Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Ordinance 01-13
RECORD OF ORDINANCES Blank, Inc. Ordinance No. Passed 20 AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 2.9 ACRES, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PERIMETER DRIVE, BETWEEN THE INTERSECTIONS WITH AVERY MUIRFIELD DRIVE AND HOSPITAL DRIVE FROM PCD, PLANNED COMMERCE DISTRICT (RIVERSIDE PCD NORTH, SUBAREA A3) TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (RIVERSIDE PUD NORTH, SUBAREA A3) TO FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE WITH AN APPROXIMATELY 14,500- SQUARE -FOOT RETAIL BUILDING, INCLUDING RESTAURANT SPACES AND ASSOCIATED PATIOS. (CASE 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP) NO , THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, L of its elected members concurring, that: Section 1. The following described real estate (see attached legal description), situated in the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District, and shall be subject to regulations and procedures contained in Ordinance No. 21 -70 (Chapter 153 of the Codified Ordinances), the City of Dublin Zoning Code and amendments thereto. Section 2 . The application, including the list of contiguous and affected property owners, and the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, are all incorporated into and made an official part of this Ordinance and said real estate shall be developed and used in accordance there within. Section 3 . This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after the earliest period allowed by law. Passed this � h�i day of it 2013. Mayor - Pr - ling O fficer ATTEST: 01 -13 Clerk of Council Office of the City Manager City of Dublin Pho 614-410 Fax:b614-410-4490 43017-1090 .Memo To: Members of Dublin City Council From: Marsha I. Grigsby, City Manager' Date: January 10, 2013 Initiated By: Steve Langworthy, Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner III Re: Ordinance 01 -13 — Rezoning Approximately 2.9 Acres, Located on the North Side of Perimeter Drive, Between the Intersections with Avery- Muirfield Drive and Hospital Drive from PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside PCD North, Subarea A3) to PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Riverside PUD North, Subarea A3) to Facilitate the Development of the Site with an Approximately 14,500- square -foot Retail Building, Including Restaurant Spaces and Associated Patios. (Case 12- 073Z /PDF /FDP) Summary Ordinance 01 -13 is a request for review and approval of a rezoning with preliminary development plan for 2.9 acres to modify the permitted uses of an existing development text. Approval of the change would allow the development of a retail building with restaurant spaces and associated patios. The site is located on the north side of Perimeter Drive, between the intersections with Avery- Muirfield Drive and Hospital Drive. Background The 24 -acre Riverside PCD North was rezoned in 2004 to allow a mix of office, medical office, daycare, retail and restaurant in three Subareas. The PCD has been under development for several years and currently includes the Shoppes at Avery shopping center, Huntington National Bank, Champaign Bank, the Primrose School daycare and medical office buildings. The subject parcel is in Subarea A3 of the PCD. The Planning and Zoning Commission commented informally on this proposal at their September 6, 2012 meeting. The Commission generally agreed with the applicant's proposal and recognized the challenges for the development of the site as originally zoned and the changes in surrounding conditions. While the Commission appreciated the architectural concept for the building, they encouraged the applicant to address signs in an innovative manner. Description The site is a rectangular, vacant parcel. Site access is provided by two internal private drives from Perimeter Drive. The development has two driveways from the internal drives from Perimeter Drive, and one driveway from a shared drive providing access from Post Road. The 14,488- square- foot building fronts Perimeter Drive with parking on all sides of the building except the south. A plaza area is indicated along the north side of the building. Restaurant spaces on each end of the building shows a patio. Memo re. Ordinance 01 -13 — Riverside PUD North January 10, 2013 Page 2 of 4 Development Text Proposed Development Text This development text modifies the permitted uses and sign standards for Subarea A3. Use The proposed development text for Subarea A3 continues to permit the uses in the SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District of the Zoning Code, which includes office and institutional uses, daycare centers, and banks. The text would also permit "casual and fine dining eating and drinking establishments with 'table' services." As requested by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the applicant has revised the text to limit the restaurant size to a maximum of 11,000 square feet but would permit additional restaurant square footage with Commission approval. The text also allows general retail uses, which was previously not permitted, but continues to prohibit drive -thru facilities or pick -up windows. The text also permits a total of 2,000 square feet for outdoor dining area to be allotted to the various tenants and approved administratively if the stipulated conditions are met. The text requires complementary amenities and furniture of black wrought iron design. A limitation to the seasonal use of the patios is included as well as a requirement to store the amenities out of view. Outdoor speakers are prohibited. Sions To address creatively this proposal's unique sign needs requested by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the proposed text permits wall signs and projecting blade signs. Each tenant is allowed three signs (the same as permitted for the retail building in Subarea A2. One wall sign per tenant is permitted along the north elevation and one along the south elevation. The wall signs must be architecturally integrated. Each tenant may install a projecting sign along the north fagade. Window signs, except for informational window signs, are prohibited. Signs must meet the Zoning Code in terms of sign colors and logos. Sign lighting requirements were clarified based on the condition from the Planning and Zoning Commission for linear fluorescent track lighting fixtures, as depicted and described in Table D. To the extent architecturally compatible and tastefully integrated, wall- mounted signs may be internally illuminated or backlit. Projecting (blade) signs may not be separately illuminated from the building. Preliminary Development Plan Overview The proposal includes a 14,488- square -foot building, with 1,623 square feet of patios at either end of the building with a potential expansion area for the west patio. A plaza area is proposed in front (north side) and five -foot sidewalk to the south. The 125 parking spaces are concentrated in the north of the site with two smaller pods in the east and west. The proposed architecture provides a residential character with rich materials and colors. Landscape pods, bike rack, and informal seating are located in the plaza area and mounding and landscaping front Perimeter Drive. Memo re. Ordinance 01 -13 — Riverside PUD North January 10, 2013 Page 3 of 4 Access /Parking Access for this site was determined with the original rezoning and the proposed plan uses the existing access points. Vehicular circulation through the site meets Code requirements. Fire access is from the internal drives surrounding the site. Pedestrian circulation includes a five -foot wide sidewalk immediately along the south site of the building. Six -foot wide sidewalks connect to the public sidewalk along Perimeter Drive. The plan provides 125 parking spaces, where Code requires 97. There were some concerns mentioned by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the informal review of this proposal regarding the parking demands of popular restaurants. In response, the applicant has reached an arrangement with Champaign Bank to allow employee parking at the bank on weekday nights after 6 p.m. and on weekends should additional parking be needed. The applicant must provide a copy of this agreement with the building permit application. Architecture The proposed architecture meets the development text requirements for traditional architecture with a residential character and natural materials. The applicant is proposing a warm -hued stone for each of the end tenants. The stone wraps around three sides of these portions of the building. A dark red brick is proposed for the central portion of the building. Other proposed building materials include dark beige fiber cement lap siding, and a dark brown board and batten cement fiber cement panel lap siding. Storefronts include a variety of Benjamin Moore colors of slate blue, dark green and burgundy. The majority of the roof includes dimensional asphalt shingles and the two lower roofs next to the central portion of the building are standing seam, which the applicant has revised to a deep burgundy color as required by a Planning and Zoning Commission condition. The applicant also revised the roof overhangs to meet the Commission's condition. Other architectural elements include wood trellises on the south elevations, metal and fabric awnings and storefront with a deep recess along the eastern portion of the west elevation. The east patio also includes a partial cover of wood columns and trim. Copper roof vents, decorative brick medallions, and brick soldier course accents reinforce a high quality character for the proposed building. Signs The proposal does not include specific signs or locations as tenants have yet to commit to the building. The development text includes detailed sign requirements including a sign height limitation of 15 feet and provisions for maximum sizes of sign panels and sign copy. Each tenant is allowed up to three signs (two wall and one blade sign). The text also includes approved sign locations on the building in Table D. Creativity is encouraged for sign design. The text includes sign lighting standards and permits linear fluorescent track lighting fixtures for which the applicant has provided a cut sheet. landscaping The proposal meets Code required landscaping as well as the text requirements for mounding and landscaping along Perimeter Drive. The plan includes large landscape islands in the parking lots Memo re. Ordinance 01 -13 — Riverside PUD North January 10, 2013 Page 4 of 4 and smaller pockets of plantings in the plaza area in front (north side) of the building. Engineering Stormwater management for this Subarea will be handled similarly to the other areas of this development using parking lot pending and controlled release at the one -year release rate to the existing pond along Avery- Muirfield Drive. Water quality will be provided by an underground unit prior to discharging to the private sewer. Recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this application at the December 6, 2012 meeting and recommended approval of the rezoning and preliminary development plan by City Council with the conditions listed below. All conditions recommended by the Commission related to the preliminary development plan have been incorporated with this submission. The applicant has also addressed Conditions 1, 3, 5, and 6 of the final development plan as part of this submission. Condition 2 will be required to be met at the building permit stage. Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan Conditions 1) That the development text be revised to limit the size of permitted restaurant use to 11,000 square feet (excluding outdoor dining patios) and that any additional restaurant square footage, exclusive of outdoor dining areas, require review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission; 2) That the development text be modified to allow patio furniture be used when the weather permits outside of the permitted dates, subject to approval by Planning; 3) That the development text be modified to limit sign lighting to the proposed band lighting; and 4) That the development text be revised to adhere to Code for sign colors including logos and that window signs be prohibited, excluding informational window signs. Final Development Plan Conditions 1) That the plans be revised to change the color of the standing seam metal roof from grey to a deep red and the metal awning color be changed to match the metal roof, subject to approval by Planning; 2) That the applicant provide the shared parking agreement with Champaign Bank with the building permit application; 3) That the elevations be revised to replace the gable returns with a more appropriate style; 4) That the site plan be revised to increase the size of the landscape island to one parking space to the west along the parking area to the north of the building; and 5) That the sea green junipers on the north side of the site be replaced with wintergem boxwood. Recommendation Planning recommends City Council approval of Ordinance 01 -13 at the second reading /public hearing on January 28, 2013. Q of Dublin 12- o]e➢PDP/FDP H R¢oning /Prellmin r oD aelopment Plan/ P Land Use and Final Development Plan Long Range Planning The Penmeter Feet PenmeterDr 0 200 400 CITY OF DUBLIN. Land Use and Long Range Pbnning 5800 Shier -Rings Road Dubrin. Ohio 43016.1236 Phone /TDM 614- 410.4600 Fax, 614-410 -4747 Web S "te: www.dubfin.oh.us February 2009 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPLICATION (Code Section 153.232) 1. PLEASE CHECK THE TYPE OF APPLICATION: ❑ Informal Review ❑ Final Plat (Section 152.085) ❑ Concept Plan ❑ Conditional Use (Section 153.056(A)(1)) (Section 153.236) El Preliminary Development Plan / Rezoning ❑ Corridor Development District (CDD) (Section 153.053) (Section 153.115) Q 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) ❑ 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. 11. PROPERTY INFORMATION: This section must be completed. Property Address(es): Avery Place /Reserve "B" Tax ID /Parcel Number(s): Parcel Size(s) (Acres): 273 - 011309 -00 1 2.930 -Acres Existing Land Use /Development: Vacant I IF APPLICABLE, PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: Proposed Land Use/Development: Neighborhood support retail center Total acres affected by application: 2.930 III. CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER (S): Please attach additional sheets if needed. Name (Individual or Organization): Avery Perimeter LLC Mailing Address: 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43204 (Street, City, State, Zip Code) Daytime Telephone: 614 - 488 -4424 Fax: 614 -488 -0603 Email orAlternate Contact Information: paulg @daimlergroup.com RECEIVED 22 - 07, Z L)PI OCT 0 8 NIZ R) ra CITY OF DUBLIN Page 1 of 3 PLANNING F„ l t IV. APPLICANT(S): This is the person(s) who is submitting the application if different than the property owner(s) listed in part III. Please complete if applicable. Name: Avery Perimeter LLC Applicant is also property owner: yes ❑r no❑ Organization (Owner, Developer, Contractor, etc.): c/o/ The Daimler Group, Inc. Mailing Address: 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43204 (Street, City, State, Zip Code) Daytime Telephone: 614 - 488 -4424 Fax: 614 - 488 -0603 Email or Altemate Contact Information: paulg @daimlergroup.com V. REPRESENTATIVE(S) OF APPLICANT / PROPERTY OWNER: This is the person(s) who is submitting the application on behalf of the applicant listed in part IV or property owner listed in part III. Please complete if applicable. Name: Paul G. Ghidotti Organization (Owner, Developer, Contractor, etc.): The Daimler Group, Inc. Mailing Address: 1533 Lake Shore Drive (Street, City, State, Zip Code) Daytime Telephone: 614 - 488 -4424 Fax: 614 -488 -0603 Email or Alternate Contact Information: paulg @daimlergroup.com VI. AUTHORIZATION FOR OWNER'S APPLICANT or REPRESENTATIVE(S): If the applicant is not the property owner, this section must be completed and notarized. the owner, hereby authorize to act as my applicant or 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: ❑ Check this box if the Authorization for Owner's Applicant or Representative(s) is attached as a separate document Subscribed and sworn before me this day of State of County of Notary Public ,20 VII. AUTHORIZATION TO VISIT THE PROPERTY: Site visits to the property by City representatives are essential to process this application. The Owner /Applicant, as noted below, hereby authorizes City representatives to visit, photograph and post a notice on the property described in this application. 1 Paul G. Ghidotti ©, the owner or authorized representative, hereby authorize City representatives to visit, photograph and post a notice on the property described in this application. Signature of applicant or authorized representative: Date: 10/8/12 Page 2 of 3 1 VIII. UTILITY DISCLAIMER The Owner /Applicant 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 Drovide essential services such as water and sewer facilities when needed by said Owner /Applicant. I Paul G. Ghidotti , 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: Date: 10/8/12 ..—^ w r-r —• tie r.r. ml. furl and nntari7pd IA. MrI' Vfvr�n � v n■ . ■v. -.... I Paul G. Ghidotti , the owner or authorized representative, have read and understand the contents of this application. The information contained in this application, attached exhibits and other information submitted is complete and in all respects true and c, to the bef my knowledge and belief. Signature of applicant or authorized representative: Date: 10/8/12 Rr"rTr Subscribed and sworn to before me this 8 State of Ohio County of Franklin day of UCtooer B , 20 - 1-H 00. 1 -N0 T 1/1 �i Notary Publ c ' TIE FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Amount Received:� Application No: .�_� 73 P8Z Date(s): i2 6 /Z PBZAction: roved Receipt No• ���?J- Map Zone: Date Received: �Q /� Received By: /7` h[l City Council (First Reading): !(f 2013 City Council (Second Reading): �u a7 -28 / 20i3 City Council Action: Ordinance Number: Type of Request: R rzon r7 Irv/ Pre 1;y" N, , E, W (Circle) Side of: N, S, E Circle) Side of Nearest Intersection: �)/ _ `n Ol4jdd Distance from Nearest Intersection: f910 �64' . Existing Zoning District: A 6 Requested Zoning District: �G11 Page 3 of 3 September 26, 2012 DESCRIPTION OF R ESERVE `B" OF AVERY PLACE ALONG PERIMETER DRIVE, WEST OF AVERY— MUIRFIELD DRIVE, CITY OF DUBLIN, FRANKLIN CO., OHIO Situated in the State of Ohio, County of Franklin, City of Dublin in Virginia Military Survey 2999 and 3452 and being all of Reserve `B ", as shown upon the plat entitled Avery Place, of record in Plat Book 104, Pages 94 & 95, said Reserve `B" being a portion of an original 24.335 acre tract of land conveyed to Avery Perimeter LLC, by deed of record in Instrument 200304020095677, all records referenced to the Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio. containing 2.930 acres of land, more or less and being subject to all easements and restrictions of record and being all of P.N. 273 - 011309. Of said 2.930 acres, 2.210 acres is within Virginia Military Survey 2999 and 0.720 acre is within Virginia Military Survey 3452. The above description was prepared by Kevin L. Baxter, Ohio Surveyor No. 7697, of C.F. Bird & R.J. Bull, Inc., Consulting Engineers & Surveyors, Columbus, Ohio, from an actual field survey performed under his supervision in September, 2004 and verified in September, 2012. Basis of bearings is the plat entitled Avery Place, of record in Plat Book 104, Pages 94 & 95, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio. Kevin L. Baxter Ohio Surveyor #7697 ' �VE " Page 1 of 1 12- 066 /Reserve -B .,Proximity Report Results Proximity Report Results 6848754r8320311 The selection distance was 300 feeL The selected parcel was 273 -011309. To view a table showing the 15 parcels within the displayed proximity, scroll down. Ge t Revo _ Print Window Back to Proximity Report Image Date: Wed Sep 2610:16:37 2012 Disclaimer This map is prepared for the real property inventory within this county. It is compiled from recorded deeds, survey plats, and other publlc records and data Users of this map are notified that the public primary information source should be consulted for verification of the information contained on this map The county and the mapping mmpan es assume no legal responsibilities for the information contained on this map. Please notify the Franklin County GIS Division of any discrepancies. Proximity Parcels Hint: To copy this report to another program 1 Hold down the left moue buttton over the top-ieft comer of the area you want to get 2 Drag the moue to the bottom -left comer of the desired area 3 Let go of the mouse button 4. Select Fdit Copy from the menu bar You Can then Paste the report Into another appuabon. Parcel Owner Name Address 273 - 012056 6455 POST ROAD LLC POST RD 273- 011547 6600 PERIMETER DRIVE LLC 6600 PERIMETER DR 273- 011309 AVERY PERIMETER LLC PERIMETER DR 273 - 011305 CHAMPAIGN NATIONAL BANK 6400 PERIMETER DR 273 -004286 DUBLIN GERIATRIC CARE CO 6430 POST RD 273 - 008208 DUBLIN OAKS LIMITED 7000 -090 HOSPITAL DR 273 -011304 HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK 6705 AVERY MUIRFIELD DR 273- 012135 ]EK MANAGEMENT LTD 6425 POST RD 273 - 000378 NORTHWEST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH PCA I 6488 POST RD 273 - 011780 OHIOHEALTH CORP HOSPITAL DR 273- 011344 OSU EYE PHYSICIANS & SURGEONS LLC 6435 POST RD 273 -012055 PERIMETER MOB LLC POST RD 273 -011303 PMDM -AVERY LLC 6695 -755 AVERY MUIRFIELD DR 273- 007471 PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA FOUN 6400 POST RD 273 - 011306 TRIPLET ROSE HOLDING CO LLC 6415 POST RD RECEIVED tol OCT 0 8 2012 CITY OF DUBLIN PLANNING l' -U73 �l�i' 273 - 012056 6455 POST ROAD LLC POST RD DUBLIN, OH 43017 6455 POST ROAD LLC 273 - 011547 6600 PERIMETER DRIVE LLC 6600 PERIMETER DR DUBLIN, OH 43017 6600 PERIMETER DRIVE LLC 273- 011309 AVERY PERIMETER LLC PERIMETER DR DUBLIN, OH 43017 AVERY PERIMETER LLC 273- 011305 CHAMPAIGN NATIONAL BANK 6400 PERIMETER DR DUBLIN, OH 43017 CHAMPAIGN NATIONAL BANK 273 - 004286 DUBLIN GERIATRIC CARE CO 6430 POST RD DUBLIN, OH 43016 DUBLIN GERIATRIC CARE CO N 273 - 008208 DUBLIN OAKS LIMITED 7000 -090 HOSPITAL DR DUBLIN, OH 43017 DON CASTO At 273 - 011304 HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK 6705 AVERY MUIRFIELD DR DUBLIN, OH 43017 HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK Bi 273 - 012135 JEK MANAGEMENT LTD 6425 POST RD DUBLIN, OH 43017 JEK MANAGEMENT LTD 273 - 000378 NORTHWEST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH PCA INC 6488 POST RD DUBLIN, OH 43017 NORTHWEST PRESBYTERIAN Cl 273 - 011780 OHIOHEALTH CORP HOSPITAL DR DUBLIN, OH 43016 OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL Ol 273 - 011344 OSU EYE PHYSICIANS & SURGEONS LLC 6435 POST RD DUBLIN, OH 43017 OSU EYE PHYSICIANS & Sl 273 - 012055 PERIMETER MOB LLC POST RD DUBLIN, OH 43017 PERIMETER MOB LLC 273 - 011303 PMDM -AVERY LLC 6695 -755 AVERY MUIRFIELD DR DUBLIN, OH 43017 PMDM AVERY 273 - 007471 PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA FOUNDATION INC TR 6400 POST RD DUBLIN, OH 43016 PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN At 273- 011306 TRIPLET ROSE HOLDING CO LLC 6415 POST RD DUBLIN, OH 43017 TRIPLE ROSE HOLDING CO L PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to City Council — January 14, 2013 Incorporating Comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on December 6, 2012 Subarea A - Post Road Related For purposes of clearly defining and limiting uses that are permitted within Subarea A of the Riverside Dublin PCD, three separate subareas are established. Each of these subareas (referred to as subarea A1, A2, and A3) is identified on the attached Exhibit A. Permitted Uses: The following uses shall be permitted within each of Subarea A1, A2, and A respectively: Subarea A a) Those uses listed in §153.026(A) -- Suburban Office and Institutional District - -of the Zoning Code. b) Financial service organizations and financial institutions (conditional use for drive -thru bank); provided that all such organizations and institutions shall be located only in Subarea A between Avery- Muirfield Drive and the access drive within Subarea A which lines up with the western access to Avery Square (the Kroger center) to the south of Subarea A (the "Demarcation Line "). The Demarcation Line is depicted on the attached Exhibit A. c) Daycare centers (including a preschool or any type of institution which provides education to toddlers and children up to the age of 13 years old). Subarea A a) Those uses listed in §153.026(A) -- Suburban Office and Institutional District - -of the Zoning Code. b) Financial service organizations and financial institutions (conditional use for drive -thru bank; provided that any such drive -thru that might be contained within a structure located along Avery- Muirfield Drive shall be screened to the satisfaction of staff and consistent with the Master Plan (defined below)). c) Coffee shops, cafes, ice cream shops, bakeries, or casual or fine dining eating and drinking establishments, specialty retail stores, bookstores, florists, stationary stores, gift/novelty shops; or stores providing goods and services which support office buildings or occupants of office buildings (e.g. copy shops, office supply /equipment sales, delivery service providers, etc.) Subarea A2 shall contain no more than 11,000 square feet of area in total of those uses described in the preceding sentence. In addition, one eating or drinking establishment within the neighborhood retail center located within Subarea A will be permitted to incorporate an outdoor seating area, along the pond between the building and Avery- Muirfield Drive, as part of such establishment; provided that such seating PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A -THE PERIMETER As submitted to City Council — January 14, 2013 Incorporating Comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on December 6, 2012 area shall have a maximum square footage area no more than 15% of the interior space of such establishment. Subarea A 3 (as revised through Ordinance 01 -13, approved on January 28, 2013) a) Those uses listed in §153.026(A) -- suburban office and institutional district - -of the Zoning Code. b) Casual and fine dining, eating and drinking establishments not to exceed a total of 11,000 square feet, except as approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission; retail stores, bookstores, florists, stationary stores, gift/novelty shops; or stores providing goods and services which support office buildings or occupants of office buildings (e.g. copy shops, office supply /equipment sales, delivery service providers, etc.) or otherwise provide support retail services for nearby residential neighborhoods provided those establishments at no time include a drive -thru. c) Outdoor Dining Areas with up to 2000 total sq. ft. of seating space within Subarea A -3 that can be allotted to the various tenants to be administratively approved by Land Use and Long Range Planning. Those outdoor dining areas shall employ complementary amenities (fences, tables, chairs, flower boxes) and must be of a black, wrought -iron design consistent with the patios which have been approved for the area. Outdoor speakers are prohibited. The proposed patio amenities shall be stored in a location that is not visible to the public when not in regular use unless the patio furniture is all- weather material, set up for use and not covered in any way, and weather conditions make the use of furniture possible. Notwithstanding any of the uses listed above in any of Subareas A1 A or A none of the following uses shall be permitted anywhere within Subarea A at any time: (i) auto service; (ii) auto repair; (iii) gas station; (iv) tire store, (v) muffler or brake shop; (vi) car dealer or any other type of business which offers cars for sale or resale; (vii) car wash; or (viii) fast food restaurant (with or without a drive - through window). Furthermore, in the event any financial service organization or financial institution that is located along Avery - Muirfield Drive desires to change to a use other than that which is permitted under (a) -(c) of Subarea A1, above, that new use shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Commission. Density /Lot Coverage: The density of each site shall not exceed 10,000 sf /acre. In addition, the total maximum lot coverage for all of Subarea A shall be equal to or less than 65% for the overall development and no individual site shall have a lot coverage greater than 70 %. 3t_ PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to City Council — January 14, 2013 Incorporating Comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on December 6, 2012 Yard and Setback Requirements: a) In 1988, the Riverside Dublin PCD text originally contemplated a large setback for Subarea A along its Post Road frontage. In an effort to reallocate setbacks and associated green space areas to reflect the nature and character of how all of the neighboring uses have since been developed as commercial /institutional uses and to adequately reflect the transitional nature of Subarea A from those same surroundings, it is desirable to adjust and increase certain setbacks within Subarea A (see attached Table A). The main goal of this reallocation is to treat the Avery- Muirfield Drive frontage with special attention. As a result, a substantial parking and building setback shall be created along Avery- Muirfield Drive and within that setback a large pond with two fountains and a cascading waterfall shall be constructed to more appropriately reflect the gateway nature of Subarea A in a manner that is complimentary to its environs. With this reallocation of setbacks, the following setbacks for Post Road, Avery- Muirfield Drive, and Perimeter Drive are created: Buildinq Setback Pavement Setback Avery - Muirfield Drive 85' 75' Perimeter Drive 40 20i Post Road (east) 100' 40' Post Road (west) 100' 70' b) Side yard setbacks shall be 15' for pavement and 25' for buildings. However, in order to promote prudent planning and to encourage the location (or relocation) of green space to more desirable areas, the planning commission may permit pavement setbacks (and rear yard pavement setbacks defined in (c), below) to be reduced to less than 15' (and even to a zero lot line situation wherein parking lots of adjoining properties would be shared). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the neighborhood retail center proposed at the northeast corner of Subarea A which is a single structure which is located in both Subarea Aland A shall be permitted to straddle the Subarea Al /A2 line. c) Subject to (b), above, rear yard setbacks shall be 25' for pavement and buildings. d) Total ground covered by all buildings shall not exceed 25% of the total lot area. Which is consistent with the current required setbacks less the additional right -of -way grant required. 2 Between Avery- Muirfield Drive and the Demarcation Line. 3 Between the Demarcation Line and the western boundary of Subarea A. 71Page PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to City Council — January 14, 2013 Incorporating Comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on December 6, 2012 Parking and Loading: a) Size, ratio, and type of parking and loading facility shall be regulated by Dublin Code Chapter [153.200]. b) All sites within Subarea A shall comply with the City of Dublin exterior lighting guidelines and will utilize "shoe -box" light fixtures with pole heights not greater than 28 feet from the grade of the parking lot. Circulation: Circulation within Subarea A and access to and from the adjacent publicly- dedicated streets shall be provided for in accordance with the approved development plan for Subarea A set forth in the Master Plan (defined below). Subarea A shall have no direct access onto Avery- Muirfield Drive. Offsite Infrastructure: In order to promote improved traffic efficiency on Post Road, Avery- Muirfield Drive, and Perimeter Drive proximate to Subarea A and in accordance with the November 20, 2003 letter from the City of Dublin (attached Exhibit B), all of the following shall occur to the satisfaction of the City of Dublin: a) Right -of -Ways (i) An additional 15' of right -of -way shall be granted to Dublin along the west side of Avery- Muirfield Drive. (ii) An additional 10' of right -of -way shall be granted to Dublin along the north side of Perimeter Drive up to the point at which the existing right -of -way is 100'. b) Road /Infrastructure Improvements (i) Payment of the proportionate cost (as determined by the City of Dublin) for the improvements associated with the addition of an east bound left turn lane on Post Road (west of Avery- Muirfield Drive) which proportionate costs relate to additional traffic which will be generated by Subarea A as a result of the Post Road P109 *14 (ii) Payment of all costs associated with the addition of a left turn lane from Post Road into Subarea A at the single access point on Post Road. The PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to City Council — January 14, 2013 Incorporating Comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on December 6, 2012 applicant shall attempt to coordinate completion of these improvements with those required of the church property on the north side of Post Road. (iii) Payment of 25% of the cost associated with any future traffic controls installed at the third intersection on Perimeter Drive (west of Avery- Muirfield Drive) if, and when, such traffic control is warranted. Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be contained and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence as required by the Dublin Code. Fences: Other than as required for any daycare center located within Subarea A1, no fences shall be permitted on any site unless otherwise approved by staff or otherwise required for screening service areas, mechanical units, etc. Storage and Equipment: a) No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of a parcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings shall be screened from public view with materials harmonious with the building as required by the Dublin Code. Landscaping: a) Landscaping shall be according to the Dublin Landscape Code Chapter [153.130- 153.139]. In addition, landscaping treatment along Post Road shall be provided within the Post Road setback and shall include a grass mound with a mixture of ornamental, evergreen, and shade trees. The mound shall be contoured, natural, and undulating in appearance and shall be broken up into sections of varying lengths between 130' and 150' in length and with varying heights ranging from three and a half feet to six feet in height. Landscape plantings shall be in accordance with the Master Plan described in (c), below, and sample elevations are included as attached Exhibit C. b) In addition, landscaping along Perimeter Drive shall include a three and a half foot contoured, landscaped mound with street trees planted 50' on center within the right -of -way and planted within five feet of the right -of -way line. c) In order to appropriately transition the institutional and residential uses to the north of Subarea A with the fast food and strip center retail development to the PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A -THE PERIMETER As submitted to City Council — January 14, 2013 Incorporating Comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on December 6, 2012 south of Subarea A, Subarea A will incorporate a large pond (with an appearance similar to The Preserve at the southeast corner of Frantz Road and Tuttle Crossing Boulevard) fronting along Avery- Muirfield Drive with a higher reflective pond that will include a cascading water fall feature. This pond will be "well -fed" in the manner approved by the City of Dublin. In addition, the pond will contain fountains at the north and south ends along Avery- Muirfield. This frontage treatment will provide for an appropriate gateway feature for vehicular traffic as it moves from the residential development to the north south towards the SR33/161 interchange. This overall landscaping plan for Subarea A will be consistent with the Comprehensive Site Master Plan prepared by Faris Planning & Design and approved by the Planning Commission (the "Master Plan "). Traffic Calming: Along the private, internal, east -west street that runs parallel to Post Road and Perimeter Drive, traffic calming measures (e.g. textured pavement, raised tables, etc.) acceptable to the City of Dublin shall be installed to slow the movement of traffic at the intersection of the driveway that provides access from the Subarea A to Post Road. Architecture: Generally The architectural design of all buildings within Subarea A shall be traditional in look and feel and will be finished with natural materials. The particular architecture for all buildings within Subarea A that will contain uses other than those permitted in §153.026(A) (the "Non -Office Uses ") shall be consistent with, or complimentary to, the style of architecture of those submitted as "conceptual" with this application (i.e. the small neighborhood retail center and The Huntington Bank branch). The intent of the foregoing is that these commercial structures have a residential feel and flare similar in design and feel to the Perimeter Center development. The architectural design of all uses within Subarea A permitted under §153.026(A) (the "Office Uses ") shall be consistent with the office buildings proximate to Subarea A along Perimeter Drive and Post Road. In addition to the foregoing, the following guidelines shall be followed: Height 1) No Non -Office Uses shall have a height in excess of 28' as measured by the Dublin Code (i.e. for pitched or hipped roofs, such a measurement shall be made to the mean height of such roof). No Office Uses shall have a height in excess of 35' as measured by the Dublin Code (i.e. for pitched or hipped roofs, such a measurement shall be made to the mean height of such roof). umm- PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to City Council — January 14, 2013 Incorporating Comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on December 6, 2012 Color Palette 1) Earth tones and muted /natural tones shall be required on all structures within Subarea A so as to be consistent with those earth tone and muted /natural colors of nearby structures. In addition, storefront colors for the neighborhood retail center shall be selected from a palette of colors approved by the planning commission as part of the development plan approval for that neighborhood center. Materials 1) Warm tone brick, stone or synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, and engineered wood composite material (e.g. hardi -plank or smartside siding and trim). 2) Specifically for Non -Office Uses, windows shall be residential in character (where appropriate for the particular type of commercial use). Windows should include mullions and muntins to reduce large expanses of glass areas. However, "store- front" glass is acceptable and appropriate in service- oriented areas for Non - Office Uses. = 1) All buildings shall have a pitched or sloped roof (whether hipped or gabled). However, for Office Uses, this requirement may be satisfied by partial roofs, towers, or pagodas -- similar to that utilized at The Preserve. In addition and regardless of whether a building is an Office -Use or a Non -Office Use, each such roof may provide open areas to house and permit the functionality of mechanical and other typical roof top equipment. 2) All structures shall contain roofing material consisting of dimensional asphalt shingles, cedar shakes or shingles, or slate (whether synthetic or authentic slate), all of which shall be in a color and style deemed appropriate by the planning commission as compatible with the neighboring buildings. 3) The use of dormers, vertical vents, and other architectural treatments which interrupt vast expanses of roof are encouraged for roofs on Non -Office Use structures. Scale: 1) All structures within Subarea A should be of a size and character complimentary with the existing nearby structures. 2) Structures should be designed to harmonize with the Master Plan. wow ;- PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to City Council — January 14, 2013 Incorporating Comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on December 6, 2012 3) Each Non -Office Use building must use articulated building elements, including, but not limited to porticoes, dormers, recesses, and other such elements to help break up the mass and bring each such building into a more residential character. Wall Articulation /Fenestration 1) In addition to using building elements to articulate the building mass, individual walls must be articulated with fenestration, pattern, or structural expression equally on all sides of each structure. 2) With the exception to enclosed service corridors, all buildings shall have the same degree of exterior finish on all sides. Other than for necessary service areas, blank facades on the "rear" of any building will not be permitted, however, articulating such facades with recesses, fenestration, fences, pilasters, etc. is encouraged. 3) The amount of fenestration should be balanced with the amount of solid facade. Signage and Graphics: All signs shall comply with the Dublin Sign Code -- [Section 153.150]. In the event of any conflict between the Dublin Sign Code and this text, this text shall control. a) Materials and Landscaping_ 1) All monument signs with a base located within Subarea A shall have an appearance consistent with, or compatible to, that depicted on Table C attached hereto. 2) All monument signs shall have landscaping around the base of the sign as required by the Dublin Code. b) Dimensions of Sign: 1) Maximum area of sign face: 50 square feet per face, with a limit of no more than two faces per sign. 2) Area of sign base (if any) shall not exceed area of sign face. The base shall not be included in the overall area permitted for the sign face. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to City Council — January 14, 2013 Incorporating Comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on December 6, 2012 3) Maximum overall height: 8' -0" above top of adjacent street curb. Signs located on grass mounds shall maintain conformance to 8' -0" maximum height above top of adjacent curb. c) Sign Graphics: 1) Graphic identification shall be limited to the site user's name, logo, and street number. 2) The area of graphic images such as logos shall not exceed 20% of the sign face. 3) Street numbers shall be located in the lower corner of the sign face or base nearest the right -of -way. 4) The maximum height of any letter or number shall be 16 ". d) Quantity: No more than one ground sign shall be permitted on any one lot devoted to one specific use or user; except that for buildings or uses having frontage on two or more public rights -of -way, two ground signs are permitted. In the event any lot qualifies for two ground signs, those signs shall comply with the Dublin Sign Code and shall consist of no more than 66.67 square feet in the aggregate. e) Illumination: All monument signs shall be non - illuminated or feature internally illuminated graphics or back -lit graphics. f) Setbacks: The setback for all signage shall be no less than eight feet from the right -of -way of any site consistent with the Dublin Code. g) Traffic /Directional: All traffic and directional signage shall conform to Section 153.152 of the Dublin Zoning Code. h) Sign Location: Other than approved as part of the neighborhood retail center as described below, no sign shall be painted or posted on the surface of any building, wall, or fence (i.e. all signage other than for the neighborhood retail center shall be PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to City Council — January 14, 2013 Incorporating Comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on December 6, 2012 monument signs). No wall murals shall be allowed. No roof signs shall be permitted, nor shall any sign extend higher than the building. i) Window Siqnage: Other than described below relating to the neighborhood retail center, no sign shall be applied to any windows for the purpose of outdoor or exterior advertising. j) Neighborhood Retail Center: All of the following signage standards shall relate specifically to the neighborhood retail center that will be situated west of the pond located along the west side of Avery- Muirfield Drive, the following signage criteria is established: 1) Each tenant store front within the retail center shall only have the right to install wall signage consistent with that depicted in the attached Table B and only along the east and west elevations of the retail center. 2) All such signs shall not exceed a placement height of 15 feet. 3) Each tenant store front sign shall be limited to one wall sign and one projecting sign along the western elevation of the retail center and one wall sign only along the eastern elevation of the retail center. Such wall signs shall be in accordance with Table B. The color of the wall sign and the projecting sign for each user shall be the same. 4) The background color of wall signs and projecting signs shall be selected from a palette of trim colors approved by the planning commission as part of the development plan approval process. 5) For purposes of aiding the public with locating a particular use within this center, each user shall be allowed to apply temporary signage to the east elevation of the retail center consistent with the Dublin Signage Code. 6) In addition to the wall signs which may be located on the east and west sides of the retail center as described in 3, above, the occupant located at the north end of the retail center (i.e. Tenant 7) shall have the right to locate one monument sign along Avery - Muirfield Drive which identifies only that occupant provided that such monument sign complies with all of items (a) - (i), above, and provided further that that occupant (Tenant 7) is limited to a total amount of signage of no more than 66.67 square feet. That monument sign shall be located as noted on Table C . 7) No projection signage located along the west elevation of the retail center shall be illuminated. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to City Council — January 14, 2013 Incorporating Comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on December 6, 2012 8) Wall signs located along the east and west elevations of the retail center should be externally lit by "goose- neck" light fixtures. Signage and Graphics Applicable only to Subarea A-, (as revised as part of Ordinance 01 -13, January 28. 2013) All of the following signage standards shall apply to the neighborhood retail building on Perimeter Drive (located within Subarea A -3) as generally depicted on the attached Exhibit D. A. Types of Signs Permitted sign types include single- sided, wall- mounted, tenant "panel" signs, and wall- mounted, projecting "blade" signs. Window signs, other than informational window signs, of any type are prohibited. B. Number and Location All signs shall be architecturally integrated into the building fagade generally in the location depicted on the attached Table D. Tenants occupying space within the building shall have the right to install one wall- mounted (panel) sign on the north building fagade, one on the south building fagade, and one projecting (blade) sign on the north building fagade. C. Mounting Height No sign shall be permitted to exceed 15' in height to the top of the sign measured from established grade. The projecting (blade) signs on the north fagade shall be a minimum of eight feet in height to the bottom of the sign from established grade. D. Design and Fabrication Creativity with signage is encouraged. However, the following must be adhered to: Wall- mounted Tenant Signs a. Maximum Size. The maximum height for all wall- mounted tenant sign panels shall be no more than 24" tall. The maximum width for all wall- mounted tenant sign panels shall be no more than 120 ". The maximum height for text /graphics within said wall- mounted sign panels shall be no more than 16 ". The maximum width for text/graphics within said wall- mounted sign panels shall be no more than 96 ". b. Additional Specifications: i. Sign Panel = Single Faced, 1.5" thick wood or high density urethane with surface applied text /graphics and routered 1" wide perimeter detail. ii. Installation = Sign panels to be surface- mounted to wall with 5/16" Hilti style expanding anchors. No mounting hardware shall be visible on sign face. 2. Approved Siqnage Shapes The shape of the wall- mounted sign panels on the north and south facades of the building shall be generally in a rectangular shape and shall have matching ends containing one of the shapes depicted in Table D. s PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to City Council — January 14, 2013 Incorporating Comments made by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their meeting on December 6, 2012 3. Wall- mounted Projecting (Blade) Signs a. Maximum Size. The maximum height for all wall- mounted projecting (blade) sign panels shall be no more than 27 ". The maximum width for all blade sign panels shall be no more than 36 ". b. Additional Specifications: i. Sign Panel = Double- faced, 2" thick wood or high density urethane with surface- applied text /graphics & routered 1" wide perimeter detail. ii. Hanging Bracket = 1 -1/2" x 1 -1/2" square steel tube and wall flange assembly with fabricated 1/4" aluminum scroll and finial cap. Bracket and hardware shall be painted in Matte Black finish. iii. Installation = Bracket installed perpendicular to wall w/ 3/8" Hilti style expanding anchors. Signs shall be suspended beneath the brackets with '/2" eye - bolts. C. Projecting (Blade) Signage Shapes: The shape of the projecting (blade) signage on the north fapade of the building shall be generally in one of the four shapes depicted in Table D. Further, such projecting (blade) signage may incorporate and include the logo of the business operating within the building or an iconic representation of the nature of the business or the primary good or service sold or provided to the public by that business. 4. Lettering, Logos and Secondary Images a. Lettering. All sign lettering is to be centered in relation to the height and width of the sign. The actual signage text/lettering shall consist of surface mounted, raised lettering (as individual letters containing the name of the business operation) and shall be adhered to the wood sign board. The height and placement of all sign lettering must comply with the requirements specified in this text. b. Logos and Secondary Images are permitted in accordance with Code Section 153.158(C)(2). 5. Color. The background color for all signs shall be in accordance with that approved as part of the final development plan presented to the Planning Commission or as otherwise approved by the Planning Staff. No more than three colors in total are permitted for each sign including the color of the background of the wood sign. A corporate trademark or symbol used as a logo or secondary image shall not be limited in the number of colors used, but shall be considered as one of the three permissible colors. The selected color scheme of each tenant must be consistent for each of the tenant's signs. 6. Siqn Illumination Wall- mounted signs shall be illuminated by linear fluorescent track lighting fixtures as depicted and described in Table D. Projecting (blade) signage shall not be separately illuminated from the building. Lez7 l 161 Page - - - -- AMP E T XT . ------ - - - - -- -- ----- -----E--- -----I PERIMETER COVE DETAIL J � (PAINT GLOSS 'BLACK') LIMITS OF SIGN COPY AND GRAPHICS 514" MD.O. SIGN BOARD (PAINT EGGSHELL 'BLACK) TYPICAL WALL SIGN SCALE: 3' -6" N TEXT NOTE - SIGN PANEL TO BE HELD OFF WALL I" (MIN) TO ALLOW FOR PROPER WATER DRAINAGE L SURFACE APPLIED, RAISED LETTERINGs /GRAPHICS, COLOR AND FONT STYLE TO BE SELECTED BY TENANT 6' LONG LINEAR FLUORESCENT LIGHT FIXTURE WROUGHT IRON BRACKET d CHAIN PERIMETER COVE DETAIL (PAINT GLOSS 'BLACK') SUWACE APPLIED, RAISED LETTERING /GRAPHICS, COLOR AND FONT STYLE TO BE SELECTED BY TENANT LIMITS OF SIGN COPY AND GRAPHICS i m, 5/4" M.D.O. SIGN BOARD (PAINT EGGSHELL 'BLACK') Z 3' -0" t�.. 7 MAXI TYPICAL BLADE SIGN B SCALE 1 . a M" O O c i O N � az N N 1 W o�o Q o J m oz a 4 N m I_. r p e LIJ O O - o m C9 X L w� o LL J u il� � o W Z �w m N �. m W I- m ^ w I � ATI/\ \I / III AI I CII. \I AklP SCALE: P = WW" LOCATION OF BRACKET MOUNTED BLADE 51GN (TYP OF 1) u 23' Y � 2� 21'-10" 21' -4" � 19' -4" NORTH BUILDING ELEVATION LOCATION OF WALL SIGN AND LINEAR LIGHT FIXTURE (TYP OF 1) 21' -10" 1. 48' -4" SCALE: 1" = 30' -0" O c O N_ � N dZ E N O N 0 U W rt� �c !E' ^ 3 C 0 Q LLI J Q c N ^ 3 OZ ME a 4 N m 1. '` p a W °o om C7 = X'l L w� o LL J v l� �O Z aw 5 w -- L J LLI ^ w n SOUTH BUILDING ELEVATION F - - -- I I I I I - - - -� (o il � AX OPTION 'A' MAX OPTION 'D' WALL SIGN DETAILS g F --- r -- R I' -0" I 4g. MAX OPTION '6' OPTION 'G' 30. I � ;MAX I I I I 3" MAX " OPTION 'E' OPTION 'F' SCALE: 1/2 = 1' -0" i 3' - 0 " OPTION 'B' OPTION 'G' OPTION 'D' BLADE SIGN DETAILS SCALE: 1/2 - 1' -0" O O O O N � 1E az' N N oi w �,§ o �o Q o J m H §E oz' a N p a W 0 0 x om U = L w� o LL J u il� �O LLJ z w m Nyy LLI W H m ^ w OPTION 'A' CITY OF DUBLIN, OHIO ZONING DOCUMENTS FOR PERIMETER RETAIL 2013 9:1079=1:i"OlThC1=1a AVERY PERIMETER, LLC. COLUMBUS. . DRIVE COLUMBUS OHIO CONTACT: AULGHI2L ACT: PAULGHIDOTTI, VICE PRESIDENT PHONE: 814A6B4424 E E MAIL: PAULGGDAIMLERGRWP.COM DEVELOPER THE OAIMLERGROUP, INC. 1599LAKESHOREDRNE COLUMBUS, OHIO 45 CONTACT: PAULGHIDOTTI,VICEPRESIDFM PHONE: 61{-0BSMb FAX 816-0080809 EMML PAULGGDAIMLERGR RCOM ENGINEER C.F. SIM 0 R.J. BULL, INC. 2575 W. DUBUN�GRANVILLE ROAD COLUMBUS, OH1043235 CONTACT: ANDREW GARDNER, P.E. PHONE: 814-701 -1861 FAIL 61x751 -1328 EMAIL:A NERGBIRDBULL.COM ARCHITECT BEAN ARCHITECT M00 NORTH HIGH STREET, SURE 401 COLUMBUS. OHIO 14 CONTACT: CARTER BEAN PHONE: 614282 -2928 FM: 814282-2928 EMAIL: CARTERGBEANARCHITECT.COM LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT KUASTUmOS CONTACT: BRENT KING PHONE 6144004 n EMAIL: BKINGGKLA-STUDIOS.COM OHIO Utilities Protection SERVICE (k11MM You Dig 800- 362 -2764 or 8 -1 -1 www.oups.org lj� n n l PERIMETER DRIVE 08D0 PERIMER DRIVE I.I.C. ( z � oxED PCD s� I I J• I 1 11 ,1 Q El - L' - --- - - - - -- - 2 J- - u 1 1; III 1 i III 2]3011900 27"113M HUNTINGTON BANK �V�_ -� ) 1 1 CTRIPIET ROSE HDIDING 5]06 AVERY - MUIFIEUD RD. % I I COMPANY LLC - ZONED PCID 1 8415 POST ROAD 1 I �\ 1 1 ZONED POD � -------- 1 - i c � � L� -_ C�7 1 1 I 1 1 I l i - -- - - -_ -- n 1 III I I I I I 0113303 I ,� ; v �U III 11 1 RIMETER LLC. 1 TED PCD I U I 1 I I I ITE� 1 950119 B A 1 CHAMPAIGN BANK S �t C 8715 AVERYd1UIFIELD W. ; n 1 I T T 1 1 -- ---- -- zonEO PCD � 1 1 zrsonaW' I I I I I HUNTINGTON SANK 1 TB TI5 AVERY- MU FIE LOPD. 1 ZONE PCD 111 P f - __� FRiM L7� - -- - -i 1 - -- - - - — L= 2 1 % f l l III BURGERpNG _______ -__- -� -' -L -L 2]300820] I F1 �� LLf -ZJ r OUTLOT•A• � I I k� -_ — _ _ y___ii_ U _ ��____n.__� ___________I 1.51 ACRES �� r _ �r =q _ �_ I I ZONED RID V III I n UBLIN OAKS. LTD. `_�___qr___� _ Ill I 1 RR 7yqu PERIMETER LO 1 H n VVVV U U U a u1 n 1 <) AVERY ROADLRETAIL CENTER III 0 I 11 �� I 1 SECTION 1 C 11 1 1 U u 2 n LOr2 n n r l - -- 15.052 C . U u I u n n d 18.05 A. � U 1 I n ZONED PUD U I r �fT {� I I 11 1 U n n WEN OYBITIM !1 U I HOHTONB U 1 li 27300820] - --�� -- �- -- - -Jn n1 ourtm a• I 1 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- ' - - - `� ____ �'n ---- 11_ —LII'j I� 1.B6AC1+ES �l �, I I - _____ -\\ -JV ZONED PUO ` �� —r mTrrtrrrr -� }„' �I T u l l 11111 I I ^ i I nrnrn I n u n n U F I I u I n I I INDEX MAP SG-E: 1• =10V LOCATION MAP NO SCALE SHEETINDEX C1.1 TRUE SHEET C1S REGIONAL CONTEXT IMP C1.3 VICINITY MAP C1A EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY CiS F INAL DE PMENTPIAN C1.8 IN PREUMIIN GRADING AND STORM SEWER P AN C PRFIIMINARYGRADINO LAN C1.8 PREIIMINARV UTILITY PIAN C1.9 L SI LIGHTIN N C1.11 OT STANINGANO DIMENSION PLAN C1.10 SITE IGHT OMETRI I-ANDS P HOTOMETRIC PLAN A001 LANDSCAPE PLMI A002 !LANDS GEMEMMAN A-1.1 BUILDING NG FLOOR PLAN & A-2.1 EXTERIOR B LOC UIUDINGNG ELEVATIONS - \ 93012050 2]50119M 99012195 \\ 8155 POST ROAD LLC OSU EYE PHY81CVN8 JEKMANAGEMENT \ 8455 ROAD AND BURGEONS LTD. \ ZONED POD BC35 POST ROAD 8425 POST ROAD \ ZONED PCD _ ZONED PCD 1 n n l PERIMETER DRIVE 08D0 PERIMER DRIVE I.I.C. ( z � oxED PCD s� I I J• I 1 11 ,1 Q El - L' - --- - - - - -- - 2 J- - u 1 1; III 1 i III 2]3011900 27"113M HUNTINGTON BANK �V�_ -� ) 1 1 CTRIPIET ROSE HDIDING 5]06 AVERY - MUIFIEUD RD. % I I COMPANY LLC - ZONED PCID 1 8415 POST ROAD 1 I �\ 1 1 ZONED POD � -------- 1 - i c � � L� -_ C�7 1 1 I 1 1 I l i - -- - - -_ -- n 1 III I I I I I 0113303 I ,� ; v �U III 11 1 RIMETER LLC. 1 TED PCD I U I 1 I I I ITE� 1 950119 B A 1 CHAMPAIGN BANK S �t C 8715 AVERYd1UIFIELD W. ; n 1 I T T 1 1 -- ---- -- zonEO PCD � 1 1 zrsonaW' I I I I I HUNTINGTON SANK 1 TB TI5 AVERY- MU FIE LOPD. 1 ZONE PCD 111 P f - __� FRiM L7� - -- - -i 1 - -- - - - — L= 2 1 % f l l III BURGERpNG _______ -__- -� -' -L -L 2]300820] I F1 �� LLf -ZJ r OUTLOT•A• � I I k� -_ — _ _ y___ii_ U _ ��____n.__� ___________I 1.51 ACRES �� r _ �r =q _ �_ I I ZONED RID V III I n UBLIN OAKS. LTD. `_�___qr___� _ Ill I 1 RR 7yqu PERIMETER LO 1 H n VVVV U U U a u1 n 1 <) AVERY ROADLRETAIL CENTER III 0 I 11 �� I 1 SECTION 1 C 11 1 1 U u 2 n LOr2 n n r l - -- 15.052 C . U u I u n n d 18.05 A. � U 1 I n ZONED PUD U I r �fT {� I I 11 1 U n n WEN OYBITIM !1 U I HOHTONB U 1 li 27300820] - --�� -- �- -- - -Jn n1 ourtm a• I 1 -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- ' - - - `� ____ �'n ---- 11_ —LII'j I� 1.B6AC1+ES �l �, I I - _____ -\\ -JV ZONED PUO ` �� —r mTrrtrrrr -� }„' �I T u l l 11111 I I ^ i I nrnrn I n u n n U F I I u I n I I INDEX MAP SG-E: 1• =10V LOCATION MAP NO SCALE SHEETINDEX C1.1 TRUE SHEET C1S REGIONAL CONTEXT IMP C1.3 VICINITY MAP C1A EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY CiS F INAL DE PMENTPIAN C1.8 IN PREUMIIN GRADING AND STORM SEWER P AN C PRFIIMINARYGRADINO LAN C1.8 PREIIMINARV UTILITY PIAN C1.9 L SI LIGHTIN N C1.11 OT STANINGANO DIMENSION PLAN C1.10 SITE IGHT OMETRI I-ANDS P HOTOMETRIC PLAN A001 LANDSCAPE PLMI A002 !LANDS GEMEMMAN A-1.1 BUILDING NG FLOOR PLAN & A-2.1 EXTERIOR B LOC UIUDINGNG ELEVATIONS � - , , gin ' , ,� ' t' � ,. "♦ � . ' "r � Ali f � f (w „w_ c1 r ,� /� , ^, r _ - _ .. , ..n.J ;ni I r ; • _`I 'Y, `fir i^ ` C ,y j 5 i _ 'T. �♦ /�' s s ���'i r: I i i t; r �' t J ' ": ♦!�✓ \\ to h.....' -'ri 4, ;41' __ ,� �` w_ i i //♦ f �,�.,, ,`` _ - k ^ F,_ . - -ti Fes' _— � _____ `� ♦ ♦� Lei; ,, �`, ,-- N' N 3 ,I P ����. /i ♦ 1 ♦ S "�'` ✓ .� s i r V fit �.✓� -_ __ -- __ � -. l � i� �� M� `�� %� S'y � � ,5;�, yJ' 4:, /: 1 -� . r-`l � Sr E:1'=M �/; o zoo rao Soo G .S / ,l BPPHIC SCAE (C�� ��� VA 1 1 ♦ _ S' �� �� / — I _1l f ________ „P 1 - ___� _ �_ _ I� 3. - I S{. _ - - - OST f RO ��� W ,I _ / ''`__-'�,� 's __ i' �'` OFFICE OFFICE��� E �, [` RETAIL 1 r L DAYCAR i 1 C l � Z� i �� ( � �__� r - �;['"., - mil■ <'£ "`.� ,J; ,, t t, -i r s r, 1, ` , r ' • �� / S - �:( L _ , - ------------ �� U' ^ SITE �r s 5 a n - -. - _ BANK 5�r �__. " - •'�T -V`I � r, _ I c� l ih BANK I / -- ' ' PFA I I �� I I I I I I I i� Ti � BUR �Il ��� _ • — �-it �,� .r GER 1 I �� s '-I 1 •• �:� ce I 1 _ 1 v 1 � • � /,' __ - - -__ - ti I KING 1 ^ 6 \ • U I� � " I � I � o-I"L �' � - �-..uu uumllalminllilllt0 I tvmm�mm 1 1 � 4 ^ � 'r (` • . AILCENTER� II 1 1 I ^ J. fr` • 1 _ G 0 0 - - T RY ROAD _em uuw uwVmii IL_SRiRvR � 1 V c> > o 7 f ' r'o 1 b G i ♦♦ OSI .�� u v u 4 ��i�i �i�i �uuu i�i�i uu uuuuuumu Ir irOnt iRU T �� BI . SI� � i ° m l I L s o t a a / murw wuruminlwu� � � dd � .� i ^ n y C A / ., d, cam, u � V ��� Mmm�r � Dii1VE — z PRAL, —o ♦ c � �� I / ��r - I �'v _ _ i ♦ ♦♦ ? G__ ., r jl} O m ill i i II1IIIIIIWIi —fO a °r ��`__ -_Y • } K O ni u il i p E ; VALGREENS \ ,�A� ;� l GA.4 ♦ 1 �T 'j c c sV' _ . L ♦ I u v � / ♦ 1 �_ }' V A � Ls - - -- mmmnm � i mmnmmrr '� V � o �,, EX SHELL � � 2000' RADIUS `I,I =_ -- ��� ��� == �'V'�� �°� 1� \` ., �.r,_ A s . ♦ �- , 2� (3--- \ 1 1 ICES ` V ui \`' r ,� v w �l ' _ l - 1 f 0 " t - - -- — ,�I _ ri__ =, 'I ti's, .� /1/ 1� d, EX. PANERA \� r ��”, _ �t / "7 / 1 � \ t c �., a i _ - a, i � �1 2 �� = i " ___li _ _ ' - � �„ � hr..; `.a, � ♦ yp�� ♦ r � PERIMETER RETAIL ♦ �i - OSPI7AL PERIMETER DRIVE -: ° - /� /� ` �>' • , 1 � d V ♦ FXN r7 / IX. OFFICES' s BREAD S � � z V �, .. ♦ ♦1 ._;�_._'_.'t__�;, / �7 a 0 , c..> .✓h ♦��\ — � DUBLIN. OHIO 1f- _ -_X1 ♦�♦ )� > - 2 •�, (bL0)96L 1661 ,' _; Bird +Bull? - -_- REGIONAL CONTEXT MAP 1 - -_. _ �, 1 f A �2 I I ", - - - -ct ff � � / �� ✓ ♦♦ ♦ ; �� ` �` , �___ � r � L i Eogi ^m�md3m • al _ w - f �` 2 ' J � � I L \ 3Pl5 W. W61iv- (hmvJl�ltwd �u ff Alf �f f,. v J�_P A a VAS JOB N . c � � ,A � A � fbmmhoe, 06Va 03293 r �b� `� � `_ � Ph: '� "' � C1 m (61Q 761 -1328 SCALE: 1' -203' CI. ` ; , I,_ -_ _- ir_____,__ n ✓ / � I" IL I A'1. `, `_ ���_____ -n, � 1_____ W W W.BIItDHUL4(%)Af DWN:SG C:KDAAG MTE� 11/15/12 12 -006 (i1,2 n N a i r i 273-012055 6455 POST ROAD L-C. 6455 A POST RD. ZONEDPCD IED PUD 273. 012135 SU£MEPHYSICANff ----- I & SURGEONS U.C. - -- 8935 A POST RD. ZONED PCD OFFICE I J L - - - - -- _- .i I 1 ZONED R1 �! - c -.✓ cal _ -- t -- -- - - -� — ----------- --- - - - - -- - - - - -- ZONED PU D L- r -- _____POST - _ - -------------------- - -, __________ ------ ROAD ? / 273-011303-00 C ,' IJ 6695A IFELDRD. ZONED z,7souao5 -_ + _ �I �rRIPLET ROSE � \ I U HDLDING�C(ILLC JEKMANNAGEM NT D. \, 8915 POS 8425 A POST RD. _ ` - ZONED PCD ZONED PCD L • "" - -, - - - -- -- -- — \ DAYCARE OFFICE \ + LLC. SITE IX_ - u _ I �• ® 273- 011305 i J c = a Edearrw�l CHAMPAIGN BANK w '715 AVERYmMUIFIELD RD. R-, I I I e= R145]9• ZONED PCD L -ax e – N •_ I I RETAIL I I I I Lri - -rl I I J I I I II II I I I I I I li I II li I I I I I I I L - - -L PERQE7�ER ORI 1 S �D N 1 " -" J BANK f f � 273.0113D9 - HUNTINGTON BANK \ 0705 AVERV- MUIFIELD Rq'. J _ -- "'-ZONED PCD � - `fib I s— I r r r I Ea - I U U __ VIII III I l l l l l l l l n n i l , , , , , l l l l l l l l l l l F ++ + + -I I F } +++444 FFF + +ii ++ IFI + +i + -I 1 I I I I U 0 %U I I I I I U IIIIIIIII n h � n IIIIIIIIIIIII n !II III I� 1 1 I, II I L %k N _ a ao m m I, ' I 1 tl ; cwsxx; awe 1 I 1 II I I 1 l 1 + <1 1 I Il m 1 — I l I I CN I + I o , I I t 11, 1 1 I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I v I 1 11 I LI i LEGEND 11 II `, l ZONED CODE: PCD: PLWNED COMMERCNL 1 J I I l DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT VI r� DEVELOPMENTSIIE B R v v 2`73` 0 7 ll 11 OUTLOT - A - L l ,1 Al i 7 6p \\ T !_Liil��ia�i «� 1 1 V I II I t I II + 1� p _QNED PU ', I I I 1 I PERIMETER SHOPS - -- - - - - -✓ 1 I PERIMETER DRIVE - -- 7 1 \ — — -_ DUBLIN, OHIO Bird +Bull ��� \ L \ y � t �L L � \ \.i ✓`iii \ � i �q I I C.F.BmD &W.S11T.41NC. + + >mPoa.ma3amsa. VICINITY MAP 1 RRlSW.Da61(v-O OX 1 5 wd 1 9 +I C t:(61 , 761 661 15 y Ph: (619)]61 -1661 _ www.RMDRIrt13 OWMSG CKOAAG InxTi J C1.3 R -111 (-1`I e= ,WAY9� � -ua• ` v S2WI iL - -, ? / 273-011303-00 C ,' IJ 6695A IFELDRD. ZONED ; SITE IX_ - u _ I �• ® 273- 011305 i J c = a Edearrw�l CHAMPAIGN BANK w '715 AVERYmMUIFIELD RD. R-, I I I e= R145]9• ZONED PCD L -ax e – N •_ I I RETAIL I I I I Lri - -rl I I J I I I II II I I I I I I li I II li I I I I I I I L - - -L PERQE7�ER ORI 1 S �D N 1 " -" J BANK f f � 273.0113D9 - HUNTINGTON BANK \ 0705 AVERV- MUIFIELD Rq'. J _ -- "'-ZONED PCD � - `fib I s— I r r r I Ea - I U U __ VIII III I l l l l l l l l n n i l , , , , , l l l l l l l l l l l F ++ + + -I I F } +++444 FFF + +ii ++ IFI + +i + -I 1 I I I I U 0 %U I I I I I U IIIIIIIII n h � n IIIIIIIIIIIII n !II III I� 1 1 I, II I L %k N _ a ao m m I, ' I 1 tl ; cwsxx; awe 1 I 1 II I I 1 l 1 + <1 1 I Il m 1 — I l I I CN I + I o , I I t 11, 1 1 I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I v I 1 11 I LI i LEGEND 11 II `, l ZONED CODE: PCD: PLWNED COMMERCNL 1 J I I l DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT VI r� DEVELOPMENTSIIE B R v v 2`73` 0 7 ll 11 OUTLOT - A - L l ,1 Al i 7 6p \\ T !_Liil��ia�i «� 1 1 V I II I t I II + 1� p _QNED PU ', I I I 1 I PERIMETER SHOPS - -- - - - - -✓ 1 I PERIMETER DRIVE - -- 7 1 \ — — -_ DUBLIN, OHIO Bird +Bull ��� \ L \ y � t �L L � \ \.i ✓`iii \ � i �q I I C.F.BmD &W.S11T.41NC. + + >mPoa.ma3amsa. VICINITY MAP 1 RRlSW.Da61(v-O OX 1 5 wd 1 9 +I C t:(61 , 761 661 15 y Ph: (619)]61 -1661 _ www.RMDRIrt13 OWMSG CKOAAG InxTi J C1.3 R -111 (-1`I e= ,WAY9� � -ua• ` v S2WI iL Ex. C k c Inle< ' C 92287 12' Can 1 e.9 5 91902 O EYE EO U-C 12 CPP N 9 8425 POST ROAD E I I AVERY PLACE M AND SU LLC E,. c k c Ime< OFFICE CONDOMINIUM II 1 P.B. 104, PG. 94 LOT 1 1015AC. is 822 CONDO PLAT 2 0 0 8112102 32 772 E, z s . M.B. LOT4 aMOAaca B PVC ,W 919 17 1 3c 92497 I" A rrnc• INSTR. 200408240198188 INSTILL 20051IMS02593M Ex c k c m A ,k 822. 9 1 CPP N k W 9191§ O' PVC E k 5 9121] y 923.01 )923.36 TC 92238 1 2 E Bul�m 1 r 0' PVC N 91873 ] A L 25 B long Setb k / 8G4E:lE -W l P vemenl Setback X°2H 13 92 - S tir el m 225 � ° sfm 91M �� 922.09 0 yg 00 N 92'3.5 92 ^ ^99 92159 91.]0 9?3H 923)1308 - 923, o^ ID 922]B 92 46 921 9 923.05 929 .: .3.31 9233 92295 822]3 �922fi0 w 9^ A -Il Ba stir 4.1°6 Noll S I M°g N°I 0RW1L• F Fund +3.06 92280 vi 8 01 3 -°. 35 923 9228] 9 253 922,29 E 92246 2 ,0] 9 3.00 9 ^3 9e34a 993 AsPh°It 92299 92285 92Hfi {°una '+ 2 33 Ap '31 5 69'1750" E 43,00 J 92316 923 923.39 1i' 922 - fi 912.E5 J 91 9 2'.12 _- 4 n 3.1 0/_9229d 92264 92236 3 92°_09 922 92 ]1 01 SC°mh nat °n Curb 923. 922.32 92269 92053 2218 941 = 90 - stir FSew - - v m m,nt setback 9 5 _-1 Bec, shrub 2.38 2-132 6 9237 i 925 . 925 925 8'son sw 9s 5 ].22 r . Beae wT 9" _ 4' i 0 x ul'9 1 Sjtb,, k L.. sa9 _ ] 1 5 \ 1 923 929 9u ldin9 Eetb°c i I - n n ��• -'.- - � 6fi9 • 3 2 1 $, s°n IS I 924 1 N 'i So MH an' °� fi . r , 3 Ex 2 n 3c P %IC I E I m 23, 9 419 x92245 x922,]8 x922.]1 x9229 x92271 x923.11 x923.48 x92395 ::923.84 x92393 x9 3.60 923,93 x923,75 x923.55 x923.32 x923.15 x923 x92 98 922, i I2 I y B' PVC E & W 913.55 EXISTING SYMBOLS LEGEND in O � 113309 °- -- RY- PERIMETER LLC _ Dsign SIGN z Dc,o. CABLE TELEWSION DROP Ex. ckc IN I a a ZONEDPCD �S Sign STREET SIGN ❑CP. CABLE TELEISION V PEDESTAL TC 92289 1912. 40 r:922J4 x923.04 ° _^2.9] 02lB 23.01 x923.33 x9 x94.1] x9 ?6.20 -1:92434 2939.39 -4.15 23,99 x923.81 1913.59 %92325 _.04 x92286 x912] 211 2 O m [l AREA LIGHT ®C. V. GAS VALVE B Pvc E 91885 Ex. c k c Inlet YARD LIGHT Ocs, GAB SERVICE 85, n, 983 a Ex. C k c Inlet 6 S w Te 922.do � W LIGHT POLE 17 G. M. GAS METER E.. c k c Inlet 11 RESERVE "B" 9y" B" W, NE k EE 917 So Lg7 LIGHT POLE WUSOR, BASE TC 922:96 9 2,990 ACRES TC 822.93 © GAS MMKER 8" PVC NE 919.55 6 " 8" PVC E 91863 Q UGHTPGLEW/TWD.BASE O00 CLEAN OUT 8" PVC W 9198 J 3.19 23.00 247 x8220 x82320 x923.29 1 119 x82336 x923 fit 192403 1D2447 x92473 x824]1 x82473 x x82391 x823 fi5 x92339 82298 x82266 x922.55 x8225+ 1 822. 222 w y ELECTRIC GUY stir cfi CATCH BASIN W/TOP OF CASTING ELEV. 9 26 9 .x M ARKER astir. inle 3 707 CURB INLET OFCASTINGEIEV. >• 378 II M °g Ndl A 200600 Q Stir. MB is JEB.a3 STORM MAN HK)UE HOLE OF CARTING ELEV. II r°unc ,r ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER 84 92 ^�' '�O 25 9 0 I] RIC M ELECT METER O Sen. MB Tc 708.43 SANTARY MANHOLE W/TOP OF CASTING ELEV. M Fo°na l �� 2B L 5622 ❑ , ELECTRIC DROP O DOWNSPOUT 3.52 523.69 x92320 x923.43 x925.5] 923159 692353 x923.]0 %924.11 X9 ^458 x52490 92490 x92464 N 924.51 x9213 <923.]4 x923.3 x92262 6922.39 x922.33 9 7 315 g22_ ° �1 f92a1 ED 56 04 e ❑ P ELECTRIC RILL BDX O ROOF 923 N 06'45'21 E ❑ P ELECTRIC PEDESTAL EXISTING NG EL ELEV. ®GUTTER LOT5 e1 2.180 ACRF9 \2392 T 1 ❑Fo ELECTRIC G _ EXISTINGGRADE ELEV. g 1 El I 9 1 9 1 9 11 E 2 5 , M.H n• g ry ^ ' BENCHMARrc LOTS c TELEPHONE CLOSURE a 87 SPOT EIEV. \I Y 1 1 >» /CBFA T TELEPHONE DROP 9 3 14,03 x923,7 x913.60 x923.68 x92315 x923 fi5 x92379 x92610 924'41 8 PVC N Tc 92 -152 ❑O. IBINKIb ^455 x92441 m x 924, 20 x -495 x923.]8 x923.2 x922]9 -192235 x92249 9. 1 M°g N°il ❑iB. TELEPHONE PULL BOX I'B7 BO LARD DELEV. R = 150.00' 23.61 4 i dpa Owe WOOD POST 1 1 a Pvc 5 910.60 a Ag F°una ❑T:P_ TELEPHO PEDE8TAL A= 35'52'09 1 Ex. 2 stm. M.H. 9 1 x,2359 d TELEPHONE POLE OMa M ETAL GAST L = 93.91 1 TC 923 B5 v _ �° 8 UTILTY POLE EXISTING TERLI \ 1 92461 36' E 91fi 2 ° n 1 ❑ Pa. PULL BOX w EXISTING WATER LINE CM1 92.36' 926. \ 61 21 u92390 x92309 x823.9 x923]9 x92.1 x 92422 30" W 91A.Qg6 TI s826fi u92630 x926P x8261E _`i _� x92362 x822.84 x9225] 93 3 mKC P.9. TRAFFIC PULL BOX \ \ N 92 9189= � N as R 100.00 ❑T LINE N2 T £m MF ° -1 nall L 37 j9' 9 EXISTING UNDERGR TELEPH NELI 517'13'55 E 12 924 lrcc RAFFIC CONTROL BOX VERHEAD ELECTRIC LINE \ \ 92 aD' au en setback m 6 T TRAFFIC SIGNAL a EXISTING O EXISTING UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE LINE M °y N °II \ , 9 z F TRAFFIC POLE \ ° z' o ° °e Humid ° ��c°mmerclol W /WUK " 11 \924.9 x924,62 a. 4.13 x923.6 x9 ^� p ^501 x925.91 x925 _ 25W2 x92aae 92. � 5 x92321 k L 5 960046 W J' TRAFFIC POLE EXISTING UNDERGR T UND C Ii UE TE ONLINE N ugi __ < 2 T ev SPRINNIER sa - 1 3 ^men Ion Pn _ 9nc°mm 20 Pa emPe i 86b P 243 8 > 56 Ex p \_ 3 4' I.D. lien Pn Ma9 No cov R 7000 __ A 19'5014 \ T R 1035'3 EXISTING INDEX MEDIATE INICUR EVISIOU LINE _ ® v WATER VALVE 2 e � y y /c p F°nna 32 Ensement m A 21'3534 YS u. FIRE HYDRANT EXISTING INTERMEDIATE CONTOUR C 24.24 J /' n L 37.69 ❑WM. WATER METER \ EXISTING FENCE LINE N 25'1462 Ch 24.11' S. cop Fnuna F° °e CM1 37 4fi' O s. WATER SERVICE 'ImIn W k �. A 2 iA6q 10 9fi9 3.65 jfi N-. 0 to _ _ x924 1 Yn E ' Uc F6 bota (, a 19 N 06'0046 E 01 pen WATER CONTROL VALVE - \ E r tS F°un 5 B B6,�G5_ M ta�� 23.9 _ P ___ Va NTROL VALVE T E vc F'� � t°� »2l S FLAGPOLE Ex: Easemen k B7 _ � -9 k Ot - F - x 9239- 1 34= °rn / m afi, Pcs� _ _ 9z ,7. a s°w. 1T9 68_ �,° a9° c .,; 2 c k 3g€- TREE LEGEND PJ - \ 30 S S 81 50 OS -y �/6 x 2 Sf P 1 D 92 y k `\ O 1 C. ra IRRIGATION CO J ❑m MNL BOX - -„ 2.2 123 uC EI _ ` ..L - 4e 53 �' 6 E yy -RS E�v EI �E C &C 3 1 X35_ 83 � y' c k °n GurO 5 e x 2 s 3 ': s23.te a G k•>�p x2a.ea o 3 s - `\�\ TREE SVMBOLSOO NOT REPRE8EMTRUNK 8IZE OR DRIP LINER. c 0i 2 GI k° 18, • As 6i^ a0 . l Sf 9 2602' C 9383 �§23 b�C x926 xJ 12 1 a.50 __ Ph°If ., t1 C b �2fi 40 - Saw \\ a 7 y 923 09 10 12 Ivc 59 _ x a�7 s °_ 9 26, o F� AL =ALDER LO•LOCUST _ _ x92 A5 x � _ 92 B4 B :K! 3 I t f a 3Z ,33 92'.53 923° PFRNETER O0. AR ABLE VA „_ stn Basel ea e2 {es RW, KH p 5 - 7 ostso = OECIDUOUSTREE q 5o ,\ A N E �'�\_� 5H =ASH MG MAGNOLIA 9 .237- ° > t V Ge28 M FIR BE= BOXELDER MU= MULBERRY AI -mow xD 9" BF•B - R 500.00 - xe2a x _ 1O ^) ALSMI NM •NORWAY APLE EE 5x, 3' one. C.8. x94416 Za Asp ° _ I L 06 52 Ex BI BIRCH 00=03A . 2' stir. M.H. . g ,� BHa..J \wcIrrymca'\`� BH =BEECH OAK =OAK TC 9@418 �� - - -'1 CF = 205.05 3c ,2483 \ A \ hAMEN GE 30'E,1Bas _ 996 a'dml BL BLACK LOCUST O '` \ =RN = ORNAMENTAL 31'.5916 9 .3 _� N66'1959 W 36'5 46'291 915,53 \, \ •EVERGREEN TREE BLO= BLACKOW( PE -PEACH BM =BLACK MPRE PL•PLUM SO•BUR OAK PN =FINE m ' \ ST= 9UCKHORN PO =PIN OW( 10'San sew Ban 12 °Run Sew, \\ =OEPD TREE BY= BU WSNA OPLAR E PR•P O 0 AVERY ROACTION I CU =CED LCENTER �sa^ \ CA= CRABAPPLE PW= PLUSSYWILLOW O 98.123 \ AR OA= QUAKING ASPEN P.B. ® ® BB,PG. 856BT \\ \ C CH TM ESTNU RM =RRDB = REESUD s° LoR2 EDMAR LE CHO -n \ f"1 =SHRUB CH =CHES ED MAP RW' = CHETNLTOAK SO•SEOOAK CC SG= SWEETGUM CS =CHINESE SE SUMAE SH=SHA MIiP ICKORY CT= CATALPA S ILVER MAP SLE •HEDJE CW= COTTONWOOD SM =BUGNt MAPLE E LM=ELM 000 So= SCA SP •SPRURCE OAK E LM =ELM CE REFERENCE BENCHMARK =STUMP FIR FIR = SS= SASSAFRAS G SU =SUMAC HAW•HAWTRDRN SYC= SYCAMORE TNT =TWIN TRUNK HB= HACKBERRY TA= THORNAPPLE BENCHWRKS WERE DEFINED FROM VRS OBSERVATIONS REFERHNCNG HEM = HEMLOCK TU•11JUP THEE MONUMENT, BID DESIGNATION OF COLB(COMPUIED USING GEOIW9) AND ALL OTHER TRT•TRIFLE TRUNK HL= HONEYLOCUST T =TREE ELEVATION ARE BASED UPON THIS OBSERVATION. H= HICKORY - MUT= MULTITRUNK HO WL= WILLOW ELEV: MAN CH CH•HORSE RSE CHESTNUT WC•WILO CHERRY (NAND BB REFERENCE DATUM) J = JUNIPER BENCHMARK TOP OF ROUND LIGHT POLE BASE O N SOUTHWEST SIDE. NOTE: ELEV.: 91 PERIMETER RETAIL UTLITES SHOWN ARE PART FROM SURVEYAND PART FROLJ RECORS OF RESPECTIVE PERIMETER DRIVE LIT AN UEIYCOMPAMESDDO NOTNECESARI SLYREPR TALL ESEN UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AOIACEN 011l O y DUBLIN, OHIO ELECTRIC T TO OR UPON SUBJECT PREMISES. rotection CLOS Ru ES�RE DURING TTHE IEELD INAESTGATIO NOFELLD AND MARKN S ORE Utilities P + BUll w` SERVICE Bird U igER YO�MwI C NG I TI SEA aM CO ON N KEC T T S EO SA S ERGROUND OR ii YM INP D.F. Ndd O. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND a n I I r s II I I P . I JEK Ml LTD. 8125 POST RD. 273 -01213500 AVERY PLACE -Y AsPF°It 298.50' _---- - - - - -- DWESTER 25 B uilding Setb ack -LA �- ts' Pavement Selboc� d ' ~I S o Ed il' 4 4 4 19 u' I R -W Q l � (_�_✓� II II I 8800 PERIMETER DRIVE LLC I I I j _ g I Ile Ill; III PERIMETER DiAl II 273011547-00 3.4 { CONCRETE PATIO 1 + 1 19 6.5 +. \ 9 19 22 e 35'5298' t t t \ 19 S 8391' Cn •9235 I t t I �k R =NLOIV e= 18 L= Z1.2!'IG y �2 N2b°1 N2W14 4'fi2L4Y I_ _- _____- y - OP f - ----- --- --- L — - -_-_—_ Ex. Ee S6 PGS. 06 & 8"I _ (\\. W -- __ _ _ 5' Si 0fi °P °s 06 & 0 7 T p° /`R =2S Em o 2TS011M-00 "I POST ROAD AVERY PLACE LOT 4 1.825 ACRES EX. PRIVATE DRIVE L4� SCALE. t' = 30' 0 30 60 an GRAPHIC SCALE R DEVELOPMENT DATA I II 3 i ZONING: PROPERTY OWNER: AVERY PERIMETER LLC d `�L', PROPERTY USE: SHOPPING CENTER F III i( ' L ID EX ISTING ZONING NORTH: POD (PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT) B AD q -,i aW ADJACENT ZONING SOUTH: PUD tl u 2Tj ADJACENT ZONING EAST: POD x °t 8100D ADJACENT ZONING WEST: POD II-m- V R X20090' q � INN o ^ eR'10'OS'23• 1', 1. SITE LAYOUT DATA: C N B ;21• E TOTAL SITE AREA 2.930 ACRES I PRIVATE STREET AREA WITHIN PARCEL: 0.29 ACRES p IC te v d 7 TOTAL SITE AREA / p / (EXCLUDING PRIVATE STREET) 2.84 ACRES IC I S / ) Q °� / a VEHICULAR USE AREA 1.165 AC. (50,760 S.F.) (44 %) Pm Rl q ?{ a L _ 2 A I PROPOSED BUILDING AREA 0.328 ACRES (14.488 S.F.) (12 %) B A oe•ov4aw n� I f SITE IMPERVIOUS AREAL 1.49 AC. ( 64,904 S.F.) ( 0.56 %) p R= 10o.a0' e p ( NOTE% AREAS ARE BASED ONSITE AREA, EXCLUDING z1 usa k a EXISTING PRIVATE STREETS) • 371 p p 37AB' 6 ®y/ NOB•00'18•E AISLE WIDTH: 22' 1 PARKING SETBACK: IS (INTERNAL ROADS) G AVERY PERIMETER ILC PERIMETER DRNE 2780'1130800 AVERY PEACE RESERVE'S' 2.W0 ACRES 12 40' Rwlamq P°vement S etback --- Ex 32 Easement P B 86 PGS, 86 & 8 El. III WI - — - VARIAI3LEWIDTH - R = Ill 5P - -- N 88 W ms s= °° y AVERY ROA SE RETAIL CENTER I P.B. W88,PD.PG.88 aeT _a a LoT] Ile BUILDING SETBACK .sI " a97 "Re m .STANDARD PARKING STALL: _ _ 1 R °' _ (El 05 QIS <aaoPo�B _ J _ TOTAL PARKING SPACES "o, REQUIRED: (1 SPACE PER 150 S.F.) \ \ Peanml TOTAL PARKING SPACES: SIGNATURES PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL DATE Ifl `Y wS%J:U\Od4ldltl PLANNING AND ZONING 0014MISSION 8ECRETARY DATE R= 20' (PERIMETER DRIVE) 25' (INTERNAL ROADS) 40' (PERIMETER DRIVE) 9'X19' 97SPACES 126 SPACES (WITH 5 HC SPACES) PROPERTI'DWNER IAPPLICANT DATE L II I'I� OBU EYE PHI'BECIANSAND BURGEONS. LLC L,I II 8155 POST RD. ' ll 2751 ACR -00 1.015 ACRE3 IF II I ' I I II II L - -- I I r s II I I P . I JEK Ml LTD. 8125 POST RD. 273 -01213500 AVERY PLACE -Y AsPF°It 298.50' _---- - - - - -- DWESTER 25 B uilding Setb ack -LA �- ts' Pavement Selboc� d ' ~I S o Ed il' 4 4 4 19 u' I R -W Q l � (_�_✓� II II I 8800 PERIMETER DRIVE LLC I I I j _ g I Ile Ill; III PERIMETER DiAl II 273011547-00 3.4 { CONCRETE PATIO 1 + 1 19 6.5 +. \ 9 19 22 e 35'5298' t t t \ 19 S 8391' Cn •9235 I t t I �k R =NLOIV e= 18 L= Z1.2!'IG y �2 N2b°1 N2W14 4'fi2L4Y I_ _- _____- y - OP f - ----- --- --- L — - -_-_—_ Ex. Ee S6 PGS. 06 & 8"I _ (\\. W -- __ _ _ 5' Si 0fi °P °s 06 & 0 7 T p° /`R =2S Em o 2TS011M-00 "I POST ROAD AVERY PLACE LOT 4 1.825 ACRES EX. PRIVATE DRIVE L4� SCALE. t' = 30' 0 30 60 an GRAPHIC SCALE R DEVELOPMENT DATA I II 3 i ZONING: PROPERTY OWNER: AVERY PERIMETER LLC d `�L', PROPERTY USE: SHOPPING CENTER F III i( ' L ID EX ISTING ZONING NORTH: POD (PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT) B AD q -,i aW ADJACENT ZONING SOUTH: PUD tl u 2Tj ADJACENT ZONING EAST: POD x °t 8100D ADJACENT ZONING WEST: POD II-m- V R X20090' q � INN o ^ eR'10'OS'23• 1', 1. SITE LAYOUT DATA: C N B ;21• E TOTAL SITE AREA 2.930 ACRES I PRIVATE STREET AREA WITHIN PARCEL: 0.29 ACRES p IC te v d 7 TOTAL SITE AREA / p / (EXCLUDING PRIVATE STREET) 2.84 ACRES IC I S / ) Q °� / a VEHICULAR USE AREA 1.165 AC. (50,760 S.F.) (44 %) Pm Rl q ?{ a L _ 2 A I PROPOSED BUILDING AREA 0.328 ACRES (14.488 S.F.) (12 %) B A oe•ov4aw n� I f SITE IMPERVIOUS AREAL 1.49 AC. ( 64,904 S.F.) ( 0.56 %) p R= 10o.a0' e p ( NOTE% AREAS ARE BASED ONSITE AREA, EXCLUDING z1 usa k a EXISTING PRIVATE STREETS) • 371 p p 37AB' 6 ®y/ NOB•00'18•E AISLE WIDTH: 22' 1 PARKING SETBACK: IS (INTERNAL ROADS) G AVERY PERIMETER ILC PERIMETER DRNE 2780'1130800 AVERY PEACE RESERVE'S' 2.W0 ACRES 12 40' Rwlamq P°vement S etback --- Ex 32 Easement P B 86 PGS, 86 & 8 El. III WI - — - VARIAI3LEWIDTH - R = Ill 5P - -- N 88 W ms s= °° y AVERY ROA SE RETAIL CENTER I P.B. W88,PD.PG.88 aeT _a a LoT] Ile BUILDING SETBACK .sI " a97 "Re m .STANDARD PARKING STALL: _ _ 1 R °' _ (El 05 QIS <aaoPo�B _ J _ TOTAL PARKING SPACES "o, REQUIRED: (1 SPACE PER 150 S.F.) \ \ Peanml TOTAL PARKING SPACES: SIGNATURES PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL DATE Ifl `Y wS%J:U\Od4ldltl PLANNING AND ZONING 0014MISSION 8ECRETARY DATE R= 20' (PERIMETER DRIVE) 25' (INTERNAL ROADS) 40' (PERIMETER DRIVE) 9'X19' 97SPACES 126 SPACES (WITH 5 HC SPACES) PROPERTI'DWNER IAPPLICANT DATE �I z X W "—�"stm sa =' a� L_1 I i se L I Y ® I� BOX PERIMETER DRIVE LLC I AVERY PERIMETER, LLC I _ 2]301150]-00 9.. e p 10.»>yy � SHOPPING CENTER y` a M f4pP 'O`�mo 7 03U EYE PHYSK:WISAND n - - j r � SURGEONS. LLC ir �- e= 35•sz99" I 8155 POST RD. u ✓`/�^%= I Ir 81.92.38 1 2]51111314-00 81] °1885'E 1 `l II I � 1.015AORES I � 1 PCD I II I L _ — __ _ __ e= 18'5q'14' L L= 2429'1° TOTAL PARKING SPACES: 81.24.11•° SI ji �I z X W "—�"stm sa =' a� L_1 I i se L I Y ® c BOX PERIMETER DRIVE LLC I AVERY PERIMETER, LLC 8800 PERIMETER DRIVE _ 2]301150]-00 9.. e p - -H_- � SHOPPING CENTER y` a M f4pP 'O`�mo 7 n c'; r � PCD (PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT) \ �- e= 35•sz99" I � u ✓`/�^%= I t 81.92.38 1 PUD 81] °1885'E 1 `l 1 ADJACENT ZONING EAST: t I � 1 PCD 1 � R =70.0 e= 18'5q'14' \ L= 2429'1° TOTAL PARKING SPACES: 81.24.11•° SI ji N 26`141 \ R�200e0' 1 e R't89B'28• A 01 TOTAL SITE AREA 2.930 ACRES Ea q Ex. sement / l P B 66, PGs. 06 n I I I V. I JEK Ml I.M. III POST RD. 278 -01213500 AVERY PLACE m stm A.Phalt maw 15 Pavement setlo 5' sT R fi M 0 p�7 R = I I 9 C/ I ?C1YI B f R•10'J R =10 g R =19 R =m' A4 19 19 22 W \ R R =l Ref 4 9 \� Ro2d C! , \ v 5- 0��� us n \ 30 Stan PATIO E (Il Ll�-li —may III I F \ lyl PRIMROSE DAYCARE OF DUBDN I. III III 27401130 I III Ali \ IJI 8415 POST ROAD II III e a I I AVERY PLACE � �I III III \\® A p LOT4 ' ll I A II. -�111� 192BACRES II III 11 A P ��� •. , L � ��� : —.. ��`�'�� :. - : �� � �II p E I I - BE EXTENDED 8ERVICE BE ANl �I Ex_ San . Y8. CO IVEARYBIONER J II TC _ 9249] S 5 MIRARYEWER — JI S I p B PVC EkS 9121) `� — � �� 5' i (Tb BE REMOVED) ��\i / \ scnLE: 1 30' 3 V r EC 15 11 Sew., ® 1 A� 0 30 60 an 'tnn Stan am at a,T _ __ EiE- SgryRARy _ —___— — __ — _ —__ -- PROP. WATER 808 AG TO SE REMOVE➢ QUALITY UNIT GRAPHIC SCALE EX. PRIVATE DRIVE 1tl.r` 1 I PROP. SMIliAI BEINEREAN I I I SEWI J PROP. STORM BEWER SAN SIN SIM S R =f R=19 Y 1� R.5 22 AVERY PERIMETER LLC PERIMETER DRIVE AVERY PLACE RESERVE'S' 2.830 ACRES 60 E ltling setback R.18" r I Fee W 1 „ T BUILDING SETBACK: STANDARD PARKING STALL: DEVELOPMENT DATA A,I Q "—�"stm sa =' a� L_1 p ZONING: Y ® c PROPERTY OWNER: AVERY PERIMETER, LLC q d �- e p - -H_- PROPERTY USE: SHOPPING CENTER y` a M f4pP 'O`�mo 7 n c'; EXISTING ZONING: PCD (PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT) \ �- ADJACENT ZONING NORTH: PCD u ✓`/�^%= I �'$° ADJACENT ZONING SOUTH: PUD f B ADJACENT ZONING EAST: PCD 1 _ ADJACENT ZONING WEST: PCD O*Mz '�a \ \_ TOTAL PARKING SPACES: t i i N SI ji SITE LAYOUT DATA: \ R�200e0' 1 e R't89B'28• A 01 TOTAL SITE AREA 2.930 ACRES - 'Li50.72 L T771A BB'1 &59'W N 19W \ Asphalt N �'2 I B °}521• E PRIVATE STREET AREA WITHIN PARCEL: 0.29 ACRES TOTAL SITE AREA a �� (EXCLUDING PRIVATE STREET) 2.84 ACRES B 'j�� ® �1 // 7 VEHICULAR USE AREA: 1.165 AC. (50,700 S.F.) (44 %) / L PROPOSED BUILDING ARIA 0.328 ACRES (14,488 S.F.) (12 %) s R ®100.W q =21°35'34• SITE IMPERVIOUS AREA: 1.49 AC. (84,904 S.F.) (0.56%) cy3;0 9 ml ( NOTE% AREAS ARE BASED ONSITE AREA, EXCLUDING S OB'W'10'W C A B EXISTING PRIVATE STREETS) p R= 100.00' e d WMw - e= 2r r1 @ AISLE WIDTH: 22' L =37.W p �6 'C n ® N N 08°08'18' E ==� PARKING SETBACK: 16 (INTERNAL ROADS) vn 12" 6 \ 20' (PERIMETER DRIVE) BUILDING SETBACK: STANDARD PARKING STALL: —W PERIMETER DRIVE VARIA°" _ �T— — — AI It Eo , GO' M a ee _ _ � — •• asp s aa�s� —�9 10 son. sew, avn O aw e 0 SIGNATURES PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL DATE 25' (INTERNAL ROADS) 40' (PERIMETER DRIVE) 9'X16 97SPACES 125 SPACES (WITH 5 HC SPACES) PROPERTY DINNER OATS A,I Q "—�"stm sa =' a� L_1 P Y w � st, Fos TOTAL PARKING �- SPACES - -H_- - - y` a M f4pP 'O`�mo 7 R= 800 �_ H +°'nnr "= \ �- REQUIRED: (I SPACE PER 150 S.F.) .00' = sue °000e fl= 23.9857 _ \ '�a \ \_ TOTAL PARKING SPACES: M=2 52' C1= \ > \ comm BB'1 &59'W N 19W \ Asphalt a �� @ �6 vn 12" 6 \ San, Seµ AVERY ROAD RETAIL CENTER. SECTI0NI an \ P.B. M. PG. 38807 A � _ W!3 f \ —W PERIMETER DRIVE VARIA°" _ �T— — — AI It Eo , GO' M a ee _ _ � — •• asp s aa�s� —�9 10 son. sew, avn O aw e 0 SIGNATURES PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL DATE 25' (INTERNAL ROADS) 40' (PERIMETER DRIVE) 9'X16 97SPACES 125 SPACES (WITH 5 HC SPACES) PROPERTY DINNER OATS 0 PH. C k G Plet I L L L J L L_L_L_J I � I 6 - - ° Ir X 1' C k G Inlet Dl I I L Em C k G Inlet s¢ PP N iC 9229 _ TO I: M.00 R�3000 SM POST RD. 10.�y Zi 8' PVC I y 9g 9 8 55 W N 213 -01213500 1 1 OSU EYE z -- AVERY PLACE SURGEONS NS III GEO STRD. �� r MM 28.2 MM 80.95 POST RD. ' 919177 10•W6917.60 2]51111314-00 I II II l � 1.015ACRES x34.D EQUAL. II I II l IL _ __ --- l L 9 TC 922.36 1 1 O 0 PH. C k G Plet I 2 I � I Tc 92z8 I O. I X 0 PVC E 919.85 1 C k G Inlet Dl I 919.4, _ Em C k G Inlet s¢ PP N iC 9229 _ TO I: M.00 R�3000 SM POST RD. & R tem Zi 8' PVC I y 9g 9 8 55 W N 213 -01213500 1 1 I I I z 8000 PERIMETER DRIVE LI AVERY PLACE TC 922.9] III PERIMETER DRWE 10 N.G918.00 MM 28.2 MM 2]301154]-00 1 919177 I - N I � I r s II� I O. I PVC E 91i: Ex c k G Inlet - - N 23.5 922.43 xc va2'Bi PVC E 91i: Ex C k G Inlet JEK MGMT. I.M. l2' CPP 5 919.4, _ MIS � B, PP N 91887 TO I: M.00 R�3000 SM POST RD. & R tem Zi TC =923.2 N 213 -01213500 k G Inlet ~ 23.7 AVERY PLACE TC 922.9] z?a 10 N.G918.00 MM 28.2 MM - B PVC SW 919177 10•W6917.60 X 1m 12' CPP N & W 919. x34.D EQUAL. - l E, C k G Inlet c 9 TC 922.36 1 1 O PROP. MANHOLE B" PVC N 91673 A PROP. CATCN BASIN OB L 10 PROP. CATION BASIN r 1 .30 4O - s\ TC = 922.5 s m San M=9 23.50 SIZING OF WATER ITYUNR OFW A TER I 1M N 6 817 1U•N.19M .61 M=922.50 ns x23.1 PROP. 10• © _ 8B x MA 232 S TM. ® 028% 77 { 0 anGFF DRAN r___ - {_ _R- 461MI -, 1 1 �y33LL G 33 1 1 L •93.91 1 8 \ 92.83 31] °1335'E � \ 1 A 1 \ 1 / R= 70.0 A= 18'5R1AC 1-.24.24 CH= 24.14 � N 2614'fiR - __ Ex. E°sam ent k 67 P B B6, PGS -w 228 TIC 30.9E °918]6 - _ 30' S ISE" - LL'I Ex. is = sza so 8415 POST ROAD 15' E ® 919 94 AVERY PLACE 15' W le A8.G4 LOT B' NA 5 ® 918.52 192BACRES E Ex- 2' s°n. IA. H. TC 924.9] 6" PVC E & 5 91217 xtm /- Ex: 15 5t°,m Sewer e <m � 2 s 7 Es EX. PRIVATE DRIVE '+ . 9 8 Ex . 925 925 8_ Son. Sew __ -f 9.0 _ P3.5 23.3 23.1 25 21.5 23.5 2 P 2 N C A RO .1 ST 4. .28% n o 00% 9 23.8 "f�l 23S 9.5 21. 29S 111 l 29 I n � F/�� C =923.0 C 29.9 11 FUJI DRNN i 23.5 � FADER��,/ g] ( 1 . 4. �. 111 ev 246 ' CRETE PATIO n aj F.F. 924.50 W j 24 24.8 RETE PATIO C 0' HOOF DRAIN ' 8' F GRAN b . LEADER Xe L R A 24.0 y1.3 21A 24A_ 1 TC•933 TCz .8 Dat °t;e c. - ______ p r. & G Snlat 12" w °oenlne - I Ec 15' W 9209 15 W 10' S O � 55'- 10 °% C k G Inlet 23.5 922.43 B PVC E 91i: Ex C k G Inlet TC 92250 V B' W. NE P1 9E MIS � B, TG ::M 11 d� TO I: M.00 R�3000 TG ::M61 & R tem Zi TC =923.2 28.0 Ex 16' E -W 89209 } 23.7 10 - NE ®919.12 z?a 10 N.G918.00 MM 28.2 MM PROP. 10 ®91710 10•W6917.60 X 1m j x34.D EQUAL. - 1a•s.5191s50 c 9 1 1 O PROP. MANHOLE A PROP. CATCN BASIN OB PROP. CATION BASIN 10 PROP. CATION BASIN r 1 .30 4O BASIN TC = 922.5 M=9 23.50 SIZING OF WATER ITYUNR OFW A TER I 1M N 6 817 1U•N.19M .61 M=922.50 10•E = 818. 71 @91 9. 6 °NW ®9188 8'NE ®91A0 rN 8 WI LL BE ON FI NAL 1 P 8. ®817A5 n IF 23 my a iC: 10'w•91 T.85 2' T I °% C k G Inlet TC 922.43 B PVC E 91i: Ex C k G Inlet TC 92250 V B' W. NE P1 9E TC= 924 10e TG ::M 11 d� TO I: M.00 R�3000 TG ::M61 & R tem Cl3]AB' 1 m p 3 08°OOemil ti A A R= 100.00' ✓ N SCALE: 1" = 30' 0 30 60 90 GRAPHIC SCALE QII C GS - - :to, y CNAMp f,]ryA'. fl 1�1 j Jl NOTE PONDING REQUIREDAND PROVIDED 18 FOR THE 25 YEAR OPTICAL STORM. SHADED AREAS REPRESENT PONDING ATTHE MAXIMUM MRAGE ELEVATION OF 923.63. MAXIMUM STORAGE CAPACITYAT 923.50 =18]63 C.F. CODED NOTES O OONTRACTORSILLLLVERIFYTHEE XACILO TIONANDOEPTIOFTHE EXISTING 15' STORM SEWER PRIORTO INSTALLATION OF MANHIXE91. OB EXI SINGMNIHOLETOaEADJUSTMTOGRAOE. e __ t c �a9e 5 . sidew A IX 5 ° 06 k 0] @" NE g 9 650 G 3 2 e St T � P 9 Bfi, 12 5 AsPbolt 3� "s2 ,63 M, H. _� en a � C°n 38 Sfm Sek E-j s 3fi" w5158H \ Y _ Insh , VARIABLE WIDTH _ _ 3 E.. z stm. m n ._ L R E sr sz e.. H °ar r '+ w - se ° o _ (Flam LEGEND J0516p " TC 92385 Le 1 . 8 28 }6 E 9,6zo _ " �� ° ^J JO W 91fi 30 '_�� w ep_` EXISTING CONTOUR ,y yLy 9-- ° °� ° _» - - -- � ABPh °/t EXISTING STORM MANHOLE PROPOSEDSA N RARYMANHOLE l � b' pIT PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE FASTINGFIREHMRANT PsPFOIt s �Ex. Gzs Moin ° a as -mss ° \ \ `0 _ EXISTING CATGH WIN A PROP03EDFIREHYDRANT t0 Son. Sew, eon son 7121. San 9 °n OI AVERY ROAD RETAIL CENTER. svn. sew. \� _ \ ■ PROPOSED CATCH BASIN ® FXISTINO VALVE 00 SECTONI On 6_�� \ PROPOSED STORMWATER ® PROPOSED VALVE p !l 0 0 FISH M, PG. SS &81 `\ PONDINGAREAS 0 LOTP II LIMITSOFPROPOSEDCONCRETE I A e e PERMANENT PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT O1 PONDING PONDING STORAGE BTRUCNREA REQUIRED PROVIDED ELEVATION 44F.9 PROP. CATCH BASIN 10,63] C.F. 92321 NOTE PONDING REQUIREDAND PROVIDED 18 FOR THE 25 YEAR OPTICAL STORM. SHADED AREAS REPRESENT PONDING ATTHE MAXIMUM MRAGE ELEVATION OF 923.63. MAXIMUM STORAGE CAPACITYAT 923.50 =18]63 C.F. CODED NOTES O OONTRACTORSILLLLVERIFYTHEE XACILO TIONANDOEPTIOFTHE EXISTING 15' STORM SEWER PRIORTO INSTALLATION OF MANHIXE91. OB EXI SINGMNIHOLETOaEADJUSTMTOGRAOE. e __ t c �a9e 5 . sidew A IX 5 ° 06 k 0] @" NE g 9 650 G 3 2 e St T � P 9 Bfi, 12 5 AsPbolt 3� "s2 ,63 M, H. _� en a � C°n 38 Sfm Sek E-j s 3fi" w5158H \ Y _ Insh , VARIABLE WIDTH _ _ 3 E.. z stm. m n ._ L R E sr sz e.. H °ar r '+ w - se ° o _ (Flam LEGEND J0516p " TC 92385 Le 1 . 8 28 }6 E 9,6zo _ " �� ° ^J JO W 91fi 30 '_�� w ep_` EXISTING CONTOUR ,y yLy 9-- ° °� ° _» - - -- � ABPh °/t EXISTING STORM MANHOLE PROPOSEDSA N RARYMANHOLE l � b' pIT PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE FASTINGFIREHMRANT PsPFOIt s �Ex. Gzs Moin ° a as -mss ° \ \ `0 _ EXISTING CATGH WIN A PROP03EDFIREHYDRANT t0 Son. Sew, eon son 7121. San 9 °n OI AVERY ROAD RETAIL CENTER. svn. sew. \� _ \ ■ PROPOSED CATCH BASIN ® FXISTINO VALVE 00 SECTONI On 6_�� \ PROPOSED STORMWATER ® PROPOSED VALVE p !l 0 0 FISH M, PG. SS &81 `\ PONDINGAREAS 0 LOTP II LIMITSOFPROPOSEDCONCRETE I A e e PERMANENT PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT O1 PROP. MANHOLE OA O PROP. MANHOLE ® PROP. CATCH BASIN O] PROP. CATCH BASIN O9 PROP. CATCH BASIN O9 PROP. WATER QQATTY UNIT TC= 924 10e TG ::M 11 TO I: M.00 TG ::M61 TC= 922.511 TC =923.2 Ex 16' E -W 89209 101.0917.50WM'OUFIGEPLATE 10•E= 818.18 10 - NE ®919.12 10 N.G918.00 GONTECHCD9- 2025ORAPPROVFD PROP. 10 ®91710 10•W6917.60 10•Will 8•SEQ819.22 8 ®818.10 EQUAL. 1a•s.5191s50 O PROP. MANHOLE © PROP. CATCN BASIN OB PROP. CATION BASIN 10 PROP. CATION BASIN NOTE: QLAl10NS AND .30 4O BASIN TC = 922.5 M=9 23.50 SIZING OF WATER ITYUNR OFW A TER I 1M N 6 817 1U•N.19M .61 M=922.50 10•E = 818. 71 @91 9. 6 °NW ®9188 8'NE ®91A0 rN 8 WI LL BE ON FI NAL 1 P 8. ®817A5 10'==91].75 10• E =9 10• W • 918.81 ENGINEERING Pi FUNG Pi AN 10'w•91 T.85 W 7 I a � I > � I I a 8500 PERIMETER DRNE 27301156]-00 L — r _ 1 I I I 1 17 \ I � I I 1 to to tG I C:l w _ -f -lob 3 p lm E. 8615 POST ROAD AVE LOT 4 E OT 4 1928 ACRES L L L J L L_L_L_J H - - ° II • y —Y �I PROPOSEDSANRARYMANHOLE l 2 Son. MH I L � I:fll PROPOSED CATCH BASIN II 111 IS 924.97 ® ry E1/; ________ — � � ® PROPOSED VALVE 9 OSU EYE yl -- P. I NS U. SURGEONS SURGEOSTRD l r 80.95 POST RD. 2751111314-00 I II II 1 � 1.015ACRES IF II IIl E4E I L — Sto•m 5 eweretm M=BM.2 etm AVERY PLACE H Sim t m W 7 I a � I > � I I a 8500 PERIMETER DRNE 27301156]-00 L — r _ 1 I I I 1 17 \ I � I I 1 to to tG I C:l w _ -f -lob 3 p lm E. 8615 POST ROAD AVE LOT 4 E OT 4 1928 ACRES 1� e EX. PRIVATE DRIVE o �—�_� _ — v_ —__ _ 6_s sew. E E c Ilk __________ �__—_— __ — — —� - - - -- .MH. AN li I B E:c 6" sanlmry serNae = 0 AL i Inv, =E13 (Per Plan) / PROP. B•E. @913.11 SA I ll �`'� smrsru srw�srlr srw� �oP. e• 9 I O I I f II a s i � P i C 11 N N / rJ r '❑ m _ h N ° B1A RM $FOER � II OL P P. ELELT IC I� I X V x I �2 F.F. =924.Btl �I A A Mx S .. z'an. BAS METER E .�N 4 rC = 924.52 LOCATION EG s' PVC N_ 911 ITC BE REMOVED) ' TRAP Fm I \ Ex 6• PVC 5 910.60 60 PROP. $'PVC E. 910]0 / .. — >;0 � l� EN rPROP.4 FIRE BERVICE DOMESTI • I 1a SERVICE PROP. 158' 8 ®OAD16 C m I PROP. SAN. M.N. M.H. p N " Onx I — J SAN '. AN I TC =RMAW 0 ff '—'ETA sbPo / / PROP. 8•W. Q911A1 4 lam °emm _ry ` PROP. S'M ®911.51 ea10m�� _ — — — — —� m ve mr � w 0 � ✓>< °� — e x9 — c STAR 12" wotenlne e. uc ESE l/ SIE VALVE O�� •n e 2 W ? / _ as• �� '�_, A, it �_ _ SH `i��\ 'Sew. _ LE W1 — eme- hex. HVarovt �- , \ SERVICE I __ _ a PROP.G LLY DRILLED «» __ _ °6 °° _�\ Feanap \� All (TO TER BEb w _� --�- UNDERPE San, Sew, n �_ 6 n n ---_— —1 -- a AVERY ROAD CENTER L SECTION I \ 9 ® ® P.B.88, P .85 SST same 0 LoTB -- 0 \ A SCALE: 1" = 30' 0 30 60 90 GRAPHIC SCALE CODED NOTES O MISTING W SANITARY SEWER TO BE REMOVED. OB EXISTING WITARV MANHOLE TO BE REMOVED. © GONRUCTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION MID DEPTH OF EXISTING SEWER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. O INSTALL W x S• NNE. CONNECT TO EXISTING A SANITARY 3ERNCE. OE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER TO BE ABANDONED IN PLACE. O PROP. UNDERGROUND WATER QUALITY UNIT. FINAL SIZE AND MODEL UNIT TO BE SPECIFIED ON FINAL ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS. LEGEND ❑ EXISTING STORM MANHOLE FASTING SANITARY MANHOLE • PROPOSED STORM MAI �I PROPOSEDSANRARYMANHOLE Ek 2 Son. MH 0. FASTING FIRE HMRANT I:fll PROPOSED CATCH BASIN A PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT IS 924.97 ® ry E1/; ________ — � � ® PROPOSED VALVE 9 PVC E & 5 912.17 yl LIMITS OF PROPOSED CONCRETE P. I aq NI PROP. SAN. M.H. E4E -- Sto•m 5 eweretm M=BM.2 etm AVERY PLACE Sim t m JII I PROP . 8' S. 0 912A1 63 III Ili ____J —_ — Em 0" E. ® 913.91 Ex. fi' Som'torY Service / � 1� e EX. PRIVATE DRIVE o �—�_� _ — v_ —__ _ 6_s sew. E E c Ilk __________ �__—_— __ — — —� - - - -- .MH. AN li I B E:c 6" sanlmry serNae = 0 AL i Inv, =E13 (Per Plan) / PROP. B•E. @913.11 SA I ll �`'� smrsru srw�srlr srw� �oP. e• 9 I O I I f II a s i � P i C 11 N N / rJ r '❑ m _ h N ° B1A RM $FOER � II OL P P. ELELT IC I� I X V x I �2 F.F. =924.Btl �I A A Mx S .. z'an. BAS METER E .�N 4 rC = 924.52 LOCATION EG s' PVC N_ 911 ITC BE REMOVED) ' TRAP Fm I \ Ex 6• PVC 5 910.60 60 PROP. $'PVC E. 910]0 / .. — >;0 � l� EN rPROP.4 FIRE BERVICE DOMESTI • I 1a SERVICE PROP. 158' 8 ®OAD16 C m I PROP. SAN. M.N. M.H. p N " Onx I — J SAN '. AN I TC =RMAW 0 ff '—'ETA sbPo / / PROP. 8•W. Q911A1 4 lam °emm _ry ` PROP. S'M ®911.51 ea10m�� _ — — — — —� m ve mr � w 0 � ✓>< °� — e x9 — c STAR 12" wotenlne e. uc ESE l/ SIE VALVE O�� •n e 2 W ? / _ as• �� '�_, A, it �_ _ SH `i��\ 'Sew. _ LE W1 — eme- hex. HVarovt �- , \ SERVICE I __ _ a PROP.G LLY DRILLED «» __ _ °6 °° _�\ Feanap \� All (TO TER BEb w _� --�- UNDERPE San, Sew, n �_ 6 n n ---_— —1 -- a AVERY ROAD CENTER L SECTION I \ 9 ® ® P.B.88, P .85 SST same 0 LoTB -- 0 \ A SCALE: 1" = 30' 0 30 60 90 GRAPHIC SCALE CODED NOTES O MISTING W SANITARY SEWER TO BE REMOVED. OB EXISTING WITARV MANHOLE TO BE REMOVED. © GONRUCTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION MID DEPTH OF EXISTING SEWER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. O INSTALL W x S• NNE. CONNECT TO EXISTING A SANITARY 3ERNCE. OE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER TO BE ABANDONED IN PLACE. O PROP. UNDERGROUND WATER QUALITY UNIT. FINAL SIZE AND MODEL UNIT TO BE SPECIFIED ON FINAL ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS. LEGEND ❑ EXISTING STORM MANHOLE FASTING SANITARY MANHOLE • PROPOSED STORM MAI O PROPOSEDSANRARYMANHOLE ❑ EXISTING CATCH BASIN 0. FASTING FIRE HMRANT ■ PROPOSED CATCH BASIN A PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT ® EASTINO VALVE ® PROPOSED VALVE I yl LIMITS OF PROPOSED CONCRETE W AW® +II I yl P. I NI JEK MGMT. LTD. -- 8125 POST RD. 213 -01213500 AVERY PLACE � m JII I l 63 III Ili ____J � etm SIM AepFolt W AW® vuI W z W 3388 PERIMETER DRNE LLD _ 8800 PERIMETER DRNE � 2]331154]-00 I 3.c I—L � JI r 1 �_ lscaor — } 1 E 95 1 1 L•939T 1 81 92.89 3 1]•133fi'E I 1 � 1 t t 1 � R= 711.0 A= 183914' L•24.b'Ia N Ch=24. 5 2b°14'fii4Y E .. Easement 86 �6"I 7 B B6 PGS �` R l L -- -- , IIII� - A3 \ � -_gym=- pERIMETE °v_--- OSU EYE PRYSICWISAND SUROE RD. 80.95 POST RD. 2]51111314-00 I II II - 1.015ACRES I� I III JEK MOMT. I.M. -- H vuI W z W 3388 PERIMETER DRNE LLD _ 8800 PERIMETER DRNE � 2]331154]-00 I 3.c I—L � JI r 1 �_ lscaor — } 1 E 95 1 1 L•939T 1 81 92.89 3 1]•133fi'E I 1 � 1 t t 1 � R= 711.0 A= 183914' L•24.b'Ia N Ch=24. 5 2b°14'fii4Y E .. Easement 86 �6"I 7 B B6 PGS �` R =zz -- -- - - A3 \ � -_gym=- pERIMETE °v_--- - n19i ° JEK MOMT. I.M. -- 5125 POST RD. 273 -01213508 ---- AVERY PLACE !II __ ° a � I I - - - -J I l y II I I P.B.88, &87 ° P LOT] _a a - Bel 2T 11M0 5415 POST ROAD AVERY PLACE LOT 4 1928ACRES I Late Ma.5u EX. PRIVATE DRIVE • zs' B uildi ng - - __ —_ - -_ 15' Pavement Setboc� R =29 R =29 Setb 113P ES6B= 19 P ES 9' 24 93 S 9' S1' 93 9 - 01' — R -10' R•4'(7YP.) R =4' R =4' R =4' b l F ° R = R =19 R =9 R =8 fill a I p Q 4 9 19 ?L' 1 b 22 18' 1 7 / R=4' 7p II Y X rJ C R.29 R =19 I _' R.4 11 R =19 e , R =19 II X R1 X01 -i3 U II ^ R�200A0' A .. 6 R_4 ��. R -4 R.19 II a 1 58.04' f. R =19 N 8 ;2V E R =1V 1 A 2T + w 212.11' V 14 a Raq R.2011 I I f "` ° YYY Up all N 19 a l Q 1 n - el / � aa' a la a Setback � E g; — x 1 = 213fi54• C • •. - 8' 11/ l 8 98'WV5•W p A 9 A R :19 _ _ - zG P avement se m h - m j p p r y \,L PROP.W y — Ek. 32 E ement _ R 109.80' C 21'9594•p p P 86 PGS. a6 L8] L•3].BB' I B Ril E\ ----- NOB'OU'b'E ----- — — — Ex Cmm: ,I — — _ — — — — _1 _ - - - _ - -- _ __ Asabvlt Cop T -__ Ela �� Coder EOaa ra „,o � 0 a N SCALE: 1 = 30' 0 30 60 90 GRAPHIC SCALE R =zz -- -- - - L A=M' -_gym=- pERIMETE °v_--- - n19i ° ---- AVERY ROAD RETAIL CENTER. __ ° a SE9T10 °. P.B.88, &87 ° P LOT] _a a - Asabvlt Cop T -__ Ela �� Coder EOaa ra „,o � 0 a N SCALE: 1 = 30' 0 30 60 90 GRAPHIC SCALE = J ----- - - - - -- r - - -- 7------ -� - - -- , I I i = -- - - - - -- — II I I 1 �i II 'i Ii I I - -=/ I'ii II II Ii I'I _ L - - -- J I ' ----- - - - - -- p —__ N N M9 N 3 v ri O N N _ I J M ao 0 v 0 E 0 a N O N 04 N A 13 N O METAL INSULATED GROUND BUSHING (TYP.)� BASE COVER 1" GROUND AFTER VERTICAL ALIGNMENT SPARE L: CONDUIT, t INSTALL PVC -40 CAP 3" CLEAR (TYP FINISHED GRADE ANCHOR BOLTS (4) FURNISHED BY POLE MANUFACTURER GALVANIZED RIGID CONDUIT (TYP.) MALE PVC TO GRS CONDUIT ADAPTER (TYP.) �-- PVC CONDUIT (TYP.), QUANTITY do SIZE AS SHOWN ON PLANS CADWELD CONNECTION #4 SOFT DRAWN BARE COPPER GROUND CONDUCTOR 314 "x10' -0" COPPER CLAD GROUND ROD, INSTALL MINIMUM 6" BELOW PVC CONDUIT #3 HOOPED TIES ON 8" CENTERS 3LE WIDTH _ ��° SITE LIGHTING PLAN NoRn, 1 "= 30' -0" AVERY ROAD RETAIL CENTER SECTION 1 P.B. 86, PG. 86 & 87 LOT 2 I i 1/ u J ll/ II a u Ir 1 u � Q / p 4 4 L LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE NOTE: FIXTURE NUMBER, LETTER PREFIX INDICATES TYPE OF MOUNTING AS FOLLOWS: CH —CHAIN HUNG; CL— CEILING MOUNTED; S —STEM SUSPENDED; W —WALL MOUNTED; R— CEILING RECESSED; WR —WALL RECESSED; CV —COVE MOUNTED; UC —UNDER CABINET; RF —ROOF MOUNTED; P —POST; GR— GROUND MOUNTED; H— MOUNTED IN HOOD FIXTURE MANUFACTURER 2 LAMPS REMARKS DESIGNATION 350 WATT PULSE START METAL HALIDE FIXTURE, TYPE P -1 (HEAD) KIM II (1) 35OW PULSE START M.H. I i LU j IIII DOUBLE FUSING. COLOR TO BE DARK BRONZE 20 ROUND STEEL POLE WITH HAND —HOLE, FULL BASE P -1 VALMONT(POLE)/KIM(ARM) DS340- 400V200— P2— DB— HH— FBC —AB/ N / A COVER AND TENON ADAPTER. MOUNT POLE ON BASE (POLE/ ARM) CSS ARM—DB AS SHOWN ON THIS SHEET. COLOR TO BE DARK w LIP -1 KIM 1A/RA254 /35OPMH2O8/DB— P/HS/DF (1) 35OW PULSE START M.H. IV DISTRIBUTION (208V) WITH HOUSE SIDE SHIELD AND DOUBLE FUSING. COLOR TO BE DARK BRONZE r d� / I I P -2 VALMONT(POLE)/KIM(ARM) I i N/A I ( POLE / ARM) CSS ARM—DB AS SHOWN ON THIS SHEET. COLOR TO BE DARK I 350 WATT PULSE START METAL HALIDE FIXTURE, TYPE P -3 (HEAD) KIM 1A/RA254 /35OPMH2O8/OB —P/DF (1) 35OW PULSE START M.H. IV DISTRIBUTION (20" AND DOUBLE FUSING. COLOR V TO BE DARK BRONZE. I 20 ROUND STEEL POLE WITH HAND —HOLE, FULL BASE \, VALMONT(POLE)/KIM(ARM) DS340- 40OV200— P2— DB— HH— FBC —AB/ N/A COVER AND TENON ADAPTER. MOUNT POLE ON BASE ( POLE / ARM) CSS ARM—DB AS SHOWN ON THIS SHEET. COLOR TO BE DARK I� \ METAL INSULATED GROUND BUSHING (TYP.)� BASE COVER 1" GROUND AFTER VERTICAL ALIGNMENT SPARE L: CONDUIT, t INSTALL PVC -40 CAP 3" CLEAR (TYP FINISHED GRADE ANCHOR BOLTS (4) FURNISHED BY POLE MANUFACTURER GALVANIZED RIGID CONDUIT (TYP.) MALE PVC TO GRS CONDUIT ADAPTER (TYP.) �-- PVC CONDUIT (TYP.), QUANTITY do SIZE AS SHOWN ON PLANS CADWELD CONNECTION #4 SOFT DRAWN BARE COPPER GROUND CONDUCTOR 314 "x10' -0" COPPER CLAD GROUND ROD, INSTALL MINIMUM 6" BELOW PVC CONDUIT #3 HOOPED TIES ON 8" CENTERS 3LE WIDTH _ ��° SITE LIGHTING PLAN NoRn, 1 "= 30' -0" AVERY ROAD RETAIL CENTER SECTION 1 P.B. 86, PG. 86 & 87 LOT 2 I i 1/ u J ll/ II a u Ir 1 u � Q / p 4 4 L LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE NOTE: FIXTURE NUMBER, LETTER PREFIX INDICATES TYPE OF MOUNTING AS FOLLOWS: CH —CHAIN HUNG; CL— CEILING MOUNTED; S —STEM SUSPENDED; W —WALL MOUNTED; R— CEILING RECESSED; WR —WALL RECESSED; CV —COVE MOUNTED; UC —UNDER CABINET; RF —ROOF MOUNTED; P —POST; GR— GROUND MOUNTED; H— MOUNTED IN HOOD FIXTURE MANUFACTURER CATALOG NUMBER LAMPS REMARKS DESIGNATION 350 WATT PULSE START METAL HALIDE FIXTURE, TYPE P -1 (HEAD) KIM 1A/RA253 /35OPMH2O8/DB— P/HS/DF (1) 35OW PULSE START M.H. III DISTRIBUTION (208V) WITH HOUSE SIDE SHIELD AND DOUBLE FUSING. COLOR TO BE DARK BRONZE 20 ROUND STEEL POLE WITH HAND —HOLE, FULL BASE P -1 VALMONT(POLE)/KIM(ARM) DS340- 400V200— P2— DB— HH— FBC —AB/ N / A COVER AND TENON ADAPTER. MOUNT POLE ON BASE (POLE/ ARM) CSS ARM—DB AS SHOWN ON THIS SHEET. COLOR TO BE DARK 350 WATT PULSE START METAL HALIDE FIXTURE„ TYPE P -2 (HEAD) KIM 1A/RA254 /35OPMH2O8/DB— P/HS/DF (1) 35OW PULSE START M.H. IV DISTRIBUTION (208V) WITH HOUSE SIDE SHIELD AND DOUBLE FUSING. COLOR TO BE DARK BRONZE 20 ROUND STEEL POLE WITH HAND —HOLE, FULL BASE P -2 VALMONT(POLE)/KIM(ARM) DS340- 40OV200— P2— DB— HH— FBC —AB/ N/A COVER AND TENON ADAPTER. MOUNT POLE ON BASE ( POLE / ARM) CSS ARM—DB AS SHOWN ON THIS SHEET. COLOR TO BE DARK 350 WATT PULSE START METAL HALIDE FIXTURE, TYPE P -3 (HEAD) KIM 1A/RA254 /35OPMH2O8/OB —P/DF (1) 35OW PULSE START M.H. IV DISTRIBUTION (20" AND DOUBLE FUSING. COLOR TO BE DARK BRONZE. 20 ROUND STEEL POLE WITH HAND —HOLE, FULL BASE P -3 VALMONT(POLE)/KIM(ARM) DS340- 40OV200— P2— DB— HH— FBC —AB/ N/A COVER AND TENON ADAPTER. MOUNT POLE ON BASE ( POLE / ARM) CSS ARM—DB AS SHOWN ON THIS SHEET. COLOR TO BE DARK SIGNATURES PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL DATE DATE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SECRETARY \\ \\ \ \ \\ r b P I R % I �I N III \ \\ III % �I �I III IH p \I I� r " • o III III II II t - I I III III I I III III JII �I DATE PROPERTY OWNER DATE APPLICANT DATE EX. PRIVATE DRIVE P -2 \ d BOLT CIRCLE PER MANUFACTURER GROUND LUG FURNISHED WITH POLE #3 HOOPED TIES ON 12" CENTERS #5 VERTICAL BARS a] .:o N N N r O M V N O N N r I D M `o 0 a N O 04 N N 0 S s a = I. LI- ==i== =1.1_ F�__'�� - - -- i j 5 �i Ii �i 1 y II r� = � == - - - - -- = == 1 I V i � u I I a LI \� u I„ LL H III II �u : . III u I II IH I II 0 - - - -- -- I II IJ 1i ___ - - - - -- I I I I - \ 0.6 0.5 0 = !ffi 20.9 MFl R 20.5 P9HS 2 PUS II .0 9 .0 .9 O.T T6O 1.5 2.3 3: 5.1 S.fi .9 .5 2.9 1.5 0.4 0.8 M1 3.B .9 1.6 1.2 1.1 .3 2.0 3.4 3.' 1.8 1.3 .0 1.2 l.fi 2.5 5.0 �.1 2 35 2:3 1.9 .1 0.0 0.8 - d X 1,3 .9 .1 0.8 2.1 3.1 3. 3�3. 3.0 5 3.1 2.0 1.3. 1.1 3.fi .8 l.i 1.7 1 2.1 3.9 3. 2 0 .7 .7 1.B 2.5 3.7 3.8 3.8 9. 3 6 .2 A 1.1. 1.2 1 \ J .4 2.5 1.7 1.3 1.6 1.2 0.9 0.9 1.3 2.0 2_5 2.0 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.6 2.0 1.8 1.3 1.1 1.3 1:4 1.9 2.2 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.5 2.2 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.2 1.6 1.3 1.5 2.3 -. -� 2 4.3 2.5 1.9 2.1 1.5 1.o 0.9 1.2 1.7 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.7 1.4 1.9 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.6 1.6 2.2 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.4 1.9 1.7 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.9 1.9 1.0 1.7 1.6 1.9 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.6 2.6 3.3 4 // = 20.5 O 22 2.0 2. 16 1.0 0.9 1.2 1.i 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.8 1 i 1.5 1. 1�fi .5 .6 1.6 1.6 �6 :Q9 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.9 2'.0 1.7 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.0 0:§ 0.8 1. 1.3 1.3 2.5 4.9 �, ��� 1.6 1.6 1. .3 1.0 6 2.1 1.8 1.7 2.0 2_0 1.0 1.3 0.9 0.7 0.6 0 0.7 0.8 0. 0 9 .9 .0 1.0 1.0 0.9 .1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.9 .6 2_1 1.5 1.3 1. 0.9 0.7 0.i 0.8 1.0 1.3 .9 4.5 1 P3H9 / 1.3 1.7 1.7 1.2 1.o 1.1 1.7 2.9 2.3 2.7 3. 3 •+ a ° a 1. 3.0 3.2 1.7 1.3: 1.1 1.0 �.7 0.8 1.0 1.4 1.9 9.B 1.1 1.5 1.fi 1.3 1.1 1.2 l.fi 1.8 1.fi 335 ,•� °• " ° J .a " a . , .7 9.9 :9 x :6 1.3 1.2 1.1. 1.1 1.3 2.9 99 . " IMP I 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.9 1.7 1.4 1 1.2 1. 1.6 1.6 43 3_•' ' �°+ ° 5. 3S�/ 27 1.1 1.5 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.9 I 1 II I 0.7 0.9 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.9 .6 1.9 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.8 z. r - -- \• ° 4.8 4.2 .1 2 1.4 1.1 1.1 1.6 2.4 2.0 1.3 2 0 �� I I II I � . •" �� � ' � � I \� � _ % II / 1.5 1.9 1 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.4 2 2. 1.8 1.9 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.2 0.9 Al 2..5 2.3 1.7 2.1 .B 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.2 • ° 9 a � �'rl 11 I0.9 0.9 1.0 .0 0.7 Os i .2 4.2 2.0 2.9 2: 1.B .9 1.3 1.9 1.5 lA 1.6 18, I 1o_ i 11 0.9 I I A A \ = 28.3 2.5 1.6 2.0 1,9 1.7 1.5 15 1.8 1.6 1.7 2.. ° °�• o s 1.3 1.4 1.1 1.2 0.7 / 2.5 - .9 i.5 2 2 2.2 2. 1.5 )✓] 1.9 1.6 z.1 3.6 ' / I A � � �. � 1.0 1s 1s 1.4 1s o. P9 o / \\ \\ 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.2 1.9 :B 2.6 2.5 2.9 4.0 � I � - 20 �° I ' 6 1.2 1.6 1:9 1. 2.1 .4 / \� # \\ \� 1.8 3.0 1.9 2.1 2.2 1.8 15 2.3 a I _ _ -' _�_ -. ' • 1.6 2.2 2.1 .6 2.0 L. -. 2.4 2.9 .3 2.4 2.8 2. 1.8 1.0 1.4 1.9 1.3 1.6 15 2.8 h1R ° /�0.5 .8 4.0 3.0 1.9 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.2 .0 ", I 0.6 1.4 1.3 1.7 \ �\ 9HH 20.5 �• I I // // // // � � \ z.9 za 14 1.7 1s 13 12 � e � ' � 0.6 1.0 13 1.1 1.3 1. .. 1.5 �• •.� _ - 7 0.5 ,I lI 2 AAVA � • II I � � � � ��� SITE PHOTOMETRY PLAN ��- 1 e _ AVERY ROAD RETAIL CENTER SECTION 1 P . 86 PC, RR R 27 Luninaire Schedule LOT Symbol J Label Arrangement Total Lamp Lumens LJF J I Max/Min -�, I L J 33000 0.720 I i 3.58 4 P4H5 SINGLE 33000 0.720 KIM #1A/RA254 /350RNH /HS (1- 350PSMH) 4 P4 a LI \� u I„ LL H III II �u : . III u I II IH I II 0 - - - -- -- I II IJ 1i ___ - - - - -- I I I I - \ 0.6 0.5 0 = !ffi 20.9 MFl R 20.5 P9HS 2 PUS II .0 9 .0 .9 O.T T6O 1.5 2.3 3: 5.1 S.fi .9 .5 2.9 1.5 0.4 0.8 M1 3.B .9 1.6 1.2 1.1 .3 2.0 3.4 3.' 1.8 1.3 .0 1.2 l.fi 2.5 5.0 �.1 2 35 2:3 1.9 .1 0.0 0.8 - d X 1,3 .9 .1 0.8 2.1 3.1 3. 3�3. 3.0 5 3.1 2.0 1.3. 1.1 3.fi .8 l.i 1.7 1 2.1 3.9 3. 2 0 .7 .7 1.B 2.5 3.7 3.8 3.8 9. 3 6 .2 A 1.1. 1.2 1 \ J .4 2.5 1.7 1.3 1.6 1.2 0.9 0.9 1.3 2.0 2_5 2.0 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.6 2.0 1.8 1.3 1.1 1.3 1:4 1.9 2.2 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.5 2.2 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.2 1.6 1.3 1.5 2.3 -. -� 2 4.3 2.5 1.9 2.1 1.5 1.o 0.9 1.2 1.7 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.7 1.4 1.9 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.6 1.6 2.2 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.4 1.9 1.7 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.9 1.9 1.0 1.7 1.6 1.9 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.6 2.6 3.3 4 // = 20.5 O 22 2.0 2. 16 1.0 0.9 1.2 1.i 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.8 1 i 1.5 1. 1�fi .5 .6 1.6 1.6 �6 :Q9 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.9 2'.0 1.7 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.0 0:§ 0.8 1. 1.3 1.3 2.5 4.9 �, ��� 1.6 1.6 1. .3 1.0 6 2.1 1.8 1.7 2.0 2_0 1.0 1.3 0.9 0.7 0.6 0 0.7 0.8 0. 0 9 .9 .0 1.0 1.0 0.9 .1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.9 .6 2_1 1.5 1.3 1. 0.9 0.7 0.i 0.8 1.0 1.3 .9 4.5 1 P3H9 / 1.3 1.7 1.7 1.2 1.o 1.1 1.7 2.9 2.3 2.7 3. 3 •+ a ° a 1. 3.0 3.2 1.7 1.3: 1.1 1.0 �.7 0.8 1.0 1.4 1.9 9.B 1.1 1.5 1.fi 1.3 1.1 1.2 l.fi 1.8 1.fi 335 ,•� °• " ° J .a " a . , .7 9.9 :9 x :6 1.3 1.2 1.1. 1.1 1.3 2.9 99 . " IMP I 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.9 1.7 1.4 1 1.2 1. 1.6 1.6 43 3_•' ' �°+ ° 5. 3S�/ 27 1.1 1.5 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.9 I 1 II I 0.7 0.9 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.9 .6 1.9 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.8 z. r - -- \• ° 4.8 4.2 .1 2 1.4 1.1 1.1 1.6 2.4 2.0 1.3 2 0 �� I I II I � . •" �� � ' � � I \� � _ % II / 1.5 1.9 1 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.4 2 2. 1.8 1.9 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.2 0.9 Al 2..5 2.3 1.7 2.1 .B 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.2 • ° 9 a � �'rl 11 I0.9 0.9 1.0 .0 0.7 Os i .2 4.2 2.0 2.9 2: 1.B .9 1.3 1.9 1.5 lA 1.6 18, I 1o_ i 11 0.9 I I A A \ = 28.3 2.5 1.6 2.0 1,9 1.7 1.5 15 1.8 1.6 1.7 2.. ° °�• o s 1.3 1.4 1.1 1.2 0.7 / 2.5 - .9 i.5 2 2 2.2 2. 1.5 )✓] 1.9 1.6 z.1 3.6 ' / I A � � �. � 1.0 1s 1s 1.4 1s o. P9 o / \\ \\ 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.2 1.9 :B 2.6 2.5 2.9 4.0 � I � - 20 �° I ' 6 1.2 1.6 1:9 1. 2.1 .4 / \� # \\ \� 1.8 3.0 1.9 2.1 2.2 1.8 15 2.3 a I _ _ -' _�_ -. ' • 1.6 2.2 2.1 .6 2.0 L. -. 2.4 2.9 .3 2.4 2.8 2. 1.8 1.0 1.4 1.9 1.3 1.6 15 2.8 h1R ° /�0.5 .8 4.0 3.0 1.9 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.2 .0 ", I 0.6 1.4 1.3 1.7 \ �\ 9HH 20.5 �• I I // // // // � � \ z.9 za 14 1.7 1s 13 12 � e � ' � 0.6 1.0 13 1.1 1.3 1. .. 1.5 �• •.� _ - 7 0.5 ,I lI 2 AAVA � • II I � � � � ��� SITE PHOTOMETRY PLAN ��- 1 e _ AVERY ROAD RETAIL CENTER SECTION 1 P . 86 PC, RR R 27 Luninaire Schedule LOT Symbol J Label Arrangement Total Lamp Lumens LJF Description Max/Min 4 L J a LI \� u I„ LL H III II �u : . III u I II IH I II 0 - - - -- -- I II IJ 1i ___ - - - - -- I I I I - \ 0.6 0.5 0 = !ffi 20.9 MFl R 20.5 P9HS 2 PUS II .0 9 .0 .9 O.T T6O 1.5 2.3 3: 5.1 S.fi .9 .5 2.9 1.5 0.4 0.8 M1 3.B .9 1.6 1.2 1.1 .3 2.0 3.4 3.' 1.8 1.3 .0 1.2 l.fi 2.5 5.0 �.1 2 35 2:3 1.9 .1 0.0 0.8 - d X 1,3 .9 .1 0.8 2.1 3.1 3. 3�3. 3.0 5 3.1 2.0 1.3. 1.1 3.fi .8 l.i 1.7 1 2.1 3.9 3. 2 0 .7 .7 1.B 2.5 3.7 3.8 3.8 9. 3 6 .2 A 1.1. 1.2 1 \ J .4 2.5 1.7 1.3 1.6 1.2 0.9 0.9 1.3 2.0 2_5 2.0 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.6 2.0 1.8 1.3 1.1 1.3 1:4 1.9 2.2 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.5 2.2 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.2 1.6 1.3 1.5 2.3 -. -� 2 4.3 2.5 1.9 2.1 1.5 1.o 0.9 1.2 1.7 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.7 1.4 1.9 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.6 1.6 2.2 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.4 1.9 1.7 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.9 1.9 1.0 1.7 1.6 1.9 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.6 2.6 3.3 4 // = 20.5 O 22 2.0 2. 16 1.0 0.9 1.2 1.i 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.8 1 i 1.5 1. 1�fi .5 .6 1.6 1.6 �6 :Q9 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.9 2'.0 1.7 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.0 0:§ 0.8 1. 1.3 1.3 2.5 4.9 �, ��� 1.6 1.6 1. .3 1.0 6 2.1 1.8 1.7 2.0 2_0 1.0 1.3 0.9 0.7 0.6 0 0.7 0.8 0. 0 9 .9 .0 1.0 1.0 0.9 .1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.9 .6 2_1 1.5 1.3 1. 0.9 0.7 0.i 0.8 1.0 1.3 .9 4.5 1 P3H9 / 1.3 1.7 1.7 1.2 1.o 1.1 1.7 2.9 2.3 2.7 3. 3 •+ a ° a 1. 3.0 3.2 1.7 1.3: 1.1 1.0 �.7 0.8 1.0 1.4 1.9 9.B 1.1 1.5 1.fi 1.3 1.1 1.2 l.fi 1.8 1.fi 335 ,•� °• " ° J .a " a . , .7 9.9 :9 x :6 1.3 1.2 1.1. 1.1 1.3 2.9 99 . " IMP I 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.9 1.7 1.4 1 1.2 1. 1.6 1.6 43 3_•' ' �°+ ° 5. 3S�/ 27 1.1 1.5 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.9 I 1 II I 0.7 0.9 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.9 .6 1.9 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.8 z. r - -- \• ° 4.8 4.2 .1 2 1.4 1.1 1.1 1.6 2.4 2.0 1.3 2 0 �� I I II I � . •" �� � ' � � I \� � _ % II / 1.5 1.9 1 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.4 2 2. 1.8 1.9 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.2 0.9 Al 2..5 2.3 1.7 2.1 .B 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.2 • ° 9 a � �'rl 11 I0.9 0.9 1.0 .0 0.7 Os i .2 4.2 2.0 2.9 2: 1.B .9 1.3 1.9 1.5 lA 1.6 18, I 1o_ i 11 0.9 I I A A \ = 28.3 2.5 1.6 2.0 1,9 1.7 1.5 15 1.8 1.6 1.7 2.. ° °�• o s 1.3 1.4 1.1 1.2 0.7 / 2.5 - .9 i.5 2 2 2.2 2. 1.5 )✓] 1.9 1.6 z.1 3.6 ' / I A � � �. � 1.0 1s 1s 1.4 1s o. P9 o / \\ \\ 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.2 1.9 :B 2.6 2.5 2.9 4.0 � I � - 20 �° I ' 6 1.2 1.6 1:9 1. 2.1 .4 / \� # \\ \� 1.8 3.0 1.9 2.1 2.2 1.8 15 2.3 a I _ _ -' _�_ -. ' • 1.6 2.2 2.1 .6 2.0 L. -. 2.4 2.9 .3 2.4 2.8 2. 1.8 1.0 1.4 1.9 1.3 1.6 15 2.8 h1R ° /�0.5 .8 4.0 3.0 1.9 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.2 .0 ", I 0.6 1.4 1.3 1.7 \ �\ 9HH 20.5 �• I I // // // // � � \ z.9 za 14 1.7 1s 13 12 � e � ' � 0.6 1.0 13 1.1 1.3 1. .. 1.5 �• •.� _ - 7 0.5 ,I lI 2 AAVA � • II I � � � � ��� SITE PHOTOMETRY PLAN ��- 1 e _ AVERY ROAD RETAIL CENTER SECTION 1 P . 86 PC, RR R 27 Luninaire Schedule LOT Symbol Qty Label Arrangement Total Lamp Lumens LJF Description Max/Min 4 P3H5 SINGLE 33000 0.720 KIM #1A/RA253 /350FHH /HS (1- 350PSMH) 3.58 4 P4H5 SINGLE 33000 0.720 KIM #1A/RA254 /350RNH /HS (1- 350PSMH) 4 P4 SINGLE 33000 0.720 KIM #1A/RA254 /350PMH (1- 350PSMH) Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min PAVED AREA Illu=ance Fc 1.79 6.2 0.5 3.58 12.40 SIGNATURES ' LANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL DATE CANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SECRETARY DATE DATE PROPERTY OWNER DATE APPLICANT DATE Lo cn CD EX. P DRIV �� D r- Z N - 5' CP x - nen track ��� i 2 ' Ulding S i_ wti / t � r p ., Q �I � / c o / o m I 1 I o II I o �� 0 ,� @ (_ �� Np ° s Y cn Cn I I I I I Minn —� — I — — — —ice � j ;' F71 I� 4 ° ��� I f� o �I i t - - D Y - o p � IIII I Y _T1 j� 10 D ID Y I I � I I I G� Imo, III �ol CD CO OD -1 M 01 A W N �m CD x� v O -0 r- ^'r- o mod co 22 05 mr xr- �O m o n 1 z �w Y ' m m me I �v � 0 v �� -13 mm� z � ��� �� C: -V yo Z m� z <� wiz �� ��r n5 y5 � 77'�11 I I WZ ' P III W o� z=G) 00-1 0 -1 0 p 0 Z� z tn� � G" III U �� < m z z D im z0 zOD D 5 1 c 0) n' yy l'', IIII I�, I 0 nZ pG) O nm CD � ��O WG) Z= Top r z Dcn z coo W 0 �fn DD p0 v � r- v Ir M z c x rzEn n� D �O f I m� Vj � � -4 ill n� ° D y� AO UG) r cm y cDU� Ocn O �� "m D� 0 �y O O O�x zm z W z0 vz Z I II I K Mm (� m m ai v 0m Oz z x�l X cnz O m aopoo O mc '�� c� �C) �� I I I O O� 003 ;U vcn cx Cnnm vZ Z -40 ( I I z x F CO O D m n v < G) mD n CD v r m <m r-4 p m < �n N 0 �m 5r �D coo r Z z � 0 ° D Cl) �cn vm < i �� 0 O 1 I o cn0 �x cnr �m 0� I p m 'n - c D D 0 O m X X D C A 0 zOC 2 ? n� m D(� zm �p c m cn z -A M ca o c xx m� yp < D. I 0 v0 �< v � z-i v < n � Q v c m fn nW D m rD x< ; m cn D a I I I D c 121 n� v w r -�— s N c I - O x_ m cn � - I I m r � x z ao rt c - x. 8" z 0 m y -4 z m E ---- - - - - -- _ �an. II I j ll � I N :I I I I � � I p ,i � I � � � I � I Co -4 M � w N owoo 0 WD XD 0 7 ' 0 Cr'0X0Mww>_i cn 51! 0 I I _, i-n x0 C 0 m o� zM r- cg0 �Onmp�Cmmwx 0 - 0 z nOzD -z _113 - z PnpcnK �mmm m -z �� coi � �� n c)� m 0 0 � fm M TU"m- 2 z0 T L D mX cn0� Z �cn0 �R1— m yOn - mn m� DmD c�mC) DOccn 0MpO> mcnn zz0� �� cz m -n ZOO 00WZDZmz- 050 ' ��r�D 0 mG �T- cn vM0-A>M - mood M I D D -� 0-0 z� ��cn XWm 0�0 XOcn ��cn� 0 c5 zmc v _4 x m <O�z r"�x t ' cn_mx -0 r N ncF- m2 >X0. �D-1 zD� i I I I mzcnp 0 m� � O0� < ; D M r- -Vm U o� � I - n -v �� A _<Drm O�v Ill �zz v �� ow z0� mO D Zr nmOX x�� ���, I cn� m �m < z Dz m m \, �W� cn m� Zn �o ��vDXZ��� m� \ I -U 0> v 0 O �DOCn�- 5�0 mp_ r z D r -4 mDz z c°n0� c)z m� CA z°Orv��0ovomc �Om I - - - - - - - -- I I n� DO m� c� D�D� <�z 0 ;U M X� r 0 r �c0 y D� - - I DDm r`2 m rcn� � v - 0 D0 m�0 <z I m0 cm DOrCn2 <m mzz C G) z0 �� z DG)W -cnm0� D (7cn > �X �_ -4Z pz W� v 0 i z 9 O m M v D 00 C r Z< O x z v2 v� n m2r� Dc DK \ <I m�Z z O p� D� X�n7<_ m v>' v �n cn -0 zz zD ��� � m5 coC3 mm Zm� �� ; � ��� y ? mm v -4mE EnnDr D x z z� �o� o v vv, �� I r map W Ocp O v m x _ w� � � � m / I l wv 0 0 0 0 A W N i r O 03 o I Z Fn m� c c0nrno Cn h C/) G) 0� > mmm - q I X D� m °�� C _ D m �Z D �DT� n m N — ZC7r �r � 0 D Z D V m �� Dz n m XCn o Z �CJI -_ n z -n w in X U Z __ I D o O �°,� 0o 7'm D CO cn _ — _ fn - - -- - cm? o �;\\\ ? ° m y n v 9 23 E'm �L — _ _ 0 x -0 z c _- m Q = == _ v ----------- - - - - -- '`IV4 p , 922.18(Ex. -- _- - Cl) F pR _ Al o r - r - \ � -�_ -` — - - - - v ;0 Asphalt M v _ m Fn CD P erimeter Retai N m N bo o M ° Perimeter Road M o Dublin, Ohio 43017 la stud z The Daimler Group o Landscape Architecture Site Planning 1533 Lake Shore Drive 9240 Robinhood Circle Westerville Ohio 43082 Columbus Ohio 43204 614.530.5273 bking@ldastudios.com vmv.aaswdi°s.com � M N D D m m < N CD n C N I om Z z N m x z z DD 1 O U N z 1 m MI O 0 r m CA) N N n O co � 0) W N m 3 oaa0 M °� C m O G z Z�,D Z cna D Fn CD P erimeter Retai N m N bo o M ° Perimeter Road M o Dublin, Ohio 43017 la stud z The Daimler Group o Landscape Architecture Site Planning 1533 Lake Shore Drive 9240 Robinhood Circle Westerville Ohio 43082 Columbus Ohio 43204 614.530.5273 bking@ldastudios.com vmv.aaswdi°s.com � A O W N z r O v � DD W A � W � p N M N N � O co � 0) W N N p oaa0 rn��0 °� C m O G Z�,D cna D W mrnp r O O p o 0n � -4 v W � � � W � G) � n z �0 m � z � � � � cn 0 � D � Tim O y m m � Z m u �z D i n m � zzC)m mNm � Cl) co � z m v- 0 n m x� < � � W W C_ v� m� ? O O c !J p n D m W r r m m m z y 0 c c c mm n c z D D z r r c c O n m 0 M m 0 � z z n � � � X z z r r nn m� m m � m Co � D D �z� D 22 D � a CO ;U � °�z v c ;0 ;0 � ;0 � D m c � w ;U v m G) m v TT 0 � � c cn cn D� c z �� m c c I � m W y= cn ai � m D � �� O c cn n v� D� ;0 fn r� M ;U n m r m m v o � � � z D m o� D � z O W � Z G) N G1 m < z Oil D D 2 � c 3 � Ti Rj m . m�� m m y D 0 c7 �= m z r n O W z y z c y ci O Z� p z m � � D o Z c ;0 Fn Fn D m cn � W ° � m x z � (1) -1 D M m m n�� O� v� m O p z 4 y 0 D � � N m< m � v� z _ M ED � m O O Z_ z oS z � v z O m C_ cn m w r W U) � 2 cn - 0 D � 2 m (n --1 n n D� r�� C z D m 0 �� O v 2 � � O � m D r m D m G) �� z ��� � W 3 m � O� Z y � o m� m�� m � � � z � m T. m x� z z� m D Z z x D z rn O 2 � 0 � v Z C1) � M � z� m �� C_ z W Z � �� ai 0< m D m m m om m m Z vim+ _< m� n p <� �� �c)c�z �o�� � � �o �� r M n D D O� p � p o m y � n � z m p r " m Fn G) v z z z z z N � Z N N W M O O O O O� t'r O A A m N � r O O is in n n n n n m C7 CD W W C7 W O O O O O � O O W W O W W W W W W W W W Z M_ CA) � � ;U � in in a � � O O o� � m� m� z r O oaa0 rn��0 °� C m O G Z�,D cna D ���n mrnp r aDaDr O o 0n „ cncncn mm�< Tcnm z �0 � TI ?1 � cn cn ;K m Tim O y m Dr " m u �z i n vN0 � zzC)m mNm � � co � z m v- ?lmoo rr�m �conp �a mm � ' M c z ;U ;U m �° p o Cl nn m O rn �z� 22 a CO o °�z aiai � m v Cl) � v TT 0 � � M vv D o � � m z G) N m o Cn Perimeter Reta i t in Perimeter Road / M -U Dublin, Ohio 43017 M / la studios 1 The Daimler Group 0 Landscape Architecture Site Planning 1533 Lake Shore Drive 9240 Robinhood Circle Westerville Ohio 43082 Columbus Ohio 43204 814.530.5273 bking@ldastudios.com vmv.aaswdlos.com M D 1 = m m C N O n )Do Z � om� Z� L -1 r- m O N M :a Z m IV O O r M z N 1 M lw � � M m z D z � N m o Cn Perimeter Reta i t in Perimeter Road / M -U Dublin, Ohio 43017 M / la studios 1 The Daimler Group 0 Landscape Architecture Site Planning 1533 Lake Shore Drive 9240 Robinhood Circle Westerville Ohio 43082 Columbus Ohio 43204 814.530.5273 bking@ldastudios.com vmv.aaswdlos.com Y � A7 l B) BZ B�4 �BbJ 8.9 C G.I G.9 p pl pa4 pb p8 E £I � (F J tlt�_r I I I I 48 -3 71' -10• 71' -4 H'-4 71'-4 71' -10" 22' -4" 73' -Iv 2 3 -- - - - - I I I �� e I® i= II J BUILDING FLOOR PLAN II I II I II I III — — _ — IN — --------- II o I ' � ' _ _ _ - - - - -- -__ _ ____ _ - --------------- - ---------------- - -- a - - - - -� - - - _ - - -- ----- - - - - ___ _ _ � _ - �_ II II II o I I ---------- ---- -- - - - - - - - - �I--------- - - - - -I n � - '�------ - - - - -- - -�-- ---- - - - - -- 'iii - -- '�-- - --------------- - - - -II - ---------------- - -- a - - - - -� - - - n � � i � I ili ii I i I i i i I ii ill I �� 0 I ili ii I i I i i �i i I ii ill I ��� p� n O U W Ld o J W LL } Iii ii � �i II I, ili I I I I I �i I I it ill I �~ U ------------------------------ - - - - -- ---------------------------------- - - - - -� - --- - — - — - — - — - — - — -�I ---------- - -' —�-- -- - — - — - ---------------- i - — - — - — ------------- — - — - — - — - — - — - - — - — � ----- - - - - -- ' II I II DRAWING STATUS --- - - - - -- --------- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- _ l SMELL BUILDII - II -------- - -! —II 1� II 8,2012 ----- - - - - -- OCTOBER 08, 2012 NOVEMBER 19, 2012 14,488 Sr-. i i III II DECEMBER 13, 2012 ' FER"EM FIN104 FLOOR IM 0- I II I I I I I I I I. II III I. DRAWING TITLE �' I II � I II III FLOOR PLAN DRAWING NUMBER li I I I I �I �i I I ii ili I _ li it I I l i i �I I I ii ili I III 1 II III I I I I OUILDINrs I I II I I II I i III II III -- _- — -_ ° -- ------- - - - - -- - - -1 - - - - - - - - - - - - -I - - - - - - I l l -- - L I I I I I I I I I I I I 22' -4" 21 -m' 71 -4" IV -4' 71 -4 46 4 7Q' -I" I IL -' IL - � I Ij ®I - I SCALE: 3/32" = V-O" O 2 4 S 5 -0 (T7P.) ELEVATION TYPICAL RAILING DETAILS ALUII RAILINGS SHALL BE PROVIDED WHERE REQUIRIED 57 >n LIQUOR LICENSING. ALL ALU I RAILINGS SHALL BE PREFINISHED BLACK C SECTION — SCALE: 1 "= 1' .0" MOULDED ALUMMUM RAIL CAP (JULIUS BLUM %J28) o/ 3/4 T x 1 -1/2" W ALUMINUM RAIL 1/2" SQ. ALUMINUM — DECORATIVE TUBNG � m I `,Lhl 1 1/1" SQ. ALUMINUM POST 1/2" SQ. ALUMINUM TUBING 3/4" T x I" W ALUMINUM RAIL 3" UU. x 11/2" H. ALUMINUM BASE (JULIUS GLUM 0 169) I _ J CflRTT bffln flRCflITfCT 4400 fIC�RTti tl�Gtl JTPttT Sul T �fllO •43 f 6 4 262 2329 COPYRIGHT W12 NL ORAWINOB ARE AND 8H REMNN THE PROPERTY OF J CARTER BEAN ARCHITECT AND MAY NOT BE USED, DUPLICATED OR TERED 'M HOUTTHEWRITTENCONBENTOFTIEARCHR CT d' O N 0 I L 0 i L r- p� O U W Ld o J W LL } w O w W J Q � Ld 0 �~ U W omm r l ^ , M ^ UJ DRAWING STATUS PRELIMINARY SEPTEMBER 8,2012 ZONING OCTOBER 08, 2012 NOVEMBER 19, 2012 NOVEMBER28,2012 DECEMBER 13, 2012 DRAWING TITLE BUILDING FLOOR PLAN DRAWING NUMBER A -1.1 BEAN #00000.00 i iui Y F' _ ����� : i ii Y n i7 i111111 II11 II I 111111 =! 11111111 111111 - -- 111111 /mini Inns, �1= n t raw rr °P Perimeter The meter Retail Daimler G oup ka studios o.r,mm.r noun Dublin, Ohio 43017 MEIN LO KING\OKINW'S7 IROM PERIMETER J. CflRTfR MR Perimeter Retail l a< T I c i Dublin, Ohio 43017 D.•...h. 13, 20 12 Z r C. VIEW MOMNG Nowt EAS "f IRON.('ERIMI= J. CflRTfR MR Perimeter Retail I c< 1 I e i Dubhn, Ohio 43017 orzen,Mr U. `nl] T� ° ��''''�Fe`kC�,y� VIEW LOOKI NG SOUTHE..kST ]=ROM PAMNG J. CflRTtp bflflM Perimeter Retail e e< n 1 1 I C l D.M.. Ohio 43017 U...mFer 13 . `VII a is VIEW LOOKING sourHWLCr rRom PARKING J. CflRTfR M Perimeter Retail s e< n I I I C l D.M.. Ohio 43017 1)...mFer 13 . `V L' -0GTML VMW LOOKING SOL FHWG41 FROM D RKING J. CflRTfR bflfltl Perimeter Retail 1 a< I I[ 1 Dublin, Ohio 43017 1).....h, 13, 20 12 I ci of Dublin Land Use and Long Range Planning 5800 shier Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 phone 614.410.4600 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION fax 614.410.4747 www.dublinohiousa.gov RECORD OF ACTION DECEMBER 6, 2012 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 3. Riverside Planned Commerce District North, Subarea A3 — The Perimeter 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Perimeter Drive Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan Final Development Plan Proposal: To develop a vacant 2.9 -acre site with an approximately 14,000- square- Warren Fishman foot retail building, including restaurant spaces and associated patios, in Amy Kramb Subarea A3 of the Riverside Planned Commerce District North, located John Hardt on the north side of Perimeter Drive, between the intersections with Joseph Budde Avery- Muirfield Drive and Hospital Drive. Request: Review and recommendation of approval to City Council of a rezoning with preliminary development plan and review and approval of a final development plan under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050. Applicant: Daimler Group; represented by Paul Ghidotti. Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner R. Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675, chusak @dublin.oh.us MOTION #1: To recommend approval to City Council for this Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan application because it complies with the applicable review criteria and the existing and anticipated development standards, with four conditions: 1) That the development text be revised to limit the size of permitted restaurant use to 11,000 square feet (excluding outdoor dining patios) and that any additional restaurant square footage, exclusive of outdoor dining areas, require review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission; 2) That the development text be modified to allow patio furniture be used when the weather permits outside of the permitted dates, subject to approval by Planning; 3) That the development text be modified to limit sign lighting to the proposed band lighting; and 4) That the development text be revised to adhere to Code for sign colors including logos and that window signs be prohibited, excluding informational window signs. *Paul Ghidotti agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 7-0. RESULT: This Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan application was approved. RECORDED VOTES: Chris Amorose Groomes Yes Richard Taylor Yes Warren Fishman Yes Amy Kramb Yes John Hardt Yes Joseph Budde Yes Victoria Newell Yes Page 1 of 2 I ci of Dublin Land Use and Long Range Planning PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 5800 shier Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 phone 614.410.4600 RECORD OF ACTION fax 614.410.4747 www.dublinohlousa.gov DECEMBER 6, 2012 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 3. Riverside Planned Commerce District North, Subarea A3 — The Perimeter 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Perimeter Drive Rezoning/ Preliminary Development Plan Final Development Plan Proposal: To develop a vacant 2.9 -acre site with an approximately 14,000- square- Warren Fishman foot retail building, including restaurant spaces and associated patios, in Amy Kramb Subarea A3 of the Riverside Planned Commerce District North, located John Hardt on the north side of Perimeter Drive, between the intersections with Joseph Budde Avery- Muirfield Drive and Hospital Drive. Request: Review and recommendation of approval to City Council of a rezoning with preliminary development plan and review and approval of a final development plan under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050. Applicant: Daimler Group; represented by Paul Ghidotti. Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II. Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675, chusak @dublin.oh.us MOTION #2: To approved this Final Development Plan application because it complies with the applicable review criteria and the existing and anticipated development standards, with five conditions: 1) That the plans be revised to change the color of the standing seam metal roof from grey to a deep red and the metal awning color be changed to match the metal roof, subject to approval by Planning; 2) That the applicant provide the shared parking agreement with Champaign Bank with the building permit application; 3) That the elevations be revised to replace the gable returns with a more appropriate style; 4) That the site plan be revised to increase the size of the landscape island to one parking space to the west along the parking area to the north of the building; and 5) That the sea green junipers on the north side of the site be replaced with wintergem boxwood. *Paul Ghidotti, agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 7-0. RESULT: This Final Development Plan application was approved. RECORDED VOTES: Chris Amorose Groomes Yes Richard Taylor Yes Warren Fishman Yes Amy Kramb Yes John Hardt Yes Joseph Budde Yes Victoria Newell Yes STAFF CERTIFICATION 1�d:q 'D fi Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner II Page 2 of 2 Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 6 3. Riverside Planned Commerce District North, Subarea A3 —The Perimeter 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Perimeter Drive Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan Final Development Plan Ms. Amorose Groomes introduced this Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan /Final Development Plan which is a request to develop a vacant 2.9 -acre site with an approximately 14,800- square -foot retail building, including restaurant spaces and associated patios, in Subarea A3 of the Riverside Planned Commerce District North, located on the north side of Perimeter Drive, between the intersections with Avery- Muirfield Drive and Hospital Drive. She said this application will require two votes, the rezoning with preliminary development plan will forwarded to City Council for final approval and the Commission is the final authority on the final development plan. She swore in those intending to address the Commission on this case, including the applicant, Paul Ghidotti with the Daimler Group. Ms. Husak said this site is on the north side of Perimeter Drive and is a 2.9 acre parcel that is currently vacant. She described the site and adjacent developments. She said the proposal is for a commercial building that could accommodate restaurants spaces on either end and has some in -line tenant spaces that could accommodate a variety of uses as outlined in the development text. She said on either end are patio spaces proposed for the building, there is a large plaza area to the north which could accommodate additional seating if warranted depending on the uses in the spaces and parking centered to the north, east and west. She said as proposed the plan meets parking requirements of 97 spaces and provided is 125. She said the applicant is proposing administrative approval for additional patio spaces as long as furniture and any other amenities complement one another and are of typical high quality design that is seen within the City. Husak said there are sidewalks on all sides of the building that also connect to the south sidewalk along Perimeter Drive. The applicant has the option for shared parking with Champaign Bank and they are asking the applicant to do a more formal agreement. She said architecturally it is very similar to what was presented at the informal review with more traditional styling and elements, a lot of detailing on all sides of the building. She said they asked the applicant to break up the roof a little and do colored standing seam as opposed to a gray and the perspective drawings do address giving the standing seam with a more a rich dark burgundy red color. Carter Bean, project architect, showed a sample of the color. Ms. Husak said they have worked with the applicant on innovative sign ideas and with the architecture and the surroundings they are looking at a plaque type sign design with the lighting suggested by the Commission that was approved for the Bridge Pointe shopping center. She said each tenant would be allowed to have two wall signs; one the Perimeter Drive elevation and one the interior elevation to the north, a blade sign would also be allowed on the north side. She said the wall signs have different options for the rounding and edges of the sign to do a bit more interesting so that they are not all uniform and the blade signs providing different options and allowing for a depiction of what the business might be on the blade signs if the use or tenant warranted. Ms. Husak said they are recommending approval of the Preliminary Development Plan /Rezoning which represents the blue in the proposed development text that the applicant changed, which is the list of permitted uses, the patio and sign requirements which are different and unique to this Subarea. She said Planning also recommends approval of the Final Development Plan and all the details presented with the two conditions: 1) That the plans be revised to change the color of the standing seam metal roof from grey to a deep red and the metal awning color be changed to match the metal roof, subject to approval by Planning; and, 2) That the applicant provide the shared parking agreement with Champaign Bank with the building permit application. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 6 Paul Ghidotti, Daimler Group, said they have shown what the Commission had hoped to see from the Informal. He said present is Carter Bean, the project architect and Andrew Gardner, Bird & Bull, site engineer. He said staff has done a wonderful job presenting the application and they have worked with them for the last three months and hopefully everyone is excited about what they are developing. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there was anyone from the general public that would like to speak to this application. [There were none.] Ms. Kramb said that parking did not seem sufficient for unlimited restaurant space. Mr. Ghidotti said they could agree to a maximum square footage that is allocated to restaurants, but they struck out the limitation due to the Commission comments that they wanted to make sure they were able to attract the right restaurants. Mr. Hardt said when they saw the informal there was a quantity of restaurant discussed and it was expressed to give flexibility. Mr. Ghidotti said the original text limited no more than 11,000 square feet of restaurant and it was modified and expressed not to have the patio square footage limit the ability to have more square footage, they designed conceptually two patios on each end, established the max square footage of the patios of 2,000 square feet and he does not think they get to 2,000 square feet and their experience is typically restaurant outdoor space and indoor space is not typically occupied at the same time. He did not think it was intentional to take out the maximum square footage and if there is a desire to put back in the 11,000 square foot, he has no problem doing that and it was not an intentional change by them. Ms. Husak said staff's concern with the limitation of the square footage of restaurants is that any kind of place that would serve food or whether it was a ice cream or soda shop or something it would all be classified as a restaurant. Mr. Hardt said during the informal he heard that this site was originally intended for up to two free standing restaurants and it was too big of a site for one and it did not work for two and they are looking to have two restaurants and fill the space in between with retail and the retail was the question because the text did not allow retail at this end of the development and he said there is a practical limit to how big any one restaurant is going to be, but he envisioned the stuff in the middle to be retail. Ms. Amorose Groomes said this came from their discussion about the coffee shop and the ice cream shop and the pretzel shop and those can come in as conditional uses if that is the mix that works. Ms. Amorose Groomes said the best solution to head off a major parking issue is to use the conditional use mechanism to come back through when a Smoothie King wants to come in there and the Commission can look at the numbers. Ms. Kramb said if they put the 11,000 square feet back in, it could be any number of restaurants and if they wanted to go over the 11,000 they would have to come back and get approval for the smoothie shop. Mr. Fishman said there are different types of restaurants that have dancing which causes a different type of traffic that would change the character of the whole area and is concerned if it is one huge 14,000 square foot restaurant. Ms. Amorose Groomes said if they have two restaurants of similar size 5,500 square foot restaurant is not a monster. Mr. Fishman said he does not have a problem with two 5,500 square foot restaurants he is concerned if it becomes one large 11,000 square foot restaurant. Mr. Taylor said if there is a cap for the total amount of restaurant and a cap for one single restaurant. Mr. Ghidotti agreed that concept is fine, his preference is not to have to come back for a 1,200 square foot Smoothie King, that example of someone that size coming back for an amended final development plan and go through that process they will lose that tenant. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 6 Mr. Hardt said they are okay with 11,000 square foot of total restaurant, but if they want to go over that they have to get approval. Mr. Ghidotti agreed. Ms. Newell said she thought that was a good solution and the development is going to look very nice. Ms. Amorose Groomes said there are solutions that they can engage and they could talk through what might be most efficient for them depending upon who is coming. Ms. Kramb suggested revising the outdoor furniture text to reflect what the Commission had previously approved. Ms. Readier said they will add the condition to modify the language to make consistent with what was used. Ms. Kramb said the text regarding signs says the creativity with signage is encouraged, but, it is not because there is prescriptive language and the signs are going to look just like every other sign. She said her issue is with sign illumination, reading the text that says "wall signs shall be illuminated either by linear fluorescent track lighting fixture as depicted in table "D ". She wondered what the "or" option is. Mr. Ghidotti said they are trying to get away from the goose necks, so they did and the architecture of the building is limited so they provided for track lighting that will not be seen. Ms. Kramb said the second sentence is allowing signs to be internally illuminated or back lit. Mr. Ghidotti said the wall signs have to be lit and there are three options for lighting and wanted to allow internally illuminated or back lit signs. Mr. Ghidotti said the wall signs have to be lit, but there will not be lighting on the blade signs or projecting signs. Mr. Taylor said he would like to see a solution and make sure that the option for a more creative sign to be proposed to the Commission. Mr. Ghidotti said they tried to incorporate the concept for the projecting signs face they could have the good or service. Mr. Hardt said there is something in the text that refers to window signs and that no permanent windows signs are permitted, and in this general area they do not allow window signs at all. Ms. Husak said they do allow temporary window signs in the area and not specified in the text. Mr. Hardt said he would like this text or code regarding window signs to match the existing retail center. Mr. Hardt said the wrong code section is reference for color limitation allowing the logo to be counted as one color allowing three additional colors. Mr. Langworthy said the correct section is 158(C)(4) refers to color. Mr. Hardt said every other retail center within a mile of this project they have not allowed internally or back lit signs and given this building was to fall into line with the other buildings in the area and is not comfortable with the two alternative lighting methods. Ms. Amorose Groomes agreed it is not an appropriate location for internally illuminated signs. Mr. Taylor agreed. Mr. Budde said if they permitted this and this is the new Dublin and the new signage and new interests, why not and if the neighbors want to come and make some changes, that would be their prerogative and the Commission could help in creating this new look. Mr. Hardt said the new look was for the Bridge Street Corridor. Mr. Budde said except for the City did not create the Nationwide Children's multi -color logo. Ms. Amorose Groomes said this is a more sign style issue. Mr. Hardt said it is an illumination style. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 6 Ms. Newell said she agrees with Mr. Hardt and it should be kept consistent with what is in place with the surrounding businesses and is only fair. Mr. Fishman said he understood the "New Dublin" is strictly within the Bridge Street Corridor and they were concerned it would leak out of the corridor. Mr. Taylor said a minor technicality with installation, signs are mounted flush to wall and where they are on the synthetic stone it would be better to stand off an inch. Mr. Ghidotti agreed. Mr. Hardt said on the cut sheet submitted for the linear florescent tubes that the cold start ballast are an option and wanted to make sure they are used or they will flicker in the winter. Mr. Ghidotti agreed to order them as indicated. Ms. Amorose Groomes said as discussed they will limit the restaurant space in the text 11,000 square feet and to exceed that would require Commission approval, some patio furniture out of season storage language to be incorporated. Ms. Husak said she added conditions: 3) That the development text be revised to limit the size of permitted restaurant use to 11,000 square feet excluding the outdoor dining patios and that any additional restaurant square footage, exclusive of outdoor dining areas, require review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission; 4) That the development text be modified to allow patio furniture be used when the weather permits outside of the permitted dates, subject to Planning approval; She said she also summarized the sign discussion. Mr. Ghidotti said they have to use the illuminated tube that is referenced in the shell of the first part of section 6. He said they were trying to get away from the goose neck lighting and wanted to give people more flexibility and it will look more uniform and different from the area and will look nice and wanted to give creativity and allow for it. He said lighting and signage were the two areas they struggled with to take their comments and come back with what they thought the commission wanted to hear. Mr. Hardt said the scalloped sign panels, wood sign panels with goose neck lighting fixtures are getting tired and would like to see more creativity as general statement, but this site is the last puzzle piece of an already developed site, they should stay the course and finish this. Mr. Ghidotti said that is exactly what Ms. Husak had told them in the early discussions after September, while they want to be creative it is hard to make a lot of changes with everything around. He said it is an infill site. Ms. Kramb said they wanted to make sure they get the logo option. Mr. Ghidotti said they wanted to refer to both paragraphs. Ms. Kramb said she really disliked the barn doors on the elevation with the pedestrian glass door next to it and with the awnings over it and looks awkward. Ms. Kramb said the finials on the center section she does not care for and they are usually crooked and look small and never look right when built and would like to nix them. Mr. Taylor said there is bad precedent in the area for leaning finials. Mr. Taylor said on the site plan the new entrance coming in from the north there is a planting island and a one and a half parking space when someone pulls out of will be into the entrance and thought they should expand the landscape island to avoid an accident. Mr. Ghidotti said that is why the island was placed there to avoid potential problems, and agreed to switch that space to a van accessible handicap space to avoid any issues. Mr. Taylor said he would like to see the return on the gables something other than little dog house returns and the trim style is simple and can be something other than the tucked under piece and the Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 6 finials. Ms. Newell said she is not crazy about the finials, but since they are on the other buildings she felt they were appropriate. Mr. Taylor said they always look good on drawings, but thought they should be replaced with something more appropriate gable return for the style of the building. Ms. Newell said she is okay with the barn door detail because it is something newer and did not object to it. Mr. Taylor said he likes the barn door on the right. Ms. Kramb said it is the western side barn door and the other is a full door with a pedestrian door next to it. Mr. Bean said they are working on another project where they are doing a similar treatment and instead of the man door being on the side it is in the middle to appear that the barn doors a slid open and this is the gap between. Ms. Kramb said that sounds better. Ms. Amorose Groomes thought it is a cool option. Ms. Newell said she appreciated the sidewalks across the street frontage that connects and it was a response to her comment that it did not have much pedestrian access and appreciated the solution. Ms. Amorose Groomes said they have circled the entire property in sea green junipers and asked that they change the back side of the rear of the property and stop at the east and west entry points out with wintergem boxwood and appreciated that they have the plantings held back more than 5 feet off of the parking surface. Mr. Ghidotti said they had a different spec tree and staff suggested junipers as one of the options. Ms. Newell said that boxwood is not a hardy plant for snow piled on them and wanted to know if that was a concern. Ms. Amorose Groomes said in the area that is in the back location because the push of snow would go in the different direction and far enough away from the drive lane to be clear of the salt spray. Mr. Ghidotti said he is concerned with the location of the dumpster at the northwest corner and not sure if they should change the plant material north of the entry drives and if they could just change out the plantings at the north drive because of the screening is mirrored on both sides. Ms. Amorose Groomes agreed to make the change on the north property line. Motion #1 and Vote Mr. Taylor moved to recommend approval to City Council for this Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan application because it complies with the applicable review criteria and the existing and anticipated development standards, with four conditions: 1) That the development text be revised to limit the size of permitted restaurant use to 11,000 square feet (excluding outdoor dining patios) and that any additional restaurant square footage, exclusive of outdoor dining areas, require review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission; 2) That the development text be modified to allow patio furniture be used when the weather permits outside of the permitted dates, subject to approval by Planning; 3) That the development text be modified to limit sign lighting to the proposed band lighting; and 4) That the development text be revised to adhere to Code for sign colors including logos and that window signs be prohibited, excluding informational window signs. Mr. Ghidotti agreed to the above conditions. Mr. Fishman seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ms. Newell, yes; Mr. Budde, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 7 — 0.) Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 6 Motion #2 and Vote Mr. Taylor moved to approve this Final Development Plan application because it complies with the applicable review criteria and the existing and anticipated development standards, with five conditions: 1) That the plans be revised to change the color of the standing seam metal roof from grey to a deep red and the metal awning color be changed to match the metal roof, subject to approval by Planning; 2) That the applicant provide the shared parking agreement with Champaign Bank with the building permit application; 3) That the elevations be revised to replace the gable returns with a more appropriate style; 4) That the site plan be revised to increase the size of the landscape island to one parking space to the west along the parking area to the north of the building; and 5) That the sea green junipers on the north side of the site be replaced with wintergem boxwood. Mr. Ghidotti, agreed to the above conditions. Ms. Newell seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Fishman, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; Mr. Budde, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Newell, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 7 — 0.) Ms. Amorose Groomes said she wanted to thank the applicant's team for taking seriously their comments at the informal review and were able to get both the rezoning /preliminary development plan and the final development plan done, so hopefully it is a net gain. Mr. Ghidotti thanked the commission for their time and effort and apologized for the sloppiness in the text and that is not how they operate and he accepted responsibility for them and said it will not happen next time. City of Dublin City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Land Use and Long planning Report Range Planning 5800 Shier Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 Thursday, December 6, 2012 phone 614.410.4600 fax 614.410.4747 www. dublinohiousa.gov Riverside Planned Commerce District North Subareas A The Perimeter Case Summary Agenda Item 3 Case Number 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Site Location Perimeter Drive On the north side of Perimeter Drive, between the intersections with Avery- Muirfield Drive and Hospital Drive. Proposal To develop a vacant 2.9 -acre site with an approximately 14,500- square -foot retail building, including restaurant spaces and associated patios, in Subarea A of the Riverside Planned Commerce District North. Requests 1) Review and recommendation to City Council under the Planned District provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050 for a rezoning with preliminary development plan 2) Review and approval of a final development plan under the Planned District provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050. Owner /Applicant Daimler Group; represented by Paul Ghidotti. Case Manager Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner II (614) 410 -4675 1 chusak @dublin.oh.us Planning Recommendation In Planning's analysis the proposal complies with all applicable review criteria and the existing and anticipated development standards. Planning recommends: 1) Approval to City Council of the rezoning with preliminary development plan with no conditions. 2) Approval of the final development plan with 2 conditions. Conditions Final Development Plan 1) That the plans be revised to change the color of the standing seam metal roof from grey to a deep red and the metal awning color be changed to match the metal roof, subject to approval by Planning; and, 2) That the applicant provide the shared parking agreement with Champaign Bank with the building permit application. City of Dlblln I Canning and zoning commissim Case 12a73Z/POP /FP2PI me Perimeter Riverside Pm norm, seareas n2 Thursday, cerember 6, zmz 1 Page z of 14 12- oTezfPOP/FOP % �+ City Dublin Penning /Preuminarvoeveiopmedf Plan/ LandUseand Final Development Plan / Long Range Planning The Penmeter o. 300 600 Penmeterrzd City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 12- 073Z /PDP /FPDPI The Perimeter Riverside PCD North, Subareas A3 Thursday, December 6, 2012 1 Page 3 of 14 F acts Site Area 2.93 acres Zoning [ PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside North plan, Subarea A 3 ) Surrounding Zoning South: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Avery Square plan) containing the Avery Square shopping center. Site Features Development Context All Others: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside North plan) containing office, daycare and commercial uses, including the Shoppes at Avery restaurant and retail center. • Rectangular, vacant parcel lacking vegetation. • Access is provided by two private drives from Perimeter Drive. • Existing sidewalk located along Perimeter Drive. 24 acres at the northwest corner of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirfield Drive. Divided into three Subareas, with specific permitted uses, such as office, medical office, daycare, retail and restaurant, depending on the Subarea. The PCD has been under development for several years and currently includes the Shoppes at Avery shopping center, Huntington National Bank, Champaign Bank, the Primrose School daycare and medical office buildings. • The subject parcel is in Subarea A of the PCD Background Planning and Zoning Commission At their September 6, 2012 meeting, the Commission commented informally on this application for informal feedback for the potential development of a vacant 2.9 -acre site with an approximately 14,000 - square -foot retail building, including two 5,000- square -foot restaurant spaces and associated patios. The Commission generally agreed with the applicant's proposal and understood the challenges for the development of the site as originally zoned and the changes in surrounding conditions. The Commission appreciated the architectural concept for the building and encouraged the applicant to address signs in an innovative manner. The Commission has also approved numerous final development plans within this PCD for a variety of office and commercial uses. City Council • Ordinance 118 -03 approved Planned Commerce District on April 19, 2004. • Preliminary and Final Plats approved on August 2, 2004. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 12- 073Z /PDP /FPDPI The Perimeter Riverside PCD North, Subareas A3 Thursday, December 6, 2012 1 Page 4 of 14 Facts Community Plan Future Land Use The Community Plan's Future Land Use Map shows the site as General Commercial (6,500 — 8,700 SF per acre) and the current zoning allows restaurants and office but excludes retail uses. The Plan describes this land use classification as retail and commercial development that is heavily dependent upon the automobile with a mix of retail, restaurant and personal services. The plan also states this type of commercial development is outdated and should not be used in the future due to the reliance on the automobile. Land Use Principles Land Use Principle 3 and 4 of the Community Plan suggest places with integrated uses that are distinctive and sustainable, and contribute to the City's overall vitality. The Plan states it is important to provide some retail services on closer proximity to residential areas and an important amenity to the residents. The Plan also accents design considerations. Details Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Plan Overview Rezoning to a Planned Unit Development requires approval of a development text to serve as the zoning regulation for the development requirements noted; the Zoning Code covers all other requirements. The development text typically addresses permitted and conditional uses, setbacks, parking, landscaping, signs and architecture, among other subjects. The proposal is a request to rezone 2.9 acres from PCD (Planned Commerce District, Riverside PCD North, Subarea A to PUD (planned Unit Development District, Riverside PUD North, Subarea A modify this Subarea of the existing Planned District, essentially creating a new PUD with standards and regulations only applicable to for this Subarea. No changes are proposed to Subareas Al and A2. Development Text This development text modifies the permitted uses and sign standards for L- Su barea A3. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 12- 073Z /PDP /FPDPI The Perimeter Riverside PCD North, Subareas A3 Thursday, December 6, 2012 1 Page 5 of 14 Details Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Use The proposed development text for Subarea A continues to permit the uses in the SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District of the Zoning Code, which includes office and institutional uses, daycare centers, and banks. The text would also permit "casual and fine dining eating and drinking establishments with 'table' services." The text limitation of the maximum number and size of these establishments has been deleted and now allows general retail uses, but continues to prohibit drive -thru facilities or pick -up windows. The text also permits outdoor dining areas at a total of 2,000 square feet to be allotted to the various tenants to be approved administratively if the stipulated conditions are met. The text requires complementary amenities and furniture of black wrought iron design. A limitation to the seasonal use of the patios is included as well as a requirements to store the amenities out of view. Outdoor speakers are prohibited. Layout The proposal has two driveways from the shared internal drives that provide access from Perimeter Drive, and one driveway from a shared drive providing access from Post Road. The 14,488- square -foot building fronts Perimeter Drive with parking on all sides of the building except the south. A plaza area is indicated along the north side of the building. Each restaurant space shows a patio. Architecture The development text requires architecture that is traditional in look and feel with natural materials. Mass, scale and architectural details are regulated to create a more residential character, particularly for the non - office buildings. The proposed architecture closely complements the Shoppes at Avery building and appears to meet the requirements in the development text for non -office buildings. Materials include brick, stone, siding and metal roofing. Storefronts include residential style windows and lights. Parking The development text requires parking by the Zoning Code. As a "shopping center' the parking requirement is 1 space /150 square feet of building, or 97 spaces. The proposal has 126 parking spaces, which meets the shopping center requirements. The applicant has also indicated that the owner of the adjacent Champaign Bank will allow shared parking on evenings and weekends. Landscaping The text requires landscaping along Perimeter Drive to include a three and a half foot contoured, landscaped mound with street trees planted 50 feet on center within the right -of -way and within five feet of the right -of -way line. All other landscaping must meet Code. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 12- 073Z /PDP /FPDPI The Perimeter Riverside PCD North, Subareas A3 Thursday, December 6, 2012 1 Page 6 of 14 Details Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Signs The applicant has worked with Planning to address creatively the unique sign needs for this proposal. The proposed text permits flush mounted wall signs and projecting blade signs. Each tenant is allowed three signs, which is the same as permitted for the retail building in Subarea A One wall sign per tenant is permitted along the north elevation and one along the south elevation. The wall signs must be architecturally integrated. Each tenant may install a projecting sign along the north fagade. Permanent window signs are prohibited. • Wall Sign: The maximum height for all wall- mounted tenant sign panels is 24 inches and the maximum width is 120 inches. The maximum height for text /graphics is 16 inches and the maximum width for text /graphics is 96 inches. Other specifications include requires a one inch wide routered sign panel. The text includes graphics for the different permitted end shapes of the wall sign. • Projecting Sign: The maximum height for all wall- mounted projecting (blade) sign panels is 27 inches and the maximum width is 36 inches. Additional specifications include a required 1 inch wide routered perimeter and matte black finish bracket and hardware. Four shapes are permitted for the projecting (blade) signs which are included in a graphic. However, the shape may incorporate and include the logo of the business operating within the building or an iconic representation of the nature of the business or the primary good or service sold or provided to the public. The background color for all signs is included in the final development plan. Other background colors may be approved administratively. No more than four colors are permitted per sign with the background counting as one of the permitted colors. The selected color scheme of each tenant must be consistent for each of the tenants' signs. The text includes sign lighting standards and permits either linear fluorescent track lighting fixtures as depicted and described in the Table D. To the extent architecturally compatible and tastefully integrated, wall - mounted signage may be internally illuminated or backlit. Projecting (blade) signage shall not be separately illuminated from the building. Traffic Study Traffic analysis has been provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Analysis Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan 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. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 12- 073Z /PDP /FPDPI The Perimeter Riverside PCD North, Subareas A3 Thursday, December 6, 2012 1 Page 7 of 14 Analysis Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan 1) Consistency Criterion met: The proposed development text modifications address the with Dub /in unique needs of this Subarea and includes appropriate regulations for the Zoning Code site. _ 2) Conformance Criterion met: The Future Land Use Plan of the 2007 Community Plan with adopted identifies the land use for this site as Genera/ Commercial. This proposal Plans expands t uses permitted fo this site. 3) Advancement of Criterion met: The preliminary development plan encourages general welfare development as a cohesive and complementary development to the & orderly surrounding area. 12) Community benefit 13) Design and appearance 14) Development phasing 15) Adequacy of public services Criterion met: The proposal will provide additional areas for retail services near residential and commercial areas, giving the community more options. Criterion met: The proposed development plan encourages the use of high quality materials consistent with the previously approved development text and other developments in the area. Criterion met: This will be constructed in a single phase Criterion met: There are adequate services for the proposed uses. development 4) Effects on Criterion met: The proposed development fits well within the existing adjacent uses development pattern of this area. 5) Adequacy of Not applicable. open space for residential 6) Protection of Criterion met: The proposal includes the replacement of removed trees. natural features and resources 7) Adequate Criterion met: All required public infrastructure is in place. infrastructure 8) Traffic and Criterion met: The applicant provided traffic analysis, which accounts for pedestrian the proposed uses. safety 9) Coordination & Criterion met: The proposal provides for a coordinated and integrated integration of development consistent architectural and landscaping details. bui lding & site relationships 10) Development Criterion met: The proposed use meets lot coverage requirements, has layout and adequate parking and circulation. The layout is cohesive in relation to the intensity existing development. 11) Stormwater Criterion met: The applicant has provided the necessary information to management satisfy City requirements. 12) Community benefit 13) Design and appearance 14) Development phasing 15) Adequacy of public services Criterion met: The proposal will provide additional areas for retail services near residential and commercial areas, giving the community more options. Criterion met: The proposed development plan encourages the use of high quality materials consistent with the previously approved development text and other developments in the area. Criterion met: This will be constructed in a single phase Criterion met: There are adequate services for the proposed uses. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 12- 073Z /PDP /FPDPI The Perimeter Riverside PCD North, Subareas A3 Thursday, December 6, 2012 1 Page 8 of 14 Analysis Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan 16) Infrastructure contributions Criterion met: No public infrastructure contributions are required Recommendation Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Approval Based on Planning's analysis, this proposal complies with the rezoning /preliminary development plan criteria, provides the opportunity for additional retail options within the city and includes a cohesive campus develop Approval is recommended. Details Final Development Plan Proposal/ The proposed improvements include: 7 Development . 14,488- square -foot building, with 1,623 square feet of patios at either Details end of the building with a potential expansion area for the west patio • Plaza area in front (north side) and five -foot sidewalk to the south 125 parking spaces concentrated in the north of the site with two smaller pods in the east and west • Architecture with a residential character and rich materials and colors • Landscape pods, bike rack, and informal seating within the plaza area • Mounding and landscaping along the Perimeter Drive frontage • Site amenity details, including signs • Two driveways from the shared internal drives provide access from Perimeter Drive. An additional access point is located in the north of the site from a shared drive providing access from Post Road. Access and Access for this site was determined at the time of the original rezoning and Circulation the proposed plan uses the existing access points. Vehicular circulation through the site meets Code requirements. Washington Township Fire Department has access from the internal drives surrounding the site. Pedestrian circulation includes a five -foot wide sidewalk immediately along the south site of the building. Six -foot wide sidewalks connect to the public sidewalk alon Perimeter Drive. Parking The plan provides 125 spaces, which exceeds the Code requirement of 97' spaces. There were some concerns mentioned by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the informal review of this proposal regarding the parking impacts of popular restaurants. In response, the applicant has reached an arrangement with Champaign Bank to allow employee parking at the bank weekday nights after 6 p.m. and on weekends should parking prove to be insufficient. The applicant must provide this agreement with the building permit application_ City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 12- 073Z /PDP /FPDPI The Perimeter Riverside PCD North, Subareas A3 Thursday, December 6, 2012 1 Page 9 of 14 Details Final Development Plan Architecture The proposed architecture meets the development text requirements for traditional architecture with a residential character and natural materials. The applicant is proposing a warm -hued stone (Centurion, "California's for each of the end tenants. The stone wraps around three sides of these portions of the building. Brick (Glen -Gery, "Cambridge') in dark red is proposed for the central portion of the building. This portion of the building is prominent, particularly as viewed from the north driveway. A higher roof in this area could give this portion of the building additional relief. Other proposed building materials include fiber cement lap siding painted dark beige, and a board and batten cement fiber cement panel lab siding painted a dark brown color. Storefronts include a variety of Benjamin Moore colors including slate blue, dark green and burgundy. The majority of the roof includes dimensional asphalt shingles (GAF, "Weathered Wood') and the two lower roofs next to the central portion of the building include standing seam (DMI, "Weathered Zinc'). Given the long roof line of this building at essentially the same eave line, Planning prefers the applicant break the roof up by using a deep red color for the standing seam portions of the roof. It appears the applicant made this change in the perspective drawings but not on the materials list or elevations. Other architectural elements include wood trellises on the south elevations, metal and fabric awnings and storefront with a deep recess along the eastern portion of the west elevation. The east patio also includes a partial cover of wood columns and trim. Copper roof vents, decorative brick medallions, and brick soldier course accents create a high quality character for the proposed building. Landscaping The proposal meets the Code required landscaping as well as the text requirements for mounding and landscaping along Perimeter Drive. The plan includes large landscape islands in the parking lots and smaller pockets of p lantings in the plaza area in front of the buildin Signs The proposal does not include specific signs or locations as tenants have yet to commit to the building. The development text includes detailed sign requirements including a sign height limitation of 15 feet and provisions for the maximum size of sign panels and sign copy. Each tenant is allowed up to three signs (2 wall and 1 blade sign). The text also includes approved sign locations on the building in Table D. Creativity is encouraged for sign design. The text includes sign lighting standards and permits either linear fluorescent track lighting fixtures for which the applicant has provided a cut sheet. Internally or backlit copy is also permitted for any text on the wall sign panel. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 12- 073Z /PDP /FPDPI The Perimeter Riverside PCD North, Subareas A3 Thursday, December 6, 2012 1 Page 10 of 14 Details Final Development Plan Lighting The proposed plans meet the lighting requirements and proposed fixtures are consistent with the approved light fixtures for Subarea A Z . Stormwater Stormwater management for this Subarea will be handled similarly to the Management other areas of this development using parking lot ponding and controlled release at the one -year release rate to the existing pond along Avery- Muirfield Drive. Water quality will be provided by an underground unit prior to discharging to the private sewer. Utilities Existing water and sanitary sewer services are used for the construction of ,, the proposed building. 1 I f Analysis Process 1) Consistency with the pre liminary development plan. Condition 1 2) Traffic and pedestrian safety Condition 2 3) Adequate public services and open space 4) Protection of natural features and resources 5) Adequacy of lighting 6) Signs consistent with preliminary development plan Final Development Plan Section 153.050 of the Zoning Code identifies criteria for the review and approval for a final development plan (full text of criteria attached). Following is an analysis by Planning based on those criteria. Criterion met with condition: This proposal is consistent with the requirements of the proposed development text and preliminary development plan. The plans should be revised to change the color of the standing seam metal roof from grey to a deep red and change the metal awning color to match, subject to approval by Planning. Criterion met with condition: The plans provide for adequate safety and circulation for both pedestrians and vehicles. On -site walks are adequate sized to allow for parked vehicle overhang. Planning requests the applicant provide the shared parking agreement with Champaign Bank with the building permit application. Criterion met: The site has adequate public services. No open space dedication is required. Criterion met: The proposed plans indicate tree replacement in accordance with Code. Criterion met: The proposed lighting plan meets the requirements and the proposed fixtures are of a consistent design with Subarea A Criterion met: Any signs for tenants within this building will be required to adhere to the details in the development text. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 12- 073Z /PDP /FPDPI The Perimeter Riverside PCD North, Subareas A3 Thursday, December 6, 2012 1 Page 11 of 14 Analysis Final Development Plan ,7) Appropriate t o Criterion met: The landscape plan meets or exceeds Code and text landscaping to requirements. enhance, buffer, & soften the building and site. 8) Compliant Criterion met: Stormwater management for the site is accommodated in stormwater the stormwater management plan and will be finalized at the building management permit stage. 9) Allphases Not applicable. comply with the previous criteria. 10) Compliance Criterion met: The proposal complies with all other known applicable with other local, state, and federal laws and regulations. laws & regulations. Recommendation Final Development Plan Approval In Planning's analysis, this proposal complies with the proposed development text and preliminary development plan, the final development plan criteria and existing development in the area. Planning recommends approval of this request with two conditions. Condition 1) That the plans be revised to change the color of the standing seam metal roof from grey to a deep red and the metal awning color be changed to match the metal roof, subject to approval by Planning. 2) That the applicant provide the shared parking agreement with Champaign Bank with the building permit application. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 12- 073Z /PDP /FPDPI The Perimeter Riverside PCD North, Subareas A3 Thursday, December 6, 2012 1 Page 12 of 14 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; 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; City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 12- 073Z /PDP /FPDPI The Perimeter Riverside PCD North, Subareas A3 Thursday, December 6, 2012 1 Page 13 of 14 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. Review Criteria In accordance with Section 153.055(6) 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; City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 12- 073Z /PDP /FPDPI The Perimeter Riverside PCD North, Subareas A3 Thursday, December 6, 2012 1 Page 14 of 14 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. Proposed Site Plan L ------ ---- j 111111111U1111111 J--liIIIIIIIIU11111111 1I Patio Patio 1 7 1, P V Dr ive f N Subarea Map r Proposed Landscape Plan M.Im Rendered Site Plan P MOW, K i ra . .'✓ f � J p�rime�r Drive South Elevation Proposed Elevations North Elevation East Elevation West Elevation t Proposed Signs �. SA M, &ypical Wall Sign r ---------- $AMPLI ! TEXT 5AMPL TEX 1 IS" RA0 � J l _ ©Typical Blade Sign Elevation Perspective View Looking Southwest Perimeter Dr N Elevation Perspective View Looking Northwest ;J.0 Per J p j imeter Dr` N PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission -- December 6, 2012 I Subarea A - Post Road Related t"r. , I p s e , t r ri l ea , [ I i de fin,. an l » IOU-n :n r.r {}. n:; ...— t+pr ,, T-iF ... nfe n: rt A .+s E +J� �./ttt ��+_1 y•.. •J . �..u[ } a'•.tti .�I t v.i t.L ��e i IStii (� C,E .J'�., ."r li (�✓.i 171.1 •� t.1:.f E.I L :1 'r 5'it1 f6t { :.i s.i..�.... �'r.� r i_ i the Riverside Dublin PCD, three separate suba eas are established. Each of these subareas (referred to as subarea A , A2, and A3 is identified on the attached Exhibit A. Permitted Uses: The following uses shall be permitted within each of Subarea A,, A2, and A3, respectively: Subarea A a) Those uses listed in §153.026(A) -- Suburban Office and Institutional District - -of the Zoning Code. b) Financial service organizations and financial institutions (conditional use for drive -thru bank); provided that all such organizations and institutions shall be located only in Subarea A between Avery- Muirfield Drive and the access drive within Subarea A which lines up with the western access to Avery Square (the Kroger center) to the south of Subarea A (the "Demarcation Line "). The Demarcation Line is depicted on the attached Exhibit A. c) Daycare centers (including a preschool or any type of institution which provides education to toddlers and children up to the age of 13 years old). Subarea A� a) Those uses listed in §153.026(A) -- Suburban Office and Institutional District - -of the Zoning Code. b) Financial service organizations and financial institutions (conditional use for drive -thru bank; provided that any such drive -thru that might be contained within a structure located along Avery- Muirfield Drive shall be screened to the satisfaction of staff and consistent with the Master Plan (defined below)). c) Coffee shops, cafes, ice cream shops, bakeries, or casual or fine dining eating and drinking establishments, specialty retail stores, bookstores, florists, stationary stores, gift/novelty shops; or stores providing goods and services which support office buildings or occupants of office buildings (e.g. copy shops, office supply /equipment sales, delivery service providers, etc.) Subarea A2 shall contain no more than 11,000 square feet of area in total of those uses described in the preceding sentence. In addition, one eating or drinking establishment within the neighborhood retail center located within Subarea A2 will be permitted to incorporate an outdoor seating area, along the pond between the building and Avery- Muirfield Drive, as part of such establishment; provided that such seating 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Prelim nary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan 51 P a Q e The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission — December 6, 2012 area shall have a maximum square footage area no more than 15% of the interior space of such establishment. Subarea A 3 as revised through Ordinance 13 -XX Date a) Those uses listed in §153.026(A) -- suburban office and institutional district - -of the Zoning Code. b)b� - Casual and fine dining eating and drinking establishments.L retail stores, bookstores florists stationary stores gift/novelty shops: or stores providin oods and services which support office buildings or occupants of office buildings (e.g. copy shops, office supply /equipment sales, delivery service providers. etc.) or otherwise provide support retail services for nearby residential neighborhoods. provided those establishme + a ,,, Rn T1r at no time include a_drive -thru. with "t a b l e Ge eF bak "] +/Gaf6s - -p r�that -at" times shall thin Sl el- ..•.r�,� de: (i) FnOre 7O"CIl� r ' CI7T - .7� iff ,.J , t1 , . c) Outdoor Dining Areas with up to 2000 total sq. ft. of seating space within Subarea A -3 that can be allotted to the various tenants to be administratively approved by Land Use and Long Range Planning. Those outdoor dining areas shall employ_ complementary amenities (fences, tables, chairs, flower boxes) and must be of a black, wrought -iron design consistent with the patios which have been approved for the area. Outdoorspeakers are prohibited. All patio materials (e.g., tables chairs, etc.) must be removed from the patio area from November 15 to April 1. Such materials cannot be stored outside at the center. Outdoor Dining Areas shall not be required to provide additional parking spaces. Notwithstanding any of the uses listed above in any of Subareas A,, A or A none of the following uses shall be permitted anywhere within Subarea A at any time: (i) auto service; (ii) auto repair; (iii) gas station; (iv) tire store, (v) muffler or brake shop; (vi) car dealer or any other type of business which offers cars for sale or resale; (vii) car wash; or (viii) fast food restaurant (with or without a drive- through window). Furthermore, in the event any financial service organization or financial institution that is located along Avery- Muirfield Drive desires to change to a use other than that which is permitted under (a) -(c) of Subarea A,, above, that new use shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Commission. Density /Lot Coverage: The density of each site shall not exceed 10,000 sf /acre. In addition, the total maximum lot coverage for all of Subarea A shall be equal to or less than 65% for the overall development and no individual site shall have a lot coverage greater than 70 %. 12 073Z /PDP /FDP RF- zoning /Preliminary Devi lopmo- nt Plan! Final a( velopment Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive - - - a a PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission — December 6, 2012 Yard and Setback Requirements: v.1 It'f t:j +1, �i is i'.i`: i.i.D[ ;,i.•, C.'at: Ir;; i F -jO C= ..1.4. ;1tt3it E.ZtI Y iiC iI1�._.t �*.: .(VG for Subarea A along its Post Road frontage. In an effort to reallocate setbacks and associated green space areas to reflect the nature and character of how all of the neighboring uses have since been developed as commercial /institutional uses and to adequately reflect the transitional nature of 'Subarea A from those same surroundings, it is desirable to adjust and increase certain setbacks within Subarea A (see attached Table A). The main goal of this reallocation is to treat the Avery- Muirfield Drive frontage with special attention. As a result, a substantial parking and building setback shall be created along Avery- Muirfield Drive and within that setback a large pond with two fountains and a cascading waterfall shall be constructed to more appropriately reflect the gateway nature of Subarea A in a manner that is complimentary to its environs. With this reallocation of setbacks, the following setbacks for Post Road, Avery- Muirfield Drive, and Perimeter Drive are created: Building Setback Pavement Setback Avery- Muirfield Drive 85' 75' Perimeter Drive 40 20 Post Road (east) 100' 40' Post Road (west) 100' 70' b) Side yard setbacks shall be 15' for pavement and 25' for buildings. However, in order to promote prudent planning and to encourage the location (or relocation) of green space to more desirable areas, the planning commission may permit pavement setbacks (and rear yard pavement setbacks defined in (c), below) to be reduced to less than 15' (and even to a zero lot line situation wherein parking lots of adjoining properties would be shared). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the neighborhood retail center proposed at the northeast comer of Subarea A which is a single structure which is located in both Subarea Aland A2 shall be permitted to straddle the Subarea A, /A2 line. c) Subject to (b), above, rear yard setbacks shall be 25' for pavement and buildings. d) Total ground covered by all buildings shall not exceed 25% of the total lot area. Which is consistent with the current required setbpr4e home + hc „a,fi + ^nil .� ^ti+ ^f ,•, ^„ ^. ^..+ required. 2 Between Avery- Muirfield Drive and the Demarcati 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP 3 Between the Demarcation Line and the western b Rezoning /Preh(mnary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan P a q e The Pe Ime er Penme er Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission — December 6, 2012 Parking and Loading: r: � h e m �: _+ .+. rt r: •d r. t r. n: r L e n r. I d i n I f r I• n R r. a r.: 4 n. c � -t di , r €f t r { € €�• Du EVv. ,i s. •JI t• •JI (.7.It J�.. .E vC��� J• Code Chapter [153.200]. b) All sites within Subarea A shall comply with the City of Dublin exterior lighting guidelines and will utilize "shoe -box" light fixtures with pole heights not greater than 28 feet from the grade of the parking lot. Circulation: Circulation within Subarea A and access to and from the adjacent publicly- dedicated streets shall be provided for in accordance with the approved development plan for Subarea A set forth in the Master Plan (defined below). Subarea A shall have no direct access onto Avery- Muirfield Drive. Offsite Infrastructure: In order to promote improved traffic efficiency on Post Road, Avery- Muirrield Drive, and Perimeter Drive proximate to Subarea A and in accordance with the November 20, 2003 letter from the City of Dublin (attached Exhibit B), all of the following shall occur to the satisfaction of the City of Dublin: a) Right -of -Ways (i) An additional 15' of right -of -way shall be granted to Dublin along the west side of Avery- Muirfield Drive. (ii) An additional 10' of right -of -way shall be granted to Dublin along the north side of Perimeter Drive up to the point at which the existing right -of -way is 100'. b) Road /Infrastructure Improvements (1) Payment of the proportionate cost (as determined by the City of Dublin) for the improvements associated with the addition of an east bound left turn lane on Post Road (west of Avery- Muirfield Drive) which proportionate costs relate to additional traffic which will be generated by Subarea A as a result of the Post Road access. (ii) Payment of all costs associated with the addition of a left turn lane from Post Road into Subarea A at the single access point on Post Road. The applicant shall attempt to coordinate completion of these improvements with those required of the church property on the north side of Post Road. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan o The Perimeter 8 1 P a q e Perimeter Drn. i PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission — December 6, 2012 (iii) Payment of 25% of the cost associated with any future traffic controls installed at the third intersection on Perimeter Drive (west of Avery- Muirfield ..:r� n,( rr f'S }r..^ r• fa.rn. . ^: r: f •ct::., i., OarrBi :�vi such 1 .raf�ic vot :./I €s- A :rt , ,r Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall 'be contained and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence as required by the Dublin Code. Fences: Other than as required for any daycare center located shall be permitted on any site unless otherwise approved for screening service areas, mechanical units, etc. Storage and Equipment: within Subarea A,, no fences by staff or otherwise required a) No materials, supplies, equipment or products shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of a parcel outside a permitted structure. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings shall be screened from public view with materials harmonious with the building as required by the Dublin Code. Landscaping: a) Landscaping shall be according to the Dublin Landscape Code Chapter [153.130- 153.139]. In addition, landscaping treatment along Post Road shall be provided within the Post Road setback and shall include a grass mound with a mixture of ornamental, evergreen, and shade trees. The mound shall be contoured, natural, and undulating in appearance and shall be broken up into sections of varying lengths between 130' and 150' in length and with varying heights ranging from three and a half feet to six feet in height. Landscape plantings shall be in accordance with the Master Plan described in (c), below, and sample elevations are included as attached Exhibit C. b) In addition, landscaping along Perimeter Drive shall include a three and a half foot contoured, landscaped mound with street trees planted 50' on center within the right -of -way and planted within five feet of the right -of -way line. c) In order to appropriately transition the institutional and residential uses to the north of Subarea A with the fast food and strip center retail development to the south of Subarea A, Subarea A will incorporate a large pond (with an appearance similar to The Preserve at the southeast comer of Frantz Road and Tuttle Crossing Boulevard) fronting along Avery- Muirfield Drive with a higher reflective pond that will include a cascading water fall feature. This pond will be "well -fed" 12- 0732 /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ f n P a g e Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission — December 6, 2012 in the manner approved by the City of Dublin. In addition, the pond will contain fountains at the north and south ends along Avery- Muirfield. This frontage }rF.•a. �:r1F i.i rr:i rf_ fir: nr -, rte, � t•ini r, n.Fr:taenr�. .a rn.. tt . :. {t i,[t t.;. a �t :� `'.ri :a.[I 1.r; •a. (r•� v..:�v:f t. r �.{ {� :;j J ��.rt i.✓'iG I`•Ji moves from the residential development to the north south towards the SR33/161 interchange. This overall landscaping plan for Subarea A will be consistent with the Comprehensive Site Master Plan prepared by Faris Planning & Design and approved by the Planning Commission (the "Master Plan "). Traffic Calming: Along the private, internal, east -west street that runs parallel to Post Road and Perimeter Drive, traffic calming measures (e.g. textured pavement, raised tables, etc.) acceptable to the City of Dublin shall be installed to slow the movement of traffic at the intersection of the driveway that provides access from the Subarea A to Post Road. Architecture: Generally The architectural design of all buildings within Subarea A shall be traditional in look and feel and will be finished with natural materials. The particular architecture for all buildings within Subarea A that will contain uses other than those permitted in §153.026(A) (the "Non -Office Uses ") shall be consistent with, or complimentary to, the style of architecture of those submitted as "conceptual" with this application (i.e. the small neighborhood retail center and The Huntington Bank branch). The intent of the foregoing is that these commercial structures have a residential feel and flare similar in design and feel to the Perimeter Center development. The architectural design of all uses within Subarea A permitted under §153.026(A) (the "Office Uses ") shall be consistent with the office buildings proximate to Subarea A along Perimeter Drive and Post Road. In addition to the foregoing, the following guidelines shall be followed: Height 1) No Non - Office Uses shall have a height in excess of 28' as measured by the Dublin Code (i.e. for pitched or hipped roofs, such a measurement shall be made to the mean height of such roof). No Office Uses shall have a height in excess of 35' as measured by the Dublin Code (i.e. for pitched or hipped roofs, such a measurement shall be made to the mean height of such roof). Color Palette 1) Earth tones and muted /natural tones shall be required on all structures within Subarea A so as to be consistent with those earth tone and muted /natural colors of nearby structures. In addition, storefront colors for the neighborhood retail center shall be selected from a palette of colors approved by the planning 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan 01 P a g e The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission — December 6, 2012 commission as part of the development plan approval for that neighborhood center. Materials 1) Warm tone brick, stone or synthetic stone, cedar siding and trim, and engineered wood composite material (e.g. hardi -plank or smartside siding and trim). 2) Specifically for Non - Office Uses, windows shall be residential in character (where appropriate for the particular type of commercial use). Windows should include mullions and muntins to reduce large expanses of glass areas. However, "store- front" glass is acceptable and appropriate in service - oriented areas for Non - Office Uses. Roof 1) All buildings shall have a pitched or sloped roof (whether hipped or gabled). However, for Office Uses, this requirement may be satisfied by partial roofs, towers, or pagodas -- similar to that utilized at The Preserve. In addition and regardless of whether a building is an Office -Use or a Non - Office Use, each such roof may provide open areas to house and permit the functionality of mechanical and other typical roof top equipment. 2) All structures shall contain roofing material consisting of dimensional asphalt shingles, cedar shakes or shingles, or slate (whether synthetic or authentic slate), all of which shall be in a color and style deemed appropriate by the planning commission as compatible with the neighboring buildings. 3) The use of dormers, vertical vents, and other architectural treatments which interrupt vast expanses of roof are encouraged for roofs on Non - Office Use structures. Scale 1) All structures within Subarea A should be of a size and character complimentary with the existing nearby structures. 2) Structures should be designed to harmonize with the Master Plan. 3) Each Non -Office Use building must use articulated building elements, including, but not limited to porticoes, dormers, recesses, and other such elements to help break up the mass and bring each such building into a more residential character. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan 111 P a g e The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission — December 6, 2012 Wall Articulation /Fenestration t' Ir:rfrf {{ { } �. h p tt } p� ? ( 'r:r ,{i,.,. ca ^► 2 1it.6'•Jt t t [ •J�[ 1 t Iti j i 6 t� .., v{ l {;.•J 4 'J t .J d[ ;. i'v U U i I {< I l� 1:J t� . J•J, i" : { U"I t walls must be articulated with fenestration, pattern, or structural expression equally on all sides of each structure. 2) With the exception to 'enclosed service corridors, 'all buildings shall have the same degree of exterior finish on all sides. Other than for necessary service areas, blank facades on the "rear' of any building will not be permitted, however, articulating such facades with recesses, fenestration, fences, pilasters, etc. is encouraged. 3) The amount of fenestration should be balanced with the amount of solid facade. Signage and Graphics: All signs shall comply with the Dublin Sign Code -- [Section 153.150]. In the event of any conflict between the Dublin Sign Code and this text, this text shall control. a) Materials and Landscaping: 1) All monument signs with a base located within Subarea A shall have an appearance consistent with, or compatible to, that depicted on Table C attached hereto. 2) All monument signs shall have landscaping around the base of the sign as required by the Dublin Code. b) Dimensions of Sign: 1) Maximum area of sign face: 50 square feet per face, with a limit of no more than two faces per sign. 2) Area of sign base (if any) shall not exceed area of sign face. The base shall not be included in the overall area permitted for the sign face. 3) Maximum overall height: 8' -0" above top of adjacent street curb. Signs located on grass mounds shall maintain conformance to 8' -0" maximum height above top of adjacent curb. c) Sign Graphics: 1) Graphic identification shall be limited to the site user's name, logo, and street number. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter 12 1 P a g e Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission — December 6, 2012 2) The area of graphic images such as logos shall not exceed 20% of the sign face. 3) Street numbers shall be located in the lower comer of the sign face or base nearest the right -of -way. 4) The maximum - height of any letter or number shall tae 16 ". d) Quantity: No more than one ground sign shall be permitted on any one lot devoted to one specific use or user; except that for buildings or uses having frontage on two or more public rights -of -way, two ground signs are permitted. In the event any lot qualifies for two ground signs, those signs shall comply with the Dublin Sign Code and shall consist of no more than 66.67 square feet in the aggregate. e) Illumination: All monument signs shall be non - illuminated or feature intemally illuminated graphics or back -lit graphics. f) Setbacks: The setback for all signage shall be no less than eight feet from the right -of -way of any site consistent with the Dublin Code. g) Traffic /Directional: All traffic and directional signage shall conform to Section 153.152 of the Dublin Zoning Code. h) Sign Location: Other than approved as part of the neighborhood retail center as described below, no sign shall be painted or posted on the surface of any building, wall, or fence (i.e. all signage other than for the neighborhood retail center shall be monument signs). No wall murals shall be allowed. No roof signs shall be permitted, nor shall any sign extend higher than the building. i) Window Signage: Other than described below relating to the neighborhood retail center, no sign shall be applied to any windows for the purpose of outdoor or exterior advertising. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Fina+ Development Plan 13 P a e The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission — December 6, 2012 j) Neighborhood Retail Center: /l l of thet- fol"o,01 ter' CI d 1,.+ . d, ,_•{n •, re. �. rr.:n- r t ine y n. r t .r r: i 1f :i :li.. li_r it..�r�ll �'• Ji�ity- -, { c t.y -� :.t•- - rrrr to }^' r • - t • ' r C r J . „alt t i:�� nf .✓i.� J(�`:. �f tt �c. �s tip �•1 �i [.,, ti•- r�i�t]�J(tt•1 +��_t retail center that will be situated west of the' pond located along the west side of Avery- Muirfield Drive, the following signage criteria is established- 1) Each tenant store -front within the retail cer-Tter .shall only have ..the right to install wall signage consistent with that depicted in the attached Table B and only along the east and west elevations of the retail center. 2) All such signs shall not exceed a placement height of 15 feet. 3) Each tenant store front sign shall be limited to one wall sign and one projecting sign along the western elevation of the retail center and one wall sign only along the eastern elevation of the retail center. Such wall signs shall be in accordance with Table B. The color of the wall sign and the projecting sign for each user shall be the same. 4) The background color of wall signs and projecting signs shall be selected from a palette of trim colors approved by the planning commission as part of the development plan approval process. 5) For purposes of aiding the public with locating a particular use within this center, each user shall be allowed to apply temporary signage to the east elevation of the retail center consistent with the Dublin Signage Code. 6) In addition to the wall signs which may be located on the east and west sides of the retail center as described in 3, above, the occupant located at the north end of the retail center (i.e. Tenant 7) shall have the right to locate one monument sign along Avery- Muirfield Drive which identifies only that occupant provided that such monument sign complies with all of items (a) - (i), above, and provided further that that occupant (Tenant 7) is limited to a total amount of signage of no more than 66.67 square feet. That monument sign shall be located as noted on Table C. 7) No projection signage located along the west elevation of the retail center shall be illuminated. 8) Wall signs located along the east and west elevations of the retail center should be externally lit by "goose- neck" light fixtures. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan 14 P a e The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission — December 6, 2012 Signage and Graphics Applicable only to Subarea A3 (as revised as part of Ordinance 13 -XX, Date 2013 All of the following si_gnage standards shall apply to the neighborhood retail building on Perimeter Drive (located within Subarea A -3) as generally depicted on the attached Table D. A. Types of Signs. Permitted sign types include single- sided, flush, wall- mounted, tenant signs on the facades of the building and double - sided, wall - mounted, projecting "blade" signs on the north facade of the building. No permanent window signs of any type are permitted, B. Number and Location. All signs shall be architecturally integrated into the buildin facade generally in the location depicted on the attached Table D. Tenants occupying space within the building shall have the right to install one wall- mounted sign on the north building facade, one of the south building facade, and one projecting (blade) sign on the north building facade. C. Mounting Height. No sign shall be permitted to exceed 15' in height to the top of the sign measured from established grade. The proiecting (blade) signs on the north fa gad shall be a minimum of eight feet in height to the bottom of the sign from established grade. D. Design and Fabrication. Creativity with signage is encouraged. However, the following must be adhered to: 1. Wall- mounted Tenant Signs. a. Maximum Size. The maximum height for all wall-mounted tenant sign p anels shall be no more than 24" tall. The maximum width for all wall- mounted tenant sign panels shall be no more than 120 ". The maximum height_ for text/graphics within said wall- mounted sign panels shall be no more than 16 ". The maximum width for text/ ra hics within said wall- mounted sin Panels shall be no more than 96 ". b. Additional Specifications- i. Sin Panel = Single Faced 1.5" thick wood or high densit urethane with text/graphics routered +/ -1/2" deep into background and routered 1" wide perimeter detail. ii. Installation = Signs installed flush to wall with 5/16" Hilti _style expanding anchors. No mounting hardware shall be visible on sign face. 2. Approved Signage Shapes. The shape of the wall- mounted signs on the north and south facades of the building shall be generally in a rectangular shape and shall have matching ends containing one of the following shapes: 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezomn:, /Pr hmmary Development Plan/ F:nal Development Plan 15 1 P a g e The Penmet -r Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission — December 6, 2012 APPROVED END SHAPES FOR WALL - MOUNTED TENANT SIGNS a ,12 KAD 8 �RAD l� 8" MAX Z 7 711KAD w 14" 8" MAX ►N 2 %2 13 3 Wall- mounted Projecting (Blade) Signs. a. Maximum Size. The maximum height for all wall- mounted proiectina (blade) sign panels shall be no more than 27" The maximum width for all blade sign panels shall be no more than 36" b._ Additional Specifications: i. Sign Panel = Double -faced 2" thick wood or high density urethane with text/graphics routered t1/2" deep into background & routered 1" wide perimeter detail. ii. Hanging Bracket = _1 -1/2" x 1 -1/2° square steel tube and wall flange assembly with fabricated 1 ' aluminum scroll finial cap & synthetic ball. Bracket and hardware shall be painted in Matte Black finish. iii. Installation = Bracket installed perpendicular to wall w/ 3/8" Hilti stele expanding anchors. Signs shall be suspended beneath the bra_ ckets with '/2" eye bolts. C. ELL ectin Blade Si na a Sha es: The sha a of the p rojecting ( blade ) signage on the no_ rth faggde of the building shall be generally in one of the four shapes: 411 / ¢ 4" 18" D f 15" IZAm 1 4 () O 3G' — 36" APPROVED SHAPES FOR BLADE SIGNS Further, such proiecting (blade) si na a may incorporate and include the logo of the business operating within the building or an iconic representation of the nature of the business or the primary or service sold or provided to the p ublic by that business. 12- 0732 /PDP /FDP P a g e Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Penmeter PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT RIVERSIDE NORTH SUBAREA A THE PERIMETER As submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission — December 6, 2012 4. Lettering, Logos and Secondary Images a. Lettering. All sin letterinq is to be centered in relation to the height and width of the sign. The actual signage texthettering shall consist of surface mounted, raised lettering {as individual letters containing the name of the business operation) and shall be adhered to the wood sin board. The height and placement of all sign lettering must comply with the requirements specified in this text. b. Logos and Secondary_ Images are permitted in accordance with Code Section 153.158(C)(2). 5. Color. The back round color for all signs shall be in accordance with that approved as part of the final _development plan presented to the planning commission or as otherwise approved by the Planning Staff. As far as the number of colors on the sign, no more than four sign colors in total are permitted for each sign including the color of the background of the wood sign. The selected color scheme of each tenant must be consistent for each of the tenant's signs. 6. Sian Illumination. Wall- mounted sians shall be illuminated either by linear fluorescent track lighting fixtures as depicted and described in the Table D. To the extent architecturally- -compatible and _tastefully integrated wall- mounted signage may be internally illuminated or backlit. Projecting (blade) signage shall not be separately illuminated from the building. 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ final Development Plan 17 1 P a g e The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT 0 O r EXHIBIT A - - -- I W p f W= I i i . t l t t r •�t ii t 3' °• / . i,t •� •. •• i IZ CKI LLJ OeR W t� t 0- be 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Fina Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drove PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT EXHIBIT B November 20, 2003 Mr. Paul G. Ghidotti ..CITY OF DUBLIN The Daimler Group, Inc. _ 1533 Lake Shore Drive S80o %jer -Irkv Road Columbus, Ohio 43204 0&1k tl6ia 43016-1236 " we/t00:6t4-4104M 1E: The Fairway F= 614 - 1616506 03- 004 -COy1 web riPo. www. Alkah.us Dear Paul: Regarding the traffic questions that arose at our meeting on November 12, ?003, I emailed both your traffic consultant (Garry Wilcox) and ours (Doyle Clear) a listing of the items that needed to be addressed. I have received a response F om our consultant and have reviewed that information and the recorded plat that created part of your property. The following indicates the questions (as they were emailed) and our desired resolution (in italics): 1. The east bound left hand turn lane on Post Road onto Avery- Muirfield Drive is noted in the report to need 290 feet of stacking. The report says that the City provided this information. How much of this stacking is generated by the traffic from this 24 -acre site? We need to portion the cost of this improvement. I have not received a response from Traffic Engineering Services on this. 1 sent my email on Thuusday, November 13. 2. How much right -of -way (width and length) is needed to accommodate the turn lane in Item I? Additional right -of -way is not needed along the Post Road frontage of your property. 3. How long of a turn lane is needed on Post Road for the site access (if granted)? Since the Planning and Zoning Commission agreed to this access point last Thursday evening, this turn lane needs to be accommodated benveen the two driveways on the north side of Post Road for the church. Also the desi should be coordinated to accommodate the future required left hand turn lane into the church properry. 4. How much right -of -way is needed from this site along the Avery- Muirfield frontage? I believe we have to accommodate an additional through lane and an additional southbound right hand turn lane at Perimeter. Only a southbound right -hand turn lane at Perimeter Drive from Avery- 11duirf eld Drive is needed in the ultimate improvement of Avery- Muirfleld Drive and its intersection with Perimeter Drive. An additional 15-feet of right -of -way is needed along the Avery- 111Iui>fleld Drive frontage of your property. According to the recorded plat (a copy is attached for your reference), a 30 foot roadway easement already exists along this frontage. This needs to be reflected on your site plan. We could use this space to build the infrastructure that we need, but 1 am not comfortable with the TADocumeats%CoWoo3W3004Co&1 Traffic Leancr doc 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Fina Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT November 20, 2003 Mr. Paul Ghidotti RE: The Fairway 03 -004 -COM Page 2 of 2 long -term use of this easement. We would prefer to reduce the easement (for coverage over the existing bike path) and have actual right -of -way for the planned improvements. Also the landscaping in the northwest corner of this intersection will need to remain outside the visibility triangle for the ultimate intersection configuration. 5. How much right -of -way (width and length) is needed on Perimeter Drive at the intersection with Avery- Muirfield is needed to accommodate the future additional eastbound left turn lane? The enclosed recorded plat answers the question as to the increase of the right - of - way at the western end ofyour Perimeter Drive frontage. The right -of -way taperspom 100 -feet to 80 feet as it moves westward from the Livery- .Muirfreld Drive intersection. When Perimeter Drive was extended to the west in 2000, we acquired the 100 feet of right -of -way on the far western portion of your frontage. The adopted Thoroughfare Plan indicates that Perimeter Drive is to have 100 feet of right -of -way in this area Therefore, we need an additional 10 feet dedicated from the intersection with Avery- Muirfreld Drive westward to the point where the 100 feet of right -of -way exists. This will create 110 feet of right -of -way near the intersection with Avery Muirf�eld (that tapers as the existing right -of -way does) and 90 feet of right -of- way where only 80 feet exists today. 6. What portion of the traffic that will warrant the traffic signal at the Kroger Drive is generated from this site? Again, this is to portion the costs. Considering this signal will have four approaches to it, the logical distribution of the costs is: 50% by the City, 25% by you, 25% by the Avery Square owners. Also, as I stated at the meeting the approach within the right -of -way at this location will include the items that we need to facilitate the installation of the signal in the future. As indicated, the only outstanding item is ;rl. Once I have received a response from your consultant, we will review the information and respond accordingly. If you have any questions on these items, please contact us at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, �t Barbara A. Cox, P.E. Assistant Director of Engineering — Development Attachment Cc: Paul A. Hammersmith, P.E., Director of Engineering(City Engineer Kristin K Yorko, P.E., Civil Engineer Chad Gibson, AICP, Senior Planner Doyle Clear, Parsons Transportation Group T.M)ocumcn&.00k1L?003\03' 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Fmil Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT EXHIBIT C L L L D a L J _L 0 N [I W Q 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT tL J 0i N Yf L U u a r- C C C L C V) N ul W W CLI tol m W J w r_ z Cie w W w .. Q C'1O =zoo z in0:�E Q J N N N N ° '0 000 W o— V > > :3 aaQ W W O >.J L LU 1000 Q Q co o 00 N Yf L U u a r- C C C L C V) Oe W Q!� J z t o U W "' Q z 0 m i } cn ' z 0 U uj cn W U— U— LU J CL z < O Q W O W O r 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP O N W J U L) Rezon ng /Preliminary Development PI •n/ Fin Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Dr ve A .100' 1 I 1 .• Z Q n C� Z_ Z w w r� U w I V) Q w D 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP 0 N 11 w J U Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Fin Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive ------ -- �11 LU LU LU o PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT 0 0 O V D O �z N C E�� AI 1 , VE IN . ] yy►► Di � �►+Sj �.!• r , / Owl .1. a adQQ�a�, �;► b .O 0 N W J U nent Pan/ R al / 1 0 (� 1.G.. w � O Z Qz O :3 w0 p wt.-_ 2 O p cn L_ 0- �z N C E�� AI 1 , VE IN . ] yy►► Di � �►+Sj �.!• r , / Owl .1. a adQQ�a�, �;► b .O 0 N W J U nent Pan/ R al PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT U 0 Z 0 CV � � @ Z w , O w Z CY- O Of O U Z t-= LLI J a- J Q T✓ 0 v� ` Z LLI (3F > ? 1 - ! 00�-- W W F- L 00 Q LQ w - Q =;T (')QCV „0-,s 1,9 43, e Z 0 U. w z Z w U-1 V) W Q W 0 w J U 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT z O CL - U U O O ZNN c� Z @ W w 11J z �pz �� UW° cnwQ �Z� L@ z w N �- aZ ? D O i -- w w rrU) Q LLJ Q vi 0cv z O CL - i Z o U W 0 o C V � 3 �� Z W o ' o W C V) Q w I W Q 12 0732 /PDP /FDP 0 N I! w U Re. omng /Preliminary Development Plan/ Fin,,' Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT ovo� e x J <Q Q N -% t Q 1 yq 11 • D IF) � Lu U Y � a N ; `- w 1„1,1 W t U Q yq N U ii \7 ILN V Z J ZO W W OW � } 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP ani F I Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive a� ani F I Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT .Y - .I F- I I 1 I 1 , s I I us 1 I in 1 I w 1 WI 1 1 I I Z 1 1 a to f Q W t 1 I O I 1 °' I t "' A 3.. r 1 I 1 I _ I 1 I I - 1 1 a 1 1 I t W I , I , Q 1 , 1 , , I I 1 I I1 1 I — .O .L a .'. A. t I I i I , I , 1 l 1 i 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 , , 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 { I I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 I I , I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I , i i 1 I I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 , - - -� r a in r- ut ci I � I i y w t l� W M - a iu ut � Q E LL ® A J a i f w 0 -- ----T 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan Th Perimeter Perimeter Drr.e o Zw l °m ag 3 m St o :- _ N m n W pp Q � Q J 1 �l C e OC N � Q W A .Y - .I F- I I 1 I 1 , s I I us 1 I in 1 I w 1 WI 1 1 I I Z 1 1 a to f Q W t 1 I O I 1 °' I t "' A 3.. r 1 I 1 I _ I 1 I I - 1 1 a 1 1 I t W I , I , Q 1 , 1 , , I I 1 I I1 1 I — .O .L a .'. A. t I I i I , I , 1 l 1 i 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 , , 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 { I I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 I I , I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I , i i 1 I I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 , - - -� r a in r- ut ci I � I i y w t l� W M - a iu ut � Q E LL ® A J a i f w 0 -- ----T 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan Th Perimeter Perimeter Drr.e PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION MARCH 4, 2004 CITY OF DUBLIII— Division of Plauaing 5800 51 o-Rings Road Wn, Ohio 43016.1236 Phone/ft 6144104600 for 6144104747 Web Site: vrww.dubkoh us The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 1. Rezoning /Revised Composite Plan 03 -119Z— Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Location: 24.3 acres located at the northwest corner of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirfield Drive. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside Hospital plan). Request: A revision to the existing PCD composite plan under the provisions of Section 153.058. Proposed Use: A mixed -use development of office, bank, retail, restaurant, and daycare uses. Applicant: The Daimler Group Inc., c/o Paul Ghidotti, 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43204. Staff Contact: Carson C. Combs, AICP, Senior Planner. MOTION: To approve this rezoningtrevised composite plan application because the plans address concerns raised by the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 3, 2003, it generally complies with criteria set forth in Section 153.058(E) of the Dublin Zoning Code, and the rezoning will provide a quality development with necessary support services within the employment core of the City, with 12 conditions: 1) That Section B — Yard and Setback Requirements of the proposed text be revised to read: "Side yard setbacks shall be a—teal of 15' for pavement..." prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council; 2) That proposed sign standards for Tenant 7 of the Neighborhood Retail Center (Subarea Al) be revised to provide a total permitted sign area of no more than 66.67 square feet to comply with Code prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council, subject to staff approval; 3) That the timing for proposed off -site traffic improvements be coordinated with and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 4) That the proposed development comply with the City of Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines and that all sites utilize coordinated shoe box lighting no greater than 28 feet in height; Pagel of 2 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /P eliminary Development Plan /' -inal Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION ! MARCH 4, 2004 1. Rezoning/Revised Composite Plan 03 -119Z — Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A (Continued) 5) That fencing be utilized only for the purposes of screening service structures, mechanical units, etc. or required by State regulations, to the satisfaction of staff; 6) That cross - access agreements be provided within all portions of the proposed development, to the satisfaction of staff-, 7) That a full sign package to be brought back to the Commission for approval prior to the development plan stage; 8) That the same level of finishing be required on the east roof of the retail center that provides an appearance with residential character; 9) That concerns of pedestrian connectivity within this retail center and to the south be properly provided for residents to the north of Post Road; 10) That the text be revised to include no financial services in Subarea A3; 11) That text language regarding daycares be revised to include an age limit of 13 years or under; and 12) That the issues of odor control be brought back to the Commission for further consideration prior to the development plan stage. * Ben W. Hale, Jr., representing the applicant, agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 6 -0. RESULT: This rezoning/composite plan was approved. The rezoning application will be forwarded to City Council with a positive recommendation. The entire sign package will return to the Commission for review and approval at a later date. STAFF CERTIFICATION Frank A. Ciarochi Acting Planning Director ,t ti Page 2 of 2 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT - z 0 g r z G O Y 1 C 4 G z 0 M 0 z W-6e i I i t t i I pft on" r 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Prel minary De wlopment Plan/ Final Deve'opment Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT i 3 2d � � 1 � r .o lot iVo ]■ — i 7 5 I 4e l" Tmu -" —4 LIP CLWI m M DUMM ONO 43 017 T W D AIMLER GRO 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP R,zonmg /Pr ohn wary Development Plan/ Final DevOopment Plan 3 Th" Perimeter Perimeter Drive f� 4e l" Tmu -" P erER L m M DUMM ONO 43 017 T W D AIMLER GRO 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP R,zonmg /Pr ohn wary Development Plan/ Final DevOopment Plan Th" Perimeter Perimeter Drive 4e l" Tmu -" i ci of Dublin Land Use and long Ran Pl 500 Igs PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Dobkin, Oblo 43016.1236 614.410.4500 RECORD OF ACTION & K ktK 614.410.4747 ww% oublinat^xnssa gov SEPTEMBER 6 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 3. Riverside PCD North, Subarea A3 — The Perianeto Perimeter Drive 12- OSOINF informal Review Proposal: The potential development of a vacant 2.9 -acre site with an approximately 14,000- square -foot retail building including two 5,000 - square-foot restaurant spaces and associated patios In Subarea A3 of the Riverside Planned Commerce District North, The site is located on the north side of Perimeter Drive, between the intersections with Avery - Muirfield Drive and Hospital Drive. Request: Review and informal feedback. Applicant: Paul Ghidotti, Daimler. Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II. Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675, chusak@dublin.oh.us RESULT: The Commission commented informally on this application for Informal feedback for the potential development of a vacant 2.9 -acre site with an approximately 14,000 - square -foot retail building Including two 5,0D0- square-foot restaurant spaces and associated patios in Subarea A3 of the Riverside Planned Commerce District North. The site Is located on the north side of Perimeter Drive, between the Intersections with Avery- Muirfield Drive and Hospital Drive. The Commission generally agreed with the applicant's proposal and understood the challenges for the development of the site as originally zoned and the changes in surrounding conditions. The Commission appreciated the architectural concept for the building and encouraged the applicant to address signs innovatively. STAFF CERTIFICATION 1 � 4•4 0. jAl 4 Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner IT 12- 0732 /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Mb Ralftig and Za" ammusaw Sep�Ift 6, 2012 - MeeUM Mbufts Page 14 of 22 reason and Idid see any reason change the text at U. File r etailed that inlon made that it was ithe text so that ' Uld be there r and look good. M Fishman said he sUessed betandards oontl to be lowered for eonnarnic reasons. said no matter fabulous the it is less ive than shake. Id he would be in f r of changing the if In allowing like stand seam metal or thing very attr e. He said the shingle wou building a new look. Mr. McAllister said he would be Of favor of the composfte shake. Mr. Fis an said he would Yave to see the ite shake before he would willing to cha the text to allow it. a said originally, it as specified that -split shake shing were to be used t he did not know the second appl n was hand -split which last a lot I He said It thicker, better, required less main nice th , but it was expensive. He sa at in Dublin, y times for the go around on she roofs, a machine shake was sub He said they h to be very ca to lower standa in Dublin. He sa bviously, he was inst the proposed Ms. Amorose asked If this was second shake on this bufkding. Mr. McAllister firmed. He said a 1- maintalned shake usually lasted 30 Ms. Amorose asked the Ikant If it was his leasure to have mmission table tD allow him rt1w research of materials and back with other ns. Mr. McAlil asked if a eom to shake had been ously approved the Commission. Ms. Groomes coul of recollect one. Mr. CAllister requesbed tabling of this ml text amend7 amended final rr.Ta ylor tion. n and Vote moved to bie this minor text mendment and a al dev elopm t the request of the Icant. Mr. Fish seconded the m The vote was as lows: Ms. Kramb yes; Mr. Hardt, yes, s. Newell, yes; Mr. Groomes, yes; r. Fishman, yes; anfi Mr. Taylor, yes. (T led 7 — 0.) / huff A n Groomes sakiission needed�o waive any time y, Plan g would work wttvthe applicant. 3. Riverside PCD North, Subarea A3 — The Perimeter 12 -OSMNF plan plan application at yes; Ms. Am or if they re in a Perimeter Drive Informal Review Chris Amorose Groomes introduced the following application requesting a informal review and non- binding feedback for the potential development of a vacant 2.9 -acre site with an approximately 14,000 - square -foot retail building Including two 5,000 - square -foot restaurant spaces and associated patlos in Subarea A3 of the Riverside Planned Commerce District North. She said the site is located on the north side of Perimeter Drive, between the intersections with Avery- Muirfidd Drive and Hospital Drive. Claudia Husak presented this case. She explained that the next step the applicant would take after this Informal, non- binding discussion was a rezoning/prellminary development plan application. She said the 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Di velopment Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dton nwirdrig and zoning Conunsion September 5, 2012 — Meft Mutes Page 15 of 22 entire Riverside Planned Commerce District includes the Shoppes of Avery Square, Primrose Daycare, and several office buildings, which are mostly medPcad. She said this site is in the center of the PCD and the other vacant pieces within the District have approved finai development plans but have not been built yet. She said the Community Plan shows this site as the General Commercial category, which is also the category for the eastern portion of this development district as well as the Avery Square Shopping Center and the area of the Giant Eagle Shopping Center, Perimeter Shopping Center. Ms. Husak said the General Commercial District is described as including most of the existing and commercial development within the City and it is also described that a lot of the pattern of that development in the commercial district is very auto - oriented with uses such as retail, restaurants, personal services, offices, lodging and other auto - oriented services. Ms. Husak presented a subarea map and said that a majority of this site Is in Subarea At, which permits medical offices and regular offices, the Suburban Office and Institutional District in the Zoning Code. Ms. Husak said that Subarea A3 is the one that the applicant would be proposing to rezone to expand the uses permitted. She said currently permitted are all of the uses listed under the Permitted section in the SO, Suburban Office portion of the Zoning Code, which are mostly office uses and financial institutions. She said also permitted in the subarea currently are two restaurants limited to a total of 11,000 square feet. Ms. Husak said that there was a specific exclusion for drive -thru, drive -up windows. W. Husak presented the applicant's contemplated site plan, which centered around a 14,000- square-foot retail building which could accommodate two restaurants potentially at either end. She said the applicant is proposing to open up the text to allow general commercial uses in addition to the uses currently permitted to minor what the Matt the Miller's building is currently laid out as with a restaurant and different kinds of uses that would be permitted in a general commercial district. Ms. Husak said that would require a rezoning because those uses are not currently permitted within the current district. She reiterated that there was a cap on the square footage of restaurants permitted within this subarea. Ms. Husak said if the applicant wanted to have those uses opened up to allow all kinds of commercial uses, an ice cream or coffee shop or a use like that which could also be considered a restaurant could be envisioned. She said there is some limitation if the text Is kept at the 11,000 square-fleet of restaurant use. Ms. Husak said if the patios are included as this proposal suggests with the restaurant, they would be limited in size because quickly they add up to 500 square feet each and they are at 11,000 square feet, the current cap for the restaurants. So a discussion point outlined was should the patios be counted as part of the restaurant space number, or is there the opportunity to allow patios to be bigger and more of an amenity and more integrated and potentially not be counted as part of an overall square footage number. Ms. Husak said that they would look at something similar to what they have done at Giant Eagle and at the Kroger shopping centers with allowing a certain overall number of patio space by right with certain amenities that they have come to be used to in Dublin. Ms. Husak said that the applicant also provided some conceptual elevations of this type of building. She said that the development text currently requires non - office buildings to have a more residential feel and style. She said the applicant Is trying to mirror what has been the look of the Matt the Miller's building and other buildings that Daimler has developed around the area. Ms. Husak said that Planning suggests the following four general questions for the Commission to discuss: 1. Does this proposal warrant a change to the development text to allow retail uses in this Subarea? 2. Would the Commission allow additional restaurants to occupy the retail spaces, which would exceed the number of restaurants currently permitted? 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Oubbn Phwr" and 2lm" C,omr lwm SeMnber 6, 2012 — MleethV ilivii ties Page 16 of 22 3. Does the Commission support excluding patio spaces from the restaurant size limitation? 4. Is the Proposed architectural character appropriate for this development? Paul Ghidotti, 6840 McNeil Drive, Dublin, with the Daimler Group, said the architectural style of this building was similar to the Wine Bistro building, across from the Shoppes at Lane Avenue. He said they thought this architecture was a step above that of the Matt the Miller building. Mr. Ghidottl said that in 2003, they partnered with OMoHealth on this 24 -acre development and created a mix of uses, 100,000 square feet of office and medical office space. He said they had talked to five restaurants over the eight - year period since they started the development. He said every time a restaurant laid out a 5,000 to 7,000 square -foot restaurant, they found that after they met setback and parking requirements and did a freestanding budding, that they needed 2.2 to 2.4 acres which left them with an unusable parcel. He said the second problem they encountered was that they could not afford to build a budding that met the standard of the Shoppes at Avery. Mr. Ghidc;W said it was his impression most of the second and third generation space that had been developed at Avery Square and the Giant Eagle center have mostly been quick service restaurants which are wonderful to have, but they have not generated any real nice sit down restaurants other than Matt the Millers and The Rusty Bucket. He said two restaurants have come to them; one an Italian family - oriented pizza, Pasta restaurant and the tenant previously mentioned that was on Lane Avenue would like to have a Dublin location. Mr. Ghidotti said the reason why bringing the uses together and creating a single building make sense is that the type of uses he is talking about cannot afford a $2M restaurant, but they can afford to rent a restaurant like this. He said they can have complementary uses If they can make It one building when there is a restaurant that is only busy at night and a user that may be a neighborhood retail service that can provide a service that people will use during the day, but not necessarily at night. Mr. Ghidotti said they did not have anyone identified yet for what is known as a retail space or letters of intent signed for the restaurant spaces. Mr. Ghklottl asked for the Commissioners' questions and feedback so that they could come back with a plan that incorporated the things the Commissioners would like to see. Ms. Amorose Groomes Invited public comments with respect to this application. [There were none.] Amy Kramb said that she was in favor of the building being shared with two restaurants, but not in favor of the retail. She was also fine with adding patio space not being included and/or adjusting the amount of square footage allowed. She said she was okay with the character of the building, but she was tired of seeing the same thing repeatedly and would like to see something new. Ms. Kramb said asked N the Development Text would need to be changed to allow the restaurant use. Ms. Husak said the development text would not need to be changed to allow a restaurant at the site, but It would require a rezoning to add other non -office commercial uses. Ms. Kramb said that she would be willing to change the development text to allow a larger square footage or somehow not include the patio space In the square footage. Ms. Husak asked if Ms. Kramb would be in favor of allowing more than two restaurants. Ms. Kramb said no, due to the strained parking in the entire development. John Hardt said that he thought this was a good proposal and supported It. He said having dealt with similar sites in his profession, he could sympathize how a freestanding restaurant really did not work on this site, so the fundamental approach is okay to him. Mr. Hardt said that he was not concerned about the retail. He said the size they are talking about make them Mom and Pop shops. He said there was 100,000 square feet of retail across the street, so he did not see how this would markedly change the 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Re oning /Pr bmmary Development Plan/ Final Developm nt Plan The Pt nmeter Perimeter Drive Qubfin HwMV hied Zwn earn Wm September 6, 2012 — Mewing Mhtutes Page 17 of 22 character of the area. Mr. Hardt said that in the past, there had been some concern about retail creep going westward down Perimeter Drive, and he was sympathetic to that; but he was okay with this proposal for a couple of reasons. He said most of the land to the west is devdoped and he did not think there was a lot of opportunity for retail left. Mr. Hardt said that the Community Plan had this site being contemplated as being commercial and the offices to the west. He said N they leaned on the Community Plan, this was an appropriate use. Mr. Hardt said there were two different related issues and one was the quantity of restaurants and the other Is the area of the restaurants. He said he had the same concern as Ms. Kramb about the parking and he wanted to be convinced that they deal with that Mr. Hardt said he was willing to consider some latitude in temps of the square footage and if it was 11,500 square feet, it would allow potentially one of the small retail spaces to be a restaurant. He said he agreed with the comments in the Planning Report regarding the patios. He said he was in favor of the patios because he thought we needed more of them. Mr. Hardt said he would like to see them incorporated Into this project in a creative way. He said regarding the eastern restaurant, the entire area between the building and parking lot could be a patio, as long as it was done well, well appointed, and landscaped. He said he did not think it needed to be a 500- square -foot box. Mr. Hardt said architecturally, he agreed with Ms. Kramb about being over this style and tired of It. He said he would love to see some more interesting, creative things happen, but probably somewhere else. He said on this site, the die has been cast and this is what we have. He said he had no trouble matching the existing center because he thought it was the appropriate thing to do and he thought this building did a good job of it He said he was willing to look and consider more creative and different approaches to the signs, but on this site, it has been established and done and continuing it was fine with him in this case. Mr. Hardt said overall, this was a good proposal with some details left to be worked out. He said that as a resident of the nearby area, he would welcome the restaurants. Morla Newell agreed that the architecture has been established in the area and what had been presented looked nice and it matched. Ms. Newell said she could support having the restaurants in the area and agreed that if the outdoor patio spaces should be done well and creatively. She said she was concerned about retail in berms of how she perceived it would remain empty and add to the existing empty retail all around which was not a good thing. Ms. Newell said that there was not a means of getting foot traffic to the location, so more car traffic is being generated with it. She said the area gets very congested with traffic and she was concerned that more retail would add to the traffic. Joe Budde referred to the south elevation and asked If something similar would be on the other side. He asked about deliveries and trash pickup. Carter Bean, Carter Bean Architects, 4400 North High Street, explained that It was very similar to the existing shops where all the services cone and go through the front door. Mr. Budde suggested if they were building a 15,000 square -foot building, why not have three similarly sized restaurants if the retail created heartburn. Warren Fishman emphasized that he would want to see the restaurant be very successful, and the big problems are parking and access. He said the parking lot is packed by Matt the Miller's Sunday Brunch customers. He said parking for retail customers may be a potential problem due to large restaurant crowds. He said he was in favor of the proposal for the restaurants, but had mixed feelings about the retall use. He said he liked the architecture. He said he thought there might be a parking and access problem having a high volume restaurant along with Matt the Miller's. Richard Taylor said that as tong as the parking situation was remedied, he was not very concerned whether there were two or three restaurants, patios or not, and retail or not. He said it was interesting 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ F nal Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive OtM Rmning and Cummm septenda 6,2012 —Meech mules Page 18 d 22 that when uses are set in the development text to look back at aornersatlons that book place and try to figure out where that came from. He said that Mr. Ghidotti did a good job of explaining it to him. He said when there was nothing there, It made sense to Limit the uses, but Lucre is nowhere else for retail to go except here at this point. He said they were talking about small retail, so he had no problem with that. Mr. Taylor said the architecture of the building looked fine. He said he would rather retail centers that have a common architecture have it be this Irish town theme than storefront, glass, and. brick like is seen everywhere but Dublin. Mr. Taylor said they are facing the back of a retail center, so If the signs were neon, which are not allowed, they would not offend anybody because they would not face a residence or business. He said to get away from these scallop edged, colonial signs and do something interesting and creative. Mr. Taylor said not to just use channel letters. He said at Bridgepointe, they did not use gooseneck fixtures but used a light that lights more evenly and did not draw attention to the fixture so just the light Is seen. He said he saw on the plan four identical signs with different words on them. He suggested four signs that reflected the businesses inside. Mr. Taylor said regarding the trade -off on the building size and patios, as long as the total number of parking spaces is addressed, there should be the opportunity. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she did not have any heartburn about the retail. She said there was not one vacant retail spot near Piada. She said that we may be a little underserved on retail right through there. She said W It was the right retail, It is healthy, and she anticipated that this would experience that same sort of evolution. She said she did not have a problem with two restaurants or the size. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she would like to see shared parking agreements, so at least the employees could park somewhere else. She said that there were many medical office uses that would have significantly different peak hours than the applicants. Ms. Amorose Groomes said that the patio spaces are great, as long as they are treated well and their boundaries are treated well with landscape treatments and the proper fencing and all that creates an environment that is welcoming, rich, and warm. She said she was okay with architecture. Ms. Kramb added a caveat to her opposition to the retail use was tied to parking. She said the problem she saw with retail was that parking spaces are assigned to them only. She said the shared parking agreements were a great idea. She said this is definitely better than the other plaza and easier to access. Mr. Ghidotti agreed that the access for the Shoppes at Avery is awful on a private drive which was forced with the geometry to ensure that vehicles could only go in and not come out of there. He said this plan Is completely different because the access points are already established and there are two points on both the east and west side where the two private drives come out to Perimeter Drive. He said It will be much easier to get in and out of this site. He said that although there are complaints about the access, Matt the Miller's revenue has Increased double digits every year they have been open. Mr. Ghidotti said regarding concerns mentioned about retail, he said the complementary uses of the restaurants and the retails are such that they really could not do 15,000 square feet of restaurant on this site. He said It would not work from a parking standpoint. He said the reason why they can try to make this work with this kind of complementary use is about daytime, travel times, and parking is that it works better. He said if the Commission is comfortable with this, they will come back with a use that is this size and type of use. He said there are no walls between each of the spaces Inside, and if a restaurant needs 400 square feet or 5,200 square feet, they will make it work for their use. Ms. Newell clarified her comment in regards to the retail. She said her concern was that it was isolated and there is no encouragement for foot traffic. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Prehminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive DdAn Prarru" and Ztmltig Chan Septiffltber 6, 2012 — Meeth MlnAes Rage 19 of 22 Mr. Ghidotti said at the Shoppes at Avery for FedEx they established three dedicated parking spaces at their front door for drop offs. He said most retail tenants love that because their customers can park at their front door. He said that might be an option. Ms. Newell said she actually would like to see the retail foot traffic encouraged. She said when there are Interconnected walking paths from one location to the other and It is a pleasant transition, people who go to restaurants want to wander before or after dinner or while they are waiting for tables. Ms. Amorose Groomes said there was nothing that required a vote and she concluded the discussion. She thanked Mr. Ghidotti and said the Commission looked forward to great things. 4. Mkwesb wn Auto Group PUD — MAG Audi 12- 057INF Ms. Am Groomes for architectural :(311a tp campus. She dial Husak presenter and Mint portion at the meeting, the archibedure red this application is to a dealership f site is located on dv 5875 Venture Drive informal Review requesting an Inf I review and non- kV the Audi franchise the Midwestern A Group south sloe of Vent Drive, north of US3 /S11161. is case. She said the Commission m the MAG cam t rroorporabe the Commission req that the Audi bk of concerns reoa the form of the I the development or con informal review feedback campus. She sal a formal aoolkation m an application r nt' for the idi Ikding as a free -sta ng building ng come back for a r review of riding, the materials not meeting as a first step, the pplicant requests an amended final lopment plan. jen k that the MAG cam incorporates ap ately 25 acres. She ted the site tss n previously review and said the buildin footprint in the ken of the site remains e before. She saki service reception a has been moved htly to the west an the nt of the bullring tD east has n size a Ifttde. Ms. H k saki architectural ,the s increased the h ht of the butkiing to mmodabe a story, mainly in service area with offices a the showroom, to US 33 is a lot h .She said while iously, ng was mainly gla ,the applkant has rated metal and ent fiberboard to building s. She said gl is primarily abng front elevation and metal parrel with honeycomb verlay has applied In a manner create angles and es which was som ing that the ion honed in as being prevalent the MAG campus. Ms. Husak said w the building is still modular in its fo the application of metal material intended to mirror the style is of MAG. Ms. Husak ted a sample of proposed metal pa�with a honeycomb ttem overlay. Ms. Husak said at Planning had co ns about using the/Clear gla /throlt, Hine to screen mechanical u She presented an tion showinr metal Quid look. She said the elevation , a dotted line Ind a window wheal baccut out so that would only the honeycomb p n over It so thuld set , but It would be covered. presented pens es showing the bull s from gles. Ms. H k said the discussi points provided a whether or not nt has add the Corn scion °s comments a concerns from the t meeting with elt of the but ing or the ma rims of the buikdtng. Ks. Husak said the development text m that faces US 33, modification to alkA agOicant has prop) plifications; as Identt Proposed to be a an additional wall ! Ktwo signs for the by Planning. She p only without an In the subarea beiM )yfld lng. She said rd the wall sign on letters or copy wt se the subarea wag bo 0 signs require south elevation requires a text limited to two wall 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive n..r� RECORD F �PRR05 n,r Hetd � � � t be non , � a ty0 - final leaving this n can Mayor Chin nld- r invited testimony. asked for cierif ca of the phrase, • Are these composed of who do not to meet certain standards? Ms. darifted that rem no tryouts. Mr. asked If the City �'� ncurred in these programs. Ms. stated that Mr, r added that he Interested in the ,'b educate, youtin, in metal values." . there is not to address the In tiis forum. f YO F ked nd asked fi ti>ene ld motion from the mend tits t as fdlonts: rtlde N. third 1 to Indicate that City recogn as to two proems; 2. he seONA , regarding the die tier soccer , on to last line ange the tern' to'c l ub' 3. V, s One. `middle tier prograrn Is a . - delete the lect` in tine next One d 'non - carded.' 4. e up the bottorn, 'Select' with • • This oonciaternry tlne so With tow amendmeri Me. On s Leddtder moved lion of the Re Ms lay. yes; Mr. no, Mr. , Yes; Mrs. tic PM notion canted vote of 4 -3.) COD 1 COMA" Oubinance T Amending Vii Dublin Codified rdlna Planned 03-013). Mr, tated that te(f star was was�e s d to A in the packet and does not raflaAf the changes. ny moved to pas this until May 'ewlder motion. Bra ftmrr staff would a or Chlnrit�- �n8, .yes; Mr. . , Ms. Section ler. no; Mr. Keenan ; Mayor no; Mr. Lecid der. 06I A6 throughh 33.056. Reg lone (Case No mad and the cored of the ord draft In the packet horn the first provide a redltned on to show the Keenan, lies; Mr. . yes; Ms. , Yes, yes; Mr. LedcO , yes. The ordinance A postponed for Arg until the May Council meeting. REZONING Ordinance 1111.03 Rezoning Approximately 24.3 Acres, on the Northwest Conner of Perimeter [rive and Avery- MulrNeld Drive, Revising Subareas Al and A2 of the Exh ti W PCD Compoafte Plan. (Case No. 03 -119Z — Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A) Mr. Combs stated that this ordinance requests rezoning of 24.3 acres at the southwest comer of Post Road/Avery Muirtield. The site Is currently zoned Planned Commerce District and the request is for minor modiOcadons to the existing text The proposed changes would Permit a variety of office and mkod -use elements for the site. He showed slides of the site. noting that to the north are institutional uses as part of the Indian Run Meadows PUD; to the south and west are other areas of the Riverside Hospitai PCD; and to the east across Avery-MuIr ield Drive are a variety of office and nixed commercial uses. The site Is generally agricultural currently, and what is proposed is a total of three different subareas. He showed a slide delineating the three subareas. Whet Is proposed with the rezoning is to divide current subareas Al and A2 Into subareas Al through A3. These W R conslst of mind use. neighborhood retail center in subarea 2. Subarea 3 will have pm*lon for sit down or more formalized restaurants. A mix of different office and °mandai lnsUhdlons whO be throughout subarea 1 Currently. the two subareas within the 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive f RECORD p hemodes �= Nice= the most part, the proposed uses one Wended to Integrate with the financial and office - type uses whhIn subarea Al and are intended to compiem ord the surrounding area. The Commission reviewed this request on several occasions, and on March 4, 2004 they �, recommended approval with 12 conditions. They requested as part of the recomrnendatior that the Commission review 91WWo and odor control for the restaurants. On March 18, P&Z reviewed arose two home and recommended approval of the request with a modification to induce five conditions Instead of 12. In general, the re ddtedure will be somewhat similar to Perkneter Center with a sign package that will complement that What Is Proposed are a variety of wall signs for the various tenants that will face away from Avery-Mulrf lsld. The other teronts and portions of the development will include ground sig nage. Wall signs will be 20 square feet and will also Include a 4.54but pr*cft sign, similar the existing centers. The other parcets within the development " Incorporate variety of sign; a be used ground sign f 00 � with Code. He showed a slide of the ailment and their location. Stan behoves die proposed rem is generally consistent with the PCD. The Community Plan des rated this area In particular as office with employment emphasis. The recommendation was carried through by the Pk n ft Commission. They recommended approval with fiva cohditions, which are listed in the doaumerws. Mr. Leddider asked I& Combs to summarize the discussions related to odor control. Mr. Combs responded that the Commission had some general concerns with odor control and whether the types of restaurants incorporated into the development would create any offsite mss. Particularly for existing residential areas nearby - on the north side of Post Road as Weil as the subdivisions further to the notih. Staff believes, based on their research, that there are not odor control measures, which can betaken that are economically feasible to facilitate complete eilmdnation of odors. Given the physical layout of the property, the subareas proposed and the prevailing winds, staff Indicated to the ^ Commission that they did not believe this would be a signtficant Issue. Another exhUthat was shown also Indicated the sit -down restaurant areas and the buffers Chet would provide distance between those uses and residential uses. After discussion by the Commission, More was no consensus on modifying the text regarding tints issue. Mr. Leddider noted that distances were measured In this review, but what relationship would this have to odors? Mr. Combs responded that staff oonsidered the distances as well as prevailing winds from the soutthwesL Staffs position is that the odor control would not be a significant Issue, based on their research. Mr. Leddlder asked If staff discovered V there are odor control devices practically In use anywhere? Mr. Combs responded that in general, for the most part, such devices do not provide complete odor control. For restaurants, there Is another Issue of the types of mec hanicals available and that creatkng a fire safety hazard. Based on the testimony. the Commission chose not to pursue tics. lair. Leddider asked about the major distinctions between the existing zoning and Met being requested llfr. Combs responded that In the existing PCD, subareas Al and 2 provide for suburban office and Institutional uses, financial and bardrtng rhstit ohs, and a variety of khstit dkn* uses Inclutli ng hospice and day care. The ffw h distinction is that the proposed rezoning provides for a small neighborhood center, which would have a mix of retail. it does r-• provide for the two outparcel4ype uses for sit down restaurants, and eliminates some of the institutional uses from the current text. Mr. Ledcfider asked if there was some feeling that there is a lads of retail in this area? Mr. Combs responded that from staffs perspective, what Is proposed are services and uses subsidiary to office use In this part of the City. There have been ongoing complaints about the fad that the lunch rush hour precludes access to many of the uses at that time of day, and that it Is under serviced at Inds time Given the surrounding lard uses and what Is proposed In the future to the west, staff behoves this is an appropriate type of i j support use for the businesses and employees. Mr. Leddider asked him to limit his response to the retail uses, not the restaurant use. Mr. Combs acknowledged that there Is existing retail to the south in Avery Square and Perimeter Center, but the applicant felt there was a need for retail In this location. What is 12 0732 /PDP /F DP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive RECORD OF P t EEDINGS --MUMMUL Dublin Cray Counci Fie tenmds within the center is a bardmg tnStItU % end another is a restaurant trim use -� smaller. nstghborhood type support services. Mr. Leddider pointed out that the renderings Indicate 7 tenants, not five. f t building, res W that the proposed layout provides for subdMftg for up to 7 terwnts I torW Is five, according to the applicant. Ms. So* asked about the substantive charges from May of 2W3 to this print. Mr. Combs stated that them were substantial changes within the text In terms of land use, there was little charge. in general, the pnaExhsed uses were carried through — what was changed was the text, and the standards were worked out. Mr. Leddider asked for clarification — there could be 3 to 5 8 WCW Institutions withirh this rezoning? Mr. Combs responded that based on the subarea map, anything in subarea 1 could become a financial Instikrtion. The cement zoning wo dd allow for the enure site to be thorn" Ith *UIOns. From stab's perspective. the proposal provides for a broader nix of uses that are bested together. Mr. Leddider noted that in the prelhndnary development plan in Bhe packet, time are iota 1, 2, 3, 5 and e r oa6y &mdal services or some cornbbhatlon thereof. So there could actually be more than five financial institutions on the site. Mr. Combs confirmed that Is correct. i Mr. Keenan asked for darttication — is linandat Inswuu= sMctly a banking or re t a il business? Mayor C,hfnnk rather stated that" sppkant Could do* this in his presentation. Mr. MCCash stated that in view of the change to retail and restaurant oomponents, was a treffiC study done mpr ftng the additional traffib generated? There are existing mblems with traffib congestion — hour will this rezoning impact the future irr�merrts planned in the Avary -Mtut ld area? He Is aware that another proposal south of the Avery-Whdrfieid bridge was rejected based on the type of uses Wgmod. Mr. Combs responded that a tragic study was completed by the appllomht in general, it was found that the proposed Mzwhthg would bring a reduction of card baffib volume during peak hours versus the wdefing zoning. The traffic would be spread over the entire day versus at morning or evening rush Hour. The capability of the intersections around the site would be Improved. Staff has worked with the applicant regarding clarification in the text of the offsae k4 overnents necessary to upgrade the surouhdig si eete and particular intersections. Ben e. Jr.. 37-W. Broad Street representing the applicant addressed Council. He noted that Paul Ghidottt, Daimler Gawp IS also present tonight. He commented as fdbws: 1. The site was zoned as pert of the Riverside PCD. The entire site was zoned by Riverside. and RMNside so retains an interest in this sae. Given Riverside's desire for the other type of uses in subareas 3 and 4 they teamed up with Daimler on Brie proposal. They felt it was inVorterht to bring all the uses to the she for development at the same tine. 2. in regard to the bardcs*wdai institutions, they require a conditional use from --- the Planning Commission. Those two are permitted uses under tooth the Previous and the requested zoning. 3. In his own research, he visited the area during the lunch hour four times and attempted to be seated in various restaurants. The area is currently under serviced for restauanfs to support the enWoyees who work in Dublin. It Dublin desires to attract more office uses Into the community and more income tax revenue. these Carnpantes look for a traffic system that flmclons well, good location, security in their Investment, and also support fadlities for their en9loyees — such as restaurants. I 4. In the Community Plan. a milled use for this area Is peer leeli e. The defirdtbn Includes omvnwdel uses, WPM Office. So in this proposal, there is a multi- building development that will be a first doss development along Avery. Mutfield Road. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ F na Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive RECORD F EEDliVGB L of P �� l�eett n g Held approximately 13,000 square feet it wiii Include a Key Bank andror at the txhmer of PosbAwy The balance of the center as laid out today does include the p iT of six additional uses, but they wtil be developed as users cane forward. Pending approval r — they have a letter of Intent from Caribou Coffee, and have Interest from several cafes and ice Cream retailers. There will likely be 3-4 retail uses. based on the space available. In terms of substantive changes. the original plan in May of 2003 Included a 20,OD0 square foot specialty food use and a funeral home. They went back on an informal basis to PWnrdN Corrimbial n in Aught of 2003 after e6rminaWg the dxheral home. They had two options Presented: one with Wed Oats and one witfiout They were told not to Include Wad Oats. They Oren reduced the number of px>tentiaA raw square footage to 20.000, a reduction from the previous 50,000 square feet of retail. i Mr. Male commented that this represents 10 peroent of the square footage allowed under the current zoning. The total square footage on the alto has been reduced to 8%000 square feet This brings a reduction In the iratec assn fated with the devebpmerd. Mr. Ghklotti added that they feft it was Importent that site provide the apprnprlale transition from both east to west as well as north to south. They have doubled the size of the existing setback along Avery- Muhfleld and are adding a arming pond feature. sllnow to that at the entry to Bellanbes, In terms of the number of bran dal institutions, at the Planning Carnrrdssion Pmm. they were encouraged to riot show sites 5 and 6 as finendal services or banks. At this point. Key Bank will anchor the Center and Fhrntitmgicn will trove a 4.100 square foot branch bank at the corner. If they recelve apprnvai of the re =ft, IheY are hopeful of oaring In for a final development plan for the entire Avery frontage. both buildings, and will construct all of Oils simufteneously, with a target completion date within a year. Market conditions have Indicated that the banking locations should be on the perimeter of the site. At the March 4 Manning Commission meeting, at the suggestion of the Commission, the office and banking locations an the site were mom — everything west of subarea 1 rmrst be office. Site 4 Is b house Prlmrese, out or Atlanta, which Is an educational facility for children from 6 weeks to 6 years with accredited teachers. Sites 7 and 8 will house R J. Boll Ready, a real estate brokerage service which Is moving their operations to Dublin. To summarize, In a very short tintefrerl e. there will be t neighborhood retail center. the Huntington Bank, the Champaign Bank and Primrose.. They do not currently have users for either of the two restaurant srbes. The area west of subarea 3 Will all be office use. They are hoping to secure a larger office use for that portion of the site of 50. 60.000 square feet This provides an appropriate transition to the west to the Pacer Logistics bulwIng. Dana Freudeman. 8132 Camoden l.ekea_ Dublin noted that he is emplc ew by Ohio Health and Is a real estate broker in the state of Ohio. He is Institutionally engaged with buying and seeing land for Ohio Health, developing medical bundIngs and managing Property In which Ohio Health has medical offices. Two years ago. inedh4 dnaily, they cam to the Planning Division with a vision as they began to think about the future hoapital at Post and Avery, south of Kruger. Part or that vision Induded the amenities needed In the neighborh t o surround this type of Institutional use — a major hestth care facility, 2 fs 4 h ours for a day. seven days a week. They wanted to satisfy two key criteria: They conducted and for patients and their fernilles who come from the region. reglo le Road west major alte evaluation last year toofdng at major' land trader from local brokers to d th oWh Dublin and down to Hilliard Cemetery Road. They engaged already awned assist A very/33 due to the conduoon was the best location was the land to visibility. the euds*V amens sound #" sea, and access to the [=don with the recent Improvement of the Avery Road bridge. They heard from Planning & Zoning Commission that If the desire was to rezone this land to Incorporate some Oner dining to accommodate staff physicians, they could encuwnter neighborhood opposition. They are not interested In turning this site Into `restaurant rove or'banking row.' They were seeking a process from Dublin where Dublin would approve everything on a rase-by -case basis that was proposed. Dublin requested a master plan. and so they approached Daimler to work with them on this p rcJed. The direction from the Corrrntssfon and staff was dear; to protect Post Road as a scenic roadway by limiting aurb curter, to create the southwest caner of Post and Avery as arks front yard to the southwest of Dubin. to have low density tot coverage, and to Include arddtecturet features that meet or exceed the Current text in the aWsting PCD plan. This was acceptable to Own. Their vision was to have a 'whits tablecloth". sit down dining faceity where a Physician group or hospital adrNmdstrators group can meet, dose to the hospital facility. Daimler Group ca n attract this type of restaurant to the development On W" Ohio f 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Mil ..r of Dublin City Council Held approved by staff and Planting Cturrrisslan. McYo CtdnnM ZUWCI err "ed public testimony. stated that there have been comments tonlghi about what makes Dublin a special place to 11". He went to the Internet and viewed the Money Afts&ne survey of cities In the U.S., which named Dublin. Ohio as No. 2 In Test place$ to live In the central region. He described the various slm8aritles and dtiferences among them The appearance of Dubin has been made possible bYgreat planning. it is a beautiful place to ON and he wards it to remain that way. As part of the C mnwnky Plan telephone survey in 1996, 95 percent rated Dubin as a good or excellent place to live; 67 percent said they would not move In the next the yam; 80 percent agreed that retail, commercial and residential development should be slowed; 80 percent said that City officials should protect the character of Dublin's outi tg areas; 70 percent said that the City should PMW 8 portion of the area's rernalid, agriculhuai land: and 73 percent said the City should work to revitWkm Old Dubin. He read a description from tie Coffman Parts design pamphlet — and asked Council to consider carefully whether they want a snip mall with restaurerds located 8=169 firm tits center of tie City's ecological interests. Kam Pnw. 8W8 Court noted that she Ives Immediately north of the Red Trabue nature preserve. They operisince odors regularly from Ute existing restaurants at Avery Square, and she Is concerned about future restanuants being approved. She then spoke on behalf of 12 neigh fntrn Lowell Trace stating that In the mid 1990's, the Plan set out the view of the qualify refer end Ines eter Center area as a showcase entrance to slung the 33 corridor, between Shier Rings Road and Perimeter Drive. A buffer r=te of offices, hospice, childcare and Institutional uses were described as suitable for the land area between Perimeter Drive and Poet Road. City Council affirmed thk view when they voted against a proposal for high Intensity use between Perimeter Drive and Post Road on the east side of Avery- MuI fleld Drive — the Super America site. The citizens of Dublin upheld City Counell's decision at the ballot box after corporate interests attempted to override City Council by bringing the issue to a rebrendtun. The confluence of this City Council vote, the Community Plan, and the majority view of residerft argue strongly against the proposal for rezoning before Council tonight The Red Trabus nature preserve Has on the north side of Post Road and constitutes the western continuation of the central park. She paged Council not to degrade tits area by placing a strip nail and restaurants nearby. she asked that Council vote against this rezoning, thereby once again establishing this area as a desirable buffer between the high Intensity development to the south and the nature preserve and aajacent residential areas. Gavin POM JIM ROLM&Mod addressed Council 811ating that he disagrees; with the proposal. He presented to Council cil a Petition 819W by his classmates regarding the proposal. The location Is not suitable for the corn rutty, and the strip mall is not needed The land should be used for business uses, office, medical, daycare, institutional, hospice, Park. etc. He presented the petition to Council. Andy Keller. 8586 Weston Cirri noted that he attended some Planning Commission hearings on this matter. He works at Cardinal Health and believes it would be desirable to have some additional sit dorm restaurants in the area From his perspective, haft a coffee shop In INS location would be very cormerdenL He agrees that there is a need for more restaurants In the area — they often must travel to other areas outside of Dublin for lunch because of the congestion at the eAsting sit down restaurants. Jeff Bg0 noted that his company plans on building two 9,000 square foot office buildings. The amenities proposed are what attract them to this site. In the proposed buitdings.wil be his company and a financial planning crxytpmy, 20 jobs of which are new to Dublin. The second building will be completed In 2005 and wand add spproximataly 40 jobs. The proposed development will add amenities to the general area and will serve as a nice gateway to the Mu k%W area. He urged Council to support this proposal. Lunn Hosfeid. resident of Lowell Trace stated that representatives of their assoda*m have attended these meetings. She wrote a letter to Council regarding concem s with the Imparts on the Red Trabue nature reserve. While there fs a need fbr jobs and economic 12 -073 Z/P D P/ F D P development, there Is Only a 8ma9 amount of epa0e remaining In the cDmmur ty for Rezoning /Prel minary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive tm.r of RECORD OF P . d; April 19; t Fie 20 brte -tens Impacts, 10-15 yens hater, creed to be ooNldarad. She urged Council to wei #" ctroice heaWy tonight — It Is slip a drolce. BIRMAM, 6= Ent Rom noted that his ,--• of a transitional use between a heavy ni tensity at concern with this rezoning Is the question Red Tmbue reserve to the north. He was heavily Involved In the re es the Super America property on the opposite comer. and it is now zoned for medical otBces — an appropriate transitional tree. There Is property which is presently undeveloped to the east of Aid and north of the medical offices. 9 a fairly Intensive use is intensive use under consideration tonight It wig likely encourage a more good use of this at the northeast comer. The proposal is not a ts p and t should is . There Is a delighthd space at the Red Trabue nature reserve preserved with a transitional use to the south. W. Locklider acknowledged that he has met with and spoken with Mr. Ghidottl and Mr. Hale on several occasions regarding this matter. Mr. GhkW has stated that lots 5 and 6 can only be restaurant sties, but the plan he has indicates restaurants or fhhandal services. He asked for clarification. Mr. Hale responded that at the Ptervft Commission, they were asked to remove Orlando ine Wdons in those locations. There was concern expransed about affecting the northeast comer of Avery-Muirfield/ Post, and so the exact permitted uses that exist today were left Intact for the soubwast corner of Avery- MukfleidlPost Mr. L ocklider asked If the retail component would have Impact on the northeast comer in terms of development pressure. Mr. Hale responded that the owner of the northeast comer property was previously In contract with Star Bank to develop the property. After Star Bank met with staff. they did not proceed with rezoning based on feedback obtained at that meeting. In terns of the southwest comer Impacting the future northeast caner development, the same uses will be left in place that existed In the previous zoning for that portion. N someone wants to propose commercial for the northeast comer, there would actually be a stronger case for a fourth caner oftice development — not the residential zoning as shown In the Conumaudty Plan. The other corn ors are zoned office, and banking is a conditional use in the zone. Mr. McCash asked hove far dorm subarea 2 begins from the corner. k Mr. Hale responded that it Is approximately 300 feet. They have substantially Increased the setback along Avery Road, doubling it from the current zoning to allow for the water features. Mr. Leddider asked for clarification. The current zoning allows for financial Institutions, but drive through banks are a conditional use? Mr. Hale responded that drive throughs are shown an the site plan. but a conditional use approval must be obtained from Planning & Zoning Commission. The Commission has made it dear that two are ins about screening at the northeast owner of the site. The zoning for the bank locations is the same as that existing today. and both conditional use and final development plan approval are needed. Mr. Leddider stated that in reading the minutes of Planning Commission, it seems they Indicated a favorable disposition to grant conditional uses for those two sites. Mr. Hale agreed. but the Conrdssion also expressed concerns about lighting. stacking. etc. The applicant will me regtd nent �h standards of the comrnua ty. He Commented briefly on the development process in Dublin r -- and taw it does result in a very high quality product 14th. Leddider asked how a white tablecloth restaurant would address the long tines at Panora Bread. Chipotie and obw restaurants? The pawns of the casual restaurants and %A to tabledW restaurants represent dtferent markets. Mr. Hale responded that many people desire a nicer restaurant where they can take clients — examlives, professkurei people. etc. Many desire healthier food and choices otrer than fast food. There Is a need for higher end restaurants in this market and location. Mr. Lectdider stated that In terns of addressing the crowding In the exidN restaurants, this does not seem WOW. In temps of a high-end restaurant, the zoning text cannot specifically crep for tads. it can be for dine -In only, not a dive trough, but it Cannot be zoned fora certain type of restaurant —high and or other. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive RECORD F� NGS r: tip , Pop la have a �. A large percentage of their hus:rtess is thiulgh the drive- Oumlgh, Finally, at the final de►reWpmwd plan stage. Dublin requIres that development conforms to the commitments made ftvughcut the heaMpon the gVilalloe. The intent here ls b have the high"rtd restaurants that have been discussed in the process. W. t eddi dar noted that that the re will be Intense pressure for additional retail and restaurant use moving wed from Mr. Hate stated understanding is that Dublin is convening a meeting of the various Jurisdictions In the area bls week about future development plans In the area. There is a fear of what will happen on the City's western border in terms of development controlled by othar)trrledicdons. He agreed that there will be some pressure for retell development, and this will be a topic of the meetings. in temps of township development outside of Dui bft boundaries, townships are governed by state law and do not have have the power or the bola to develop in the awns way. In terms of tinendal base, townships do not have the abi4ly to hire planners to ensure the best development, Ms. Salley stated that she shares the reWdenW concerns about the long-term erwill'On rental Impacts of the development Is it possible for conditions to be krt -ttlsd that would aid to the exduslon of the nuisance birds? She is disappointed to hear that the odor control Issues cannot be addressed. This Is unbrtunats, as the existing restaurant odors WO a nuisance to the residdents. Does Mr. Hale have any suggestions for language In the text to control the arsvknnrmentel impacts? The qty needs to be cognbm t of We as more g development encroaches on the national areas of the City. It IS IrnporlaM to be sensitive to these natural areas. Perhaps a means of measuring ng the Impact on natural areas Is advisable. Mr. Hale responded it* the issue of rtcdsarme birds Could be addressed in the way that trash Is handled on the sile. Birds are attracted to open trash bins. and Owe are trash Contpactore. which cotdd help to reduce Ne problem. Many pros occur when the bins are not dosed and trash Wows around the site. Ms. Salay stated that perhaps the buslnesses could have employees police the area to pick up garbage from their sties. Mayor Chinnid- Zuercher asked if she has a suggested text amendment to address this. Ms. Sassy responded that this is likely a final development plan Issue and could be addressed at that time. A& Hale offered that at the time of the *W development plan, they could corn mlt b a conditdon to address this If problems occur In the future. Mayor Chhudd- Zuercher asked staff to review these matters so that they can be addressed at the final development plan stage. Ms. Salay added that It would be Important that the businesses understand the expectations of the community regarding these items. Mr. McCash asked how the mechanical systems would be addressed for the restaurants in view of the shed roofs? Typically, the mechankeis have been on the roof with a fence surrounding them, and they are very unsightly. W. GhkM responded that with a similar building they have constructed In another area. the sloped roof Comes to a point to hide the mechankals. and Owe Is a relief area in the � middle where they can be Widen. Ms. Salay asked If the east elevatlon of the strip center looks tine some on both sides. Mr. GhkdoW responded that the only difference is that there will not be sign bands on the east elevation. At the March meeting, they showed the Commission renderings of the other elevation. Mr. Reiner stated that the opportunity for the community to have a hospital is really Important. Ohio I lost Is very committed b making a large presence here In Dublin and the development will Include many types of facilities. Good health care is one of the best things the City can offer to its residents. In a recent visit to the Cleveland Clinic, he noted that the largest employer in Cleveland Is the Clinic. The quality of food at the nearby } restaurants was excellent. In addition, a large number of doctors and professionals live in Dublin and would like to work In Dublin. There is a shortage of tine restaurants to support all of ft development. He does agree with the residents' concems about the environment. He also asks that time residents consider conservation design and new 12 -073 Z/ P D P/ F D P Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive RECORD OF P EEDINGS im »na of Mtn City ]ylerin� _. E Held � The ersulrennrhlenlet issues should be aldnissed In a " ddier forhRn. He knows the Ohio Health organization well, and CBS will be needed to allow hospital employees to have hunch during the time provided. The applicant has made krgkat arguments In support of Inds rezoning, and he will support it as well. 111 Mr. McCash noted that while he recognizes the need for additional restaurants in Dublin, everything r=6 of Perfnhster Drive and Post Road has been very contentious. It is a difficult thing to address In this rezoning. Mr. Keenan stated that the corporate neighbors who help to maintain the overall quality of life for Dublin have asked for Caatcii's support In this matter He echoed the comments made about the need for additional sit-down restaurants in the area to serve the needs of the corporate citizens. His office faces this area and he has rot noticed arty significant odor Issues from the center. Ms. Satay wknowledged that she met with W. Ghidottl and reviewed the proposal. She has personally struggled with this, as the proposed center is beautiful. Obviously, the businesses would like to have note restaurants. This is a mboad use with offices destred, bring more lobs and support far the hospital which win be important to the coot mrnkyy. On the other hand. she recalls the zoning battle fought for the prop vty across the street and how the residents of the area and community supported the matte hanks of a transition between the Intense retail to the south of Perlhcalm The ponds are beautiful, and there seerns to be support from tlhlo application on Council. The Planning Cormnission supported ft application by a vote of ". There were no citizens voicing any opposition to this application during the rezoning process at the Planning Commission. which Is fnatrating to her as wen. Mr. Leddloer stated that one of his concerns is the sense that this is being consMer+ed as the last rezoning available for restaurants uses In the area There Is much land available to the west for these uses as wen. Likewise, he does not deny the need for additional restaurants in the area, but it is an Issue of where they will be located. He does not believe the area is under - retailed, and that the appropriate transitional zonkhg for this parcel is office with some fihancal Institutions. What has been presented Includes very good architecture, landscaping. etc. It is singly his view that the retail and restaurant uses proposed for this parcel are not appropriate. Mayor ChInnild -Zuerc her noted that she would like the environmental issues to be addressed by staff and the applicant at the final development plan stage. AN of Council has an Interest in these Issues for development throughout the City. Council has given guidance to staff about the Importance of etc development to the conmmity. Some of the feedback she has heard is that the commercial venire needs other support services nearby — childcare, restaurants, coffee shops, eta It Is often difficult to marry the residential use with the commercial uses of these venues. There are work -life Issues for everyone to manage. and it Is Important to determine how these needs can be addressed within the City's development. She believes that the proposed plan is very attractive visually. that the reduction of square footage has been addressed, and that adding the Pond and trees enhances the environment and provides a haw from the roadway. Mr. Keenan moved approval of the Ordinance. W. Reiner seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes, Ms. Salay. no; Mr. McCa no, Mr. Lecdider, no; Mrs. Boring, yes. Mayor Chinnid•Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. (Ordinance passed 4-3) . Boring noted for the record. The minutes of P8Z reflect her comments true Commission ad no monument signs. However, this Is not whet she meant sign package rig beck to P&Z at a later date for review. and she she asked that Cour>c8 Members vide feecloaddc to her. FEE ORD /NA E AMEMDMENT Ordinance 2 Amending rtflnanae 126 -03 Fee Wale for Facility R at the Dublin Common Recreation Ce Ms. am stated that the have no changes roe the last 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 7V RECORD OF A,CHON MARCH 4,20W CITY OF DUBUlt. swamp 1w 9^ 0bb 4=6.1216 N2o I M 6tN194r611 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting. - I. ReUnkglRevlsed Composite Plana 03 -119Z— Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Loeation: 24.3 acres located at the northwea corner of Perimeter Drive and Avery - Muirfiield Drive, Ea M89 Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside Hospital plan). Request: A revision to the existing PCD composite plan under the provisions of Section 153.058. Proposed Use: A mixed -use development of office, bank, 'Wail, restaurant, and daycare uses. Applicant: The Daimler Group Inc., do Paul Ghidotti, 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43204. StefTCoutact: Carson C Combs, AICP, Senior Planner. MOTION: To approve this rezoningfrevised composite plan application because the plans address concems raised by the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 3, 2003, it generally complies with criteria set forth in Section 153.058(B) of the Dublin Zoning Code, and the rezoning will provide a quality development with necessary support services within the employment core of the City, with 12 conditions: 1) That Section B Yard and Setback Repirements of the proposed text be revised to read: "Side yard setbacks shall be a-4ew14 I S for pavement.. is prior to scheduling for a public hearing at Qty Council; 2) That Proposed sign standards for Tennant 7 of the Neighborbood Retail Center (Subarea Al) be revised to provide a total permitted sign area of no more than 66.67 square feet to comply with Codc prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council, subject to staff approval-, 3) That the timing for proposed off -site traffic improvements be coordinated with and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, 4) That the proposed development comply with the City of Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines and that all sites utilize coordinated shoe box lighting no greater than 28 feet in height; 11 Pagel of 2 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Pt•nmeter Dnvr PLANNING AND ZONR%C COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION MARCH 4, 2004 1. Rezoning/Revised Composite Plan 03 -119Z Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A (Continued) 5) That fencing be utilized only for the purposes of screening service structuees, mechanical units, etc. or required by State regulations, to the satisfaction of staff. 6) That cross- access agme rents be provided within all portions of the Proposed development, to the satisfaction of staff'; 7) That a full sign package to be brought back to the Commission for approval prior to the development plan stage; 8) That the same level of finishing be required on the east roof of the retail center that provides an eppewwce with residential character, 9) That concerns of pedestrian connectivity within this retail cuter and to the south be properly provided for residents to the north of Post Road; 10) That the text be revised to include no financial services in Subarea A3; 11) That teat language regarding daycar+es be revised to include an age limit of 13 years or under; and 12) That the issues of odor control be brought back to the Commission for further consideration prior to the development plan stage. * Ben W. Hate, Jr., representing the applicant, agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 6-0. RESULT: This rezoning/composite plan was approved. The rezoning application w"ll be forwarded to City Council with a positive recommendation. The entire sign package will return to the Commission for review and approval at a later date. STAFF CERTIFICATION Frank A. Ciarochi Acting Planning Director I Page 2 of 2 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — March 4, 2004 Page 3 It not put them in a best light or gi thm the best t He imposed it go the other ay caompletely t o it up for or to leave it `as rer sa id Ca issioners arena t tonight and it w important that one us this. The 'ssioners t agreed to th.Uk ut it and discuss ' at the next meeting. /tion d it made sense to rm a subeommitt o work with staff eater clarify t by "conservati esign" / ow nY Counal as review it. his ution form now d more is needed to d ir h staff is lications real w a dexaade with to what pro�g may appl He suggesteommittee of ee meet with st on p to pass it on to l and the a Revision T ng at issue. Mr. Zimm erber, Ms. Reiss volunt serve on the 'ttee_ /amnd e a motion that the mnmission a subconmlittee ova address the 'gn process for clarification. . Messineo seeon�d the motion, was as follows: Reiss, Yes, Ms. g, yes, Mr. Zimlrerman, yes; Mr. es; and Mr. Yes• (Approved ) r said the mmittee m should be ad W ised like any ot* meeting. s. Farley said she ould be responsibls notifying the media gs at Ppropr'ate time. Mr. Gerber said t any other Co issioners who to attend were w e. He asked that all Commissioners notified, Mr. n informed the ommission that pdated Administao(ve Can update bad distributed tonight. , r. Gerber noted t a lot of work had been accomplished over last eight months. Gerber asked for show of hands those present for e&ch case on the da night. Mr. Gerber that the inf al Case (Case 5) yvould be held first lowed by Cases 1, 2, and 4. [Later in a meeting, Case was tabled as !yt ed by the applicant's alive due to 'me limitations, be re Case 2 was he The minutes reflect t rder of the publish agenda.] I. Rezoning/Revised Composite Plan 03 -119Z — Riverside Hospital PCD, Subarea A Carson Combs said this is a proposed revision to the existing composite plan for the Riverside Hospital PCD for 24.3 acres located north of Perimeter Drive. This has been before the Commission a number of times. When heard in November 2003, the 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plant 1 v+ Development Plan The Perimeter Per meter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — Mare 4.2004 Page 4 Comausmon 6mussed nine general issues that they requested be resolved by the delmlopw and staff: �) The proposed sign package does not comply with Code and is not in keeping with nearby multi- tenant retail development. 2) The text does not clearly indicate developer participation in related off -site traffic improvements. 3) The plans and text should be revised to provide additional opaque landscaping to screen the drive -thru stacking areas. 4) The text should be revised to refled appropriate setbacks based on required right -of- way dedication and traffic improvements. 5) The text permits non -earth tone colors that are not in keeping with the overall character of the area. 6) The text should be revised to provide maximum ovie all lot coverage of less than 65 Pte• 7 ) The plans need revised to provide leas opportunity for cut - through traffic 8) The text should be revised to prohibit Avery- Muirfieid Drive access. 9) The Subarea boundary is not clearly demarcated on the plans. He showed slides of the site located at the southwest corner of Post Road and Avery - Muirfield Drive. The site is agricultural south of Post Road, with one existing barn located on the west end of the site. Properties to the west and south are part of the Riverside PCD. Ac rm Post Road, to the north, are a variety of institutional uses that are zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District. The site is relatively flat, and a pedestrian connection exists from the institutional uses on the north side of Post Road to the Avery Square shopping center. This Plan Proposes to modify the existing Subarea A into three different subareas. In general, most of the uses will be the same as the existing text. The changes are generally in Subareas A2 and A3, which provide for retail and restaurant uses that are not in the existing text. Mr. Combs said staff has worked with the applicant to resolve all of the above nine issues. He said most of the issues dealt with technical aspects of the proposed development text. Staff feels very comfortable with this revised plan and the Community Plan indicates this site should be mixed- uselemployment ermphasia Staff believes that the proposed uses will provide a mix that is called for in the Community Plan, and is consistent with the overall goals. Due to the narrow nature of the site, it will he bisected from east to west to provide for uses that will served by a single, interior access drive. Curbcuts will be located along Perimeter Drive. The site extends west to the portion of Subarea Al that is undefined for future office use. He said in general, there are a total of four access points on Perimeter Drive that include a right -in one, and three full- service curb cuts (one with a traffic light). One access on Post Road was agreed to by the Commission several meetings ago, and the text specifies there will be no access onto Avery- Muirfield Drive The site includes a 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Pion/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — March 4, 2004 Page 5 mix of different office uses that wall be hiSWigirted by sit -down mstumft and a neigWxmh od center that will provide for a mix of ®aller retail and ca%.type uses. Mr. Combs said a large entry feature will be looted along the Avery- Muirfield frontage. The applicant has also proposed landscape treatments along Post Road as well as along Perimeter Drive that are attached as exhibits to the development teat. Signage proposed is more consistent with the Code and surrounding shopping centers. For each tenant in the neighborhood center, one wall sign (20 square feet) and one projecting sign (4.5 square feet) for pedestrian orientation is peltmitted, similar to the Other centers. There will be, a total of seven tenants. He said Tenants 1 through 6 would have that sign package. The seventh tenant (Key Bank) will have one larger wall sign (48 square feet) and the ability for a monument sign along Avery Road. Mr. Combs said Tenant 7 is looted on a corner with two frontages. In general, Code would permit two monument signs that total 66.67 square feet in total area, He said with this particular development, staff is trying to balance the fact that they want to keep Post Road as scenic and uncluttered as possible, while providing something that blends with the cen and the established monument_ style signage along the Avery Corridor. He said other buildings will be, permitted one monument -style sign totaling 50 square feet, which is consistent with Code. The maximum height for all monument signs is eight square feet. Any additional comer property would be permitted to have two signs that comply with the 66.67- square foot Code requirement. Ms. Boring asked if the bank on the southern comer would be allowed two signs. Mr. Combs said yes. U is in a different subarea and is located on a corner with two fivntages. He said staff' had worked with the applicant to limit monument signs to a maximum of two along Avery- Muirfield Drive. Ms. Reiss understood that other tenants in the multi - tenant building would not have monument signs on Avery- Muirfield Drive Mr. Combs said Tenants 1-6 will only have a wall sign facing to the west, so there would be no signage oriented towards Avery. Muirfield Drive` Ms. Reiss asked if the projecting signs would also be on the west side of the building. Mr. Combs said yes, they are oriented toward the parking lot and pedestrian movement. He said Key Bank will have one wall sign on that side of the building and one monument sign on the other side facing Avery Road, Mr. Combs said staff is recommending that the applicant work with staff so that both signs total no more than 66.67 square feet in area. Ms. Reiss questioned the text wording regarding signage because she was confused about who was getting a monument sign, how many there would be, where they would be located, and if the wall signs were on the east or west side of the building. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Firsal Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — March 4, 2004 Page 6 Mr. Combs said staff had reviewed the text and thougO it was dear. Exhibits are attached that refeeraece the elevations, so the particular position for each sign on the building is noted Mr. Gerber requested Commission questions be held until the completion of the presentation. He noted there were individuals in the audience that wished to speak, and that there will be ample time for questions. Mr. Combs said staff believes the proposed application is consistent with the Community Plan. The applicant has worked at length with 9taffto address all the issues raised by the Commission. Staff recommends approval of this revised composite plan with six conditions: 1) That Section B — Yard and Setback BequOvinrents of the proposed text be revised to read: "Side yard setbacks shall be a-tetal-ef 15' for pavement..." prior to scheduling far a public hearing at City Council; 2) That Proposed sign standards for Tennant 7 of the Neighbodv)od Retail Center (Subarea Al) be revised to provide a total permitted sign area of no more than 66.67 square feet to comply with Code prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council, subject to staff approval; 3) That the timing for proposed ofd site traffic improvements be coordinated with and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 4) That the proposed development comply with the City of Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines and that all sites utilize coordinated shoe box lighting no greater than 28 feet in height; 5) That fencing be utilized only for the purposes of screening service structures, mechanical units, etc., to the satisfaction of staff, and 6) That cross- access agreements be provided within all portions of the proposed development, to the satisfaction of staff~ Bah W. Hale, Jr., representing the applicant, said he was not present the three previous times this application was presented, although he had reviewed those staff reports. He said he knew there had always been a concern about what happens on the other corner with this setting a precedent. Mr. Hale suggested discussing only where the uses will be changed. The use on the north side is not being changed. A bank is permitted already. He said the drive - through is a conditional use. Therefore, they have not changed the zoning on this property, except for two small areas. However, since the City wanted additional right -of- way to accommodate the expansion of Peruneter Drive, they have made the setback about ten feet smaller. Other than that, he said the standards for this site remain the same. Mr. Hale said he had the advantage of knowing what was being done elsewhere because he worked in many other cities such as Westerville, Easton, and New Albany. He said Dublin has a great deal of office shown in the Community Plan. He said part of being competitive with other cities is to have the amenities that office employees want. The 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ r i . Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes —March 4, 2004 Page 7 office ,jobs drive the quality of life. He said Dublin has an expanding residential bam and office uses are needed to continue to keep the balance. Mr. Hale h>owcver, has obsarvW crowded parking the times he has come to Dublin to eat hinge. He said Dubl +n is under-seived with rest urmt uses for the amount of office that exists today. They are suggesting a nice neighborhood center with the ability to have sit-down restaurants without drive4hrus. He said the remainder of the site is basically the same as the existing development text. Mr. bale accounted the history of the adjacent shopping centers and said this center is exceptionally well done. He said the total density is 65 percent and it will service an existing need today. If built, he said all the restaurants will be successful. Pceinider Center, which is turning largely into restaurants, shows there is a great demand for such uses. Mr. Hale said all the sign issues had been resolved. He said this proposed design, comtr u Lion and material is very expensive. He said it will demand a high dollar per square foot and receive it. lirir. Hale said these uses have been and are needed. He requested the Commission to look at this with a very open mind because he thought this was appropriate for the site. He understood the precedent argument, but everything to the north is developed and nothing else is going to happen. This will not have any domino effect. The zoning at the southwest corner is exactly the same as on the southeast corner. He said if it does not meet the community standard in how it looks and feels from Avery Road, the Commission should say no. Mr. Hale said there is no question that it fits a current need in the community. It is important to help current office uses because Dublin is "under restaurented" right now. W. Hale said at peak hour, traffic will be under what it would be if the site was developed as currently zoned, and there is not a traffic or density issue. He said the Commission needs to decide if this is an appropriate look and a need that should be filled. Dr. Larry Allen, pastor of Northwest Presbyterian Church, north of the site, said they felt this would be a very good use. He said the advantage of this proposed development to the church was that the properties facing them look like offices. Dr. Allen said when they expand their sanctuary in a couple of years, they must install a left turn lane. By doing this development now, they will cooperate with the Damher Group and do both turn lanes at the same time so they coordinates. He said they would love to have restaurants this close after worship on Sundays. A resident east of this site said he worked for Ashland and there is no place now to pick up a sandwich at lunchtime in an hour. He questioned how, if there were additional offices, the employees would be fed. He agreed that this area is "under - restauranted." Andy Keller, 6586 Weston Circle East, said he lived north by Dublin Jerome High School and worked at Cardinal Health. He said now there are only fast -food establishments and bars to meet clients in this area. He said his family likes to meet for 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Pian/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — March 4, 2004 Pap 8 coffee on werr, and the onl place in town is in Historic Dublin, which takes too long to get there. He said it would be nice to have a nearby place to meet fbr coffee or a meal; especially on Sundays. Dana Freudernan, Prime Medical Group, (representing Ohio Health), said approximately two years ago they approached the Planning staff with an idea for the property they owned- They were considering uses that would compliment and supplement not only Patients and visitors, but also their staff and physicians working 24/7. He said stag at the time, told than they were sympathetic to their proposal and ideas for sit -down restaurants and felt the west side of Dublin lades this type of use. He said they then engaged Mr. Hale because they are healthcare developers and build medical buildings. He said doing a larr mixed -use development on 24 awes at a prominent corner like post and Avery Roads was out of his area. They partnered with the Damlier Group because they knew they build and produce a quality Product and have done a lot of work in Dublin. Mr. Freude man said at the recent State of the City Address, City leaders had the Opportunity to meet their president who will have the sole task to put together the development of the Dublin hospital. He said Post and Avery Roads will be the hospital's front yard. He said they think this plan is proper for the comer and asked for the Commission's support. Martha Hubbell, Huntington Bank, said they were thrilled with the opportunity to partner with Daimler on this development. She said they are very anxious to expand their Presence in Dublin with a third location. Ms. Hubbell said the restaurants are needed. Huntington has over 20 employees that live in the neighborhoods directly to the north who are all excited about a location at this site and the other services provided including the daycare and sit -down restaurants. They welcome the opportunity to be in Dublin at this new location. Another resident who lived north of the site near Kamer Middle School, who has a law office in Dublin said his biggest concern is them is currently no place to meet a client for a sit down lunch or dinner in Dublin. There are twelve restaurants near Perimeter Center that he considered fast food restaurants. He said a nice sit -down restaurant would help the area. He saw no negativity about it. Mr. Gerber noted that this case had previously been before the Commission. A concept Plan was approved 5 -1. Mr. Combs said it was discussed in August and November 2003 and was tabled in February 2004. Mr. Gerber reiterated that the Commission's previous concerns had been addressed with staff. Ms. Reiss referred to page 14 of the proposed development text under Item 6 and said she did not see Item "K." Mr. Combs said there was no Item "K ", but that referenced to the Key Bank tenant location under "A" through "J." He said that portion of the text allows one monument sign that complies with all the text standards and Code. Ms. Reiss said this section was confusing because the beginning of Item "J" discusses the retail center. It does not say one tenant of the retail center or the northern tenant of the mail center 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Fin Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Cwndssion Minutes — March 4, 2004 Page 9 gels to do all these things. Mr Combs said the text refers directly to Table % which is auached as an exhibit of the text and shown on a slide that clearly dentifies the wall Signs. There is an attached detail specifying the dimensions and text for each of the signs. Mr. Gerber asked if there were any monument signs further south on either side of this development. Mr. Combs said there were many monument signs along Avery Road. Most are located on the east side, but there is the Riverside Hospital signage, as well as Wendy's and Burger King signs. Across the street, there are a number of banks, as well as Panera Bread, McDonald's, and the on stations with monument signs. Ms. Boring said City Council did M want more monument signs on Avery- Muirfield, NW that in order to get what is present, Mr. Hale had to do a jig." She was very concerned about putting in more monument signs, especially since there is such a short distance. Mr. Hale thought Avery Road was to be all monument signs with no wall signs. He said they wanted a monument sign and wall sign on Burger King, but they only got a monument sign approved. He said everybody has a monument sign. Mr. Combs reaffirmed that all texts for surrounding developments specify monument signs as a standard for the Avery- Muirfield Corridor. Mr. Gerber said the Burger King and Wendy "s signs seemed to be set back a distance from the road. Mr. Combs said that was likely a function of right -of -way width Code requires signage to be a minimum of eight feet outside the right -of -way. Mr. Gerber asked how far the signs would be from the road. Mr. Combs said the text specifies that the Commission will determine the locution of the signage during the development plan stage, Mr. Gerber said the Commission needed to sm inize the signage issue at some point in some detail. It is not necessarily a deal - killer, but the proposed signage will have to be reviewed carefully. Mr. Hale said they would be happy to bring the full signage back with locations, etc. to the Commission for review and approval at a separate meeting before the development plan. Mr. Saneholtz's concern was with the pond, which is a completely different treatment than the properties to the south (Burger King and Wendy's). He thought their signs were close to the hedgerow or incorporated into it, off the road. He did not want the applicant to say, because of this pond, that signage on the backside won`t work because it would not be seen or that on the front side of the pond it will only be 15 feet away from the roadway. 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Olin/ F + Development Plan The 'enmPter Penme er Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — March 4, 2004 Page 10 Mr. Hale said they agreed to comply with the Sig Cade Mr. Saneholtz asked how far off the road was the sigwge setbacks for Burger King and Wendy's. Mr. Combs guessed they are at least eight feet o ff the right- of-way. Mr. Hale said there was a large right -of -way. He there was a considerable amount of greenspace between the curb and the signs. Mr- Gerber asked the Commissioners how they felt about pulling the signage package out and considering it separately from this. Ms. Boring suggested a condition: That a full signage package be brought back to the Commission for approval prior to the development plan stage. She said that made sense and would allow the Commission to take more time to scrutinize because they had many things to consider. Mr. Hale agreed to separate the full sign package out from this application and bring it back for the Commission's consideration. Ms. Reiss asked how long temporary signage would be limited. Mr. Combs said they must comply with Code. Ms. Boring said although she had seen Damiler's products and they looked fine, she wanted to make sure that she saw the cascading pond. She asked if there were any stone wall treatments in the area. Paul Ghidotti, Damiler, said they would match the hedgerow to the south on both sides of the street with the evergreen hedge and columns required in the text along the entire Avery- Muirfield Boulevard frontage. He said on the ends, they proposed to sweep the plantings into the water and have the columns actually in it to provide a different feature. He said the upper pool has a radius fall, and the water will cascade. It is not meant to be a waterfall, but a smooth cascade similar to the one at the entrance of BWlantrae. Ms. Boring asked what material would be used for the walkway. Mr Ghidotti said it would be paver material. There would not be a walkway area between the terrace and the pond. The terrace would extend into the water. Ms. Boring said she would like the east elevation to be more detailed with a more residential appearance. Mr. Ghidotti said the elevation she was referring to was the west elevation (there was no drawing of the east elevation). He said although six tenant spaces were shown, it would likely be three or four, depending upon their configuration. He said there are offsets to make it feel like traditional storefronts. Ms. Boring said she did not want it to look like storefronts She wanted it more residential, although she appreciated the architectural relief. She said the roofline was 12- 0 /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan Tht Perimeter Perimeter Drlve Dub% Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — March 4, 2004 Page 1 I too ordinary. She said at the daycare across the stroect, dormers were added on both sides of the roof Mr. Ghidotti said finials will provide a feeling of height to the center, different than what exists now. He said the building is four -sided and the materials will all be the same. Ms. Boring said it appeared that the retail space had been reduced tremendously as requested. She understood the t to limit was 20,000 square feet. Mr. Ghidotti said the structure was 13,500 square feet. The bank is portion 3,000 square feet, so there is approximately 10,500 square feet within the retail portions. He said they had signed commitments from Caribou Coffee and Camille's Sidewalk WE He said they were also talking to another restaurant operator who was not comfortable being discussed. He said the three -acre subarea can, at most, hold 11,000 square feet of sit -down, casual restaurants (no drive -thrus or fast food restaurants). The text is very specific in its limitations. Ms. Boring said the applicant did a great job of providing parking in the back of the mail center, although she wanted the back to look better than the front. She said there is an office building along Post Road where the parking is proposed in front. She asked why parking could not be pushed behind that building. Mr. Ghidotti said the issue they struggled with on this site was its linear nature. There is approximately 2,000 feet of frontage on Post Road. The building could only be moved about 25 feet to the north, and there would not be room to park for the office building. Mr. Gerber asked to see landscape features along Post Road Mr. Ghidotti said along Post Road their landscape architect had worked closely with staff to come up with a typical 100 -foot cross section for Post Road. He said in each 100 feet, there are three deciduous shade trees, nine ornamental trees, and eight deciduous medium shrubs, in addition to the 3% to 6-foot mounding. Ms. Baring asked if anything blooming would be added for special effect. Mr. Ghidotti said the Post Road text is not very exciting, so they substantially increased it. They are proposing plantings comparable to Upper Metro Place without the stone wall. Mr. Gerber noted that Upper Metro Place looked nice in the summer, but not in the winter. Ms. Reiss said there were housebound residents across the street from this office building who would be looking at the parking lot out their windows, especially in the winter. Ms. Boring said they actually would be looking at the mounding. Ms. Reiss said she agreed with Ms. Boring about trying to flip the office building, but she understood that the setback for pavement is less than the building setback. Mr Gerber said the Commission saw a case about two years ago on the northwest corner and the one regret he had was that they required the parking in the rear. That forced the 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Conmission Minutes — March 4, 2004 Page 12 building right out on the corner and it seemed like it gave it a larger proportion to the area If it were sufficiently mounded with nice landscape features, he thought the building would not be so imposing. Mr. Gerber asked that the traffic pattern from the north be explained for those who would be stopping at the days center. Mr. Ghidotti explained how access to the site would be made. He said they are picking up their portion of the improvements for the intersection to add a left turn movement to go north on Post Road. Ms. Boring said the Commission has concerns about odor control. She asked if staff knew of any odor control devices that could be installed as restaurants are built She wanted some odor control to be incorporated. Ms. Readler said she vaguely remembered the situation with Indian Run Meadows when they investigated mechanisms. She did not think many of the smaller rest worts have any sophisticated methods, but large high -rises have special mechanisms. However, they found in the research that the most important thing to keeping the odors down was to have good cleaning procedures in place and to follow them. She said any kind of more sophisticated odor control system is much too expensive. Ms. Boring asked for an investigation to ensure that all bases have been covered Brandol Harvey said staff would look into it further. Having designed some restaurants previously, he said one of the problems with odor control is that there are many possible sources and it is hard to guarantee that it is going to be under control. Ms. Boring appreciated Mr. Harvey's observations and believed that the exhaust would affect the ciiwrch first. She asked for a condition that odor control be brought back with the sign package. Mr. Hale agreed to work with staff and come back with suggestions. He said this is south of all the residential, and typically there is a west wind. Ms. Boring also wanted bikepath connections to make this as pedestrian - friendly as possible. Mr. Ghidotti committed they will relocate the bikepath to make sure there is a connection. He said they would provide connections from the various office buildings to a walkway system. He said they are not required to extend the bikepath on Post Road Mr. Saneholtz noted that most of the residents are to the north of this property. To ride a bike to the neighborhood center, one would have to ride past it to go to Penmeter Drive and ride back up. Mr. Ghidotti said the existing bikepath will be moved back because of the right-of-way and plantings. Mr. Ghidotti committed to a bikepath connection. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Ruomng /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — March 4, 2004 Page 13 Ms. Reiss suggested a condition that the brc not be in the exact sane spot. It should start in the same place, bend to the west, and end at the same place. She said many Dublin Village Retirement Center residents walk to Avery Square. That would attract them to these restaurants also. Mr. Gludatti agreed. Ms. Boring asked if the shoebox lighting, because it is part of a Guideline, needed to be a condition. Mr. Combs said that already listed in the report as a condition. Ms. Boring suggested that dumpster signage be on the doors and reflected in the zoning text. Mr. Saneholtz said the architecture proposed was fabulous, and he had come 180 degrees on the retail center. However, he could not get over the hurdle of the drive -thru on the corner of Avery and Post Road. He heard the neighbors say restinvants are needed, and he only saw one fnw- standing restaurant, some netauranthetail spaces and three drive - thu banks. He said this is a visible comer, and he did not want to see a drive -thru. He said the bank to the south of the retail enter is fine. He said there are three conditional uses on this property already with drive -thnrs and he thought it was highly intensive. He suggested flipping the location of the bank. He preferred a restaurant with patio seating to the north where people can be seen enjoying themselves, rather than seeing drive -thru lanes. Mr. Saneholtz refmned to page 6 of the development text (Subarea A3), which lists " and fine dining and drinking establishments with table service or bakery/sales..." He said the Commission had discussed bakeries/cafds where customers came in and left quickly. He was in favor of table service, but doubted bakeries or cafds without table service should be included He felt the text was too vague, Mr. Ohidotti said the classification of bakery/cafds is meant to include a Panes Bread- " of operation. He said Cemille's Sidewalk Caf6 had operations in the 2,500- to 3,000- square foot range and it caters mostly to breakfast and lunchtime crowds. They close around 6 or 7 pm. Mr. Gerber said the bank drive -thus are conditional uses and will have to be brought back to the Commission. Mr. Hale said if there is an irresolvable issue, in order to use this for a restaurant site they would have to expand it. Mr. Saneholtz said it could not be expanded to the corner. Mr. Gerber said the issue was that the drive -thru could be seen from the intersection. Mr. Ghidotti said they have studied the issue at length because they too, are concerned about the drive -thru bank. They worried about the precedent this creates here. A larger sit - down restaurant that would have wonderful exposure would be good. Mr. Messineo said the drive -thru seemed a very intense use of this land. He said they were talking like there was no open space to the west. He asked if there were any other locations on Perimeter Drive to US 33 that a bank with a drive -thru could be constructed. 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezon ng /Prehn a dry Development P n/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — Mare 4, 2004 Page 14 Mr. Combs confurneld that there are other sites within the City, but they are talking about this particular proposal. He had not heard a clear cxnsensus from the Commission. Ms. Boring said they did not want to "junk up" the area to the west because there is enough room to construct a two- or three -story office building, which means income to the City. That office building cannot be placed to the east because of the setbacks required. Mr. Gerber asked if the aoncarn with the bank drive -thrus was aesthetic in nature. Mr. Saneholtz said very much so. He was willing to concede about the southernmost portion of the property and he was willing to concede the one to the west. However, he questioned if three drive -tbru banks on this parcel was the best use of the property. He said another nice restaurant was needed. He did not want the drive -thru seen on the corner, yet he did not want it so screened that it looked like a screened drive•thiu. Mr. Ghidotti said in November, the tabled proposal was required to provide effectively a 100 percent opacity and they have. He considered flipping the Key Bank drive -thm within the middle of the building, but that created cars stacked on the water. He said the water should be seen and not hidden. Mr. Saneholtz felt this proposal was being driven by the fact that Key Bank was ready to buy the corner. He did not want to discount that fact, but felt as a resident he did not want to see a drive -thru on that corner. Mr. Gerber reiterated that the drive -thru had been landscaped. Mr. Saneholtz said he understood. However, BP in front of Tuttle Mall had opaque landscaping with ten-foot tall pine trees, but it was not visually appealing whatsoever. Mr. Gerber said if Key Bank is flipped, there will be two banks back to back. Mr. Saneholtz said he did not like that either. He was proposing a bank on the corner and a bank to the west. Mr. Ghidotti said they can only have four financial institutionslbanks. However, he clarified that the two -story Champaign Financial Services regional headquarters office building will have a bank on the first floor. There was a discussion about how many banks are proposed. Mr. Messineo counted five: He said he liked the original office zoning for this site. However, the residents wanted restaurants. Ms. Boring hoped this becomes an economic tool to get the rest of the site developed into offices. She said a bank is open 5% days a week and not at night. They are not open until peak traffic gets through the area. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP RetoningjPrelimmary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — March 4, 2004 Page 15 Mr. Messineo said he did not hear anyone say more banks are needed to service the coining offices. Mr. Gerber asked if the drive -thru bank on the corner concerned any of the remaining Commissioners. Ms. Boring was not concerned because she thought the screening made a difference. She felt if the uses were flipped it would ruin the total look of the development Ms. Reiss said the aesthetics of a drive -thru at the corner bothered her. However, putting a restaurant at that comer with outdoor seating also bothered her due to the longer lours. It could be intrusive if the northeast comer becomes residential. Mr. Gerber agreed with Ms. Reiss about the restaurant. He said as long as the drivo4hru is landscaped as proposed, he had no problem. Mr. Zimmerman agreed with Mr. Gerber. Mr. Hale understood concern about opacity for the drive -tlw. He said the landscape plan would be provided at the time of the development plan. Mr. Gerber and Ms. Boring had no problem with there being four banking facilities in the development. Ms. Reiss said there is no restriction in the text, except in Subarea A3, on the number of square feet. In the rest of Al, there is no restriction as to low many of any use there could be in the development. She said there could be 100 percent office, bank or daycare uses. Mr. Hale said there are hundreds of awes of office uses surrounding this site where a bank is a permitted use and a drive -thru is a conditional use. Ms. Boring was not interested in creating a row of restaurants, and Mr. Saneholtz was not interested in creating a row of banks. Mr. Saaeholtz said this site was over saturated with banks because they are the present buyers. He would rather see a more creative use of this land and he would like to know what is still available to the west of this property, Mr. Saneholtz said if the only potential restaurant land is used up as banks, it would not solve any challenges. Mr. Hale agreed to remove the bank from the corner site. Mr. Ghidotti said they were willing to change a subarea so that financial services are not permitted. It could be office and restaurant uses. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development PI n/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning C omission Minutes — March 4, 2004 Page 16 Mr. CAkMbs pointed out for the nxorld Hutt the lard is already zoned for finial nstitutions and every site could develop as a bank today. Ms. Reiss referred to Condition S about the forcing around the mecharucals. She asked if fencing included landscaping to sanm them. Mr. Combs said fencing was not addressed in the text, so it must meet Code requirements. The Code allows combinations of mounding, screening, stone wall, etc. to comply. Ms. Reiss would rather shrubbery or greenery be used to screen mechanicals instead of fencing or putting up additional walla. Ms. Reiss asked about the age of children attending the daycare center. W. Ghidotti said the Primrose School would accept children from six weeks through the first grade (six or seven years old). Ms. Reiss suggested the tent read: Children up to age ten years, instead of `young" ehr'ldmL She said that would quantify it, as opposed to something lace a Sylvan [.earning Center where high schoolers might be tutored, etc. Mr . Mdotti weed. Ms. Reiss said Condition 3 should read ...education to toddlers and children up to age ten. Ms. Boring asked why there was concern about the age of children educated at the school. Ms. Reiss wanted a more solid, quantifiable situation that it is either permitted or not permitted. Mr. Gerber said there may be children eleven or twelve years old dropped off after school and the age restriction would prevent it Ms. Reiss wanted to clarify that it is an educational place and not a daycare. Ms. Boring expected it to be used as a daycare. Mr. Zimmerman noted that children six weeks old would be 151 0xe04 so it might be considered a daycare. Mr. Qhidotti said Primrose School was not a daycare. Ms. Boring had a problem with limiting the age. She did not think Code Enforcement should check the age of children. Ms. Reiss suggested not using the adjective "young" in text. Mr. Combs indicated that the Zoning Code does not reference any age 1 imits for daycares or similar uses. There is no way to enforce it. Mr. Hale agreed to limit the age of children in the daycare to thirteen years old. 12 - 073Z /PDP /FDP Re,oning /Prr liminary Development Pi in/ fm. +I �Ievelopment Plan The Perm ter Penmet -r Dnve Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — March 4, 2004 Page 17 W Zimmerman asked if there would be fencing around the playground. He was Coreverited th0 the text limited fencing, Wr. Ghidatti was sure fencing would be needed. Mr. Combs c "arified that fencing is required for Playground areas by State regulations. He modified Condition 5 adding ...or as otherwise required by State regulations." Ma Boring said (in the interest of Mr. Sprague, who was absent) there is Conom about the right- inMobt -out access being so close to the intersection. She asked if there would be a deceleration lane. Mr. Ghidotti said the issue had been addressed thoroughly with staff. He said it was the Preference not to do the deceleration lane, but to be sure the geometry for the right -in only would be very easy coming off to Perimeter Drive. Mr. Ghidow said thew would be "Do Not Enter" signage and an area on site with no corripetitim for stacking. Mr. Messineo asked if the undesignated area to the west was was for office. Mr. Ghidotti said two 9,000 - square foot office buildings will be developed. One would be occupied with a family practitioner. When the office market gets better, the other area will be a perfect location for a REA Financial -sized type building. Ms. Boring made a motion to approve tlus rezoninghrevised composite lam p application because the plans address concerns raised by the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 3, 2003, it generally Complies with criteria set forth in Section 153.058(E) of the Dublin Zoning Code, and the rezoning will provide a quality development necessary support services within the to with employment core of the City, with l2 Conditions: 1) That Section B — Yard and Setback Requirements of the Proposed text be revised to read: "Side yard setbacks shall be a--tet d_9f 15' for pavement..." prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council; 2 ) That proposed sign standards for Tenant 7 of the Neighborhood Retail Center (Subarea Al) be revised to provide a total permitted sign area of no more than 66.67 squaw feed to comply with Cade prior to scheduling for a public hearing at City Council, subject to staff approval; 3) That the timing for proposed offsite traffic improvements be coordinated with and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 4) That the proposed development comply with the City of Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines and that all sites utilize coordinated shoe box lighting no greater than 28 feet in height; 5) That fencing be utilized only for the purposes of screening service structures, mechanical units, etc. or required by State regulations, to the satisfaction of staff. 6) That doss -access agreements be provided within all portions of the proposed development, to the satisfaction of staff; 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Re_omng /Preliminary DevOopment Plan/ Final Development Plan The Ptrimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes — March 4, 2004 Page 18 7) That a fall sign padmv to be broom back to the Commission for approval prior to the develalpmem p1m 8) That the same level of finishing be tequirled on the east roof of the retail cetaw that provides an appearance with residential charaaer, 9) That concerns of pedestrian connectivity within this retail center and to the south be properly provided for residents to the north of Post Road; 10) That the text be revised to include no financial services in Subarea A3; 11) That text language regarding daycares be revised to include an age limit of 13 years or under; and 12) That the issues of odor control be brought back to the Commission for further consideration prior to the development plan stage. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Mr. Hale agreed with the conditions listed above. The vote was as follows: Ms. Reiss, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, yes; Mr. Messiaeo, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; and Ms. Boring, yes. (Approved &0.) Mr. Gerber thanked Mr. Hale ayrneemess. A ini ess , At 9 p.m. Gerber called a rr=Gc rb " e " rsWd Dr AdOtIon —i and a condition uses, those for their hard work. Use X90 Perimeter cad are two awlicatimwteing considered, Separate votes 1 berequired S� dad to spe ore ak the Commisd2v — Avery M were at swore -in. Jamie A said this site is 1 ed north of SR 1, /ping ery -. 'rfield Drive. She ed slides of the si The Avery Squ shop is shaped and has two arceis on Avery eld Drive. site is part of the lar PCD. S 'ng parcels are ed PCD, s. Adkins said addition is a scant site that wou connect two f the shopping as originally oho on the appro iminary B plan. in , landscaping, g, etc. for this addi ' ware installed Four tenant aces are proposed r this addition wi two outdoor dinin /yeas. The total squ footage of this ad tion is 14,557 sq feet, and the pati area is 1,155 Square f t. Ms Adkins said staff ecommends appro of the develop nt plan with ei ditions: 12 073Z /PDP /FDP FIezomnp /Pre iminary Development Plan/ Final Deve:opment Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS _ MittLne of Dublin City Cean+w:l Meating Ocdober 20, 2003 Page 3 -- EIeW 2D the North Side Road, South Brand Road, �f M Orhre, as , t�lrktaed Su ResideMtat and R, R(Case No. 0Z — Post Road to Rom, West Drive end -Croy Road ZTIO Aft. Zuercdter, yes; Mr nstuber, Yes: , yes; Ms. Saladkler, Boring. yes: yor McCash, yes. INTRO — ORp AG ce 114.03 the City to Enter Into Agreement with Delaware M Prosecutor the Delaware C Mufdclpal L.e klider the ordinance. Brautigam steel 0ds relates to annual ow trect servkx3s provided the Delaware M tor. The t has been red last year's , based on the Mayor McCash that a second k: has will be scheduler) the November 3 ncti meeting. AWARW 810 115-03 the L for the Was Paris Dove Project Ms. inboducar the Inane. Mr. offered to to questions. Ms y noted fhat at time this was ntod to P&Z. the seemed mod about the lion of the future aM. Have m®e been held with yesklients and has comfort level Im ? llltr. Hahn stated a moo" with the is took praise rior to the P8Z on the park plan. Th may have writ the 2005 bik th project that subsequent to P&Z hewing. Th residents were into that when fund is appropriated f the bit prp . staff will work ndividual reskents address The engineering for project will not be until the j appropria are available in ra c I oncerns that ft"" the by P&Z The kepath erect ad t e plan r Council y. after Canncil has a ropriated funding. Mr. eck ider asked If company has d pNayground work f City previously. �� they have done oral such projects the City and I � f There will be a s readhWpulft at the 3 Council rnesti CODE A MEN NT —CON L USE P Ordinance M 153.238 of Dublin CodOed nances E °Procedure for a Cond Use" (Case No. Ms. Introduced the and moved to Plami g & on. Ms innici- Zuercher nded the motion. V Mr tuber, yes; Mr. eddider, yes; McCash. yes; Me S , yes; Ms. Chinni Zuercher, yes; tints , yes; Mr. R . yes. ZONING Ordinance 118-03 Rezoning Approximately 24.3 Acres, on the Northwest Corner of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirf#eld Drive, from: PCO, Planned Commerce pisbict, to: PCp, planned Commerce District (Case No. 03499 — Riverside Hospital, PCD Composite Plan Revision, Subarea A). Mr Reiner introduced the ordinance. j Ms. Chinnkd- Zuerdw moved referral to Planning & Zoning Commission. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Mr. Ledctider asked that staff ensure that all parties are notified who were noticed when 12 -07 3 Z/ P D P/ F D P INS was previously considered. Such notice went beyond the requirements specified In the Code. Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS M of DublInCityCound , ing �1 Odd 20, 2003 Page 4 -` Held 20 ! vote on the modor, Mr. Ledd ider. yes; Ms. SalaY, yes; Mayor McCash. yes; Ms. Chinnkl- Zuercher, yes; W. Kranstutm. yes. nit. Reiter, Yes; Mrs. Sonng. yes. Mayor =8 ked the Clerk to the tides of Ord 119-03 thro 122.03. Ordinance 11 Rezordnp Imately 28 P Comprising Area of Appro sly 43 Acres as Arne from Washingto ownshtp 881 and 2001, of Brand Road, of West Bridge To: R. Rural Istrict or R -1. feted Suburban Rest al District, or R inked Suburban esidew tfal DI (Case #03 -1202 Indian , M al. Area ling) 120.0.4 R 42 Parcels C sing an Area of xhnatey 544 as Annexed Washington T SW between 1 and 2000. the SMer-RingsJ Road IMe on, East of Cos y Road, To. R, Ru or R-1, Suburban Distri (Casa No. 03 -121 SW Ordir� 21 • Residenlist Remwtg) Rezoning 13 s Comprising an ee of Approx 40 Acres as Annexed Wasldngton T wnahip In 1990, nerally South of r- a,; Temple . and West of A Road, To: RI, ated Industris , Planned I ark or NC. Nei nod C District. (Case .03-122Z-OW Shier 8- Road, I Area R big) O 122-03 Res Approxim Parcels Ing an Area of ximately 376 as Annexed ashh*ton and rome Townships San 1886 and 1 , South of Post ad To: R. Rural trlct, R -1, Restrf Suburban Rest al RI. Restrl Industrial Dd U, limited Indu 1 District or 61, oral dustrlal DisMct. Case No. 03 -1232 SR 161NS 33, or Area Re Ms Salay fntrod d the ordinances, owed to waive the ell Rules of Ord to treat these as a group nd for them to nning & Zoning mission. Mr. LecicUder the motion. V to : 1�. Reiner. Mayor McCash. s; Ms. Chinnid- er, yes, Mr. !' Leckllder. ; Ms. Salay, Yes; Baring. yes; Mr. redrber, yes. d. • otellMotel Tax Reoommenda - Finance 1 i reported that met on October 7 w tians for tellmotet tetc gran . There were a I rxrmber of applies no ye E Wzl of funds avallable grants was . due to previous I tax funds to- ) the Dublin Con on and Visitors u - 25 percent of tM tax revenues $80,000 per for fin years to ine their rent at the builiti ft 2) the n Arts Council g t per the lease and 3) City events, induct Dublin Idsh F St. Patrklk's , July Fourth Ce! don. HoNy Days Spaddacular. Me of time is were approvarJ mvkxm CouncUs. addition. a multi- Commitment was ade to Dublin Youth for field I at Darree s. The to DYA for 2004 Is $52. .00, Given these . the ttee lei reeomme three addict I grants- 1) ublin l0wanis F Jump - an amount t to exceed $2,000 or City services p related to the ev ; The Arthritis F ation for the Ann u Classic Auto S - an amount not to exceed $2, or City services; 3) The Dublin torical society - $1 0 to expand the d lopment of the I image and library depicting history of Dublin. N Forthe laic fund of applications, the ties is reco rig disapproval us to the hV. s of the letters nt to applicants a been provided to Co. Mr. Kranstu moved approval of Finance C recommend Mr. LecddWe eoonded the mo fo . Mr. Reiner, ; Mrs. Boring, Mayor McCash. . Ms. Say. yes; Mr. der, yes; Rte. nidd- Zuerd>er. yes; . Kranstuber, yes Ms nil- Zuerclter that a Committee has been uled for Thursda 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP i ber 6 at 6 p m to the poUcy for waivers regarding DCRC and the Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ final 0 Arts Council. All ndl Members a to attend. Development Plan The Perimeter d Perimeter Drive rm Ok X PLANNING AND Zomm COMIV MON RECORD OF ACTION Xrn (OF Dt:6 IA AUGUST 14, 2003 4�tW PdWAW.614416 -{610 ft WASk q The Planning and Zoning Commission took no action on the following case at this meeting; 2. Informal Hearing - Rezoning 03-016Z - Riverside HWOW PCD - Subarea A Loeation: 243 acres located at the northwest eons of Perim&r Drive and Avery- Muir6eld Drive. Falsdng Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside Hospitaal plan). Request: L6formal feedback from the Commission. Proposed Use: A mixed -use development that includes rcta% restaurant, office, and funeral home uses. APpllemb Hospital Properties, Inc., 3722 Oleatawgy River Road, Suite K, Columbus, Ohio 43214; represented by The Daimler Group, Inc., cto Paul Ghidotd,1333 Lake Shore Drive, Cohnnbus, Ohio 43204. Staff Contact: Chad D. Gibson, AICP, Senior Planner. RESULT: There was a 30- minute discussion of two possible development scenarios. The Commissioners, except one, liked the concept in general. The Commission stressed the need for additional landscepiag features, high - quality materials sin> dar to these used at the Pacer building, parking to be to the rear of the building, and addressing traffic flow. There was generally less support for the version that included a large format retail use. No vote taken on this inform! case. STAFF CERTIFICATION V n . Barbara M. Clarke Planning Director 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoni»mmission Minutes —August 14, 2003 Page 6 2. Informal Heahring - Raoaiug 03-016Z - Riverside Hospital PCD - Subarea A Mr. Gerber announced dint this info><mal case would not exceed 30 minutes. Chad Gibson said this site is part of the Rivers Hospital PCD, Planned Commerce District, which includes the Avery Square shopping cutter. He noted tie Commission disapproved a retuning application for this site in May 2003, which was later withdrawn. This is a request for informal feedback on a mixed -use development. Tle major changes are to the uses and including a hnm pond along to Muirfield/Avery Drive with substantial setbacks. Mr. Gibson said Concept 1 is two mstaurants two banks, a daycare, retail center, and office. Concept 2 includes one restaurant, two banks, a daycare, retail center, a specialty food store and two oflioes. Hs showed slides of the area. Paul Ghidott4 Dangler Group, said their design team took a fresh look at this site. They have two designs with etclhitectume and aestlietiles as nice as anything else in Dublin. They want to assum the Avery Road corridor is appropriately treated. Both concepts retain the office and provide for locally supported retail services in this transitional site. The Community Plan shows the site as `mixed -use employment his.' Mr. Ghidotti said a pond was added along the Avery/Muirfield frontage on both concepts. The setbacks total 4.5 acmes due to so much road frontage and provide the most beneficial view of this site. By moving all the development back 150 feet, they have recognized the Avery/Muirfield frontage and the transitional nature. He showed renderings of the concepts. Mr. Ghidotd said the linear pond will be very similar to the pond on Franz Road in Sont of the Preserve building. It will have a natural edge, not stone. Water will cascade down from an upper pool, similar to the park on Woenw- Temple Road at Ballantrae. An arched waterfall will be 30 feet in its radius. At the two ends of the pond, there will be water plumes and a reflection pond. This layout will lend itself to some small sitting areas on the pond, such as for a nice cafd. Mr. Gbidotti said the access reflects what the Engineering staff approved in May. Regarding to the land located farther west, they know it needs to be office. It is a third tier site in the Mt. Auburn study, with many better office sites available. They tried to incorporate the Commission comments firom May into a transitional concept. He wants to be sure they are on course. Mr. Ritchie said this was a good job, and the May application was just another shopping center. He said they combined some unique retail qualities and a pedestrian environment. He liked the interaction between the retail and the lake. Mr. Ritchie thought a specialty grocery store was needed. He did not compare Concept 1 and 2. He lilted the destination idea Mr. Messineo said he liked Concept 2, and the pond is a big bonus. Mr. Sprague said this was a really good job on a challenging site. While he liked both concepts, he preferred Concept 1. He noted the need to have infrastructure in place to support this, primarily to address traffic. If this is planned carefully, he felt this would succeed. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and ssion Minutes —August 14, 2003 Pop Ms. Baring appreciated that the applicant had directly addressed both the Community Plan and the Mt. Auburn surly. She was dsappointed that the funeral home was not iucduded because Dublin needs one. She liked the idea of the parting in the back, and the outdoor mad4eating is a Brent concept. She said she preferred Concept 1 because of the sustakwbility of largo scale retail in Dublin is questionable. There are batter Dublin locations for a grocery stone. 14is. Baring said unless Dublin sets a policy that these will not be more big boxes, there will be cottnn ued vacancy and tumover she favored two restaurants; she has heard repeatedly that are inadequate facilities for employees to get lunch To encourage the employment emphasis, lunchtime eating places must be provided. Ms. Hosing liked the setbacks. She was disappointed that the p1mous artwork discussed was not included. Ms. Boring noted that page 5 of the text limits pound coverage by buildings, exclusive of parking garages, to 25 percernt of the lot, and that seemed restrictive. Mr. Ghidotti said this concept has not been detailed. Mr. Ghidotti said regarding sustainability of the hTW store, the two users proposed have 50 to 100 existing stores. One is publicly traded, the other is family owned, and both are stable. Ms. Boring noted several large store vacancies, and she questioned if new retail space is needed. Mr. Ghiddotl said both retailers had specific criteria for their store function and location. Both require their own firedog stores with docks. Ms. Baring said it may be time for Dublin to be tough about building new large format uses. Mr. Zimmerman said both concepts were nice. He is cow=ned that the original subarea plan addressed locations for offices and for retail, including restaurant outparmis. The current text requires this indwea to be offices that reflect residential scale and character. He said the Pacer building is one of the nicest looking ones in Dublin, and this site was intended to be office use. Mr. Ghidotti said the Community Plan shows their site as one of the few in this area as "mixed use employment emphasis." That contemplates office use primarily and secondarily either retail or residential. This site is inappropriate for residential use. Mr. Zimmerman said the concepts were beantifirl, but he was looking for office use here. Mr. Ghidotti said while office buildings could be constructed, parking would be a problem due to the narrow width. He said these uses would support the Pacer office building. Mr. Gerber summarund that five of the six Commhsshoners present could support this concept, including himself, He said he was unsure of another big box, given the national p er f ormance , of some retailers. He appreciated how Mr. Gibson had addressed the Community Plan issues. He said this is a mixed use in a transition area, but office should still be the predominant use. There is a shopping center to the south. He liked how the restaurants were located and the transitional nature of the design. He said landscaping is a key issue, and this should be more than roadways and buildings. He like the landscape features, but there should be more at this gateway. The development here will act to shape the future growth to the west. The uses were acceptable. He said his preferred materials would be those similar to the Pacer building. He asked if the applicant wanted to return for another informal discussion or with an application. 12.073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zo ' fission Minutes — August 14, 200 0 Page Mr. Ciddoth said they will submit a formal rezoning application based on these comments. Ms. Boring said she would like more parking to the rear to be incorporated. Mr. GbAotd said they would like to have the elevation of the internal private roads dip down so traffic moving in and out will not be seen from the cKta rior street. Mr. Gerber said hoped traffic would flow well. Mr. Ghidotti said in May, they were requested to contribute infrastructure needed today. They agree to accept the burden for any mgxu b they cause, but they should not be required to bear the burden for anything that exists today. Mr. Gerber said it needed to be worked out with the staff. Mr. Glridotti asked for direct feedback on Concept 2, which has the larger format =WL It could be removed, if need be. He thought Dublin's 30,000 residents need services, and the closest house in Lowell Trace is fiuther away fiem this site than the AveryAJS 33 ire. Mr. Gerber believes a big bon retailer will leave at some point. Ms. Boring said the big box will be a specialty store, and that meant it was destination driven. She prefeaed read uses that serve the local area. There are other sites in Dublin that could be modified for a large reddkr. Mr. Ghidottl said Concept 2 has two retail users, one with 19,100 square feet, and the other either 21,000 or 26,000 square feet. He said it was an outstanding winelcheeselgift type shop. Mr. Gerber said five of the Commissioners present were in agreement with the basic concept. He told Mr. Gibson that he had done a very nice job on this report. 3. Pnellmiaq► NO t 03.033PP — op's Ran Mr. Gerber in those who i 'Bal a desire speak on this i i 've IColby said this is liminary plat r 35 acres on y Mr. Tumock said B' 's Run is for 56 lots, and mop's was zoned for 2 lots, eight of which being transf onto this y plat. applicant to include the ei ots with this immary plat f Bishop's Run the Bishop' Crossing tact ll ue to apply to . This Old* odes the section of Tull Drive. Mr. Tcock 'wed the minim lot sizes area optt in each text. a noted only Lots 1- are required to the divorsi standards, and 57-64 are The lots backing up the Metro Park b 7 -17) are 00 feet wide at request of ' 'on at the and they ' not vary in lot Since the val of the B` 's Crossing prel' ' plat, Dublin uestal that the path along T ore Drive be north, and this been done. He ted there will speed tables at entrances to a Metro Park, th will provide tr c calming increase pod an safety. are two five- t paths betty n lots for Metro ark accea. Mr. Tumock the frontage tment along H and -Croy Road Nas done for th "Wowl" program. It bosques, ev , grasses, ' d lower% fencin erred a bikepa 'th 8100- foot tan buffer along T lymore Drive. is landscape p reeds to show mounding. 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive WITHDRAWN APPLICATION PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION rV RECORD OF ACTION MAY 15, 2003 »CITY OF t)IIBUN amu d t6•ie6 s110sh4brow 16ertiIM614410400 iwbSk w The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 4. Revised Composite Plan 03-016Z - Riverside Hospital PCD - Subarea A Location: 24.3 acres located at the northwest comer of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirfield Drive, Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Riverside Hospital plan). Request: A request to rezone the property through the revision of the composite plan and development text under the PCD provisions of Section 153.058. Proposed Use: A nixed -use development that includes retail, restaurant, office, and funeral home uses. Applicant: Hospital Properties, Inc—, 3722 Olentangy River Road, Suite K, Columbus, Ohio 43214, represented by The Daimler Group, Inc., do Paul Ghidotti, 1533 Lake Shore Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43204. Staff Contact: (grad D. Gibson, AICP, Senior Planner. MOTION: To disapprove this rezoning application because the proposal does not support the concept of a transition zone, the development is not necessarily consistent in all respects with the purpose, intent, applicable standards and preferred land uses as noted in the Community Plan, the preliminary site layout does not maintain the image of Dublin as a planned community, and there is a likelihood of an increase in traffic in the area which is a great concern of the residents. VOTE: 7 -0. RESULT: This rezoning application was disapproved. It will be forwarded to City Council with a negative recommendation. STAFF CERTIFICATION ace . Barbara M. Clarke /�► Planning Director 12 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan Thr � enmeter Perimeter Drwr Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission hfinuties - 1 t9tHDRAWN APPLICATI � 4N © 1) � to PCD, pq, lx{ gp days 2) the plan be to to the / landscaping completed by 30, 2004 That tree zones located along tree rows all n phases; 4) That the a lighting ly with the Li ' Mr. Ri seconded motion, and vote was yes; Mr. S yes; Ms. yes; Mr. -0.) Mr. thanked Mr. Landscape 9W and that ootxipeVecy whiuhew� later; site, with and utilize cut -off follows: . Messineo, , Mr. . Yrn; • Rim e. M Mr. and the 4. R=Dukg 0"16Z — Mverdde Hospital PCD — Subarea A Chad Gibson said this is a mquest to rezone Subarea A of the Rive4W& Hospital PCD to expand the mix of uses and clime the development standards. He said site currently permits offices and iostitutional uses in buildings that have a residential scale. The site is long and narrow and borders Post Road,, Avery Road, and Periader Drive just north of Avery Square. The open field only contains a barn at the west and and a temporary bikepath. He said the proposal has six subareas. Subarea l and S will permit office and institutional uses including a bank. Subarea 2 permits restaurant, bank, and office uses. Subareas 3 and 4 are proposed for retail, office, and restaurant uses, and Subarea 6 permits a fnmeral home and offices. Ic Access ints include a ri y ve, a full service access po ght -in onl on Perim Dui aligned with the service access across Perimeter Drive, a full service access aligned with the Kroger driveway, and a full service access on Post Road opposite the church driveway. Mr. Gibson said a traffic study and, a memo from the traffic consultant were distributed. This overall development produces ten percent more traffic than if it were developed as currently permitted. During the AM and PM peak periods, 25 percent less traffic is produced. He said when the preliminary plat was approved, it had a condition which discouraged any access onto Post Road. Mr. Gibson noted the sign package does not yet meet Code The density and amount of retail and restaurant uses are unresolved. Mr. Gibson said the amount of restaurant and mail uses permitted in Subareas 2, 3, and 4 needs to be reduced. Staff navmauneads that Subarea 2 remain an office zone. Subareas 3 and 4 should include all of the retail and ressmurant components. Staff recommends a 12,000 square foot limit on restarmant and a maximum retail area of 20,000 square feet. Staff also believes the restawant or retail uses in Subareas 3 and 4 should be oriented towards the back of Avery Square. He said the existing temporary bikepath needs permanent placement through the site. Mr. Gibson said the traffic study recommends an eastbound left turn lane on post Road at Avery- Muirfield Drive. Substantial improvements are needed at the intersection of Perimeter Drive and Avery- Muirfield Drive, including more right -of -way. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning diem WITHDRAWN APPLICATION Minutes — May 15, 2003 Page 6 Mr. Gibson said staff reoonnmands approval with deven coffins: 1) Thai the text be revised to limit restaurant use to 12,000 square feet and retail use to 20 ,000 square feet for the entire 2) That restaurant uses be permitted only in Subo bareas 3 and 4, and that they be oriented toward P+n wWw Drive only; 3) That a plat be submitted which meets all requirements of the zoning text and stW% and permanently relocates the bikepath; 4) That the text be revised to require a minimum open space requirement of 35 percent; 5) That the proposed development smnage be limited further m the text; 6) That drive -dm Facilities be treated as conditional uses in all subareas; 7) That right -of -way be dedicated consistent with the lboroughbre Plan, recommendations within the previously accepted traffic studies, and be incorporated into the text as required by Engineering shA subject to staffspproval; 8) That all site access points have ge ometr y approved by the City Engineer; 9) That the text be revised to require adherence to the Stormwatw Regulations; 10) That bright trim colors be eliminated from the permitted color palette; and I1)11M a west bound left -tum lane be installed on Post Road and that an east -bound left -turn lane be installed at Post and Avery Roads, and that a 25 percent contn'bation towards sigrW installation at the Kroger enhance drive along Perimeter Drive be made prior to occupancy of any portion of the site. Mr. Gibson said Condition 11 had not been discussed with the applicant. +� Mr. Gibson said the Community Plan recommended `mixed -use employment emphasis" which generally has office as the primary land use Other accessory uses, including retail, could be included. Severely limiti ng regional and large scale retail uses is reoommrended. Mr. Gerber asked if this is to be a transitional area. Mr. Gibson said yes. The current plan requires an office park of residendal scale. Paul Ghidotti of Daimler Group said this was one of the finest projects they have brought to Dublin in 20 years He d inked the staff for its work on this. This is an in -fill site, and they aunt elevate the level of quality already achieved. It will be a transitional area He said the site has been umaucce ssfirlly marketed for some time. Daimler reconrnended a first class mixed use project with a main focus of office use for the site. Mr. Ghidotd introduced Daimler's design team including Jim Bean, Gary Wilcox, John Hart, and the Glimcher Organization. He said Daimler has developed over 12 million square feet of commercial space in 20 years, and over 2 million square feet within Dublin. He gave background on income tax revenue produced. Mr. Ghidotti showed a PowerPoint presentation of Daimler's Dublin projects including the Preserve, Dominion Homes office, eta. Daimler developed Upper Metro Place which had a TIP for extraordinary landscaping. Mr. Gerber said the Commission was aware of the fine projects Daimler had produced, and he requested that Mr. Ghidotti discuss this application. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Plannin and zoning Condon WITHDRAWN APPLICATION Minutes —May 15, 2003 Pap y Mr. Ghidotti said their goals were to elevate the quality of the development, and to recognise the transition zones. Tboy are trying to implement the mixed ass as mentioned in the Community Plan. He described the site and surfing development. The landscape plan has two plaza areas. They will extend the bikepath along Post Road. The Avery Road hedgerow and coltunns will be continued. A dry laid stone wall, ponds with fountains, and a kinetic metal sculpture are planned. Mr. Ghodotd said they met with nearby neighbors on Post Road, Indian Run Meadows and Lowell Trace. He was aware of their cam, to which they are trying to respond. He said medical Woups may want small singlestory buildings. They are focusing on specialty retail, restauuants and two boutique specialty food stores. Schoodinger Funeral Homes is iate+asred. Mr. Ghidotti said buildings along Avery Road will be one story, and non -office uses must have shake roofs, match mg the architecture of Panora Bread and Monro Muffler. He said there are only two full access points on Perimeter Drive, not four as shown. The fast is ri& in only and part of it is not an access point to the development, it is for Schoedinger. Farid Masri, Indian Run Meadow Civic Association, said they prefer office use as currently planned. He said it may not be not realistic to assume it would be strictly office. He said the landscaping proposed was very nice. Limiting the offices along Avery Road to one story was also attractive. They do not want more fast food restaurants along Avery Road. Mr. Mam said that retail uses should be limited by square footage and quantity, and the number of restaurants should be limited. He said the area needs a high -end quality restaurant, especially to xm the office uses. Restaurants may cause nuisance issues such as odors or noise to the neighbors, and they attract outside customers. He said the zoning text should require that testmrants facing Avery Road include environmental controls to minimize odors. A barbeque restaurant would not be appropriate. Minimizing light pollution and noise should be included. Wood shakes require too much maintenance, and he suggested using slate or imitation slate. Shawn Maddock, Lowell Thrace Civic Association, summarized resident feedback on this project. He said the all 25 residents he spoke to oppose this rezoning. They believe there are already adequate shops, restaurants and services. Vacancies at Perimeter Center and Avery Square should be filled first. They oppose alcohol sales. They questioned the need for more banks or a funeral home. The nearest residents were concerned about noise and light pollution. He said if this becomes a retail development, he thought the staff suggested conditions are very reasonable. Ms. Boring said she appreciated the concern about alcohol- serving restaurants, but the alternative is often fast -food restaurants. She did not want more fast -food and drive -thrus here. Mr. Gerber asked how far was the nearest residence to this proposed restaurant site. Mr. Gibson said there were residents on the north side of Post Road. Mr. Ghidotti asked to respond to this issue. Mr. Gerber said no, to please let the Commissioners ask their questions. 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP R ± /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublm Planning and zoning Commission WITHDRAWN APPLICATION Minutes —May 15, 2003 Page 8 © Mr. Zimmerman estinatod them were 300 units in the Dublin Retirement Center. Mr. Gibson said Gorden Farms was further west on Post Road, but he did not know the number of units. Mr. Tirnmaman and M. Sprague agreed there were quality of life issues for dte residents of the rietirement center facing Post Road to be considered. his. Boring said for the east side of Dublin, they created a multi - family area so that there could be a pedestriar=type atmosphere so they could walk to the transition zone. IVir. Sprague there were multi - family area and senior living already established. The bikepaths are connected, and it is more pedestrian- 5iendly. Mr. Ritchie said fire uses proposed tonight are those of which you need an automobile. Mr. Gabor understood first fie Community Plan was trying to establish a buffer between activity or destination area (Perimeter Center) and the neighborhoods. The point was to maintain some level of privacy and to limit traffic. He said for a deviation fiom the Community Plan use of a transition office area, die fits must be eompd b& He has not yet been persuaded this evening. Ms. Boring reported previous conversations with Mr. Gi idotti. She was concerned about the mail. She bekeved it was responsible to state there is enough retail space in place. She noted #hare is a need for restaurants and for a funeral home in Dublin. M. Saneholtz said the only "retail" use north of Perimeter Drive is the Fifth -Third Bank The area's charmer is residential. Supporting dris, means supporting change in the area's character. He quoted from the April 7,1988 Commission minutes. It was clear then that officelmstitutional would be expected at this site. Mr. Saneholtz said the Commission is remaining consistent with the 1988 undarAllinding that retail was not necessarily envisioned for this parcel. Mr. Saneholtz said one upscale restaurant to the center of the property, fronting onto Perimeter Drive with significant waterscape; landscape buffer, and land buffer between it and Post Road, could be an effective use of this property. There was no opposition to the Amaral home use, and its conduct would be closer to office than retail in character. However, cremaltion activity here might not be appropriate. He would prefer a restaurant with a serene waterscape to one with an outdoor patio facing the retirement eenta. He could support one sizable restaurant on the south edge of the property. Otherwise, he said he preferred office and institutional uses for this site. Mr. Sprague said the traffic impact issue was significant There has been tremendous study of traffic impacts for this and related sites. The City made improvements to enable carrying significant traffic for much of the day. He said a great job had been done. With an increase in the level of activity and density, there will be adverse impacts on the infrastructure. He noted that more turn lanes and signals, as well as re- routing traffic, would be needed. He noted the area currently experiences traffic back -ups on Perimeter Drive. He said office use, as it is zoned, would be an appropriate land utilization leading to a better quality of life. Mr. Gerber said this is still a transition area as set forth in the Community Plan 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ Final Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Plantin and Zoning Commission WITHDRAWN APPLICATION Minutes —May 15, 2003 Page Mr. Sameholta said the exist left trim lane on Perimeter Drive to go north on Muirfheld Drive; needs to be addressed now. Ile said access onto Post Road would not be necessary. Barb Cox said the Post Rand access helps to balance the traffic and to give drivers options. She noted the existing problems at Perimeter/ Avery- Muirfield Drive. Without access onto Post Road for this site, there will be even more problems. Although this proposal increases overall traffic, it does not concentrate so much traffic in the peak hours. She noted farther study is needed b&. Sanehboltz does not want to see traffic stacking on Post Road to get onto this property. However, emoting traffic is less of a concern. He would prefer a double left turn to pushing that traffic onto Post Road. Mr. Messmao agreed and said it takes him two full signal cycles to get duough in the AM peak. Things will wormer with additional developmawt. M. Messmso asked what "comparing baseline traffic with permitted uses" meant m the study. Gary Wilcox, Traffic Ewing. ServicM said Dublin's original traffic model assumed all this land to be office at 10,000 square feet per acre. The zoning actually permits other uses, like banks The modified baseline traffic adds some of those other permitted uses. Mr. Messineo said this would really be a `worst case" and indicates the maximum loading of the site He thought there should have been a comparison to the Dublin's tested baseline. Testing against the worst case scenario is misleading. Nk. Wilcox said part of this issue is terminology. Trips generated and traffic impact are two different things. There are morning peak hour problenn, and more offices will wormer it Retail and restaurants are not open during the AM peak. N you measure the affect on the ngjor nearby intersections, the proposal, the modified baseline, or the original plan all have similar results, in terms of capacity analysis. Mr. Messilow said this site was a transition to the serenity of Red Trabue Nature Preserve. Mr. Gerber said it seemed that the Commissioners were saying that this is truly a transition area, consistent with what was laid out in the Community Plea M. Ritchie said he was looking at this proposal for sustaiinability. If the site is developed as offices or a balance of offices, be thought it was more amble and will have more long term benefits for Dublin than restaurants. Looking at the long term, office and institutional are best. Ms. Boring said Daimler Group does a great job. She liked the artwork and the Post Road hit She said there was no question about the actual development or the developer. The biggest reason for disapproval was the transition in the land use issue and the long term sustainability of that l and. Mr. Gerber agreed and said he sensed that the Commission wanted to maintain this as a transition area Mr. Saneloltz made the motion to disapprove this rezoning application because the proposal does not support what the Commission would anticipate being a transition zone, the development is not necessarily consistent in all ruts with the purpose, intent and applicable standards for 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Re: oning/Prehminary Development P Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive Dublin Planning and zoning Commission WITHDRAWN APPLICATION Mnutes—May 15, 2003 Page 10 die permissilde land uses as noted in the Community Plan, the preliminary site layout does not maintain the image of Dublin as a planned community, and there is a likelihood of an increase in traffic in the area which is a great concern of the residents. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Ritchie, yes, because of the lack of long -term sustainability and lack of conformance with the Community Plan; Ms. Boring, yes, and she agreed with the other Cwnmissionexs; Mr. Zimmerman, yes, citing the Community Plan and other thoughts of the Commissioners; M. Sprague, yes, the development is not consistent in all respects to the purpose, intent, and applicable standards, permissible land uses, and the density is not in conformance with the a comprehensive playa; W.Messinco, yes, because it was not in conformance with the Community Plan; Mr. Gerber, yes, because the dice& established in Section 153.05(B) have not been sufficiently and by the applicant and with respect to the Community Plan, and he did not hear any compelling evidence to deviate from that plan; Mr. SanehdU6 yes. (Disapproved 7-0.) Mr. Ghidotd asked For more time to speak. Mr. Gabrx said he had been allotted over 20 minutes for the won, and the Commission has now voted. Mr. Ghidoth dra led him. Mr. Gerber at 8:10 pm called a short recess. The mewing reconvened at 8:30 p.m. 5. Rezo 02 -1362 — will Cow to Plan - T Crossing Subarah 4 — Chipo Medcan — SS20 Parkway Kelly this application permit a restaurant ' ubarea © 4 of a Cross' PCD. The acre site two and is on the Awed corner- Tuttle C ' Boulevard Blazer y. The building is a herald's and the building ' emsorh W retail sauce is half No site la changes are Vosed. The 'on is a Chipode exican Grill be added to the half of retail Daoaenfe said Subarea 4 was in 2004 for uses with reduced t ( m 121 to 83 ). That ' g the ' n of the 6, square foot =dds the 4,000 sq foot t. Due to a second e prohibite d. She said has this site on n erous us during urah hours, about half of lot is open parking. She wed an ae ' slide which taken on a y at 122 It showed parking was fairly and the driv at Mc d's was pads Ms. Darmerd said staff 'eves that two can work t but it is no cominced any two rests could in harmony. Staff that any restaurant be nsidered a co itional use, 'ring P Commission val. e wail :re does meet the standards. . Damhenfel said the Tine additional ts, and tall believes t the Chi and McDonalfl'9 can work t .Staff ends with six coed' on C 12- 073Z /PDP /FDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan/ F r. Development Plan The Perimeter Perimeter Drive