. There are two curb cuts for the site, one for each parking area. She said the dumpster location has been amended and will be screened per Code and will have an offset entrance as requested by staff. Ms. Adkins said staff has requested additional screening of the parking area, and the applicant has consented. The existing cross will be relocated because of the building addition. She said staff is recommending approval of this application with 12 conditions: 1) That the landscape plan be revised to incorporate comments in this report, subject to staff approval; 2) That the applicant show the floodplain on engineering plans and secure and provide proof of floodplain activity approval from ACOE; 3) That site plans show all adjacent and opposing curb cuts, both existing and proposed; 4) That site design meet Stormwater Regulations to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 5) That site visibility triangles be re- evaluated to ensure a clear path; 6) That the design of parking lot pavement meet the approval of the City Engineer; 7) That there be no open cutting of the existing pavement to access the existing waterline. 8) That the dumpster enclosure utilize an offset design and a gate height to match the stonewall; 9) That handicap parking areas meet ADA accessibility standards including signage; 10) That lighting plans address issues in this report, subject to staff approval; 11) That appropriate building permits be obtained prior to construction; and 12) That any signage changes meet Code, subject to staff approval. Tim Kelton, Ruscilli, representing the applicant, agreed to the conditions. He said a public meeting was held on January 20 by the church at the Dublin Community Center. There were no attendees present in opposition. He said they plan to change the color from blue to the more natural grayish tan color. Mr. Kelton said subsequent to the staff report being issued, they received an objection letter that was submitted to the Commission. The height of the building is approximately ten to twelve feet 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text KAn,I ifi,atinn Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 5, 2004 Page 14 shorter than the existing structure. There is a 54 -inch landmark oak tree that has a drip line that they have to be careful of along the northwest corner of the property. He noted that the staff felt the tree preservation plan was outstanding and would serve as a model in the future. Neal Hahn said they had lived next to the church since 1986. He said the area had been inundated with water several times. The Bear Run and the Indian Run have caused them considerable problems. He presented a list of requests and conditions to the Commissioners. He said they met with Ms. Adkins twice and she visited their home to listen to them. He said they protested this expansion because it is too large for the parcel. Mr. Hahn realized the church was given permission 22 years ago to build on less than five acres. He said none of the other 38 churches in Dublin are in a situation like this. Mr. Hahn said he hoped this would not be an excuse to have an expansion of the preschool. He said there had been a pond between them and the church years ago, but it was filled in. He said the staff report said all is consistent with the PUD and will benefit Dublin as a community. He asked how it would benefit them. He said they helped cut the church's grass years ago and when their water ran out, they used his well for two weeks. He said the church had an oak tree hit by lighting, and because it gave him shade, he paid half of it to have the tree removed. Mr. Hahn said they had a contentious situation with the church since their first development, and would love for the Commission to deny this request because it is too big. He said there are groundwater and flooding conditions. [Mr. Hahn's five minutes expired, but Mr. Gerber provided more time for him to finish.] Mr. Hahn said parking spaces are proposed where an oak tree will be removed. Although screening is proposed, he did not think it will prevent headlights from shining into their window. He requested that the parking spaces be moved elsewhere or redirected to prevent headlight trespass. He thanked the Commission for their time. Mr. Gerber asked if Mr. Hahn attended the public meeting held by the church. Mr. Hahn said he was invited to it, but chose not to attend because of past problems. Mr. Gerber asked if they had considered hiring legal counsel. Mr. Hahn said he did the last time there was an expansion because they wanted to expand within 20 feet of their property line. He said the church reconsidered and they moved it back to 30 feet. Mr. Hahn said since then, they have not been friends. Mr. Sprague suggested that this case be tabled to allow the applicant to work out things with the Hahns. Mr. Kelton said they seek approval tonight to move forward with this project. There is nothing more that they can do, except not build at all. Mr. Gerber asked if Mr. Kelton had seen Mr. Hahn's ten conditions presented to the Commission. Mr. Kelton said he had not. [He was provided a copy.] 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 5, 2004 Page 15 Ms. Boring was not opposed to tabling the case, but thought it would be premature if there might be Commission concerns, also. Mr. Gerber agreed and asked for Commission comments. Peter King, an Earlington Parkway resident, said he had been involved with the Earlington Village Civic Association since its inception in 1988 and served as its treasurer since 1990. He said he was asked by the architectural firm working with the church for perspective. He did not attend the January meeting. He said there are two churches on Earlington Parkway, this church and Dublin Baptist Church at Coffman Road. His home was very close to Dublin Baptist Church which has had three expansions. He said his other neighbors were upset when it first proposed a 20,000 square foot addition. He said the expansion turned out nicely and the church was a good neighbor. He considered it very desirable and his property values are higher than ever. While they are not adjoining neighbors, they are separated by Earlington Parkway, they are still directly impacted by traffic, which is not a problem most of the time. He believed that Prince of Peace would be a good neighbor. Teiko Yu said this was her home church. She said she bought her nearby condominium because of the closeness of the church so she could walk there. She strongly recommended that this application be approved. Pastor Craig Swanson, a Fallen Timbers Drive resident, said he and his wife felt part of Dublin's appeal was its value of youth. He said this expansion will add Sunday school space. He said the majority of parking is on the east side of the building, away from the Hahn property. Pastor Swanson strongly recommended that this not be tabled. He said they were willing to work with L W the Halms, and their ten conditions sounded fine. Mr. Kelton said a cut sheet attached to the application showed lights up in trees in error. They are all ground- mounted uplighting. Ms. Adkins said they were addressed in Condition 2, Mr. Kelton said Mr. Hahn's concern about the headlight glare was valid. He said it would be difficult to eliminate the parking spaces because of the landmark oak tree and landscape feature. He suggested they work with staff to put natural evergreen screening materials there. Mr. Gerber asked if there was anywhere on Mr. Hahn's property a screening could be created to satisfy his concern. Mr. Hahn said he appreciated the Commissioners listening to him and said the lights he was concerned about were from five parking spaces. He asked where the headlights would point. Mr. Kelton said they would point northwest. He said when the original project was expanded many years ago, they did not meet the parking requirements and there was an agreement that they would provide about 152 spaces. Since the original submission of plans, they have reconfigured the parking lot on the east side to add additional parking spaces. The church has a letter of agreement from two different sources. Mr. Gerber said Mr. Kelton was deviating from his issue at the moment. 1 1 - 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 5, 2004 Page 16 © Mr. Kelton said he was trying to recommend that perhaps the church could just eliminate those spaces and go to the number of spaces that are currently on the site, which would meet the requirement and eliminate any sense of glare towards the Hahns. Mr. Messineo suggested instead of removing all the parking spaces towards the Hahns residence, perhaps if one was moved, they could be angled so that they do not aim directly towards the house. Mr. Kelton said there was not an ability to mound because there is a dry detention basin at that point. He said however, there can be a variety of screening methods used that are opaque (plantings or a wall, etc.). He agreed to look at natural material screening with staff. He respectfully said he was being put on the spot to redesign the site that has been submitted Mr. Gerber suggested a condition; That additional screening sufficient to properly alleviate headlight trespass be provided, subject to staff approval. Ms. Reiss asked if there was a proposal to change the height of the exterior cross, which is to be relocated. Tom Hawk, the architect, said the cross is currently located to the east of the existing building. They intend to move it adjacent to the new entry. In doing so, they plan to raise it onto a platform (approximately 16 feet tall) and it will be the height of the existing sanctuary (45 feet). © The current height of the cross is approximately 36 feet. He said it is illuminated by landscaping. They plan to landscape the frame the cross will be mounted onto so they can eliminate pedestrian glare. Ms. Reiss asked staff if stormwater requirements had been looked at because of the additional impervious surface put in place. Ms. Cox said staff had reviewed the stormwater management plans submitted and is presently working with the applicant. They will meet the Code. Ms. Reiss asked if the site was on a septic and leach field still. Ms. Cox did not believe so. She said they are going to add a new water service with this project. Ms. Reiss asked to see a sample of the color proposed to paint the existing building and the addition. Mr. Kelton provided a color sample. Mr. Messineo asked when the parking agreement with Asherton of Dublin expires. Mr. Kelton said letters have been provided to the Commission. Mr. Messineo said a timeframe was not included. Mr. Gerber said if the parking agreement were terminated, there would clearly be a Code violation. He asked what the procedure is with respect to an off site parking agreement. Ms. Adkins said staff received the letter from Asherton of Dublin reaffirming the parking agreement previously made and it was acceptable. She said if Asherton no longer wished to cooperate, staff would request that the church find other means of parking. 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 5, 2004 Page 17 © Mr. Gerber asked what is permissible and what are the restrictions for parking along Earlington Parkway. Ms. Adkins thought parking was permitted on both sides of Earlington Parkway. [Later, it was determined it was/was not permitted on both sides.] Staff was unsure about parking on Earlington Parkway. Ms. Boring asked for the proposed lot coverage with the addition and parking. Mr. Kelton said it was about 54 percent, well under Code. Ms. Boring said this addition is going to be on the front of the church, and wondered if it would be seen from the Hahn property. She was also concerned about the parking issue and read in the staff report that the site required 200 parking spaces per Code. She said the site provides a total of 162 spaces and Asherton provides 27 parking spaces, and the site is still not up to Code. Pastor John Morris said they also had an agreement with the Dublin Schools to shuttle people from Wyandotte Elementary School, which they have done on special occasions. They have tried to have multiple services so that they are not overloading the church parking lot. Ms. Boring said it was hard for her because this was truly a service to the community and an exciting thing to see Dublin's religious community growing. She was excited that the youth are getting this instruction. However, this church was on only four acres and she wondered at what ® point was it too big. Pastor Morris said moving was not financially feasible. Ms. Boring said she was not asking the church to move. Ms. Boring asked if the preschool students were kept in a fenced in area. Pastor Morris said yes. Ms. Boring suggested adding to Condition 8: ...that the standard signage be placed on the doors regarding the closure of doors, and adding Condition 13: That the existing siding be painted to match the new addition. Ms. Boring asked what was the policy about replacing trees that are disturbed. Ms. Adkins said a landscape inspector would visit during phases of construction to check tree fencing and the quality of trees. If trees die during construction, they have to be replaced. Mr. Gerber requested that be standard language in the future. Ms. Boring said she never considered children playing a nuisance or a disturbance in any way, shape, or form. She was sorry that the church's neighbor feels that way. Mr. Gerber asked Mr. Hahn if the conditions were close enough to his list of concerns. Mr. Hahn said if the five parking spaces are realigned by removing one space, that would be fine. If not, a stone wall could be placed there. Mr. Gerber said they decided some kind of landscaping. Mr. Hahn said if landscaping works it was fine. If not, he asked that they could come back for a stone wall if the headlights still shined in their home. 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 5, 2004 Page 18 Mr. Gerber said the landscaping or stone wall would be subject to staff approval. Mr. Hahn said they understood that the church must be a church. They know the church serves the community and they are within their rights to do everything they are doing. He would just like a little cooperation. The following is a list of Mr. Hahn's concerns brought forth in his letter submitted at this meeting: 1. Add additional screening as planning department requests for north parking. 2. Add screening to our south lot line — evergreens. 3. Remove or redirect five parking spaces on northeast side near north side of new building. 4. We have well water — What effect will this have? 5. Groundwater and flooding — We are in Floodplain. 6. Prohibit tree spotlights — Keep pole lights to minimum — Reduce glare. 7. Request all lighting be turned off at midnight. 8. Direct sump pump water toward Earlington Parkway — Not our direction. 9. Is new build for expansion of preschool? We have been greatly distressed by the noise and traffic this brings. 10. Our area is flooded often as it is. What will this new parking area and additional roof top area bring us? Mr. Gerber reviewed the list of issues and said, with respect to Issues 1 and 2 above, they should ® be included in Condition 1. Mr. Kelton said with respect to Issue 3, dealing with landscaping so that the lights do not shine through to Mr. Hahn's property. He suggested either redirecting parking spaces or eliminate parking spaces so that the headlights do not shine directly at the Hahn property, or plant or provide other natural materials to an opacity agreed to by staff. He said if they use landscaping planted to 100 percent opacity, it will be dead the second year. Ms. Reiss said there were two sections of parking that could possibly shine into the Hahn property. Ms. Adkins said is required around all parking lots. Mr. Gerber said Condition 15 should be as suggested by Mr. Kelton above. Mr. Gerber said with respect to flooding, they have to comply with the City Engineer's Stormwater Regulations. Mr. Gerber said Mr. Hahn's issue regarding tree spotlights was addressed in Condition 10. Mr. Kelton said there were safety issues to consider with turning the lights off at midnight. He agreed to work with staff on timing. Mr. Kelton agreed to following the City Engineer's recommendation regarding the direction of sump pump water. Ms. Boring asked if the sump pump direction going to be included in the stormwater consideration. Mr. Kelton said if it was not shown on the plan, they would modify the plan to accommodate it. 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — February 5, 2004 Page 19 Mr. Gerber suggested Condition 16: That sump pump water should be directed towards Earlington Parkway, subject staff approval. Mr. Kelton said they would follow the City Engineer's direction to make the pump work properly. Mr. Gerber made the motion to approve this revised final development plan because the proposed addition is consistent with the approved zoning and applicable standards, it improves the general welfare of the neighborhood and municipality, and the benefits of the arrangement and design of the proposed development justify a deviation from the standards for this development, with 16 conditions: 1) That the landscape plan be revised to incorporate comments in this report, subject to staff approval; 2) That the applicant identify floodplain on engineering plans and secure and provide proof of floodplain activity approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; 3) That site plans show all adjacent and opposing curb cuts, both existing and proposed; 4) That the site design comply with Stormwater Regulations to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 5) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 6) That the design of parking lot pavement meet the approval of the City Engineer; 7) That there be no open cutting of the existing pavement to access the existing waterline; 8) That the dumpster enclosure utilize an offset design and a gate height to match the stonewall and include standard signage regarding closure of doors, subject to staff approval; 9) That all handicap parking areas meet ADA accessibility standards including signage; 10) That the lighting plan address issues noted in this report, subject to staff approval; 11) That building permits from the Division of building Standards be obtained prior to construction; 12) That any signage modifications comply with Code, subject to staff approval; 13) That existing siding be painted to match the proposed addition; 14) That all construction comply with the requirements of the Tree Preservation Ordinance 15) That the applicant provide additional landscaping or other screening methods to screen the Hahn property from headlight trespass, subject to staff approval; and 16) That sump pump water be directed toward Earlington Parkway, subject to staff approval. Ms. Boring seconded the motion. Mr. Kelton agreed to the conditions as listed above. The vote was as follows: Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Messineo, yes; Ms. Reiss, yes; Ms. Boring, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Approved 6 -0.) Mr. Gerber said he appreciated Mr. Hahn and everyone working together. He said this worked out very well. Re/hnot 5 — Riverside Woods Kolby a concept plan fort ' development was a roved by City Co 1, and the proponot changed much. he site is located in e northeast quadr of D ublin. It is heawith three gener open areas. The si is currently zoned 1, and this is to rezone a single -fam' eas shown include/ development of 5 ots. The retention many es that ar eing saved. He s ' only four lots b; 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION I I l jk, RECORD OF ACTION APRIL 6, 1995 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at its regularly scheduled meeting: 3. Final Development Plan - Earlington Village - 5775 Dublinshire Drive - Dublin Presbyterian Church (Phase I) Location: 5.001 acres located on the south side of Dublinshire Drive, approximately 350 feet west of Ashlord Court. Existing Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District ( Earlington Village Plan). Request: Review and approval of a Development Plan under the provisions of Section 1181.07 of the Planning and Zoning Code. Proposed Use: A new church of 13,274 square feet. Applicant: Dublin Presbyterian Church, c/o Robert J. Apel, Meacham & Apel Architects, 5640 Frantz Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017. MOTION: To approve this Final Development Plan finding it conforms to Earlington Village {� Refinement, has been planned with sensitivity toward the adjacent residential neighborhood, and meets the subarea standards with the following six conditions: 1) That Phase II be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission at a later date; 2) That lighting conform to the Dublin Lighting Guidelines; 3) That the Landscape Plan be revised to include: replacing the Red Maples with a hardier species, replacing the deciduous shrubs around the parking lot with evergreen shrubs and adding additional evergreens at the northern portion of the parking lot, and adding street trees to the plant list; 4) That floodway, floodway plus 20 feet, and floodplain boundaries be accurately shown on all plat, planning, building permit, and engineering documents and that all City Codes be met regarding floodways and floodplains; 5) That signage conform to Code and be externally illuminated; and 6) That the driveway be widened to 22 feet. * Robert J. Apel, representing the applicant, agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 5 -0 -1. RESULT: This Final Development Plan was approved. STAFF CERTIFICATION Mary Graduate Landscape Architect 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 6, 1995 Page 8 Ywhic That a bikepath installed along Bran oad, and a buffer an be provided for lots abut Br d Road; 10) That a left lane and street fighting be provid at the entrance to a site in coordina 'on with the Shanno len subdivision; 11) That changes be made o the text and pl to the satisfaction f Staff prior to sc uling this applicati before City Counc' ; and 12) at four additional 1 (adjacent to the p along the north si of the North Fork the Indian Run) be edicated as parklan and the rear prope ines of the two tee ots which abut the uthern park area be oved farther west. Mr. Ferrara seco ed the motion. Th ote was as follows- r. Fishman, yes; r. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Za y, yes; Mr. Ra yes; Mr. Ferrar yes; Ms. Chinnic' uercher, yes. (Approved -0.) 3. Final Development Plan - Earlington Village - 5775 Dublinshire Drive - Dublin Presbyterian Church (Phase I) Mr. Rauh stated he would abstain from discussion and voting on this case and turned the meeting over to Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher to chair. Mary Newcomb presented this case and slides. This is a request for approval of a Final Development Plan for Phase I of the Dublin Presbyterian Church. The site is located on 5.001 acres on the south side of Dublinshire Drive, approximately 350 feet west of Ashlord Court. It is located in the Earlington Village PUD within the Tamberry Refinement. The Final Development Plan for Turnberry was originally approved in 1988 and included 50 single- family cluster homes. Only three of the cluster units were constructed. In 1990, a plan refinement for 37 standard single- family homes and the five -acre church site was approved. The single- family area is The Woods of Dublinshire. There is an existing bikepath that runs along the eastern and southern boundaries. Ms. Newcomb said there will be one access point off Dublinshire Drive. Ms. Newcomb said Phase I consists of 13,274 square feet of church, with parking for 154 cars on the eastern portion of the site. The applicant anticipates a future addition of about 17,000 square feet, with an additional 91 spaces. This building meets the setback requirements of 30 feet along Dublinshire Drive for both pavement and building, and 15 feet on the sideyards for pavement and 30 feet for the building. Additional information about floodplain should be required to ensure all applicable Codes are met. Ms. Newcomb said the applicant will construct a sidewalk along Dublinshire Drive. Staff requests that this section match the existing adjoining sidewalks. The applicant proposes substantial buffering along the western property line. There is an existing mound and evergreen planting on the eastern property line. The applicant has been working with the residents to create a combined mound and buffer. Staff recommends minor changes to the landscaping plan. 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 6, 1995 Page 9 The building will be constructed of stucco stone and stucco with dryvit basebands. The roof is to be dimensional weathered wood color shingles; the trim is to be stained cedar. Ms. Newcomb said the building fits well into the residential character of the neighborhood. Staff recommends approval with the following six conditions: 1) That Phase II be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission at a later date; 2) That lighting conform to the Dublin Lighting Guidelines; 3) That the Landscape Plan be revised to include: replacing the Red Maples with a hardier species, replacing the deciduous shrubs around the parking lot with evergreen shrubs and adding additional evergreens at the northern portion of the parking lot, and adding street trees to the plant list; 4) That floodway, floodway plus 20 feet, and floodplain boundaries be accurately shown on all plat, planning, building permit, and engineering documents and that all City Codes be met regarding floodways and floodplains; 5) That signage conform to Code and be externally illuminated; and 6) That the driveway be widened to 22 feet. Ms. Newcomb said tonight's approval is just for Phase I, but the applicant submitted an outline of Phase II. She stated the applicant made a substantial effort to involve the neighborhood by distributing flyers and conducting meetings, which were well attended. Bob Apel, Meacham and Apel Architects, agrees with all the conditions as recommended in the Staff Report. He said the church would like to be an integral part of the community. The sanctuary is the largest mass and will be to the east to avoid parking wrapping around the building. Where the building is closest to residences, a stone wall was added to the mound to provide a better barrier. He said he has a letter of intent to create an easement with six affected neighbors to accomplish buffering in common. He said the cupola is for ventilation and there are no bells. The lighting will conform with Dublin sighting Guidelines. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher asked how close the comer of the fellowship hall (part of Phase II) is to the mounding and houses. Mr. Apel said it would be a minimum of 30 feet. Mr. Zawaly said the cupola was the only cedar -sided area. Mr. Apel chose the color to blend with the other roof elements and dormer, but a lighter color would also work. Mr. Fishman asked if the mounding would be put in before the building. Mr. Apel said yes. Mr. Sutphen made a motion to approve this Final Development Plan finding it conforms to Earlington Village Refinement, has been planned with sensitivity toward the adjacent residential neighborhood, and meets the subarea standards with the following six conditions: 1) That Phase II be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission at a later date; 2) That lighting conform to the Dublin Lighting Guidelines; 3) That the Landscape Plan be revised to include: replacing the Red Maples with a hardier species, replacing the deciduous shrubs around the parking lot with evergreen shrubs and 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 6, 1995 Page 10 adding additional evergreens at the northern portion of the parking lot, a adding street o trees to the plant list; 4) That floodway, floodway plus 20 feet, and floodplain boundaries be accurately shown on all plat, planning, building permit, and engineering documents and that all City Codes be met regarding floodways and floodplains; 5) That signage conform to Code and be externally illuminated; and 6) That the driveway be widened to 22 feet. Mr. Ferrara seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Zawaly, yes; Mr. Ferrara, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, yes; Mr. Sutphen, yes; Mr. Rauh, abstain. (Approved 5 -0 -1.) 4. Rezoning AppliSgfion Z95_0o4 - cKitrick Propert - Revised Development This case was po ned to April 20, 5, prior to this ting. 5. al Development PI - Perimeter Cen - McDonald's Res urant Vi90 Papsidero present this case and slides f a Development P for co/ated new 58 square -foot fast ood restaurant wi rive -thru service, a site is cated 1 %W at the northeast co r of Avery- Muirfi Drive and Peri me Loop Road. ea E of the Perimeter enter PCD develo ent, which permit ee- standing faants. Architecture, to planning, traffic ighting, etc., are w' in the Commissio Mr. Pa dero said the struc re is in the center the site, there is a service drive, pro pick -up window , and a stacking la for eight cars. U er the standards f the su ea, eight stacking aces per window required. The s dard follows the C umbus ode. /ecom le endows, six spaces r window are requ' ed, for a total of 1 There is a 10 -fd on the north pro line and a 5 -foot azd abutting a 5 -foo uffer along the Ba 59 parking spac are required by C e, and the plan sh s only 52, one of whe trash dumpste . The interior lands ping within the par g area falls short of Colso recomm ds the inclusion of dditional plant m rial. The propose,1 Parkin ng are in ' ations of overdeve ment of the site. `r. aramg ngnt -or -wa long Avery -Muirfi d Drive, Mr. eport. An additi 1 12 feet is reque ed for a contint properties to ace odate Perimeter rive. Amore suit landscape bu Mr. Papsidero s wed a slide of a pr responding the Staff Report. t has not been eval tec show th -foot hedge /col eatment for the s Dine Papsi ro noted an error i e Staff tou ght -turn lane in f nt of both I e area is provided a permanent used landscape pl submitted today !. Street trees an issue. It does center. 11- 019Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan Earlington Village PUD Text Modification