The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About48-08 OrdinanceRECORD OF ORDINANCES 48-08 Ordinrnace No. Passed , 20 AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 0.55 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGH STREET WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT FROM CB, CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TO HB, HISTORIC BUSINESS DISTRICT (HISTORIC DISTRICT -CASE NO. 08-042Z). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, ~ of the elected members concurring: Section 1. That the following described real estate (see attached map marked Exhibit "A") situated in the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned CB, Central Business District, and shall be subject to regulations and procedures contained in Ordinance No. 21-70 (Chapter 153 of the Codified Ordinances) the City of Dublin Zoning Code and amendments thereto. Section 2. That application, Exhibit "B," including the list of contiguous and affected property owners, and the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Exhibit "C," are all incorporated into and made an official part of this Ordinance and said real estate shall be developed and used in accordance therewith. Section 3. That this Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after the earliest period allowed by law. Passed this [ p-~~ day of , 2008. ll n~ ~/~ _ _ ~ .. Mayor -Presiding Officer Attest: Clerk of Council Sponsor: Land Use and Long Range Planning Office of the City Manager 5200 Emerald Parkway • Dublin, OH 43017-1090 M e m o CITY OF DUBLIN_ Phone: 614-410-4400 • Fax: 614-410-4490 TO: Members of City Council FROM: Jane S. Brautigam, City Managerc« SSt3 DATE: July 31, 2008 INITIATED BY: Steve Langworthy, Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning RE: Ordinance 48-08 Historic District Rezonings (Case 08-0422) Summary The City of Dublin has initiated this application to rezone three properties, 123 South High Street, 95 South High Street, and 45 North High Street from the Central Business (CB) District to the Historic Business (HB) District. The three properties are located within the boundaries of the Historic District and are being utilized for various retail and business uses including a catering business, a peanut butter and pastry retail establishment, and a hair and nail salon. The purpose of the rezoning is to provide the Historic District with zoning districts that take into consideration the dense nature of an historic downtown area. The HB District also attempts to integrate a wide range of land uses to create a mixed use setting, as well as implement design features that promote pedestrian traffic. The three properties have been selected for this application based on review processes, either informally with the City of Dublin or formally by the Architectural Review Board, that have required rezoning to the Historic Business zoning classification. History Property maintenance and redevelopment efforts in Historic Dublin have been challenging. This is due primarily to the fact that the underlying zoning of the district is suburban in nature and does not reflect the development patterns within the original village. As a result, the Zoning Code provisions do not adequately address the Districts unique qualities. The Historic Residential and Historic Business Districts were adopted in October 2003 in an effort to address these concerns. The purpose of the districts is to permit the preservation and development of homes and businesses on lots that are comparable in size, mass and scale, while maintaining and promoting the traditional character of Historic Dublin. The districts were further designed to maintain the unique qualities of this historic community and ensure that those development patterns continue the intent and purpose of the original village. The application was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on June 5, 2008 and the Commission has forwarded to Council with a recommendation for approval of the rezoning. Recommendation Staff requests approval of Ordinance 48-08 at the second reading/public hearing on August 18, 2008. __., R-4 ~~~~ SO 1 ~--~ ~_~ ~ CB ~-~I R=4 ~~' HB HB CB _ jSITE CB R-4 R-4 HR H ~1 CB _CB _-~-a ~~ f CB CB -SEC- _!. R-4 -- HB C -. C R-4 CCC i_ --- --Street ~_ Badge _ ` ~-c H R-4 ~ PUD g~CC __~ -~~ I ~ PUD ~-ECC'` PUD PUD ~ 1,,`~~.- ~ ~ HR 1 CB ~ ~ --~ _~- IrPUD 1.--:=~'.~I CB HR HR - PUD ~ - 1 ~ CB _~ PUD R-4 _ . CB - ~+',_-- HR R-2 ---~ C, (D ~--eB~ HR -- PUD R-4 CB N~-l-CB PUD R-4 CB Cg HR ---HR" - ~ HR R-4 _ R-a ~-~C~" R-4 R-4 ' ~" C B ~_ R-a `~ '' SITE R-4 ~ _ R-4 ~ CB 1 f ~ HR Jr ~ CB _~ R-4 ~ R-4 CB -- ~B _-Hf2--- ~, l R-2 R-4 ~ R-a SITE ~g - HR R-4 ~, R-4 CB ~_ HB ~ PUD PUD -i HR R-4 y-R ~~ J ~~ PUD R 2 J~J HR PUD _ R 22 R-4 ~ P D ~f r HR HR PUD ~ R-4 _.. R-2 R-4 -- PUD R_4 R-2 -J _ - -~ f ~~ P D PUD _ R-2 R-2 ~~IR~ HR R-4 ~ PUD ~ ~-` P ~ PUD PUD R-2 .~- f PUD _~ R-2 R-2 R=E P D \PUD \ PUD ~~ PUD R-2 _r -~ ~ `P~ p I I-PIED-~~ PUD /~ /PUD ~,,~-~~ ~,- -_`- ~f R-2 I ~I __ I ~,u ~~1~~~/II i-~f-.~~~' ~;~il;i"VEIL ~` 08-0422 ~~: - 1~-0~ poi; ~,.,~:~. ,i~; aN~~g ~._ City of Dublin Rezoning ~ Land Use and Historic Dublin Rezoning Long Range Planning 123 & 95 S. Hi h, 45 N. Hi h g g 0 112.5 225 450 Feet CITY OF DUBLIN.. January 2007 EXHIBIT "B" REZONING APPLICATION (Code Section 153.234) TO EXPIRE ORDINANCE NUMBER Land Use and long Rangs Plonning CITY COUNCIL (FIRST READING) 5800 Shier-Rings Rood °~blin.°'''043°'6_'236 CITY COUNCIL (PUBLIC HEARING) Phone/iDD:b14-410.4600 CITY COUNCIL ACTION Fax: 614-4144747 wQb Sfte: www,du6lFn,oh.us NOTE: All applications are reviewed by Land Use and Long Range Planning for completeness prior to being processed. Applications that are incomplete will not be accepted. Applicants are encouraged to contact Land Use and Long Range Planning for assistance and to discuss the rezoning process, and if needed; to make an appointment for apre-submittal review prior to submitting a formal application. I. PLEASE CHECK THE TYPE OF APPLICATION: Preliminary Development Plan (Section 153.053) Other (Please Describe) II. PROPERTY INFORMATION: This section must be completed. Property Address: I.2 3 ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~~ , ~--~-~ ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ '`-}-I `1 Tax ID/Parcel Number(s): ~ 7 30 0 ~ ~ _I j -2, .- ~ _ ~73f~C~(>L''SU Parcel Size (Acres): ~' i I U 6 rFS b.7-I <~cYrPS Existing Land UselDevetopment: / 1 I ~ X~ (Ii Corn rn e v c-; ~t.( Proposed Land Use/Development: ~i ~ ~~ ~~y~ {~I ~~ L~~1d(~Lt / y ~{ ~y(~ 1 Existing Zoning District: C, ~~ Requested Zoning District: I-} ~ Total Acres to be Rezoned: ~ ~ 5 Ja C III. REZONING STATEMENT: Please attach separate sheets (8.5 X 11) to the back of this application with your responses to the following sections. A. Please briefly explain the proposed rezoning and development: -I-1n ~. Nrt:; r' P-V t1 ~S w i til ~>>° Vr>° 20 Vti~d £rurv~ C ev~{-r-al 13~n ~, Irul ss t a vv~p r z c~ w pw ~ vi <ti }~ e- G l Gt ~s~i-EiG G~'ri v v~ ~ t-ti ~~'t21~ L~ ~ 1~l S1 V~-Q-S S B. Briefly state how the proposed rezoning and development relates to the existing and potential future land use character of the vicinity: ~-y~ IrQ~i,~e~~G~ ~t,~wl,ti`~ G~i~~`c~' 1`~ v~n~v~e ~ppvc;~~~1K. {z,-~ --E h~ eX i ~>ti4~. m -~ d t, ~evtik ~ r~ 1 '~ 1~-~' 1.~.Y'~ ~~~cC. ~~ ~ YZ k fie. 1-~i s~v.rti c C~ ~<~`~,~ ~~~r C. Briefly state how the proposed rezoning and development relates to the Dublin Community Plan and, if applicable, how the proposed rezoning meets the criteria for Planned Districts [Section 153.052(6)]: ~ o C.6c,t ~0~1 sr rt,e.~ S ~-f v ~~t' ~ v~ I Ica ~ !~~nrtitiU.ivi -~c D. Briefly address how the proposed rezoning and development meet the review criteria for Preliminary Development Plan approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission as stated in [Section 153.055(A)J (SEEATTACHMENT A): A$ SUE3MI~f ~E~ fiQ ~f~UN(:IL ~~ -~ Page 1 of 5 Has a previous application to rezone the property been denied by City Council within the last twelve months? ~ Yes ~ NO If yes, list when and state the basis for reconsideration as noted by Section 153.234(A)(3): IV. PLEASE SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING FOR INITIAL STAFF REVIEW: Please submit large (24x36) and small (11X17) sets of plans. Please make sure all plans are stapled and collated. Large plans should also be folded. Staff may later request plans that incorporate review comments. Fourteen (14) adddional copies of revised submittals are required for the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. TWO (2) ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATIONS AND THIRTEEN (13) COPIES Please notarize agent authorization, if necessary. FOURTEEN (14) COPIES OF A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY FOURTEEN (14) COPIES OF A TAX PARCEL ID MAP indicating property owners and parcel numbers for all parcels within 500 FEET of the site (Maximum Size 11X17). Please contact Land Use and Long Range Planning if you need assistance. FOURTEEN (14) COPIES OF A LIST OF CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET of the perimeter of the property based on the County Auditor's current tax list, including parcel number, owner name (not Mortgage Company or Tax Service), and address (Maximum Size 11X17). It is the policy of the City of Dublin to notify surrounding property owners of pending applications under public review. Please contact Land Use and Long Range Planning if you need assistance. FOURTEEN (14) COPIES OF 7HE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT [~ FOURTEEN (14) SMALL (11X17) and FOURTEEN (14) LARGE (24X36) COPIES OF SCALED SITEfSTAKING PLANS SHOWING a. North arrow and bar scale. b. Location, size and dimensions of all existing and proposed conditions and structures (significant natural features, landscaping, structures, additions, decks, access ways, parking). c. Proposed Uses (Regional transportation system, densities, number of dwellings, building/unit types, square footages, parking, open space, etc.). d. Size of the site in acres/square feet. e. All property lines, setbacks, street centerlines, rights-of-way, easements, and other information related to the site. f. Existing and proposed zoning district boundaries. g. Use of land and location of structures on adjacent properties. IF APPLICABLE, FOURTEEN (14) SMALL (11X17) and FOURTEEN (14) LARGE (24X3&) COPIES OF THE FOLLOWING SCALED PLANS: a. Grading Plan. b. Landscaping Plan. c. Lighting Plan. d. Utility and/or Stormwater Plan. e. Tree Survey, Tree Preservation and Tree Replacement Plans IF APPLICABLE, FOURTEEN (14) SMALL (11X17) and FOURTEEN (14) LARGE (24X36) SCALED, ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS with proposed colors and materials noted. IF A PPLICABLE, FOURTEEN (14) SMALL (11X17) and FOURTEEN (14) LARGE (24X36) COPIES OF SCALED DRAWINGS SHOWING: a. Location of signs and sign type (wall, ground, projecting, or window). b. Sign dimensions, including letter sizes and proposed distance from sign to grade. c. Copy layout and lettering styles (fonts) of signage. d. Materials and manufacturer to be used in fabrication. e. Total area of sign face (inGuding frame) f. Type of illumination MATERIAUCOLOR SAMPLES (swatches, photos, plans, or product specifications), Include manufacturer name and product number. Page 2 of 5 V. CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER(S): This section must be completed. Please attach additional sheets if needed. 12 3 ~ ~• Name (Individual or Organization): ~~~~~ I ~ _ ~ n L ~~t /1,~~ "-l l~ Mailing Address: 1 1 ~ y' ~ " 1 ~ -7 {Street, City, State, Zip Code) 17-~G' [ `~~1.V1 t~-~ j Vl ~%1 Y{~. ~ .~ ~t ~-~~ i yl t~ ~'E ~ %,r`~ Daytime Telephone: Fax: Email or Alternate Contact Information: VI. APPLICANT: Please complete if applicable. This is the person(s) who is requesting the zone change if different than the property owner(s). Name: ( ' ~ 't~ `~j r~ ~/~ ~ J~ -~ e. ~~ ~~ L~ ~ Gi F'Yl ~ I f ~~ l~ -oV~~1~1<< t -Y Organization (Owner, Developer, Contractor, etc.): Mailing Address: ~ 7 ~~ ~~~ ~~' ~ Q~ ~~ ~ w~.~t- i/c1 ~~! n ~~~ `~1J~7 (Street, City, State, Zip Code) ! _ r Daytime Telephone: ~n C L( _ L1 J ~ ~_ i / i1 ~ U `t" "T Fax: Email or Alternate Contact Information: VII. REPRESENTATIVE(S) OF OWNER/APPLICANT: Please complete if applicable. This is the primary contact person who will receive correspondence regarding this application. If needed, attach additional sheets for multiple representatives. Name: Organization: Mailing Address: (Street, City, State, Zip Code) Daytime Telephone: I Fax: Email or Alternate Contact Information: Page 3 of 5 Additional Property Owners Owner of 91/95 S High Street Luanil Albert 91 S High Street Dublin, Ohio 43017 Owner of 45 N High Street Sonksen Properties LLC 5679 Haddington Drive Dublin, Ohio 43017 VIII. AUTHORIZATION FOR OWNER'S APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE(S): if the applicant is not the property owner, this section must be completetl and notarizetl I ,the owner, hereby authorize to act as my applicant/representative(s) in all matters pertaining to the processing and approval of this application, including modifying the project. I agree to be bound by all representations and agreements made by the designated representative. Signature of Current Property Owner: Date: Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 20 State of County of Notary Public IX. AUTHORIZATION TO VIStT THE PROPERTY: Site visits to the property by City representatives are essential to process this application. The Owner/Applicant, as notarized below, hereby authorizes City representatives to visit, photograph and post a notice on the property described in this application. X. UTILITY DISCLAIMER: The City of The Owner/Applicant acknowledges the approval of this request for rezoning 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. XI. APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT: This section must be completed and notarized. \'G'1V1 [% F~,f Gt-[,l T T~G~ry1. , ~'~ ~ " I G(ilit L~'~(~i(~ ,the owner or authorized representative, have read and understand the concert of this application. The informs fon 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:~~~s ~~~i.w~!1c~rv~ I Date: Jr . Zcf .~ Subscribed and worn to before me this a~ 7 day of I ~~ , 20 (~ .'' ~'"' ~~ " ° ''• ~9~'; ~~ ~ . i State of U L~ ~ `~~"~ ~ 1 't; ,RACHAEL M. VlE11i N ,, - / ~ I D ~~, F`~~ '~"'_"~~~~.' •~ Notary Publlc, 3teto of Ohlo ty r-' ~'•~'~~~~~ Notary Public ~*~~"` ~~ ~'' 't r` My Comml~elnn f:>c~In10!!•08.08 coup of NOTE: THE OWNER, OR NOTED REPRESENTATIVE IF APPLICABLE, WILL RECEIVE A FACSIMILE CONFIRMING RECEIPT OF THIS APPLICATION FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Amount Received: Application No: P8Z Dates}: P&Z Action: Receipt No: MIS Fee No: Oate Received: Received By: Type of Request: N, S, E, W (Circle) Side of: Nearest Intersection: Distance from Nearest Intersection: Page 4 of 5 ATTACHMENT A: PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL CRITERIA (A) Preliminary development plan. In the review of proposed planned developments, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall determine whether or not the preliminary development plan complies with the following criteria. In the event the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the proposed preliminary development plan does not comply with a preponderance of these criteria, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall disapprove the application: (1) The proposed development is consistent with the purpose, intent and applicable standards of the Zoning Code; (2) The proposed development is in conformity with Community Plan, Thoroughfare Plan, Bikeway Plan, and other adopted plans or portions thereof as they may apply and will not unreasonably burden the existing street network; (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; (13) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress designed to minimize traffic congestion an the sur- rounding 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 pedes- trians; (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 accept- ability of the development plans contribute 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; (12J The design, site arrangement, and anticipated benefits of the proposed development justify any deviation from the standard devel- opment regulations included in the 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; (16) The applicant's contributions to the public infrastructure are consistent with the Thoroughfare Plan and are sufficient to service the new development. Page 5 of 5 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION JUNE 5, 2008 CI11 OF DIYLI'V.. Lond Use and long Ronge Planning 5800 Shier-Rings Rood Dublin, Ohio 4301b-1236 Phone: 614-410-4600 Fox: 614.410.4747 Web Site: www.dublin.oh.us The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 4. Historic Business Rezanings 123 and 95 S. High and 45 N. High Street 08-0422 Rezoning Proposal: Rezoning of properties from CB, Central Business District to HB, Historic Business District within Historic Dublin. Request: Review and approval of a rezoning under the provisions of Code Section 153.234. Applicant: Jane Brautigam, City of Dublin. Planning Contact: Tammy J. Noble-Flading, Senior Planner. Contact Information: (614) 410-4649, tflading@dublin.oh.us MOTION: To approve this Rezoning application because this request is in keeping with previous intentions of the City of Dublin to rezone portions of the Historic District to a zoning classification that is consistent with the development located found in this area and goals of both the residents of the Historic District and the City of Dublin. VOTE: 6 - 0. RESULT: This Rezoning application was approved. STAFF CERTIFICATION ~ ~, ~: ~ ;% ~ r /- i Tammy J oble-Flading ~ Senior Planner f1S SUBMITTED TO COUNRCI/Ll ~~~ ~~ FOR MEETING ON 11 J"I. -0~ Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2008 -Minutes Page5of10 Mr. Zimmerman pointed Alit that at the Wor ession the c buffering was provid~n the western elev on of the site to and the service do,9 s. Ms. Noble-Flad' g said to the exten~ screened, that isstte has been addres She said the a~is southern bo~ary and some addi~i pal vegetation on the wes~ ;omm~ion wanted to en~uie that a~uately screen the 1 aiding area ~a service area of tfs size can be ant has propos screening on the ern boundazy // Final Develop nt Plan with the Mr. l~an agreed to the twg~onditions listed be 1Vlotion and Vote Mr. Zimmerma~ma~ following tw~onditi 1) The applicant landscape mat 2) That any trayx~ a motion 'with Planning to on the landscape ;d material that doE this ~ectly identify all ew, transplanted in order tom t the Code. t survive, ust be replaced ac~COfdir existing Code. Ms. Amoros roomes scconde~! The vote was as f ows: Mr. Fishmn ,yes; Mr. Walter, s; Mr. Frei nn, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, yes; Ms. Amo se Groomes, yes; d Mr. Zimmerm ,yes. (App ed 6 - 0.) ~' 3. Dublin.Medical Campus P - ,Subarea II Hospita rive Connection. 08-U25AFDP ~ / Amended Fi I Development P Jean-Ellen Willis, Traffic Engineer on behalf of the City of Dublin s given the oath Mr. Zimmerman. Ms. Willis greed to the two ~riilitions as listed i e Planning Repo There was no further discussla~ii on this case. ~ Motion and Vote ~~ ' Mr. Zimmerman made the motion to approve this A ended Final Development Plan, and Mr. Walter seconded. The vote was as follows: Freimann, yes~~lvlr. Saneholtz, yes; Ms. Amortise Groomes, yes;. Mr. Fishman, yes,; r. Walter, yes;. 'and Mr. "Zimmerman, yes. (Approved 6 - 0.) 4. Historic Business Rezonings 123 and 95 S. High Street 08-0422 45 N. High Street Motion and Vote There was no discussion regarding this case which had no conditions recommended. Mr. Zimmerman made the motion to approve these reLOnings and Mr. Fishman seconded. The vote was as follows: Mr. Saneholtz, yes; Mr. Waiter, yes; Mr. Freimann, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Fishman, ycs; and Mr. Zimmerman, yes. (Approved 6- 0~,~; ,IJL~MIT-1'EU 70 CUUNp L 1. ~ ' F017 MEETING ON o ~ M WO SESSION M .Zimmerman expl• ' ed the Work Session purpose and procedures. He advised that all omments made h e Commission are' nformal and non-binding, and are intended only to provide general tdance to the applicant regarding the application. PLANNING REPORT cr7v of DL~BI -~ PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Land Use and Lang Range Planning 5800 Shier•Rings Raod .IVi11Ej 2QQ8 Dublin, Ohio 43016-1236 ~ Phone: 614-410-4600 Fox: 614A10-4141 Web 5ile: www.dublin.ah,us SECTION I -CASE INFORMATION: 4. Historic Business Rezonings 123 and 95 S. High and 45 North High Street 08-0422 Rezoning Proposal: Rezoning of properties from CB, Central Business District to HB, Historic Business District within Historic Dublin. Request: Review and approval of a rezoning under the provisions of Code Section 153.234. Applicant: Sane Brautigam, City of Dublin. Planning Contact: Tammy J. Noble-Flading, Senior Planner. Contact Information: (614) 410-4649, tflading@dublin.oh.us Case Summary: This is aCity-sponsored application for review and approval of a rezoning to Dublin HB, Historic Business District. T1ie application consists of three properties which have been based upon recent permitting procedures that have either required rezoning to the Historic Business zoning classification. All non-conforming uses and structures will be subject to the requirements of Section 153.004(C) of the Dublin Zoning Code. Planning recommends approval of this rezoning. Case Background: Property maintenance and redevelopment efforts in Historic Dublin have been problematic over the last couple of years. This is due to several issues, including the fact that the underlying zoning of the district is suburban in nature and does not reflect the development patterns within the original village. As a result, the Zoning Code provisions do not adequately address the District's unique qualities. The Historic Residential and Historic Business Districts were adopted in October 2003 in an effort to address these concerns. The purpose of the districts is to permit the preservation and development of homes and businesses on Lots that are comparable in size, mass and scale, while maintaining and promoting the traditional character of the Historic Dublin area. The districts were further designed to maintain the unique qualities of the historic community and ensure that those development patterns continue the intent and purpose of the original village. Site Description: The area is comprised of approximately .SS +/- acres that are currently zoned CB, Community Business District. The parcels are located on the west side of High Street within the Historic District. Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2008 -Planning Report Application No. 08-0422 Page 2 of 3 The current uses of these properties are commercial uses, including a catering business, a peanut butter and pastry retail establishment, and a hair and nail salon. No new development is proposed with the current application and all properties will be subject to the development standards of the HB, Historic Business District. Proposed Rezoning: T`he uses permitted in the HB, Historic Business District aze similar to those permitted in the CB, Community Business District. However, the development standards for the HB, Historic Business District are more conducive to more dense development patterns. A comparison of the districts follows: CB District Historic Residential District Uses Residential structures (one Residential uses (one through four through four dwellings); dwellings), retail uses, eating and retail stores, administrative drinking establishments, offices, personal and administrative offices, medical and consumer services. dental offices, personal and consumer services, institutional uses, religious uses, child care, parks and public plazas, bed and breakfast establishments, outdoor patios and dance related studios. Lot Area No minimum lot area is No minimum lot area is required. re wired. Lot Width No minimum lot width is 60 feet minimum lot width and re wired. frontage required. Side Yard Adjacent to residential Minimum side yard of 0 feet with a district, the required side total side yard of five feet. yard is one-fourth the sum of the height and depth of the building, no case less than 15 feet. Rear Yard Adjacent to residential All lots shall have a minimum rear district, the required rear yard of five feet. yard is one-fourth the sum of the height and width of the building, except when adjacent to a dedicated alley of not less than 20 feet. Hei t No re uirement 35 feet Lot Coverage 80% lot coverage of the 80% lot coverage unless otherwise total lot area. permitted by the Architectural Review Board. Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2008 -Planning Report Application No. 08-0422 Page 3 of 3 Evaluation and Recommendation based on the Community Plan Future Land Use: The adopted Future Land Use Map in the Community Plan shows this site as Mixed Use Village Center which is consistent with the uses contained in this rezoning application. The Village Centers include targeted areas near arterials or major collectors that are intended to provide daily retail, major grocers and other conveniences to serve the Dublin community within a 3 to S-mile radius. Village Centers incorporate moderately-sized nodes of commercial activity with a target size of 125, 000 square feet of gross leasable space. Integrated office uses are encouraged in a manner appropriate to the overall area. Medium to High Density Mixed Residential uses are encouraged and should be integrated to facilitate pedestrian activity and to provide support,for commercial uses. Future Land Use met: The existing uses remain commercial in nature with an intended purpose to serve the local community. No changes in use are proposed. Area Plan: This site is part of the Historic Dublin Area Plan within the Community Plan. The main goal of this area plan is to enhance and revitalize Historic Dublin as activity center within the City thttt is vibrant, pedestrian-oriented and user friendly with integrated mix of uses that supports economic, civic, recreational and housing opportunities for all segments of Dublin 's population. Area Plan met: The existing uses do concentrate the services and overall design of the site to pedestrian oriented customers. The uses permitted in the HB District continue to support these recommendations made by the Area Plan. SECTION II -REVIEW STANDARDS: The objective of this process is to rezone the residential portions of Historic Dublin to a zoning classification that is more reflective of the type and size of development located within the Historic District. Planning is supportive of this process because it provides more appropriate standards to the parcels and allows development and redevelopment of the properties to occur in amore streamlined review process. After the Planning and Zoning Commission makes its recommendation, the case will be forwarded to City Council for a public hearing and final vote. With a positive recommendation from the Commission, a simple majority vote is required for passage. A negative Commission recommendation requires five votes for City Council passage. If the ordinance is approved, it will take effect in 30 days. SECTION III -PLANNING OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION: Approval The Historic Business District was adopted by the City in 2003 for the distinct purpose of providing a commercial district that took into account the lot size and development potential of this unique portion of Dublin. This request is in keeping with previous intentions of the City of Dublin to rezone portions of the Historic District to a zoning classification that are consistent with the development located found in this area. Planning is recommending approval of the request based on the fact that it is in keeping with these previous objectives and goals of both the residents of the Historic District and the City of Dublin. EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT § 153.030 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. (A) Permitted use. The following uses shall he permitted in the Central Business District: (1) Residential. Residential structures containing not more than four dwelling units. (2) Retail stores. Retail stores primarily engaged in selling merchandise for personal or household consumption and rendering services incidental to the sale of the goods, including the buying or processing of goods for resale. (a) Building materials. 522 Heating and plumbing equipment dealers 523 Paint, glass and wallpaper stores 524 Electrical supply stores 5251 Hazdware stores (b) General merchandise. 531 Department stores 532 Mail order houses 533 Limited price variety stores 5392 Dry goods and general merchandise stores (c) Food. 541 Grocery stores 543 Fruit stores and vegetable markets 544 Candy, nut and confectionery stores 545 Dairy products stores 5463 Retail bakeries - nonmanufacturing 5499 Food stores not elsewhere classified AS r;lJt.tiMl-~~-f~;lj I l~ t.~lil~cll '~~~ "fig FOR MEETING ON. f-s- 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT (d) Apparel and accessories. 561 Men's and boys' clothing and furnishings stores 562 Women's ready-to-wear stores 563 Women's accessory and specialty shops 564 Children's and infants' wear stores 565 Family clothing stares 566 Shce stores 567 Custom tailors 568 Furriers and fur shops 569 Miscellaneous apparel and accessory stores (e) Furniture, home furnishings and equipment. 571 Furniture, home furnishings and equipment stores 572 Household appliance stores 573 Radio, television and music stores (f) Eating and drinking. 581 Eating and drinking places (g) Miscellaneous. 591 Drug stores and proprietary stores 592 Liquor stores 593 Antique stores and secondhand stores 594 Book and stationery stores 595 Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops 597 Jewelry stores 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT 599 Retail stores not elsewhere classified (3} Administrative, Business and Professional Offices. Administrative offices primarily engaged in general administration, supervision, purchasing, accounting and other management functions. Business offices carrying on no retail trade with the general public and having no stock of goods maintained for sale to customers. Professional offices engaged in providing tangible and intangible services to the general public, involving both persons and possessions. (a) Finance. 601 Federal reserve banks 602 Commercial and stock savings banks 603 Mutual savings banks 604 Trust companies not engaged in deposit banking 605 Establishments performing functions closely related to banking 611 Rediscount and financing institutions for credit agencies other than banks 612 Savings and loan associations 613 Agricultural credit institutions 6l4 Personal credit institutions 615 Business credit institutions b 16 Loan correspondents and brokers 621 Security brokers, dealers and flotation companies 622 Commodity contracts brokers and dealers b23 Security and commodity exchanges b28 Services allied with the exchange of securities or commodities (b) Insurance carriers. 631 Life insurance 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. I-sigh, 45 N. High EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT 632 Accident and health insurance 633 Fire, marine and casualty insurance 635 Surety insurance 636 Title insurance 639 Insurance carriers not elsewhere classified (c) Iasurar7ce agents. 641 Insurance agents, brokers and service (d) Real estate. 651 Real estate operators (except developers) and lessors 6,53 Agents, brokers and managers 654 Title abstract companies 655 Subdividers and developers 656 Operative builders 661 Combination of real estate, insurance, loans, law offices (e) Holding and other investment companies. 671 Holding companies 672 Investment companies 673 Trusts 679 Miscellaneous investing institutions (f) Professional. 801 Offices of physicians and surgeons 802 Offices of dentists and dental surgeons 803 Offices of osteopathic physicians 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning ] 23 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT 804 Offices of chiropractors 807 Medical and dental laboratories 809 Health and allied services not elsewhere classified 811 Legal services 891 Engineering and architectural services 893 Accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services (4) Personal and Consumer Services. Personal services generally involving the care of the person or his personal effects. Consumer services generally involving the care and maintenance of tangible property or the provision of intangible services for personal consumption. (a) Persorurl. 721 Photographic studios, including commercial photography 723 Beauty shops 724 Barber shops 725 Shce repair shops, shoe shine parlors and hat cleaning shops 726 Funeral service 727 Pressing, alteration and garment repair 729 Miscellaneous personal services (b) Business. 731 Advertising 732 Consumer credit reporting agencies, mercantile reporting agencies, and adjustment and collection agencies 733 Duplicating, addressing, blueprinting, photocopying, mailing, mailing list and stenographic services 735 News syndicates 08-0427 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT 739 Business services not elsewhere classified (except 7391 -research, development and testing laboratories (see § 153.026(B)(3)(a)) (c} Miscellaneous repair. 762 Electrical repair shops 763 Watch, clock and jewelry 764 Reupholstery and furniture repair 769 Miscellaneous repair shops and related services (B) Conditio~ral use. The following uses shall be allowed in the Central Business District, subject to approval in accordance with § 153.236. (1) Residential. Living quarters developed as an integral part of permitted use structure. (2) hTdustrial Controls. 3622 Industrial controls, but limited to those of an electronic character. (3) Large format retail. Any retail or wholesale use of 20,000 square feet or more of gross floor area. (4) Outdoor service facilities. Outdoor service facilities when developed independently or in association with a permitted use. (C) Development standards. In addition to the provisions of §§ 153.070 through 153.076, the following standards for arrangement and development of land and buildings are required in the Central Business District. (1) Intensity of rise. No minimum lot size is required. street. (2) Lot width. No minimum lot width is required; however, all lots shall abut a (3) Side yard. Aside yard shall be required adjacent to a residential zoning district or planned residential zoning district as listed in § 153.016. These required side yards shall be not less than one-fourth the sum of the height and depth of the building, but in no case shall be less than 15 feet. (4) Rear yard. A rear yard shall be required adjacent to a residential zoning district or a planned residential zoning district as listed in § 153.0]6. These required rear yards shall be not less than one-fourth the sum of the height and width of the building, 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT except when adjacent to a dedicated alley of not less than 20 feet. A use designed to be serviced from the rear shall provide a service court, alleyway or combination thereof having a width of not less than 40 feet. (5) Location and appearance. The location on the site and appearance (architectural character) of structures proposed for construction in the Central Business District shall be governed by the provisions of Section 1183.1 I . ('80 Code, §§ 1167.01 - 1167.03) (Ord. 21-70, passed 7-13-70; Am. Ord. 147-97, passed 12-15-97; Am. Ord. 88-98, passed 11-2-98; Am. Ord. 68-99, passed 9-5-00; Am. Ord. 57-07, passed 9-4-07) Penalty see § 153.999 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT 153.036 HISTORIC BUSINESS DISTRICT. (A) District intent. The intent of the Historic Business District is to improve economic viability and to provide a greater mix of uses with an emphasis on historic preservation and traditional development patterns. Utilization of the district is intended to foster pedestrian-oriented development that will enhance Historic Dublin as a community focal point. It is intended to discourage auto-oriented uses, uses with fleet parking, commercial storage and other uses that would detract from the visual quality and scale of the district. Its goal is to foster appropriate development standards to preserve historic character by promoting the re-use of existing buildings when compatible with the district and the addition of suitable infill development. (B) Permitted uses. The following uses shall be permitted in the Historic Business District. (1) Retail. Retail stores engaged in selling merchandise or rendering services incidental to the sale of the goods, including the buying and processing of goods for resale or repair. (a) General merchandise (b) Food and catering activities (c) Apparel (d) Home furnishings (e) Arts, crafts and antiques (f) Miscellaneous retail (2) Tatirrg a~ad drinking establishments. Eating and drinking establishments that are commercial establishments engaged in furnishing meals on a fee basis. (a) Restaurants (b) Bars and taverns (c) lce cream parlors (d) Coffee shops (e) Bagel shops (f) Delicatessens and sandwich shops OS-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT (3) Administrative, business and professional offices. (4) Medical and dental offices. (5) Personal and consumer services. (a) Barbers (b) Beauty salons and shops (c) Tanning salons (d) Pedestrian-only ATMs (e) Tailors and pressing shops (f) Print shops and copy centers (g) Photography and framing shops (6) Institutional. (a) Government offices (b) Libraries and museums (c) Community theaters (7) Religious. Churches, temples or other places of worship. (8) Child care. Kindergarten, childcare, or daycare in accordance with all applicable state provisions. (9) Parks and public plazas. Parks, public plazas, playgrounds, play fields or other related park uses. (10) Bed and breakfast establishments. Bed and breakfast establishments with a resident manager/owner providing eight or fewer guest units. (11) Ihvellings. One-family through four-family dwelling units, including residences in detached accessory structures (i.e. carnage house units) and/or residences in conjunction with structures containing other permitted Historic Business District uses. (12) Outdoor patios. Outdoor seating areas, including but not limited to outdoor dining and restaurant patio spaces in conjunction with other permitted Historic Business District uses. 08-042L Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 INT. High PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT (13) Dance, aerobic, exercise, gymnastics, and related studios. (C) Corrditio~ial rises. The following uses shall be conditional uses within the Historic Business District: (1) Notel and motel facilities. Hotels, motels and other boarding facilities, including bed and breakfasts as not otherwise noted in division (B)(10) of this section. (2) Recreation centers. (3) Lodges, banquet halls, and private elr~bs. (4) Parking lots. Stand-alone parking lots not in conjunction with other permitted and/or conditional Historic Business District uses. (5) Open-air markets. Farmer`s markets or other outdoor markets. (D) Development standards. The following standards for arrangement and development of land and buildings are required. (1) Lot area. There shall be no minimum lot area; however, lot size shall be adequate to meet all applicable development standards. No land may be subdivided or combined into lots greater than 21,780 square feet (0.5-acre). (2) Lot width. Lots shall be a minimum of 60 feet in width with a minimum frontage of 60 feet along a public street. (3) Front yard. All lots shall have a minimum front yard setback of 0 feet. (4) Side yard. All lots shall have a minimum side yard of 0 feet with a total of side yards of five feet. Minimum side yards for parking with direct access onto an alley shall be 0 feet. (5) Rear yard. All lots shall have a minimum rear yard of five feet. Minimum rear yards for parking with direct access onto an alley shall be 0 feet. (6) Height. No dwelling structure shall exceed 35 feet in height. Maximum height for other structures shall not exceed a safe height as determined by the Fire Chief and as reviewed and accepted by the Architectural Review Board. (7) I,ot coverage. Combined square footage of all primary and accessory structures and impervious surfaces shall not exceed 80% of the lot area, unless otherwise approved by the Architectural Review Board. (Ord. 53-03, passed 10-6-03) 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION AUGUST 9, 2007 CITY OF DUBLI\ land Use and long Range Pkaning 5800 Shier Rings Road Dublin. Ohio 43016-1236 Phone: 614410-4600 fax: 614-410-4141 Web Site: wvrw.dub6n.oh.us The Planning and Toning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 4. Historic Dublin South Riverview and Residential Rezonings High Streets 07-0692 Rezoning Proposal: Rezoning of properties from R-2, Limited Suburban Residential District and R-4, Suburban Residential District to HR, Historic Residential District within Historic Dublin. Request: Review and approval of rezonings under the provisions of Code Section 153.234. Applicant: Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager, City of Dublin. Affected Parcels: 19, 25, 37, 55, 56, 61, 63, 64, 73, 76, 83, 84, 97, 109, l 12, 129, I34, 137, 143, 170, 179, 180, 185, 195, and 224 South Riverview Street, Short Street Tax District 273, Parcel 011175, 190 South High Street. Planning Contact: Tammy Noble-Flading, Senior Planner Contact Information: (614) 410-4649, tnobie@dublin.oh.us MOTION: To approve this Rezoning application because it is in keeping with the objectives and goals of both the residents of the Historic District and the City of Dublin. VOTE: 5 - 0. ILESULT: 'I~his Rezoning application was approved. STA ~ F CERTIFICATION Steve Langworth Planning Directo 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Planning and 7_oning Commission Minutes -August 9, 2007 Page 18 of 30 Mr. Gerber said it wovl'd take him a while more open space more of a setback. buildings are go' to the ARB, it is go' g support it witl} t more stone and brie to~et used to this. He s~(d he was expecting a ittle hIe said with respect~to the architecture, w ile the to come back to the~ommission. He sal could not Mr. Mc h said regarding the ace issue, there is a t of noise along Bri a Street, and said the el ated internal plaza w ld provide a view a that was really the b of activity on the site r. Gerber said he d' not disagree with th as far as gathering p cos, but really thoug t y would have more g en, more open. Mr. McCash said e only other comme a had on architectu was that snow guar be used on the portions the buildings with s ding seam metal roo He noted that with wn Center I there have b en instances where s wand ice have slid the metal roof and tentially onto people pas 'ng by on the sidewal . Mr. Gerber said he appreciated all of Mr. Bird's hard work and thanked 4. Historic Dublin Residential Rezonings South Riverview and High Streets 07-0692 Rezoning Steve Langworthy presented this rezoning application which was requested by petition from the property owners. Ile expressed Planning's appreciation to the residents who helped determine properties that wanted to be included in the petition. He said the criteria used for this zoning was similar to those used for the area rezonings. Mr. Langworthy said Planning's attempt with the Historic Residential District originally was to devise a district that was more in tune with actually what was happening on the ground so that it is a more realistic zoning district placed mostly on these historic properties. Mr. I,angworthy said Planning's recommendation is for approval of these rezonings and to forwazd the recommendation to City Council. Ms. Amoroso Groomes noted that the present zoning was residential, and asked what differences would be if this were rezoned. Mr. Langworthy said primarily, the differences were not with uses, but with lot dimensions and setback requirements. He said most of the properties aze fairly small and it was difficult for additions to be made without having to appear before the Board of Zoning Appeals. Ile said the idea was to try to create a district that was more in tune with the historic nature of the area. He said it was likely in the future that Planning will come back with more of these rezonings in the Historic Residential District. He said Planning is only reacting now with the petition received. Ms. Amoroso said she understood that currently, if someone wanted a bed and breakfast, it would require a variance and if these rezonings were to happen you would not only need a variance, but also you would need to be rezoned. Mr. Langworthy said if she was talking about a use variance, then a rezoning would not be necessary because if the use is not allowed, it is just a straight use variance to the Board of Zoning Appeals, or you could be rezoned to a district that did permit the use and the rezoning 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -August 9, 2007 Page 19 of 30 would go though the Commission. He said it would not require both - it would be either/or. Mr. Langworthy confurned that this potential change would not have impact on that process. David Garcia, 109 South Riverview, said one of the main reasons why the residents wanted rezoned was that they wanted to preserve the consistency, at least in this very small section. He said it was a quaint street without sidewalks with a speed limit of 15 mph. 1-Ie said some businesses and residences are seen in certain historic areas, but as it stands today, particularly with no sidewalks and a lot of children on the street, that is why the residents decided with one voice to try to preserve this as a residential section. He said that would not prevent someone in the future, if they did want a bed and breakfast or something, from requesting it. Mr. Fishman confirmed this HR rezoning was still for asingle-family residential district. Mr. Gerber recalled that this rezoning process began approximately three years ago. He said it was to distinguish between business and residential areas. He said this new rezoning will preserve the residential areas more than it does now. Motion and Vote Chris Amorose Groomes made a motion to approve this Rezoning application because it is in keeping with these previous objectives and goals of both the residents of the Historic District and the City of Dublin. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Walter, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; and Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes. (Approved 5 - 0.) 5. Eiterman Road Right- -Way 5625 E'rrman Road 07-058PP/FP Preliminary P and Final Plat Ed Reinhard, 6634 trathern Court, thanked't Commission and Plarui g for the additional review of this t. He said initially, it w set to go through the tr a line and remove the, existing buffp{ng, but the redesign mat med the tree line and a ded an additional 15 fee {f buffer. einhard brought up the is e of the proposed speed it of 35 mph and said~~lii dren from e Ballantrae neighborhoo will cross the road to geft to the school. He was oncerned about their safety. He asked f9r a reconsideration to redu~the speed limit to 25 i. Steve Smith, Jr. plained that most spee~ mits are set statutorily epending on the typ~f road and ther 's a process to go througl~,to either lower and/or ra' a speed limit. He su fisted that Mr. 'nhard contact the Engin~rmg department. Mr einhard said he had alre y discussed the speed r uction with Engineeri ,but he did not feel like it was being hear roperly. Mr. Gerber stated t this was a preliminary at and final plat, and t would be reviewed and approved or dis proved by City Counci He recommended that r. Reinhard attend the City Council meeting when this is scheduled o express his concern. OS-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD BOARD ORDER MAY 24, 2006 CITY OF DUBLIAr_ Land Use and long Range Punning 5600 Shier•Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016.1236 Phone: 614 10-0600 Fox: 614-910-4141 Web Site: www.dubtin.oh.us The Architectural Review Board took the following action at this meeting: 2. Architectural Review Board 06-OS6ARB - 91/95 South High Street -Dublin Hair and Nails Location: 0.21-acre lot located at the northwest corner of Pinney Hill and South High Street. Existnag Zoning: CB, Central Business District. Request: Review and approval of the demolition of a 578-square-foot building and the construction of a 772-squaze-foot building. Proposed Use: Nail salon. Applicant: John C. Albert, 10776 Campden Lakes Boulevard, Dublin, Ohio 43016; represented by aim Clarke, Clazke Architects, 507 Village Park Drive, Powell, Ohio 43065. Staff Contact: Todd Corwin, Senior Planner, or Joanne Ochal, Planner. Contact Information: (614) 410-4656/Email: tcorwin@dublin.oh.us, or (6l4) 410 - 4683/Email: jochal@dublin.oh.us. MOTION #1: Kevin Bales, made a motion, seconded by Clayton Bryan, to approve the demolition, with two conditions:. Demolition: The demolition of the existing 578-square-foot outbuilding is within the Guidelines. Staff feels the removal of this structure for the construction of the new structure will enhance the Historic District. Staff recommends approval with the following two conditions: 1) That a demolition permit be obtained from the Building Division prior to demolition; and 2) That demolition occurs within six months of ARB approval. VOTE: 5-0 RESULT: 'The building demolition was approved/ RECORDED V~ Thomas Holton Kevin Bales Clayton Bryan William Souders Linda Kick RTES: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Page 1 of 3 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin P~ezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 445 N. 1~igh ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD BOARD ORDER MAY 24, 2006 2. Architectural Review Board 06-056ARB - 91/95 South High Street -Dublin Hair and Nails (Continued) MOTION #2: Thomas Holton made a motion, seconded by Clayton Byran, to approve this building construction with 16 conditions: New Proposal: The proposed structure will replace an unsafe, historically insignificant outbuilding. The proposed replacement structure is consistent with the Historic Dublin Design Guidelines. Staff believes that the proposed building materials are of high quality and have been traditionally used throughout the Historical District. Staff recommends approval of the building addition with the following 16 conditions: 1) That the applicant rezone the property to HB, Historic Business District; 2) That the applicant obtains a variance for the size of the accessory structure; 3) That the two lots be combined prior to the issuance of a building pernut; 4) That a building permit be obtained prior to construction of the proposed improvements; 5) That the plans be revised to show existing and proposed conditions, including the location of ADA accessible parking, utility services, and pedestrian paths; 6) That the necessary civil plans be prepared prior to submitting for a building permit; 7) That the applicant complies with the City's Stormwater Management and Stream Corridor Protection Zone Ordinance; 8) That landscaping requirements be met, subject to staff approval; 9) That protective chain link fencing for the black locust tree be installed prior to and maintained during all construction activity; 10} That if the black locust tree dies or becomes a hazard within five years, it will be replaced on an inch by inch basis or the appropriate fee will be paid; 11) That gray asphalt shingles be used on the new accessory structure's roof, subject to staff approval; 12) That a tree removal permit be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit; 13) That any lighting proposed for the new construction be subject to staff approval; 14) That all mechanicals be screened to Code subject to siaff approval; 15) That any proposed signage be brought back to this Boazd prior to installation; and Page 2 of 3 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD BOARD ORDER MAY 24, 2006 2. Architectural Review Board 06-056ARB - 91/95 South High Street -Dublin Hair and Nails (Continued) 16) That the applicant work with the property owner to the north to install a brick sidewalk to provide connectivity from Mill Lane to the pazking lot, if feasible, and to install coach or post lighting fixtures along this sidewalk, subject to staff approval. VOTE: 5-0 RESULT: This building addition was approved. RECORDED VOTES: Thomas Holton Yes Kevin Bales Yes Clayton Bryan Yes William Souders Yes Linda Kick Yes STAFF CERTIFICATION ~~~~ Todd Corwin Senior Planner Page 3 of 3 08-0427 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezo~:ing 123 & 95 S. High, 4~ N. Iiigh ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD BOARD ORDER MAY 24, 2006 CITY OF DtiBLI'V_ land Use and Long Range Pknning Sfl00 Shier-Rings Rood Duhlin, Ohio 43016.1236 Phone: 614-010-0600 Fax: 614.410741 Weh Sile: www.duhlin.oh.us The Architectural Review Boazd took the following action at this meeting: 3. Architectural Review Board 06-041ARB - 45 North High Street - Krema Products Addition Location: 0.25-acre lot located on the west side of North High Street, 300 feet north of East Bridge Street. Ezisting Zoning: CB, Central Business District. Request: Review and approval of the relocation of an existing 1,208-squaze-foot building and a 3,422-square-foot addition to the existing building. Proposed Use: Wazehouse and retail space. Applicant: Craig Sonkson, 45 North High Street, Dublin, Ohio 43017. Staff Contact: Jeff Jacobs, Planning Intern, or Joanne Ochal, Planner. Contact Information: (6I4) 410-4677IEmail: jwjacobs@dublin.oh.us, or (614) 410- 4683/Ernail: jochal@dublin.oh.us. MOTION #1: Linda Kick made a motion, seconded by Kevin Bales, to approve the building relocation with one condition: Demolition The demolition of the existing outbuilding is within the Guidelines, as it is not economically feasible to restore the structure and because there is no reasonable economic use for the structure as it exists Staff believes the removal of this outbuilding for the construction of the sidewalk will provide connectivity from Darby Street to North High Street and will enhance the Historic District. Staff recommends approval with the following condition: 1) That if a demolition is approved; the owner of the land which contains the out building is required to obtain a demolition permit from the Division of Building Standazds prior to demolition. OS-0422 Page 1 of 3 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD BOARD ORDER MAY 24, 2006 3. Architectural Review Board 06-041ARB - 45 North High Street - Krema Products Addition (Continued) VOTE: 5-0 RESULT: The building demolition was approved. RECORDED VOTES: Thomas Holton Yes Kevin Bales Yes Clayton Bryan Yes William Souders Yes Linda Kick Yes MOTION #2: Thomas Holton made a motion, seconded by Linda Kick, to approve this building addition with ten conditions: New Construction: Staff believes that the proposed expansion is compatible with the Historic District and will provide a suitable and consistent addition to the existing building and the character of the streetscape. The expansion provides architectural detailing and relief and generally meets the intent of the Guidelines. Staff recommends approval of this application with the following ten conditions: 1) That the applicant revise the Landscape plan to reflect the comments in the memo dated May 12, 2006; 2) The applicant comply with ensuring all stormwater is adequately routed to a public stormwater system and not onto adjacent properties; 3) That the applicant obtain a parking variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals or that Code be met; 4) That the applicant file an application with Land Use and Long Range division to rezone the property to Historic Business (HB) prior to issuance of a building permit; 5) That the applicant return to the ARB for approval of any additional signage prior to installation; 6) That the applicant obtain a sign permit for the relocated sign; 7) That the applicants lighting plan be revised to meet the Dublin Lighting Guidelines; 8) That the applicant pay a fee of $100.00 per inch for any required tree caliper inches not relocated on site; 08-0422 Page 2 of 3 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD BOARD ORDER MAY 24, 2006 3. Architectural Review Board 06-041ARB - 45 North high Street - Krema Products Addition (Continued) 9) That if a demolition permit is necessary, it be obtained from the Division of Building Standards prior to demolition; and 10) That can lighting be eliminated from the original structure and ceiling mounted fixture be installed, subject to staff approval. VOTE: 5-0 RESULT: This building constntction was approved. RECORDED VOTES: Thomas Holton Yes Kevin Bales Yes Clayton Bryan Yes William Souders Yes Linda Kick Yes STAFF CERTIFICATION G.~ oanne Ochal Planner Page 3 of 3 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Dublin Architectural Review Board Minutes -May 24, 2006 Page 2 of 12 Tom Hol n noted that the pl next to the Frog P was almost comple and the frog was finally ' its place. C 'Holton made a m ion to go into Execut' a Session to discuss rsonnel matters. Keith Bales secon d the motion, and th ote was as follows: .Holton, yes; Mr. ales, yes; Mr. Bryan, yes; .Souders, yes; and s. Kick, yes. (Appro ed 5-0.) [The Boar members left the roo for the Executive Se on.] Mr. Iton upon return of Board, made them ion to elect Kevin B s 2006 Vice Chair th Architectural Review oazd, and Mr. Bryan econded the motion. he vote was as foll s: s. Kick, yes; Mr. uders, yes; Mr. B ,yes; Mr. Holton yes; and Mr. Bale , yes. (Approved 5-0.) Mr. Bryan ma the motion to elect homas Holton 2006 hair of the Archit tural Review Board, and .Souders seconded emotion. The vote as as follows: ales, yes; Mr. Bryan, ye , Mr. Souders, yes; M . 'ck, yes; and Mr. H ton, yes. (Approve -0.) Kev' Bales made a moti ,seconded by Tho Holton, to accep a documents into e re rd. The vote was as llows: Mr. Holton, s; Mr. Bales, yes; .Bryan, yes; Mr. So ers, es; and Ms. Kick, ye (Approved 5-0.) Thomas Holton de a motion, seconde y Kevin Bales, to prove the April 19, 06 meeting minutes as pre nted. The vote was oolows: Mr. Holto ,yes; Mr. Bales, yes; .Bryan, yes; Mr. Souder yes; and Ms. Kick, ye . (Approved 5-0.) Mr. H on swore in those wh intended to speak t ght before the Boar Architectural Re 'ew Board 06-069 - 25 South Riverv' w Joanne Ochal apolo ized because the ap icant for this case w not present when case was called. She requ ted that the case b ostponed to the end the meeting to alto time for the applicant to co a to the meeting. Chair To Holton agreed to p tpone this case until a end of the meeting Aft all other cases wer eazd; Clayton Bry made a motion, seco ded by William Sou rs, t ble this applicati due to the absence the applicant or a r resentative at the eting. he vote was as fol ws: Mr. Holton, yes• .Bale, yes; Mr. S ders, yes; Mr. Bryan es, and Ms. Kick, yes. ( led 5-0.) 2. Architectural Review Board 06-056ARB - 91/95 South High Street -Dublin Hair and Nails Planner Todd Corwin presented this case and slides for this application for the demolition of a 578-square-foot structure and the new construction of a 772-square-foot strnrttire_ He said 14 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Dublin Architectural Review Boazd Minuses -May 24, 2006 Page 3 of 12 parking spaces aze proposed which is sufficient for the site. Mr. Corwin said the existing Black Locust Tree will be preserved. Mr. Corwin pointed out that the 772-square-foot building proposed was beyond the 25 percent square foot expansion of an accessory structure allowed by Code He said the Board had previously approved such an expansion on this site. He presented paint samples. Mr. Corwin stated that the proposed building has astucco-stone foundation and anasphalt-shingled roof. He said Andersen 400 Series windows and ogee gutters would be used on the structure. Mr. Corwin said the applicant worked with staff and Dublin's Historic consultant to reduce the scale of the proposed porch. Mr. Corwin said the existing roof was in poor condition. Mr. Corwin said staff recommends approval of the demolition with the following two conditions: 1) That a demolition permit be obtained from the Building Division prior to demolition; and 2) That demolition occurs within six months of ARB approval. Mr. Corwin said staff recommends approval of the proposed building construction with 12 conditions: 1) That the applicant rezone the property to HB, Historic Business District; 2) That the applicant obtains a variance for the size of the accessory structure; 3) That the two lots be combined prior to the issuance of a building permit; 4) That a building permit be obtained prior to construction of the proposed improvements; 5) That the plans be revised to show existing and proposed conditions, including the location of ADA accessible parking, utility services, and pedestrian paths; 6) That the necessary civil plans be prepared prior to submitting for a building permit; 7) That the applicant complies with the City's Stormwater Management and Stream Corridor Protection Zone Ordinance; 8) That landscaping requirements be met, subject to staff approval; 9) That protective chain link fencing for the black locust tree be installed prior to and maintained during all construction activity; 10) That if the black locust tree dies or becomes a hazard within five years, it will be replaced on an inch by inch basis or the appropriate fee will be paid; 11) That gray asphalt shingles be used on the new accessory structure's roof, subject to staff approval; and 12) That a tree removal permit be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit. Mr. Albert said the colors for the rear building would be identical to those on the front building, which were previously approved colors. Mr. Holton asked about the roof. Mr. Corwin provided a sample of the asphalt shingle proposed. Mr. Albert agreed to use a gray asphalt shingle as requested by staff. Mr. Bryan asked for an explanation of the lot coverage. 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Dublin Architectural Review Board Minutes -May 24; 2006 Page 4 of 12 Ms. Ochal said part of the approval is that the two pazcels be combined in order to build the new structure. She clarified that the 25 percent issue had to do with the size of the existing structure. She said Code allows accessory structures to be 25 percent of the main building. She said this structure is above that and the applicant has applied for a Board of Zoning Appeals variance for that increase. Mr. Corwin said the proposed structure will be 27 percent over the allowed 25 percent (52.7 percent or 1,464 square feet), and the addition will be 772 square feet (52 percent) for the accessory building. He said both structures exceed the 25 percent permitted by Code. Ms. Ochal said this property was akeady approved for a partial demolition of the outbuilding and the construction of an addition to the outbuilding. She said the construction size proposed by the applicant within the current application was approximately the same as what was approved in 2001. She said what has changed with this application is that the Board requested during the approval process in 2001 that part of the outbuilding be repaired. She said now, the outbuilding has decayed and needs to be replaced. Kevin Bales asked what type of lighting is proposed for the site. Mr. Albert said it would likely be a light near the door, similaz to what was on the front building. He said a coach lamp of some type would be attached to the wall on the porch. Mr. Bales said can lighting was not acceptable and suggested a condition that exterior lighting would be subject to staff approval. Mr. Albert said they were flexible with the lighting. Ms. Ochal asked if the Board wanted the lighting to specifically match that of the existing building. Mx. Bales said "subject to staff approval" would suffice. Ms. Ochal read drafted Condition 13: That any lights proposed with the new construction be submitted, subject to staff approval. Mr. Souders asked about signage for the new building. Mr. Albert said it would be addressed when it is decided what its use is. He said he knew the ARB process for sign approval. Mr. Souders asked if there was any historic value of this building. Ms. Ochal said there was no historic value to it. Mr. Bryati suggested placing a lighted sidewalk along the alley or installing some lighting on the back of the building to make the area pedestrian-friendly. He asked for other suggestions. 08-0427 Rezoning 1-Istoric Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Dublin Architectural Review Board Minutes -May 24, 2006 Page 5 of 12 Mr. Bryan asked if the other Boazd members were comfortable with the one over one window proposed. Mr. Clarke replied that the historical consultant had indicated that they were appropriate. He said they were similaz to the main building. Mr. Souders said he liked the idea of a sidewalk and a lamppost being added. He said the light would help when pulling trash back to the alley. Mr. Albert said the outbuilding to the north had already received ARB approval for demolition and plans, but he could not recall what had been proposed for the back of the building. Mr. Albert said the structure to the north would be only 10 or 1 S feet from their building. Ms. Ochal said that the proposed building would set five feet from the property line, therefore, she did not believe a sidewalk would be possible on the south elevation. Mr. Bryan recalled that a sidewalk had been approved, but was not sure if it was on the north or south side of the building. Mr. Holton said he remembered the Board approving the structure to the north and he knew they talked about doing installing a sidewalk to link the pazking azea to the alley. However, he said he could not recall if the sidewalk was to the north or south side of that building. He said on the south side, it would border this property and could perhaps be a joint venture. Mr. Albert said brick pavers aze presently located in the azea between the two outbuildings and the parking lot to the west. Mr. Bales said the applicant should be sensitive to the residents behind him regarding lighting. Mr. Bryan suggested a coach light or something similar, which would not be intrusive to the residents. He said he would like to see a joint venture. He said there would be ample space to put in a sidewalk and perhaps one lamppost. He said the azea would then appear to be more inviting for those walking down the alley. Mr. Holton said lighting should be minimized in the Historic District. Mr. Holton asked about the stormwater requirement where staff recommended that the applicant work with the engineering department to meet current stormwater requirements. Mr. Corwin said for this site, the applicant will be required to show the City Engineer that water will not be diverted to an off site location such as the neighboring properties. Mr. Clarke said they had not yet talked to the City to see what was wanted. He said they will follow the recommendations. Mr. Bryan said he would like to have a connecting sidewalk from the parking lot to the alley, as a condition to be reviewed and approved by staff. 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Dublin Architectural Review Boazd Minutes -May 24, 2006 Page 6 of 12 Mr. Clarke said he would rather look at the possibility of placing a sidewalk to the north rather than to the south to avoid damaging the large tree. Mr. Clazke asked if the Board would rather have a post lamp than asoffit-type lamp. Mr. Bryan suggested something other than a down light.be used, perhaps a post lamp or a lantern, something that would be sensitive to the building design. Mr. Bryan said he thought both the lighting and sidewalk issue could be considered for staff approval as a combined issue. He said that way, the option is open for a joint venture with the property to the north. Ms. Ochal reviewed additional conditions regarding can lighting, mechanical screening, and any proposed signage being brought back to the Board for approval. She said there were now a total of 16 conditions, including: That the applicant work with the property owner to the north to install the sidewalk to provide connectivity from Mill Lane to the parking lot, and that the applicant install coach or post lights along this sidewalk, subject to staff approval. Mr. Holton said the coach lights, if used must match or compliment the main building, subject to staff approval. Mr. Holton asked if there was enough right-of--way. Ms. Ocha1 asked if the Board had another suggestion for the sidewalk if it is not possible to construct it due to the location of the condenser and trash receptacles. She said Code states that the minimum sidewalk is to be four feet wide. Mr. Albert asked if brick pavers similar to those on the north elevation would be satisfactory. Mr. Bryan and Mr. Bales said the brick pavers would be acceptable. Mr. Holton modified the recommendation to install a brick paver sidewalk for connectivity, if feasible, and that the applicant work to install coach lights. Mr. Souders suggested that the original property owner be contacted to see if a sidewalk was previously approved. Ms. Ochal agreed to report back to the Boazd regazdvng the original site plan and the sidewalk. Mr. Holton asked why the applicant had decided to do nothing about the building condition. Mr. Albert said in 2001, they received approval for an addition, but the estimates were cost prohibitive. He said he was told it would be less expensive to demolish the structure and build a new one. Motion #1: Mr. Bales made'a motion seconded by Clayton Bryan, to approve the demolition of the existing 578-squaze-foot outbuilding, as it is consistent with the Historic Dublin Design Guidelines, and that the removal of this structure for the construction of the new structure will enhance the Historic District, with the following two conditions: 1) That a demolition permit be obtained from the Building Division pric 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Dublin Architectural Review Board Minutes -May 24, 2006 Page 7 of 12 2) That demolition occurs within six months of ARB approval. Vote: The vote on the motion regadding the demolition of the existing outbuilding was as follows: Mr. Holton, yes; Mr. Bales, yes; Mr. Bryan, yes; Mr. Souders, yes; and Ms. Kick, yes. (Approved 5-0.) MOTION #2: Thomas Holton made a motion, seconded by Clayton Byan, to approve this building construction because the structure will replace an unsafe, historically insignificant outbuilding, it is consistent with the Historic Dublin Design Guidelines and the building materials are of high quality and have been traditionally used throughout the Historical District with 16 conditions: 1) That the applicant rezone the property to HB, Historic Business District; 2) That the applicant obtains. a variance for the size of the accessory structure; 3} That the two lots be combined prior to the issuance of a building permit; 4) That a building permit be obtained prior to construction of the proposed improvements; 5) That the plans be revised to show existing and proposed conditions, including the location of ADA accessible parking, utility services, and pedestrian paths; 6) That the necessary civil plans be prepared prior to submitting for a building permit; 7) That the applicant complies with the City's Stormwater Management and Stream Corridor Protection Zone Ordinance; 8) That landscaping requirements be met, subject to staff approval; 9) That protective chain link fencing for the black locust tree be installed .prior to and maintained during all construction activity; 10) That if the black locust tree dies or becomes a hazard within five years, it will be replaced on an inch by inch basis or the appropriate fee will be paid; 11) That gray asphalt shingles be used on the new accessory structure's roof, subject to staff approval; 12) That a tree removal permit be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit; 13) That any lighting proposed for the new construction be subject to staff approval; 14) That all mechanicals be screened to Code subject to staff approval; 15) That any proposed signage be brought back to this Boazd prior to installation; and 16) That the applicant work with the property owner to the north to install a brick sidewalk to provide connectivity from Mill Lane to the parking lot, if feasible, and to install coach or post lighting fixtures along this sidewalk, subject to staff approval. Vote: The vote on the motion regarding the building construction was as follows: Mr. Holton, yes; Mr. Bales, yes; Mr. Bryan, yes; Mr. Souders, yes; and Ms. Kick, yes. (Approved 5-0.) 3. Architectural Review Board 06-041ARB - 45 North High Street - Krema Products Addition Jeff Jacobs presented the staff report and slides. He said this is a request for zeview and approval of a demolition of a 135-squaze-foot outbuilding and an addition to the site. He said the site is located in the northeast portion of the Historic District and it is zoned CB, Central Business District. He said the applicant is proposing to deed 12 feet along the southern property line to the City to provide for a sidewalk connectivity from High Street to Darby Street. He said the City is also looking into the relocation of the outbuilding to another site within the District. 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Dublin Architectural Review Board Minutes -May 24, 2006 Page 8 of 12 Mr. Jacobs said the site includes a 1,208-square-foot building located along North High Street. He said the applicant is proposing to relocate the structure approximately 12 feet closer to High Street and convert the building into office space. Mr. Jacobs said 2,578 square feet aze proposed to be retail warehouse azea, and 422 square feet of that azea will be a retail showroom. He said the total size of the building will be 3,000 square feet, slightly different than was indicated in the staff report and on the original plans. Mr. Jacobs said new parking spaces are proposed on the west side of the lot. He said the applicant is going to request a variance on the number of required parking spaces. Mr. Jacobs said fiber-reinforced cement board siding and trim will be used. The siding will be painted Agreeable Grey and the trim will be painted Mega Greige. He said the windows aze white Andersen 400 Architectural Series. He said the cupola proposed for the west peak is to be painted Billiard Green to match the existing roof. Mr. Jacobs said the applicant had taken into consideration the historian's recommendations for limiting the number of cupolas on the building. He said tine copula trim will be painted Agreeable Grey which will match the siding of the addition. He said the new retail space will be located on the west elevation. Mr. Jacobs said the existing building will be repaired and repainted. He said the siding of the building will be painted a Mega Greige and the trim will be Agreeable Grey. Mr. Jacobs said the windows on the existing building will remain and be painted to match the windows of the addition. He said the existing metal standing seam roof will be repainted a Billiard Green. He said downspouts and ogee gutters will be prefuushed five-inch aluminum in Natural Linen. Mr. Jacobs said the applicant will be retaining the front porch structure, adding a decorative Billiard Green metal railing to match the roof and cupola. He said the porch on the south elevation will be removed and rebuilt to coordinate with the front porch and a ramp and railings will be added to meet ADA requirements. Mr. Jacobs said the applicant is proposing to relocate the previously approved sign from the current site. He said coach lights have been added based on staff recommendations. He said can lights are proposed for the soffits. Mr. Jacobs said staff recommends approval the demolition with the following condition which had been modified and distributed to the Commission: That if a demolition is approved; the owner of the Iand which contains the out building is required to obtain a demolition permit from the Division of Building Standazds prior to demolition. Mr. Jacobs said staff recommends approval of the application for the addition with the nine conditions as listed in the staff report. Tom Holton said there seemed to be a contradiction with the demolition and the relocation. Mr. Jacobs explained that the historian had indicated that outbuildings are an important part of the District, but this particular building is not architecturally significant. Staff has contact other property owners to see if they would like to relocate the outbuilding. 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Dublin Architectural Review Boazd Minutes -May 24, 2006 Page 9 of 12 Mr. Bales said there was a Board concern about the perspective from the street regarding the appearance of the flat elevation having more mass. He said most of the mass disappeared behind the existing building. Joe Sullivan, Sullivan Bruck Architect, representing the applicant said the addition has very little impact from the street. Mr. Bryan said if it were rotated southward, there would be nothing to obscure the roof line all the way to Bridge Street. He said the back of the original structure would still wind up even or in front of the face of Tucci's. Mr. Sullivan said the addition would be two to three feet in front of Tucci's. He said the existing house will be exposed, but the building behind will be mostly obscured by Tucci's. He said there is a slight grade change which will diminish the scale from a distance. Mr. Bales said a lot of it will disappeaz with the landscaping. Mr. Sullivan apologized and said that they had exchanged the colors on the plan. He said the design intent was not to have the two buildings the same color, but a palette of different colors. He said it was more appropriate to have a dazker siding and lighter trim on the front structure that faced the street, and then to reverse that on the addition where there is lighter siding with the trim being darker. He said the lighter color will recede and diminish its perceived scale. He said the additional railing on the front is on the steps only. He said they are maintaining the existing porch rail. Mr. Sullivan said on the side, the railing was at the ramp, but not at the porch. Mr. Holton asked why metal railing was proposed instead of wood. Mr. Sullivan said they felt that using wood was out of character with the rest of the house. He said the thin metal railing painted Billiard Green would recede and not be a prevalent element. Mr. Sullivan clarified that railing on the front elevation has balusters and the south elevation does not. Mr. Holton asked if there was signage on the front of the building. Mr. Jacobs said the applicant was proposing to add signage later and it would come back to this Board for approval. Mr. Bales said the drawing did not show exterior can lighting, as in soffit lighting. Ms. Ochal said staff had suggested coach lighting to replace the flood lighting shown. However, the applicant still wants can lighting. Mr. Bales said that can lighting has not worked in the past. Mr. Sullivan said can lighting was on the existing facility. However, he said if there is an objection to can lights, they could do asurface-mounted porch light to the ceiling which would be historically appropriate. 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Dublin Architectural Review Boazd Minutes -May 24, 2006 Page 10 of 12 Mr. Holton said it was the Board members consensus to allow recessed lighting in the reaz only. Mr. Bryan asked about the shingles material. Ms. Ochal provided a sample of the dimensional shingle proposed. Mr. Jacobs said dimensional shingles had been approved by the Boazd in the past. Mr. Holton recalled that the Boazd had approved the three-tab gray or black shingles in the past. He thought that was what the Guidelines recommended. Ms. Ochal said that the dimensional shingles have been approved in the District. Mr. Holton noted that this will be the largest roof in the area and will be very visible. Mr. Sullivan said they were trying to get more texture on the roof because of its scale. He said they specifically wanted that roof different than the one on the house. He said the house had a standing seam roof painted green. Mr. Holton asked what was the concern about dimensional shingles. Mr. Bryan said dimensional shingles allude to a look that is not authentic. Mr. Sullivan said this addition was a new structure. He agreed to go in the direction the Boazd wanted. He said they thought getting texture on the lazge roof was good. He said it being a new structure, they did not feel it compromised the historic quality of the neighborhood. Mr. Bryan agreed. Mr. Holton said the Boazd wanted to be consistent. He asked if the Weathered Wood shingle color was acceptable. Ms. Kick agreed that the warm gray shingle color was acceptable. Mr. Holton said in regazds to the dimensional vs. three-tab shingles, the Board needed to be consistent with their decision. Mr. Bales said dimensional shingles are now being manufactured to look more like cedar wood. He repeated that continuity within the District and the Guidelines is the issue. He said if the owner and architect have objections to using athree-tab shingle to maintain the criteria within the design Guidelines, then that is what should be used. Mr. Sullivan agreed to use three-tab shingles. He said the building will still look good. He said dimensional shingles will define the texture. Mr. Bryan said he had a problem deviating from the Guidelines, but that the Guidelines are only guidelines. He said if that deviation had been allowed in the past, then he suggested they were doing a disservice to a patron by disallowing something that would be a 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Dublin Architectural Review Board Minutes -May 24, 2006 Page 11 of 12 as long as the Board could provide some idea or rationale for changing from the Guidelines because of something that is already pre-existing and approved, then he had no problem approving a dimensional shingle. Mr. Holton asked if the Board had decided on dimensional shingles. The Board members all agreed. Mr. Bryan said the only additional recommendation was the change from recessed lighting to surface mounted lighting on the original structure. Mr. Holton asked if the storm water would be tied into the City system. Mr. Sullivan said yes. Mr. Holton asked if the Hackberry tree in the front would stay. Mr. Sullivan said it was akeady significantly damaged and would not stay. He said new trees will be added in the tree line. MOTION #1: Linda Kick made a motion, seconded by Clayton Bryan, to approve the demolition, with two conditions: 1) That if a demolition is approved; the owner of the land which contains the out building is required to obtain a demolition permit from the Division of Building Standards prior to demolition 2) That demolition occurs within six months of ARB approval. Mr. Holton asked who owned this property now. Mr. Sonksen said Pat Grabill owned the property now, but he would simultaneously buy this property and do the 12-foot strip so that the City can put theiz sidewalk through. He said in reality, the building was the City's problem, not his. Ms. Ochal confirmed that the building actually sat on the City's property MOTION #2: Thomas Holton made a motion, seconded by Linda Kick, to approve this building addition with 10 conditions: 1) That the applicant revise the landscape plan to reflect the comments in the memo dated May 12, 2006; 2) The applicant complies with ensuring all storm water is adequately routed to a public storm water system and not onto adjacent properties; 3) That the applicant obtain a parking variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals or that Code be met; 4) That the applicant file an application with Land Use and Long Range division to rezone the property to Historic Business (HB) prior to issuance of a building permit; 5) That the applicant return to the ARB for approval of any additional signage prior to installation; 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High Dublin Architectural Review Board Minutes -May 24, 2006 Page 12 of 12 6) That the applicant obtain a sign permit for the relocated sign; 7) That the applicants lighting plan be revised to meet the Dublin Lighting Guidelines; 8) That the applicant pay a fee of $100.00 per inch for any required tree caliper inches not relocated on site; 9) That if a demolition permit is necessary, it be obtained from the Division of Building Standards prior to demolition; and 10) That can lighting be eliminated from the original structure and ceiling mounted fixture be installed, subject to staff approval. VOTE: Mr. Souders, yes; Mr. Bryan, yes; Mr. Bale, yes; Ms. Kick, yes; and Mr. Holton, yes. (Approved 5-0.) Mr. Sonksen agreed to the above conditions The meeting was adjorned at 9 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Libby F ley Administrative Assistant 08-0422 Rezoning Historic Dublin Rezoning 123 & 95 S. High, 45 N. High