54-99 Ordinance RECORD OF ORDINANCES
Dayton Legal Blank Co. Form No. 30043
54-99
Ordinance No Passed
YE.aR
An ordinance providing for a change in zoning for 55.5 acres located on the
west side of Avery Road, and north of Rings Road, From: R-1B,
Restricted Suburban Residential District and EU, Exceptional Use District
(Washington Township classifications), To: PUD, Planned Unit
Development District. (framer's Crossing, aka Avery Village
Commons/File No. 99-0412)
NOW, T~REFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, State
of Ohio, of the elected members concurring:
Section 1. That the following described real estate (see attached map marked Exhibit "A")
situated in the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned PUD, Planned Unit
Development District, and shall be subject to regulations and procedures contained in
Ordinance No. 21-70 (Chapter 153 of the Codified Ordinances) the City of Dublin Zoning
Code and amendments thereto.
Section 2. That application, Exhibit "B", including the list of contiguous and affected
property owners, and the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
Exhibit "C", are all incorporated into and made an official part of this Ordinance and said
real estate shall be developed and used in accordance therewith.
Section 3. That this Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after the earliest
~ period allowed by law.
02 D o ~
Passe day of 1~9.
or -Presiding Officer
Attest:
Sponsor: Planning Division
I hereby certify that copies of this OrdnancelResolution were posteu~ the
City of Dublin in accordance with Section 731.25 0# the ~'~o Revised Code.
.
Q~o4~. C c of Council, Dubin, Ohio
0
~ ~ 6
~ ~
4k Yh r x,
•
0
1
R PLR
R
WOERNER Ec TE1~P1~ RD
~ ~ p~
PCD
SITE a-~a i
R G R
R-~s u R-~~
-z
R-3
NC '
- ~ -
~D
; R-~ ~
R-~
MONO PCD
e
99-041 Z
~18 Preliminary Development Plan
Cramer's Crossing -
~ ~
lsit<vrr~..• ~ .
06/02/2000 10:20 5147649814
l ~ -
~ .
~
~ ~
• ` ~ ~ .
-
_ - •
r
~ ~ ,
N
J ~ _
o
~~Nw ~ ~1 ~~CN
r
a~
W ~
j-
Blaugruad, Herbert & Martin
INCORtOAwTED
Dsvid S. Biaagrand Atforaeys and Counselors at Law Emily J_ Lewis
Jerry 'r. Burdett Rox9 A. Liming
Sharon Cason-Adams 5455 Rings Rosd, Suite 500, Dubiirt, Ohio 43017 Steven A. Martin
Christopher T. Cline Michael C. Mentel
Lawreaee H. Cohen Phonc_ 6141764-0631 Feac: 6141764-0774 Sharon l..R. Mi1kr
David J. Demers Duecl Dial: 614-923-3132 Charles R. Munoz
Beverly J. Farlow Marc Myers
Jehn W. Herbert B-mail: CtC a~bhmlaw.nCT Sttpben P. Posiaiakjs
Steven E. Hillman Teri Rasmussen
John S. Jones Carol D. Weiss
David S. Kessler
FA,X TJ2A,NSMISS)(ON
DATE: S June 00
TIME: 0915
Page i of 2
Fax Reply: 6147b4-0774
Fax Send: 799-9593; 764-0237; 873-1407; 224-68b6; 224-7775; 268-3003 :799-9703
Memo for: Bab Adamelc, Tom McCash, Marilee Chinici Zuercher, Cathy Boring; Chuck
Kranstuber; Greg Peterson; John Reiner
Subject: Cramers Crossing
Attached is the revised site plan for Cramers Grassing, which has been tabled to tonight.
This is very much last minute as the golf course changes, which controlled this charge,
happened only Thursday Hite.
There aze 81 lots shown, with two proposed for deletion. These have "Xs" on them. No
lots are smaller than 70'. This subdivision now has lot sines as large as the best
subdivisions existing in the SW. This is also typical of Waterford Village, but at a much
k lower density. The SF portion of Waterford is 3.1 dnJa (4.1+ with the MF}.
The park carries over into a revised park area on the golf course as approved. Together
the entire open pazk area is about I7+ acres. The southern entrance may be moved to the
west leg if requested by the S W residents though we don't think it's a problem.
Rockford continues in its commitment to bring the sewer and water to the golf course
boundary even though the road is no longer there.
Rockford will cornznit to all natural materials in the single fatrlily section.
Overall, the various changes have resulted in a higher quality subdivision.
By the end of the day more detailed sraphics should be available. 7'he same planner
working on this project, Mike Fite, is also the golf course architect and his films time has
bec-n monopolizxd by the golf co~use.
I will provide more information as its available.
Very truly yours
Christopher T. Cline
CTC:pq
Encl~l
X
Blaugrund, Herbert & Martin
I N C O R P OR A T ED
David S. Blaugrund Attorneys and Counselors at Law Emily J. Lewis
Jerry T. Burdett Roxi A. Liming
Sharon Cason-Adams 5455 Rings Road, Suite 500, Dublin, Ohio 43017 Steven A. Martin
Christopher T. Cline Michael C. Mentel
Lawrence H. Cohen Phone: 614/764-0681 Fax: 614/764-0774 Sharon L.R. Miller
David J. Demers Direct Dial: 614-923-3132 Charles R. Munoz
Beverly J. Farlow Marc E. Myers
John W. Herbert Stephen P. Postalakis
E-mail: ctc@bhmlaw.net
Steven E. Hillman Teri G. Rasmussen
John S. Jones Carol D. Weiss
David S. Kessler
June 5, 2000
Mayor Charles Kranstuber and Members
Dublin City Council
5200 Emerald Parkway
Dublin, Ohio 43017
re: Cramers Crossing; Ord 55-99
Dear Mayor Kranstuber and Council Members:
Attached is a revised development standards text addendum for the above ordinance,
which has been tabled to this evening's agenda. At my request, the applicant put the
revision into the same format as used for the Dublin Golf Course Community. In
reconciling this addendum with the original text, the following rules are used:
• Where the addendum addresses subjects covered in the original text, the
addendum controls.
• Where the addendum addresses subjects not covered in the original text, the
addendum provides the standard.
• Where the text addresses subjects not covered by the addendum, the original
text standard survives.
Very truly yours
! ~
Christopher T. Cline
CTC:pq
Encl-1
06/05/00 15:32 FAX 614 785 9181 ROCRFORD HOMES f~1j002/002
r
' Development Text Addendum
6/5/00
Ord 55-99
CRAMER'S CROSSING
LOCATION: WEST OF AVERY ROAD, NORTH OF RINGS ROAD
DESCRIPTION: SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED AND DETACHED DWELLINGS
ACREAGE 55.5
TOTAL UNITS: 143 G~ b
PARKLAND/OPENSPACE: ~ 14.03 d
MINIMUM LOT WIDTH/AREA: 70' AT THE BUILDING LINE -~-1'86 SQUARE FEET
AVERAGE LOT WIDTH/AREA: 75' AT THE BUILDING LINE 9,750 SQUARE FEET
FRONT YARD SET BACK: 25' TO 30'
SIDE YARD SET BACK: TOTAL OF 15' WITH A MINIMUM OF 7' ON ONE SIDE
REAR YARD SET BACK: 25'
MAXIMUM HEIGHT: 35'
MINIMUM GARAGE SIZE: 2 CAR
PUBLIC SIDEWALK: 4' ON ALL STREETS UNLESS NOTED AS BIKE PATH
BIKE/LEISURE TRAILS: 8'
RIGHTS OF WAY: SEE DCHIBIT
PAVEMENT WIDTHS: SEE EXHIBIT
ON STREET PARKING: SEE EXHIBIT
STREET TREES: 70' ON CENTER / 1$/<'° TO 3" CALIPER
LANDSCAPE BUFFER: %a~~' ALONG RINGS ROAD; 200' ALONG AVERY RD;
25' SCREENING ALONG COMMERCIAL PROPERTY LINES
COMMUNITY GATES: NO
NO BUILD ZONES: 25' REAR YARD
ROOF PITCH: 6/12 MINIMUM
ARCH DETAILNG: 4-SIDED ARCHITECTURE CONSISTING OF ADDED
WINDOWS WITH TRIM WRAP OR OTHER DETAILS ON
LOTS INDICATED ON SITE PLAN
EXTERIOR MATERIALS: SINGLE FAMILY -BRICK, SYNTHETIC OR NATURAL STONE,
STUCCO, WOOD SIDING, CEMENTlTIOUS SIDING
(HARDIPLANI~
CONDOMINIUMS - TO BE 70°~'o SYNTHETIC STONE ALL
51DES WITM 30°l~o VINYL SIDING - .044 MILLS
EXTERIOR COLORS: NATURAL EARTHTONES, WARM OR COOL MUTED HUES
CHIMNEYS/FIREPLACES: ALL MASONRY REQUIRED -SYNTHETIC OR NATURAL
STONE, STUCCO OR BRICK. DIRECT VENT ON REAR ONLY
FENCING' PER DUBLIN CODE
OUTDOOR STORAGE: NO PREFAB STORAGE OR OUTBUILDINGS PERMITTED
ARCHITEGTURALLY DESIGNED ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTED OF THE SAME MATERIALS
AS THE MAIN STRUCTURE MAY BE PERMITTED INSIDE
THE BUILDING ENVELOPE WITH A.R_C. APPROVAL
MAILBOXES: STANDARD DESIGN REQUIRED
~ ~
r
.
~ i
_
v
F__ _ - ~
s ~ ~ o; . ~
~ ~
I~ ~ i
1 ~ ~ ~n
/ ~
~ -
- ~ ~ ail ~
_ ~
_ - ~
~ L it (i ' ~ oeb, \ - r - Ii'
/
_ ~
_
y~ jr(/~ ;
- ~ _
~ ~n F
_ _
? I ~ a fl ~ j Ea CJ
{ 1 I ~ ' a ~ ~ ~ ~ I off,
II
i
b f
i,,l h r h h y N
_ ~ \c
N I M
~l_ 'K'
~n
~
~ 6 ~p b
_..J
~ a /}yam.
N iF iF a v ~ ~
_ ~j
N ti l~ \ ~
. v ~ '
N m ~r .
~ • ^ ~ N
_
\ Q
n
n ry _
_ VVV
11-----~~ ,
ro
~ dE v
T ?
Q ~ . .
_
a
\ N
N
~ °
I VV~r `O \ .
C
M ti .p
a ~ _IUWT3
~i ! ~ ~ ~ ~ N
~x t
N n _ i _
i ~ / ~
z
\ ~ I ~ 0
\
~ U
g ~ ~
h
. \
i+ c ~
( `1 ~ ~
~ C \ / /
~ \
/
~ 1
1 ~ i
% ~
~
~ ~
1\ \
i ~ ~
/
\ ~ \ ~
~ /
~ i
~ /
~
I ~
~ i
o
~ 'fit
ri h~
1
t~r~ir~a~lce i~o. 54
ssoo shier Rings Read City Council 1st Reading ~~T49
D~~~~in, Ohio X01 S
.sii~ Council Public I'°Q^ri~",
- ~'.Cf1;. _ J
Fix. s. !>~°7 City Council Action
Fort eFF;c;~ (9SE f3~1L`f _
Amour:' Z c~:r~: A~lit~ai:,r~ No: PAZ Date(s): PuZ Aetien:
~...y_- ~q,sp.uv _ Rq~ o~~ ~
~~ct tVo: T~ iJr15 Fr No: Date Received: ~?ecEiv~~f By:
.~1.~__~. i
~Ty~=' cf R~cussf: \ 1
? pLE.~~SE st:E~VI(T'P~`!'O CRIJ!NAL SIGNED APiD NOTARIZED APPLICATIONS ~ PLEASE PRINT -
rR~diJ 7~tiIZTs:~EN (~3) CCP:!_S OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATFON and
CHC;'. T'~ T`'P'': Cri ''~?;'LtC'.~TiUtd
? Ccm~site Ptan(Code Section 153.OS8)
...ti;:.inar~ DeveloPrrsent Plan (Code Section 153.OS6)
? Other (Describe)
i. PR_OPi_RTY iNFO`Fi;4t;aT!O?.!
~~TAX!D::C; w-~_ Parr-lSi~a; ~
f~~!sTtttcTPai~cELNO: 274-000029; 274-000022 (Acres) 55.5
~ Prope~tyP,ddress. Rings and Avery Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016
_
Pi. Fi C'(tV ~OC3tICil:__-_.._~
west of Rims/Avery intersection
~i S;ceof 5trcc~t: s, C,,ri) _ _ west side of Avert/ Road _
'r `:;~:'~.ti _ ~ ~ Rings Road and Avery Road
Distarc~ Rc,:.: ~ ^-,t !r'{r a t in t er s ee t i on - rJ, s, from ;Jeer^st Inter,ection
Ek'-"'`' - ~ 274-000029--undeveloped, farmland
_ 274-000022--exceptional use, clubhouse, private park
residential development with 68 condominium units
and 92 single family homes _
rt ; r .i~r7 ~ r~rgt°st~ ~ No. of Acres to in. ,i~Ze^^~t
~~_..-----R1B,--EU ----------____--II PUD,--DC 152.056(G)(2_) J 5.5...5
P7.;c ! ~ Re. one ,1rF,icaticn
e~wr
~~CC~-19~!°~ ~o~P~
I~ Jt:ate i:L:~iy iiOY~ the prcpcs~Td ZGnIRg and C~~BiCpti;J7~( i.auies t0 file 2X;Si1G3 :iCd poten[ial fLiUf:: 1.3na l...:
~i i
I see attached development text
!iii
~i
ij
i
f STATEMENT:
State briefly how the proposed zoning and dwelopment relates to the Dublin Community Plan.
i
i
see attached development text '
I
PREVIOUS APPLICATION?
Has an application for re.~or,ir•Ig the property >~n denied by the City Council within the last two (2) years? YES ~7 NO ?
lF YES, WHEN?
State the basis of reconsideration:
A different preliminary development plan, for
premises that also included five other parcels, was denied
by Dublin City Council in 1998.
~L_____~__ - _
r---_ _ _
w.~. ~ 1 ANNED DISTRICT IS REQUESTED, IS COMPOSITE GR PRELIM{NARY PLAN ATTACHED? ^S ~ 'JO ? A
~ REQUESTED, 1S PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT A, r;Z~, FD7 YES ~ NO ?
L
.I. PLEASE INCLUDE THE FCLLC~"!i"JG:
_ ~'~S Cam' -~CF _ .~,,,T ~,PI: S~~ /
L qal description of the property to ae ~,~zoned con:;ists of tyre(s). G1C,~/`
/~x_1_.
II PLJN REQUIREMENTS:
fi f-+ : ^r_ANS TO SC.~,L~ (NOT GREATER TN;;;1 _^-l"X36") SH041(ING:
a. T;.e ± "III land 504 fewt b~irrd'he t~urdares
b. Nerth arrow -i -+!e
c. Ex~~•t r~ scrdrhons (Roads, L~ I ::r;;-- ' ~~^tat~en tepegraphy, jur sdlctioral boundaries, utildies, etc.)
d. %(cposed ~:><:s (I~~,;crsl tr~nspertation system, dens;tics, ;t ur hr;ildirg/unit ty~s, square toctages, park;ancL'epen space,
etc,)
e, r_e ,ting and prr p:~_ ~d cr.~r, ~r~,trct hc~ndares
j~ f ~I of to n acr slsquart3 tc~a; and
I I 9 All property unas, street ngllt ~ of-way c l..rn-~rrts, Ord other infcnra6on Iciated to the IocaUon of the proposed t~oundarle&:~ " .
~ i~ SETS OF REDUCED tCR;'lY~d1PdG(S) (NOT r,RF':~TER THAN 11" X 1T')
l ~ ?4 CCP'ES CF COUNTY C4~dF;ERSti;f' .'.1RP: (NOT LESS TI i 1'J 3'.4" X 11"AND NOT !v10RE THAN 16" X 2C") _
,hc~tilr conk uous propert owners vnthin 504 tea frem the per~metar of the area to be rezoned. ' '
f'iGa~ ~ rf R+~zcne Appticat:on
~~~O~I~
ill. CCN I lGUCtiS ~r2GF£r(TY OWN~eZS
- ' ~r of the area to be rezoned. Such 'int'o be m acccrcur.c~ with the County Auditor's
current tax fist. (Us2 additional sheets as necessary.) Labels farr..~;._. , , ~ . _ ; , _ . ~,,a1:, cr cn a ccmp~.~ter ~'~c':.
~h~__~._.__~
PROPERTY OWNER CiTYiSTATE/ZIP COLE
~
i~ ~ ~
.~a.
I
i
i
ii
~l ~ ~ I
!I
I~ -
i
_
'1 _ ~
i
i'~sgc 3 cf 4 R:-~cce ~1Fplication
A,
~d~~~~~~ rrprr
-"~_~~~--~~+~_~~-^.rtyCtivner{s): 274-000029 Ulbaldo Monaco, TR
I~ 274-000022 Mid States Development Corgi--
I~ tvlaiiing a,caress:
fcrr~t, City, State, Zip Code)
II Daytime Telephone: Fax:
Name of Contact Person, (ex. Attorney, Architect, etc):
~ „ Applicant is Rockford Homes, Inc.
(sireet,Cfty State, Zip Code) c/o Christopher Cline, Attorney 5455 Rings Road, Dubl'n
~ Daytime Telephone: Fax: OH 43017
Which of the above is the primary contact person?
Christopher Cline
V. AUTFiORIZ.~T'CP1 ~ ,^,CPI=RTY
Site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application. The Owner/Applicant hereby authorizes City
representatives to visit, photograph and post a notice on the property described in this application.
VI. UTILITY DISCLAIMER
Tile City cf Gubiin will maize every effort to provide essential services "•a rrcperty as n~'ect. However, the rapid growth of the City of Dublin and northwest
Franidin Camty has stretched the Citys Capac/ to provide these services to the limd. As such, the City of Dublin may be unable to moka ail er part of said
facilities available to the ap~icant until some future date. The Applicant/Owner hereby acknowledges that approval of this requast for rezoning by the Gublin
Planning and Zoning Commission andlor Dublin City Council does not constitute a guarantee or binding commitment that the City cf Dublin wi;l be able tc
provide essential services such as water and sewer facilities when needed by said Applicant.
VlI. OWNER AUTHORIZATION FCR REPRESENTATNE
I, Rockford Homes , InC . , the~r and applicant, hereby authorize
Christopher Cline
to act as my representative and agent n aY matters pertaining to the proc.•ssing and approval of this application including modifying the prejE~ct, and I agree
to be bound by all representations and agreements made by the de:>ignated agent.
Slgnature c! P P., r ~ _
~'~`k~E~~`~'~Cxxx Applicant ~ 4/1/99
;
5{gnaturt of Current ?rcNer'y Cwner: ~ ^*te:
_ c
VI;I. ?PPL1CAf~IT'S .4FFICrA?dlT
sT~ . ~ oF-__-_--_-_--- Ohio
I~ cOU~TY Franklin _ _
I _ Christn~er t"1 i np r. ;:p,i~ar~~ or th applicant f ~,r__ i~ ~e, hate
{i ur ~ ..r~'~rianc: the car;ent., ~ ; - ~~~tion The ~ntcfmatien ccntair=u' n this application, ~t! ached exhibits a~ ~d ether !r,forr,at,cn submitted is completo
and in ail resp:.c;.. ~ CORBCt, to the ~ f my knowledge anC btii~l.
Slgnature of d~ cl!rnt or - - A Date:
II Authori..rd Rcpre.
-
Subsc, t,~'. t^~, +o ~e~fcre ;tee ;his day of _ / 1 ~
- ~F -
`,o~PP1AL,~",S~ Nc•tary Puhl;c
r~ 2° 9` MARTHA M. SEIDENSTICKER ~ - •
- - Notary Public, State of Ohio
~i My Commission Expires 5122100
Te o F o~' . - ,
• ~ , ~ ; ; ,'•1 ; ;•i'LAN`FCJ,Rt J`,?1'rL'CA1'~f~t-7_. i= A!'P
03/30/99 15:53 FA% 614 785 9181 ROCKFORD HOMES X1003/006
i•iMn-~e-l~yy 11 ~ 54 CQRPQRATE OFFICE < 4_'~ ,:'a ~
:i 1 qua tecl a f'lp~ / ~ P. 02
4~ P r~4 !ly in Virginia Military survey No_ 3L53
S~• W+, ~ ly in Virgihia MillLary Surve and
~hin~;tvn, County of ~rankl in gt~°' 300y, in the Township opfrt-
ticfn of a 40.22 acre Cract of land to of O~tio, and being a
' by (deed p£ record in Deed Book 106ScoPveyed co iiiZ 1 lam C, por
Fralnklin Count ~ age 181, Recorder's p~g~Ce
i ,
Y• Oh•to and bounded ar~d described as (allows:
8eg'innfh,g at a railroad s ike
s3i~ railroad spike be~~.ngplvcatedCSoutezicexlxne of Rin s
sec nds Wesc h 84 degrees 03 ~inutes•
a distance of 1673.52 fc_ front th 15
err Ction of Rin$5 Road and Avery Road, said ironCei~erline in[~
lor~ted at Che so~tGheasz torneT a,£ 2, P- also being
John P. Fitssimrnvns.and Mari2 n R, 87g acrd t•raet conveyed to
of >~'ecord in Official ReeordsYpo583trri9st~tecorderSSmmons by deed
~ 1~zai County, Ohio: - Office, Frank-
Thet~ce north 05 degrees 52 hiRuCes
easterly lire: Of the said 2.879 aere3tra¢tnda distance of 6
f[. I[a an _ along the
acrd tract; on pin at the northeasterly corner of the said 2789
I
The ce SouCh $4 degrees OZ minutes 28 seconds west a
nOZ herly lute of the said 2.879 ac=e trapr, a distanlong Lhe
ft. to an iron ~ Ce of 200.00
acre tract, saidiron pin alsohbefngrioeated er of zhe said 2_879
bf a~ 81.00 acre tract cenvayed Co William M. & Rober>:STerTh Tine
y deed o~ record in Deed Heck 3452, pages 190, Recorder's Oforaas,
. Franklin County, Ohio. face,
`~-~~G-F' Thence Nflrth OS degrges 53 minutes 52 seconds Wes
east~riY Iine of the said $i,pp acre tract. a distanceoog the
~-~~-~-`~1c ft. ~o an iron pi,n at the ttortheasterl f 154.5.61,
acreltract; 3? corner of zhe said 81.00
~h e
n e Narrh 84 degrees 02 mfnu[es 43 seconds East, a distance of
L`A5~} . 805. 6 ft . Co an iron pint Totaled at the sort w
h est corner of C:7e
20.0 37 acre tract conveyed to Mid-Scales pevelopment Cox orati
~~~LLI, ~ by deed of record in Official Records 59o3-n03, Fec . P on
Franl~lin Courtly, Qhio. order s Office
~ ~ ~
~ ?hence goc,th OS degrees 53 minutes 52 seconds East ala
line f the said 20.0837 acre tract, aloe ng the west
I9.55 acre tract conveyed to Ubaldo Monaco &hAnnasy, l)Koretaco be
~ //o ~ deed pf record in Deed Bonk 2963 Y
~~L.p6 Line Qf the 1 .11 acre tract cortveyed$ta1Paul ap~ Pendlgeters besd
of zecord in Official Records 05876-CIS, Recorders Office, Franke
~ . inn[h1 linty, Ohl°' a di-sCance of Zl7z_ 73 ft.
Sy ~ centerline of Rings Road. to a railroad spike
C~• 834,gp ft_ passing iron pins an line at
~ ~ 1688 _ 18 f'C . and 214 2 _ )3 F>r . ;
~j# ~ Thenc~ artd along the cenLCrl irte d
minut~s 15 seconds hest, •a distanceRofg6Q5p86 ft~CCO$theepoin[ of
/~Z~° l~egin~ing, concaiRing 37.31L9 acres
all legal roadways, easements and restriccionseofsrecordecc zo
Harry Greene, Reg9stered 058
2160 rernont Center, Colu Dcr,~y,~titt~;,,~~kq '
uuJ .iF~ f
~X~
~
it
HI K-~G-1777 1G• JCS LUKr"UKI-11 C Urr l l,t r ~J
~ -
April 8, 1999
I DESCRIPTION OF 18.236 ACRES ON AVERY ROAD
AT RINGS ROAD, (TO THE EAST), DUBLIN, OHIO, FOR
~ MID-STATES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Situated in the State of Ohio, County of Franklin, City of Dublin, in Virginia Military Survey No.
3004, nil being all of the 18.226 acre trail of land (18.236 acres by recent survey) conveyed to
Ubald~ Monaco, Trustee, by deed of record in Instrument 199901190013
five, Franklin County, Ohio, and bounded and described as follows: ~ 540, Recorder's Ot-
Begin 'ng at Franklin County Monument No. 2229 found at the intersection of the centerline of
Avery oad with the centerline (to the east) of Rings Road, said monument being at an angle
point i the centerline of Avery Road and in an east line of said 18.236 acre tract;
. thence S 6° O9' 08" E along the centerline of Avery Road and along an east line of said 18.236
acre ct a distance of 245.88 feet to a P.K Naif set at a southeast comer of said 18.236 acn:
tract a~i
d at the northwest comer of a 0.657 acre tract of land conv
dead o record in Instrument 199712050160132, Recorder's OfficeeFradnklin~CaurrtyROhho, a d
P.IC N it being N 6° 09' 08` E a distance of 784.82 feet from Franklin County Monument No.
8847 f nil at the intersection of the centerline of Avery Road with the centerline (to the west)
of Ring Road, said monument being at an angle point in the centerline of Avery Road;
thence S 59° 36' 03" W along a south line of said 18.236 acre tr
act and along the north line of
said 0. 7 acre tract a distance of 300.59 feet to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe set at a comer of said
18.236 cre tract and at the northwest comer of said 0.657 acre tract {passing a 3/4-inch I.D.
iron pip set in the west right-of--way line of Avery Road at 32.90 feet);
thence 5° 40' 34" E along an east line of said 18.236 acre tract, along the west line of said
0.657 a e tract, along the west line of a 0.667 acre tract of land conveyed to Emerson E. and
Marjori Armstrong by deed of record in Deed Book 2704, Page 361, Recorder's Office, Frank-
. lin Cou ,Ohio, and along a portion of the west line of a 0.765 acre tract of land conveyed to
Esther . DiCenzo by deed of record in Oeed Book 2672, Page 689, Recorder's Office, Frank-
lin Coun , Ohio, a distance of 173.15 feet to a 3/4-inch I_D. iron pipe found at a southeast cor-
ner of s id 18.236 acre tract and at the northeast corner of a 1.115 acre trail of land conveyed
to Jenni Lou Fox by deeds of record in Deed Book 3493, Page 309, and in Official Record
6571, P ge B 02, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio;
thence 84° 24' 09" W along a south line of said 18.236 acre tract, along the north line of said
1.115 a e tract, along the north line of a 1.114 acre tract of land conveyed as Parcel No. 2 to
Carla J. ox by deed of record in Official Record 31015, Page J 07, Recorder's Office, Franklin
County, Ohio, along the north line of a 2.229 acre tract of land conveyed to Arlene M. Pettit by
deed of ~ cord in Official Record 2877, Page F 10, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio,
and alon~the north line of a 2.229 acre tract of land conveyed to Hany D. and Janet C. Mill
by deed of record in Deed Book 3694, Page 817, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio, a
distance f 600.00 feet to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe found at a corner of said 18.236 acre tract, at
the Wort st corner of said Miller 2.229 acre tract and at the northeast comer of a 1.113 acre
tract of I nil conveyed to Philip R. Nolette, Jr. and Dianna Weber by deed of record in Instru-
ment 19 812100318204, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio;
I 99-059D18 236.DOC
Page 7 of 2
~ Z/3
HI"K-GG-1777 1G • J7 ~.UKt"UKI-i i C Ut-r- 1 LG ~
~ ~ I_
i
thence S 83° 47' 29" W along a south line of said 18.236 acre tract, along the north line of said
1.113 acre tract and along the north line of a 1.111 aue tract of land conveyed to Mid States
Devet pment Corporation by deed of record in Official Record 15424, Page J 16, Recorder's
Officej Franklin County, Ohio, a distance of 199.58 feet to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron
south est comer of said 18.236 acre tract, at the northwest corner of said 1.111pacre tact atnd
in the least line of a 37.3149 acre tract of land conveyed to Mid-States Development Corp, by
deed df record in Official Record 14649, Page 107, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio;
i
thence N 5° 13' 20° W along the west line of said 18.236 acre tract and along a portion of the
east line of said 37.3149 acre tract a distance of 854.56 feet to a 5/8-inch I.D. iron pipe found at
the northwest comer of said 18.236 acre trail and at the southwest comer of Lot Number Five
(5) in orthwest Corporate Centre, as shown of record in Plat Book 68, Page 77, Recorder's
Office, (Franklin County, Ohio;
I
thence~N 83° 41' 03' E along a north line of said 18.236 acre tract, along the south line of said
Lvt Noj 5, along the south line of Lot Number Six (6) in said Northwest Corporate Centre and
along portion of the south fine of Lot Number Seven (7) in said Northwest Corporate Centre a
distan ~ of 671.12 feet to a 3/4-inch I.O. iron pipe found at a northeast comer of said 18.236
acxe tract and at the northwest comer of a 1.329 acre tract of land conveyed to Mid-States De-
vetopm~ent Corporation by deed of record in Instrument 199805050109134, Recorder's Office,
Frankli~t County, Ohio;
thence ~ 6° 34' 40" E along an east line of said 18.236 acre tract and along the west line of said
1.329 a tract a distance of 150.00 feet to a 1/2-inch diameter solid iron pin found at a comer
of said ; 8.236 acre tract and at the southwest comer of said 1.329 acre tract;
I
thence ~ 83° 41' 03" E along a north line of said 18.236 acre tract and along the south line of
said 1.329 acre tract a distance of 387.24 feet to a P.K Nail set in the centerline of Avery Road,
at a norytheast vomer of said 18.236 acre tract and at the southeast corner of said 1.329 acre
tract (pissing a 3/4-inch I.D, iron pipe set in the west right-of--way line of Avery Road at 357.24
feet); ~
thence ~ 6° 43' 44" E along the centerline of Avery Road and along an east line of said 18.236
acre tract a distance of 170.63 feet to the place of beginning;
containing 18.236 acres of land more or less and being subject to all legal highways, ease-
ments alhd resfictions of record.
The abq~e description was prepared by Ted L. Robinson, Ohio Surveyor No. 5361, of C.F. Bird
~ R.J. dull, Inc., Consulting Engineers & Surveyors, Columbus, Ohio, from an actual fie
vey periaormed under his supervision in April, 1999. Basis of bearings is the south line of
NorthweJst Corporate Centre, being N 83° 41' 03' E, as shown of record in Plat Book 68, Page
77, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio.
f~P~~OfiO
~ ~ _ TEDDY ``•,O
Ted L. Rlobinson ~NDOu
ROSINSCN ~ ;
Ohio Surveyor #5361 _ • ~Ir
~ ~ ~ `:,,,9 S-5361 ~
' €
'~~~~sYe~~
~
i s~AVEYO~'''~ 99-059D18_236.DOC
~ -~M1.M1..n~M~'
~ Page 2 of 2
3~
3
CRAMER'S CROSSING Exhibit "B"
Rockford Homes
Avery & Rings Road Residential Site
List of Property Owners (w/i 300 ft)
William M. Thomas and Robert Thomas Norma Ray Kaiser
5510 Classics Court 5505 Avery Road
Dublin, Ohio 43017 Dublin, OH 43016
John P. Fitzsimmons Brucie & Beth Huhn
6388 Rings Road 5544 Avery Road
Amlin, Ohio 43002 Dublin, Ohio 43016
Phillip Noelette & Diana Weber Wyatt Dorse
6270 Rings Road 5556 Avery Road
Amlin, Ohio 43002 Dublin, Ohio 43016
Harry and Janet Miller City of Dublin
6260 Rings Road 5200 Emerald Parkway
Amlin, Ohio 43002 Dublin, Ohio 43017
Arlene M. Petti SAR Construction
6236 Rings Road 6079 Northgate Road
Amlin, Ohio 43002 Columbus, Ohio 43229-2481
Carla Fox Avery KKP LLC
PO Box 351 400 South 5"' Street #400
Urbanna, Ohio 43078 Columbus, Ohio 43215
Jennie Lou Fox Mid States Development
PO Box 127 5720 Avery Road
6226 Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016
Amlin, OH 43002
Columbia Gas of Ohio
Leon and Linda Hoover 200 Civic Center Drive
6166 Rings Road PO Box 117/R Schoenbaum
Dublin, Ohio 43016 Columbus, Ohio 43216-0117
Larry C, DeeAnn and Helen Goebel Esther DiCenzo
5527 Avery Road 3446 Redding Road
Dublin, OH 43016 Columbus, Ohio 43221
~'2
}
~r~
~~~~b~~-
Emerson and Marjorie Armstrong Swickard Enterprizes, Inc.
PO Box 332 2828 Bremen St
10080 Harriott Road Columbus, Ohio 43002
Marysville, Ohio 43070
Angelo and Anna M. Dallas
Michael R. Sharp 3265 McKinley Ave
5555 Avery Road Columbus, Ohio 43204
Dublin, Ohio 43016
Dolores D'Amico
St Johns Lutheran Church 6263 Rings Road
c/o Carolyn Rings Amlin, Ohio 43002
3850 Surrey Hill Place
Columbus, OHIO 43220 Angelo J. Dallas and John J. D'Amico
3927 McKinley Ave
Shamrock Lane Development Co Columbus, Ohio 43204
PO Box 370
Dublin, Ohio 43017
David W. Noel
6375 Woerner Temple Road
Dublin, Ohio 43016
Shirley A. Wotring
6401 Woerner Temple Road
Dublin, OH 43016
Donald Wotring, et al.
c/o Robert Wotring
3271 Dover Road
Columbus, Ohio 43204
~..a
Joseph A. Bucci
6409 Woerner Temple Road
Dublin, Ohio 43016
James and Wenonah Hartman
6445 Woerner Temple Road
Amlin, Ohio 43002
Edward Burt
6501 Woerner Temple Road
Dublin, Ohio 43016 ....r .
y
. ,
2(2
Ht''K-G~-1777 1G• JC I,UKt'UKH I C urr ii.t r •
ti.w .nv..c urr ll.t~a,~ C1
~ ._+3 P.~
ssa+~'
i
1
' : ~~d ct~Ea~s 1~~U~ G'o
' c oFCaEeF+t~cuu„
' MIDUSTp1 ~ APAf{TiNEMT PRt7tlECT$ 5720 AvEpY Roap
Qi7BLIN, pH a~016
18 A ~E AVERY ROAD LTD. ~ K ~ r b i ~ C tb 1 a ~ aes- ~ t a3
(A L 'rued Partnership)
.+r ~ I
' ; ,
I
i
' I ~ ~?ptfl Z7~ 1999
I
I:
. Ci'IY of biin '
seoo S Road
DtJblin, ro~0.~078
Gentl en:
tease be advised that rre are the oMn+ers of the 18 acre parcel locamed on A
t~two ( description and survey st~ct'ed ne~to). w® suppoR the rezon; ~ Road, Dnbltn.
. torsi 'on oa behaN of Rodciord Hpmes. ~ currern~ under
a yw t?a+?e any questions regarding our ewn.rship or support on their behalf. tease
at 889- 43, exL 23. Thanking you in advance for' your vooperatbrt, p calf me
. ~ 5incetely, ~
~ d-vbd
5. Robert Davis, President of
Mb~Stat,BS Oevetoprnent Corp.
~ • ' The Cer~ere! Rattner of
i 18 Acre Avery Road t..t4.
(A Limed Partnershtpl
SttD/rstpp~
. EnctosuFes
t
i
i Yara~ P,ee
PROPOSED TEXT
CRAMER'S CROSSING
Preliminary Development Plan (Dublin Code 153.056 (G)(2)
Rockford Homes
55.5 acres; Rings Road and Avery Road
April 1, 1999
Revised August 10, 1999
Revised November 15, 1999
Revised February 4, 2000 •
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
HISTORY
A Concept Plan (PUD) was approved for the same premises presented in this
application in 1996. That Concept Plan provided for 207 multifamily units, two one acre
single family lots and 2.7 acres of office.
A Preliminary Development Plan was submitted under the name Avery Village
Commons and was considered in late 1997 and early 1998. This plan included the same
55.5 acres, an additional eight acres of industrial land and also a single family home on
Avery Road; the total acreage was about 64 acres. The proposed uses were 256 apartments
and 71 single family homes. The proposal was disapproved by both the Planning and
Zoning Commission and City Council with split votes.
This present plan was heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission on June 17,
1999, September 16, 1999 and on January 6, 2000. This text version has been revised to
incorporate a number of items the Planning Commission (P&Z) identified as issues in each
of these hearings, and to incorporate staff suggestions following the January 6, 2000 P&Z
hearing.
CHANGES IN THIS VERSION
Changes in the newly revised version of this plan are the reduction in total units
from 149 to 145, with the reduction being three lots along the eastern boundary of the
northern single family area with a concomitant adjustment of the adjoining park area. One
lot was removed in the western portion of the southern single family area allowing larger
lots in that section. Increased commitments in the architecture, materials and landscaping
sections are also made. An alternative design for the southern single family area is now
offered. This design uses two cul de sacs to place only four homes in the area closest to
Rings Road. This allows a wider spacing between the homes, more in tune with the open
feel desired from the Rings Road vantage point. This is coupled with a "forest" planting of
deciduous trees in the setback area to the south of those homes, in the buffer area along
Rings Road.
Additionally, the internal design of the condominium area has been revised through
a review of alternatives presented to staff. This design creates an internal "village green"
with community open space. The area north of the east-west road, now being called
Cramer Road, now has a landscape plan which is shown on an a • e~
sl~et.
~ ~ •
' g9-o~t1~-
rya F t : ~a;*a~~g~ ~ ...i:
Cramer's Crossing ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ _
Preliminary Development Plan Text ~ . / ~ ~
Version of February 4, 2000 ~ ` '
Page I ~ -
c~n o~ QucLiN
PLANNING GUIDANCE
The 1996 Concept Plan which this application implements was prepared under the
Southwest Area Plan which contemplated 10 dwelling units per acre in the eastern part of
the plan area (Subarea 7, Avery Road Special Corridor) and 2.75 dwelling units per acre in
the western portion (Subarea 9, Residential). The Concept Plan met the overall average
density for the total site but in fact had multifamily units in the western area that exceeded
the density target for that portion of the proposal. The 1997-8 Avery Village Commons
proposal was in fact more true to the Southwest Area Plan because it concentrated the
higher density apartment uses in the eastern portion and left the western area as single "
family, staying well within the density targets for each area of the plan.
However, during the pendency of the hearing process for the 1997-8 Avery Village
Commons Plan the 1997 Dublin Community Plan began to take final shape. The Avery
Village Commons plan was given no allowance for its inception under the Southwest Area
Plan and in fact was evaluated under the new Community Plan, which advocated an overall
single family land use at 2.0 dwelling units per acre. Though there was in fact a degree of
acknowledgement that the eastern portion of the site could be higher in density than the 2
units per acre proposed under the new community plan, another provision of the new
community plan also came into play. This provision limited multifamily zoning to five
dwelling units per acre, and that Applicant was not able to reduce the multifamily portion
to that density and still commit to the major unloaded roadway that traversed the site. The
adherence to neotraditional planning concepts included in the 1998 Community Plan was
also an issue.
At this point the 1997 Community Plan has been enacted by City Council and
provides the planning guidance for the subject site. The troublesome portion of the
Community Plan which provided for neotraditional planning principles appears to have
been repudiated as a planning principle for the area, however.
SUMMARY OF FORMER PLANS AND PRESENT PROPOSAL
Type Plan Acres Open Space Multifamily Single Family Total Units Overall Density
Approved Concept Plan 55.5 13.2 ac 207 2 209 3.99
(1996) (24%) (condos/apts)
Avery Village Commons Plan 64 15.95 ac 256 71 327 5.1
(1997-8) (25%) (apartments)
Cramer's Crossing Plan 55.5 14.03 ac 64 81 145 2.61
(1999) (25%) (condos)
Cramer's Crossing
Preliminary Development Plan Text
Version of February 4, 2000 ~
Page 2
J
PROPOSED LOCATION AND SIZE OF AREAS OF RESIDENTIAL USE
All of the 55.5 acres included in this proposal is either residential use or else
associated parkland. There are two types of residential use. The eastern portion of the site,
located to the south of the industrial subdivision, is condominium developmept. There are
16 four unit buildings, each unit having an internally accessible garage. The garages are
either one or two car. The units are planned to be two bedroom ranch style condominium
units of about 1500 sf with a loft bedroom a frequently selected option. It is probable that
all units will have a screened porch. The buildings will essentially be`masonry material as
provided in the development standards. This material will be synthetic stone. It is further
anticipated that the selling price of the units will make ownership for investment purposes
impractical. In previous projects of this nature in Dublin, the typical homeowner is an
independent older person or couple. Typically, one bedroom is occupied, one is used as an
office or study and the third as a guest room.
Overall, this condominium portion of the proposal includes about 18 acres with 5.6
acres of public open space. Density of this section is about 3.5 units per acre, significantly
less than the target limit of 5 units per acre that was discussed in the Avery Village
Commons Plan. In addition to the public park area additional open spaces on a smaller, or
neighborhood scale, are in the interior of the condominium portion.
The 81 lot single family portion is composed of the area presently occupied by the
Dublin Clubhouse and Picnic Grounds. This is about 37.5 acres. There are two single
family areas, separated by Cramer Road. The area to the south, which adjoins an existing
trailer park, has slightly smaller lots in the 65' front-foot range except in the western
section, where they are at least 70'.. The northern portion contains a mix of lot sizes
ranging from 65' to 80' front-foot sizes. Looked at separately, the 37.5 acre single family
portion has a gross density of 2.16 units per acre.
This submission includes a new alternative layout for the southern portion of the
site which utilizes two cul-de-sac roadways. Using this configuration will allow a larger
setback from Rings Road which will be used as a forested landscape area. Four, rather
than six, houses will be closest to Rings Road, allowing a more appropriate spacing. The
sides of the houses will face Rings Road and in addition to natural materials extra
architectural detailing will be required on the Rings Road elevation; examples of this
treatment are shown in the drawings.
In both the southern and northern areas, the development standards show
commitments in the areas of architecture and materials designed to maximize an
appearance of quality, even though the subdivision is of moderate price. This is done by a
mix of natural materials and by requiring two sided architecture in highly visible locations.
In many cases, both natural materials and two sided architecture are specified.
Despite the challenges of the adjoining industrial ground and trailer park, the
Applicant anticipates that it will be possible to build homes of equal or higher price than
are present to the east of Avery Road The standard diversity plan presently used in Dublin
is set out in the single family architecture section.
Cramer's Crossing
Preliminary Development Plan Text
Version of February 4, 2000
Page 3
PROPOSED SIZE LOCATION AND USE OF NONRESIDENTIAL PORTIONS OF THE TRACT
The nonresidential portions of the site are parklands and retention areas. It is likely
that there will be wet ponds in several locations. In this concept, rather than having only
the minimum number of ponds, more ponds than aze needed will be used with each pond
shazing a portion of the overall retention requirement of the development. This allows not
only more ponds, but also more aesthetically pleasing ponds due to freeboard reduction.
The calculation of the park azea as a result may be reduced by a factor whiclr•reflects this
process. Such a factor has not yet been devised but should not pose a problem due to the
large pazk surplus that is shown.
The bulk of the parklands are located along both sides of Cramer Road and to the
north of the Cramer Ditch, an intermittent stream. These aze lazgely unimproved, but it
may be possible to save an existing shelter house near the western portion of the site. This
pazkland, bordering the road, will help to preserve an open feeling as one enters the
southwest residential azea, as well as providing useful recreation azea. Applicant will
construct a bikepath will be in this azea also, to the south of Cramer Road.
Public park azeas total in all about 14.03 acres (25%), significantly more than the
9.08 acres required. Because the City's concept for required setback areas along Avery
and Cramer Roads is in flux, applicant has included all open space (except the retention
azea north of Cramer Road at Avery Road) in the pazkland calculation. As stated, since
there is such a lazge surplus an adjustment of the space provided can be made when the
setback factors are determined.
Additional, highly visible parkland is located in the area which divides the
condominium and single family areas, about 2.57 acres, and in an additional .88 acre parcel
immediately to the west of the north-south access road,. Used in this manner, these open
spaces tie the condominium and single family areas together with a shazed block of open
space. Within this azea is presently located a 6,000+ sf assembly building and a parking
area. Over the years since the Concept Plan was first proposed, there have been varying
opinions as to whether this building should be preserved or removed. The building is
architecturally undistinguished and does not serve as an asset to a proposal to develop the
surrounding land as high quality residential. The Avery Village Commons plan removed
the building, but, alternative plans proposed by City Planning Staff proposed retaining the
building.
At the June, 1999 hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission indicated that it
was necessary to tie the condominium and the single family areas together. Applicant has.
decided that doing this will require that the open space between the two areas be utilized as
a jointly accessible amenity, and that the existing party house building and its extensive
parking area do not further this goal. As a result, Applicant's position now is that the party
house and parking azea will be removed and the area graded and seeded as parkland.
Planning Commission also asked that the lots adjoining the industrial area be enlarged.
Applicant has removed three lots and adjusted the park area. There will be two formal
pedestrian access points between the condominium area and this park. Due to ADA
(Americans with Disabilities Act) requirements, the condominium area will have a
complete sidewalk system which will tie into this park bikeway system.
Cramer's Crossing
Preliminary Development Plan Text
Version of February 4, 2000
Page 4
The condominium area also includes a compact "village green" central open space
as an internal focal point for the development. This additional private open space is not
included in the pazk calculations.
PROPOSED PROVISION OF WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND SURFACE DRAINAGE FACILITIES
Sanitary sewer service is available through a 21" line located to the east of Avery
Road at Rings Road. Applicant is willing to extend this sewer along the eastlwest road
through the site, at an appropriate size to be determined through discussions with the
Dublin engineering staff. Applicant anticipates reimbursement by the City for oversizing.
Water is similarly available through a 20" line stubbed along Rings Road east of
Avery Road. Applicant is willing to extend this line through the site along the east/west
road at a size determined to be appropriate through discussions with the Dublin
engineering staff. Again, Applicant anticipates reimbursement from the City for
oversizing.
Stormwater management will be according to Code. The site is bisected by Cramer
Ditch, to which the entire site is tributary. The retention azea is anticipated to be on the
north and south side of the east/west road at Avery Road. An additional retainage azea
may also be necessary on the south side of the creek to the reaz of lots bordering the creek.
Some retainage may also be utililized in ponds in the pazk azeas north of Cramer Road.
Should it be necessary to add additional retainage to that which is indicated on the site
plan, Applicant reserves the right to do so in the excess pazk azea, ie, the amount of pazk
dedicated in excess of that required by the code, or in the setback azea along Avery Road,
south of the new road
PROPOSED TRAFFIC CIRCULATION PATTERNS
The site is composed of two sets of roadway systems. The loaded roadways from
which the single family homes aze accessed comprises the first of these systems. The
second system is a major east/west unloaded roadway which stretches from Avery Road to
the western portion of the site. This is presently being called Cramer Road. Unloaded
means that no dwelling units aze directly accessed off of this roadway. Applicant agrees to
construct this 2000'+ roadway with two lanes at its own expense. It is anticipated that this
roadway will serve as a major neighborhood collector for a portion of the southwest area
west of Avery Road. To the east of Avery Road, this roadway becomes Norn Street and
connects to the new Woerner Temple extension, which in turn connects to Emerald
Pazkway and to Frantz Road to the east of Interstate 270. Aright turn to the south gives
access to Avery Road and hopefully, soon to the extension of Tuttle Parkway and thus to
Interstate 270. A turn to the north on Avery Road gives access to the State Route 161/US
Route 33. Overall, the roadway access to the site is excellent.
The connection to Rings Road that was on the first version of the plan has been
removed in accord with the direction received from the Planning Commission. This was
coupled with a redesign of the southern residential azea which also produced a 200'
building setback from the centerline of Rings Road, another Planning Commission goal.
A stub road to the west, in the northern single family azea, has been added at the
direction of staff.
Cramer's Crossing
Preliminary Development Plan Text
Version of February 4, 2000
Page 5
The condominium azea will receive access from two curb cuts on the east west
collector roadway, spaced at each end of this section of the project.
Applicant will dedicate land to fulfill the requirements of the Avery Road
Alignment Study (MS Consultants, November 22, 1996) and of the City's Thoroughfare
Plan for Rings Road (70 foot ROW).
PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF SITE DEVELOPMENT
The condominium portion will be initiated at the same time as the single family
portion. The condominium portion will be in one phase, but, the pace of construction may
be controlled by demand. The single family portion will probably be in one phase south of
the east/west roadway and two phases to the north of that road. Whether the north and
south portions of these phases will be sepazate or concurrent has not been determined.
The single family portion will either be initiated first, or concurrently with the
condominium portion. The central roadway will be constructed through the single family
section, to the western boundary, along with the first single family phase. Utilities, as
provided above, will also be brought to the western boundary.
RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO EXISTING AND FUTURE LAND USE
Four major planning factors dominate inconsideration of this site:
• The challenge of introducing quality residential development to the west of
Avery Road, considering the general industrial appeazance of the area.
• The specific challenge posed by the adjoining industrial development to the
north.
• The trailer park to the south, on Rings Road
• The expense of the 2,000+ ft unloaded eastlwest roadway.
The Applicant cannot control or remedy the general industrial character of the azea. What r.++
the Applicant can do is to provide a positive entryway into the azea through the new
east/west roadway which will be a continuation of existing Rings Road. Applicant feels
that with this "clean front door", it can deal with the general industrial character of Avery
Road to the north.
The condominium portion is an effective strategy for bordering and containing the
industrial land immediately to the north of the condominiums. Applicant has found this
type of development to be an effective transition in circumstances such as this. It must be
remembered that while this industrial area is not presently offensive, a wide range of uses
are possible under its zoning and outside storage is permitted. Additional landscaping will
be necessary along this northern portion. This is indicated on the attached plans.
Similazly, the single family portion is moderately challenged by its border with the
industrial pazk. The strategy for dealing with this challenge is to have an increased buffer
which will be shazed with the industrial park. This total package is indicated on the
Cramer's Crossing
Preliminary Development Plan Text
Version of February 4, 2000
Page 6
attached plans. There are a number of trees which have been planted throughout the
present private park area which may be relocated as desired. The greatest challenge to the
single family area is at the northeast corner where a border exists with a second, very low
quality industrial park. Outside storage is predominant in this industrial pazk and it is
unsightly. Fortunately, the affected area is small and Applicant feels it can deal with this
factor with additional landscaping and buffering.
The trailer park to the south on Rings Road is, as trailer parks go, a very nice trailer
pazk, inhabited by a stable, generally elderly population. However, it still is atrailer pazk
which is not the ideal neighbor for homes in the $200K range. The Community Plan
ignores the planning challenge of this trailer park and as a result, Applicant must assume it
will be a permanent feature, at least to buildout of this proposal.
Perhaps the major planning challenge present is the inclusion and construction of
the new east/west collector roadway. Though the roadway divides the two single family
residential portions of the site, it is not a negative factor. The challenge of this roadway is
purely economic, as the roadway combined with the sewer and water lines is major
expense for the 145 units of this proposal to absorb. Applicant is able to meet this
challenge with the density proposed in this plan.
The Applicant wishes to emphasize that it believes it can effectively deal with the
planning challenges set out above. While the site is not ideal due to these challenges,
Applicant feels that the development it proposes is of an appropriate value and quality
level for the site and will be an asset to Southwest Dublin, both on its own merit, and also
as a transitional use which mutes and contains these planning challenges.
THE DUBLIN GOLF COMMUNITY PROPOSAL
An additional major planning consideration is the proposed Dublin Golf
Community. This project is a 600+ acre proposal that composes the bulk of the
undeveloped land in the quadrant bounded by Rings Road, Shier Rings Road, Avery Road
and Cosgray Road. This major project has the potential for setting a firm direction for the
southwest section of Dublin. It also has the potential for elevating the qualitative prospects
for the azea to a point that either equals or exceeds areas of presently developed Dublin.
The Cramer's Crossing proposal has been designed to dovetail smoothly into the
golf community. All plans have been freely shared between both developers with the
result that a single cohesive plan is created. The southern portion of the golf community
which adjoins this application is similarly planned in terms of lot size and economic
expectations as to unit selling price. The roadway interconnection also provides usable
and smooth-flowing access. Also significantly, the utility expansion included in this
application, particularly the sewer, is essential for development of the golf community.
As of the time of the submission of this text, the annexation of the ground for the
golf course community was in process and the applicant has filed for rezoning.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE 1998 COMMUNITY PLAN
This proposal diverges from the 1998 Community Plan because the density exceeds
the 2 unit per acre target. Otherwise, the proposal is for residential use as listed in the
Community Plan.
Cramer's Crossing
Preliminary Development Plan Text
Version of February 4, 2000
Page 7
The Community Plan does not state mandatory requirements, but rather serves as a
planning guide. Although this proposal diverges slightly from the Community Plan, it is in
fact less intensive than the approved Concept Plan. The Community Plan, unlike the
Southwest Area Plan, was not a document which looked in detail at each planning area.
Rather, it listed "broad brush" land use and density azeas. In implementing the
Community Plan, it is thus necessary to look in detail at each azea without specific
guidance.
The planning factors which caused the Southwest Area Plan to recommend 10 units
per acre for the eastern portion of this proposal and 2.75 units per acre for the western
portion have not changed, and were discussed above. The land use mix and density
proposed in this application makes sense, considering the adjoining planning challenges
and the expense of the unloaded roadway, and thus in fact further the general aims of the
Community Plan to achieve high quality residential development to the west of Avery
Road.
Significantly, this plan meets the dominant request made of the prior Applicant in
the Avery Village Commons plan: that the multifamily area be five units per acre or less.
As an added bonus, the multifamily portion is now a condominium project rather than
apartments.
It should be noted that the community plan was tested with all single family uses on
this site. Because this type of condominium use generates less traffic at peak than single
family, the variation from the traffic load tested in the Community Plan is not computed.
In fact, despite more units, the load may be less.
This proposal is a solid, common sense planning tool for dealing with the existing
planning. challenges in this area, and provides a valuable entryway into the undeveloped
land to the west. It additionally provides an effective, unloaded roadway for collector
access to this western area. Applicant believes this plan in fact effectively achieves the
overall goals of the Community Plan for the southwest azea of Dublin.
ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Multifamily Area
Materials: Exterior materials shall be at least 70% masonry,
defined as stone, brick or synthetic stone. The
calculation will be achieved by calculating the square
footage of each facade, subtracting window and door
area and multiplying by 70%. Balance of materials
may be cementous board material, good quality vinyl
siding or wood.
Architecture: Buildings will be four unit attached ranch style
condominiums with two bedrooms and an optional loft
bedroom. Garages will be one or two car attached.
Building Setbacks 200' from CL along Avery Road.
30' from ROW edge along Rings Road extended
(east/west collector)
Cramer's Crossing
Preliminary Development Plan Text
Version of February 4, 2000
Page 8
-,wrurwwarsyirs:
r
20' from other roads.
25' building setback from north (industrial) boundary
Pavement Setbacks 45' along Avery Road (from edge of ROW)
20' along Rings Road extended (from edge of ROW)
20' along other roads (from edge of ROW)
Parking Per Dublin Code. Shown on the attached site plan.
Lighting Cutoff fixtures, except individual porchlights.
Poles along parking and roadways max height 25'
Landscaping Per Dublin Code. Buffering plan for area adjoining
industrial ground shown on separate sheet.
Landscaping along Cramer Road shown on separate
sheet.
Refuse No dumpsters are included in this proposal
Uses Residential at density proposed. Home occupations as
permitted by Dublin Code. Model unit or sales office
IAW Dublin Code.
Single Family Area
Uses One single family home per residential lot
Diversity Throughout the development (1) the same model with
the same front elevation shall not appear within two
separate houses on the same side of the street and, (2)
the same model with the same front elevation shall
not appear directly across the street or side by side to
the house directly across the street. Streets shall
count as a lot when applying the above formulas.
When the lot in question is a corner lot no lot at the
same corner shall have the same model with the same
front elevation.
Architecture Lots 30, 29, 21, 20, 34 and 13 in southern section and
lots 1, 12, 59, 57, 55, 35, 44, 70 and 81 in the
northern section will have increased architectural
detailing on the second elevation visible from the
roadway. Possible examples are window surround
trim, bay windows, shutters, extra windows and
window placement. Drawings attached.
Cramer's Crossing
Preliminary Development Plan Text
Version of February 4, 2000
Page 9
Materials Overall, 35% of the single family homes will be
predominantly natural materials. Specifically,
prominent locations are designated: In the south
section, lots 20, 21, 29, 30, 34, 13, 14, 15 and 16. In
the north section lots 1, 12, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 34-44,
74, 70 and 81. Applicant may choose the remainder
of the homes to be of natural materials.
Natural materials are wood (not T-111 plywood),
stone (natural or synthetic), brick, stucco and
cementous board.
If vinyl siding is used, it must be of at least .044 in
thickness and will be 6" beaded vinyl. Samples have
been furnished to staff. Substitutions may be made if
staff in its discretion determines that quality is equal
or better to sample submitted. Application of vinyl
will maximize length of runs and minimize joining
seams to the greatest degree possible. All homes
with any vinyl elevations will have 6" wood trim
boards on all corners and on all windows except sides
of windows where shutters are used.
For homes not all natural materials, at least 30%
of each front elevations will be predominantly brick
or cultured stone. This coverage will wrap around
the adjacent side elevation at least 18"where the side
elevation is exposed on corner lots.
Fireplaces If a fireplace has a chimney chase, it will be brick or
cultured stone.
Building setbacks 30' from ROW edge along Rings Road extended
200' from CL along old Rings Road (south
boundary)
30' from ROW edge along other streets
25' rear yard minimum setback
15' sideyard total, minimum side 7'
Pavement setbacks Driveways and parking IAW Dublin traffic code
Landscaping Street trees per Dublin Code.
Sidewalks Per Dublin Code. Not required on same side of street
as bikepath.
Fences No fences are permitted except privacy or screen
fences within the buildable area of the lot, subject to
Dublin Code.
Cramer's Crossing
Preliminary Development Plan Text
Version of February 4, 2000
Page 10
Residents Association A residents' association with provision to allow
mandatory dues to maintain common features will be
included in deed restrictions. Entry features and cul-
de-sac islands will be maintained by the association.
Entry Feature Applicant will install a low stone wall with signage
as indicated on the attached drawings. The feature
will be on the south side of Rings Road extended at
Avery Road. The signage may be used by Applicant
for marketing during the building .period and
afterward will be available for use as an entry feature
to the larger residential area.
Additional Commitments
Bikepath in Park Applicant will construct an 8' asphalt bikepath south
of the new east/west road at a location to be
determined in consultation with City staff.
Razing Existing Clubhouse Applicant will remove the building and parking area
and grade and seed the resulting open space.
Brick Paver Crossing A brick paver (either natural brick or textured concrete
to look like brick) crossing to the park area south of
Rings Road extended will be included in the roadway
design by Applicant.
Christopher T. Cline
Blaugrund, Herbert & Martin, Inc.
Attorney for Applicant Rockford Homes
5455 Rings Road
Dublin, Ohio 43017
614-764-0681
Cramers Crossing
Preliminary Development Plan Text
Version of February 4, 2000
Page 1 I
~l ~ ...V
_ _ - C(1LUM14U~ MAIIYSVILIf: KIl -
c
SHIER RINGS RU
x
M
~ ~
scHER ~
r a
W OX P a
SHI R RINGS RD ~ w
?REIA PL ~ tia
SHIER W u G V G " ~ INNOVATION OR
HOLJDAY W ti
Ate, . ,
DAN-SH ~ BURGH MAY
A OVA110N D ~ ~x
1CENDAIL SAf10Y WNW
BLVD. n sHt~ ~ ~ ~~o' .ri
CORiEY DR ~
a
t1 W~'N a SCOTIA
~ a
MOF~~ k ~ GAEIIC C7'
o
M pwlfiA'/AY Cf ~ 04 C
X ~ DR.
sue'
~ GlE~J`~iGS W
ATE CENTER 4unu~~Y eve ~ DR ~
SITE _ ~ ~ R
~~GI~~
a d x r
AML~N ~ ~ o`
. ~
RINGS RD cARA ~
rA ~
_ ~ 1217R1C[{'1' SN N ~
t0t1l77 L~~
tN
hl~ ~ ESNE n
~ z s~
r..r1
r C
0
~I
WO2
? SHINGTON
WP
HIL
x
0
~2
99-0412
Preliminary Development Plan
Cramer's Crossing
CRAMER'S
CROSSING
u
~ ~
J 1 ~
~w
1 _ _
i
~ - ;
! 1 t'~ ` j Ili .
~ . x 'i
1 1 ; ~
l s? .O ~ ~ ~ ate' --~q' ~ -
.
y - - ~
~ _ ~
_ a ~ U: _
F V l~'~
r ~ ,
$ ~ •e M )r:
nb O Q / 1'7~
,y
i
l~'
s
4
~r ;,yt
e~
'~Y
.t :{S'
ti
31
•d`.
~
A
~u,
yn
II~Irf
1
li ` .
~ Y
I.k e~ ~d. 9...
.
~ "
,,.d -L ~i iII it , I ~I~
;`:,fit r -:;;.31 ~ ~ ! , i FF" ~
~
c=-
I
b ^ ` , , I l~ O
8 n ~ 1~, ,v I
x _ /J,
C,~ r~ - Gl~
_ - _
_ _ _ ~
` ~ ~
i
L ~ ~ 7l< I'`L_i' 111 r0'.
'--r 1~ p u off' 1 ~ ~ ~ I~ ~ _ _ 1
~j. -
J ~ ~ _ ~ -
1 i,~ ~ L,Q' _t' 1
_ ~ ~y't-.-- ' - IrT
- ~ . _ ,-r-rr-r, _ -
i ~ ; ~
~
i
~ _ e 2
_J ;
~7
X RT -l _ y
1
l b`~ 4- _ 4 '~7
- ~
_ ~ n - _
1~ S~ ~p
- ~ -
t~~
_ -
4
I ~ ~
° ~ Jr,
~ s
s
~ ~
' ~-1(~li
II'i~ 1 ~ l ~
~ ~ ~ ' \ '
I
1
I ~
C~
I ~ ns _
I~ _
- - ~ r~
~ _ ' ~ ~ p ~
1 ~ _
I
II - ~ ~ ~
. I ~ ~ ~;F.
- 1 ,
- , 1
' i~' I _ ~ -
to I II~~ ~ + / 1 i -~/.i# ~^C ' ~a ~I~~~
;-y ~V, 1 ~ _ Y R` ~ ~ ~
' _j l}
1
II r~ 1/I f l~ r 1 1~, 1 11
o"-+.`'~~.~--~ SA BLS ~
_ ~ _
~ ~ I I ~ I ~ I t.--~ I I ~ . I'~ ~ I'' ~ c iJ
v ~ ~I II 4 -111 ~'\I 1 ~ 1 T-'.~rJ
1~ ~I ~ J 1~ ~ ~
~i I~Irr~ _ - 4 ~ __~I~L~I ~ I Ilr- ~ Li l
' , - ~ !a° 'III ~ ~ ~ ' y~~ 'U,
X17 ~1--i1U - ~ I~ ~I ~ ~1~~
o s~
-
\ ~ n~`~1
_ , , ~
_ :.1 1 1
ail ~,~i
I
I' 1 ~ ~
, - rl a ~ N ~
~ . _ ~ -
, _ ~ $ ' ~ ~ , rte: ~ i . I Il ~ z =
_ ~ ~~I
I i~ I-'}-r - m i l 1,1 1 E;
p ~ 1. L~ . I I ~ '
_ ~
a ill ;a, I~-_ 11~116~,\I
_
r ~ i„ j ~
I 4
_ _'1', ` _ -S i8i1 '.III; ~ ,1y~i
~ aQ m
2 T A~ ~ ~~Ea~~
cif; ~ ~ ~ - >
',i: z ~ ~
.may a aao~2~~4 k~'~ p~
x G Vie. E a
3 /1 r= A C n > =4'
, (
~I''. i - d -
~ ~ I i
\
I4
~ I
i
I
, 1 l~
~ - -
1 C..oA
• > G ~ ~ '
I, ~
_ _
I~i~ l~ '
~ li
~~~I~ II_ ~
1~ - ~ 1 ~
~ i -
~ ~i ~jbbo i oU rr ~_^I_~ ~I J ~
I ~11 C ~ L y
~ ~~a I l~ ~
~ , ~ -t
~ - ~ 1-~ ~ ,
`_'-1
L- I I ~ ,J
i, J,
f ~
. - -
_ r - a - - s ~
II i
I:=1 , _i r ~ - i, ~ ~ it
_ - , ~ ~ 'I 1 L' -
r; ~
. ,
1.Y
. - b
- j. ~ \
1
- - ~ ~ ~I1
1 i., .,_l. L.. _ ~Y
i
, - _ _ /
1 ! ;
~ x
8
Ts'~nbn o
w ~ a ~ $
~lil~ _ a ~ ~ 3 k
~F~;L ~ ~ ~
na.~ ~ - a ti
~ a ~ ~
~ i
~
_J__~
N~ r, _
e b
_ -
s
_-C
L.
t
,
k': ~ _ I ~ ^ ry:~ a
~
I
fi
~ R ~ 1 ~ ~
* _ :
~a
R
lI i `"`"fie ~ ~ „'~cc
1 h d ~ x~ c 2 a
~ a E e
Fa
\ 3fi`
f , 2"y
~ I i <
~tiA~
i
a ~7 Q b
:E a'Z ~ti 1
3~ "y €
y ~ .C
,g ~
a~R
a _ ~ ~ ~~a
3~ E
~i~
~n
E O ~ ~
i
L~_; ~1 ?
iBi~:6 O ` ~ ~ ~ b ~
n
~ n_
V1
e ~
_ I
o -
o ggg
e.._.... k ~ S'
r
A ~ A'
L ~ I
e~~'~ i
a~~ ~
.
- ~ -
~ ~ i I k r w.
c~r
~ - ;F
,y\\ _5.9
c ~ ~ O
O
~ 8 '
Wwuw
i3 _
~ ~
_ ~ A
Is
t
;a
o a
s
x ~ \ , r
a
t ~2y T O~ P m ~
;A'; t
~trf y 1~, b a s s
h; ~ a
~ ~ II 'I~~I _ ~II° ,lI III I~ I I~ I
$~n 'iii II
I it iil I illll V III ~ ~I .Illj !
I> I III ~ ~II~ it I ,I. II '.I
~ I, I ~a I ,
m
III'I~~~ ~I ~II~I~ ~ Iii ~ ICI lllj', ~ ~
'll ~ I I) ~ I it
' ~ i ~ . d ' ! I III L~I~ MY~
I IIII I i III IZ I III ,I I
II II
!III I i I ~ lil I I ~I I Ill ®I~ lil
I ,I
I; ~ I I Il~lll IIII I 'III III I ii
I II' II I I ail I~ ~I it Ijl ~ I~' i ~~II
ii 'I I I III II II I ' Ill' I'®I'.
I I ~ III .III I ~'II,IIII ~ ~ I :III
~ , iIl! I'!I, 111 I ,II I~I .I ~ I 1~I
' iI , I I I i. II pp I III I I' ,4 I I, I ~ iJ~
i Ili~'1~1 I I I'Illlli. ~ F I II ,lY II
'
~ I I it ~ ~~-~i
_ I'. I I ; I
5 ~
~ ~ ~
m I ii 'O II'~ ~ ~ I ~I t'. I I
y ' I~fl~! I
y I ii j Ill lli il~~/ I ~ C,.
i ' Im I I"IN~,-{'III
i d I
~.o I _
'li I I. ':z ' I~
~ I I ,I
i I , I i
I
i I , ~f'11 1~ ' I j III ~ rr~
;~J I I i, I 'I ~ I i I I II r!
I I I: ~ I I ~
II ,l ~
I
I I ~ tom, ~ !11,
•
I @ 'I '111
e
I ~ '
^ O
II o n. m
rf~:~ ~ ~ ~
Fact Sheet
Cramer's Crossing by Rockford Homes
Dublin City Council
Size: 55.5 acres
Uses: 37.5 acres single family
81 lots 65' to 80' fronts (2.16 du/ac)
18 acres condominium
64 units in 16 four unit buildings (3.55 du/ac)
Architecture
Condominium area: cultured stone with hip roofs
Single Family area: 35% of homes are natural materials; specific sites designated
15 homes with second visible facade have increased detailing
if vinyl used must be .044 thickness and 8" beaded
6" wood trim on vinyl homes
30% masonry on fronts of vinyl homes
chimney chases brick or cultured stone
Open space Required: 9.31 acres (16.7%)
Open space Provided: 14.03 (25%)
Major setbacks: 200' from both Avery and Rings Roads
Infrastructure Provided: 2000' of unloaded (no individual lot access) roadway
sanitary sewer line to west boundary
water line to west boundary
SUMMARY OF FORMER PLANS AND PRESENT PROPOSAL
Type Plan Acres Open Space Multifamily Single Family Total Units Overall Density
Approved PUD Concept Plan 55.5 13.2 ac 207 2 209 3.99
(1996) (24%) (condos/apts)
Avery Village Commons Plan 64 15.95 ac 256 71 327 5.1
(1997-8) (25%) (apartments)
Cramer's Crossing Plan 55.5 14.03 ac 64 81 145 2.61
(1999) (25%) (condos)
Major Planning Factors Affecting Site
Industrial development on east and north sides
Trailer Park to south
2000+ unloaded roadway
' , Q`(~ i{I~,{ w ~ ~ ~ . ~ \ _ -.fit.
I ' 1{
~ 1
F _ ' M \ {
O ~ \ L 111
i F
/ -
I
~ - 4 __t - > _
! I -
~ _
J~
j - ~~l ~ ! ~
i' , '
G
1
, _
~ a
a . ~ u ~
6.~ _
bra.. `r[~ { 1 N N~. ; 1 1 ¦ > . ~ ' ~ ~ ~ -
I~ ~
1 r' -
P a ~ ¦ _ _
1 ~ . ,
_
{ I
1 I ~ ` ~
' r !F ' '-w~
F ~ ''mil i ~ -•--r-- - ' .,U , ~
i ~ ~1~ i r'
~t
- n -'(-'T__: ~ ~ I \ ~ , sir \`jj -9 I~~,T~ o I~.
I ~ `
~ I -
9 Flo I~~
I h~ ' . ~ ,
~ij111"~~' ~ l ~1
~ ~ ' 1 ,"^i-r~-i % ~I~~II) ~i. X11
, o , ~ ~ 111.
I
i - _ . 1
-
i r J ~ - - - -
~i
_ ~ ~ 1
,
I > I i•
. ~ _
- i ~ ~ ,
II i
,
/ ~
' 1 -
_ _ _ - _ ~ T~( , L
O O $ ~ N ~~A
~ Z ~ y ~ ~
Z
S3 r_ ~ C ; ^ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
v, ~ ~
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
March 16, 2000
CITY OF D[?fil.l\ '
Division of Planning
SB00 Shier-Rings Road
)ablin, Ohio 43016-1236
Phone/TD D: 614-761-6550
Fax: 614-761-6566
Web Site: www dubtat.oh.us
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
2. Rezoning Application 99-041Z - Preliminary Development Plan - Cramer's
Crossing (formerly known as Avery Village Commons)
Location: 55.5 acres located on the west side of Avery Road, north of Rings Road.
Existing Zoning: R-1B, Restricted Suburban Residential District and EU, Exceptional
Use District (Washington Township zoning classifications).
Request: Review and approval of a preliminary development plan under the PUD
provisions of Section 153.056.
Proposed Use: A development of 85 single-family lots, 64 condominium units and
11.26 acres of park.
Applicant: 18 Acre Avery Road Ltd. and Mid-States Development Corporation, c/o S.
Robert Davis, 5720 Avery Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016; and Rockford Homes, Inc., c/o
Donald Wick, 999 Polaris Parkway, Columbus, Ohio 43240; represented by
Christopher T. Cline, 5455 Rings Road, Suite 500, Dublin Ohio 43017
MOTION: To disapprove this application because the proposed project density exceeds that
recommended in the Community Plan, and the proposed plan's characteristics, including lot
sizes, architectural standards and materials fail to justify a density increase. The proposal will
set a negative precedent for future development to the west.
VOTE: 5-1.
RESULT This application was disapproved. It will be forwarded to City Council with a
negative recommendation.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
J
Jo Talentino
S119~MtTTED TO COUNCIL. Assistant Planning Director
2 ~ FOR fi~lEE1i'iNG {~N b U
~ _ - _
t
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Staff Report -March 16, 2000
Page 9
CASE 2: Rezoning Application 99-0412 -Preliminary Development Plan -
Cramer's Crossing (formerly known as Avery Village Commons)
Location: 55.5 acres located on the west side of Avery Road, north of
Rings Road. _
Existing Zoning: R-1B, Restricted Suburban Residential District and EU,
Exceptional Use District (Washington Township zoning classifications).
Request: Review and approval of a preliminary development plan under
the PUD provisions of Section 153.056.
Proposed Use: A development of 81 single-family lots, 64 condominium
units and 10.38 acres of park.
Applicant: 18 Acre Avery Road Ltd. and Mid-States Development
Corporation, c/o S. Robert Davis, 5720 Avery Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016;
and Rockford Homes, Inc., c/o Donald Wick, 999 Polaris Parkway,
Columbus, Ohio 43240; represented by Christopher T. Cline, 5455 Rings
Road, Suite 500, Dublin Ohio 43017.
Staff Contact: John Talentino, Assistant Planning Director.*
UPDATE:
On January 6, 2000, the Commission tabled this application after a lengthy discussion
regarding density, lot sizes, vehicular and pedestrian connections, streetscapes, site
layout, exterior materials, architectural detailing, and open space.
The plan has been revised by reducing the number of units by four, from 149 to 145,
increasing the park from 10.38 to 11.26 acres, and adding commitments for architectural
diversity and quality of materials. The current plan consists of 81 single-family lots, 64
condominium units, and 11.26 acres of park on 55.5 acres.
BACKGROUND:
On March 19, 1998, the Commission voted to forward a negative recommendation to
City Council on a previous application for this site. That plan included 256 multi-family
units, 71 lots, and 15.95 acres of park. On May 4, 1998, City Council disapproved the
proposed rezoning by a vote of 3-4. This site is one of four sites that were exempted
from the rezoning moratorium in the Southwest Area. On June 17, 1999, the Planning
Commission tabled this case after a lengthy discussion. Issues of concern included
density, lot sizes, setbacks, pedestrian and vehicular connections, quality of building
materials, architectural standards and diversity, a commitment to complete the
construction of the entire Rings Road extension, and perimeter landscaping. The plan
was then revised by reducing the number of units from 160 to 150, enlarging the park
from 9.91 to 10.5 acres, eliminating the Dublin Clubhouse and parking lot, eliminating
the Rings Road vehicular connection, and providing a 200-foot setback along existing
• Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Staff Report -March 16, 2000
Page 10
Rings Road. On September 16, 1999, the Planning Commission tabled this case after
another lengthy discussion. Four of the six Commission members in attendance directed
the applicant to significantly reduce the project density toward the level recommended in
the Community Plan. Each of the six Commission members expressed the need for
increased architectural and material standards. The plan was then revised by reducing the
number of units by one, from 150 to 149, decreasing the park from 10.50 to -10.38 acres,
and adding commitments for architectural diversity and quality of materials.
The Commission and Council approved a previous concept plan for Avery Village
Commons in 1996. The concept plan consisted of 207 multi-family units, two one-acre
lots, 2.7 acres of office, and 13.2 acres of park on an overall site of 55.5 acres. One
condition required the density to be lowered to 4.0 dwelling units per acre. The site was
then enlarged to 62.81 acres, and the new plan consisted of 244 multi-family units, 71
lots, and 15.95 acres of park. The Commission requested including the Samson property
without increasing the density, adding architectural commitments and amenities in the
text, increasing the setback on Avery Road, and providing a more innovative project
layout. The plan was then enlarged to include the Samson property (64.225 acres), but
the overall density increased from 5.01 to 5.09 dwelling units per acre. That plan
consisted of 256 multi-family units in the eastern portion of the site, 71 lots in the
western portion, and 15.95 acres of park along Rings Road. The staff prepared alternative
plans to show more graphically the goals for this site.
The Commission will make a recommendation on this revised rezoning application and
forward it to City Council for a public hearing and a final vote. Atwo-thirds vote will be
necessary to override a negative recommendation from the Commission. If approved by
Council, the rezoning will take effect in 30 days. All development will be subject to final
development plan approval by the Commission prior to the start of construction.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
The site is 55.5 acres on the west side of Avery Road, north of Rings Road, and
contains the Dublin Clubhouse. The site wraps behind 12 rural lots near the corner of
Rings and Avery Roads. It is irregular in shape with about 450 feet of frontage on
Avery Road and over 600 feet on Rings Road. The site extends 1,800 feet west of
Avery Road and 2,200 feet north of Rings Road. The eastern portion of the site is
undeveloped, and the western portion is developed with private recreation grounds
and a 6,000-square-foot building. The Cramer Ditch runs from west to east through
the southern third of the site.
• The site is zoned R-1B, Restricted Suburban Residential, and EU, Exceptional Use
Districts, both Washington Township classifications. It is in the Hilliard City School
District. To the northeast are a home (formerly Samson) on Avery Road, the
Northwest Corporate Centre industrial park (zoned PIP, Planned Industrial Park
District), and very deep estate lots with houses fronting on Woerner-Temple Road.
To the west are a residence and undeveloped land (R-1B) in an unincorporated area of
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ,
Staff Report -March 16, 2000
Page 11
Washington Township. To the south across Rings Road is the Ponderosa Estates
mobile home park. To the east across Avery Road is St. John's Lutheran Church (R-
1 B), and the future apartments and condominiums of the Balgriffin PUD.
Community Plan Issues:
• The Community Plan identifies the entire site as residential use (1-2 dwelling units
per acre). For this site, 110 homes would be the maximum development projected. ~
Proposed densities in the southwest area were discussed at length during the
Community Plan process, and some were lowered, including this area. One of the
goals of the Community Plan is to control the quality and intensity of development
along Dublin's western edge by respecting the recommended density levels.
• The Avery Road Area Plan gives specific design considerations for the area. It
encourages new development plans to respond to adjacent developments. The
primary challenge is to create a continuous and cohesive fabric of neighborhoods by
connecting existing developments with roads, paths, and park space. It recommends a
more traditional approach to neighborhood design, providing parks in prominent
locations, maintaining primarily residential development south of Shier-Rings Road,
with density decreasing to the west of Avery Road. Boulevards, pedestrian-friendly
streets, and highly visible parks are also encouraged. The Community Plan also
encourages development patterns that support pedestrian mobility, including mixed-
use development.
• One of the goals of the proposed new plan for the southwest area of Dublin is "raising
the bar" of quality in the southwest area. A network of open space is one of the
unifying concepts. "Conservation" design to accumulate a substantial amount of open
space has been proposed. Stream corridors, drainage ways, woods, and hedgerows
are important "form-givers" and provide links in the open space.
Land Use: ~
• The park requirement is 9.085 acres (based on 55.5 acres and 145 dwelling units),
which represents 16 percent of the land area. The plan shows 11.26 acres (20
percent). It contains 6.3 acres along the south side of Rings Road extended, plus 4.08
acres along the north side, and a 0.88-acre landscaped island within a loop street in
the northern portion of the site. Consistent with the Commission's policy, the setback
areas (200 feet from centerline along Avery Road and Rings Road) constitute 3.65
acres which are not included. Any area utilized for detention cannot be used to meet
the minimum park requirement. This will be re-verified when additional engineering
has been performed.
• The proposal has 145 dwelling units and 11.26 acres of park on 55.5 acres, yielding
an overall density of 2.61 dwelling units per acre. An extension of Rings Road is
proposed through the site from Avery Road to the west boundary. The street will be
32 feet wide (70-foot right-of--way). There are 64 condominiums and 59 lots
proposed on the north side of this new road. The remaining 22 lots will be located
south of the new road. A total of 11.26 acres of parkland is proposed, consisting of
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Staff Report -March 16, 2000
Page 12
6.3 acres (including the Cramer Ditch) stretching along the entire south side of the
new road, plus 4.08 acres on the north side of the road. This includes 2.57 acres
adjacent to the condominiums containing the 6,000-square-foot party house and its
pazking lot. The house and parking lot will be removed and this area will be fine
graded and seeded. A wet pond will be located along the Rings Road extension in
this area. -
Access:
The multi-family area is located near Avery Road and will have two curb cuts on the
Rings Road extension (70-foot right-of--way through the site, consistent with the
Thoroughfare Plan). The site plan shows 16 buildings with a total of 64 units and a
small central open space. The layout shows a core area consisting of three buildings
and the open space, with the remaining 13 buildings surrounding the core. The two
entrances are located to give views across the central open space. The internal
streetscape features street trees and a looped pedestrian path with two connections to
the adjacent 2.57-acre park azea. This revised layout does a better job of integrating
the site through paths and open space than previous versions.
The single-family lots will not have direct access to the Rings Road extension. Stub
streets are shown to the north and west. The existing estate lots to the north (on
Woerner-Temple Road) have 1,000 feet of depth. The reaz portions of these lots aze
expected to be developed at some future time. There are no direct vehiculaz
connections shown between the multi-family and single-family azeas, but this was a
condition of concept plan approval on June 6, 1996.
Interconnecting street and sidewalk systems are very important elements of the Avery
Road Area Plan. The Community Plan recommends continuous, direct and
convenient pedestrian linkages to and between activity centers. It states that
"development should have pedestrian and vehicular connections to several
surrounding roadways." The development of multiple connections is encouraged.
The Thoroughfaze Plan recommends aright-of--way for Avery Road varying from
approximately 62 feet (from existing centerline at the north end of the site) to
approximately 66 feet (from centerline at the south end). This right-of--way must be
specified on the plan. Along existing Rings Road, the Thoroughfaze Plan
recommends aright-of--way of 35 feet from centerline. At the intersection of the new
Rings Road extension with Avery Road, pavement should be widened to 36 feet, for a
left turn lane. The length of the left turn stacking and taper should be based on the
future width of Avery Road. Street lighting will be needed for safe operation of the
intersection.
• The Community Plan promotes a 200-foot from centerline setback along both Avery
and Rings Roads, as "scenic" roadways. The text has adopted this setback along
Avery Road and Rings Road, but pavement is shown within 140 feet of centerline
along Rings Road. The proposed building setback from the industrial property to the
north is 25 feet. This is industrial property without many limitations, and the width of
buffering and amount of plant material must be substantial.
I
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission .
Staff Report -March 16, 2000
Page 13
Parking:
• Required parking for 64 multi-family units is 160 spaces under Dublin Code. The
text meets this and requires gazages, but it is not clear how the parking will be
provided. Proposed pazking setbacks aze 45 feet along Avery Road, and 20 feet along
all other roads. The pavement setback should respect a 200-foot setback along Avery
Road. ~ _
Architecture:
The proposed condominium buildings will be similaz to the Heather Glen North
condos. Synthetic stone (instead of brick) and hip roofs (instead of gabled) will be
used on the ends. The roofs will have a minimum 8/12 pitch, which should be
included in the development standazds. The proposed text requires 70 percent
masonry materials (brick, stone, or synthetic stone) after subtracting windows and
doors. The balance of exterior materials may be cementous boazd material, good
quality vinyl siding (0.044-inch thickness), or wood. Staff recommends limiting the
materials more strongly. Exterior materials should be of equal quality on all sides of
each building. Site layout and architecture should result in a high quality visual
image. This should be provided with the preliminary development plan.
• If vinyl siding is to be used, it should meet all of the following standards as a
condition of approval: minimum thickness of 0.044 inches; OSB or plywood
sheathing; wood trim four inches or more in width applied azound all windows and at
the intersection of all building planes; seamless ends/panel joints (run lengths must go
from trim-corner to trim-corner); smooth (not wood grain) texture and aloes-gloss
finish; color must be from aCommission-approved color palette and profile; five
percent overstock provided to homeowners for repairs; no more than 25 percent of the
total number of homes in any subdivision may use vinyl siding as the predominant
exterior building material (i.e. no more than 40 percent of the exterior opaque surface
area of the structure). ~
• The proposed text requires at least 35 percent (29 homes) of the single-family homes
to be all natural materials, including Lots 1, 12, 13-16, 20, 21, 29, 30, 34-44, 55-59,
70, 74, and 81. The notes on the plan appear to have reversed the symbols identifying
"all natural materials" and "two-sided azchitecture and all natural materials." Natural
materials specified in the text are wood (excluding T-111 plywood), stone, brick,
stucco, and cementous boazd siding. Synthetic stucco has been eliminated from the
natural materials list. Vinyl siding (at least 0.044-inch in thickness) is also permitted.
Staff recommends that vinyl siding be eliminated from the approved materials list
unless it meets the standazds listed above. The text requires that for homes not of all
natural materials, at least 30 percent of each front elevation be brick or cultured stone.
The text should be revised to be clear on this requirement. The text requires increased
azchitectural detailing on elevations visible from the roadway on Lots 1, 12, 13, 20,
21, 29, 30, 34, 35, 44, 55, 57, 59, 70, 74, and 81. Lot 55 is not shown on the plan to
require this detailing. The text and plan should be revised for consistency.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Staff Report -March 16, 2000
Page 14
Development Standards:
• The plan shows a minimum lot width of 65 feet for the single-family area north of the
Rings Road extension, with 80-foot lots along the west boundary. Setbacks for the
azea are 30 feet from Rings Road extended, 200 feet from the centerline of existing
Rings Road, and 30 feet from all other streets. The reaz yard is 25 feet,, A combined
side yazd of 15 feet and aseven-foot minimum per side are required. No build zones
should be shown along the entire perimeter, all reaz yazds, and side yazds adjacent to
parkland. All fencerows should be within no disturb zones. Text definitions for no
build/disturb zones aze needed.
• The timing of this case is difficult with the Southwest Area Plan in process. Staff
recommends that the lot width of the lots abutting the western property line be
increased to at least 80 feet. This will help to set the standard for future development
that is in line with adopted density standazds.
• The text should include single-family development standazds that require the
elevations facing Rings Road extended and existing Rings Road to be azchitecturally
pleasing with the same materials and detailing as the front. The text requires the same
azchitectural diversity standard as approved with other subdivisions in Dublin.
• The text prohibits all fences except privacy or screen fences within the buildable area
of the lot, consistent with Code.
Landscaping and Tree Preservation:
• The Community Plan recommends preserving existing fencerows and wooded azeas.
An inventory of lazge trees has been submitted. It shows their approximate locations,
but does not indicate condition or which trees will be preserved. Additional
information is required concerning total caliper inches to be removed and tree
replacement.
A landscape plan indicating buffer areas between the proposed and existing uses was
also submitted. The text emphasizes the significant challenges presented by the
industrial and mobile home uses in the azea. The minimum Code requirement is a 15-
foot wide buffer strip with asix-foot high completely opaque buffer and one tree
every 40 feet. The proposed buffer along the adjacent industrial property consists of a
double row of evergreen trees. Along the single-family lots, evergreen trees will be
planted within a 20-foot-wide buffer, and deciduous trees (at least 1 per 40 feet) will
be planted outside the designated buffer area. Along the condominium portion, one
row of trees will be within aten-foot-wide buffer on the industrial side. There will be
one row of trees on the condo side outside the designated buffer area. No deciduous
trees are proposed here.
Open Space:
• The Community Plan recommends public spaces to facilitate congregation and
conversation. Moreover, it recognizes the need for mixed-use development
integrating all types of community facilities where possible. A pedestrian path will
be provided along the entire perimeter of the 2.57-acre park area with two
.r....s~~.__._.. l
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Staff Report -March 16, 2000
Page I S
connections into the condominiums. The path will continue in a loop through the
condominium area.
• An eight-foot bike path will be provided along the south side of Rings Road extended
and along the Avery Road frontage. The text also states that sidewalks will be
provided on both sides of all other streets. Street trees will be installed per Code.
• The Rings Road extension is proposed to be constructed to the western boundary with
the first single-family phase. Staff recommends that the extension be completed
within three years of rezoning. All of the park should be dedicated to the City at the
time of approval of the first final development plan (either single- or multi-family).
Entry Feature:
• The Sign Code permits an entry feature sign with a maximum 20 square feet in area
and six feet in height. A conceptual entry feature consists of a ground sign behind a
decorative stone wall located on the southwest corner of Avery Road and Rings Road
extended. The sign must meet Code, including having a rectangular shape.
Utilities:
• Stormwater management must comply with the City's Stormwater Regulations. No
FEMA boundaries exist or are .required along Cramer Ditch west of Avery Road.
FEMA has established Special Flood Hazard Area east of Avery Road, but the
detailed study for the floodplain stops at Avery Road. This developer will not be
required to extend the detailed study, but he needs to use prudent engineering design
practices on the stormwater management design. Major flood routing outside street
right-of--way within the single-family site must be provided with easements. The
proposed text indicates that an additional stormwater retention area may be necessary,
which would be located in the park behind Lots 8-12 in the southern portion. Areas
used for required stormwater detention do not count toward the park requirement.
• The developer will extend the 21-inch public sanitary sewer west of Avery Road to ~
the proposed site. The developer is required to extend public sewer to the boundaries
of the site, and to size the sewer to serve the remaining upstream portion of the
watershed as shown in the Community Plan. The sewer will reduce in diameter as it
is extended through the site to its northwest corner. Public sanitary sewer is
discouraged within the multi-family site. Should the developer wish to pursue the
public sanitary sewer option, strict design controls will be required.
• The developer will extend the 20-inch waterline underneath Avery Road, and then
along Avery Road to the southern property line. The developer will extend a 12-inch
water line from Avery Road to the western boundary of the site along the new street.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This plan represents a significant improvement over the concept plan and previous
preliminary development plan proposals. The applicant has revised the plan numerous
times to accommodate the City's concerns as new issues have arisen. This application
has been in process for a long time, and the Community Plan now recommends lower
• Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Staff Report -March 16, 2000
Page 16
densities than were included in the Southwest Area Plan. This plan does provide for an
exceptional park and a needed through-street.
Due to density, staff still respectfully recommends disapproval because the proposal will
set a negative precedent for future applications to the west. The applicant revised the
plan consistent with the recommendations of the Commission. The following issues
remain unresolved:
Issues:
1) The project density (2.61 dwelling units per acre) exceeds the recommended
density in the Community Plan, and the proposed plan's characteristics fail
to justify a density increase.
2) The lots along the western boundary in the southern single-family portion
must have a minimum width of 80 feet.
3) The plan fails to incorporate the Avery Road and existing Rings Road
rights-of--way consistent with the adopted Thoroughfare Plan.
4) The applicant must submit a complete tree survey, a tree preservation plan,
and a tree replacement plan, consistent with the provisions of the Code and
as required by the approved concept plan, prior to being scheduled on the
Council agenda.
5) The text should be revised to require a 200-foot pavement setback along
Avery Road.
6) That the Rings Road extension be completed within three years of rezoning.
7) The plan does not provide adequate buffers along surrounding industrial
properties.
8) The submission fails to provide scaled building elevation drawings or
illustrate quality and "four-sided" architecture as well as the appearance
from Rings Road, Avery Road and the park.
9) The plan does not adequately address architectural quality for those lots
visible from Rings Road and Rings Road extended.
a_
~,V..~
q< COWltBV3 1tARY5v1
SEDER RING
i q
1 s
i~
yltCS RD ! ~ ~007C PL
i ~<~11N PL -
SE~t ~ i a G
i ~NrEOV
i ~
i
DAN-sE~ R~ YAZtoct R G O~
EtiBt.
s~
i BE.vn. ~ ~ ~ 1
r
i ~ OOREEY DR 1?t~ ~
i tAT~ a
. ILD ~ SCOTT!
~(OERttER ~ T~~ GAELS
/ 4
` M
i ~ ~ gAZglUfAY CT .
o a
su
~ ~ C@ETER
GL
• i ~ ~~,wc ?vc c3 DR
1
i ~ ITS - gxNGS Rn
RiCEIGR<
i ~ ~ I2i
i ~ ~e CiEARFiE
~L~~ ~
RINGS RD CARA RD 1
~ ~ ~ K xo
` ~ o N
~ i ~ ~ ~
c
rv~J
i ~ ~
! ~
t..,...~
i
o iooo 2000 ~
i
' SCALE IN FEET
( 1 IN EQUALS 1200 F7 ~
! i I •
. i ~
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
is ~ ~
C
>E~c ~ °
R ~ ~
18 S~
c
R PLR
R
1NOERPIER ~ TEMPLE RD
- ~ ~ PI~R
PCD
SITE ~ ,s
R G
R-f8 U R-fS
-2
R-3
NC
R-1i F
R-t
Ir0/rC PCD
Q
99-041Z ~
R-J$ Rezoning Application f
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)-
'Pi, 1 1
D lin Planning and Zoning ommission ,
inutes -March 16, 2000
Page 13
Mr. Fishman said did not favor tabling. T o often applications aze ly slightly revised. It
wastes too muc ime. He made a moti to deny this rezonin pplication based on the
discussion thi evening, and Mr. Easte seconded. Mr. Banc sky said the Commiss' n
typically tab s when the applicant so r uests.
Ms. Bo ' g said she cannot suppo denial of the request tot le. The application will e refiled
and r cheduled for another he 'gone way or the other.
e vote on the motion to ny this application was follows: Mr. Peplow, y ; Mr. Sprague,
es; Mr. Lecklider, yes; s. Boring, no, Mr. East ,yes; and Mr. Fishman, es. (Disapproved
5-1.)
The Chair announ d a brief recess.
2. Rezoning Application 99-0412 -Preliminary Development Plan - Cramer's Crossing
(formerly known as Avery Village Commons)
John Talentino presented this revised rezoning plan. The plan was reduced to 81 lots and 64
multi-family units, for a total of 145 units. The pazk was increased to over 11 acres, not counting
the setback areas. He said commitments on azchitectural diversity and materials have been
included in the text. He showed several slides.
Mr. Talentino said in the condo area, there is a central open area with a good path system. The
lot layout was adjusted, reducing the number of lots facing Rings Road. There is a "Wow"
planting azea along the frontage. He said most of the western lots are now 80-feet wide. Staff
has consistently asked for the wider lots (80 feet or greater) along the full western border, setting
the expectations for future development on the next properties. The amount of 65-foot lots was
significantly reduced.
He said there is a vehicular connection to the west, consistent with the Community Plan. There
is a 10-foot buffer, and it needs to be wider. Mr. Talentino said it should meet Code and be 15 to
20 feet. It would be 10 feet off site and 10 feet on site. He said the building elevation had some
extra dormers for detail. In the proposal, some lots are required to have two-sided architecture so
that the front and any side facing the park or public street would have to have additional detail.
Mr. Talentino said most issues were discussed at length at the last meeting. The biggest issue is
the high density. It should be below 2 du/ac, consistent with the Community Plan. He said
some definite improvements were made to the plan, including layout and text commitments. The
plan has pedestrian paths and road connections to the west. Staff recommends a pavement
setback of 200 feet for Avery Road, and the applicant agreed but did not include it in the text.
Lot widths of 80 feet or wider along the western line would help set the standards for future
development to the west. Additional information is still needed to meet the tree replacement
ordinance. The Rings Road extension will be built with the first single-family phase. Staff
recommends athree-year trigger after rezoning incase the residential area is delayed.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -March 16, 2000
Page 14
Mr. Talentino also said additional stormwater detention may be needed iri the park areas. It can
not, however count towards parkland dedication. The amount of parkland can not be reduced
lower than required by Code. '
Mr. Talentino said this plan is a significant improvement over previous submissions. It has a
nice park element and a needed through street, but based on the density, staff respectfully
recommends disapproval. This will set a negative precedent for future applications to the west.
The applicant has made a number of revisions as requested. He listed nine issues that need to be
resolved in order for staff to support this application:
1) The project density (2.61 dwelling units per acre) exceeds the recommended density in the
_ Community Plan, and the proposed plan's characteristics fail to justify a density increase.
2) The lots along the western boundary in the southern single-family portion must have a
minimum width of 80 feet.
3) The plan fails to incorporate the Avery Road and existing Rings Road rights-of--way
consistent with the adopted Thoroughfare Plan.
4) The applicant must submit a complete tree survey, a tree preservation plan, and a tree
replacement plan, consistent with the provisions of the Code and as required by the approved
concept plan, prior to being scheduled on the Council agenda.
5) The text should be revised to require a 200-foot pavement setback along Avery Road.
6) That the Rings Road extension be completed within three years of rezoning.
7) The plan does not provide adequate buffers along surrounding industrial properties.
8) The submission fails to provide scaled building elevation drawings or illustrate quality and
"four-sided" architecture as well as the appearance from Rings Road, Avery Road and the
park.
9) The plan does not adequately address architectural quality for those lots visible from Rings
Road and Rings Road extended.
Mr. Fishman asked how many lots would have to be eliminated to lower the density to 2.2 du/ac.
Mr. Talentino said 23 units.
Mr. Fishman asked if all the lots were 80 feet wide, what would the density be. Mr. Talentino
said it depended upon layout. Mr. Fishman liked the layout, but had a problem with the small
lots.
Ms. Boring said removing two condos would reduce the density without increasing lot size. Mr.
Fishman said lot size is equally important. He did not want set the precedent of lower standards,
and smaller lots in the Southwest Area. He said the issue was "density, density, density."
Mr. Talentino said the pedestrian connections were needed to truly integrate the park.
Mr. Talentino said the applicant has agreed to widen the pavement at the intersection of the new
Rings Road extension and Avery Road to 36 feet.
Mr. Lecklider asked about parking for the multi-family units. He noted the parking setback was
proposed at 45 feet along Avery Road, and it should have a 200-foot setback. Mr. Talentino said
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ,
Minutes -March 16, 2000 .
Page 15
the text said "45 foot pavement setback", and the staff report suggests it to assure that area does
not get paved. Pavement is not shown on the plan.
Mr. Talentino said hip roofs were being proposed which was an improvement over the gabled
roof form at Heather Glen North. He said the units have the same floor plans. He was generally
satisfied with the architectural diversity for the single-family area. EIFS was eliminated as a
potential material. He said if only high quality vinyl is specified, staff can support that.
A public sanitary sewer through the multi-family site would require maintenance by the City.
The pipes are generally under the pavement, and keeping these sewers private is consistent with
City policy on condominium projects, according to Mr. Hammersmith.
Chris Cline said he represented Rockford Homes. At the last meeting, his client agreed to
eliminate four lots, and they have done this. They have also cooperated with the staff in
satisfying many of their concerns. He said there is some discrepancy between the plan and the
text on architectural detailing and natural materials. He noted that the text is correct.
Mr. Cline said they have given higher standards in some cases than were actually requested.
They cannot lower the number of lots any further.
Michael Fite, Bird-Houk, showed where the lots had been eliminated. He said the request to
make the western lots bigger is new. He did not think additional adjustments of lot widths were
possible, and the 65-foot lots are all internal to the design. There is a gradation of 65-, 70-, 75-,
and 80-foot lots. They have reconfigured the condo area. There is a parkway from Avery Road
to the west property line.
Mr. Lecklider thought that widening the lots was possible. Mr. Sprague and Mr. Peplow echoed
this same concern.
Mr. Fite said in the last meeting, the Commission voted to support the density of this plan with
81 lots, after deducting four lots. The Commission did not direct them to eliminate 23 more lots.
They have taken a lot of direction from the staff on this design, including incorporation of Road
to Wow elements. He explained the buffer. The finalized tree preservation plan will be
submitted with the final development plan. The plan has apark-like setting.
Ms. Boring thought density related to units per acre, not a set number of lots. Mr. Cline said he
believes the Commission gave approval of a plan with 81 lots, after removing four lots.
Ms. Boring thought a mix of lot sizes would be better than creating rows of exactly the same size
lots. The neighborhood will look more interesting with a mix of lot sizes and house sizes. Mr.
Eastep thought varied setbacks are more important to break up the views along the street. Mr.
Cline said this is a marketing issue. Mr. Lecklider and Mr. Sprague said they have seen a mix of
lot widths elsewhere, and it is more interesting.
Mr. Fite noted that the legend on the drawing for the two-sided architecture and natural materials
is incorrect. The drawing itself is correct. Mr. Cline said there is at least 30 percent natural
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
• Minutes - Mazch 16, 2000
Page 16
materials on the front elevation. Mr. Fite said this equates generally to having brick on the first
floor of the elevation, and then vinyl on the second floor.
Mr. Peplow asked about the six-inch trim around the windows. He said some vinyl azeas seem
to show no trim. Mr. Cline said this commitment was for the single-family area only.
Mr. Cline said the plan changes were generally commitments made in the meetings and include:
increased architectural detailing; 15 very visible homes will have additional detailing on the
second side; 35 percent of the homes will be predominately natural materials; the vinyl product
has been defined; and chimney chases will be stone, stucco stone, or brick. Mr. Cline said there
will be direct vent fireplaces.
Mr. Peplow said increasing lot sizes in the southern and western areas are very important to him;
80 feet should be the minimum lot width. Mr. Cline said he cannot reduce any more lots.
Ms. Boring said this site will set a strong precedent, especially if this developer refuses to mix lot
sizes. It sends a strong message to the next developer about small lots.
Mr. Lecklider said in future, direct-vent fireplaces should only be permitted on the rear elevation,
and they should be screened. It said the Commission spends a lot of energy trying to get brick
and stone used on the elevations, and with direct-vent facilities, there is only siding. The
appearance is not attractive, and they should not be on side elevations. Mr. Fishman said this
should be addressed in some type of appearance code for the City. He does not like the
appearance as they hang off the side of a building.
Bob Yokum said the direct-vent fireplace is less expensive than a full masonry chimney. He
discussed the need for foundations and the different components.
Mr. Lecklider said one of his primary concerns was still density, but he wanted materials,
azchitecture, etc. to be fully resolved. He found 30 percent brick or stone on the front of the
garage and first floor unsatisfactory and unappealing. He was also concerned about the vinyl
used between the gables on the condominiums. The architecture and materials should knock his
socks off in order to justify an increase in the density. For that reason, and because it will set a
precedent for the development to the west, he could not justify the smaller lot sizes.
Mr. Cline said extra attention would be devoted to the second side of high visibility sites.
Michael Fite said there is a shallow lot on the west edge and then the proposed golf course. He
noted that he was retained for the golf course project, as well as this one. He was concerned that
this plan was not being reviewed on its own merits.
Mr. Cline said John Fitzsimmons owns the smaller parcel, and it will probably remain as a
farmhouse with outbuildings. He had met with Mr. Fitzsimmons on behalf of both of his clients
to show him what is being developed. He is fixing his house up to sell. Mr. Fishman speculated
that the new owner might come forward claiming a hardship. It is outside this application.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ,
Minutes -March 16, 2000
Page 17
Mr. Cline said there was a curbcut on Rings Road for his single-family home. He said they will
provide Mr. Fitzsimmons an accessible sewer tap as he requested.
Ms. Fite said this 80-foot lot width issue arose at the Saturday golf course meeting. The
Commissioners disagreed. Mr. Fishman said discussion was reflected in the minutes about
setting a dangerous precedent for the property to the west.
Ms. Boring thought Mr. Cline was saying that 65-foot lots should be at the golf course too. Mr.
Fite said all 65-foot lots had been taken out of the southern piece. The developments are not
connected, and they should judged independently.
rrrr
Mr. Cline said if it was important to enlarge the lots on the western boundary of the southern pazt
site, they will lose a lot. He agreed to enlarge them. Mr. Fite said the 80-foot lots will not fit.
Mr. Lecklider did not favor adding a lot back on the northeastern portion because it is a nice
configuration as it sets.
Ms. Fishman felt very strongly that the plan was too dense, and the lots are too small. He said
2.2 du/ac was mentioned many times as the desired maximum density. Previously, residents said
they were in favor of the development, but they had concerns about density. He said the plan is
much improved. If some lots were eliminated, and all lots were enlazged to 80 feet, he could
support the plan. However, this does not meet the Community Plan. The Southwest Plan and
the Wow program aze under consideration. It needs lazger lots. He said it is much improved, but
nothing "knocked his socks off." Mr. Lecklider agreed.
Ms. Boring agreed. She said it was raze that staff recommended disapproval. She had no
problem with 60 to 65-foot lots, if they aze lined up the same and if there is a lazge amount of
greenspace. Ms. Boring suggested the Commission might look at this differently if the
architectural standards were tougher. However, she said she owed it to Dublin, not just the
southwest azea residents. She said it was tough to hold to a vision, but it must be continued.
Mr. Eastep said his opinion had not changed because the density was too high.
Mr. Peplow said he previously was supportive of this plan. He said the site is difficult to develop
due to nearby industry. A 2,000 foot unloaded road is proposed with a lot of greenspace on each
side. Density is not always the only issue. Residents want curb appeal. He would like bigger
lots, but he would be supportive of this plan, if the western lots could be wider. Mr. Sprague and
Mr. Lecklider concurred.
Mr. Lecklider was not completely comfortable with the density. He recognized the site is
difficult to develop, and that the unloaded road was an asset. He liked the woodland at the
southernmost point and the cul de sacs. He said he still had concerns with architectural standards
and materials. The ration of natural materials on the front elevation was insufficient. To justify
smaller lots, the quality needs to be apparent. The same is true of the condominiums. He said he
agreed staff's issues, with the exception of issue number one, regarding density.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -March 16, 2000
Page 18
Mr. Eastep said this was the third time this application had been heard by the Commission, and
explicit directions were given. This violates the Community Plan density recommendation.
Mr. Sprague said the density question and 80-foot lots had not been addressed.
Ms. Boring was not worried about development to the west due to the proposed golf course. She
noted that the original concept plan was all multi-family.
Mr. Fishman said the Community Plan recommended one to two units per acre, and lowering
density moving west. He said the Community Plan stressed the importance of the "lower-than-
, low" scenario.
Mr. Fishman thought the smaller lots should be scattered across the subdivision.. He suggested
eliminating Lots 26 25, 24, 27, 23, 25, 22, 29, and 21 in favor of greenspace. Ms. Boring was
not convinced that the open look would be noticed while driving through it.
Mr. Sprague understood it may not be economically feasible to reduce the density.
Mr. Lecklider said the entryway has appeal, but the amenities did not overcome his concerns
with respect to architectural control and materials, etc.
Mr. Fishman said except for the unloaded road, this may have been disapproved in the
beginning. It is necessary to stick to the Community Plan.
Mr. Lecklider said there seemed to be three Commissioners for it, and three against the rezoning.
Ms. Boring said even for those who would vote positively, there needed to be text modifications.
Mr. Cline said the density is necessary to pay for the unloaded road and the right-of--way for it.
If the Commissioners like the unloaded roadway, the park along the stream, the vision, and
solving the industrial buffer, it requires this number of units to support them. He felt they had
done what was asked, and he asked for a vote.
Mr. Eastep made a motion that this application be disapproved based on the issues raised in the
staff report and this evening's discussion. Mr. Fishman seconded, and the vote was as follows:
Ms. Boring, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Peplow, no; Mr. Fishman, yes; and
Mr. Eastep, yes. (Disapproved 5-1.)
3. Fi 1 Development Plan 00 13FDP - McKitrick D - Killilea Section -Lots 47
rough 57
. Talentino said this is mal development plan or 11 lots located on t north side of
merald Parkway. The s' is zoned PUD, Planne nit Development Dist ' t. The Cardinal
Health campus is across merald Parkway. He sa' an adjustment is neede n the setback from
72 to 82 feet, and the is adequate room to do is. He noted the buildi pads for the four lots
along Emerald Par ay are a bit tight, typical plot plans of omes with decks were
submitted. Varia es will not be needed. said plat notes E and F ed to be amended.
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
January 6, 2000
Division of Plaaaing
5800 Shier-Rings Raad
Dublin, duo 4301b-1236
.rrW
Pbone/(D0: 614161-6550
fax: 614761-6566
Web 5'ite: www.dubla~oh.us
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
3. Rezoning Application 99-0412 - Preliminary Development Plan - . Cramer's
Crossing (formerly known as Avery Village Commons)
Location: ~~.5 acres located on the west side of Avery Road, north of Rings Road.
Existing Zoning: R-1B, Restricted Suburban Residential District and EU, Exceptional..
Use District (Washington Township zoning classifications).
Request: Review and approval of a preliminary development plan under tie PUD
provisions of Section 153.056.
Proposer! Use: A development of 85 single-family lots, 64 condominium emits and
10.38 acres of park.
Applicant: 18 Acre Avery Road Ltd. and Mid-States Development Corporation, c/o S.
Robert Davis, 5720 Avery Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016; and Rockford Homes, Inc., c/o
Donald Wick, 999 Polaris Parkway, Columbus, Ohio 43240; represented by Christopher
T. Cline, 5455 Rings Road, Suite 500, Dublin, Ohio 43017. ~ ...r
MOTION: To table this application.
VOTE: 5-2.
RESULT: After a lengthy discussion regarding density, lot sizes, vehicular and pedestrian
connections, streetscapes, site layout, exterior materials, architectural detailing, and
openspace, this application was tabled at the request of the applicant.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
~hn Tal
Planner 99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -January 6, 2000
Page 10
Mr. Hale agreed to the above conditions on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Peplow seconded the
motion, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Harian, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes;
Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Eastep, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; and Mr. McCash, yes. (Approved 7-0.)
3. Rezoning Application 99-0412 -Preliminary Development Plan - Cramer's Crossing
(formerly known as Avery Village Commons)
John Talentino said this application was tabled in September 1999, and the Commission
requested a reduction in density closer to the 2.0 du/ac, as recommended in the Community
Plan. He said the plan has been revised, and one unit was dropped. `The parkland has been
rearranged, reduced and located along the Rings Road extension. There are now 85 single-
family lots and 64 condominium units (total 149 units) with 10.3 acres of parkland. The
density is now proposed at 2.68 du/ac.
Mr. Talentino showed slides. He said the existing clubhouse will be razed. Staff believes this
is an improvement over the concept plan for "Avery Village Commons." The layout was
adjusted to face some lots towards Rings Road and to keep a 200-foot setback from the
centerline. He pointed out the different width lots in the plan. He said the condo arrangement
is unchanged. The 200-foot building setback is met on Avery Road, and the units are similar
to Heather Glen. They will have a hip roof and stone instead of brick.
Mr. Talentino said the buffer treatment along the industrial property has not improved.
Mr. Talentino said there are additional commitments on house materials and detailing. He said
35 percent will be predominately natural materials; and staff recommends eliminating synthetic
stucco and vinyl siding as "natural- materials" . Commitments were made on architectural
detailing on lots visible from the roadways, but that needs further refinement. Additional
vehicular and pedestrian connections are still needed, including a pedestrian path through the
„ condominium area to integrate the project through the open space. The Rings Road extension
will be completed to the west end of the property by the second residential phase.
Mr. Talentino said the applicant and staff are unable to resolve the density issue, layout
concerns, and some of the design issues with respect to materials and detailing. He said staff
respectfully recommends disapproval of this rezoning application with 11 bases:
1) The project density (2.68 dwelling units per acre) exceeds the recommended density in
the Community Plan, and the proposed plan's characteristics fail to justify a density
increase.
2) The density and lot size will set a negative precedent for future development to the west.
3) The plan fails to incorporate the Avery Road and existing Rings Road rights-of--way
consistent with the adopted Thoroughfare Plan.
4) The plan does not include adequate pedestrian and vehicular connections to adjacent
properties to provide a continuous fabric of neighborhoods, consistent with the goals of
the Community Plan.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -January 6, 2000
Page 11
5) The plan does not integrate the development through direct pedestrian and vehicular
connections .
6) The plan does not create visual interest in street design by including boulevard design and
pedestrian-friendly streets in the multi-family area.
7) The submission does not include an adequate inventory of large trees or a tree
preservation plan, as required by the approved concept plan.
8) The plan does not provide substantial and defined buffers along surrounding properties.
9) The submission fails to provide scaled building elevation drawings or illustrate quality
and "four-sided" architecture as well as the appearance from Rings Road extended,
Avery Road and the park.
10) The plan does not adequately address architectural quality for those lots visible from
Rings Road and Rings Road extended.
11) The plans do not satisfactorily indicate the timing or phasing of the proposed
development and infrastructure improvements with adequate assurances.
Mr. Talentino said the text requires either aone- or two-car garage. Code requires 2'/i spaces
per unit, but the plan does not show this. For all units with two bedrooms or more, Code
requires 2.5 spaces apiece. Detached houses require two spaces.
Mr. Lecklider asked how many houses would be predominantly natural. Mr. Talentino said
the proposed text cites 35 percent, or about 29 or 30 homes. Another section said all 85
houses will have at least 30 percent brick or cultured stone front elevations. One dozen lots
with the most visible locations will have increased detailing.
Mr. McCash said "natural materials" to him included wood, stucco, etc.
Mr. Fishman said there still would be typical vinyl wrap on three sides on two-thirds of the
buildings. Even with partial stone on the fronts, they are 70 percent vinyl.
Mr. Talentino said the diversity formula in the text was the same as used elsewhere in Dublin.
Mr. Sprague asked about Bases 5 regarding linkage, open space, and pedestrian paths. Mr.
Talentino said the looped path was proposed by staff previously, but the applicant does not
want to loop the bikepath through the condominium area. He said there was less resistance for
the pedestrian path, but they did want any path to be perceived as a public area.
Mr. Sprague asked when the Thoroughfare Plan for this area had been amended. Mr.
Talentino said Bases 3 could be met. It just had not been shown on the plan.
Mr. Sprague said besides the density and lot size, most of the bases are more detail-oriented
issues. Mr. Talentino said that was generally true, but there is not agreement on those.
Chris Cline, representing Rockford Homes, said there were more changes than outlined. They
have tried to improve the site quality. He said the park area was opened up, removing one lot
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -January 6, 2000
Page 12
and two others were relocated. He said the previous park calculation included park to Avery
Road, and this 1.25 acres is not. included but is still there. The southern portion was
reconfigured. He said houses facing Rings Road are not conducive to a high quality
development.
Mr. Cline said the Commission has been extremely interested in density. He said the single-
family density is 2.26 du/ac, and the condo site is 3.5 du/ac. Their diversity will match that
approved for the M/I development. He agreed to work with staff on architectural detailing.
He said the text used the standards from the Southwest Area Plan where possible. They want a
mix of vinyl and natural materials, and they agree to use .044 mil beaded vinyl with good
installation techniques.
Mr. Lecklider asked how the installation could be controlled. Mr. Eastep said at times, Styro-
foam sheeting instead of plywood sheeting is used. As the moisture content cures out of the
studs, they twist and warp, and it is magnified through vinyl when the sun is shining on it and
the studs are warping and twisting, the vinyl follows the studs.
Mr. Cline said the masonry front elevations would wrap around the corners of houses which he
thought would provide a quality feeling. The chimney chases will be masonry or brick. The
porches will have peaked roofs, not flat.
Mr. Cline said they agreed to take the road and sewer through to the west boundary of the first
phase. He said that removed the phasing issue. He said previously the Commission said it
liked the look of the unloaded road, and this density is needed to pay for it.
Mr. Cline said there is not a parking problem at Heather Glen North. They do not want the
public bikepath inviting people into the condo area. They are in ADA compliance. Mr. Cline
said the plan reflects the very recently amended Thoroughfare Plan.
Mr. McCash asked if the 6'/a-inch beaded vinyl siding came with a smaller face, to make it
less flimsy. He suggested afour-inch beaded for 4 over 4 type siding.
Mr. Eastep said 4 over 4 generally comes in eight-inch sheets, not four. Mr. McCash said it
was two fours and an eight. Mr. Eastep said from his experience, the six-inch looked better
than the 4 over 4. Mr. Cline said they will use the type of vinyl the Commission approves.
Mr. Eastep was still troubled by the density exceeding the Community Plan. Mr. Fishman
suggested eliminating three lots to lower the density. Mr. Cline said that was not appreciable,
and reducing 20 lots was not financially feasible.
Mr. Eastep said 2.2 du/ac was strongly encouraged at the last meeting, and now this is 2.68
du/ac. Mr. McCash said actually, it is 2.2 du/ac for the single-family and 3.5 du/ac for the
condominiums. Mr. Eastep did not want to consider the project separately.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -January 6, 2000
Page 13
Mr. McCash and Mr. McCash discussed the basis used for the Community Plan land uses and
densities. Mr. McCash does not agree with all of the recommended land uses.
Ms. Clarke said in a PUD, the density has always been considered under the umbrella of the
overall plan. She gave Muirfield Village, Earlington, and Brandon as examples of different
types of houses, and the gross density is always based on the overall site.
Mr. McCash said multi-family sites are limited because he believes Dublin does not want more
renters. These are owner-occupied condominiums, and the density is well under five du/ac.
He said no apartments have been built in Dublin since the Community -Plan was approved.
Mr. McCash said the single-family area was at 2.2 du/ac., just slightly over the Community
Plan density. This minor density increase will not affect traffic. He said this plan provides a
through road without driveways and a lot of open space. The plan exceeds the Code park
requirement. The said higher cost homes will not work here, and this density will provide the
amenities shown.
' Mr. Fishman said the density is too high. If the rumored golf course is built, along with
$500,000 to $1,000,000 homes, the market for houses on this site will change enormously.
Mr. Cline said the section next to this site in the golf course plan has similar lots. He said the
more expensive houses are farther to the north and west. He said these will be $200,000
houses on 65-foot lots, and it will be a nice neighborhood.
Mr. Fishman suggested eliminating the lots between the condominiums and the houses. That
would change the feel of the subdivision and provide more openness.
Mr. Cline said they would prefer to lose the lots to the south using the wishbone plan again. It
would be a better quality subdivision in that southern section. He does not see any value to ~
having houses face the trailer park across Rings Road. Mr. McCash said having the houses
face out to Rings Road is part of the Road to Wow plan.
Mr. McCash suggested eliminating three lots north of the Rings Road extension.
Mr. Harian said previously he was against this for the density issue, but the plan has
improved. This site has challenges, especially with the industrial uses and the trailer park. He
thinks eliminating three lots would open it up more.
Mr. Cline said three lots would be the maximum lots he could eliminate because of financial
constraints. He would accept this in a motion for approval, leaving the south portion alone.
Mr. Eastep asked if placing the condominiums towards Rings Road had been considered. Mr.
Cline said the density was concentrated towards the industrial uses.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
' Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -January 6, 2000
Page 14
Mr. McCash said the mobile home park was very well maintained. Mr. Cline said the trailer
park also has very nice residents, but it is still a major planning factor.
Ms. Clarke said any negative affect caused by the trailer park is mitigated by the greenspace
buffer being established along Ring Road. There is the opportunity to improve the setback
with Wow elements to catch the eye and divert it from anything else in the area. Mr. Cline
agreed to do some landscaping along Rings Road, but not with typical mounds and screening.
Mr. Fishman said there were still many issues to resolve, and he could not yet vote for it.
Mr. Harian said because the product is better, the density is less of an issue for him. He
appreciated that the parkland was opened with a better view. He had an issue with vinyl, and
how the units will be trimmed on windows and corners is very important.
Mr. Cline agreed to do 1 x 6pre-primed white pine trim on the corner boards and windows of
the entire house with vinyl siding. Mr. Eastep said if shutters are used, the trim requirement
should be nullified for them. The text needs changed. Mr. Cline agreed.
Mr. Lecklider was concerned about creating 50 new 65-foot wide lots. He said the. unloaded
road was compelling. He also like the efforts regarding elevations and natural materials. He
wanted. more homes with at least 30 percent brick or stone on the front elevation.
Mr. Fishman suggested that one more lot be eliminated (totaling four) which will permit the
remaining lots (15) to be made 70 feet wide. Mr. Yokum agreed to eliminate the four lots and
widen the others.
Mr. Cline said all neighboring golf course lots will also be 65 feet wide.
Mr. Yokum said the lots in Heather Glen north are 63 feet wide by 120 feet deep. Mr.
Fishman said the were many complaints about those small lots. Mr. McCash said they did not
have the architectural diversity and other standards this subdivision will have.
Mr. Yokum said the "super" beaded vinyl siding used on the houses would also be used on the
condominiums. It will be used where stone can not be used.
Mr. Lecklider asked if there was a 70 percentage of stone to be used listed in the text. Mr.
Cline said possibly, but not on the gables, dormers, etc. where stone cannot be used.
Mr. Peplow said he felt more comfortable with the materials shown. He still was concerned
by the 12 bases for disapproval in the staff report, but density is not sufficient cause to deny it.
There was some discussion of tabling. Mr. Cline did not want new issues raised.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -January 6, 2000
Page 15
Mr. Peplow said they were past the density issue only if the other issues were resolved. Mr.
Cline said most of the 12 bases for disapproval were just fluff. Mr. Peplow said Bases 5 and 6
were significant reasons for disapproval. Mr. Fishman was not happy with 65-foot lots. Mr.
Cline said they are at the limit of what they can do.
Mr. McCash said it is difficult to make the numbers work for this plan because the market is
not for expensive homes. Boulevards cost $1,200 per foot. -
Mr. Cline asked if on the boulevard, would an unloaded road with linear parkland or a loaded
boulevard like in Kendall Ridge be preferred. Mr. Lecklider said Option A. Mr. Fishman
said a boulevard would help set the right tone.
Mr. Talentino explained the boulevard issue and its evolution from the original Avery Village
Commons version of this plan. He said Base 6 is not asking for afull-length boulevard on
Rings Road extended, but an entryway.
Mr. McCash said a boulevard entry would not be aligned with the east side of Avery Road.
He asked if a boulevard entry could be installed on the east side of Rings Road when the
design is done to Norn Street, etc. This would be consistent with recommendations of the
Southwest Traffic taskforce on "cut-through" traffic and making that a neighborhood entry.
The boulevard should be on both sides or neither.
Ms. Clarke said Dublin did not get any extra right-of--way for a boulevard on the east side.
Mr. Cline said this is the first suggestion of a boulevard entry across from Rings Road.
Previously, the boulevard entry was into the condos. He could install one at the first entrance
into the multi-family site.
Mr. Talentino said the design for a streetscape through the condos was insufficient. If the ~
main road had lots on it, then perhaps a boulevard was needed. He said there were options.
Mr. Harian and Mr. Fishman did not want a loaded road. Mr. Talentino said in addition to the
boulevard, pedestrian-friendly streets with an interesting design and paths would help give it
the appearance of a coordinated and integrated project. No street tree plan was submitted.
Mr. McCash said that would come at the time of preliminary plat. Ms Clarke noted that under
the PUD regulations, the rezoning also serves as the preliminary plat.
Mr. Cline said the final development plan for the multi-family units would be reviewed by the
Commission in the future. The plan can be tweaked if their 64 units are approved. He agreed
to work with staff on the details and put conditional language in the text.
Mr. Cline said between each of the units, there are two spaces at the end of each drive (32
extra spaces). They will meet Code; each unit has atwo-car garage.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -January 6, 2000
Page 16
Mr. Lecklider asked about the landscape design on the north side of the unloaded road, in front
of the condominiums. Michael Fite, Bird and Houk, said it has not been addressed. It will
include street trees and buffering to screen the two parking spaces at the end of each driveway.
Mr. Eastep said he still had a problem with the density. At the previous meeting, at least four
Commissioners were dissatisfied with the density, and only one unit was dropped. Tonight, a
few more were eliminated. The project still needs more work, but he did not ,want to spend
two more hours re-designing it. His issues have not been addressed.
,
Mr. McCash said four Commissioners seem satisfied with the density. `Mr. Fishman suggested
' tabling. Once the staff resolves the issues, it can be rescheduled for a vote. He, personally,
still has a density problem because it exceeds the Community Plan.
Mr. McCash said there are many amenities, an exceptional park, and a majority of the lots are
at least 70 feet wide. The local residents are not fighting this plan.
Mr. Eastep said many people do not object until a project is completed. He noted the
Southwest Plan is underway. The residents have constantly said the bar should be raised.
Mr. McCash disagreed. He said the densities in the Community Plan are set artificially low
purely on traffic issues. Mr. Eastep disagreed.
Bud Buford, a Rings Road resident, said he provided the Commission with a letter regarding
density issues at the last meeting. He said three of the four homeowners immediately adjacent
to this property oppose this density. The developer has not done what the Commission asked.
Mr. Lecklider summarized that a total of five lots have been eliminated since the last .hearing,
much less than the Commission had requested and advised. This is a very tough case. He still
was not comfortable with 65-foot wide lots, but the developer has improved it overall.
Mr. Lecklider said if the density issue is solved, it should not be raised again if tabled. Mr.
Cline also wanted a commitment that he did not have to totally redesign the plan. Mr.
Lecklider said the road layout would not need to change. The big issues for him are getting
the architecture, materials, use of trim, etc. in the form of written commitments.
Mr. Harian agreed. He hoped the density issue was settled. He thinks the remaining issues
can be resolved between the applicant and staff. These are: tree preservation, submittal of
scaled drawings, and the architectural quality of the Rings Road and Rings Road extended lots.
Mr. Fishman also said this is a tough case. During the Community Plan, they agreed only if
something "knocked their socks off' would the recommended density be exceeded. He
assumed there would be four-sided architecture on all houses, etc. to meet that standard. He
liked the unloaded road and opening up the greenspace. He could accept the density if the plan
is revised to really "knock their socks" off. It should set new high standards for the area.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -January 6, 2000
Page 17
Mr. Cline said it will be impossible to get staff approval because there are philosophical issues
as reflected in the staff report. He agreed to work with staff on the remaining issues.
Ms. Clarke said staff approval is unlikely because of the power associated with a precedent of
65-foot lots south of the creek. Staff fears the next application will show the very same thing,
and the same dissatisfaction will be registered. She did not think that was consistent with the
Community Plan goals. Unless there is 50 percent open space or an otherwise dramatic plan,
the Community Plan density should stand. Mr. Fishman agreed completely.
Mr. McCash said due to the unloaded road and the park layout, the density does not bother
him. It provides some Road to Wow amenities. It has come a long way toward "knocking
your socks off" from the first plan. He said there are still things that need to be tweaked.
Mr. Sprague said he could accept this density. He hoped that Mr. Cline would work with staff
to reach an agreement over the issues.
Mr. Peplow said he was supportive of this density, minus the four lots to be eliminated. He
wants the architectural detailing and all issues in the staff report addressed. He asked that the
applicant demonstrate at the next meeting why the east/west connector was not.needed.
Mr. Eastep was bothered that the Commission gave a strong recommendation to reduce the
density to 2.2 dulac at the last hearing. This was not done. He said the three percent density
reduction finally offered will never be noticed by anyone driving by. He said the east-west
connection will be installed either by this developer or the golf course, and it cannot leverage
the density. Mr. Eastep agrees with the staff; this ~is an unremarkable plan. It is a net gain for
the applicant, but it will not make Dublin a better place.
Mr. Lecklider said the site has a trailer park to the south and industrial uses to the north.
Under any other circumstances, he would not even consider approving this development. He ~
did not know what else would be practicable at this site. [His positive recommendation on
smaller lots and the generally higher density would be based on limited bases for approval on
unique circumstances.J*
Mr. McCash said the site had unique circumstances that do not set precedent for any other site.
Mr. Cline agreed to table this application. Mr. McCash made the motion to table this rezoning
application and Mr. Harian seconded. The vote was as follows: Mr. Fishman, no; Mr.
Lecklider, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. Eastep, no; Mr. Harian, yes; and
Mr. McCash, yes. (Tabled 5-2.)
At 10:35 p.m. the Commissioners agreed to observe the 11 o'clock rule. Only the next case
was heard, and the remaining cases were postponed. There was a brief recess.
*Clarified by Mr. Lecklider at the February 3, 2000 Commission meeting.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING CONIlVIISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
FEBRUARY 1, 1996
5800 Shier Rings Road '
Dublin, OH 13016-1236
ie/TOD: 611/161.6550
~w.~ fax: 611/161-6506
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at its regularly scheduled
meeting:
8. Concept Plan -Avery Village Commons
Location: 55.5 acres located on the west side of Avery Road at the intersection of Rings
Road and Avery Road.
Existing Zoning: R-1B, Limited Suburban Residential and EU, Exceptional Use
Districts (Washington Township Zoning).
Request: Review of a concept plan under the provisions of Section 153.056 of the
Planning and Zoning Code.
Proposed Use: Mixed use development including 206 multi-family units, 44.two-family
units, 2.7 acres of office and 10.8 acres of park.
Applicants: Dehlendorf and Company, c/o Gary Schmidt, 263 Franklin Avenue,
Worthington, Ohio 43085 and Mid-States Development Corporation, c/o Randy Asmo,
5720 Avery Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016.
Staff Contact: Lisa L. Fierce, Planner.
MOTION: To table this concept plan.
VOTE: '7-0.
RESULT: After much discussion, this Concept Plan application was tabled as requested by
the applicant to permit unresolved issues to be addressed. The Commission
expressed concerns about density, type of units, ownership of units, and
connection between neighborhoods. Several residents spoke about similar issues
including density, drainage, and setbacks along Rings Road. The Commission
also mentioned the need to include the Hilliard Schools within future discussions.
S ~ FF CER CATION
I;YSa L. Fier
Planner
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -February 1, 1996
Page 20
approval by City uncil. A time extension may extended by the Commission. The
Commission appr ved extensions in January and Au st 1995. The last approved extension
period expires in few days. The applicant is worki to construct utilities on the site now.
Staff is repo nding approval of a third extension o time with the following two conditions
were imposed reviously): -
1~ That an evergreen planting, similar to a existing evergreen planting along th west
pro rty line of the Campbell's prope (5699 Wilcox Road), be installed on south
pr perly line of the site (adjacent to W cox Road), to screen the stormwater b m; and
2) t the aforementioned trees be ' ed as soon as the basin .is completed.
Randy Asmo,-.the applicant, said the proj is scheduled~~o~be~completed=in~May.
- ~ - ~ ~ Mr: - utpheamade a motion to approve is six month extension for ffiing the f plat with the
foil wing (continued) conditions: .
~1 -.That anevergreen-planting;=: imilar to the-existing evergreen plan'along-the-west
.property line of the Campbe 's .property (5699. Wilcox.Road), be ' led on the.south
properly: line of the site (ad' nt to Wilcox Road), to screen the sto water basin; and
2) That the aforementioned be installed as soon as the basin is feted..
Mr. Rauh seconded the motion d the vote was as follows: Mr. Haria.i yes; Mr. Ferrara, yes;
Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. Rauh yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; M Boring, yes; and Mr.
Sutphen, yes. (Approved 7 )
8. Concept Plan -Avery Village Commons
.Lisa Fierce presented this concept plan for 55 acreswith frontage~on Avery-~ Road and Rings Road. ..r
. The site includes-the Dublin_Clubhouse and Picaic~Grounds,~~a private7ecreational facility, along
. - ~ _ ~ ::the west zoned EU, Exceptional Use District. -yThe-easternportion~~is~undeveloped~and zoned .Rl-
B, Limited Suburban Residential District, (both Washington Township Zoning classifications).
To the south there is a :small strip of land zoned NC, Neighborhood Commercial District,
(Township). Farther. south is the Ponderosa Estates mobile home park. Farmland is located to
the west, existing single-family houses to the north and along Rings Road, an industrial park
located to the east, The site also. wraps around the Samson property. An asphalt access drive
through the clubhouse grounds connects with Corporate Park Drive.
The Southwest Area Plan (SWAP), included this site within two subareas within the future land
use plan. The eastern portion is located within Subarea 7, the Avery Road Corridor Mixed-Use
zone which is ezpe<xed to include various development including residential, commercial, office,
and industrial uses. The western portion is located within Subarea 9 where there is a high
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -February 1, 1996
Page 21
likelihood of incorporating smaller sites into a larger, consolidated residential plan. Within that
subarea, the recommended density is 2.75 du/ac.
The proposal includes multi-family and two-family development. The extension of Rings Road
is proposed from Avery Road to the western end of the site. The multi-family use: is proposed at
7 du/ac. Fronting on Rings Road, forty-four two-family units are proposed. ~ - No specific
information has been submitted on any of the units. The overall. density of the proposal is 4.8
du/ac.Staff believes this needs to be reduced in order to bring it closer. to the recommendations
of the Southwest Area Plan
Staff = is:. also .concerned about the -impacts .that .this development may have: _on .surrounding
pnope~'ties: The SWAP was specific in recommending:that~neo-~traditiot~l:planning. principles be -
implemented. `-It-is_unclear how this proposal>will~ effect-other areas:
- The parkland proposed is 10.85 acres located entirely on the south side of the new road. The
requirement based on-the new.residential development is 14.85 acres. The applicant is also
-propos'uig •to provide the 6,000 square •foot partyhouse as part. of -the- dedication to offset the
required additional four acres. The Parks and `Recreation Advisory Committee and the Service
~Suboommittee of City Council both have reviewed-this proposal and recommended that the City
consider the idea of accepting -the building to fulfill a portion of the overall park dedication
requirement. This has not been done in Dublin to date. The applicant has provided a combination
of two sizable tracts at the request of Staff and joined them together into one application.
Ms.' Fieree~stated that neighbors were concerned-about the use of the outdoor facilities relative to
noise control. Mr. Samson stated concerns about density, .drainage, the septic system and his
leach field which ,maybe-intruded by this development, and •the need for buffers.. She stated that
other neighbors commented on density and how it may effect their properties as well.
°~~Staffisrecommending that'this application be~tabled.::~Issues~which.need~xo. be:.resolved include: -
1) The density be reduced to no greater than'4:O-overall,with~iess:dense-development to the
west;
2) The architecture and materials used within the residential development should help to
establish a quality image along Avery Road;
3) ~ ~ The issues relative~to the potential dedication of the clubhouse (parking, lighting, use) need .
to be resolved, an alternate design of the site with the entire land dedication should be
provided;
4) The perimeter landscaping and buffers should be addressed relative to surrounding, non-
like uses; and
5) An inventory of large trees should be provided; and
6) Conceptual utilities should be provided.
Ms. Fierce stated there is a 90~1ay time limit for the Commission to review this concept plan.
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -February 1, 1996
Page 22
Mr. Peplow asked if this area was serviced by utilities. Ms Fierce said the utilities were being
extended from Wilcox Road west to Avery Road with Balgriffin development.
Ms Chinnici-Zuercher asked about the school district. Ms Fierce said the site was in the City of
Dublin, but in the Hilliard School District. No contacts have been made to date with the school
district. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher said she needed to know about the school's reaction since the
density is so-high.: She asked if •the partyhouse was owned by the City of Dublin. Ms. _ Fierce said
no, . it ~ is privately .owned by the applicant. The applicant has stated . a desire to provide the
building as part of the parkland dedication requirement. Staff is asking that an alternative design
be provided if the City does not wish to accept the building.
Dean:Schulman, Atzorciey;•°575 South Third Street,::Columbus;-.repre..~ented~theapplicants: He said
theapplicant's •philosophy:hasbeeo concentrated AaSouthwest~oals ~andyobjec~ives: and sucxess
::.has been>particularly apparent with these~:standards:: =:He~.discussed:~how:the~-plan .addresses
provisions'-for appropriate buffers between non-compatible iaad uses -for an~economically viable
.and diverse. mix land uses and, encouraging assemblage of parcels and .large scaled planned
.development proposals for coordinated public infrastcudure and commercial facilities.. The higher
density inSubarea=9 of the Southwest Area Plan~does not seta precedent for future development
because of the: transitional character of this site (industrial.,to the north and east and a mobile . .
home park to the south).
Mr. Schulman stated that the applicant designed a roadway that flows through a park environment
with access limited to four points for the multi-family~housing. A deficiency in total park land -
. - .has _ been solved with the dedication of. a .fully functional,6,000 square. foot clubhouse. The
• Service Committee found merit in this facility. The housing ~mix-proposed provides a spectrum
of:options for new residents: Mr-.Schuman said this is a good plan and a-,good transition between
diverse uses.
_~`fiary Schmidt,- Land Planner;said the site~was a combination of the~Mid-States Development and
Deleadorf properties. -Two major changes have:been-made~to the~original:.plan-in~terms of the ~
-•Avery.Road frontage: -Office uses, are proposed~along~Avery Road:~::~e~rchitectural materials
- ~-.will be for offioe~:build'uigs. -Two small office buildings ~wili~make-a~better~trai~sition from-Avery
Road as that .road is planned to be widened. The new road is now single-loaded, with a park
running continuously from the east to the western edge of -the site. He said the acreage required
.;according .to his calculations, was 13.7. acres, not 14.85 acres, because .there was a provision that
it would not exceed 25 percent of the site. They are providing 10.85 acres with the land area and
- :--then the party house. He stated that this is a very. unique opportunity. -For the twin-single units
to the south, pedestrian access to the park will be provided.
Mr. Ferrara asked why this project was still so dense. Mr. Schmidt said density was a relative
issue. Neo-traditional developments were a goal for the southwest area, with Mariemont, Ohio,
as an example. That density was six to seven units per acre. This is under five du/ac at 4.6
du/aa. The previous plan was more dense. Mr. Percara said Mariemont was built in an age when
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
r
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -February 1, 1996
Page 23
there was quality of craftsmanship that may not exist today. He agreed with Mr. Schmidt on the
density aspect of it.
Ms. Boring asked if the units were all to beowner-occupied or rental units. Randy Asmo said one
area was rental and the remainer would be a simple ownership basis. He said the higher density
was determined as a transitional u9e because of the heavy industrial uses and the trailer-court. Mr.
~ Ferrara~said he considers lot coverage with density and saw no change. - Mr. Schmidt said-the lot
coverage was act known.
Ms: 'Boring asked about `there being only one aoc;ess poiat to the twin single development. She
asked if the safety officials had reviewed it. Ms. ~ Pierce said typically there .is concem.when there
is a long street being constructed.This was a short `street. Sta~f~s'~interested~.in:tieing the two
.:proposed neighborhoods together:There have-beensno:provisions:for:~~vehicular:bridge.
Mr: Harian asked if there were two differeat types of multi=family uses proposed. ~Mr. Schmidt
- -said the Delendorf property would be developed with ranch-type condominiums (for sale) and the
other portion would be rental unit apartments.
Mr. Sutphen and Mr. Peplow agreed with staff. Mr. Peplow said .the high density was still an
issue. He was also concerned with the setbacks on all the -existing homes along Rings Y2oad. The
proposed setbacks for the two-family homes appear to be very close to the street. He asked if the
applicant had met with the neighbors along Rings Road. Mr. Schmidt said yes. Randy Asmo said
setbacks were not an issue with the neighbors. Their concerns were with the density, the park,
and the overall.project. Mr: Schmidt said-they would be required to put in landscape buffers.
Mr.:-Peplow-~sked~ ifttie~retention pond~was for stormwater management. Mr.:Schmidt said it
needed to be studied by a civil engineer, but did not know whether the-pond in the park could be
used.
Mr. Rauh had similar concerns of Mr. Peplow.,°~He-complemented~the~appiicants for providing
a larger parcel. He said the area with the two-familyunits occupies an<,area offive single-family
residences. °Justification~could be made if those-owners got~together-und sold-to become part of
this project.
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher had the same concerns as when .the project was previously presented. It
looked more attra,arve with the combination of the properties and the roadway, but the density was
still too high.
Ms. Fierce clarified that the parkland dedication is 13.75 acres. They are short of the
requ'uements by slightly under three acres. She added that neo-traditional planning principals may
mean more density in some areas, but they also provide grid streets, tree lined streets, and a
central area for community facilities.
Bud Bukard, 6236 Rings Road, said they were concerned with densities, drainage, and transition
from the single-family homes into multi-family units. He thought with the combination of the
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission -
Minutes -February 1, 1996
Page 24
properties, there would be a softening of the transition. Instead, the new proposal was a higher
density. He asked that the Commission support staff s recommendations as the neighbors did.
John Samson, 5611 Avery Road, said the proposed density was not good for his community or
Dublin. He said 4.8 du/ac was misleading because there are different densities ip the two areas
averaged. He said 7 du/ac was too dense, it should be at least cut in half. Mr. damson said
drainage from °the existing homes went through .this parcel and his~~leach field encroached this
development. He would appreciate drainage tiles in the field to be considered. "
- Mr Schulman requested that this case be tabled to permit the applicants to return with a revision
,that will be.met with greater approval of all conoeraed.
::Arlie Bukard;-6236 Rings Road,-said her:home was~built-urith~~00~feet:setback:'':She said while
she_had attended the_neighborhood/developer meeting;.she;did~ot~pay~ttentionto the proposed
units. --She~said they should be'set_back farther. She said the road jo'uiing the two.properties
would bring more traffic onto Rings Road. A walkway to the park area would be better. She did
not like the rental units proposed because they would not provide stability.
Janet Jordan said the Service Committee wanted to remain true to the green space ordinance. If
this was an acceptable idea,. the party house could be edited out with:the associated parking and
retention/detention azea, be given credit for the amount of land dedicated, and buy back the
property (a double transaction).
Mr. Peplow said he liked-the change .including the .office use along Avery Road. making .the
• -corridor more atxra,ctive. He hoped the applicant would take staff s concerns regarding the quality
~:of~materlals-used into consideration. -Ms.,Chinnici-7uercher agreed. -•Mr. Femara.•.asked staff to-
make sure there was a communication between Halliard and Dublin school districts.
.~~~Mr..Sutphen_made a motion to table this concept plan.as .requested:byrthe_applicant to permit the
:above unresolved issues to be addressed, adding •.that~communication:~ec3nade=with the Hilliard
school district. Mr. Rauh seconded the motion and,the:vote:vras:as:follouvs:-~Mr. Harian, yes;
Mr. Ferrara, -yes;:Mr. Peplow, yes; Ms. ~Boring,~ yes; Ms:rChinnici-Zuercher; yes; Mr. Rauh,
yes; and Mr. Sutphen, yes. (Tabled 7-0.)
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher said working closely together with the residents impacted by this type of
development had created a better product in the end. She encouraged the applicants to include the
residents in the formal discussions.
9. 1 Development Plan - MuirCiel illage -Phase 45
Due to elate hour, this case was posipo without discussion until February 15 1996.
10. Rezoning Application Z95-01 -Erwin West 99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
June 6, 1996
C[1'Y UE OI:BLt\
'"'x°400 Shia Rings Road
~Gh OH 43016-7295
700:614/161-6SS0
Fa~c 614/161-6506
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
2. Concept Plan -Avery Village Commons
Location: 55.5 acres located on the west side of Avery Road at the intersection of Rings
Road and Avery Road.
F.Iasting Zoning: R-IB, Limited Suburban Residential and EU, Exceptional Use
Districts (Washington Township Zoning).
Request: Review of a concept plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.056.
Proposed Use: Mixed use development including 207 multi-family units, two, one-acre
single-family lots, 2.7 acres of office and 13.2 acres of parkland.
Applicants: Dehlendorf and Company, c/o Gary Schmidt, 263 Franklin Avenue,
Worthington, Ohio 43085, and 1Viid-States Development Corporation, c/o Randy Asmo,
5720 Avery Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016.
MOTION: To approve this concept plan because the proposal is consistent with the Land use
and thoroughfare recommendations of the Southwest Area PIan, it preserves the
Cramer Creek and provides substantial access and visibility to the park land, and
it will provide right-of-way for the widening of Avery Road, with the following
three conditions:
1) That conceptual utilities be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer;
2) That information relative to flood hazard be provided, and conformance with
FEMA regulations be met; and
3) That utility connnections and drainage issues be resolved regarding the Sampson
property, at the developer's expense.
* Dean Schulman, representing the applicants, agreed to the above conditions.
VOTE: 5-0.
RESULT: After much discussion, this concept plan was approved. The Commission
requested that the applicant consider the following issues at the time of preliminary
development plan review:
99-0412
Page 1 of 2 Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
,
DUBLIN PLAI~TNING AND ZONING CONIlVIISSION
. RECORD OF ACTION
June 6, 1996
2. Concept Plan -Avery Village Commons (Cont.)
1) The architecture and materials used within the development should help to establish
a quality image along Avery Road.
2) The perimeter landscaping and buffeas should be addressed relative to surrounding,
non-like uses.
- 3) Aa inventory of large trees should be condudsd and a tree preservation plan should
be submitted.
4) ~ Access should be provided between uses, and between the multi-family azea and
Northwest Corporate Center. Access across the Cramer Creek within the park
should be investigated and adequate access should be provided.
5) The floodplain (100-yeaz), floodway, and floodway plus 20 feet area should be
- designated on all plans.
~ Final determination should be made regarding the reuse of the party house, with
provision for adequate parking.
'n A provision should be made for shazed parking between the office use and the
pazk.
8) Access should be provided to the Sampson property.
9) Minimum development standards should be established consistent with existing
development on Rings Road, which provide adequate setback from new Rings
Road, and appropriate separation between buildings.
10) Buffering should be added along the western property line, and on the north and
east, if neccessary.
11) The density should be reconsidered towazd the end goal of creating a more open
look.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
sa L. Fierce
Planner
99-0412
Page 2 of 2 Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
' • Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -June 6, 1996
Page 2
Mr. Ferrara made a otion to adopt all documents as p esented into the record and Mr. eplow
seconded. The vo was as follows: Mr. Harian, yes• .Ferrara, yes; Mr. Peplow, ; Ms.
Boring, yes; and r. Sutphen, yes. (Approved 5-0
1. Revised Development Plan - Earlingto Village -Prince of Peace I.utt~ n Church
- 5725 B nd Road -
:This :appli on wasformally .withdrawn by a applicant prior. tothis -meetin :Withdrawal
notices w mailed~to the surrounding pro owners. There was no discussio or action taken.
~ -
2. Concept Plan -Avery Village Commons -
:I:isa~Fi+erce
e•presented the oonceptplan for.55-acres; •previously reviewed:in~~ebruaryf~1996:~`-Then;
--the-Commissioa had expressed concerns about~thedensityYtype•ofsunits~unitrownership,~and
-neighborhood connections. ~ Several neighbors addressed:density~drainage;.anda~tkhe;setback along
Rings •R~oa~d:: She~said thisplan ~has-a density ~of 3:99 du/a,c. -The two=family units along : the Rings
Road frontage have been replaced by two one-acre lots. The east
west road has been realigned.
. ::.:Ms. Fiercesaid •the eastern ;18 -acres is vacant: and;-zoned R-1B. ~ -Thy other 37::acres :is zoned
Exceptional Use District, containing the Dublin Clubhouse and Picnic Grounds. The party house
- . 'is located centrally in the site and .has various athletic facilities. The.Cramer ~CYeek-runs through
the flat site. According to the Southwest Area Plan, the eastern 18 acres is in Subarea 7, Avery
Road Corridor, which is to be a mixed use area..The western portion is in Subarea 9, which was
slated for single-family development at 2.75 du/ac. The plan was meant to be flexible.
Ms: -Fierce •said the 6,000square ~ foot party -house was .formerly discussed as a -possible
~ oontribufion toward:,the park requirement, but.this is no longer being considered for dedication.
The party house may be used for the multi-family project.
Ms. Fierce said the proposal includes the extension of Rings Road to the.west property line. The
clubhouse and parking will be located on the north side~f~~the=Toad:
~3Condominiam-development
of four-family units is -shown on the eastern section. _ .Offices are located:alongAvery Road. A
combination of townhouse/garden units are shown on-the~~western--section. -~The~park.is 13.2 acres
located along the south side of Rings Road extension and may contain a stormwater basin. There
will be a bikepath, .and the proposed park dedication meets the Code requirements.
The °Commission requested that Hilliard Schools be contacted about this case, and it is being
reviewed by them. This site is contained within a 130-acre area requesting a transfer from
Hilliard to Dublin Schools. This issue will be resolved this fall.
Ms. Fierce said staff is recommending approval of this concept plan with two conditions:
1) That conceptual utilities be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and
2) That information relative to flood hazard be provided, and conformance with FEMA
regulations be met.
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
. Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ~ '
Minutes -June 6, 1996
Page 3
Mr. Ferrara asked if the Cramer Creek drained all the property to the west and north. Randy
Bowman said there may be a small drainage divide towards the northern end of the site, but
engineering analysis has not been done yet. Mr. Ferrara said drainage was a sensitive issue.
Ms. Fierce said the parkland dedication meets code. Multi-family developments usually qualify
for the maximum park dedication, 25 percent of the total acreage. She said the area necessary to
provide storm water detention will not be counted toward meeting the park requirement.
• Ms. Boring asked if •the Rings Road extension is the only public street. Ms. Fierce said yes. Ms.
.Boring aslaed about the appropriate land use to the west of. this site: ~Ms. Fierce expected single-
- .family use, with this site being a transition between the Avery area and lower density residential.
She.said thisxiensity-of 3:99 du/acr +wasa-bleaded~density betweentwosubareas:~shown~•inthe
- Southwest .Area Plan. ~ She-said higher densities; :perhaps rJO.ucuts:~acre-; ~are~:expected in the
-Avery Road Corridor. She said the subareas should=be flexible: _ -
Ms: Fierce said-staff has encouraged the applicant to:participate in setting up appropriate design
standards for Avery Road.
Ms. Fierce said no signalization :had been discussed for the proposed intersection. She said Avery
Road will be much wider in the future. The current study may indicate future signals.
Mr. Foegler thought the new Woerner-Temple Road would be a major solution to the issue.
Dean Schulman, attorney, represented the applicant. He accepted the conditions in the staff
:report.: ~-He said thetwo-family area along Rings Road had been converted to just two lots and
park. _ He said retention pond shown in the park area will be subtracted from the dedication to
comply with Code. He•said 56 multi-family units will be adjacent to the industrial uses, not 60.
Gary Schmidt, Schmidt Land Design, representing Dehlendorf and Company, said the plan
presented at the meeting did not represent the density.-shown:.graphically.°~~aid:the closest unit
to the Samson's properiy,was about 60 feet from the rear-plot-line of~the Samson residence.
. Mr. Schmidt said the plan was to sell these units. Mr. Harian asked if there could be four
individual owners per building. Mr. Schmidt said yes.
Mr. Schmidt said there were 207 townhouse and garden units and two single-family homes. He
•said .the lot coverage was quite low, perhaps around 40 percent.. Mr. Ferrara said he preferred
net, rather than gross density calculations.
Mr. Ferrara asked if there would be a common landscape and maintenance for the condos and
apartments. Mr. Schmidt said each would have its own landscape maintenance program.
John-Samson, 5611 Avery Road, said the density was too high. He said drainage from his
basement went to Cramer Creek, and he was concerned about stormwater drainage from the multi-
family units. He said he was promised by the developers that any septic or drainage problems
would be corrected. He asked who would prevent his basement from flooding. _ He vredicted the
99-041 Z
Rezoning Application
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -June 6, 1996
Page 4
drainage would backup into his basement. He said his septic tank was on the south end of his
property and he assumed the leach bed would go into the development. Mr. Samson said he had
never, in 21 years, had water problems in his basement.
- Randy.Bowman said the developer would have to account for any drainage problems as the result
of the development. He asked Mr. Samson if the public sewer became available tQ him, would
he be willing to explore tapping into it. Mr. Samson said yes.
.Bud Buford, 6336 Rings Road, said he shared Mr. Samson's concerns. He thought his drainage
. system goes into the dedicated park.:His "gray" water has emptied into the creek for 30 years, -
and he wanted. to :know if this would now be prohibited. He appreciated the plan changes.
Randy:bowman said no public sewer is ~available-here, and .Franklin~Couaty~~oard •of Health
could get ~ involved ~in the solution. ~Mr. Buford lsaidthat ~"`gray-"~~water~s~the'~
outflow from the
septic tanks.and=leach beds plusstorm water. He~was:afraid:this~might.~atnaoceptable: flow into
.-a.park:-'~VIr:;-Sutphen;said the:leach-bed~outflow~-had~to~be accepted'as the`finishedproduct:
Ms. Boring • said Council had shown -some reluctance on the Gorden .Farms multi-family
development: - ~Ms. Clarke. said this mayhave been- because the ~ CommunityPlan . does ~-not-
currently address the Gorden Farms area, and any decision may set a precedent. She said the
adopted -Southwest Area -Plan (SWAP) addresses density: and appropriate land use in this area.
. Mr. Schulman said a commitment had been made in writing that if Mr. Samson's drainage is
interrupted by this development, they will tie him into the sewer with the tai feep~12y the
developer.
* and see that appropriate drain file is installed at the developer's expense.
~ Mr. -Harlan :was -concerned .about :density, but supported a transition from Avery. Road.- He
.::thought the layout, -landscaping,.. and buffering, especially to the west, needs to be very pleasing
- to encourage low densities and single-family use; rather than continued multi-family to the west.
~ Mr: Ferrara found the location of two large lots on Rings Road~across~:from;~the~nobiie~home park
~to be puzzling. He envisioned a very busy::Avery Road Corridor~=:xhat~would provide
• neighborhood; service-type offices. He was concerned~~bout~.the~densityajJie°~said~the industrial
park was not a desirable neighbor but wondered how the SWAP would be implemented with this
as an initial step, setting a precedent. He thought utilities should be available to the other homes
in the area.
~Ms.-Boring agreed with Mr. Ferraraand Mr. Harlan. She said multi-family use should not
- -continue westward and thought Council-.would be very careful about more such zonings. She
liked the revisions but was still concerned with the density.
*Minutes corrected by motion at the July 11, 1996 Commission Meeting.
99-041Z
E~ezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -June 6, 1996
Page 5
Mr. Peplow liked the two one-acre lots and was glad the neighbors were working with the
developer. He said the considerations in the staff report are important for incorporation into the
preliminary development plan. He would prefer a lower density.
Mr. Sutphen agreed. He thought the two large lots were awin-win solution for the neighbors.
He thought the northern boundary would benefit and help screen the commerciaLbusiness. He
said the existing trailer pazk was quite nice and well-kept, etc. -
Mr. Ferrara hoped Council will enforce the densities of the Southwest Area Plan. Ms. Boring
agreed.
..rr
Mr. Schulman said this development creates a type of housing needed in the.community because
-of:~the large. amount .of commercial development.. This will~.,be~~
>community with natural
materials;~etc: =Itis more affordable housing:that~will-~be=attratxive=to:employees~in the~area.
:.Mr.~~Peplow~made:.the-motion to appmve~this conceptplan.because~the~proposal~is'consistentwith . ~
the.. land use and :thoroughfare recommendations of the Southwest Area Plan, it preserves the
~~Crames Creek and provides substantial access and visibility to the park land; and it will provide
::.right-of-way for the widening of~Avery Road, with the following three conditions:
1) That conceptual utilities be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer;
~2) That information=.relative~to flood hazard be provided, and conformance with FEMA
regulations be met; and
3) That utility connections and drainage issues be resolved regazding the Sampson property,
at the developer's expense.
-and with the .following considerations for. incorporation into the- preliminary development plan:
1) The :architecture and materials .used .within the development. should help to establish a
quality image along Avery Road.
2) The'perimeter landscaping and :buffers should be addressed relative to surrounding, non-
like use.
3) An inventory of large trees should be.conducted.:and~4ree~reser~cation=plan-should be ..a
submitted.
4) . Aa~ss should be provided between uses, artd~betweenFthe~nulti_familyrarea:and Northwest
Corporate Center. Access across the Cramer Creek within the park should be investigated
and adequate access should be provided.
5) The floodplain (100 year), floodway, and floodway plus 20 feet area should be designated
on all plans.
~ ~ ~ Final determination should be made regarding the reuse of the party house, with provision
for adequate parking.
'n A provision should be made for shared parking between the office use and the park.
8) Access should be provided to the Sampson property.
9) Minimum development standards should be established consistent with existing
development on Rings Road, which provide adequate setback from new Rings Road, and
appropriate separation between buildings.
10) That extra buffering be added along the western property line, and on the north and east,
if necessary; and
11) That the density be reconsidered toward the end goal of creating a more ooen look.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
"Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
- Minutes -June 6, 1996
Page 6
Mr. Harlan seconded the motion.
Mr. Schmidt said the SWAP permitted this 18.2 acres a density up to seven du/ac., or 127.4
units. The western tract is 37.3 acres with a planned density of 2.75 du/ac., or 102.5 units. The
total is 230 units, and their proposal is for 209 units. Ms. Fierce said the Avery Road Corridor
had an assumed density of 10 du/ac. for half of the acreage. -
Mr. Schulman agreed to the above conditions and considerations.
The vote was as follows: Mr. Harlan, yes; Mr. Ferrara, Yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. Sutphen, Yes;
and Ms. Boring, yes. (Approved 5-0.)
3. Preliminary P t - McKitrick Property -Sub 4 xillilea _ , - -
Dan Sutphen ested that the case be taken-off th table. ~Joe~Hariansaid-~as.an adjo g -
property owner a will recuse himself.
_ .Bobbie Clazk said ahis preliminary :plat was tabl April 18..It~involves 48.6 acres.loca on-
Dublin Road the north of I-270, Subarea 4 of a McKitrick PUD. It~is zoned fora Ingle- .
family subd' 'sion, ~ similar to Coventry Woods. ~ Ms. Clazke showed several slides of a area.
She said E erald Pazkway is under constructi The Cellular Oae office building nearing
completio ,and this is the next proposed devel meet. On Dublin Road across from a site are
very lar estate lots along the river. She d the Commission asked fora 'big p' ture° map
showin everything from Brand Road to I
2 0 on the same drawing, and a very h pful exhibit
was pr ed by the applicant.
Ms. larke said this subdivision has two a s points, one at Emerald Pazkway, d a second at
' ea Drive-along Dublin Road. Both f these roads will be three lanes {36 f )wide. There
' also be left-turn stacking on the eter roads for entering vehicles: The azkland is along
th Indian Run and ~ connects to a in Coventry :~Toods:: =-There.las :a:b' th .connection
een lots in Coventry Woods that extend;to the path along ~Emeraid=P kway. There will
so be a bikepath along Dublin Ro d. The~City=..of::Dublin~wasrsuccess b.tauung-funding
for it through ISTF~,' and to qualify or the subsidy, the path will need to eet federal -standards:
20 MPH design speed, 10-foot nimum width, etc. It will be more d' ficult to maneuver the
path around lazge trees and o er features. Dublin will be perfo ing the environmental
assessment as the next -step to alify for the ISTEA grant.
,;Ivis. Clarke said stormwater d tion areas are~not used to meet the nimum pazk requirements.
The one-acre parcel at the Du lin Road comer was deleted, and the k is consolidated along the
Indian Run. A 100-foot ck is along Dublin Road, and it varies ong Emerald Parkway from
62 to 82 feet, depending u n the lot. A landscape plan for Dublin oad was developed including
an informal planting sc me consistent with this historic high ay. The design incorporates
evergreen material, clus 'ng trees, etc. She said the eastern o-thirds of the site is the subject
of a stormwater detenti n waiver. Without the waiver, basins are needed near Dublin Road. A
pond in the park will andle the storm water from the weate third of 99-0412
- ~ Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(rormerly Avery Village Commons)
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS •
Dublid l~ty Couiicp Mating Page 11 Meeting
Minutes of _ - -
Hel July 1. 1996 9
Council meet'
Mr. Kicdra that la tams of " . if dce deteatioa waiver h; appc+ovod ton t,
Burgess and iple will they update their ta3s<iag laps cad dsey MrUI be facwacded to O for
. their parch malt. This process sviU take to ti svoda.
Mr. I stated that tuning h a tads. the City has a responsibility to d0 this t. Ho
askod if ere is a professional engineer tonight who will tote drat dds tystem 1 wait.
The 1" hY rem svhh the one who ~ k svip smock,
Mr, tevkwod the cacmbas to stafly eacphasiZlag dot dce ~wuat taxurio is
• -the downstream of the 21' Pipe a 24' pope sdclch a+ossa a-dcivrrvray ld 6ave io
be aaratod m siu if dceoe was a He crspaaded duo is his professio opinion. dca
. tern ass proposed will sock.
. Kinder stated >ha< it is basod oa dull eagiaeaing'Pcaaad'~(Y !4%J't~"'
mplies whh dose. The system aQ dk.standatds.
• - . Mayor KraasWba ea~phasimd drat is suppoctive+oflhirsraiveraad _ - eel ,t~ppcuval. .
Mr. Z.twaly mound to approve a :Dorm water detentaa waiver for KilleTa ion.
Mayor Kraostuba' soooadod motion.
vote on die motiQa - Mr. yes: Mr. 2:awaly. yes; Mayor ,yes; Mrs. Stillwell.
yes; Mr. Mct~sh, no; Mrs:- . no; Ms. Hide Pittaluga, no. •
. ~~Pian _ Ave{y Village Commons
_ - Ms. Clarke emphasinod that this is the ticst stage of review is a PUD nerd is aoa-binding oa die
muni nerd the dcvdopa. Approval of the ~noept play audaciaa the sppliatioa to go
. to 51e the
focwud throagh dce PW process. noel We next step k die eagcaoaiag accessary
preliminary devdapmeat_plaa - dce reaoaing. This Is a ~bti-family Proposal which iadades 207
multi-family units. fiao large single~amcTy lots Urontiag along Rings Road, and a couple of smap
- office rites of 2.7 saes. Tha+e are also 13 aa+es of Puic asaoclatod with the plan. The icte is SS
• aax+es located opposite. die easteeu tera+ioat of Rings Road, • cad this site sroaW be dce
• eoatmuatioa of Rmgx Road. ~TGa~e was a dacrosion r~udmg dais rite pctvioarly is terms of dce
_ future of the Dublin. Club House cad svlcedcer k sNOUId be trod b meet the paciiaad raluiraneQa.
3a this .proposal.•dut banding k usad as raaiusteaanoe o~iioe/managaaeat oHiodpaRy.hoase for dce .
apaRma?t complex. The pack would be loctotod to the :oath of ctrl: ncvv road extension from Rings
-Road. The Planning Commission revievvod dais is June cad rooommeadod approval with three
coadifans:
1 s ~ • ' That aoaceptuat utilities bo- pmvidcd W the sstafadioa of die day euginea;
2. That lafoaaatioa relative to flood.haxudebe-pcorided. - '
regulataas 6e mU; cad -
3. That ud'lity tonaoctioas and drainage issncs braesolvedzegstdiag.~.Sa~son~roPetty. ~
the developer"s expense.
Staff is suppoctivt of.thIs plan. Iris eoearstact•with the Southwest Ac+ta Plea. Tx provides a large ..rt
piece of pacidaad dun is very visible, cad it also aceommadaba the srideaiag plan for Avery Road.
Mayor Kruutubec askad how much of this development k within die HcUiud School district.
Ms. Clarke rapoadod.dat the believes ail of h is. but sreTl have dce developer rexpond diroctly. I
Mr. McCash rated dux ht the caiautes ~ PdcZ of June ti, 1996. Ms. Fieroc stated that highs 1
densities, perhaps l0 units pa acre„ are a:potted to die Avery Read corridor. He does na reap t.
anything is the SWAP regac+ding Subarea 9 svhlch h svhac a saajorhy of this devdopmaK lies. It I
specifies that aces as tiagte faaaly whh a denshy of 2.75 pa acre. •
Ms. Clarke respoadcd duo die SWAP ic?diadts a dauity of 2.75 but doaa't tpodfy single family.
The 2.75 number came tram averaging all of the development between Post Road and Brand.
Coffman W Avery cad d~ae are a cwmba of multi-family projats hiduded la dot uea.
Mr. McCash ukod about the dauity fa elk ooe?dominIum portion of the project.
il.an Srtialman Stria Fsre~ ~^'•:+lmaa d:Aaxk ~S ~+~7liird ~+*~n. iambus. tJhio ttatod
that he represents dce developer. nary ScbmWt of Sdantdt Ltd Design is also pracnt tonight.
They have worked hard b b[lag elk plan within sGdf roootmt>eadatloas. The pcopotad plan
•.concaKratet higher deatity adjacent to b~dustcW trsu; with Iowa deaeity raldaeWl and parkland
adjacent to siecgte funny rtes. The plan dens aratlvdy srMh the tcanshbaal ehsracta of the the
I
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer': Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
RECORD OF PROC E~DZNGS Meetia~
Minutes of icy C011Ael1 Matheg
t9
Held July 1. 1996 = _ _
_
• u thac u industrial ale to the aoeth sad cast sad a mobne home park W the south. They have
providod appropriate buffos betwa:n these aoamle ~ Htctns
~ ~ to them Sdeooal
u wittdn the Hnliacd Sdwol datciU but u wbjea b a P~~ .99.
d'utcid which u W be heard this fall. The Dusan dauity
Q~y e~midt ~midt i ate-Desl~.t statod that he believes the ooadomlai
. appro,dmately S oc SS pa a«~e. k appeal amore dace bxwse there are one srACY
more lot oovexage. •
Ms:l4iide Pitdduga stated that she has soave coaoans about safety sad aaaurtY ~ chndrea is vow
of the industrial uses tkacby.
>bz< state ~p~ ~ of 7 Waits per
Mr. zawtdy aocod ~ there see references oa the plan
aea~e sad 9.tmitt per tear density.
Mr. Schmidt stated that those are is the Balgrif6a area which suss t~ro~"eact agn="1~Y~ - •
have a+ot bees devdopod yet.
Mi. HidelPiibMuga asir,~d if the 6ev~dopa add a°°sida~ difra+eat >pQ~a~''~3~ : - - .
which are more dace. Perhaps ~ to P rates outward and awrciag
tea is rase around die oouatcy ~ a frost potrh - a ooameroanity
Some phnosoph
bui(dia8 design.
soeau-vay
fragmaitod aid ~ need of as activity axster for
. Mrs: SW(weli stated that the proposal a~ no tease of place fur this devdopmaU.
die housing sad otfias. there is reo ooaatoa thane
The daaay of the devdopmeat ooaarns ha a~ the doesn't believe this is the best trod use.
_ Ma. Boring eotad that PdtL ttru88l~ ~ ~7' of the same usnes. Thu p u aauch
improved ova the fast plan. The dansity is an hapoctant usue sad she woald 10ae to see it iowa'ed.
Mayor Kranuuber' asked stoat materials. with an ~ sutdtryd materials. The
Mr. Schmidt respoadal shad they to an iadaaaial area
ooadomiaium units wID be priced is &e f 150.000 txage. the loeatioa afjaoeat
He heals Coimcn ezpccss~8 a dese:c for-more open >t~~
mates this a ddficult project.' ~ ~ projat was d'~tated by
and a diffaant density oc different aaange~ of ~d?e site.
~ auggestioas~aad aeighbax'• eoaoecas as wen as~h~ttctt~
Mr. Schmidt addod that they do not have detans yet
--Mayor Kraastnba scrod dot he has eoacaas stoat the daesity. H'~s main coaoaa u the school
em with the proposal c+egacdless of what the appearax+a: a K they
d'aaict issue:'•He may have a probl P~ ~ dee lhiblia Schools.
arc ansueoessful in tcaufaYiag
. Mr. Campbell ttaetod that he lnaes the lake, the Panic:'thevmd•at+o~'$°~:ooc~'~e
da~sity,' pardadariy In the meddle aces. He a hopeful+Bud`th~l~+RPro'r6`d'e:transfer: Af
school d'uYCicts. - i
Mayor Kranscnba anoved approval of the ooaapt plan of Avery village Commons with the
tond'Kaas of Pluwhtg do Zoaiog.
~Mr. Gmpbdl seconded the motion. Mrs. Bociag. Ya: ~
yore en the motion - Mr. Campbell, yes; Mrs. Stniwelt, Mr. Ziw$y. yes:
Mr. McCash, ao; Ms. Hidc P"ataluga. ~a; lrfaY'a Ya~
n 1 ~mittoe Reports , that ~ have asks tq gather '
Mr. M . ~1 force ~ wZlh akighboriaS ~ ictionst.
additional nfornutioa regarding the proposed
Ms. H' Pittaluga, ccpated that they have met twi sad d'ucussed
of the anal computer aetwotkiog is Dubl~a She notod that ~
the a regarding the updaticeg ~ ings was viewod
d the budget matlags of 1995, a eat for 5300.000 to aetwori: City The i
as largo aaaaba. This moacy wu oa hardware and ta9.waro for ~4 that the '
ag of banding: has not 6oea ertakea Yet- 'the t-ommlttoe't j
y atdeRako a two~pact study - f rA have as outsWe oonsuitaat tetxCtS a dxe study dose four ~
tth ptrpacatioa of as RFP sod y, a auaagemeat study butWbag u tnooauaaed~ sotto
ago for dee (Sty by Ernst ouag. The Dort of dill two4att
'ezcood 550.000.
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMIVIISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
January 15, 1998
crrv c~h~ oullun .
olYl~ ~ ,
se0o s~«-w~~
Ou6Gq, Oha 43016-1236
r.rr
Mione/IDO: 614161.6550
Fmc 614761.6566
Web Site: www.du6Gn.ah.us
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
2. Rezoning Application Z96-014 -Preliminary Development Plan -Avery Village Commons
- Avery Road and Rings Road
Location: 62.81 acres located on the west side of Avery Road and north side of Rings Road.
Existing Zoning: R-1B, Restricted Suburban Residential District; PIP, Planned Industrial
Park District; and EU, Exceptional Use District (Washington Township classifications).
Request: Review and approval of a preliminary development plan under the PUD, Planned
Unit Development District provisions of Section 153.056.
Proposed Use: A development of 244 multi-family units, 71 single-family lots, and 15.95
acres of parkland.
Applicaat: Owners Ubaldo and Anna M..Monaco and 11Tid-States Development Company,
c/o Randy Asmo, 5729 Avery Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016; represented by Christopher T.
Cline, attorney, 37 West Bridge Street, Dublin, Ohio 43017.
MOTION: To table this application as requested by the applicant.
...r
VOTE: 7-0.
RESULT: This application was tabled. The Commission directed the applicant to provide a plan
that includes the Samson property with no increase in density; specify architectural commitments
and amenities in the text; increase setback on Avery Road; and provide a more innovative project
layout.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
n D. Talentino
Planner
99-041 Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
bublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -January 15, 1998
Page 4
Mr. McCash said until had been concerned about a 15 foot height of the sign, but w
satisfied with the tat this time. Mr. Lecklider said ce the wall sign appeared within a xt
revision appmv by City Council, he was no longer ncerned.
Mr. Ferrara e a motion to approve this develop ent plan because the use is compati a with
the surroun ' g area and meets the intent of the P 'meter Center text with three condi ons:
1) That the uilding match the original MAG b ding in terms of colors and ma ' ;
2)'=That if Rover~s-no-longer the tenant of• a building, that~the green architec element
,
oa th frost elevation and the wall sign be emoved; and
3)' ~"That overall'site ~laddscape plan be to show all changes caused by the evelopment .
of d Rover.
~Nir. cC~:Sh ~meoanded the -motion and the•v was as~follows:.Ivir ~Prague,~y .:Mr:-Lecklider, _ -
yes• . Peplow, yes; Mr. Harian, Yes; . Chinnici-Zuercher,yes;~:Mrdl~i -yes;-and Mr.
F yes. (Approved 7-0.)
. Chinnici-Zuercher thanked and ngratulated Mr. Brentlinger on this xpansioa.
2. Rezoning Application Z96-014 - Prel~minaiy Development Plan -Avery Village Commons
- Avery Road and Rings Road
John Talentino presented this mooning which was tabled without discussion on December 4, 1997.
The development includes 71 lots and 243 multi-family units. An "unloaded" road without
driveway cuts will be built by the developer~through the site. All•development is to the north of
it, and there is a park to the south. Access is from the new street with a secondary access from
Corporate Center DDrive. ~ ~ He showed the Samson property immediately to the .north. Mr.
Taleatino said the pool and :parking are both within the 200-foot setback..A pond with .a fountain
provide added interest.'; He said the architecture drawings were conceptual.
Four industrial lots have been added to the plan at the end of Corporate Center Drive.. Office use
ispreferred in` the Community Plan for these.:-~The rest>of:the~site~s:shown~:in the.:Plan as
residential. use or 12 du/ac.Staff has been working:with this applicantforaa~long..:ti.me. The use,
except for density, complies with the Southwest.AreaPlan'::~:Staffziil~es~'theamenities such as the
large park -and new road. This plan defines a point where the single-family area begins. The
applicant has responded to many of the City's requests.
- Mr. Talentino said issues of~ density, road/pedestrian connections between this site and off site; . .
and provision of parkland have not been resolved. Lot sizes should increase as they move
westward.Architectural drawings have not been submitted. The applicantwants fcedback on ,
density. He said staff recommends disapproval of this rezoning based upon 11 reasons:
1) The project density (five dwelling units per acre) exceeds the recommended density in the
Community Plan, and the proposed plan's characteristics fail to justify a density increase.
2) .The plan fails to incorporate the Avery Road right-of-way consistent with the adopted
Thoroughfare Plan.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Nrnutes -January 15, 1998
Page 5
3) The plan has inadequate setbacks along the public streets, based on the recommendations of
the Community Plan.
4) The plan does not incorporate a street connection to Rings Road.
5) Additional standards need to be incorporated into the text to facilitate true traditional
development patterns.
~ The plan does not include adequate pedestrian and vehicular connections withinthe plan and
to adjacent properties.
7) - ~ The submission does not include an inventory of large.trees or:a tree preservation plan, as
required by the approved concept plan.
- 8) The text does not'incorporate acommitment to coordinate the frontagelandscape design with -
other Avery Road sites for a more unified design.
9) The plan. does not detail laadscaping/buffers along surrounding properties.
10) The'text~~fails'to address-the sanitary~and~drainage improvementsato,~the~dj2~c~nt property , - .
(Samson), as required by the approved ooacept.plan.
- I1) The text includes inadequate documentatioa~to,.support'~he proposed::reduction in Code-
. ~l Paz~•
Ms.' Chinnici-Zuercher asked if action is requested tonight. ~ Mr. Taleatino said -yes. -This is a
- - rezoning application and ~ staff<-was recommending ::disapproval. .The: applicant is .proposing
amenities which he thinks are sufficient to justify an increase in density. Staff is not at that point.
1VIs. Chinnici-Zuercher understood about the amenities versus density issue, but resolving the
density issue does not resolve other staff issues remains ing. She asked if this was a work session.
Ms. Clary said this is a formal rezoning application, and .the applicant is requesting ~ approval and
refeaal to City Council. She said the density is the central issue, but staff and the applicant are
some distance apart on that issue.: 1VIs. Chinnici-Zuercher asked if -this is considered . to be a
"pipeline" project under the Community Plan. 1VIr. Thleatino .said. this is largely consistent with
the Southwest Area Plan, but it was not included as a pipeline project due to lack of zoning.
IVis. Clarke said a concept plan was approved in June 1996, but it is non-binding. She said there
was difficulty in making the traffic numbers work<viithin~.the.Community~P]aa,:aadit was agreed
°that zoned projects would be considered to be~in:the~pipeline. This_project>~vas-.not included.
Mr. Ferrara asked for an example of such a change in the planned land use. 1VIs. Clarke did not
know of any. She -said this is one of the first ~ following adoption of the updated Community
Plan. That comprehensive plan took three years to work through the transportation testing and
modeling; etc. ~ It is notsurprising that there are philosophical changes by the end of the process. -
Ivir. Ferrara asked if the land immediately to the west of this site was in the-City of .Dublin. 1VIr. _
Talentino said the Thomas property of 81 acres is in Dublin. lvlr. Ferrara asked if the intent is
to extend the stubbed roads in that general direction. Ms. Clarke said yes. She said the
recommended density has dropped in this area from 2.75 du/ac under the Southwest Area Plan
to a maximum of 2 du/ac under the Community Plan update. When the Plan testing was done,
there was a need to lower traffic, and densities in the outlying areas were lowered, including this
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -January 15, 1998 -
Page 6
site. Mr. Ferrara asked if Dublin is looking to even lower densities farther to the west. Ms.
Clarke said yes. It has a maximum of 2 du/ac which is a lower range single-family density.
Mr. Talentino said the Community Plan addressed traditional design which included large parks,
but there should also be smaller green spaces interspersed into the grid system. Mr. Ferran asked
if they qualified as parkland. Mr. Talentino said yes. ~
~Mr.'-Ferrara asked if this site was in the Billiard School District. ~ Mr. Cliae.said yes..:
, Ms.~ Clarlae said this plan is much better than the 1996 versions. There.have beeii~many revisions.
Mr. Peplow asked if this density would be permitted with the Southwest Area Plan. Ms. Fierce
said probably;-because it fallsinto two subareas. -The subarea for Avery Road was a higher
density of 5:10 ~du/aa ~aad is thin case; multi
family~is~~shown which~rould~apply~oons~stcmtty :with
the ~ Southwest Area Plan ~aad ~ the western portion (Subarea~0) :_wasi~•~resideut~al, .low-density
subarea of 2.75 du/ac. Ms. ~ Clarlae said the` Aver3?~Roa~l :~orridor~was~expectedrto:be a mined use
corridor which included office use.
Mr. Peplow asked if the intersection at new and.old Rings Road was scheduled to be signalized
at the ~eatraiice to this development at Avery Road:- Ms. =Clarkeaaid;it:would not besignalized
until it meets signal vvairants. The goal is to distribute traffic as much as possible. Staff feels this
development should be better connected to the overall road system.
Mr. Sprague asked if the warrant study found it feasible, what would be the earliest the developer
would be able to install a signal at this intersection. Ms. Clarlae said there was no intersection yet,
and -the question cannot be answered until the intersection is used by traffic.
Mr. Talentino said ~if -theepark is distributed between the single and multi
:family..areas, the
apartment density is about 7.7 du/ac. Mr. Sprague had a problem with that high density..He said
density was discussed by Council several weeks ago for several •hours.. The staff was given the .
assignment ~ to research several issues for Council. ~ Given Council's .actions regarding the 5.0
du/ac density, he thought it would be premature~to~ppmve~ahigher~lensity;;hr~:
Ms: Clarke said higher density along Avery Road~hasaiwaysbeen~xpectedr~t~will be a large
road in the future, five or seven lanes in width. --However, the single-family-area causes more
concern because it has a much denser layout and smaller lots than are likely to be permitted
immediately to the west. Abetter single-family transition to the lower density is needed. The
issues for the multi-family section oente~ on layout and design rather than density.:She: said- it will
- be extremely hard to keep.densities low if a higher density precedent is .set here.
Mr. Lecklider asked about the Avery Road 200-foot setback issue. Ms. Clarke said the applicant
has agreed to dedicate right-of-way consistent with widening of Avery Road. A goal of the
Community plan was to maintain open views along historic roads, including Avery Road. While
it is not codified, it would greatly enhance this plan and provide more compliance with the
Community Plan. The depth of this site make it easy to comply, and that will not always be true.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
~
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ~
Minutes -January. l5, 1998
Page 7
With the depth of this site, it can easily comply. Mr. Lecklider asked if it would be consistent
with developments on the east and west sides of Avery Road. Ms. Clarke said Avery Road had
setbacks existing between zero and 700 feet. Mr. Talentino said Balgriffin had a setback of 120
feet, and it predated the plan.
Mr. Harian asked if there was a field north of Lots 17, 18, 19, and 20. Mr. Talentino said the
lots weave on the back end of deep residential lots oa Woerner Temple Road..Mr. Talentino said
these lots were in unincorporated Washington Township.
Mr.:Harian asked if there would.be any parking permitted oa the. Rings Road extension.:Randy
Bowman~said if it was 32 feet wide,-and Code permits park~ng.oa:both_sides.~.Mr. Aarian asked
.about parking for access to the park. Ms. Clarke said.the spac~fic development design of the park
had not beea°considered. ~lt may~be-large eaough=:for~a parkingdcstry~~he~~pacif~c-design of the ~
park will need to be.discussed with the neighborhoods.
Mr. Harian asl~ed if there vas a°oonnection between 'the residentiat and ~:multi=family areas. ~~Ms. _
Talentino said no.
Mr Harian askr~ if aleft~ura lane~was being proposed on Avery:Road. , Mt; Talentino said yes.
Mr. McCash askedif the:requested connection to existing :Rings Road would be a public road
through the park. Ms. Clarke said yes. Mr. McCash asl~ad if the park greenspace was being used
for a public road. Ms. Clarke said this 300 feet needed more aa~esses. There has been much
di,,~`icukly in .cases when the developer of the larger ntanber of units does not fund or build the
bridge.: The lower density .developer ca~uwt be expected, to do so. * .This is the higher density
project-with sufficient depth from Avery Road to need an:a~ccess~to the south. ~ She said this is
.;where it should be included..If there ..were. a larger .development proposal:{combining parcels) the
connection might be moved farther to -the west. -Staff believes this development necessitates that
improvement in~the overall circulation. The first choice is not to build a road through a-park, but
staff .believesthere needs to be a connection based oa this number of units : and. the general
~cimulation needs of this population, Mr. McCashK~ask~ed=if~heR-road~nthe=.park~avould align with
an~existing<single-family street:and the existing.~connection tothe>north:.~Ms~Clarke said there
is no predetermined location ~ for the access -load;=~~and~it~would>~eastF~~disrupt>~the park. The
circulation requirements of this site require a connection to Rings Road, however, it should not .
be the City's obligation to provide circulation improvements it needs.
Mr. McCash asked if a connection between the single-family -and multi-family area and then
through to .Corporate .Center Drive would alleviate some of staff's circulation. concerns...Ms. . -
Clarke said staff is serious about developing the area to the west of Avery Road according to a
different style and scale than used in the rest of Dublin. More road connections are necessary
here.
Mr. McCash asked how the existing industrial developments along Avery Road should be
addressed. Ms. Clarke said of the adjacent industrial properties, it was developed most recently
*As amended and approved by the Commission on February S, 1998. 99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Nrnutes -January 15, 1998
Page 8
and has a substantial office component associated with it. Office use would provide a good
transition between developed industrial and future residential zoning. Multi-family has been used
almost as successfully as a transitional use.
Christopher Cline, attorney, said the key issues were density and the roadway through the park.
The grid pattern is nice, but this is Dublin and times have changed. The streets,will connect
anyway. There are spacial streets already designed to move traffic.
He said there are three parcels. The 37 acre western parcel is the~Dublin Clubhouse is a private
park at this time, ~ The four northern industrial lots are vacant. There .are 18 acres .under: an
::option..- Sewer lines to °Avery Road will•make the:industrial.sites more viable...If this rezoning .
does not go forward, -those industrial. sites will be developed under the present zoning.:. Mr. Cline
said~the`original, lower.density~ooacept plan~was not eoonomically~easible:
Mr:~
Caine paid he lmew this was not is the pipeline;abutthey:~ad.•:aworloed~athis~laa fora long
time: ''1~e-developer is~oontributing;°2;000 feet~of~nloaded roadway, the~2l-inch sanitary~sewer
at Avery Road and the 17-inch waterline to the northwest corner of the site, plus the park. All
of these items were conditioned upon the density seen here.
Mr.~ Cline .said the Samson Properly is under contract for purchase by this developer. If the
.Samson house remains, logically, it could be a home converted into an office.
Mr. Cline said the roof pitch on the multi-family has been raised to 6:12. He said the design of
- the multi-family buildings will change. He said architecture and site layout are nov a feature of
the pnliminary development play presented today. Development standards, density, roof pitches,
materials; etc:°-are to be decided~at~this time.-:The actual details and layout~will-be presented for
:the multi-family.at the time~of the final development-p1an..He said this is the.first commitment .
to use 50 percent masonry..They have also committed to similar quality on all four building sides.
Mr.~~Cline said this is not a neo-traditional single-family neighborhood.. There is a modified grid
layout~with a challenging transition to accomplish:<~~~T'hey._~nticipated~;therarc~itecture will be
similar to that already in southwest Dublin.
Mr. Cline asked for guidance as to whether or not the other interconnections are necessary. He
did not see any reason for the .stub to the north because of the single-family homes. The
interconnection between the multi-family and the single-family-developments is a problem. They
have agreed to construct a bil~epath down the eastern side of the single-family area where the lots
are 150 feet deep.
Mr. Cline said the Southwest Civic Association had requested mounding along Rings Road
extended and the developer has will build four-foot mounding along the road. Staff has recently
asked that the multi-family setback be increased to 60 feet, and he agrees.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -January 15, 1998
Page 9
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked why the current clubhouse had to be removed. There were very few
places in Dublin to hold meetings or events. She wished it could continue to be available to the
community. Mr. Cline shares her regret, but there was no other way to do it. Ms. Chinnici-
Zuercher asked if it would be removed in the next six months. Mr. Cline said no, it would be
operated until the single-family area gets started. It terminates at the end of 1998.
Ms. Ctunnici-Zuercher asked if there had been any discussion with the Hilliard School District.
• • Mr: °Cline said 'this section was ~ within the school district transfer .he filed and cost. ~ It is now .in _
'the Court of Appeals. The City of Dublin and the Dublin City School District support.
. - Mr. McCash`°had expressed concerns oa the layout and -multi
family..architecture. to .Mr. ~ Cline
.prior to the meeting and did not think a visual oomdor would be created.. Mr.. C1iae said this plan
- pis ooaoeplual ~and-can be changed gat the 5na1 developmeat plan::stage:~a~Hersaid~tte~~lan~ shows 2:5
. `parking spaces per unit which may be too -much;~fand~the=#extisays ~.:5~arkingspaces .per unit.. : -
He said °iz wdl depend upoa whether at the time of~hefinais~developmentplan;~;the'~raphics justify
.-a reduction.to 1:5 parking spaces per unit. . .
Mr. Cline said 243 quality, units .are requested. A two~edroom will rent for $1,300.
Mr. McCash asked what would happen to the 1.37 acre Samson property and residence. Mr.
Cline said they will incorporate it in this design. ~It willMake 22 :multi
family units to compensate
for including it. The Samson property is included to solve an existing Avery Road problem.
Mr. Banchefsky said the applicant cannot add the Samson property to this rezoning application.
Mr. Cline said he will update his application to include-it in accordance-with the density as part
. of the final development plan:~ Ms: ~Clarlae•said~-the acreage cannot beincreased at~this time. _ This
--is a re~zoning:application.for~62:81 aeres.:If the applicant chooses to expand.the acreage, it must.
be done by formally amending the application, the notices sent to the property owners, and the
_ newspapers. - Mr: Cline said he would work with Mr. Banchefsky to solve the problem. He will
.agree to a .condition requiring :the acquisition and incorporation of the .Samson property. .
~ : = ~Mr: - Banchefsky -said- .thee rezoning application: <needed :to : ~ be ~ amended:~nd .returned to the
Commission for review.- Mr. McC~ash asked if this-necx'ssitatedcbeginning~with-a completely new
application and another first reading at Council, etc. Mr. Banchefsky said the zoning ordinance
in process can be amended at the public hearing. This can be accomplished with the staff.
Mr. Cline said the Samson property could be done as a separate application.
Ms. Clarke said Dublin does not have a development with a 22 du/ac density,and density .is
already a problem on the existing plan. Mr. Cline said in order not to lose money, that is what
it would take. There are other options, and he was sure it could be resolved.
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -January. l5, 1998
Page 10
Mr. McCash said density is one of the biggest issues to be resolved, and how this gets resolved
may make a difference in the Commission's action. Mr. Cline figured there would be between
7 and 8 du/ac on the multi-family development.
Mr. McCash said it is difficult to deal with multi-family and industrial uses and proper transitions.
He said 1 to 2 du/ac would be expensive housing and unlikely next to an industrial.,Use. Farther
to the west, this density can work. Council debated density in the Community Plan, iie did not
-agree-that 5 ~iu/ac is appropriate for all Dublin azeas.~ -The surrounding,uses-.and impact oa visual.
corridors need to be considered. Because it is along the industrial area, a density of 7~du/ac for
the multi=family or,5 du/ac for the whole site, would-~be acceptable. Tt might~be.a problem in
other:southwestereas. Mr. McC~ash said it-was unfair to the applicant to;require that the plan be
redrawn' after the Community Plan was adopted, dropping the density back to 5 .du/ac. He .would
• to seethe building orientation: changed. - If: the ~Samson.propeacty~s~dded~t~ay add:~to the
. gr+aenspace incorporated into the multi
family~and~rovide~vider;setbacks:~onAvery:.Road. Mr.
~McCash~ said the 200 foot<~setback was not clearlyxiefiaed:~ndr~vill3~nequi~ea~work.
Mr: -McCash doubted a , checklist of -density credits -will be available.-from .City .Council by
February. Mr: • Sprague hoped that Council-could give the Commission as to how flexible the
density figures-are: = Mr. McCash said Council shad mixed feelings ~on_density.
Mr:Cline agreed to comply with Bases 3 and 5 above. He would not agree.to the density or the-
connection to existing Rings Road. He would reconsider the setbacks along Avery Road.
Mr. Lecklider asked if the multi
family development-would be constructed first. Mr. Cline said
probably, but this is not certain: He said all of the pazk will be dedicated at the time of the first
approved final development plan. The exceptional use zoning will cease on January 1, .1999.
Mr. I.ecklider was concerned that if the multi
family development comes first, the overall
~ proposal might change to' extend ~ the multi
family, arguing that single-family is not viable here.
He wants to know how to assure this will not happen. Mr. Cline said they believe. that .the single-
• family- development is very viable and they wantto xnove~.forpnamptly~vith.it.
Mr. Cline said this is in :the Hilliard School-
~Districti -.~To~ransfer::~,as;3~een.~ppmved, but
application can be made every two yeazs.
Mr. Ferrara asked if "quality" on the four sides of all buildings meant the same materials. Mr.
"Cline said they will use 50 percent masonry and similarquality on all sides of all buildings:.-They
cannot. be all brick on the -front and all stucco on the back. Mr. Ferrara asked if it was the same
~or equal: `Mr. Cline said buildings on Rings Road extended may~have:more:brick on the front.
Mr. Peplow asked if a joint development to the west had been considered. Mr. Cline said they
would have to be two separate developments. He said they had met with representative of the
Edwards Company about the plan, and they expressed an interest in the multi-family portion. He
said the owners of the Thomas property (to the west) have talked to the Edwazds Company also.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery pillage Commons)
r_.
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission _
Minutes -January 15, 1998
Page 11
Mr. Sprague asked if people will pay $1,300 a month to live beside an industrial azea. Mr. Cline
said they will provide a good buffer for the transition. The northeast corner is a challenge.
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher said connectors between different developments produced excess traffic.
She thought it increased potential danger. She was not impressed with either layout. The single-
family to the west will increase the commercial potential here.
John Samson;-561 i ~ Avery Road,. requestedthat this application be.approved. ~ He wanted to -leave ~
.the azea because it °had~ changed a lot over the years and Avery Road was going to be widened.
Ms Clarke said the Edwards Group may be interested -in property to -the west, but they have not
.tallaed with the Engineeaing or Planning staff as yet. ~ Regarduig a-school:traasfer, people tend to
~be.`veryatta~ched to the local-school district:' ~New~buyers:willlanow.~this~.s~n~he~illiard School
District, and a~future transfer; ~onoe units are oaxxpi+ed,-~,is~vezy.~aunlikely e~ayout~.for the multi
familyarea is not one staff~endorses,•and Mr..Cliaethas;~aidd~may~sbe~hanged-at~he;time-of the.
~final~development~plan:YStaff:needs~to note that unless there~is~a-coadition~on-the-issue;-if•.the
same -plan is submitted for. final development plan, it will be very difficult to deny it.
-Ms: Clarke said Condition~5-relates •to both single=•family and multi=family areas: A~ stub street
to the north is quite important. There is undeveloped land which is likely to be a future
neighborhood.
Mr. Cline said one company, Shamrock Investments, owned the entire industrial azea.
Mr. Ferrara said he agreed with Mr. McCash. The plan is too dense. He is still concerned that
--the school issue~is not yetfully settled. * He-agrees-with Ms. Clarke that-the school district holds - -
.the neighborhood together.
-•~Ivir: Peplow does notthink~l to 2 du/ac single-family homes -next to the industrial-azea is viable.
He also had a problem with density.
.¦r
Mr: Sprague agreed with the comments of Mr. ; Ferrara:and rMr.: Peplow ~3e_~as a problem with .
- - - density.- Higher trafficrauses too much traffic:
~He~uggested~leferring:~to~ouncil:on the density
question until it gives the Commission more specific guidance.
Mr:~McCash said~the connection to the north may not~help the:traffic~situation, depending on its
location. On the eastern road, at Lot 22, is a possible connection to the north and may provide
~ :additional buffer. ~He has no problem with the density, but.there aze still unresolved issues.
Mr. Harlan agreed with the other Commissioners. He thought the density may be acceptable if
it is a transition area. He would like a more innovative plan using better greenspace. He thinks
a larger setback from Avery Road is needed. He did not want a road to go through the park, there
may be the opportunity to get the connection to Rings Road on the property to the west.
*As amended and approved by the Commission on February S, 1998.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -.January 15, 1998
Page 12
Mr. I.ecklider agreed with the comments of Mr. Sprague. He is concerned about the density.
The site presents unique challenges. There are a number of unresolved issues. He hoped the
multi-family design was only conceptual and will reflect a higher level when it returns.
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher agreed with Mr. Harian's comments on density. The Community Plan
is not a binding document; it lends a frame of reference. She agreed with Mr. McCash about the
visual corridor. She would like to see a layout that included the Samson property. The
documentation and presentation had changed, and the case should be tabled.
~ ~ Ms. Chinnici=Zuercher took a straw vote regarding the density.
Mr:-Ferrara said if the density remained the same, he expected to see on a refiled applicatioa with
many amenities nailed-down and they-he would approve-the deasit3?...-
Mr:: Peplow said he -could acxept the density=~as ;atti~was, ~but::nomore._ 13e~'xPects -the .Samson . _ _
.property to be included in the layout.
Mr. Ferrara did not support the additional connections.
Mr.~ Sprague -said he might accept density. The plan. should be refined as to design.
Mr. Mc;C~ash said the density was not a problem at this location. He had a problem with bisecting
the park with the road although a connection ~to the south was important. The road to the north
might add value. Mr. Harian agreed.
~Ms.~~Chinnici-Zuercher was~comfortable=with the density.- She definitely.did not want a road
through the park, but respected. the need for access.
Mr. Cline said if the Samson property was added, ~ the number of units -will change.. Ms.. Chinnici-
Zuercher understood.. Mr. McCash said the Samson property, with 22 more:units would not pass.
Mr. Cline understood. Mr. Peplow did not wantirthe-~totaidensiiyincmased:~t°all.. -
Mr. Cline requested tabling.
Ms. Clarke said last year, staff recommended approval if the density was lowered to 4 du/ac. The
concept plan was approved with a density of 3.99 dulac. The density is now up over 5 du/ac, and
staff cannot support the density on this plan. If it becomes denser, the staff opposition .becomes
greater.
Mr. Ferrara made the motion to table this rezoning application as requested by the applicant and
Mr. Sprague seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. McCash,
yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. Harlan, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; and Mr.
Ferrara, yes. (Tabled 7-0.)
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher thanked everyone and apologized for the case taking so long.
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Averv Village Commons)
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING CONIlVIISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
March 19, 1998
c[~ of nua[.[w
Oub6'm, Oha 43016-123b
wne/[00: 614761550
fmc 6141b1-65bb
fdi Site: www.du6Gnoh.us
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted to disapprove the following application at this
meeting:
1. Rezoning Application Z96-014 -Preliminary Developmeat Plan -Avery Village
Commons -Avery Road and Rings Road
Location: 64.225 acres located on the west side of Avery Road and north side of Rings
Road.
F~dsting Zoning: R-1B, Restricted Suburban Residential District; PIl', Planned Industrial
Park District; and EU, Exceptional Use District (Washington Township classifications).
Request: Review and approval of a preliminary development plan under the PUD,
Planned Unit Development District provisions of Section 153.056.
Proposed Use: A development of 256 multi-family units, 71 single-family lots, and
16.056 acres of parkland.
Owners: John Samson, 5611 Avery Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016; Ubaldo and Anna M.
Monaco, 5949 Sinclair Road, Columbus, Ohio 43229; and Mid-States Development
Company, c/o Randy Asmo, 5729 Avery Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016; represented by
Christopher T. Cline, attorney, Blaugrund, Herbert & Martin, 5455 Rings Road, Suite
500, Dublin, Ohio 43017. ~
MOTION: To approve this rezoning application with the following 27 conditions:
1) That a shared access point be shown on Rings Road extended (as shown in Staff
Alternative B), prior to submission to City Council, and subject to Commission review
with the final development plan;
2) That Lot 61 be eliminated to provide common or village green area similar to the multi-
family village green concept;
3) That prior to submission to Council, the text be revised to reflect the concerns and issues
of the Commission and Staff;
4) That the plan create visual interest in street design by encouraging boulevard design and
pedestrian friendly streets;
5) That the Avery Road building and parking setbacks be increased to 150 feet from
centerline, and be extensively landscaped, subject to staff approval;
99-0412
Page 1 of 3 Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
March 19, 1998
1. Rezoning Application Z96-014 -Preliminary Development Plan -Avery Village
Commons -Avery Road and Rings Road (Continued) _
6) ~ ~ That the required park land be shown on the plan and be acceptable to ~ .
'n ` ~That~theapplicant meet with°staff on site to identify existing trees .and to prepare:a.tree
preservation plan for Council review;
8) That the plan be revised to incorporate the Avery Road'(62 feet from centerline at the
-north end of.the site-and .66 feet at the south end) and Rings Road ~(35=feet from centerline)
. lights-of-way, consistent with the Thoroughfare: Plan;=and~fiafian~easement~ad right-of-
way dedication plat be submitted prior to.eonsttuction; -
9) That the entuc length of Rings Road extended~~oompietedsprior.~oxissuanc~Qf :80 percent
~of occupancy permits for the multi-family area;
10) 'That the plan. state a minimum lof size for the single-family area;
11) That the applicant demonstrate the developability of the single-fanuly lots prior to
submission ~ to Council; with example house sand deck footprints in compliance with
development standards, to the satisfaction of staff;
12) That any single-family building elevation visible- -from Rings Road .extended be
architecturally pleasing to the same degree as the front elevation;
13) That no build zones be defined and shown. on the plan;
14) That all buildings in the multi-family area, including garages, have a minimum of 50
percent masonry on each facade;
15) That exterior building materials be of equal quality on all sides of each building;
~~1~ ~ ~That•the-~applicant submit scaled building.elevations'for the multi-family area at final
development plan review;
1'n That phasing for all development be shown;
18) ~ ~ That if the multi-family portion is phased,. the,Samson structure .be removed within the
first phase,
19) That documentation supporting -the proposed~reduction:~.in =Code.-required. parking be
provided prior to final development plan revievr.=subject~to~staff~approval;-~-
20) That fencing details be shown on the plan and that restrictions be amended to prohibit
masonry;
21) That a note be added to the plan indicating a future crossing of Cramer Ditch with
connection to Rings Road to the south;
22) ~ That a forced'and, funded homeowners association be established for all residential .areas;
23) That jargon be eliminated from the text;
24) That the text be amended to include everything that is missing including but not limited
to: architectural standards, aesthetic considerations along public rights-of--way, single-
family lot standards, landscaping commitments, tree preservation commitments,
homeowners association responsibilities, Avery Road setbacks, future road connections,
fencing restrictions and details, and no build zone definitions and locations;
Page 2 of 3 99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMIVIISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
March 19, 1998
1. Rezoning Application Z96-014 -Preliminary Developmeat Plan -Avery Village
Commons -Avery Road and Rings Road (Continued)
25) That the text and plan be in agreement;
2~ That all city requirements be met on design of public roads, private drives, public and
private utilities, and storm water management; and
` ~ 2'n ~ ~ That a plan which incorporates all of the changes required-:above-be submitted prior to
being scheduled for Council.
* Christopher T. Cline; attorney;..:representing-#he:applicant;.ragreed=~viththeabove conditions. .
VOTE: 2-3.
RESULT: The motion failed. This rezoning application will be forwarded to City Council with
a negative recommendation.
STAFF CERTIFICATION `
Talentino
Planner
..r
99-0412
Page 3 of 3 Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
MEETING MINUTES
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MARCIi 19, 1998
clrv oN oulll.rn -
.'~iriska of P{c~i«
saoo ~
wLGq, Ohio 13016-1136
trhaae/100: X14-761550
imc~11161 6
Web S'de:
1: -Rezoning Ap 'catioa Z9G-014 --Preliminary=Deve1 ment~Pian -:Avery Village Comoro
- ~ = - Avery. Roa and RingsRoad (Disapproved 2-3 . _ . -
. . . . . . . ,
2. Revised polite Plan 98-020Z -Perimeter enterSubarea F -Bob Sumerel '
Company 6600' Peruneter Loop Road (Post ed without .discussion or vote)
- 3: Rezoning- pplication 97--1522 - preLnninary velopmeat Plan - Ind~aa Ridge - D blin-
Bellepo' t Road and I
270 (Tabled 4-1)
The mee ' g was called to order at 6:30 p.m by Chair Marilee Chinnici-Zuerch Other
Commis on members present were Tom M ,George Peplow, John Fe ,and Tim
Spragu Joe Harian and Tim Lecklider ere absent. Staff members preseat ere Mary
Newco b, Chris Hermann, Suzanne Wing field, Kim Littleton, John Talentino, isa Fierce,
Chad 'son, Rick Helwig, Randy Bowm Mary Bearden, Fred -Hahn,. Martin yer, Mitch
Banc efsky, Flora Rogers, and Libby Far y.
Mr Sprague made a motion to accept th documents into the record, and Mr. low seconded.
.N
e vote was as follows: Mr. McCash, es; Mr. Peplow, yes; Ms. Chinnici- ercher, yes;
. errara, ..yes; and Mr. Sprague, yes. ` Approved.5-0.)
Mr. Ferrara moved for approval -the February-i9=}199.8~:aneeting~. ~ utes. ~ Mr. McCash
seconded, -and the vote was as f lows: ~'Mr.~'Peplow;-yes; 'i~+Ir:Fe ,-yes; Ms. Chinnici-
Zuercher, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes• and Mr. McCash, yes. (Approved 5
1. Rezoning Application Z96-014 - Preliminary Development Plan -Avery Village Commons
- Avery Road and Rings Road
John Talentino presented this rezoning which was tabled in January. The Samson tract was to be
included without increasing density. Architectural commitments, text amenities, increased Avery
Road setback, and a more innovative layout were requested. This plan includes the Samson
property, but the density is slightly higher. The 64-acre site now has 256 multi-family units, 71
lots, and 15.95 acres of park. He said staff has generated alternative plans for the site.
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -March 19, 1998
Page 2
Mr. Talentino said there is a revised multi-family layout. Amore innovative design was
attempted by creating a streetscape, expanding the village green, placing parking areas behind
buildings, and breaking up the parking. The building setback along Avery Road is 150 feet, but
the pool and tennis court are within it. Archways have been added to the multi-family design.
Mr. Talentino said the multi-family plan was improved, but staff still has concerns particularly
in the single-family area. Staff recommends disapproval based on the following: ~ -
1) ~ The project density (5.09 dwelling units per acre) has been increased, which exceeds the
recommended density in the Community Plan, exceeds the density approved under the
concept plan, (4.0 du/ac), and the proposed plan's characteristics fail to justify a density F
increase.
2) The density and lot size shown set a negative precedent for future development to the west.
"3) ~ The ~ plan fails ~ to incorporate the Avery..Road .and .existing ::Rings Road. rights-of--way
consistent with the adopted Thoroughfare Plan.
4) The plan has inadequate setbacks along Avery..Road,:based.on.:ihe~recommendations of the
Community Plan.
5) The text does not provide adequate standards to ensure a high quality development
for the 256 multi-family units.
6) The text does not incorporate adequate standards to facilitate a more traditional development
pattern, especially in the single-family area.
7) The plan does not encourage a development pattern which supports pedestrian mobility
through mixed use (residential and non-residential) development.
8) The plan does not include adequate pedestrian and vehicular connections to adjacent
properties to provide a continuous and cohesive fabric of neighborhoods, consistent with
the goals of the Community Plan.
9) The submission does not include an inventory of large trees or a tree preservation plan, as
required by the approved concept plan.
10) The plan does not detail landscaping buffers along surrounding properties.
11) The text includes inadequate documentation to support the proposed reduction in Code-
required parking.
12) The plan does not provide adequate park land as required by Code.
13) Text revisions are needed to ensure quality of building appearance from Avery and Rings
Roads.
14) The preliminary development plan and text are not in agreement on many issues.
15) The plan does not unify the housing mix through shared, centrally located open space and
through direct pedestrian and vehicular connections.
16) The plan does not create visual interest in street design by encouraging boulevard design and
pedestrian-friendly streets.
17) The submission fails to provide scaled building elevation drawings or illustrate if exterior
building materials are equal on all sides of each building.
18) No build zones are not shown on the plan or defined.
19) Fence details for the pool, tennis court, and single-family rear yards have not been provided.
20) The plans do not indicated the timing or phasing of the proposed development.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -March 19, .1998
Page 3
Mr. Talentino showed slides of the site and surrounding area, portions of the Community Plan,
and proposed plans and conceptual elevations. He said staff supports a plan in which the garage
is not the most dominant part of the neighborhood architecture.
Mr. Talentino said two alternate plans were prepared by staff and shared with the applicant in
February. He said many of the staff s key concerns were not incorporated into the applicant's
many revisions, and this is an attempt to communicate graphically. Staff
s alternative plan has
a lower density than the proposed application.
_ Kim Littletonpresented~the alternatives he had prepared:to represent-concepts from the Plan. The .
alternate~plaris have~single and multi
family .use, but with better connections.. There is an attempt
to separate.the vehicular traffic.. The plan has a centralized green.space around the party barn and
a deep~~tbackalong~Avery~~Road:.°~There are~linksto_ail:surrounding~propexties:~;Tfre~iots at-the
western~~perimeter meet the R-2 standards. He dishibuted_sexerai~graphics:
Mr Sprague said theapplication has -an -increase in~density~
-1Vt~.»3~i+entino Baia
rhere:may: have
been a difference in interpretation. The overall density'was about five units per acre, and staff
assumed that density was to be controlled. ° The applicant relied on-the multi-family density.
Mr. Peplow asked how this site fits into the Community .Plan's overall multi-family totals. Lisa
Fierce said this site was not included as amulti-family site in the build-out totals. This site was
discussed during the Community Plan hearings, but it was not chosen for multi-family. She noted
the Plan is flexible, and trades can be made among the sites.
Mr. Ferrara asked about the bases for. disapproval. , Mr..Talentino said-these unresolved issue.
=have-been=discussed over a number of months..Some are minor-and others are:.fundamental.
Mr. Ferrara asked about the market acceptance of the alleys and rear garages. Mr. ~ Littleton said -
he is not aware~~of local cases; but they have beensuccessfully used -elsewhere in larger
developments. Older neighborhoods in Columbus with them are successful and remain. stable.. -
Mr._ McCash wanted clarification on several bases:for.~denial. _-3Zegarding:~arking;:~e~thought the
multi-family plan meets Code. Mr..Talentino. said~lre~ext~ern,t~c~~arking:seduction for the
apartments. Mr. McCash was concerned about the parking ratio in place at~Dublin Village.
Regarding park dedication, Mr. Talentino said the park requirement increased .with the additional
units on the Samson property. The park calculation needs to be~re-verified. Mr.°Talentino said
-the buffer strategy along the industrial area should be articulated at this stage.: The type of buffer
has not been identified, and the Code minimum is a six-foot screen of some type: ..A planned
district generally incorporates the buffer specifications. There is an existing tree row.
Mr. McCash asked who maintains alleys over time. Mr. Littleton said they could be public or
private. Public right-of--way would be policed by Dublin. The right-of--way could also handle
garbage pick-up, utility placement, etc. In other jurisdictions, these are usually public alleys.
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes - Marchl9, 1998
Page 4
Chris Cline, attorney, said he is now with Blaugrund, Herbert, & Martin, 5455 Rings Road. He
said the Commission instructed them to incorporate a more imaginative multi-family design and
to include the Samson property without an increase in density. He said the many bases for
disapproval were fluff. There are only a few substantial issues: the multi-family layout, the
density, the Avery Road setback, and whether the single-family issues are reasonable.
Mr. Cline said they have learned a lot about the neo-traditional development, and the density is
often much higher than Dublin will accept. They incorporated the traditional single-family
characteristics which have merit on their own. He thinks this will be a special neighborhood. Mr.
Cline said this is a challenge because it abuts an industrial area.
Mr. Cline has examined the staff-prepared plan, and said it is pretty, but unrealistic. It drops 18
lots, costing the project $800,000. -The aveaage lot-price.would rise.awell;above::themarket .for the
area. He said the subdivision needs to be homogenous with only~a $20,000 ~to $30,000 difference
between the least and most expensive homes.-:.He:,offered.4o drop..onelot aon..the west property
line: Thisplan is vesy~~closeto the bottom line;~and~few things can:be conceded: ° He said this will .
be comparable to Heather Glen or Trinity Park. He thinks alleys are a negative. The open space
meets the Community Plan, and the idea of saving the party barn was abandoned some time ago.
Mr. Cline said adding 22 extra units will be necessary to break even with the addition of the
Samson property. They have added 12 units which is a rough extension of their multi-family
density as proposed. He believes the Avery Road setback of 150 feet from centerline meets the
goal of the Community Plan, and the tennis courts can be relocated.
Mark Schieber, _landscape architect for the project, said he admired the .Community Plan and tried
to incorporate elements of it. He said neo-traditional development is somewhat experimental.
Many projects have been highly successful. Many are located in more urban areas. This project
has an extremely low density for a neo-traditional design. Neo-traditional design is pedestrian-
oriented and creates a secure environment. He said the central green, the nearness of the multi-
family .units to the streets and the narrow width of the streets are.consistent with neo-traditional
design. Neo-traditional design often includes a retail area or a school.
r..
Mr. Cline said there was some amended language-regarding ~the-:garages-.and:~the~25-foot-setback.
Mr. McCash liked the shared entry of staff's Alternative B and preferred a less obvious
demarcation between the single and multi-family areas. Mr. Cline was open to incorporating this
in the final development plan, as long as the density is maintained. He said the recreational needs
of single and multi-family occupants are completely different.
Mr. McCash was not sure the connection to the north was needed. He noted the looped asphalt
in the multi-family area was not very efficient, and he preferred more green space. A buffer
between the garages and the single-family lots would be appropriate. Mr. Cline said the garages
serve as a buffer, but this will be dealt with at the final development plan.
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
' Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -March 19, 1998
Page 5
Mr. Cline said there is potential to have a 100-foot central green at the rear of the single-family
lots, but this is not fully studied.
Regarding the text, Mr. McCash said masonite garage doors may present a maintenance problem.
- Mr. Cline said these will be subject to Commission approval at the final development plan.
Mr. McCash thought the layout should be improved and that the rezoning should not be tied to
,this siteiayout. -~Mr:.~-Cline-said `the architecture has not been.~studied as yet; but~the~.layout was.;
submitted as a commitment. He said the Commission has wide discretion at the final development
plan'on all aspects of the design. Mr. McCash said a site plan condition should be added.
Mr.. McCash -had ~ concern about lighting and. the placement of .the refuse containers. _ He .said
>Council~has•aelected the southwest area for.some.neo-traditional~leYelcapmente-is concerned- -
that many.developers have executed a partial neo-traditional~lesign;
xon~ceatrating~~n=the lucrative -
- ~ aspects such as °smaller lots, minimal setbacks,etc:;:-r~Ie:~aid~+ounciL~s:~sshuuggling :with the
dominance:wf the-garage onae~ house. ~~~He •asked-Yf~~approaches':tether=than}alleys such=as::.
architecture .or running -a -narrow driveway beside the house to .the rear of the lot, had been
oonsiderecl. Mr. Cline said not at this time. ~ He hopes this will be a typical Dublin neighborhood.
~Iie does-not=think•detached garages pare a-good idea; sand stylized architecture was~not-.considered.-
Mr. Cline~said the homeowners association would be permanent and funded.
Mr.-McC.~sh was concerned about the timing of the development, that both the single and multi-
family areas would be developed simultaneously. Mr. Cline said all of the park will be dedicated
in ~ the first final plat, and an 80 percent occupancy triggers the Rings Road extension construction. .
He was concerned.about making a phasing commitment.
Mr. Ferrara was most'concerned about density. He said the concept plan was approved with a
density: of 4.0 du/ac,. and density of this plan is 5.09 du/ac. Mr. Cline said the plan now. includes
- -both the Samson property and. several industrial lots, and the layout has ;changed. =They :think this
~ concept ismore effective: There are no longer:mulfi=family _units-along~the;~v-est~-.edge of the site..
Mr. •Cline said pedestrian-friendly streets relate+to:racreationaL-uses;mot=Ath~er:3ife•~unctions. He - .
- said the- multi-familylayout reflects the new urbanism with the parking de-emphasized and hidden. -
It fosters interaction between people.
- - • Mr: Schieber said this •developer had to be convinced to include neo-traditional-aspects. They -
- ~ increase the cost of development by raising .the~percentage of street, ,greenspace to develop, .etc.:.
He said the 18-foot wide streets in the multi-family area reinforce a sense of neighborhood..
Mr. Ferrara suggested eliminating at least one lot to increase the vista for everyone. He thought
the pedestrian easements needed to be improved upon.
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -March 19, 1998
Page 6
Mr. Peplow said there seemed to be too strong a division between the single and multi-family
areas. Mr. Cline said they represent two different types of people. Regarding masonry on the
buildings, Mr. Cline thought the commitment of 50 percent masonry may even be a mistake. It
limits their design flexibility. Mr. Peplow liked the village green in the multi-family area.
Mr. Peplow wanted assurance that there will not be additional higher densit~? housing as
development moves to the west. Mr. Cline said this site abuts some industrial uses.-
- ~Mr: Cline-said the pool and club house will-be~moved away from Avery~Road. =The club house
will be all brick, and it is a sales feature so it will be at the entrance, not centralized.
Mr. Cline said the overall density will be 5.09 duJac.. It was noted that the Community .Plan
recommends 2 du/ac. -
::Ms: Chinnici-Zuercher said page 6 of the text~tates~this-swill':bethesite~lan~fo~themulti-family
development; :but Mr:°Cline :has ~-said :the site plan7.is~flexible-~She~asked~for~larification.M~
Mr:-.
'Cline-said he~would accepts-condition amending the text~on this-point and the adherence to the
Dublin Lighting Guidelines.
John Samson, 5611 Avery Road, asked for the Commission to pass this rezoning.
Mr. Cline said he has met with all of the southwest area civic associations and residents, and he
said it was significant that no residents were present to speak against this rezoning tonight.
-Mr. Talentino said masonry does not insuregood design. ~He said staff is uncomfortable with a
;:-:higher density than.the:Community.Plan:recommends, except.for.a.xruly:exceptional_project. lvir:...
Talentino was unaware of future plans for development of the areas to the-west; and he had not--
- been invited to any of the neighborhood -meetings...He received two calls from Rings Road
residents who were concernedabout the density and buffering.. Ms. Pierce had spoken with two
Council. members who ~ expressed concern with this rezoning .plan,° however they will review it
later. '
..i
Bud-Pettit; 6236 Rings Road; said he had called Mr,•~-alentinor~I~e,~said~the~plan~fias:continuously - -
- been modified regarding size and density. He has been concerned about a buffer.
Mr. McCash sees this area as difficult to develop due to the industrial influences. He does not
think-it°will evolve into multi-family use in the future. ~ He did not see single-family use abutting
xhat .area. as ,a .logical use..,He is comfortable with this density, -.and he feels .that .this. site will
buffer the areas to the west for lower density development... He remains concerned: about _the .
layout near the front and some issues in the development text. He hoped these could be addressed
in a motion and resolved prior to the City Council hearing. He has conversed with the local civic
associations and Council member Greg Peterson, and he has not heard any opposition. He was
unaware of opposition by any members of City Council.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
bublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -March 19, 1998
Page 7
Mr. Sprague said Dublin does not oppose multi-family use, and there are hundreds of additional
apartments zoned and others the pipeline. He said the proposed density substantially exceeds the
recommended density of the Community Plan, as they were discussed and debated prior to
adoption. He said the goal is to maintain a high quality level for development in this area.. He
opposes increases in density because of increased traffic. Local roads are already over stressed.
Rings Road is projected to have low intensity development. He thinks further industrial
development is not likely, eliminating the need for amulti-family buffer. Iie ..thinks the
:w ~ Community d'lan density levels are achievable.: ~ He :has spoken:~vith~Mr:::LecklideLand several ,
members ofCity Council, and: they expressed concern about the proposed density..He said Mr..
Cline is a fine development attorney, but he must oppose this application. ~
Mr.-Peplow said the density issue as been debated extensively::He~supports the Community Plan
`~density:leveLs:-He~°believes-theydensityshould:be;lower~~than•.atHeather~len.~and:~hearea west
Hof-Avery~Road is not.the place to deviate frrom:the:Plan:if~3ow>deasity~~hegoal~s:~ievelopment
~:moves:viestward:Hesaidsome changes•are~needed~#ache.~ct~s:~discussed~.y~l~ir-McCash.: .
-He-cannot?support~the~ingle ors.multi=familyplans~as presented: •
Mr: Ferrara'said this site is difficult due.to the•neighboring uses,:but thinks.ahis.may be subject
'to change: ~.He.doesnot think thesouthwest:area-should be experimental;-it~should,be.a normal
Dublinneighborhood: • However; -.this density :will set a negative .precedent :because it is not in line .
with the CommunityPlan. ~-There are opportunities. to grow ~ new; :good: neighborhoods.- He
appreciated Mr. Cline's verbal concessions, but he is uncomfortable that they are not in the
written text.
..Ivis.- Chinnici-Zuercher said. the January review. of this project yielded fewer,density concerns from _
-the~Commissioners~.than~have.beenverbalized tonight..She understood,:ahroughahe:Community.. -
- ; : •Plan-hearings and documentation; that.Dublin will have adequate multi-family housing without.
adding .this site. Her concern was that. this ~ area is being planned in a piecemeal way.: • She said
- ~ the application that -remains is -.too .cloudy- for. a vote. There.are conflicting .documents, .and the
. ,commitments from Mr. Cline are not in writing: the Community:Plan is newly adopted,:and.this: .
• conflicts with it. She was unclear. as to the proposal-~.eing~nesented~or.~ote:~-She noted the .
staff is recommending disapproval.
-Mr.' Ferrara thought it was inappropriate for the Commission to edit the text this evening. ~He -
~-thoughtthisshould be-done.through the.staff; and it should be clear.before a Commission vote.
~Mr: Cline said the revisions discussed include the multi-family.-layout and the. lighting .guidelines.
Mr.Ferrara said there were other issues also, such as reconfiguring the 193-foot deep lots. Mr
-Cline said Rings Road access .point(s) .and perhaps acombined-.access ~ for :both_areas_will _-be:
included, if necessary. Mr. Cline said many of the 20 .issues in the staff report are not
substantive.
Mr. McCash said the density and the multi-family issues can be handled at City Council. He
made a motion to approve this rezoning with three conditions:
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -March 19, 1998
Page 8
1) That prior to submission to Council, that the applicant review the possibilities of creating
shared or common access point(s) along Rings Road, utilizing a similar concept to that shown
in staff-generated Alternate B, and that the layout be subject to approval by the Planning and
Zoning Commission at the final development review;
2) That Lot 61 be eliminated or specific areas be widened to allow better community access to
a commons area at the interior lots similar the multi-family village green concept;
3) lfiat prior to the submission to Council, the applicant revise the development text to reflect
the;issues~:andconcerns expressed:by-members of the Commission,:and..to the.:maximum.extent::
feasible, . with..the issues and concerns that the staff raised in its report.
_..Ms::Chinnici-Zuercherseconded the.motion... Mr._Cline agreed to the.above conditions.
- ~1~Is.~:Fiercesaid xhat~taff~:prepared-a~-set of.30 possible conditions:fortheriCc~mmission's.use, and ` -
the following list was distributed:
~.1) ~~That-project densityybelowesed.consistent withathe~ecommendations.nf~themmunity Plan
.2): That.:the»:site~plan~e~°reconfigured.~to providexa ~~more: neoatraditionalxrievelopment~pattern.
including: ~ alleys,~links to surrounding.properties, blending between-multi- and single-family
- .areas;andemphasis•on.the pedestrian scale such as orienting-:garage ~doors.away .from streets
to..limit creation:of "garage streets";
3) ..That-additional vehicular:oonnections beprovided from .the single-family _area to the north and
east;
4) That lots abutting the western and northern property lines meet the R-2, Limited Suburban
Residential District development standards including a minimum width of 100 feet, a
minimum area of 10,000 square feet, 8-foot side yard, 20-foot combined side yard;
5) .That .the .plan create visual.interest-in. street design :by :encouraging. boulevard design and _ _
pedestrian friendly streets;
6) That:.the ~ snix of ..housing .types =be unified through shared open space .and through direct -
pedestrian and vehicular connections;
- :.7) ~:That.theAvery..Road building~and:parking.etbacks be increased to 150 feet from centerline,..
and be extensively landscaped, subject to .staff approval;
8) That the.required park land be shown •on the~ianand;fieacceptableao~.taEf;--::.
9 Thata:com letelandsca lan ~.includin ananvento . ;.oflar e.trees,~a~r reservation lan
P Pe P~ g ry g ~ P
. .15-foot-minimum buffers along the adjacent:indastziaLvses~~si~erlandscaping-within
the~Avery~Road setback be submitted at meets Code and is acceptable to staff;
10) That .existing trees .be protected ..with .fencing .(placed at least.l5..feet .from .the .trunks) .prior
to and during all phases of construction with field verification by staff;
11) - -That the plan be revised to incorporate the Avery Road (62 feet from centerline at the north
....end nf.thesite and 66.feet at the.south end) and.Rings Road_(35 feet from.centerline) rights-
- ~ - of--way consistent with ..the. Thoroughfare Plan, and that an easement.and aright-of--way
dedication plat be submitted prior to construction;
12) That the entire length of Rings Road extended be completed prior to issuance of 80 % of
occupancy permits for the multi-family area, or within five years of final development plan
approval of same;
13) That the plan state a minimum lot size for the single-family area; Standard condition]
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -March 19, 1998
Page 9
14) That the applicant demonstrate the developability of the single-family lots, with example
house and deck footprints in compliance with development standards, to the satisfaction of
staff;
15) That any single-family building elevation visible from Rings Road extended be
architecturally pleasing to the same degree as the front elevation;
16) That no build zones be defined and shown on plan;
17) That all buildings in the multi-family area including garages have a minimum o€ 70 percent
masonry on each facade;
~18) ~ That exterior •building •materials be of equal quality on all sides of each building;
= ~ 19) That he applicant submit scaled building elevation .drawings for.the multi-family area;
20) That phasing for all development be shown;
. 21) ~ Zhat if the multi-family portion is phased, the Samson structure be removed within the first
phase;
• 22) -That documentation supporting the proposed_~eduction~:in>~flode~equired- parking be
provided, subject to staff approval;
23) ~~That•fencingrestrictions be~amended:to'prohibit-masonry~and~that-detaiis-be:shown-on:the
plan;
24) ..That-a:notebe~added to~theplan indicating.future crossing~of Cramer.Ditch with connection
to Rings Road to the south;
. _25) .:.That a°forced .and :funded :homeowner's association be established. for all residential areas;
26) That jargon be eliminated from the text;
27) That the text be amended to include everything that is missing including but not limited to:
architectural standards, aesthetic considerations along public rights-of-way, single-family lot
standards, landscaping commitments, tree preservation commitments, homeowner's
=association :responsibilities,.-.Avery..Road..setbacks, .future:..road connections, :..fencing.
restrictions and details, -and no build zone definitions and locations;
28) That the text and plan be in agreement;
29) That all -city:;requirements be met on .design of public roads, private .drives, public and
private utilities, and storm water management;
30) That a plan which incorporates all of the changes required above be submitted within two
weeks.
Mr. McCash suggested taking five minutes.to review:~he~cc~nditions~uggested~y~tafft-prior to
voting, and the other members agreed. A recess was then taken.
Mr. McCash reviewed the above conditions. He said Conditions 1-4 should be deleted and
replaced with the three conditions :given 'in his original motion. Condition 5 .should remain;
Condition 6 should be deleted; Conditions 7 and 8 should remain; Conditions 9 and 10 should .
be combined; and Conditions 11 through 30 should remain.
Mr. Cline could not commit to completion of the Rings Road extension within five years of the
final development plan approval. He questioned the necessity of demonstrating the developability
of the lots. Ms. Fierce said it is a common requirement to show that no variances will be needed.
Example footprints were required for Kendall Ridge and some of Wyndham Village.
99-041Z
_ Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -March 19, 1998
Page 10
Randy Asmo, the applicant, said the houses would be in the $200,000 range and would be on
standard Dublin lots. He agreed to submit typical house footprints, but he will not agree to alleys
and detached garages. Mr. McCash said it should be demonstrated that a standard Dublin house
with a deck could be built on these lots, and prior to City Council. Ms. Fierce said staff
recommends compliance with all conditions prior to setting the Council hearing.
Mr. Cline said he could not meet the 70 pero°nt minimum masonry. on each facade: ~Mr. McCash
:~asked:if-~the~design:of the multi-family..buildings,~.including~garages,~was subjectao~mmissionM
~~review at the #inal development~stage. ••Mr. ~Cline~said•yes:~Ms:~-Fierce•said70 percent-masonry
on each facade~was:required:forMariin Commons and Heather Glen North multi-family-projects. ~ ~
.Mr:Cline.said..that.:may.:not..be:.oonsistent with neo-traditional concepts, which often include many _
:materials. ~~Ms..Eiercesaid no example had been shown-how the material mve:would apply~to this
•site. iVlr.:. Cline said the textgives wide.discretion .to the Commission.., - .
There:-was discussion of~whether.the text~should~reference0,;petc~ent~nasonry"~or~"af~ieast 50
.percent:masonry.:"•:=rIt~was~voncluded that.the~t~exttshouid•read:-__~a°muumum~af~d~trcent•masonry:
This was accepted by Mr. Asmo.
Mr.~ Cline said .they cannot:provide~architecture at~this:time. Mr. Banchefsky~said the architecture
.:and aesthetics .can be deferred, but only if the. applicant is committing to-defer this phase of review
. ~ ~ Ito:..the ..final development-.:plan stage. Mr: Cline: agreed; _~and ~he agreed- that the .designs of ahe
multi-family buildings will all be subject to review and approval by the Commission.
Mr. McCash said Conditions 12, 20, and 21 need to be completed prior to the Council hearing.
. Mr. Cline said Conditioa 22 would be. a problem because the tenant mix is .not determined.. Mr.
..:..::Asmo.said he will:tneet the=pazking~:Code:(2.Sspaces per unit); but he.thought every.
one_wanted
to; eliminate -all unneeded .asphalt. Mr. Cline :said the 2.5 parking spaces per unit could be
demonstrated now one the plan. Mr. McCash -asked .that "...prior to -final development plan
review,subject to Commission review" be added to Condition 22. Mr. Cline agreed.
For Condition 23,. Mr. .Cline agreed to amend the;textto:<remov~~e£erences~a~masonry. fences.
:<Regazding:Condition 24; Ms. Fierce said the>planshouid~o~c:~~roposedR;c~nneationto Rings
Road to the west (Thomas). She said a note was being requested on the plan.- Mr. Cline agreed.
Mr. McCash said staff needed meet with Mr..Cline regarding his Condition 3: "That the
...:.applicant revise.its development text to reflect the issues and concerns expressed by Commission",
and to resolve and remove the jazgon in Condition 26.
Randy Bowman stated for the record that there is a public sanitary sewer that needs to be extended
across Avery Road to the western boundary of this site. The developer needs to extend a 20-inch
water line across Avery Road and then south to the property line. Stormwater management
regulations need to be applied to this project site. Areas where the roadway is less than 32 feet
wide should be provided with "no parking" restrictions on one side of the road. Avery Road
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(rormerly Avery Village Commons)
`Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -March 19, 1998
Page 11
needs widening to provide for left turn stacking and widening is necessary on the north and south
sides of Rings Road to account for the change in pavement width and the also for the east side of
Avery Road onto Rings Road.
Mr. McCash suggested that the phrase "within two weeks" in Condition 30 be removed and
replaced with "prior to submission to Council".
Ms.;Chinnici-Zuercher~pointed out:that Case.3was :tabled~xonight:for.the`jexact~season°~that`:fhree.
hours have been spent reviewing.this rase. She said~this~workshould have•been done ~etween,the
applicants and: staff prior ~to coming.-before the Commission. ~ This is not ;the Commission's
:function: ~-Ms.<:Chinnici-Zuercher said-this>method is~ very. painful for all concerned, .and it;is
important for the Commission to avoid this in the future.
Mr:~MeCash amended his_ motion~for approvalto.:~include~the~xrliouv~ngr~~~aondifion~=~_
1) ~ ~ ~:T~hat:ashared•aocess point•be~shownon~Rings•:i{toai~,~ex#ended..~(as~shc~vvn~n~Sta~£ternative~ _ .
;~);~priorto:-submission:to ~City~:Council~ and~~subject^xa~Commissron'~revievv~vith~the Final
development plan;
- 2) - -°That~Lot- 61 ~be eliminated to provide common or .village green area similar to the multi-
. family village green concept;
3) .That prior.to submission to Council, the .text be revised to reflect the concerns and issues of
the Commission and Staff;
4) That the plan create visual interest in street design by encouraging boulevard design and
pedestrian friendly streets;
5) That-the Avery Road building and parking setbacks be increased to 150 feet from centerline,
and be extensively landscaped, subject to staff approval;
6) ,That the required :park land be shown on the plan sand be; acceptable to staff;
- That,the applicant meet with staff the .applicant on site to identify existing. trees. and to
prepare a tree preservation plan for Council review; -
8) : - That. the plan .be revised. to incorporate-the. Avery. Road {62 feet~from-centerline at the north
end of the site and 66 feet at the south end) and Rings Road (35-feet from centerline). rights-
~of-way; .consistent :with the ~Thoroughfare?Planwand:~ithat~n~~asement~and~ght-of-way
dedication plat be submitted prior to construction;
9) ~ ~ That~the.entire~:iength of Rings-Road extended sbe~cumpleted~prin~ta~issuan~f~0 percent
of occupancy permits for the multi-family area;
10) -That the plan state a minimum lot size for the single-family area;
11) -That the applicant demonstrate the developability of the single-family lots prior to
submission to Council, with example house and -deck footprints in compliance with
development standards, to the satisfaction of staff;
12) That any ~ single-family- building -elevation visible fromRings -Roadextended ~ be
architecturally pleasing to the same degree as the front elevation;
13) That no build zones be defined and shown on plan;
14) That all buildings in the multi-family area, including garages have a minimum of 50 percent
masonry on each facade;
15) That exterior building materials be of equal quality on all sides of each building;
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
~M
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission '
Minutes -March 19, 1998 '
Page 12
16) That the applicant submit scaled building elevations for the multi-family area at final
development plan review;
17) That phasing for all development be shown;
18) That if the multi-family portion is phased, the Samson structure be removed within the first
phase,
19) That documentation supporting the proposed reduction in Code-required parking be provided
prior to final development review, subject to staff approval; -
20) That .fencing -details be-shown on~•the plan.and that restrictions be amended to.prohibit
masonry;
21) That a note be added to the plan indicating a future crossing of Cramer Ditch with
connection to Rings Road to the south;
22) That a forced and funded homeowners association be established for all residential areas;
23) That jargon be eliminated from the text;
24) -That the text beamended?to~nclude:~ev~rything~~tha~tj~is:missing :including~u~t~t3i~ited to:
architectural:standards;
{aesthetic~onsiderationsaalong-~ublic~rights=o~~a~=~°si8glmly. lot
standards, landscaping °lcommitments tree' *pfeservation - commitments; °~homeawners
association responsibilities, Avery Road setbacks, future road connections, fencing
restrictions and details, and no build zone definitions and locations;
25) That the text and plan be in agreement;
2~ That all city requirements be met on design of public roads, private drives, public and
private utilities, and storm water management; and
27) That a plan which incorporates all of the changes required above be submitted prior to being
scheduled for Council.
Mr. Asmo was aware of all of the engineering issues. Mr. McCash said the Engineering concerns
should be addressed by the applicant prior to Council.
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher seconded the amended motion as presented above. Mr. Cline agreed with
the above conditions, and the vote was as follows:
Mr. Sprague, no.
Mr. Peplow, no. He~said dte~+was~unha~py.~wth~he+edensity. ~He said was~~doing Fthe job<he ;was
appointed to do, and this does not meet the intent of the Community Plan.
Mr. Ferrara, yes. He said these issues had been previously discussed.
Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, no. She has worked very hard for four years so that the Commission does
not conduct business in the manner used tonight. She said there were too many conflicts, and the
final application contents were unclear to her.
Mr. McCash, yes. He said the whole issue was density, and Council needs to make the decision.
(Disapproved 2-3; the motion to approve this rezoning failed.). `The application will be forwarded
to Council with a negative recommendation)
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
' RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Meetin
eetuut ,ne
Hel 19 i'
_
the other side of the sto L
' Mr. Helwig Comm that a decision will likely be made by 'd-year, and the timing is I
~ in lino with the other rojects underway in Old Dublin. I
~
Mr. Smith clarified t the City has not signed any tease f the property and is under no ~
legal obligation to the property to the prrferrod can data -
Mrs. Bo ' no that
j; rrng perhaps the alternate applicant ld be accommodated in another
i; bur~ding in Old ub]in.
Mr. McCash r nded.that Mr. Shaw has investigat this option, but found no other
witable butt. ' in Old Dublin.
Mayor wnuttarized that this w~71 r as a staff duetted project until mid-
Junes At t limey Couna'1 can give fiuther co ' oration to this matter.
i+
a
noted that exeartive sauioais aclteduled:tontght .
. for ors. He asked if this is a matter vexed under th
p e Suashute htw:
Mr. S replied that the session is schedul for discussion of pending or threatened -
litigati n in accordance with the Sunshine 1a .
Mr. er noted that a surveyor has on his property doing work for the bike th
alo Dublin Road: He has just become a of the enormity of the devastation w 'ch I:
' occur all along Dublin Road with th bike path construction, He wonders ifr dents
aware of the plans for the path. He rged Council to ride down Dublin Road d ~
' e the aesthetic impact of a s cut 20 feet from the centerline of Dublin cad. i'
Mr. Helwig stated that the design be done during 1998 and a review time be set I;
for Council and for the community Funding is not in place for construction rho bike j
path at this times The goal is to seruitive to rho preservation of the en ' ent along I
this scenic roadway. - ;
i~ ~
n Mrs. Boring asked staff to a that Mr. Maurer is sent a notice when a review session '
is estabiishcd for the plan. j
Staff Comm ntc
ML.~mith asked that Ordi ce 34-98 and Resolution 35-98 be tabl for two weeks.
Legal staff received a rig of entry today from State Savings and th are continuing to
negotiate with them.
x Ecx~ ATr(1N
i
~i Ordinance No. 42- - An Ordinance Extending the Time arntr Communications ~
Franchise Agree nt. (Previously Tabled) i
Mr. Helwig noted at staffis recommending defeat of this o dinance as discussed at the
last meeting.
' - Mr. Adam
ek, no; Ms. Hide Pittal a, no; Mr. Peterson, no; Mr.
McCash, no; s. Boring, no; Mr. Reiner, no; Mayor stuber, no.
Ordinance No. 01-97(Ameadtd) - An Ordinance Providing for a Change in Zoning
" ~ ~ for 64.225 Acres Of Land Located On The West Sido Of Avery Road and Rings ~
Road, From: R-1B, Restricted Suburban Residential District; PIP, Planned
Industrial Park District; And EU, Exceptiurtal Use District (Washington Township
Classifications) to: PUD, Planned Unit De~•elopment District. (Avery Village
Commons) (Applicant: (John Samson, 5611 Avery Rd, Dublin, Ohio 43016; U'baldo and
Anna M. Monaco, 5949 Sinclair Rd, Columbus, Ohio 43229; Mid-States Development
Co, do Randy Asmo, 5729 Avery Rd., Dublin, Ohio 43016; represented by Christopher
T. Cline, attorney, Blaugrund, Herbert & Marlin, 54SS Rings Road, Suite 500, Dublin,
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
~ (Formerly Avery Village Commons)
KtC:UKD OF PROCEEDINGS '
Minutes of Meetin
atmg age
Held p fay11 1998 19 I'
' 1
Ohio 4301
i
1
l~ Ms. Chu9ce stated the site consists of 64 acres on the west side of Avery Road and north
~I ofRings Road. This property is recognized as a recreational and party facility that has
1+ access from Rings Road. There is also a single fiunily home, some vacant aaeage and a
couple of industrial lots on the sift. The proposal is to rezone the property to PUD fora l
combination of single family and multi-family housing. The proposal includes 71 single I -
Ij family lots, and 256 apartments with a parkland of about 16 acres. The Planning
Commission heard this case several tunes, and it has ban revised numerous tunes. On
March 18, 1998, the motion made by the Conunission was to approve the application with
27 conditions, but that motion failed. According to the Law Director, this action was ~ vr~'
effectively a recommendation to Courua7 of disapproval
She then showed slides of the site and surrounding area.
Mr. Smith confirmed that five votes are Waded tonight to overrule the recommendation '
from the P18zming Commission I
Ms. Clarke noted that the planners provided two altcrnativcs to the applicant which they7:: ~ j
j ' bdieve rovidod better co~ormance with the -
J P Comnwnity Plan and the SauW~vest Area
Plan The ~3' planners' goal was to provide conrtections in all directions ~beuuse •staff
believes that the rest of this area wdl most likdy develop residentially City staff
suggested saving the party barn, and haling larger lots along the western and northern
perimeters to lessen the density, especially next to the adjoining properties which may 1
devdop in the future. The Community Plan apeafies a maximum of two units per sae in
;I density. The yield on the parkland is lower than that indicated in the devdoper•s
I° application. Staff believes that the 27 conditioru in the Record of Action would ruult in a
much better plan that what is on the table. However, the applicant must bring to Council
the same plan which was presented to Planning Commission. ~i
,I
Mayor ICranstuber invited Council to bring any questions for staff to the table at this time. III
1
Mrs. Boring stated.that she does not understand why two separate land uses are combined i
to compute density on this proposal ~
~ Ms. Clarice responded tltat PUD's have been administered this way overtime. For ~ -
example, the Eariington Plan included the multi-family units at Asherton Asherton's
i density is actually between S and 6 units pcr•auq .but the overall density for the Earlington I
PUD is 3.18 units per acre. The overall number includes the apartments as well. PUD acts ~
as a big umbrella. The overall density for this proposal of 327 dwelling units is 5.09 units {
per acre. The density is not broken down for the two uses. The concept plan was
approved with tho-wndition that. the overall density be 4 units per acre or Icss. I
i
rr
In response to Mr. Adamek, Ms. Clarke clarified that City staff srecommendation-was to
' disapprove this application. However, if the Planning Commission's intent was to -approve
I) . it, staff fdt that the plan could be improved with the 30 conditions provided inthe staff
I~ report. The Conunissiorr then motioned for approval with 27 conditions.
I
Mr. McCash pointed out that the meeting at the Commission regarding this application
was very convoluted with lengthy discussion and much confusion.
i'
Ms. Clarke pointed out that it is unuwal for staff to recommend disapproval, because by
the end of the PUD process, there is generally a product that staff will support. In this
case, the essential problem remained the density which is basis number one for
disapproval. The Community Plan states this area should have a maximum density of 2 li
uniu per acre. There will not be a compdGng argument for maintaining a lower density
for the next piece of property if the higher density is allowed on this one. It seas a bad i~
precedent for the area. Staff also believes that other standards should be added for the
single family area.
;i
Chris Cline. 5455 Rings Road. attorney r~resenting the aR li ants prosonled renderings
99-0412
Rezoning Application
- - Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
' RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Meetin
n y
Held ~~yst, 199.8 t g .
i
• li
of this project to Council. He noted that the Planning Commission process was unfair to
the applicant as staff did not share the 30 conditions with the applicant prior to the
hearin It was difficult for the a licant to res nd uickl to these I
g• PP Po Q Y Changes on a S25
~i million project. He noted that the project is composed of four tracts of land. The
applicant purchased the Samson piece at the City's urging in order to solve a problem of w
an orphaned single family house sitting on Avery Road. He emphasized that the existing r
zoning allows for intense industrial zoning, irrduding outside storage. The Avery Road ~ ~
intensity also impacts the potential use of the lard. The trailer park to the south also -
°°F impacts the use for this ro The 'etxiv theref'
I; P P~Y• Pig ~1 es, ore, were to mnurrnze the
industrial influence, to avoid the trailer park, and to achieve usable tingle family on the
existing party house ground. Councl's recent direction to staffto limit density formulti- I~
r family to 5 units per aae affected this application. The multi-famt~y in ilus plan provides a
buffer and transition to the single famdy. Detar'Is of the development will be spocifial in
the final development plan. They have included some elements of neo-traditional design in
•tire multi-famr~y aria. The tetback was inarasod to 60 feet along Rings Road u staffs . :
~ direction. Tire setbacks needed on the project along AvecyRoad•reduoethe useable land.
The srngle family homes wr71 cost between S 180-200,000 :with GS fooC:bts along thesouth
side. The t~ty has always calculated the single and:muhi family densityxogetherur older::- -
to force a 25:percent parkand dedication out of the.entire parcel. It is not fair-for thc'City
to look at ~ ` ~ I
~ density one way for parkland computation and another way for zoning. Hrs best estimate
of the density of each use is 7.2 units per acxe for the multi-family and 2.ti for the single ~
family. The plan complies completely with the adopted Southwest Area Plan.
3~ He noted that they will agree as a condition to construct the single family first if that is ji
Council's preference. They are also willing~to provide a stub road to the north 1
He added that the plan assembled by staffwould necessitate building 5400,000 homes and
those are not feasible. They also will work out the parking for the multi-family in the final ii
~ development plan. ~ I
-
1 Robert S. Davis Md States Devclonment stated that their goal is to bring a development I
to the City which is economically feasible and which is appropriate. They have been asked
~ to:. donate 16 arxes of parkand valued in access of 5750,000; keep the overall density at ~
5 or below, pay for a no load road which will save as a major artery for the City; and '
solve the problem with the Samson piece. They have redesigned the development several
times. They were asked to provide access to the nosh and complied. They were asked to
I downzone the manufacturing land and they are trying to do that: They wcxe 5nally asked ,
to redesign the entire development in the last 90 days. At this point, if they are not grvcn ~
- the zonurg, they will have no choice but to develop the presently zoned industrial lots for '
manufacxuring and retain the clubhouse as such.. He asked .Council to give than-favorable
consideration. J
~
Melissa Davie_ 104 Bro•rmingSourt. Dublin stated thatshe manages..thcDublin.:Clubhouse
' and ~cnic ounds. The have been antici t' a than a ~in use forthe ass two
P 8r Y Pa mg g p .years, .
and they are anxious to find out what will happen with the property. She is excited that ~
the clubhouse will be incorporated into a larger plan.
John Fitzsimmons 6365 •ngc Road stated that he supports approval of this rezoning.
r•
Ms. Hide Pittaluga stated: ;
1. She has recently returned from out of town and apologized that she could not
return calls from Mr. Cline or from Mr. Davis.
2. As a matter of public record, she disclosed that Mr. Cline drafted articles of
incorporation for "Safe America" - anon-profit corporation she btgan last year. .
He did this as a public service, and there is no equity intuest involved in a non-
profit. She does not believe it is necessary to remove herself from the vote this
• turning.
3. In tams of density, would it be possible to reduce the density in lieu of donating
parkland?
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
• RECORD OF PROCEEOtNGS
Minutes of Meetin
un age
7i
Held ,hria3r~l,1Q9g 19
I
Mr. Cline responded that the paridand ~is already included in the density computation. j
However, if the City would agree to pay for part of the roadway, that could help in
j reducing the density by lowering the developer's costs for the project. This would not be
I) consisterrt with Dublin's goal of having developers pay for infiastnrdure .
4. She Ir7ces the~project as opposed to the ahernative industrial use, howevu she
I stroagty supports Councd's previous policy direction regarding density and would
be concerned with setting a different precedent.
1' Mrs. Boring indicated she has no questions for the applicant.
Mr. Reiner noted the same. !
l
Mr. Peterson asked when the construction would begin if the plans were approved
ii
. •Mr. Cline responded that the single family would be constructed as soon as thaclubhouse . .
contracts have expirrod..The single family would be;doae in two phases nver;xbout 2-1/2
. years, deparding upon sales. The end date for ust of
the clubhouse is ~vfarch 31;.1999.
Mr. McCash stated that he has no fuNrer questions at this -time.
' Mayor ICrarrsirrber invited Mr. Cline to address the school district issue. .
n
.j Mr. Cline stated that this land was annexed to Dublin and is in the Hilliard School District. ,
i. They are trying to change the school district to Dubfin. He urged the City to become
more proactive in pursuing this change.
i~
~j Mr. Smith added that the City has little influence with the State Board of Education and
this is a difficult issue for elites, school districts and developers to resolve. The
7 ' Community Plan includes language regarding all of Dublin's land being included in the ~
Dublin school district.
At this point, Mayor Kranstuber closed the pubfic hearing and invited Council manbers io
make that comments prior to the vote.
i
j Mr. Adamck commented that Council has talked adensively about density issues and this i
j~ whole case comes down to a density issue. He has indicated informally that he supports l .
~ e 5.0 formulti-family, but this case merits some exceptional consideration in view of the ~ ~
' t land to the north, and because of the additional 8 acres of parkland being
- _ donated. He believes that this plan wnforms with what is already in.phice in.this area.
The residerrts of the area support this rezoning as it will eliminate the possible°industrial i.r
use for the land. Therefore, he is in favor of this rezoning.
~ Mr. Rdnerstated that he supportsthe Planning and Zoning Commission`tiand thc~City staff •
recommendation. There is not enough modification in this plan to merit changing the
I; Planning Commission's decision by overruling them. He doesn't believe that this area will ~
be developed with industrial use in view of the City's investment in the area and upgrading
of Avery Road. The City is not prepared to invest additional monies in infrastructure in
this arcs at this time which impaus the density issue for this proposal. In terms of neo-
traditional design, this plan does not remotely resemble anything related to a neo-
traditional village. In summary, the density is too high. He will not vote in favor of this ~
application.
Mrs. Boring stated that this proposal causes her great concern. Shc does not believe that
this is the best proposal which will come forward for this land. A commitment was made
to the community in the adopted Plan that the ratio ofmulti-family to tingle family would
be hold to a reasonable rate. She is concerned with the proliferation ofmulti-family. Sho I;
believes that Council's credibility is on the line tonight -they have direcxcd staff and
Planning Commission to demand lowu density and less multi-family and this is Council's
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
• (Formerly Avery Village Commons)
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Meetin
u t y un age
Held aia}r e, t ooR ig j
first test. She will support Planning Commission's recommendation of disapproval. i
it ~ Mr. McCash pointed out that when the concept plan was brought to Counal, the entire
project was multi-family. He voted against it at that time, and Mrs. Boring voted in favor
of the concept plan.
Mrs. Boring clatfied that they were proposed as owner ocwpied, and the
recommendation at the time was for s lower density. -
Mr. McCash stated that Council cannot dictate owner ocarpied or rental with their zoning
~ action. He voted
against th4 original concept plan due to the poor layout. The plan has
II bees modified see that time, with multi-family located near the industrial as a buffer.
The huh will never be used as office in vices of the land cost; if anything, it would likely be !
commercial and retad. Mr. Cline met with the southwest residents and there was no I .
strong opposition to the plan, but only coacaas about the mix of uses and the need for a
buffer of multi-fanu7y as a tcattsitionai use. He supported the motion at ~'lanaing. - .
Coaunission.to approve the plan. There was much cor~±sioa ~Yhe'Mat+ch=meeting~tlue to
the pending membaslup dtange of the Commission and thadebaa about the 30 ~ >
I conditions. He is is favor of the rezoning and will vote accordingly.
Ms. Hide Pittaluga indicated that she
believes it is important to adhere to the density
standards set in the Conununity Plan. She will not be able to support this application
based upon traffic considerations and the density issue.
Mr. Peterson stated that he has struggled with this issue, and spent the weekend reviewing i
tj the Southwest Area Plan, the Conununity Plan, and reading through the P & Z minutes
and staff reports. Ile believes there arc two significant issues: the school issue, for which ~
there is no good solution at this ttme, and the density issue. Council disaused an overlay
district for the southwest arts at the recent goal setting session. He believes the City
needs to assess the status of the southwest arcs, revisit what is planned, and d'uect
additional capital improvement dollars there, so that future development will not impact
the quality of ~o for those already living in that area. For these reasons, he cannot
support this rezoning. .
Mayor Kranstuber noted that it is obvious that there are not enough votes to support the
f proposal $e has concerns about what will happen if this rezoning is turned down. Is j
1 there any possibility of striding this back to Planning Commission for further modification? ~
j !
Mr. McCash responded that the issue at P&Z came down to one of density. The
Community.Plan specifies l to 2 in this area. That is the aitical•issue and one which
Council alone can resolve.
Mr. Cline commented that they had assembled what they.thoughtwas•agood~plan and
• I thry met with the residents in the area.. There has been no testimonyinnpposition to the
. 'I proposal.
';I Mr. Peterson clarified that he attended the meeting with the residents. His impression was
' this was the first time the plan was being reviewed by the residents, and they were not II
~ asked to make a decision about their support at that time. It was presented as a solution '1
to mitigate the eyesore of the industrial.uses above it. He has not been personally told by
any residents that they support this project. , ',i
~ At this point, Mrs. Boring called the question. ~ ,
Vote on the ordinance - Mr. Reiner, no; Mrs. Boring, no; Mr. McCash, yes; Mayor ' ~ 1
• ICranstuber, yes; Ms. Hide Pittaluga, no; Mr. Adamek, yes; Mr. Pearson, no. ` ~lp-
Ordin net 10-98(Amtnded) - An Ordin net Providing for a Change i ning for Ij
3.818 Acres Located Approximately 50 Feet East of Avery Road, fro :PCD, j;
Pla eel Commerce District, to: PCD Tanned Commerce District. erimeter i
Ce ter Plan) (Perimeter Center Sub rea I -Crown Mercedes Deal hip, 6400
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
_ _ .
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
June 17, 1999
tNristoa of Hlaaidag
5800 Sf~-tangs Road
tlai~in, 0ha 43016-123b
oone/tDO: 61 ~-761 X550
Paz: 614-161-6566
k6 Site: www.du6Gn.oh.us
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
1. Rezoning Application 99-041Z - Preliminary Development Plan - Cramer's
Crossing (formerly known as Avery Village Commons)
Location: 55.5 acres located on the west side of Avery Road, north of Rings Road.
Existing Zoning: R-1B, Restricted Suburban Residential District and EU, Exceptional
Use District (Washington Township classifications).
Request: Review and approval of a preliminary development plan under the PUD
provisions of Section 153.056.
Proposed Use: A development of 92 single-family lots, 68 condominium units and
9.91 acres of park.
Applicant: Mid-States Development Corporation and 18 Acre Avery Road Ltd., c/o S.
Robert Davis, 5720 Avery Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016; and Rockford Homes, Inc., c/e
Donald Wick, 999 Polaris Parkway, Columbus, Ohio 43240; represented by
Christopher T. Cline, 5455 Rings Road, Suite 500, Dublin, Ohio 43017. tw
MOTION: To table this application as requested by Mr. Cline.
VOTE: 7-0.
RESULT: After a lengthy discussion, this case was tabled as requested. Issues of concern
included density, lot sizes, setbacks, pedestrian and vehicular connections, quality of building
materials, architectural standards and diversity, a commitment to complete the construction of
the entire Rings Road extension, and perimeter landscaping.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
hn D. Talentino
Planner
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
' ~ Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -June 17, 1999
Page 2
Mr. lecklider noted that Case 1 previously unteered its slot so that Cardinal Health cou
be heard. He wanted to honor the promi to hear that case first tonight. He said Case is
not a "reconsideration"; it had been di proved with no appeal filed. Mr. Talentino s ' only
the architecture of the connector is ing heard. Jennifer Dutey said it is not tec 'tally a
"reconsideration"; the applicant n s to meet the previously imposed requirement
Paul Ghidotti, Daimler Gro ,said he is in a similar situation with Case 9. torm and sewer
easements are needed gh the Thomas Elementary School's soccer d baseball fields.
The schools are very perative, but the work has to be complete by gust.
Mr. McCash ask why applications are not heard in order by number. Ms. Clarke said
the agenda is sually arranged on the basis of the most co lete, those that are the most
"ready tog , or those that have known time constraints.
Mr. 'an said he hoped to heaz this case, but he no the Commission does not do its best
wo at 1:30 a.m. Several others agreed, but giv the caseload, they were not optimistic.
r. Eastep noted that the agenda is published, residents use it to schedule their appearance
fore the Commission. Staff noted that an e rgency meeting could be scheduled on 24-ho
notice. Ms. Clarke said that if the Co on defers action on one of tonight's cases a
specific date, no additional notice is requ' ed.
Mr. Ghidotti said the project could delayed an additional year. Mr. Lecklide oted there
was no consensus among the to tee hearing of these cases tonight.
Mr. McCash made a motio to accept the documents into the record. M .Sprague seconded,
and the vote was as fo s: Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Hazian, yes; . Lecklider, yes; Mr.
Sprague, yes; Mr. Pe ow, yes; Mr. Eastep, yes; and Mr. McCash, es. (Approved 7-0.)
Mr. Peplow mo approval of the May 6, 1999 minutes. M azian seconded, and the vote
was as follow . Mr. Fishman, abstain; Mr. Eastep, yes; . Hazian, yes; Mr. McCash, yes;
Mr. Peplo ,yes; Mr. I.ecklider, yes; and Mr. Sprague, stain. (Approved 5-0-2.)
.
Mr. rague moved approval of the May 20, 1999 utes; Mr. Peplow seconded. The vote
w . Mr. Fishman, abstain; Mr. Eastep, absta' r. Harian, abstain; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr.
eplow, yes; Mr. Lecklider, abstain; and Mr. prague, yes. (Approved 3-0-4.)
1. Rezoning Application 99-041Z -Preliminary Development Plan - Cramer's Crossing
(formerly known as Avery Village Commons)
John Talentino said this is a rezoning from (Washington Township) R-1B and Exceptional Use
to PUD for 68 multi-family units, 92 lots and about 10 acres of park. He said Council had
disapproved a rezoning for another plan on this site (256 apartments, 71 lots and 16 acres of
park). This site was exempted from the Southwest rezoning moratorium. He showed several
slides. He noted the industrial lots .and the Samson property were no longer included. The
party barn is shown within the proposed park area.
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Averv Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ~ '
Minutes -June 17, 1999 "
Page 3
There are deep residential lots on Wcerner-Temple Road, and a street stub is shown into this
area. Staff suggests park and pedestrian connections as well. He said the proposed parkland is
fairly substantial and visible. The park is smaller in this plan because there are fewer units.
He said the lots range from 65 feet wide to 80 feet wide. Staff is concerned the setback is too
shallow on Rings Road. The density in the Community Plan for this site is one to two units
per acre. He said these multi-family units will be very similar to those at Heather Glen north.
Mr. Talentino noted a major study of the southwest is currently underway. Until it is
completed, staff suggests using R-2 standards along the west establishing maximum density.
He said a tree inventory and preservation plan are still needed. Staff is concerned about the
buffers, specifically along the industrial land and along Rings Road. These buffers should be
substantial and shown on the plans.
Mr. Talentino said this plan is improved, but it still does not meet the density in the
Community Plan. It provides parkland and a nice through road. Issues such as density, design
and layout are still unresolved. Staff respectively recommends disapproval based on the
following:
1) The project density (2.9 dwelling units per acre) exceeds the recommended density in the
Community Plan, and the proposed plan's characteristics fail to justify a density increase.
2) The density and lot size will set a negative precedent for future development to the west.
3) The plan fails to incorporate the Avery Road and existing Rings Road rights-of--way
consistent with the adopted Thoroughfare Plan.
4) The plan fails to incorporate a 200-foot setback on Rings Road, consistent with the
Community Plan.
5) The plan does not include adequate pedestrian and vehicular connections to adjacent
properties that provide a continuous fabric of neighborhoods, consistent with the goals of
the Community Plan.
6) The plan does not integrate the development with shared, centrally located open space
and direct pedestrian and vehicular connections.
7) The plan does not create visual interest in street design and lacks design amenities such as
boulevards and pedestrian-friendly streets.
8) The submission does not include an adequate inventory of large trees or a tree
preservation plan required by the approved concept plan.
9) The plan does not provide substantial and defined buffers along surrounding properties.
10) The submission fails to provide scaled building elevation drawings or illustrate quality
and "four-sided" architecture as well as the appearance from Rings and Avery Road.
11) Fence details have not been provided.
12) The plans do not satisfactorily indicate the timing or phasing of the proposed
development and infrastructure improvements with adequate assurances.
Mr. Peplow asked about applying R-2 standards to the northern and western part of the site.
Mr. Talentino said that staff would like to set a precedent for future development. Mr.
Talentino said the six lots to the north on Woerner-Temple Road are in Washington Township.
Mr. Eastep was concerned that Dublin has no control over how they might develop.
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons) -
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -June 17, 1999
Page 4
Mr. Harian asked if Dublin wanted the party barn in the park. Mr. Talentino said staff
recommends maintaining the structure. Mr. Harian asked if fencing was permitted. Mr.
Talentino said a detail for yard fences is needed.
Mr. McCash said references to conservation development are being made, but no decision on
conservation design has been made. Mr. Talentino said these lots are similar in size to those
in a conservation design, but the open space is much less.
Mr. McCash asked why two units per acre was not discussed in 1996. Ms. Clazke said the
concept plan was judged against the approved plan at that time, the 1993 Southwest Area Plan.
The Community Plan was still being developed. Mr. McCash asked 'why, if conservation
development has smaller lots, were lazger lots being proposed along the western edge. Ms.
Clazke said is it not yet cleaz that conservation design will be adopted. The adopted plan needs
to be applied, which is currently the Community Plan.
Mr. Kinds said generally streets without curb and gutters were unacceptable.
Mr. Lecklider noted the setback along Rings Road, east of Avery Road, is faz less than 200
feet. Mr. Talentino stated that those developments preceded the Community Plan.
Chris Cline, attorney, said the major plan difference is that this developer will build the -both
the condominiums and single-family homes. The product is designed for "empty-nesters." He
said the typical subdivision lot width in the area is 65 feet. The concept plan had 49 more
units than this plan. The main unloaded road is intended to reduce traffic, but it imposes an
economic burden. It serves a lazger azea and costs $1M. He said he was open to suggestions
regazding the party barn.
Mr. Cline said the Community Plan is a guide on densities. This density is less than was
approved in the concept plan. He said they aze willing to follow the Thoroughfare Plan.
Along Rings Road, the plan provides for 130 feet of setback, and this could be increased if
access to Rings Road is eliminated. Mr. Cline feels that the site is well-connected. They are
willing to work with the bikeway plan.
Mr. Cline said the plans were revised according to staff suggestions. The original plan had a
central green space which would have a greater long-term effect than saving the existing tree
row. The east-west street will have no curb cuts and is designed to move traffic. Completing
the tree preservation plan at this time would be uneconomical.
Regazding azchitecture, Mr. Cline said more information has been provided than is necessary
for rezoning; there is more detail at the final development plan. The fence details are in the
text. He said that single-family and multi-family will begin together, or the single-family area
will go first. The road will be built in the first phase through part of the single-family area.
The remainder will be dedicated before the fmal plat for the last phase of the single-family area
Mr. Harian asked for clarification between the two plans and whether detention areas were
included in open space calculations. Mr. Harian asked for a paved or bricked access from the
condominiums into the adjacent 2.5 acres. Mr. Cline said the detention area was not included
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Fnrmnrly Avnrv VillaaP C'nmmnnsl
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -June 17, 1999
Page 5
in the 9.91 acres of park space. He agreed to provide access depended on what happens to the
current barn and parking lot.
Mr. Cline said Hardi-plank, similar to that at Gorden Farms, would be used for the
condominiums. High quality vinyl siding and stone will be used on the single-family homes.
Architectural diversity standards will be resolved through the staff. Mr. Cline said the
building setback will be 130 feet from the centerline of Rings Road. He preferred no access to
Rings Road.
Mr. Talentino said the staff recommendation is for multiple access points to split traffic in all
directions. He felt the park space should be used to buffer homes from the industrial uses.
Mr. Cline said owners of the industrial property have agreed to provide 10 feet for buffering.
Mr. Fishman said the development should not occur if it cannot meet the standards. Given the
southwest planning effort and the preferred density, he felt this project should be something
very special if it does not fully comply. If the site can not be developed economically, he said
that the applicant should wait for a feasible proposal.
Mr. Fishman said the Community Plan set up a not to exceed density of one to two units per
acre. Projects over that density should be approved only. if they are truly exceptional. Mr.
Fishman commented the road is needed to support new development.
Mr. Harian asked why there was no buffering along the existing'single-family use. Mr. Cline
said the developer also owns the surrounding property. He will be providing sewer access to
the Fitzsimmons property.
Mr. Sprague was concerned about traffic and buffering. Mr. Cline said that buffering was
adequate. He is not concerned about industrial uses because the condominiums are internally
oriented. Industrial uses have no evening activity, and the adjacent lots sell well. The
condominiums are for empty-nesters with less traffic. Mr. Sprague said the traffic is better ~I
distributed with this plan.
Mr. Peplow expressed concern for the scale of buildings along the street and the scenic
character of the road to the west. He suggested limiting the boulevard to the entrance area.
Mr. Peplow asked if the industrial buffer areas met Code. Ms. Clarke said industrial and
residential uses are opposite land uses. A planned district should specify the proposed buffer,
especially given these uses. She said planned districts are designed to give more detail. Mr.
Cline said the buffers will match Heather Glen North.
Mr. Peplow asked how phasing of the development would impact those issues such as road
development and building construction. Mr. Talentino said the text provides no guarantee.
Mr. Peplow stated something more concrete on road commitments was still needed.
Mr. Eastep recommended more creativity in the road design, elimination of some of the lots,
and providing lots with a minimum width of 70 feet and depth of 135 feet. He also suggested a
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
«r\rrr~Prly AvPrv Village Commons) -
' 'Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -June 17, 1999
Page 6
camelback or chicane to create more rectangular lots. Mr. Ciine said that a few lots could
possibly be eliminated, but more would be unfeasible.
Mr. Eastep suggested eliminating vinyl as an exterior material in favor of Hardi-plank. Mr.
Cline agreed to this for the multi-family area only. He also agreed to install bikepaths and
appropriate connections in accordance with the Dublin Bikepath Plan.
Mr. Eastep said suggested adding 25-foot no-build to the interior lots. He said the Dublin is
discouraging perimeter fencing in all neighborhoods. Mr. Cline agreed to limit fencing to a
split rail design with wire mesh. He will add no-build zones if utilities were permitted. He
will also satisfy any concerns of the Fire Department regarding turning radii.
Mr. Eastep said the density is still too high, and diversion from the Community Plan will
require an exceptional plan.
Mr. Cline said the unloaded road is expensive, and the must be offset by the units. Future
development requires the road to be built. Mr. Harian said about 50 units should be deleted to
meet the two units per acre Community Plan density.
Mr. Lecklider liked -the unloaded road. Mr. Talentino said initially there were driveways
along the road, and staff asked for them to be eliminated. The unloaded road is a good
feature, but it is not required. Ms. Fierce said the applicant was advised to submit some other
alternative if the unloaded road is not feasible.
Mr. Sprague stated that without the unloaded road, the plan is substantially altered. It could
not be voted upon tonight. Ms. Clarke said the Commission may recommend modifications.
Mr. Cline said empty-nester housing was not addressed by the Community Plan. Eliminating
50 units would cost $3M.
:,N
Bob Yoakam, Rockford Homes, said to his knowledge, there are no children at the Heather
~ Glen North condos.
Mr. Fishman said the road is one of the plan's best features. He suggested eliminating some
of the southern lots, expanding the park, and respecting a 200-foot setback. Mr. Fishman said
this should be special, but it currently looks unremarkable.
Robert Bukard said he and three neighbors oppose this application. He distributed a petition to
the Commission. He said this concept has been reworked, but the density is still too high.
They are also concerned about the land uses. He recounted the public process for this case.
He said the developer was directed to meet with the immediate neighbors, and this has not
happened. This density is excessive. The trailer park and industrial uses should not interfere
with positive development.
Mr. Bukard supports the density in the Community Plan. He said a meeting of area residents
was held in May, but the immediate neighbors were not invited. The residents of the Wilcox
99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -June 17, 1999
Page 7
Road area apparently had no objection. He said Mr. Cline distributed a letter that was
misleading and indicated the adjoining owners had no objections.
Mr. McCash reviewed the February 1, 1996 minutes. Some of the issues presented before
Council included questions about density and objections to a connection to Rings Road. He
asked if the residents would still be concerned without the Rings Road connection. Mr.
Bukard said yes. They have concerns about traffic loading, densities, and transition from
residential to higher density. He said that the major issues have always been density and
zoning. He thought they were settled when Council turned down the rezoning. He said future
homes will create the traffic and the need for a signal.
Mr. McCash said the minutes from the February 1, 1996 meeting seem indicated the neighbors
had no problem with the density. He said the Community Plan suggested two units per acre,
and the developer shows 2.9 units per acre. Mr. McCash asked Mr. Bukazd what he
considered as "excessive density." Mr. Bukard responded that he supported the density
established by the Commission. Mr. McCash said an acceptable density should be determined.
Mr. Talentino said he had attended the developer's meeting with some area residents, but
none of the immediate Avery and Rings Road residents were present. Mr. Cline said four
civic groups, existing and new residents east of Avery Road, were invited. Only two people
attended. An invitation was sent on May 6 to all the residents.
Mr. Hazian said he felt the Community Plan is a guide. He said the uses are compatible with
others in the azea. He liked the greenspace linkages to the other areas. He could not support
this plan as drawn and wanted several modifications. His main concern was the 200-foot
setback. The plan should connect the condos to the park with a formal trail. Vinyl siding
should be excluded. He liked the unloaded road. Architectural diversity requirements should be
applied and should include the sides of the structures and views from old and new Rings
Roads. Mr. Harian said a boulevard entrance would "set the tone."
Mr. Fishman said the layout was outstanding. He could not approve this excessive density of
50 units over the recommended density. It should be closer to two units per acre and "knock
your socks off." He would like to eliminate the seven lots along Rings Road and maintain the
200-foot setback. He liked the entrance on Rings Road to promote proper traffic flow. Mr.
Fishman would also like the park expanded north and would like a water feature. He wanted to
see natural materials.
Mr. McCash said the Community Plan was designed as a flexible document. This applicant
has agreed to build an expensive single-loaded road. Eliminating the connection to the south
may avert cut-through traffic and allow deeper lots. He would only support the 200-foot
setback if all of the existing homes that are closer were demolished. Architectural and material
diversity should be addressed. The concept plan was approved for a maximum density of four
units per acre, and now this proposal has been reduced to a density of 2.9 units per acre. He
believes that the density as proposed is fine and would support the project.
Mr. Sprague concurred with Mr. McCash and commended the design. He said that there were
only minor adjustments to deal with and that he could vote in favor of the nro.ject tonight.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -June 17, 1999
Page 8
Mr. Peplow could not support 2.9 units per acre. He wants to increase the visual interest of
the road with a boulevard entrance, and a commitment for a completion of the road.
Architectural diversity is very important but he strongly disagrees with vinyl siding. Mr.
Peplow also wants to see connectors between the condos and park. He could support the
project with a few modifications.
Mr. Eastep agreed with Mr. Harian and Mr. Fishman. He wants all natural materials and a
density near 2.2 or 2.3 units per acre. At this time he cannot support the proposal.
Mr. Lecklider prefers to see the road built to the west and is not concerned with the connection
on Rings Road to the south. He had density concerns and wants it to be consistent with the
Community Plan. He does not expect the Community Plan to be "hard and fast" in every
instance when considering density. Mr. Lecklider wants to see the park extended to the south
and more green space. Architectural diversity and quality materials should be used while
eliminating vinyl. Mr. Lecklider said he would not be inclined to vote favorably.
Mr. Cline requested tabling of this application.
Mr. Harian said the Commission had heard this many times and did not want to hear it two
more times. He did not expect the applicant to return with two units per acre.
Mr. Fishman did not want to set a precedent for a higher density. He thought the project
should be with something closer to two units per acre.
Mr. Cline said that they could provide the 200-foot setback if the south road is eliminated.
Mr. Eastep wanted to see two accesses for fire safety.
Mr. McCash made the motion to table this case and Mr. Fishman seconded. The vote was as
follows: Mr. Eastep, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Harian, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr.
Y
Lecklider, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; and Mr. McCash, yes. (Tabled 7-0.)
2. Revised Final Development Plan 99-058RFDP -Wyandotte Woods, Section 1
Chris Hermann sa' in April 1999, the Commissio approved the fmal developm t•plan of
Section 1. It is r ruing for consideration of the ormw~ter master plan regulat ns, etc. A
detention pond been added in one of the rese a areas along Riverside Driv . Additional
open space w added to make up for the det tion pond, and the lot lines ere adjusted.
There are no 37 lots on 34.8 acres. Open sp ce has been increased to 7.6 a es, including a
detention ar
Mr. He ann said Wyandotte Woods Bou vard will connect to Emerald P rkway, requiring a
turn lan and traffic light. Phase 1 doe not have to follow the tree pro ction ordinance, but
future sections will need to do so. Blasting for construction is not permitted. Staff
recd ends adding a bikepath throug the site that would wind betwee the cul-de-sac and the
exis ng limestone wall, incorporati g wrought iron fencing for afety. He said staff
r mmends approval of this appli ion with 16 conditions: 99-041Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
.,.r~ (Formerly Avery Village Commons)
. ,
DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECORD OF ACTION
September 16, 1999
C[TI OE Ut~I3LIN
saoo sty-~r.~ ~a
. Ohio 43016-1236
taone/roo: 614a61.6sso
Fmc 614-161.6s66
Web ~ www.~uhGn.ohus
The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting:
5. Rezoning Application 99-041Z -Preliminary Development Plan - Cramer's
Crossing (formerly known as Avery Village Commons)
Location: 55.5 acres located on the west side of Avery Road, north of Rings Road.
Existing Zoning: R-1B, Restricted Suburban Residential District and EU, Exceptional
Use District (Washington Township classifications).
Request: Review and approval of a preliminary development plan under the PUD,
Planned Unit Development District provisions of Section 153.056.
Proposed Use: A development of 86 single-family lots, 64 condominium units and
10.5 acres of park.
Applicant: 18 Acre Avery Road Ltd. and Mid-States Development Corporation, c/o S.
Robert Davis, 5720 Avery Road, Dublin, Ohio 43016; and Rockford Homes, Inc., c/o
Donald Wick, 999 Polaris Parkway, Columbus, Ohio 43240; represented by
Christopher T. Cline,- 5455 Rings Road, Suite 500, Dublin, Ohio 43017.
MOTION: To table this application.
rw
VOTE: 6-0.
RESULT: After much discussion regarding issues including density, open space, architecture,
and exterior building materials, this application was tabled as requested by Mr. Cline.
STAFF CERTIFICATION
J D. T entino
Planner
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
~ .
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -September 16, 1999
Page 13
5. Rezoning Application 99-041Z -Preliminary Development Plan - Cramer's
Crossing (formerly known as Avery Village Commons)
John Talentino said this case was last tabled in June. That plan reducee the number of units by
ten (to 150), enlarged the park by 0.6 acre, and eliminated the Dublin Clubhouse and parking
lot, and the vehicular connection to Rings Road. A 200-foot setback along existing Rings
Road is shown. The current plan has 86 lots, 64 condominium units, and 10.E acres of park.
Mr. Talentino said neither the Sampson parcel nor the industrial lots to the north are now
included in the site. He noted this site was exempted from the Southwest Area Plan rezoning
moratorium, and he showed several slides.
Mr. Talentino said staff recommends additional vehicular connections to the west, between
uses and to the south. Two lots became park area. The condos are arranged in rows instead
of around. the interior spaces. Buildings will be similar to Heather Glen North, but with stone.
Lots range from 65 feet to 80 feet wide.
Mr. Talentino said the Community Plan shows the preferred use as residential for one to two
units per acre, or 110 new family homes. This plan exceeds that recommendation by 40 units.
Some of the 10.5 acres of park is in the 200-foot setback, and it has been the Commission's
policy not to count that toward the park requirement.
He said staff recommends more pedestrian connections for the condos, the lots, and the park.
More commitments are needed on architectural materials. Also the views of residences,
particularly from the parks and the street, should display four-sided architecture.
Mr. Talentino said a tree preservation plan and an actual tree survey are needed. A time
commitment is needed on the road extension through the site. He said the buffers need some
revision. The text mentions that additional stormwater retention at the rear of some of the lots
near the stream may be needed.
Mr. Talentino said staff recommends disapproval based on the following 11 bases:
, 1) The project density (2.7 dwelling units per acre) exceeds the recommended density in
the Community Plan, and the proposed plan's characteristics fail to justify a density
increase.
2) The density and lot size will set a negative precedent for future development to the
west.
3) The plan fails to incorporate the Avery Road and existing Rings Road rights-of--way
consistent with the adopted Thoroughfare Plan.
4) The plan does not include adequate pedestrian and vehicular connections to adjacent
properties to provide a continuous fabric of neighborhoods, consistent with the goals of
the Community Plan.
5) The plan does not integrate the development through shared, centrally located open
space and through direct pedestrian and vehicular connections.
6) The plan does not create visual interest in street design by including boulevard design
and pedestrian-friendly streets in the multi-family area.
99-041 Z
Rezoning Application
Cr~mer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
"
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -September 16, 1999
Page 14
7) The submission does not include an adequate inventory of large trees or a tree
preservation plan, as required by the approved concept plan.
8) The plan does not provide substantial and defined buffers along surrounding properties.
9) The submission fails to provide scaled building elevation drawings or illustrate quality
and "four-sided" architecture as well as the appearance from Rings Road, Avery Road
and the park.
10) The plan does not adequately address architectural quality for those lots visible from
Rings Road and Rings Road extended.
11) The plans do not satisfactorily indicate the timing or phasing of the proposed
development and infrastructure improvements with adequate assurances.
Mr. Eastep asked why the density did not meet the Community Plan. Mr. Talentino said the
applicant has indicated the project would not be viable.
Mr. Sprague was not pleased with the building renderings, especially the roofline. Mr.
Talentino said staff is looking for architectural quality, and the applicant is proposing to use its
known product. Mr. Sprague said the materials were nice, but the roof has large masses.
Chris Cline, attorney for Rockford Homes, disagreed with the swearing-in procedure enacted
by the Commission, although he agreed to be sworn. He said it would make this aquasi-
judicial proceeding of the 25-22 appeal, not a judicial proceeding. He thought it was a big
mistake for Dublin affording an automatic appeal to the Common Pleas Court.
Jennifer Duty said this Commission had both quasi judicial administrative functions. Mr.
Cline said this was a rezoning, not a conditional use, etc.
Ms. Duty said she did not know how it could hurt to require an applicant to swear to tell the
truth. She said the blanket swearing-in at the beginning of the meeting encompasses everyone,
even those with administrative business before the Commission. Mr. Cline said aquasi- ~
judicial proceeding gives him the right to cross examine the witnesses. There was some
additional discussion of swearing-in of witnesses and the appeal procedures. ,,,r
Mr. Lecklider suggested a brief executive session to discuss the litigation ramifications of the
swearing-in procedure. Mr. Fishman made a motion to that effect, and Mr. Eastep seconded.
All indicated agreement by voting "aye." Mr. Cline again agreed to be sworn and encouraged
the City to research this issue very carefully.
[The Commission went into executive session for about 10 minutes.]
The Chair swore in the additional witnesses upon returning.
Chris Cline, attorney, represented the applicant. [There was a malfunction of the sound
equipment at this point, but the tape includes the full discussion.] He said the rules have
continually changed through the process, and density is an issue. He said the applicant has
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -September 16, 1999
Page 15
eliminated four condo units and six single-family lots. He said the major unloaded road makes
reducing the density impossible. He said it will cost about $1M. His treatment of the road
will not inhibit quality development to the west. This density is lower than other plans, and
this is a higher quality plan. It has a 200-foot setback on Rings Road. He said the party house
is being eliminated, and this permits linking the single- and multi-family areas. Fence
standards are now included in the text. There will be a brick paver crossing to.xhe park.
He said the houses near Rings Road will have natural materials, as will the houses on the west
(those north of Rings Road extended). These are not yet defined. ;The four houses along
Rings Road will have extra architectural detailing on the one exposed side. They will not face
Rings Road. He also volunteered to add addirional detail to the six houses which back up to
the creek. All fireplaces will have amasonry-look chimney (includes stucco, EIFS, and stucco
stone, but not vinyl) for the single-family houses.
Mr. Cline said the text references the commitment to dedicate right-of--way in accordance with
the MS alignment study. There will be a 20-foot buffer on the adjacent industrial property.
He said this plan has a density of 2.9 units per acre overall, and this is a good plan.
Mr. Sprague asked about the multi-family elevations and breaking up the rooflines. Mr. Cline
said these now have a hip roof, rather than a gable, and this diminished the roof form. He said
this perception may be an effect of the drawing rather than the real world experience.
Michael Fite, Bird Houk Associates, said the hip roof takes away the roof mass on the ends.
He did not think dormers would reduce the roof mass.
Mr. Fite said this plan has 10.5 acres of greenspace identified. He said the 200-foot setback is
contiguous to their park, and the total acreage of 13.5 acres. If the road were scaled back,
there would not be any question about whether the greenspace acreage is being met.
Generally, this plan exceeds the letter and intent of the ordinance.
Mr. Fite said there are connections from the condos to the open space. He feels the open
space is centrally located. He presented the buffering details. The buffer area will be 45 feet
in width, 20 feet on the adjacent industrial land, and 25 feet on their site. There will be a
double row of pine trees along both buffers. Trees along the fence line are to be retained, and
deciduous trees will be added in the rear yard areas.
Mr. Sprague hoped the adjacent buffer will be presented in the form of a permanent easement.
Mr. Cline said this residential development will influence the type of industrial uses that will
be developed to the east of this site. This will forward Dublin's goals.
Mr. Fite said the tree survey has not been done because the trees are not being disturbed. Mr.
Cline said this was a timing issue. He does not want to fund a tree survey until he has an
approved plan. Mr. Cline said it will be submitted with the final development plan.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -September 16, 1999
Page 16
Mr. Fite said the development of the park and the paths through it have not been determined.
It may include a lake.
Mr. Cline said he does not want a public bikepath going through the condo area, but walking
paths are not a problem. Mr. Fite said another connection to the west is unnecessary.
Mr. Lecklider asked for a direct response to the issues presented in the staff report. Mr. Cline
said the bases for disapproval by the staff have not changed. He said he has already addressed ~
several of them. He said Council continues to say the density of the Community Plan is not set
in stone. The Community Plan is only a guide. The expensive road should justify the increase
in density. He noted the approved concept plan had a higher density and was all multi-family.
He believes that 80-foot lots on the west are not too low a standard, but may be too high given
the adjacent uses. R-2 lots are an unreasonable suggestion.
Mr. Cline said this plan has enough connections and does not encourage cut-through traffic.
He said architecture is not required at this stage. The fencing is limited to the split three-rail
design with wire mesh. He said the major road needs to be finished before the last residential
phase is completed. There will be three residential phases and which should be developed
quickly.
He said natural materials will be used on Lots 1-13, 8, 9, 16, 136, and 137, being the most
visible. He proposes that "natural" materials should be brick, stone (either natural or
synthetic), stucco and EIFS, cementious board, and wood (not including T-111 plywood).
Don Wick, Rockford Homes, said their product here will look similar to their product in
Dublinshire and Earlington with all natural materials on similar houses. This area will not
look like Heather Glen, but should mix very well with it. It will have natural materials in the
areas visible along Rings Road and controlled colors.
Mr. Cline said the text says 70 percent stone on the condos, and there may be more.
r
Mr. Sprague was concerned about the phasing of the road and asked if it could be moved
forward to the second phase. The residents would benefit if it were done sooner. From
Dublin's perspective, it would be an advantage to have the road earlier. Mr. Cline agreed.
Mr. McCash noted that each successive plan lowers the density, and now it is 2.7 du/ac. He
said the 200-foot setback is not an ordinance, but a suggestion. All of this are should be
counted as park space. This plan has more openspace than is typical. He likes the use of
natural materials in certain areas but is concerned the remaining houses may be all vinyl. The
plan needs a bit more diversity in architecture and materials. He suggested some limits on
vinyl as a percentage of lots and as a percentage of the building facade. This would provide a
better transition to the west. The trade-off will be the additional 0.7 du/ac density. Other
issues include the road and centralized openspace, but architectural standards can address
diversity and improve the overall subdivision.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
•
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -September 16, 1999
Page 17
Mr. Cline said 19 of the 86 houses will have natural materials. He said additional natural
materials will increase housing costs.
Mr. McCash was most concerned about the area adjacent to the industrial property.
Mr. Wick proposed having 30 percent of the front elevations in brick or stone o~ all remaining
houses that are not all natural. Mr. Lecklider thought this was too low if it applies only to the
front elevation. Mr. McCash thought a percentage would miss the point. The houses should
be nicely addressed so the sides match, perhaps with a brick or stone wainscoting on the sides.
Mr. Cline said equal materials on all elevations promote mediocrity because cheaper materials
will be used. He supports dressing up the street-facing elevation. It will cost an extra $20,000
to use brick on the typical house. He suggested designating up to 10 percent of the lots for
additional architecture treatment, such as on Lot 24 and others. Mr. McCash said the sides of
the houses on Lots 36 and 37 front onto a roadway; and Lots 26 through 35 are less of a
concern. Where the lots widen and more of the side is visible, several lots become similar to
corner lots.
Mr. Cline said the architectural detailing would apply to Lots 156 and 137 along Rings Road.
Mr. McCash said this should also apply to Lots 19, 20, 51, 46, 45, 41, 23, and 24 and perhaps
Lots 22 and 25. Mr. Cline agreed to extra architectural detailing on elevations visible from the
road including more windows, shutters, corner boards, and/or window trim. Mr. McCash said
Lots 12, 13, 1, and 24 have the same issue. Mr. Cline did not want this provision to apply on
the 65-foot lots. Mr. McCash said something additional is needed. Mr. Cline agreed.
Mr. Harian liked the openspace, the way the greenspace flows and the road configuration. He
was still concerned about the high density. More openspace is needed and fewer buildings.
Using natural materials is good. Mr. Fishman agreed.
Mr. Fishman said the Community Plan is not set in stone. The recommended density of one to
two units per acre means a maximum of two with density decreasing as development moves to
the west. There should be a more rural feel, and this does not have that. He said this is a
lovely development, but he could not support its density. The spirit of the Community Plan
was for this area to be a density of under two dwelling units per acre. He said the Commission
is responsible to do what is best for the residents.
Mr. McCash disagreed. He said the Community Plan is a flexible document. If the desired
density is one per acre, Dublin should not annex any more land. There is no incentive for
owners to become part of Dublin. He said this is a tough site along Avery Road, behind an
industrial area, and it provides a transitional area. He has not heard that the southwest
residents oppose this proposal. They are concerned about commercial traffic cutting through
their neighborhood, speeding, commercial densities, adequate buffers, etc.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
e
~ ~ .
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -September 16, 1999
Page 18
Mr. McCash said the concept plan had 3.99 du/ac for 204 apartments, and this is much
improved. Many recent developments ,such as the soccer stadium, were not envisioned in the
Community Plan. Flexibility is necessary. He found the staff report to be inconsistent. The
density difference of 0.7 above the Community Plan is insignificant. There would be no
negative precedent for development to the west. This record is clear about expecting densities
to drop to the west and raising the bar. He said all the issues had been addressed, and this is a
reasonable interpretation of the Community Plan. A tree inventory is not necessary.
Mr. Sprague concurred with many of Mr. McCash's comments. He does not oppose multi-
family use. The Plan determined how much was already zoned and in the pipeline. He thinks
that will be adequate to meet Dublin's needs for the foreseeable future. He said with the
proposal modified as discussed, he could support it.
Mr. Eastep disagreed. He previously stated the density was too high, and a diversion from the
Community Plan would require an exceptional plan. He does not think this is an exceptional
plan. He understood the marketability of the area, etc., but several Commissioners wanted to
eliminate vinyl, and it is still the predominant material. He said Mr. Cline previously agreed
to use Hardi-plank in the multi-family area, but vinyl was still was listed for that area. He
believes the Community Plan was a guide, but every time the density is increased, it hurts. the
Thoroughfare system. He can only support two units per acre because it was not an
exceptional plan.
Mr. Lecklider said one unit per acre adjacent to industrial uses is impractical. He previously
stated his preference for a lower density, but he could support a higher density for a great
plan. This one seems average, except for the unloaded road. He thought the 3.5 acres of
openspace was located properly, and he liked the tree preservation and buffering to the north
and east. To exceed the Community Plan's suggested density of two units per acre, reliance
on natural materials, elimination of stucco fireplaces and architectural diversity should be
assured.
Mr. McCash said there is a lot of openspace along the Cramer Ditch, similar to what happens
at the Indian Run. Setting that up to build upon for westward growth is good. He also hoped
for exceptional plans as the basis of deviating from the Community Plan. Because this site has
industrial land next to it, "exceptional" may not be feasible, and the Commission should adjust
its expectations. He supports holding the standards for areas to the west.
Mr. Lecklider expressed discomfort with a definition of exceptional for this particular site that
includes 65-foot wide lots and mostly all-vinyl exteriors.
Mr. McCash wanted architectural diversity addressed. Mr. Eastep said four Commissioners
do not support the density. Without the density resolved, architectural diversity did not matter.
Mr. Fishman said this site in the Community Plan was discussed as possibly remaining
agricultural if the economics do not work. Ms. Clarke said agricultural use is positive, in its
99-041 Z
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -September 16, 1999
Page 19
municipal revenues and the cost of services, either short or long term. Mr. Fishman said at
the Community Plan meetings, residents overwhelming favored having agricultural land.
Mr. Fishman said an outstanding job had been done on this project and the applicant should be
commended, but it is too dense. Buffering the commercial/industrial from Lots 52- 62 is a
problem. If those lots were replaced with park, this would reduce the density, etc. He
expressed support for a water feature that could be viewed from the street. He supported using
all natural materials to make this exceptional. He could not support over two units per acre.
Mr. McCash said developers are not charitable organizations. Removing lots and using only
natural materials increases development costs, and this raises housing prices. This equation
may not work in this area as it did when Muirfield was developed
Mr. Fishman said the Muirfield proposal initially provoked a lot of controversy. He said many
River Forest residents thought Muirfield would be a nightmare with densely packed 100-foot
lots. They considered it urban sprawl. He said the Community Plan guidelines include the
"lower-than-low" scenario with an agricultural feel heading west. Mr. Fishman said it was not
Dublin's responsibility to make this work if it violated the Community Plan.
Mr. McCash noted the Community Plan would have prohibited the Cardinal Health South
Campus, but the Commission approved it.
Mr. Cline asked what good a plan was, if no one could ever build it. He said Dublin has
expectations that cost a lot of money. If Dublin did not require them to build that road, then
perhaps the developers would be able to do different things. He asked for a tabling of this
application, and what was needed to get it approved. They cannot prohibit vinyl.
Mr. Eastep said most of his issues were raised at the last meeting. He was not sure tabling
was appropriate here.
Mr. Harian said some vinyl may be fine, but his concern is density. He wants the quality of
life in this area to remain. He might support a density of 2.1 or 2.2, but 2.7 du/ac was too
high.
Mr. McCash was concerned that if this site cannot be developed as development starts going
west, it may indicate Dublin was imposing unreasonable restrictions. Mr. Harian disagreed,
and said some alternate type of development could happen here.
Mr. Fishman said if this would truly enhance the Southwest Area, with a golf course for
example, a density over two units per acre would be considered.
Mr. Talentino said Dublin did not impose the unloaded road. It has been shown in most
versions of the plan and is very desirable. The applicant was encouraged to find a cheaper
solution if the road could not be funded by the project, but none was submitted. The
connections in all directions were advocated consistently by staff.
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes -September 16, 1999 '
Page 20
Mr. Lecklider said architecture and density are his concerns. For an exceptional development,
the density could exceed two units per acre. His views remain the same as recorded in the
June 1999 meeting minutes. He would like the 3.5-acre greenspace instead of a water feature.
He wanted more than 30 percent natural materials used. It should cover more than the 19
houses already agreed upon. He thought the architecture and materials used were average.
Mr. Fishman made a motion to table this case as requested, and Mr. Harian seconded the
motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Eastep, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes;
Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Harian, yes; and Mr. Fishman, yes. (Tabled 6-0.)
Mr. McCash suggested lowering the density to 2.0 du/ac by eliminating the unloaded road.
The Commissioners indicated by straw poll that they would not waive the 11 o'clock rule.
6. Accessory Structures and S ing Pools - 99-022 M -Proposed Code ndment
Due to the late hour, this case as .postponed without disc Sion until October 7.
7. Code Revision - 98-10 ADM -Fence Code
Due to the late hour, this se was postponed without iscussion until October
The meeting was adjou ed at 12:05 a.m.
/ Respectfully submitte ,
Libby Farley
Administrative Secretary
Planning Division
99-0412
Rezoning Application
Cramer's Crossing
(Formerly Avery Village Commons)
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dublin City Council
FROM: Timothy C. Hansley, City Manager ~ ~
INITIATED BY: Balbir S. Kendra, Director of Engineering/City Engineer
DATE: May 13, 1999
SUBJECT: City of Dublin/Columbus Southern Power Agreement Concerning
Construction of Emerald Parkway Between Innovation Drive and
Perimeter Drive
Construction of this section of Emerald Parkway requires going through the Stanley
Steamer property and Columbus Southern Power's substation. Going through Columbus
Southern Power's property requires relocation of significant components of the
substation, which makes this section of Emerald Parkway one of the most difficult
sections to design and build. In addition, this section will also require burial of overhead
distribution lines (not transmission lines) and a construction permit from the Ohio
Department of Transportation. Attached is a copy of a drawing showing the general
location of this project.
In August 1998, the City Council adopted the 1999-2003 CIP and gave direction to staff
to prepare construction plans in 1999 for construction to begin in 2000 for this project.
Typically, utility companies, including Columbus Southern Power, will start design for
relocation of their facilities after the City's design is finalized for reasons of not knowing
final alignment of the pavement, sidewalks, bikepath, street lights, right-of--way/easement
width, vertical grade, sewer locations, etc.
After being given direction by the City Council to start construction in 2000, City staff
initiated dialog in September 1998, with Columbus Southern Power, to urge them to
become a partner in our design effort for Emerald Parkway. Additionally, within the first
week of the approval of the 1999 budget, a consultant was retained by the City for up
front design coordination with Columbus Southern Power. Since last falUwinter, to-date,
we have been meeting with Columbus Southern Power on a regular basis. Significant
progress has been made in a coordinated design effort for relocation of substation
elements and design of the road.
It is essential and basic to the construction of Emerald Parkway to have certain elements
of the substation relocation design finalized, constructed, and cost-sharing arrangements,
including land acquisition, be agreed and approved by City Council to achieve your goal
of starting construction in 2000.
Memo to Dublin City Council
May 13, 1999
Page 2
To achieve this goal, Columbus Southern Power and City staff have agreed to a shared
arrangement of various design and construction activities and their respective target dates
as outlined in exhibit "C".
The attached agreement is a negotiated agreement reflecting several months of hard work
by the City staff and several individuals from the Columbus Southern Power Company.
The substation relocation components primarily will consist of burial of distribution lines
(transmission lines will stay as they are), some relocation of the parking lot and access
drive and relocation of the control building. The agreement also makes concessions for
building setback and zoning requirements in order to acquire right-of--way and easements
without placing additional burden on Columbus Southern Power. The financial
arrangement of this work is similar in manner as already has been done for Coffman
Road at Willow Grove and burial of the power lines for SR 161/US33, Frantz & Post
Roads intersection. City staff has utilized the services of Paul Blaeser of Blaeser
Engineering Services, for oversight of Columbus Southern Power Company's "overhead"
and "upgrade" costs. The estimated cost of the City's cost for relocation of substation
elements is $ 2,015,000.00. The cost of land/easement acquisition is estimated to be
$ 545,000.00 and the estimated cost for burial of distribution lines, switches, pole
relocation is $ 605,000.00. Also attached please find a copy of an ordinance for approval
by the City Council authorizing the City Manager to sign this agreement.
We recommend your approval of this agreement for expedient implementation of the
substation component relocation.
Attachments
P:IPASSIENGI000NCILIColumbus Southern PowerAgreement.doc