Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout59-00 Ordinance RECORD OF ORDINANCES Dayton Legal Blank Co. Form No 004 59-00 Ordinance No Passed AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FOR 22.462 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF METATEC BOULEVARD AND POST ROAD, FROM: PCD, PLANNED COMMERCE DISTRICT, TO: PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (HOMESTEAD COMMUNITIES/CASE NO.00-030Z). NOW, THEREi~ RE, BE IT OY4.DAINED °cy the Council of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio,_j 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 recommenda*.ions 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. Passe is ~ day of , 2000, ayor -Presiding icer Attest: ~ ~ Clerk of Council Sponsor: Planning Division t hereby certify that conies of t`;s ~?;:.rnar~ce./Resolution were pasted in lily of Dublin in accordance with Section 731.25 of the Qt;io Revised Co , ~j,~- Cte of Council, Dublin, Ohio ~~1sAYTH0RN b~i _ V t~~+a ~ ~ PL 0 ~,Q.oo P ~ o PUFFRt DR ~ OOl_ 1 ~ ~0 / ~ V P Sf. ILL o '(S' DV$ ~ d Q ~ arYNFOt~ `QO ~,pti ~t~ 't gF t' V. lf0 LN. cl' S' G$ ~~a ~ ~ SAY 04' ` oUND ~ ~o cT FINNEGAN ~ ~ D 1 ~ ro~ER LN. ~ P uo ~o xYNF° w ~ ~ ,JOY Lrt ~ o C¢t ~ g O y a c[wtRE G c k ~ ~ R. L't~N ~4'' RBI( 0 4, 4~ ~ 1 . ° 9~ `~~pcr. ~ DESxoxD ~ yeti by p ~ p cT ~'4 4 ~A~ SELLS 1IIIy D o k PARKifAY ~ .a ~ ~ D q w Y ~ ~ Ro°~ v ~ ~ 3curtctE ~ a 1 »AVESN~ A ~ ~ OID PO AD PARK D .~(O~ 8 CLA a ~R SE ,,y l' CAVAI ~ ~ IS[N ROUND ~ .~0~ ~Q~r _ U q~ Bp ~~0 ~ CT .e}t " QGrl,~~G D N~R~E DR O~'~'~'~ ~ ~ 9q`' ° RANGE DR ~ G OTTALA ~ BIl?~il?~ W ,A y, AD~TURE DRS < DING Y ROSOO~utoN D~r1f0~, / p ARAP OE Ct w ~ q a 4'~'~ bb AL~~¢. PL G Gay E. `~~'~TRL.iY .~10~ ~,~tG'fOK ~ a~ W~ rstEs . o ~R- FALIEN ~~Q`_ ~ to _ 'OST RD ~ pA`., LPAIOrSLN LAIC LOOP 2 - ~ o p'~q SIfANNON ~ V ~ P PERp[ETER DR p 2 ~@ K ° SITE ~O~~' ~ ~ tin a 6 ~ PL pg Dg ~~~-j P6 ~ r ~ ~.a ' ~ c°aa p~~ ~CRO~ °d d p~ ~ ~ _,r(~P'L VENTURE DR ~ P ~ _ ~ ~ 33 161 ' COLUlBU3 YARYSYII,I,E RD ~ a q i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i i ~ ~ ~ SIIIER RINGS RD ~ i A STANLEY ~ ~ ~ ° ~ ( ii~~ ARKKAY ii r ; ; ~ d.'P' ~ b 1fIIJCOX PL ~ ~ . ~rf - a gZlXlrl PL o 00-030 h~ N E ~ IxNOVArtoN v Preliminary Development Plan Perimeter Center PqD . J Subareas B&C DAN-sHERRI ~ Homestead Communities AVE NATION DR ~ OIDENBURGH KAY A w iO;NDALL ~ gArtll~ Rutcs cam Iq~ 'may ~ -1 R 1 PUD D 0 TAN p ELLS AY R-1 0 0 4~~w J~ 0 0 0 0 ~ o 0 _ P R 1 R-1 - ~D i ~ P UD mil' A ~ ~ ~ w '"1 U ~ RIM R ~ ~ ~ PLR. SIT ~ ~ ioo P D vR 11 P ~ PERI •o P PLR ~ PLb p D vErrru DR ~.I 33 161 RI . a RI I e SHIER LI t .o ~ ~ I , ~ so d " 00-030TH ~ o Preliminary Development Plan RI Perimeter Center P~D s Subareas B&C '8 s ~ Homestead C (oJ/JJJm JmJAeunities F ~ a. . EXHIEIT "B" RE~OI~1N~; APPLICAT101U (Code Section 153.234) EXPIRE Ci't'1 OF DCIjLI Ordinance No. 5800 Shier Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016 City Council 1st Reading Phonu'T D D: 614/761-6550 Fax: 614/761-6566 City Council Pudic Hearing City Council Action FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ? Ameunt Received: Application No: P&Z Date(s); P&Z Action: Re<<~ipt No: MIS Fae No: Date Received: Received By: Tyl.e of R•:rl~~~_.. ~ ? PLEASE SUEiv11T TWO (2) ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATIONS - 1'I .I:~S!: I'!:!~ I' - Ai JDTHIRTEEN (13) COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLECATION and CHECK HE TYFE OF APPLICATION Composite Flan(Ccdc SE~;tien 153.058) Preliminary Development Plan (Code Section 153.C~6j ? Otl~,er (Describe) _ ' PROPERTY INFORMATION - I - II TAX ID NO/ Parcca SI_==~~~ a`.- ~ DISTR{CT PARCELNO: 2~3-000180 (A~:r~~s1 _22.~F62 I ' i~ ~ I'"~~~' ~~!'Ir~''~~ 00000 POST ROAD I _ ~ I- ~ r I I i r I ~ ' _ ~ i f _ _ _ ~ i , ~ ; ( ~ METATEC & POST , '`I' N~~ar~~st Intrr.~eo;ion: ~ ' - F. 4N horn IN ~r Est In'~ rsectiun Ci ~ in~;.~ from N~~arc~st Intcr_,ec.ti~m'. AT INTERSECTION N I { ~ I'~I Exi..lin~) Land Usi/D~welopmcnt: ~ ! ~ ~ I PERIMETER CENTER PCD I__ _ _ i'ir!~~~r.~vi L.+n~l Usr.D~~~rlrl~m„iil ~,i RESIDENTIAL /ACCESSORY COMMERCIAL ! I;~.,,,,r,:n~l ,~IIi,r„i;r~n PLA-tU3 U.i(+~ C`)l:'3.93 " ~ EXHIBIT "B" Current or Existing Zoning District: Requested Zoning District: No. of Acres to be Rezoned: PCD M TIFAM Y STATEMENT: State briefly hors the prcposed zoning and development relates to the existing and potential future land use character cf the vicinity. SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A STATEMENT: State briefly hew the proposed zoning and development relates to the Dublin Community Plan. SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT B I PREVIOUS APPLICATION? I ~ I-{~~s an application for rc;zcning the property been denied by the City Council within the last two (2) years? YES ? NO ~ i ~ IF YES, WHEN? State the basis of reconsideration: i i I - IF A PLANNED DISTRICT IS REQUESTED, IS COMPOSITE OR PRELlN11NARY PLAN ATTACHED? YES C~ NO ? i, I IF A PLANNEU DISTRICT iS REQUESTED, IS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT ATTACHED? YES ~ NO ? II. PLEASE INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING: - ~ ~ 14 COPIES OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ~ ~ Z ; i 3 ~ ~X L.~cp+I d~~scripticn ~>f thc~ {~rnluxty to be retuned con:;ista of payc(s) ' ~ I' ' PLAN REQUIREMENTS: ~ ' 14 SETS OF PLANS TO SCALE (NOT GREATER THAN ~4" X 36") SHOWING: L _ _ a. Th~~ site ,+rd .+II land 500 f~~rtt beyoni! thu hound+anes ~ ~ r ~ r ~ ! ~ h N ~ h .jr« ,v ,+n~l b.ir sr.d„ E ~ ~ ~ ~ 1_ i f._ f r f_~ i~l rn iiU~"nr. (r2n,uh:, buihlin~I , vuclrL+tion,topogr,+hhy jui ~fi~li~n it Lcund.+nc~s, uli' .1 ('rch~':~~~1 Usrs (R,"~_licn il lc,+nsportation system, d~~nsilcs of ~Iv.rllin_1.., buddirnl;unit tyl~u";. syu,uc>, toolfool ~~I~~rh!ndic.p~ n .,l~aa,, ~~h~) FsisLnrl ,end {ncpo:~,~~d anin~I ~iislrict bound,s~ie:: ~ F~~~:::nu~y ~~.1{In .ili~~n PLA-108 D~~tr~ 09~28i99 U EXHIBIT "B" f. Size of the site in acres/square feet; and g. All property lines, street rights-of-way, easements, and other information related to the location of the proposed boundaries. 14 SETS OF REDUCED DRAWING(S) (NOT GREATER THAN t 1" X 17") ? 14 COPIES OF COUNTY OWNERSHIP MAP: (NOT LESS THAN 8'/ " X 11"AND NOT P.10RE THAN 16" X 20") Showing contiguous property owners within 500 feet from the perimeter of the area to be rezoned. III. CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY OWNERS List all neighboring property owners within 300 feet from the perimeter of the area to be rezoned. Such list to be in accordance with the County Auditor's current tax list. (Use additional sheets as necessary.) Labels formatted for Avery 5160 ma;~ be submitted as labels or on a computer disk. PROPERTY OWNER (not Mortgage Company or Tax Service) MAILING ADDRESS CITY/STATE(LIP CODE SEE ATTACHENT C X N' ~ _ 3 I ~ . ~ i ~ ~ ~ i 1 i _ r ~ ~Ll~ U t i~ rnrnli~l~l,ln.ihcr Pt~1-1C8 D,ifi~G:uBi`?9 ~rhlame oI Current Property Owner(s). Continental/NRI Ventures Ltd C/0 ~IQUs~ihari--Kas~- Maliing Address: (Street, City, slag, Zip code) P . 0 . Box 712 Dublin, OH 4301 Fax. DaytimeTelcphonc 221_1800 - -i'- 1Jarne of Conl~cl Person', (ex. Attorney, Architect, etc): Gary Gray 'Please comlrlete ltte Agent Authorization, Sectir~n VII, below. t~taiiingArldress: Homestead Communities 150 E. Broad St. Columbus, OH 4321 (Street, Clty, State, Zip Code) Fax: Daytime Telephone: 2 21- 3 5 6 7 221-1800 Wltict~ of the above Is the primary contact person? Gar G r a V. AUTHORIZATION 70 VISIT 7tIE PROPERTY Site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives In order to process this application. The Owner/Applicant hereby authorizes ity representatives to visit, photograph and post a notice on the property described in This application. V1. UTILITY DISCUIIMER _ ll~e City of Dublin will make eve eeC~ so aaclty to protvide htese services to the limite As su h~the City of Dublinrmayhbe utnable to makelall orr part olf said Franldin County has stretched th hr P IlcanUOwner hereby acknowledges that approval of this request for rezoning by the Dublin facilities available to ttte applicant until some future date. Ttte App Planning and Zoning Commission andlor Dublin Ctty Council does not constitute a guarantee or binding commitment that the City of Dublin will be a e o provide essential services such as water and sewer facilities when needed by said Applicant. VII. OWIJER AUTHORIZATION FOR REPRESEIJTATIVE ~ ~ ,the owner and applicant, hereby authorize G~an+~u I, to act as my representative and agent in alt matters pertaining to the processing and approval of this application Including modifying the project, and I agree to be bound by all representations and agreements made by the designated agent. p.{?-fi e_e_ "~r_,-~{-u„•~sr ~-}v. Date: n n Signature or Current Property Owner: i... p ,~'r~ ~~-~~01 ( /rv ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'r- / ~-r -I- 0.•,m ~s S Date: Signature or Current Property Owner: vnl. nPPUCnr,rr's nr-rlDnvlT - + STATE OF_~,'~~T ~ COl1NTY OF ~1~/~tt-~~ L~ ~~trZ`` C' ~ f~~~ , tt>e applicant or the applicant representative, have read I, r C l~ atvf understand tPre contents of this application. The informatton contained In thrs appllcalwn, attached exhibits and other Information subtrtitled Is comp e e and in all respects tare and correct, to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date: ~ / if CQ Slpnalwe of Applicant or l ( r / ~uthorized Re;•~-~--.t~tive: - ~ ~ _1~~ Subscribed and sworn to be,~. _ i w~cl y r uuu.. 1 f o,•~O~P SF.y'- ~ ~ r i : ~ - ~ 1 TAMARA SCNAMBS ~ , ~ ~ * * NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF OHIO s o MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NIARCN 17, 2004 I - ~ l~T~nO ouO`r~`` Page 3 of 3 Concept Plan Application ~ STATEMENT: Exhibit A Briefly state how the proposed development and zoning relates to the existing and potential future land use character of the vicinity. 1. Current development along north side of Post Road is predominantly residential. 2. Approved zoning for development south of Post Road is Community Commercial. 3. A point of interface between the residential and the commercial is inevitable. 4. Our development would move that interface from Post Road to Wall Street. 5. Existing residents would not be on the front line of transitional uses. 6. Our use is owner occupied condominiums. 7. Our density and orientation is a better point of interface between the two dissimilar uses than the existing condition. 8. Unit sale prices will be an average of about $250,000 with high quality, low maintenance exterior materials. 9. The Live/work units will serve as an additional transitional component. With small (800 s.f. to 1500 s.f) commercial spaces at the street level and living units above , a small scale commercial presence will be maintained as the interface between the commercial uses to the south and the residential uses to the north. STATEMENT: EXHIBIT B " Briefly state how the proposed zoning and development relates to the Dublin Community Plan. 1. Helps establish and maintain the residential character of Post Road as a scenic roadway. 2. Rather than Post Road being a strip of pavement between two uses, it will be a unifying element tying similar uses together. 3. Housing for empty nesters is critical to the continued vitality of Dublin. Locating this type of residential use near shopping and recreational uses will permit residents to partake of the riches of Dublin, without the necessity of driving great distances. i ~ r- n ~XN~giT g~-~ REV: March 1, 1999 October 7, 1998 DESCRIPTION OF A 22.=f62 ACRE TRACT ON POST ROAD AT iv1ETATEC BOULEVARD DUBLIN, OHIO, FOR CONTINENTAL/NRI OFFICE VENTURES LTD. Situated in the State of Ohio, County of Franklin, City of Dublin, partially in Virginia Military Survey No. 2542 and partially in Virginia Military Survey No. 2999, and being a portion of an original 42.592 acre tract of land conveyed to Continental/NRI Office Ventures ltd. by deed of record in Instrument 199808210213135, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio, and bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a 3/4-inch LD. iron pipe set in the south line of Post Road (60 Feet wide), at the point of tangency at the east end of the curve connecting the south line of Post Road with the east line of Metatec Boulevard (variable width) (originally Discovery Boulevard), as Post Road is shown upon "Post Roacl, Wilcox Road, Perimeter Drive & Easements Dedication Plat", of record in flat Book 85, Pages 51, 52 and 53, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ollio, and as Metatec Boulevard is shown t?pon "Dedication of Discovery Boulevard & Easements", of record ill Plat Book 66, Page 97, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio; thence N 88° 07' 20" E along the south line of Post Road and along a north line of said original 42.592 acre tract a distance of 598.12 feet to a 3/4-inch l.D. iron pipe set at a point of curvature; thence easterly along the curved south line of Post Road, along a curved north line of said origi- nal 42.592 acre tract and with a curve to the left, data of which is: radius = 5,759.70 feet and delta = 2° 01' 00", a chord distance of 202.72 feet bearing N 87° 06' S0" E to a 3/4-inch 1.D. iron pipe set at the point of tangency; thence N 86° 06' 20" E along the south line of Post Road and along a north line of said original 42.592 acre tract a distance of 342.76 feet to a 3/4-inch LD. iron pipe set at a corner of said original 42.592 acre tract, in the west line of an original 2.024 acre tract of land conveyed to Camberlane Associates by deed of record in Official Record 11732, Page E 17, Recorder's Of- Lice, Franklin County, Ohio, and at the southwest corner of a 0234 acre tract of land conveyed out of said original 2.024 acre tract to The City of Dublin, Ohio, for Post Road right-of--way pur- poses by deed of record in Ofrcial Record 13=144, Page J 06, Recorder's Office, Franklin COllllty, 01110; thence S 3° 54' 20" E along a line of said original 42.592 acre tract and along a portion of the west line of said original 2.024 acre tract a distance of 240.18 feet to a 3/4-inch LD. iron pipe set at a corner of said original 42.592 acre tract and at the southwest corner of said original 2.021 acre tract; thence N 86° 06' 20" E along a north line of said original 42.592 acre tract and along the south line of said original 2.024 acre tract a distance of 332.49 feet to a 3/=1-inch LD. iron pipe set at a ~--eri~ -t~a-l--2 corner of said original 42.592 acre tract and at the southeast • r-1 ' r f, ~i, ~ ~ ~ tract; ~ r; 1 r~ ~ n ~r~,i '.i~11 ~ . _.98-173D22- 4B2JDOC t , a ~ Page 1 of 3 ~ : - ~ ~ ~_=0~ thence N 3° 54' 20" W along a line of said original 42.592 acre tract and along a portion of the east line of said original 2.024 acre tract a distance of 202.28 feet to a 3/4-inch LU. iron pipe set in the curved south line of Post Road, at the southeast corner of said 0.234 acre tract and at a corner of said original 42.592 acre tract; thence southeasterly along a portion of the curved south line of Post Road, along a curved north line of said original 42.592 acre tract and with a curve to the right, data of which is: radius = 308.83 feet and sub-delta = 7° 58' 00", a sub-chord distance of 42.91 feet bearing S 61° 13' 40" E to a 3/4-inch LD. iron pipe set at the point of tangency; thence S 57° 14' 40" E along the south line of Post Road and along a north line of said original 42.592 acre tract a distance of 422.32 feet to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe set at the Wort least corner of said original 42.592 acre tract and in the west line extended northerly of Lot Number One (1) in "Metro North Business Park", as shown of record in Plat Book 66, Page 71, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio; thence S 2° 53' O1" E along a portion of the east line of said original 42.592 acre tract, along the west line e~ctended northerly of said Lot No. I and along a portion of t}ie west line of said Lot No. 1 a distance of 908.74 feet to a 3/4-inch LD. iron pipe set at the northeast corner of a 4.230 acre tract of land conveyed to Perimeter A, Ltd., by deed of record in Instrument 19981 1190298745 (passing a point in the south line - to the east - of Post Road and at the north- west corner of said Lot No. 1 at 12.30 feet); thence S 87° 06' S9" W along the north line of said 4.230 acre tract a distance of 383.00 feet to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe set; thence N 5° 52' 35" W crossing a portion of said original 42.592 acre tract a distance of 510.27 feet to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe set at a point of curvature; thence northtivesterly crossing a portion oP said original 42.592 acre tract and with a curve to the left, data of which is: radius = 250.00 feet, and delta = 86° 00' 05", a chord distance of 341.00 feet bearing N 48° 52' 37" W to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe set; thence S 88° 07' 20" W crossing a portion of said original 42.592 acre tract and along a south line of said original 42.592 acre tract and along the north line of Wall Street (60 feet wide), as shown upon the plat entitled "Dedication of Discovery Boulevard, Perimeter Drive, Wall Street and Easements" of record in Plat Book 72, Pages 79 and 80, Recorder's Ottice, Franklin County, Ohio a distance of 898.09 feet to a 3/4-inch LD, iron pipe set at a point of curvature; thence westerly along a portion of the curved north line of Wall Street, along a curved line of said original 42.592 acre tract and with a curve to the left, data of which is: radius = 1,030.00 feet and sub-delta = 2° 44' 17", a sub-chord distance of 49.22 Feet bearing S 86° 45' 12" W to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe set at a corner of said original 42.592 acre tract and at the southeast corner of a 1.432 acre tract of land conveyed to Ruma hlvestment Company by deed of record in Offi- cial Record 18377, Page 118, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio; thence N 4° 36' S7" W along a west line of said original 42.592 acre ~ t ~~c- 1 ~;on~~th~ e~~~ li~~'e ~ L, i i of said 1.432 acre tract a distance of l 87.16 feet to a 3/4-inch 1.D. iro ` ~i ~!~et 7t a ~orAi:-r-.off=sa+d1 ~ ~1 ~ original 42.592 acre tract and at the northeast corner of said 1.432 ac?~~ ~;~~ct; , ~ _ ~J 98-173D22_462.DOC' L_ ~ Page 2 of 3 - --4' thence S 89° 07' 19" W along a line of said original 42.592 acre tract and along the north line of said 1.432 acre tract a distance of 303.95 feet to a 3/4-inch LD. iron pipe set in the east line of Nletatec Boulevard (60 feet wide), at a corner of said original 42.92 acre tract and at the north- west corner of said 1.432 acre tract; thence N 0° 52' 41" W along the east line of Metatec Boulevard and along a west line of said original 42.592 acre tract a distance of 52.32 feet to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe set at a point of cur- vature; thence northerly along the curved east line of Nletatec Boulevard (variable width), along the curved west line of said original 42.592 acre tract and with a curve to the right, data of which is: radius = 500.00 feet and delta = 6° 31' 1 1 a chord distance of X6.87 feet bearing N 2° 22' SS" E to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe set at the point of tangency; thence N 5° 38' 30" E along the east line of Nletatec Boulevard and along a west line of said. original 42.592 acre tract a distance of 121.03 feet to a 3/4-inch LD. iron pipe set at a point of curvature at the south end of said connecting curve; thence northeasterly along said connecting curve, along the curved northwest line of said 42.592 acre tract and with a curve to the right, data of which is: radius = 30.00 feet and delta = 82° 28' ~0", a chord distance of 39.5 feet bearing N 46° 52' S5" E to the place of beginning, containing 22.462 acres of land more or less and being subject to all easements and restrictions of record. The above description was prepared by Kevin L. Baxter, Ohio S~irveyor No. 7697, of C.F. Bird & R.J. Bull, Inc., Consulting Engineers & Surveyors, Columbus, Ohio, from actual field surveys performed under his supervision in April, 197, in October, 1985, in November, 1986, in April, 1990, in July, 1996, and in July, 1998. Basis of bearings is the centerline of Post Road, being N 88° 07' 20" E (east of Metatec Boulevard), as shown of record in Plat Book 8~, Pages 51, 52 and 53, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio. yq,,,,.,~..,....~:,,, Kevin L. Baxter r Ohio Surveyor #7697 ;T ` B~~~.l~ . ~ ~5-76~?';~~ C1~t~~r# I i v~ ~i _ ` F ~ , , ; ' r ~ _ _t~~30~~ 98-173D22 462.DOC Page 3 of 3 _ c~--~~o_~~' CI-I, INC. ` r--- ~ Adjacent Properly Owners '~j Pro~~erty Owner I'~~erty Address iu M1-rllii~~ A'~dr~s~s ~ City oCDublin, Ohio 6565 Conullerce Paclcway 6565 Conlnlerce Parkway Dublin, Ohio 43017 Dublin, Ohio 43017 Olde Poste I'roperlies I'ostrear Road c/o Ruscilli Construction Co. Dublin, Ohio 43017 2041 Arliiigate Lane ~,OIu111bUS, Ohio 43228 Ruscilli Construction Co, Inc. 0 V~~ilcox Road 2041 Arlingate Lane Profit Sharing Plan & Trust Dublin, Ohio 43017 Columbus, Ohio 43228 Gordon Plesch Company 5655 Venture Drive 2030 Diviclencl Drive Dublin, Ohio 43017 Columbus, Ohio 43228 H)?R Realtors 1.335 Acres on Perimeter Dr. 4656 Cxecutive Drive Dublin, Ohio 43017 Columbus, Ohio 43220 CheckFree Corp. 6000 Perimeter Drive 6000 Perimeter Drive Dublin, Ohio 43017 Dublin, Oliio 43017 Drentlinger Dilterprises 14.5 Acres on Perimeter Dr. SO1/6 Post Road Dublin, Ohio 43017 Dublin, Ohio 43017 Mctatec Corporation 7001 \~lilcox Road 7001 Metatec I3oulcvard Dublin, Ohio 43017 Dublin, Ohio 43017 Ohio Credit Union League 5815 Wall Street 1201 Dublin Road Dublin, Ohio 43017 Columbus, Ohio 43215 Jentgen Klein Company 6631 Commerce Paclcway 1550 W. Old Henderson IZd Dublin, Oliio X43017 Columbus, Ohio 43220 JA Associates 675 I Commerce 1'arlcway 1 S50 W. Old I-Icnclerson Rd. Dublin, Ohio 43017 Columbus, Ohio 43220 Triplex Company 6543 Commerce Parkway 1550 W. Old I-Ier~clerson Rcl. Dublin, Ohio 43017 CO1lIl11bUS, Ohio 43220 Triplex Company 6631 Commerce Parkway 1550 W. Old I-Icnderson Rd. Dublin, Ohio 43017 Columbus, Ohio 43220 Ralph & Julia I-Ialloran 6124 Post Roact 6124 Post Roacl Dublin, Ohio 43017 Dublin, Ohio 43017 Gary Sc. Lori ICinman 6080 Post Roacl 6040 Post Roacl IJ Dublin, Uhio 43017 Dublin, Ohio 43017 /f t ~XHl~li~ 3 Christopher ~C Deborah Clinc LOGO Posl Road Renaissance "rower Dublin, Ohio 43017 1201 Elm Street Dallas, TX 75270 Larry Segner, Tr. 0 Post Road 7340 Dublin Roacl Dublii:, Ohio 13017 Dublin, Ohio 43017 Albert & Stephanie Dantzer 5952 Post Road Renaissance Tower Dublin, Ohio 43017 1201 I;lm Street Dallas, TX 75270 W,-.- Todd c~ ~1nl;elika Parrcll 5930 Posl Road 425 Walnut Street Dublin, Ohio 43017 CIIICIIlna~l, Ohio 45201 Gregory & Do~uia Anderson 5904 Post Road Renaissance Tower Dublin, Ohio 43017 1201. Elm Street Dallas, TX 75270 .~-i Patrick & Valerie Costello 5886 Post Road Renaissance "rower Dublin, Ohio 43017 1201 Elm Street Dallas, TX 75270 Robert A. Layman III 5863 Post Road Renaissance Tower Dublin, Ohio 43017 1201 Elm Street Dallas, TX 75270 Ruma Investment Company C>701 Discovery Boulevard 1 15~ Goodale Boulevard Dublin, Ohio 43017 Columbus, Ohio 43212 2C:\WP W iN\TROTTIPROPO WN.CI I ' r ' ' i ~ i : ~ 1 I- r , LJ vl L______-- - _ --_---____-I ~ ~ ~a . Preliminary Development Standards PROPOSE D Perimeter enter Sub Area B ~ TE X T A D M E N D M E N T Current Zoning: Planned Commercial District Proposed Zoning: Multifamily Residential Owner: Continental /NRI Ventures Ltd. Applicant: Homestead Communities LLC Date: March 1, 2000 Use: Empty nester condominiums. Total number of units = 70 owner occupied units on 22 acres = 3.18 DUA Parkland: Required; 4.62 acres, Provided; 5.14. Detention lake will be improved with walking paths, benches, etc. Setbacks: Along Post Road: Building: 100' Pavement: 100 average' Along Wall Street: Building 25' Pavement 25' Along Metatec: Building 50' Pavement 50' Sideyards: 10' minimum Landscape Buffer: Along Post Road: The primary focus of the Post Road frontage will be a water feature. This water feature will be a stream with small drops in elevation going from a high point at the northwest corner of the site and then east along Post Road in a series of small waterfalls until the lowest pool is reached. The water will be recycled from there back to the point of beginning. The balance of the Post Road frontage will be landscape materials and mounding. Along Wall Street: Stone fencing will run along the Wall Street property line. In addition to the stone wall will be landscaped zone that increases in depth from 25' on the west end to 50' on the east end. This zone will he planted with a variety of materials to assure screening year round. Additionally we will be planting street trees along the south side of Wall Street to add a second layer of plant material and to create a consistent landscape corridor along our frontage. Building materials: Siding: Stucco, cultured stone, brick, and cementitious plank siding. Colors: Stucco and plank siding; White, buff /beige and gray Trim : "Plytrim" Color: All trim will be White Roof: Asphalt shingles Color: Weatherblend 1 ~ ~ Windows: Vinyl ' ! _ - Color; White ~ ~ ~ '!~J 1_.J ti ii ~1~ . _~r I3 RECORD OF PROCEE[~INGS Min ~ c of McPt1nH Dublin City Council Meeting Page 13 Held Tannarv ~R, ~nnn ~Y~R~ Community D velopment Committee: John Reiner (Chair), Gre eterson, Bob Adamek; P is Services Committe .Marilee Chinnici-Zuer er (Chair), Cathy Boring, Tom Mc sh. Mr, A ek seconded the mot' n. Vote n the m tion: Mrs. B ng, yes; Mayor ICranst er, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Mc ash, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuer er, yes, Mr. Adamek, yes. Conceut Plan -Homestead Village Ms. Clarke explained that the concept plan is the first step in the PUD approval process. The 22-acre site, located on the south side of Post Road, is currently zoned PCD, primarily for office purposes, but partially for industrial purposes. It is part of the major Perimeter Center development that stretches from Avery Road eastward to the Justice Center property. This is a residential proposal for 60 attached residences and 15 live- work units (units that have home office attachments). Staff initially recommended disapprovat on the basis of land-use issues. The proposal was heard by Planning Commission twice and was approved December 2, 1999 by a vote of 4-2 with four conditions: (1) that a more intense buffer be implemented between this project and the light industrial and commercial uses; (2) that the site layout be reconfigured and units are dropped to achieve a lower density and create better open space; (3) that the plan enhance the scenic roadway with elements from the "WOW" program; and (4) that pond amenities be added per the staff report. The developer agreed to the above conditions. Ms. Clarke added that staff was pleased to see a residential proposal for this area, and there is considerable support from the neighbors on Post Road. The beauty of this project is impressive. The Planning Commission believes it is the appropriate development for the south side of Post Road. Mr. Peterson asked if this multi-family development serves as a transition from the single-family homes on the north side of Post Road to the commercial uses to the immediate south. Ms. Clarke noted that the residential properties on the north are buffered by the parkland along the stream, but the multi-family will add additional buffer for the Post Road homeowners. Staff is more concerned about buffer for the multi-family project. There is no control over land use to the south of it, and there is no option of downzoning the land to the south. Mr. Peterson asked if there is any way to address the additional traffic which will come with this project. Ms. Clarke responded that the access for this site has not been determined. Staff would prefer to see the access continue to be south from Perimeter, Wall Street, and Metatec and not directly to Post Road. Twenty-two acres developed as residential will generate much lower traffic than the use for which it is currently zoned. Mrs. Boring noted that Metatec to the west has expanded a couple of times already and inquired if there would be room for further expansion if this project goes in. Ms. Clarke responded that Metatec has developed most of their space. Mrs. Boring inquired about staff s recommendation to install community gardens along Post Road. Mrs. Clarke responded that the community gardens were in the original draft of the WOW catalog, but at a joint work session with staff and Planning Commission, the idea was discarded. Mrs. Boring requested that sufficient buffering of lights and traffic be considered in the PUD, so that residents of the new development do not request those attl$t~~1r1"~d CoUNCK. oD~~ M~nN oa 3 OD ~,,.y f ]i RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Meetino Dublin City Council Meering Page 14 Held TannanLl $ x(1(1(1 ~Y~R~ non, ~=*a~~ President of Homestead Communities, thanked Ms. Clarke for her positive description of his project. He addressed the issue of anticipated uses for the land south of this project. He explained that of the three adjoining areas, one parcel has been sold and there are plans for an office building; CheckFree recently purchased the second parcel, probably for parking expansion; and one undeveloped corner parcel remains. All of those are one-story commercial uses. He described the different levels of buffering planned for the project, the benefits of the transition it will provide between residential and commercial, and the minimal impact on traffic it should have. Mrs. Boring inquired if there will be fountains in all the ponds to keep the geese away. Mr. Gray responded affirmatively. Edith Driscoll. 6230 Post Road, testified, representing the citizens on Post Road between Emerald Parkway and Avery Road. Over 75% of the neighbors have been contacted regarding this proposed development. There has been no dissenting vote. Their opinion is that this development will be an asset to their neighborhood, and they encourage Council's approval. C kris line 6060 Post Road, stated that he and the four other adjoining residential landowners all strongly support this project. He noted that this is the former site of the proposed Wellington School. Since that project was discarded in the 70's, there has been concern about the type of development that would eventually come in. They are very pleased with this proposal; it is high quality and will provide a great view on Post Road. They have discussed with the developer the possibility of complementary landscape and use of common elements in the development, such as the stone piers, up and down Post Road to bring an integration of the view. He added that the residents prefer the access be to Post Road. The current traffic problem is due to the fact that traffic speeds up in the open spaces. Curb cuts and turning movements on the road would inhibit its use as a major thoroughfare. He encourages Council approval. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher moved to approve the concept plan for Homestead Village with the conditions as stated. Mr. Peterson seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Peterson, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr.. Adamek, yes; Mayor Kranstuber, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Council Round Table/Committee Reports Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher reminded Council members of the Police accreditation meeting on Monday, January 24"', at 7:00 p.m. in the Mayor's Courtroom at the Justice Center. Mayor Kranstuber stated that current Council policy provides funding for the chairman of Planning and Zoning Commission to attend inservices and training, including the annual APA conference. He proposed extending this benefit to the other members of the Commission. He estimates that the cost of the APA conference, including airfare, would be approximately $2,000 - $2,500.00 each, and, consequently, suggests that amount. However, he clarified that he does not propose designating the money only for APA conference, but for any related education. Mr. McCash agreed that if the intent is to have the best informed individuals on this Commission, it is best to provide them the opportunity to remain current with advances in land planning and other relevant information. Mayor I{ranstuber moved to approve $2,500 per Planning and Zoning Commission member annually for relevant travel and training. Mrs. Boring seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Adamek, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Kranstuber, yes. Mr. Peterson inquired what the consensus of opinion was in regards to the letter distributed by Mr. Smith concerning campaign contribution limits. Would it be prudent DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION December 2, 1999 ~tN' t?t~ttl,t !~d'Svisioa of Pfaadng 300 Slims-Rings Road Oha 43016-1236 Plione/tDO: 614-761 X550 Fmc 614-7616566 Web Site. www.dubGn.ahus The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 3. Concept Plan 99-071CP -Perimeter Center PCD, Subareas Band C -Homestead Communities Location: 22.2 acres on the southeast corner of Post Road and Metatec Boulevard. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Perimeter Center Plan, Subareas B and C). Request: Review and approval of a concept plan under the PUD, Planned Unit Development District provision of Section 153.056. Proposed Use:.. A development of 60 detached residences and 15 live/work units with 5.1 acres of parkland. Applicant: Continental NRI Office Ventures, Ltd., P.O. Box 712, Dublin, Ohio 43017; c/o Gary Gray, Homestead Communities LLC, 150 East Broad Street, Suite 505, Columbus Ohio 43215. MOTION: To approv this concept plan with four conditions: 1) That a ore intense buffer be implemented between this project and the light industri 1 and commercial uses; 2) That th site layout be reconfigured and units are dropped to achieve a lower density d create better open space; 3) That the plan enhance the scenic roadway with elements from the "WOW" program; and 4) That pond amenities be added per the staff report. A8 BUBMRTLp 7n COUNCIL * Gary Gray agreed to the above conditions. ) 0~ I ~ fCR MEET1Na ON VOTE: 4-2. RESULT: This concept plan was approved. It will be forwarded to City Council with a positive recommendation. STAFF CERTIFICATION ~~itn.~~- Chris Hermann Planner Dublin Planning and Zonir `'ommission Staff Report -December 2, . X99 Page 9 CASE 3: Concept Plan 99-071CP -Perimeter Center, Subareas B & C -Homestead Communities APPLICANT: Continental/NRI Ventures Ltd., P.O. Box 712, Dublin, Ohio 43017; c/o Gary E. Gray, Homestead Communities L.L.C., 150 East Broad Street, Suite 505, Columbus, Ohio 43215. REQUEST: Review and approval of a concept plan under the provisions of Section 153.056 for a residential development of 60 detached units and 15 live/work units with 5.1 acres of park. This 22.2-acre site is located at the southeast corner of Post Road and Metatec Boulevard. STAFF CONTACT: Chris Hermann, Planner. BACKGROUND: A large area was rezoned in 1988 as the Perimeter Center PCD for a variety of commercial, multi-family, and single-family uses. The proposed site contains portions of Subareas B and C and is generally zoned for office, daycare, and some other uses. The proposal is for a residential development including some limited first floor office space. The Commission informally reviewed a plan for 85 detached condominiums (3.83 units per acre) in May 1999. The Commission indicated support for a residential use provided it was an outstanding project with lower density, masonry materials, and adequate park, setbacks, and buffers. A concept plan should generally indicate the proposed land use, the overall project design, and how it relates to the surrounding area. The Planning and Zoning Commission is to make its recommendation and then forward the concept plan to City Council for its consideration. Approval of the concept plan authorizes the applicant to prepare a more complex preliminary development plan (rezoning application) within 180 days. Approval of the concept plan is not binding for either the applicant or the municipality. It is intended to inform the applicant whether the request appears to be appropriate in the City's view and worthy of further pursuit. CONSIDERATIONS: Site Characteristics: • This undeveloped parcel is flat, "J"-shaped, and contains 22.2 acres on the south side of Post Road. The site has roughly 1,700 feet of frontage along Post Road and wraps behind the Camberlane office on Post Road. It also has 250 feet of frontage on Metatec Boulevard and 450 feet on Wall Street. A tree row runs from Post Road to Wall Street, and a large man-made pond is located at the southeast corner of the site. • The parcel is zoned PCD, Planned Commerce District. The site is located in Subarea B and permits office, research, daycare, and institutional uses. The southern 20 percent of the site is in Subarea C and permits a broader group of uses including ancillary commercial uses, limited assembly, manufacturing, and wholesaling. Residential use is not permitted in either subarea. • To the north across Post Road are houses on estate lots zoned R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District. To the east and southeast are office and flex-offices buildings zoned LI, Limited Industrial District. The office buildings for CheckFree and the Ohio ? y Dublin Planning and Zonir ':ommission Staff Report -December 2, ~ 999 Page 10 Credit Union League are to the south across Wall Street (Subarea C) and the Perimeter Flex Office is south of the pond (Subarea C). To the southwest (corner) is a daycare center (Subarea B), and west across Metatec Boulevard is the Metatec complex (Subarea B-1). The Camberlane office project is along Post Road (zoned SO). Community Plan Issues: • The Community Plan shows Perimeter Center Subarea B as "office" and Subazea C as "mixed-use, employment emphasis." The Community Plan did not assume any residential use in this area, and no residential density was established. The total density of the proposal, including the pond area, is 3.38 dwelling units per acre plus 7,200 square feet of office. ' • Residential development of this site is a sensitive issue due to the abutting uses and potential industrial uses, some of which operate 24 hours per day, seven days a week. For a residential use to be viable in this location, it must emphasize setbacks and very substantial buffering. Ideally, there should be transitional uses that would act as buffers. • The Wall Street segments are not yet connected. Wall Street will conform to the approved preliminary plat, including sidewalk, street trees, street lighting, and utility lines. The dedicated right-of--way for Post Road and Wall Street (60 feet) meets the Thoroughfare Plan. • The Community Plan identifies Post Road as a scenic roadway. Setbacks of 200 feet have been recommended. As the Commission is aware, staff is in the process of creating an alternate scenic setback program ("Road to WOW"). The existing Perimeter Center text requires a 100-foot setback, which is shown on this plan. Land Use and Site Layout: • The site is designed with its main boulevarded entrance on Post Road. The plan shows a linear pond within the setback with two arched stone bridges. The entry street is ' lined with two three-story buildings, and a community center is located in the median. A narrow alley access is shown on Wall Street, opposite the main entrance. Two offset roads, one running east and the other west, connect to the entry road. An existing 3.8- acre pond is located at the southeast corner of the site. • The plan shows 75 units, of which 60 are detached units. They have asingle-family home appearance, including garages and 45-foot wide lots. The remaining 15 units are divided among two three-story structures along the entrance road. These units are proposed as "live/work" units, with the first floor used for small offices (front) and garages (rear) and living space on the second and third floors. • The streets are to be private and vary from 18 to 24 feet in width. On-street parking is proposed in front of the three-story buildings, and surface parking is provided behind them. • Under the current PCD, no access is permitted from Post Road. Adequate access has been provided for this site through the new street system of Perimeter Drive by way of a completed Wall Street. A Post Road access is inconsistent with the adopted policy to de-emphasize Post Road. Access into this site would also require the construction of a Dublin Planning and Zonir `:ommission Staff Report -December 2, X999 Page 11 turn lane on Post Road. Engineering staff is also concerned with the feasibility of driveway access to Metatec Boulevard. • The plan continues the currently required 100-foot building setbacks along Post Road, and it increases the 75-foot pavement setback to 100 feet. The plan, however, lowers the setbacks for Metatec Boulevard (25-foot pavement/50-foot building) and Wall Street (15-foot pavement/50-foot building). It shows less than afive-foot building setback from Metatec Boulevard and a setback along Wall Street as low as 25 feet. Code requires opaque buffering at least six feet wide adjacent to offices, and ten feet wide adjacent to businesses. These have not been articulated. • A development text has not been provided and is generally not required for the concept plan. Five-foot high, stucco-stone walls are proposed around most of the development. This is the extent of proposed buffering. Each of the detached units has a "yard," largely marked with stucco-stone walls. The walls are not set back from Metatec Boulevard and vary from zero to 45 feet along Wall Street. Open Space/Park and Tree Preservation: • Code requires park dedication for all residential developments, and in this case, the required park dedication is 4.57 acres. The plan provides internal greens, external setback areas, and the existing 3.8-acre pond. The external setback areas (100 feet wide at their maximum) total just over 5 acres. The plan also provides the 6-acre area around the retention pond. The retention pond will require some upgrading to meet the "amenity" criteria for storm water structures. Appropriate amenities could include fountains, waterfalls, walking paths, landscaping, and adeck/overlook. There are three main internal greens totaling 0.7 acres. How the park dedication is to be met will require further consideration. • A consistent landscape treatment of mounding (the Post Road buffer) was installed along the south side of Post Road. This includes an eight-foot bike path. This proposal replaces the mounding with a linear pond. It preserves the bike path and also adds a "°x community garden area. As part of a rezoning, a five-foot sidewalk will be required along Metatec Boulevard. Pedestrian connections from the Perimeter Center pond and the site to the Post Road bike path should be investigated at the next stage. • A tree row runs north to south through the site approximately 600 feet east of Metatec Boulevard. The plan does not indicate that it will be preserved. The preliminary development plan must show compliance with the tree preservation and replacement ordinance. Architecture and Design Elements: • The conceptual architectural elevations for the three-story buildings along the boulevard entrance reflect an Old English style similar in design to Craughwell Village. The buildings are highly detailed and have steeply pitched roofs, varying front facades, balconies, tall chimneys, straight and flat-arched windows, and first floor storefronts (including some awnings and projecting/wall signs). Conceptual elevations for the detached units were not provided. They are individual ranch, 1'/z, and 2 story LI Dublin Planning and Zonir "'ommission Staff Report -December 2; .999 Page 12 structures with pitched roofs, many windows, stone and stucco exteriors, and various other details. All units have garages and three-foot high stone walls. Utilities: • The site plan shows lots slightly encroaching on the existing retention pond. .The applicant plans to use the proposed Post Road pond to make up for any reduction in storm water capacity. The City Engineer must approve this and the development must comply with the City's stormwater regulations. Public water is available to the site from a 16-inch line along Post Road, a 12-inch line on Metatec Boulevard, and asix-inch line along Wall Street. Public sanitary sewer is available to this site and should be extended along Wall Street, connecting with the line along Perimeter Drive. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The primary issue for this plan is land use and the appropriateness of residential development at this location. The secondary issue is balancing the density and bulk of this development with the needed buffers, park, and amenities. Varying from the Community Plan not only requires an exceptional site plan, but also a strong buffer plan to assure a good housing environment over the long term. Staff fords the concept and site design very appealing, however this is not the appropriate site. Staff recommends disapproval. Bases: 1) The plan is not consistent with the land uses recommended in the Community Plan. 2) The proposed residential use is not compatible with the surrounding, non- residential zoning, and neither transitional uses nor proper buffering is provided. 3) The plan does not provide the necessary open space. 4) The plan is not consistent with the established City Council policy of de- emphasizing Post Road. 5) The plan does not meet the 200-foot setback scenic road setback recommended in the Community Plan. 6) The plan exhibits inadequate setbacks in some areas, such as Metatec Boulevard. . ~ (J Odve A a " (n tll (11 mmm m m 1 i~`"'"` YJ ~ ~ ~~~~yT W c' t7 m C7 ~ ~ ~ g~levacd ~ ~ m c ~ cu W ~ z ~ _ . - ~ D - - ~ ~ o a.. cn . ~ ~ a ~ m f ~ a _ - - n ~ _ ` - p Z DO ~ 1 c . ~v o n ~ 99-071CP Concept Plan ~ ~ Perimeter Center PCD Subareas B & C Homestead Communities ~ ~ Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -December 2, 1999 Page 13 13) That 20 perce solar gray tint be used on windows; 14) That the pl structure be restricted ton xral earthtones; 15) That five second story windows square and be spaced above ev other lower sto window; and 16) at revised site plan and bu' mg elevation drawings consistent 'th the discussion at this meeting be submitted thin two weeks, and be approved b staff. Mr. Sampson agreed to the ove conditions. Mr. Peplow se ded the motion, and vote was as follows: Mr. S ague, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; . McCash, yes; Mr. Har' ,yes; Mr. Eastep, yes; Mr eplow, yes; and Mr. Fishman, s. (Approved 7-0.) Mr. Lecklide anked Mr. Fraas and Mr. S on for their patience. Mr. Lec ider called a brief recess. Upon returning, he announced the o'clock rule. 3. Concept Plan 99-071CP -Perimeter Center PCD, Subareas Band C -Homestead Communities (Mr. McCash did not participate in this case.] Chris Hermann said this concept plan is for 75 condo units on 22.2 acres. He said this concept plan has been revised significantly since last May. The Commission had asked for a really special plan. The area uses include daycare, office-warehouse, and offices. He said the sections of Wall Street will be connected through this site. The stormwater pond at the southeast corner is included to meet the park requirement, along with internal greens and the external setbacks. He showed several slides. Mr. Hermann said the entrance from Post Road has three-story buildings with "live-work units" and a community center in the median. The balance of the buildings will be two stories and have residences only. The Post Road 100-foot setback will have a linear pond, stone walls ,g and includes several "wow" features. The overall density is 3.38 units per acre. Mr. Hermann said this is amuch-improved plan, and the units are very striking, but the proposed land use is a problem. Some industrial uses are permitted on the adjacent property, and this plan does not have transitional uses or area or any buffers. Staff believes this will lead to long-term incompatibility. He noted some residents have expressed support, and positive letters from Metatec and Cardinal Health were distributed. Mr. Hermann said some of the uses, existing or future, can be 24-hour, seven-day a week operations. Residents usually expect protection from such uses. He said staff recommends disapproval based on the following: 1) The plan is not consistent with the land uses recommended in the Community Plan. 2) The proposed residential use is not compatible with the surrounding, non-residential zoning, and neither transitional uses nor proper buffering is provided. 3) The plan does not provide the necessary open space. 4) The plan is not consistent with the established City Council policy of de-emphasizing Post Road. ~°°~a a Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -December 2, 1999 Page 14 5) The plan does not meet the 200-foot setback scenic road setback recommended in the Community Plan. 6) The plan exhibits inadequate setbacks in some areas, such as Metatec Boulevard. Mr. Peplow asked if the concern would be alleviated if the surrounding land were totally developed. Ms. Clarke said uses change over time. She said the land use rights run with the land, and these have not been addressed. Changes of use, which meet the PCD text, do not require Commission review. She reviewed some of the Perimeter Center zoning history. The entire site had LI, Limited Industrial zoning, and the areas along Post Road and US 33/SR 161were downzoned to office-only. Some industrial uses were retained in the middle section, including part of this site and the land to the south of it. She said if the industrial rights were to lapse, the staff would withdraw its opposition, but no one is offering to downzone the land right next door. These are probably the least compatible, on their face, types of use in Dublin. Mr. Sprague said this was a proactive and cautious approach. He noted that Metatec is a local industrial business, and had retained good relations with the neighborhood. He said this property was a challenge to develop. Mr. Hermann said this is a concept plan, and, if approved, the next phase will be a PUD rezoning application. Mr. Fishman said this is a rezoning for apartments, and he feared that the outcome may not be "special." The players and the product might change. Ms. Clarke noted that many PUD rezonings are very specific, and some are looser. That will be determined in a future phase. This review is on the general land use, not the plan specifics. Mr. Fishman said this plan should be very specific. He did not want the possibility of unpleasant surprises. Mr. Lecklider agreed and said the special-ness should be a binding component. Mr. Fishman said approval of the concept plan starts the process, even if it is a "non-binding" review. Ms. Clarke added that approval of the concept plan authorizes the filing of the PUD rezoning, and the developer needs genuine feedback to determine if moving forward with the expenses of engineering, etc. makes sense. She urged the Commissioners to u be very clear in their comments. Mr. Lecklider said the concept plan record should include their caveats. If the rezoning plan does not address their concerns, the Commission should not approve it. Mr. Sprague said it should be clear that an unimpressive apartment project that barely meets the density requirements will not be approved. Mr. Eastep said this could have been filed as a rezoning request instead of a concept plan. Gary Gray, Homestead Communities, said the Commission had previously supported a residential use for this site, if the development could "knock their socks off." This is their goal. He understood the non-binding nature of the concept plan and that the PUD rezoning will need to be very specific. The plan was revised to address density, layout, and materials. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -December 2, 1999 Page 15 It uses a European layout. The Post Road entry comes cross the pond. He showed several renderings. Mr. Gray said there will be stone bridges, and a community center at the entrance. The buildings have 15 live-work units; each of these townhouses has a garage below and a 400 square foot shop in front. These were a response to market research on empty nesters. The rest of the site is more open. There are steps down to the water and a stone wall along the pond across half of the Post Road frontage, similar to the pond at the Dublin recreation center. This is a condo development on private streets without lots. He said the curb and gutter will not be standard. Mr. Gray said the Wall Street side has a wall as a land use transition. This area will be at the rear of the dwellings. There are 15 live-work units and 60 residential condos. The units will be from 1,600-2,200 square feet and all have basements and two-car garages. The condos are stand-along units without common walls. The exterior materials are stone and stucco. Mr. Gray said the greenspace area excludes the existing retention pond, and they believe this area exceeds Code. He disagrees with the staff report that indicates a park shortfall. He noted a letter in support from Cardinal Health. He estimated the cost as $250,000 per unit. Mr. Lecklider wanted data on the park calculation. Gary Schmidt, the project planner, said the Code requires 4.7 acres. The three green area are: the perimeter road open space of 3.95 acres, including the Post Road pond; the Wall Street open space is about seven acres, including the pond; and the internal greens are 0.85 acres; yielding 11 acres overall. He said they then subtracted the pond of 5-plus acres, and they have 6.8 acres of open space which qualifies under the Code. Mr. Fishman noted the land for open space is very linear and thin strips. Mr. Hermann said the area needed for storm water detention facilities will be subtracted. However, if amenities such as paths and benches are added at the perimeter, that land area should count toward the Code requirement. He noted that setbacks are not usually counted for park. There are some "wow" factors, but this has not been finalized. Mr. Ezell noted that this site is located in the "River Heritage" area, and the recommended setback is 100 feet, as shown on this plan. Mr. Fishman really liked the design, but he was undecided. He said Willow Grove was also "transitional" housing with buffers, etc. However, when Emerald Parkway was built, Dublin had to install a very expensive buffer. The residents packed the hearing room asking for walls, landscaping, etc. He fears this will happen here and noted that Metatec will increase manufacturing in Dublin. The future is not set for this area. He said this plan is too dense and has inadequate buffers. Buffers should be funded by the developer, not by Dublin later. He said the buffer should be as good as the one at Willow Grove. He expressed concern about future residents having complaints about night deliveries, commercial noise, etc. ~1 Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -December 2, 1999 Page 16 Mr. Lecklider did not thing that Willow Grove was a like situation. Mr. Harian agreed and said any new buyer can see the commercial buildings and will make an informed decision. Mr. Fishman said he could not vote for this concept plan as submitted. While it is beautiful, it still needs a lot of work and buffers from the industrial use. The site needs a broader perimeter, and he suggested surrounding it with water. It should be spectacular. Mr. Peplow said the density was not decreased since the first hearing some months ago. Mr. Gray said the project was reduced from 85 to 75 units. Mr. Gray said the greenspace and personal space have been greatly increased. The townhouses in the center have the highest density, and the rest of the units are now bigger. Mr. Gray said the townhouse and the commercial space are sold as a unit, for people who work at home. Mr. Peplow had concern about commercial traffic from those units on a non- public road. Mr. Fishman said the restrictions on these units will have to be spelled out in the text, as general commercial would be unacceptable. Mr. Gray said the condominium association itself decides what uses are acceptable and polices it. He said their market study indicates it is largely for the semi-retired or part-time professional. Mr. Lecklider noted that Metatec is a known use, but they're a number of land use unknowns. He noted that Checkfree is the second occupant of the building, but there are some protections against really noxious uses. Mr. Hermann said Subarea C, south of Wall Street generally, includes industrial uses. Along Post Road, in Subarea B, office and daycare are permitted. Mr. Fishman said teaches that Dublin should not create incompatible land use situations. He reiterated that the density is too high. Mr. Eastep noted the density has dropped from 3.8 to 3.3 units per acre if the pond is included; without the pond it is 5.5 per acre. Mr. Gray said the land use issue already exists with the residents on Post Road. Mr. Harian said he liked this concept and thought it was a good use for the area. The quality will have to be very high as this goes forward. He liked the wall along Wall Street. He said it may be too dense, but he likes it overall. Mr. Fishman there needs to be more distance at the rear; it is a quality of life issue. It is not just afour-sided architecture issue. He restated that the density should be lower. Mr. Gray asked if raising the wall height along Wall Street to four or five feet would solve the separation problem. Mr. Fishman said, no, it should be increased space with landscaping. Mr. Peplow said this plan provides a good housing choice if you do not want a big yard. Mr. Eastep agrees with the staff that this is the wrong land use. He previously stated he could support a density of 2.5 units per acre with proper park dedication, but he disagrees with the applicant's park calculation. Park dedication should provide new amenities. He believes the 5 Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -December 2, 1999 Page 17 density is really five units per acre, because the pond should not be used in density. He thought "European" design was another way to describe over-developed or too dense. A wall is used to provide privacy, as the last resort, and it indicates inappropriate development. Mr. Eastep said the area is already zoned properly--for office and Research and development uses. He saw no justification to rezone revenue-producing ground for anon-productive residential project. He thought the units were acceptable, but they were more appropriate for German Village. He did not feel his comments were incorporated from the previous hearing. Mr. Sprague said overall, there were many things he likes about this. The live-work units are interesting and should work here. He thinks the wall makes an effective demarcation between uses. The architecture is attractive and does not need much work. The density should be lowered, perhaps by 20 percent, and the buffer should be enhanced with "wow" features. This provides a good transition. The text needs to be very specific because he would not support just a standard housing product here. This site should have something special. Mr. Sprague noted that decreasing the density may make this project financially unfeasible. Mr. Lecklider liked a number of things about this plan, but there are some problems. The Post Road frontage treatment and entry, and the concept and design are attractive. He appreciated the drop in density, but it should be lower as the "live-work" units offset it. The setback on Metatec Boulevard is too close. The Wall Street setback is acceptable to him. Mr. Lecklider said this site is unique, and improvements around the pond will benefit the area. He was sympathetic to the views of the Post Road residents and noted that there are other residential uses along the south side of Post Road. If this slate were clean, this might be the preferred use. The text will need to be very tight if this application goes forward. Mr. Peplow said most of the Commission's comments were made at the former meeting. Chris Cline, Post Road resident, said Perimeter Center land uses have changed over time. He said this land has been serviced for years, and he fears that a future use will be less compatible. The former Deluxe Check plant is no longer used for manufacturing, and the area does have a strong industrial future. He said Metatec has been a good neighbor and a special case. Mr. Cline said the text will need to be locked down at the rezoning stage. Mr. Cline said this land is class "B" or "C" and is not prime for commercial purposes. He said this is similar to the Weatherstone section in Muirfield Village. Mr. Fishman said Weatherstone is situated next to a large open space. Mr. Cline said the garden plots along Post Road seem inappropriate. He noted that the WOW program is not yet enacted. He supported the project. Mr. Harian said the density question should be answered now. Mr. Fishman agreed. Mr. Fishman thought the concept could work, but the people will need a buffer. He said the Commission should not put in land uses that will create problems later. Density and openspace are the questions; more open space and fewer units should be shown in the plan. ~ Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -December 2, 1999 Page 18 Mr. Gray said from a density standpoint, they were at the edge already. If that is the dividing issue, they will withdraw the application. Mr. Sprague also liked the entry feature. He said it was first class and beautiful. He said EMS will appreciate having multiple entry points. Mr. Peplow did not know how the additional buffering and openspace could be obtained without decreasing the density. Mr. Lecklider said this was an unique concept which required a certain density. Forcing the density down may create "just another neighborhood," which is not appropriate along Post Road. He suggested dropping some units on the west side along Metatec Boulevard and a couple around the pond. He thought the concept did fit the area. Mr. Harian agreed. Mr. Peplow said if the buffer could be provided without lowering the density, the project could still work. He wanted to protect the current residents as much as possible, but did not want to have a wall built. He asked how residential units could be placed so close to the light industrial uses and still assure some type of buffering between the two. Mr. Peplow said the requested architectural changes had been made. He would support this project if arranged differently and with greater landscaping along Wall Street. Mr. Sprague liked the plan, but would like to see it reduced by five or six units, or perhaps have the interior greenspace expanded. Mr. Gray said the plan is close to equilibrium without much room for negotiation. They need adequate revenue to pay for the amenities. This should be as a high quality and unique. He wants this to be a trophy project. Any reductions in density mean giving up something else. Mr. Sprague suggested evaluating a density reduction. With a slightly reduced density, stronger buffering and a "wow" or two, he would support it. If the density cannot be reduced, it is not the right use. The pond and quality need to remain the same. Mr. Lecklider said the Commission would like to see the density reduced slightly, but his greater concern was buffering. Mr. Gray responded a 20 percent density reduction would not be possible, but there are many buffer possibilities for Wall Street. Mr. Fishman did not have a specific density in mind. The Community Plan indicates this area for revenue production, not residential use. Given that, it had to "knock their socks off". This is too dense, and zoning should only be changed for solid reasons. Bill Dargusch, a partner in the project, thought the Commission should support this because the residents support it. They will work on the Wall Street buffer, but it will not be lined with trucks. He said landscaping, Dublin walls, etc. could be used. Their entry gatehouses and landscaping create the proper image at the entries. They have worked with staff for four months on a plan to "knock people's socks off ' . He wanted clear direction on the Wall Street buffering. ~7 Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -December 2, 1999 Page 19 , Mr. Fishman said his responsibility is to obtain the best results for Dublin and for the neighbors. He noted that staff recommends disapproval of the rezoning and that the Commission has given two hours of feedback. This is anon-binding hearing. In addition to buffering of Wall Street, they had a problem with density and open greenspace. Mr. L.ecklider said a majority is inclined toward this as an appropriate land use. Mr. Eastep said he still had a problem with this land use. Only if it is fantastic should they vote to forego the tax revenue potential. He noted the many area improvement that have increased the opportunities at this site. He did not support changing the land use to multi- family with the potential loss of tax dollars. He agreed with the staff report. Mr. Gray said they are the only buyers at the table, and this is the highest and best use. Ms. Clarke said the product "knocked the socks off" the staff, and she has not heard the same level of excitement from the Commission. She asked for clear direction. Mr. Lecklider said his "socks were coming off". He said this might be an appealing place for him to live as a future empty nester. There are not many places like this existing in Dublin. He said this issue is less about density than buffering, but a lower density would be welcome. He said the applicant had come a long way towards meeting the concerns of the Commission. Mr. Peplow and Mr. Harian did not want eight or ten-foot wall along Wall Street. Something similar to Emerald Parkway would work. Mr. Fishman said density was a big issue for him. Mr. Lecklider the majority does not expect a 20 percent reduction in density. Ms. Clarke said during the Community Planning process, the existing zoning was examined to see if it still made sense. The Perimeter Center Plan PCD was considered to represent good future land use. When the Steering Committee did not like the land uses shown on the zoning map, etc. and they proposed alternates. No alternate was proposed here. Mr. Fishman said he worked on the Community Plan. The consultants figured the revenue streams, etc. based on the zoning in place. Ms. Clarke said one big decision made in the process, was not to roll back the existing zoning. The bias of the subcommittee was to leave the zoning in place unless it stood out as a problem. Ms. Clarke said Metatec built when the land had its original industrial zoning. Metatec cooperated with Dublin in rolling its land in with a Planned Commerce District, agreeing to architectural review, etc. Ms. Clarke said the company is a good, responsible corporate citizen. Mr. Lecklider agreed that Metatec (aka Discovery Systems) has been an outstanding neighbor. Mr. Harian made a motion to approve this concept plan with four conditions: 1) That a more intense buffer be implemented between this project and the light industrial and Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -December 2, 1999 Page 20 commercial uses; 2) That the site layout be reconfigured and units are dropped to achieve a lower density and create better open space; 3) That the plan enhance the scenic roadway with elements from the "WOW' program; and 4) That pond amenities be added per the staff report. Mr. Peplow seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Fishman, no; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Eastep, no; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. Harian, yes. (Approved 4-2.) 4. Rezoning Application 99-1082 - Revi Composite Plan -Tuttle Crossing PCfD, Subarea A4 - Kinko's Copy Store - 5 0 Paul G. Blazer Memorial Parkway This case was postponed without discu ion until December 9 due to the late hour. 5. Development Plan/Co itional Use 99-109DPCU -Tuttle Crossing PC1), Subarea A4 - McDonald's Resta ant - 5170 Tuttle Crossing Boulevard and nko's Copy Store - 5520 Paul G. Bl er Parkway This case was po oned prior to the meeting. There was no di ssion or vote taken. 6. Rez ng 99-1162 -Tuttle Crossing PCD, Su ea C -Offices at Tuttle Crossing - Tuttle Crossing Boulevard This case was postponed without discussion un ' December 9 due to the late hour. i~ 7. Development Plan 99-107DP -,t cattle Crossing PCD, Subarea C1 - ices at Tuttle Crossing - 4800 Tuttle Cross~~ig Boulevard This case was postponed with t discussion until December 9 due to elate hour: 8. Development Plan 99-117DP -Perimeter Center D, Subarea D -Rea Building - 5775 Perime r Drive This case was ostponed without discussion until December 9 due to the late hour. The meeting adjourned at 12:08 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Flora Rogers Clerical Specialist II Planning Division. 0 0 ~ 0 _ -Y~ - ~ ( J -b a ~ 1 ~ i _ ' a I , _ i c ~ 3 ] _ 's O ~ ~ ~ x ~ n - 0 1 ~ 4 ~ 0 1 j ~ _ ~ ~ x z - ~ !m ~ , •r ` _ ~ - L i ~ x l ,I . ~ m _ f j Y/ - ~ m iii i ~ . j , 1L - ~ _ ~ y i i, ~ 1 . 1 . \ ~ ~ .1 ~ fi - ! R' / - I ~ - / , - 99-071CP _ - - - - - - Concept Plan J i / ~ Perimeter Center PCD Subareas B & C ~ ~ v ~ Homestead Communities ~3a ~ ~ ~ Y/~~~ ~ ~~~1 1 ? ~ ~ ~ ~ y:i ~ ~ ~ ~ - j'_ r T y } ~ p- a 1 ' ~ , T ~ i .k~ ii 1 i ' ~ 1 ~ ~ a ~ tike L. ~ r h" ¢ ~ 's s ~ ' Y l ~ t T ' ~ ~ : ,i a ~ ~ ~t . , - j O 1 ~ > r - f`. ~ say . - r 99-071CP - Concept Plan Perimeter Center PCD Subareas B & C Homestead Communities 3! . ; ~ r il, ~ , f ~ , 7~ i 1 f' : LNyI Y f 4~ f ~ ~ sit}r ~ , ~ t ~~'~.---~y i ±i . -'~j rl tl ~ i~) a ~tyi" i~ ~ j~~, r~ ~ ~ - ~t ' i~ F7 i r a ?i G' s ; } i J r~ _ - ~ 1, iL l - ; ~ 1 /J -f. r . j r ~ ~ 1 r ; _ ; ; . N%_~- ; 1 r - ~ ~ m 1 : i ~ ~ ~ -x ~ . _ ~ t / ~ , ,r ~ 'fa ~ I ~ I ~!!F 1 'Lt f . + t ~ T S ~ 1 ~ r _ f L ~~g yl rb a: { T~' ~ . a.. ~ ~ y / / ~4 1. . .a y,, r ' tr.. T 2 , . 99-071CP Concept Plan Perimeter Center PCD Subareas B & C ~ ~ Homestead Communities DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION May 6, 1999 CCl'1' OE DU[3LI~ isioa a< 9 ~A Slims-Rings Road Ouom{, Oha 13016-1236 Phone/100: 611-161550 fmc 614-76i~566 Web~wvririnahas The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following actioa at this meeting: 1. Informal 99-0ZSI -Perimeter Center -Homestead Communities L~Cation: 28 acres located at the southeast corner of Post Road and Metatec Boulevazd. Existing Zoning: PCD, Piaiuied Commerce District (Perimeter Center Plan, Subareas B and C). Requesf~ An informal review of a development proposal. Proposed Use: 85 single-family homes and 5.3 acres of parkland. ApplicandOwner: Gary E. Gray, Homestead Communities L.L.C., 150 East Broad Street, Suite 505, Columbus, Ohio 43215. RESULT: The Commissioa generally liked the residential use of this proposal. They felt , however, that since it violates the Community Plan, it should be an outstanding, unique development with a lower density. Issues discussed included: additional greenspace, parkland requirements, setbacks, buffering, and masonry building materials. This was an informal review and no vote was taken. _ STAFF CERTIFICATION C l~~-~~ 22 Christopher Hermann Planner 99-071CP Concept Plan Perimeter Center PCD Subareas B & C Homestead Communities 33 .•e¦ Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -May 6, 1999 Page 2 Ms. Clarke said the go is that informal be discussed o more than 3 inutes. This time limit does not inclu time for public timony. Info al reviews are r the Commission to give feedback to developer, wi abbreviated s report. Mr. klider wanted to make an exception fo ublic comments this case. The er commissio ers agreed. 1. Informal 99-028I -Perimeter Center -Homestead Communities Mr. Lecklider said for the record that Mr. McCash has recused himself from this matter due to a potential conflict. Chris Hermann presented this informal review of a condominium project in Subareas B & C of Perimeter Center. The plan has 85 units on 22.2 acres, including 5.3 acres of park, which is primarily the existing retention pond. There is one access on Post Road and a 60-foot building setback. The plan extends Wall Street. Mr. Hermann said the community Plan recommends this site as office and mixed uses with employment emphasis. The zoning is PCD for office along Post Road with additional industrial uses along Wall Street. This development is primarily for empty nesters. He said the density is 3.83 dwelling units per acre, including the pond. Amenities are planned for the parkland, including a path around the pond. Given surrounding zoning, much buffering is needed. Mr. Hermann said if the pond is used solely for storm water detention, no park dedication credit would be given. Adding enough amenities to bring it up to park standards would justify some sort of credit for parkland. It may be a percentage credit. Jonathan Kass, Continental Real Estate Companies, said this is a better proposal then Care Matrix was. It meets park land and density guidelines and accommodates the Wall Street extension. Gary Gray, Homestead Communities, said this product is appropriate for the site, providing the transition line from Post Road to Wall Street. He said this type of use creates more amenities. They will improve the lake, but they do see the area around the pond an active recreational area. Mr. Gray said the condos will have basements. He said there are garden area at the corner of Wall Street and Post Road, at the east end along Post Road, and by the lake. He said the architecture would be traditional Colonial American, with a white, gray and beige color scheme. Edith Driscoll, 6230 Post Road, said the neighbors were in favor of this change of usage. She said they prefer the residential use instead of office use. Chris Cline, 6060 Post Road, said his house adjoins this site. He said the community would like to see this area residential. This is a great transitional use aad ideal for an older population. They favor pushing the project as close to Post Road as possible. Julie Halloran said she is opposed to the shopping centers. She asked about the space between each building, the square footage, and the number of condos. 99-071CP Concept Plan Perimeter Center PCD Subareas B & C ~ Homestead Communities Dublin Planning and Zoning ~,ommission Minutes -May 6, 1999 Page 3 Mr. Harian believes this is a land use issue. He believes this makes a good transitional use on Post Road. He likes the idea, the structure, and the quality. He thinks there needs to be more green space with Colonial-type town square or common area. It is too dense. Mr. Fishman said when a proposal contradicts the Community Plan, it has to be of exceptional quality. He said the residential density is already too high around this area. He said in the past, water was not included as parkland. Mr. Gray said units range of 1800 to 2200 square feet, not including the basements. Mr. Fishman asked what was the distance between the units. Mr. Fishman said he would like to see a lot of masonry. Mr. Peplow said he is open to the residential possibility, but he is concerned with setbacks and buffering. He is glad Wall Street is continued. He felt it should be open more and maximize on green space. He said it does not have to be close to Post Road to provide a residential feeling. Mr. Eastep said land usage is important. The pond seems inappropriate to meet the parkland dedication. He said at this density, this project would be considered multi-family. He supports the Community Plan at a density of 2 du/ac for asingle-family project. He said there is a potential for switching the usage if they can reduce. the density to 2.5 du/ac, have 100-foot setbacks along Post Road, and dedicate the required parkland. Mr. Lecklider said this is an improvement over other proposals. They need to take into consideratioathe neighbors' view. He said the alternative on this site might be unattractive office with greater traffic impact at peak hours. He questioned the viability of office use along Post Road. His concern is with density. The building setbacks off Post Road should be 100 feet. He wanted landscape buffering throughout the perimeters of the property. He is willing to compromise oa the pond and it consideration in the equation of parkland. He may be willing to compromise on the pond as park. He would like to see a guarantee of high quality materials in the text, use neutral colors, and have a forced association. Mr. Eastep said the density is 3.3 du/ac with the pond and without the pond it is 5 du/ac per acre. He is in favor of a minimum 100-foot setback. The plans do not meet the new Fence Code. Mr. Lecklider announced the Commission's rule not to start any cases after 11:00 p.m. 2. Development Plan 99 DP -Wyndham V' lage Park Lisa Fierce said this fo -acre park is locat on the north side of T lymore Drive. She said there is an eight-f concrete bikepath ong the entire fron e. This is a mixed-use neighborhood park ith play structures, gazebo and a stone 1 are proposed. Toward the middle of the site is a volleyball area, d at the southwest co er is a circular basketball area. The eastern po ion of the site is to an open play area. T ere is a 3'/z-foot mound along the western po 'nand evergreen tr throughout. She said bikepath would be connected to the existing p throughout the par 99-071CP Concept Plan Perimeter Center PCD Subareas B & C 3 S Homestead Communities DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION December 10, 1998 uH uat3uN ?0 a~igsRoad '0. 13016-1236 w.. /100:611J61~550 kic 61N61-6566 Ita Mwwaahas The planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: - 1. Coaoept Pian 98-113CP -Care Matrix - Subarea B and C -Perimeter Center- Location: 27.021 acres located at the southeast corner of Metatec Boulevard and Post Road. . E~sting Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Perimeter Center Plan). Request: Review and approval of a concept plan under the PUD provisions of.Section 153.056. Proposed Use: A seniors' housing development including 242 units. Applicant: Continenta~l/NRI Ventures Ltd. , PO Box 712, Dublin, OH 43017; c% Victoria Newell, Architect, Meacham and A pel Architects, 5640 Frantz Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017. ` MOTION: To table this application as requested by Richard Bolin, attorney, represenimg the applicant. VOTE: 6-0. i, RESULT: This case was tabled as requested after much discussion. Issues included those raised in the bases of the staff report with particular emphasis oa providing a greater setback on Post Road, buffering the development, connecting Wall Street, providing required park land exclusive of the pond, and creating a development with upgraded architecture and materials. STAFF CERTIFICATION Chris Hermatui Planner 99-071CP _ Concept Plan Perimeter Center PCD Subareas B & C Homestead Communities `3 ~ Dublin Planning and Zoning ( .mission Minutes - Deoetnber 10, 1998 Page 2 1. Concept Plan 98-113CP -Care Matrix - Subareas B and C -Perimeter Center Chris Hercnacui presented a concept plan for Senior housing on 27 acres of Subareas B and C of the perimeter Center PCD. The request is to rezone it to the PUD, Planned Unit Development District. He showed several slides. The plan includes athree-story, 162-unit building in the middle of the site with two- and four-unit buildings around it. Mr. Hermann said Wall Street would be permanently terminated and not continue through the site. Mr. Hermann said most of the site is in Subarea B, for offices use, along Post Road. He said Subarea C is zoned for office and manufacturing uses. Zee Community Plan indicates "office" and "mixed uselemployment emphasis". This proposal is residential and differs from the Community Plan. This play has 162 units in the large assisted living building and 80 ind~endeat living units. Code requires a park dedication for all residential uses. A 200=foot setback along Post Road is encouraged is the Community Plan but not shown here. There is a pond and no other park land. Mr. Humana said the total density is 8.96 dwelling units per acre. Conceptual elevations wes~e submitted. Setbacks of 100 feet-for building and 75 feet for parking are shown along Post Road. Mr. Hermann said this is a land use issue. Staff is coaoetned that the area to the south is zoned for iadustral 24-hour/seven~ay operations. These are generally not considered to be compatible with residential use. A~transitional. area and buffering will be needed. Any new use needs to be compatible with the corneal place. He said staff is coaoemed that the three-story building is too close to Post Road. Staff recommends disapproval of this concept plan based oa the following: 1) The proposed plan is not consist~t with the land use guidelines established by the Community Plan, 2) . The proposed plan is not consistent with the multi family density requirements established by the Community Plea. 3) The proposed plan does not provide the 200-foot setback on Post Road recommended by the Community Plan. 4) The proposed land use is inoompafible with uses to the south and the plan lacks transitional areas. 5) The proposal does not provide for park land. 6) The plan does not conform to the approved prehaunary plat or Thoroughfare Plan for Wall Street. Mr. Hermann said residents might not like having officelflez or industrial uses around them, and significant buffering is needed between the two land use areas. Mr. Harlan asloed how traffic compares to as office use. Mr. Hermann said the traffic from senior housuig will be much lower and will not be a peak hour user. He said the property depth is about 450 feet from Post Road. Mr. Harlan asked about the deed restxidions and defining senior housing. Mitch Band:iefsky said federal statutes define senior housing is for those 55 years and older. 99-071CP Concept Plan Perimeter Center PCD Subareas B & C Homestead Communities 3 ~ Dublin Planning and Zoning C mission l~nutes -December 10, 1998 Page 3 Mr. Pislunan asla~d if Wall Stmet was to be a main arterial stn~et and would it be eliminated. Mr. Hermann said the Care Matrix proposal will make Wall Street two unconnected stubs. Mr. Hermann said there are new stormwater regulations, and there may be an issue of water runoff into the pond. This pond serves other sites in this area. Mr. Lecldider ask+ad what density was Windsor Court on Muirfield Drive. Mr. Hermann said it was previously called Liberty Health Care, and had a density of 25 beds per ac. ~-e. gidlaid Boylan, atton~ey for Care Matrix, said they met previously with staff and residents. He said senior housing is an institutional use, which was originally included in the Perimeter Center Plan. They feel this should be as amendment to the PCD. gon De(7ola said Care Maboix is a .publicly held senior housing company with i 13 developments. This development has iadep~dent and assisted living units. ~Their.use is usually included with hospitals; convalescent homes, and medical centers. Residents -pay for services as they go, and medical staff is available 24 hours a day. They treat residents with Alzheimer's disease. Most residents in the villas are around 70 years of age. Centralized dining is in the main building. 1`ransportatioa, a beauty salon, housekeeping, security, and a pharmacy are available for a fee. Roger Faster said there are many issues with Community Plan, Thoroughfare Plan, and the 200- foot setback oa Post Road. He thought the application should not go forward. Mr. I asl®d how similar usages such as the Indian Rua Retirement Center and Windsor are zoned. Ms. Clarloe said both are zoned P17D. Mr. Eastep said this is a multi family complex, He said Indian Run Retirement Center has had trouble trying to maintain its occupancy is spite of its beautifiul setting. He agreed this is a land use issue. He said Dublin would suffer if the Thoroughfare Plan is not followed and Wall Street is eliminated. Mr. DeC`,ola said therr use is a transitional use, a buffer between residential and office or retail He has no concerns about the proximity to light industrial.uses and the zoning in place. Mr. Fastep said this would be the fourth facility of this type within a few miles. He does not want one quadrant of Dublin saturated with this type of housing. Mr. Fishman agreed. Mr. Banchefsky cautioned that the economic viability is not an appropriate basis for determination. Tun Sprague said regarding land use, this is not an appropriate use for this site. Warren Fishman thought this project would be viable. He said Wall Street should not be eliminated because it is an important mad to help relieve tcaf'fic. He could not support this plan because of its setback, no park land, being the wrong land use, and eliminating Wall Street. Mr. Banchefsky said this Concept Plea is not legally binding on either the City or the applicant. He said if the Commission is dissatisfied with the land use it should not continue this review. 99-071 CP Concept Plan Perimeter Center PCD Subareas B & C 3 Homestead Communities Dublin Planning and Zoning < emission Minutes -December 10, 1998 Page 4 Joe Harlan said it makes a transition from the office use in that area- There may be traffic benefits to the community. He said the land use is not bad, but there is a lot still unresolved. Mr. Lecldider asked why staff recommended usuig the PUD as opposed to a PCD. Mr. Hermann said the institutional component could use either district. Residential use cannot use the Planned Commerce District, and some of this housing is fully independent. He cited several examples. Bob Apel, Meacham and Ape1 Architects, said the Community Plan did not address this type of use. He said because of the villas, it straddles between a residential and commercial use. The development is a community with different levels of care. Mr. Apel said all units have kitchens, but residents can choose to use the dining hall. He said multi..-family developments need very little land coverage. Mr. Apel said they are stickuig with the 100-foot setback originally Proposed. -Mr. Fishman said maybe the size is too small for this project. ~ . Mr. Apel said the 200-foot setback is unrealistic due to the parcel shape. He said 80 units have garages. This project would relieve traffic, Mr. Apel said park land was not considered for a seniors' Project at Martin Road and Riverside Drive. Mr. Hermann said the history shows park lead. Mr. Fishman would not consider getting rid of .the pond. Mr. Apel said it could be a,ooommodazed as a dry basin, He asked that the five acre pond be considered open space. Mr. Fishman said it is not usable as a park. Mr. Apel said elderly housing presents a type of development for which specialized recreational facilities maybe preferable. Jonatl~aa Kass, Coabincetal Real Estate, said the Care Matrix project seemed to be an institutional use. Without the independent villas, this would be approved as an institutional use. He said the 200-foot. soeuic s~,ck ~ Fost Road could not be enforced wader the Perimeter Ceat~er PCD text. He said the Wall Street thoroughfare issue is critical. He feels this is a good use for Dublin and it provides the Post Road residents a buffer from Perimeter Center. Ms. Clarke said along Post Road, only office use is permitted, not flex-office products, etc. Those other uses are permitted in the center part of the Perimeter Center PCD. industrial uses were retained for only the internal portion. Mr. Kass said the PCD could be modified to include this as an additional permitted use. Care Matrix has not been treated as a multifamily residential use in any other community. They think the opportunity is here to provide an attractive and sensitive buffer to Post Road. Chris Cline, Post Road Residents Association, said Commissioneas should hear all information before making up their minds. He said is the mid 1960s, the township rezoned everything between post Road and Shier Rings Road in the industrial category. Around 1974, a new zoning code was enacted. He said there is no record of this land being zoned industrial in Dublin. He said Post Road was always considered the dividing line between residential and non-residential uses. 99-071CP Concept Plan Perimeter Center PCD Subareas B & C Homestead Communities 3 q Dublin Planning and Zoning ~ .emission Minutes -December 10, 1998 Page 5 Mr. Cline said they are thrilled Metatec brought a clean component into this industrial area. In 1987, they were thrilled with the Perimeter Center plan because it showed Post Road as a future cul de sac, making it a residential road. -This drdn t happen. They believe this development would be better for them than offices. He said originally, the Perimeter Center PCD -had elderly housing at 15 units per acre- He said elderly housing is totally appropriate for this area. Mr. Cline said the ?AO-foot setback is non~nfo~ble because it is a taking. He said Wall Street had only a few parcels. He said this would serve.a very definite community need. Peter Leffier, 6866 Conquistador, a formes Planning Commissioner; said the Community Plan should be followed as best as possible. He encouraged the Comm~~~oners not to be swayed by arguments that are not black and white. _ Shawn Innis, Ohio Credit Union League, said the company ~ is -only concerned about the elimination of Wall Sfre~. W~ ~y considered par<kasing their_curnent site, it was considered as asset to have access through future Wall Street. Mr. Hariaa said this is a transitional use and w~71 serjrice the community. He said its traffic would be lower. He feels time may be too much oa this plan. He would ~lil~e to see a larger setbaof ties usable parkland. He was undecided .about the Wall Street issues. He is in suppo development concept if the 20p-foot setback oa Post Road. is provided, parldand is provided, and it conforms to the approved preliminary P~ or Thoroughfare Plan for Wall Street. Ivlr. Fishman also has a problem with water features. He said high quality nra~terials must be used. ~y said the Community Plan was a fle~nible planning document. A 200-foot setback is desirable, but there will be parcels where that will not be possible. Mr. Sprague said he feels this use is not appropriate for this site. He supports senior housing, and there will be a need for it in the community. kVlr. Peplow said this was one of the clearest cases .for denial he has seen. There is no buffer between the residential cad eommereial uses. He .sees this project as residential. He has a problem with the setback, and eliminating Wall Street is unacceptable. R the issues could be worked out, he could support it. 1VIr. Eastep said this is a land use issue. He said it is an apartment complex, and the park requirement must be enforced. He would like a 200-foot setback if possible, and wants Wall Street extended. He said staff did an excellent job with the staff report. _ Ivlr. Lecldider said 'the impact to the Post Road residents was a concern. He said the concept is good, but he does not believe this is the appropriate location. He is seusitive.to the concerns raised about Wall Street. He could not give a positive recommendation to City Council. 99-071CP Concept Plan Perimeter Center PCD Subareas B & C Homestead Communities .,.,d„ Dublin Planning and Zoning ~mmission Nfu~utes - December 10, 1998 Page 6 Mr. I~acldider asked what would happen if the majority of the Commission members disapproved this concept plan. Mr. Banchefsky said the application will be forwarded to City Council, and it makes the final determination. Concept plans are non-binding. Mr. Fishman ask~ad if they were willing to meet the conditions. Mr. Apel said he would discuss them with the applicant. Mr. Fishman was concerned about park Land. He showed Mr. Apel a rough sketch of how the site could be rearranged. Mr. Apel said it would be hard to meet the park land requirement. Residents would have to cross the street to use the park as sketched. ~ roved the could come back am with a new plan. Mr. Sprague said if the concept was disapp y ~ Mr. Fishman said they could approve with the sac staff raoommendalions. He believes, however, this is too much development for the Property, ,and it does not comply with the Community P1aa. Mr. Apel said they would lilac to table .this :to ;resolve .some of. the issues. Mr. Fishman made a motion to table this application. Mr. Harlan seconded die motion, and the vote was as follows:.Mr. Eastep, Yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. Sprague, Yes; Mr, Harlan, yes; and Mr. Fishman, yes. (Tabled 6-0.) 2. Develo went Plan 9&122DP -Tuttle , Subarea C -Goddard School 4980 park ~ Avenue B"im~Littl a presented this development plan or a 7,450 square foot preschool oa 0. 4 acres oa ~ ter Avenue within Tuttle Crossing. It is in Subarea C which permits offi and day care cen .Lower density office is the p ominant use. He showed several slid Mr. said the building is set back o er 100 feet from Parkcenter Avenue. has parking for cats; 25 spaces are requued. The fenced 8,000 square foot play yard is back 121 few m the property line. Ile said the ' ~ lot needs more landscaping and ' ds. The sign - is own 21 feet from Parkcenter Av ue. The 32 square foot sign submi is larger than pe 'tzed by Code. Code sets the um size at 15 square feet and the h ht at 6 feet. A dumpster is located in the front screened with a :fence. -Staff recomm ds that the screen aterial match the building. N tral colored playground equipment is proposed, and 'cations should be provided f r it. The south elevation shows stucco a or cultured stone and siding along th stucxo on the lower floor at the main entrance within the dormers on the top of a building. Staff is recommending drat the appli t consider how the dormers are p1a oa the roof and using a different roof style, perhaps hip roof, which is similar with other b 'dings in this area which will break up the mass of th building, especially at the roof line. 99-071CP Concept Plan Perimeter Center PCD Subazeas B & C Homestead Communities ~h c-~ t`r Q~An~~ L.~ ~ 1 ~o~~~~~i W e~ v z ~ ~ cns~~~ -i ~Dil~ lllf i I ~ / / ' - I i it I `U' I j I ~ / ~ II _ ~ y A, h• _ / - - _ I' as a.~ta a~_41 p ; ~ / ~ ~ ~ z J - ~ b , a ~ o _ _ - LF , d-. it-: r~~ ~r~ _ ; ~so ~ - - ~ z t ~ Qb'', ~ i Do. aop °Oo ~ IItia,~~~'~~~ r.~ cad , ~5: 0 ? ~ ~ ~ o o ,n o ~6' ~p a aan' bo'~~ a „ p0 ~ ~ ~3 i ~ o ~ I i ~ ~Oy°-" ~9a .~~o~~'~.Q 0 ~ I~. ~bOa~ 0 ~ ~q fl d r~ 'p ~ ~ j ~ ~ - a r _ A~0 p - E a~~~ O~ 0,4 ~ ~ ~ } + a ~ ~ III i ~o Ct r' ~D -6 a D : D ~ / i II ij jbio,0 y ~ ~a~,:C~ o_ I , , j ~ S Grp 9~~ d- _ op i i j D_ t1 ; paio~ Lt ~ d _...._g ~.,,.rrt.. ~ ~I I L. . [a Off'---~, o p ~ ~ ~ j oio p Q O ~ , oo ~ ~ ~ i t j a Ia~o°~° ~'~~a % _ _0____; - ~I I , it I. p ~ ~ oaf ~ ~ ~ ~i , otiooa;ao 'Qb P ~0 - w~,..,.. vQ 6~~y~ ,(7v 4 CT~~Q f ~7. y'I~--1 I 1j , Y ~n GQ' i ~ z n g I~ ~b a?O,d4 % - - I ~ A~ ~ '--'r-q F ? 111 0 - i~ ,~a o,p ,~onD~. 6.~ ~4 1, J ooaoaa o , - a fcr~~o :a _ ~ j ~ ,~~r0 Qq'. I ~ ~Od' ~4c1a ~ T. I rrfn~-i ~ ~5 0.-- A / y,~ ~ I - 1 0/O p~ o an ,L7 ~~D t o~ Q I ~ _ ~ 1 h V ~ ~ ~ ~y i t i j ,o p / ~ ~ I - b Ills ~ \ ~ _ ~ ' j n c a~ r--~1 n. i ~ti JOSEPH W. TESTA FRANKLIN COUNTY AUDITOR MAP AREA :SM DATE :MAR 6, 2000 v ~ P 5 , a ~ N ~ ~ ~`F ~ , LEGEND s~ ' ~ s t'. -r ~x r ~ e ~ s , , ~i. ~ - + ~ - - j - t r ~ - - „ ti, f A ~ -f~ + ~ n ~ r..-°" ~ r': weir ~ ~ r 1 ..a~N ~"~,..r ~„~_'i, r H t~ u ~ 7t Vii. - M!+*e~P d-~ ~ ^t+i - -:"~y~~N.da.r-~+,-F ~..s ~.,T-tom °""\„a..:. z ~ ~ - _ - yr::ye... ~ _ y Y ~'1 _ _ ~ ~ . ~Y" ,3~ - - ,~_~r JI~~ ~_r I~. a r ~ ~ ~ V,.~ ~,i ~ k ! ate:, ~l ~ y ~~i. I - t,. r 1 h~ y i i , S ~ ~ ~ -P ~ ^4 h ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ,ry a. s _ I - - - ~ ~ .tea.. _ { . ~ u t p ~ ~ Y ~ ~:r,', 'i c ' = a, t ~ _ • _ - - I, ~ ~ - 0 r ~ I - ~ ~ i _ f c ~ i,. 1 - - - ; . _ ` - i _ r - ~ _ - ~ 9 :;P e, ~ - - - _ 1 _ - - 1 _ - j i - ,D s ,b M~ - - _ _ META7EC BLVD. M - - 1 _ - kk 1..~.~ ~ 'D x ni 'C3 ry y o p~ ._1 1 1 ~ 11, ~ f07 o II n R g 7~ (D 'y, ~ ~.1 ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ Q ll E N vv~, A ~p `a ~ C'.'' kY ~ iii ~ ~,i I ~ O~ ~ w ~ w N~ `.G p O N ' I 1~ 1 ' ~ ~ ` 1 1 w C U ~ T ~ 1; I 1~ 'rl - I '3 M rt 1 1. , ~ O L y J C a I' I'. , ~ I I ~Y 1 ; I z m ' I l 1 ~ I 1 II _ _ ~ ~ i m rn W ~ ,I r ~ ~ G F{' ' I 7I ' :off li - V Obi ~ ~l N r. i~l~ ~ ~ 41 I u' Mme! vi 1,,~ 0. u~ O A ~I j I I ~ i ..J ~ ~ H ~ n n C ~ I uu~~ M ii A n mI J~ f4 m _~u O _ ~ ;I 1 l ~ ~ ~ ~I - ~ ~ 3; ~ i /O`r L' ; ~ ~ it N X ~I II'', I I ~ . _ yl i I I D I I I M. I '-ooz~r~~~-.xG~~nmdntoyr 1 a o ~ pro o ~c robCro ~ -`"_l I, i ~ I G ~ 5'~~ rv~C~~c coo p ; I j j I - N ~ _J ~ 'i I. O O ~ ~ Ql ti O y p N p I II ~ I ~ I. O _ i. M ~ ~ O ~ I c~ oo i _ x' ' ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ ~ I , ~ ~ ~ - ~ ti ; - ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ J,. ~ i 6---- i I i ~ ~ ~ ' - I ~ = I - _ - i i ~s` BUILDING SE18 \ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ I DING SETBACK - ~ ~1 / 35' PAR, ~ ~ ~1~i ~ ~i~ 1 I / u ~ L / l - _ ii i u, ~ y 0 o NDtl8135 'JNIO'11f18 SZ. M ~ ~ u.. rYYY - ' < j \ - j ? c i i j i Y I ,~Y W ? ~i f 1 t-r w'< ~ / ` I I ~ / 1 I / - ~ o ~ x I n\ i/ / >m ~ I ~ ~ ~ m I m m ILDING SETBACK ~ m ~ _ _ r / _ i vy ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~c~ FP~ < _ ~a r'~~ v .~'a~i. it II - ~ .,,r, i n. 'g ~ jY ~ -=if ~ 7~1'N , o~ ---i- ~~<~<<<, ~r f~ 4 / t Yr<~r v l -7 ~l~ I ~ t a ~ ~ o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n I ~ y 1 1~ _ -n ~ r~ k ~ t . I~ 70, ~ y\\`. `S ~~i rrr ~il! ~ E-11_ F , ti - I !I _ RJ~I. .5 _ - 4' i. ~.~,t - ~7 ~ ; ~ ~ , i ~ ~j'~~ ' i ~ - ° ~ ~ a i.,;.i ~ ma d'c~ on? o. ~ ii I~ S ® S n I U!11 j i I ~ L_JL~ i I ~ ~I i ~ i ~i I,~ I:i' I~a' ~ I ~ I~. _ ~ I~, _ I T 1 ~ ® I~ I r - T T I' _ ~ L ~ I~, r ' ~ ~ .~1 i~ - i' Ali t i''.+T © i ~G ; i - ~ _ _ _ _ _ H ~ - _ - - - - ~ ~ 1 w _ , tn'~' 7 ~ Y ~ xi A g m NON , _ _ ~ _ ¢ N ya pppp N< ~ Dlr. ~\~VsyOJ O ~ II ~.i .^,~S~w ~ ~ NF V \ { Z-~. Qr / ~ ~ ~ d < w ~ ~ ~ ~ IW N ~ N~ ~ I { / v ~ `~e / ~ t d ~ - ~ =w c. r - ~ 4 V 4 ; - _ s~ r i - _ _ - r iI` _ L_.__---_ I / - ~ ~X"~, _ ail z III ~a, _ ~ I _ I j/ III 1 I ~ ~ ( r I _ y _ ~ I ~ ~I ~ ~ i i _ _ a, ~ ~L r_ ~ I I ~ r J ~ I f/ i a I ~ J ~ l___.- l < u J f w ~ ~~SEJ ~N l7 < i ~ ~ r. A'. I _ ~ Z< _ ~O Omm~K ~wuOF g M1 F ~ m OZ ~opv~~U ~ZQ ~ A ~ ~ w T J ~N ~ZN~00 ~W Z~EU) Yww,+i - N d Jn w~6~~wOr~ 9 w<~ v[ w~ 8 If - m5 F- © ~u<i~owcy<~~`-'N\~~z ~ O O N N r ~d - 2T~uW "¢LL F- - m ~w ~ Z ~NrcN ~OS <N> I In - i 3 "Sod NON ~-wiwur~ I~ - _ ~ o _ J ow mKri~;~uw~m ~ I ~ < G Q ~°o~<N~-<<-"w ~10~`o Wks N I~ ~ zz wF ZLL ~`z OL ~ i~ ~im~~~wn w fV~^i II g _ ,,y, ~ Z wGind~owe<y aarno n~~~~z.~J LJJ ~u~moNm~a°'N~ n'iNO Ii r""i III ~ E - ~ - rv m a ,n m . r-1 H~. r~ f l' Z I~~ 1/~~17/~ 5 t < • I 11 ~ ' I c. n. ' ter: I ~ - - - ~ E--, a - ~ I - ~ ~ ~ _ ~ a = ~ W v ~~w N w ~ o U J ! i ~ ~ o ~ ~ C m'O 1 w ~o r 'I, 't _ I--~I ~ U z r^ ~ - ~ w _ _ Q I ~ ~ ~ ~ Rj ~ _ , ~ ~ 8 ~ _ - _ I • ,..i ~'t I ~ I _ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~~ldi3w ~ Fih-+-1.1 a E ~ s i ~ i E~~'~~~ ~ as ~ ~ ~o~~e~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~LL a° 3 o ~ o d ~ ~ ' U 1~ A' ys ~ o Q ~ ~ o ~ta~ ~ FT 888 ! ~ _ ~ U x ~ ~ i ~ 0 ~ a _ ~I ~ .m.o__~ nod \ ~ R~ jr\r~~r0,^_,~1,J 4 dy3r~ 3 ~ 'Mir • p - 1~~4 N 4 2 ^ ~F ~ a a° i2 S 7 \ Q p 0`N 4- ~y/~ ~i ~U' ~ U m o y ~ '~jjwj1} ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ h~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q 0 ~ H U ~ ~ ~ ~ W a H ~ ~ ~ ~ W o U m .7 ~ ~ ~ W~ ~ Q ~ b W ~ . ~ x a ~ W a h+l a ~ _ _ _ - _ - .6 _ _ _ _ I /I ~s o ~ II 4 /i I I ~ ~ o "s ~ is ~ I r ~ I I ~ i 1' I ~ I ~ ~ 1. I V II I $ i I ~ I I ~ I o w i ; o \ j i ~ ~ i - ~we~' / I I owe i z _ e - I I ~ l _ _ _ _ _ - _ ~ w i~. i i"~ _ e _ ' I I o / _ _ - ~ < i 1 I ~ a - I 1 I t l ~ i ~f II 7 / i t I ~ ~ z i ~ ~ ly ~I ~ I j ~ I ~ ~ I ~ ~ f' it I I i ~ A ~i ~ J j 1 w~ l II vi III I. I I ~ O I uj rn - . I~ _ I I r- -l._^ ~ I C 'i ~ I I ~ ~ I l~ L~ ~ L I - - - - ` I i I - - - _ ~ - ~r--~ I ~ ~ I I~I ~ I 1 III 'I ~ _L I i _ - II it ~ I I I> t i~/ ~ i I I It I I I I I I u I l 4 I i I ti II II II ~ a ""r~ y~~r~? t i _ I~ L ' ' /I Am ~~~~r z „sue°=ru s ~ k I ~ I NNmoo~omm ~ i°~o~oo~ ~ I I ip / ~ I I~ m ~ ~ ii I I 11 I I /I I I I N' ( I ~i ~I II I - _ ~ !~'1 I ~I ` f 1 ~ y I i I I I ~ II ICI ~ O I+:. I I I~ I ~ t I I i I C I f r I i , I I~ I I ~ O I''.. h I I I I ! ~ I~ I I I Iz I I J I W I I ~ ' I` I II I ' ' I ~ L( TI~~1 r 1~ I' I I f t I I' I~1 I ~ ~ I I ~ I ~ ~ ~ A~All II II II I I I - i o V/ rTl I' ~I I I t I K' w li ~ I I I I ~ o ^ I I ' 1.. j I I ~I, ~I, ~ m w i~-1 II! ~ I I - - I~ z z m Q: ~ I I. I I N o z O~ , I i. I I I II 1 I f ~ G I I I 'I C_ d~ ~ ~ ~ I. I ~ ~ I I` and Z~ U II 1 ~ w ~ Z t I I I.. I I W w~w~ N~ ~ b If I ' 1 ~ O LLQ w ~ u 1 Q ~ w O W III I I 1 I ~ _ Q <~8~ ~ - ~ O Ii I I _ ` - x w= _ ~ . III I I ' - - - - _ ~ - = - - - ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ _ F~1 ~ 1. _-_----~-'l~ /1 1~1 a s I - I ~ ~ w _ - - "W ~ _ ~o~~~ mm I I ~ i,~ I I \ ~ ~ I ~ I I ~ I I ~ \ I I ~w I ~i ro I I - U1 I I ~ ~ o < N i ~ V Z ~ o _ _ ~ / I I ~'K ~J O - ~ 2 _ _ ~ ~ u w _ t9 - I ~ w i~ _ ~ ~ u ~ O _ I. i. i III II i ~ I' ~F I I / I ~ (i ~ I ~ J Vj Ly I ~ I I ~ I I I ~ ~ ,I O a I I ~ ~ Cl I I I h I I I 1' O ~ C ~.i J 2 i I I i I II I I ~ d/ ~ Z ~ ~ - j ~ 'I I I I i ti ~ ~ j ~ I I ! d ~ cn ' f I G 1 _ 'i ~ ~ I ~ _ ~ ~ t--~_ I ' i Ili , I I ~ ~ II ~ ` ! i I I I ~ , I ` I' ~ ~ I I ~ ~ I ~ I ~ ~ ~ ; ; - { I I I - I' ~ I r r rr r ~ „rr£ I I ' Ili I I~ ys~~yE~ ~'EE~K~BXx~w r I II I, CC$ u ^ i i a Nmio iomm w ~ ~ ° ~o ~ - - ' I~ p \'i I I E~~/ ' I I I I k II I I' ~ I I III ~ I I j~ I O ~ ~ \ ,I a Vii., ~ I' - «3 O I ~ i ~ 1.Y-. I «y I. i I ~ 1 ISM I~ I I I _ II ii I i I~~ U t _-I.._- - v1 h~ L - ~ II j i jQ~ ~ -I{-~ I jl $ k ~ i - FBI V I ; i to ~ I ~ O I I ~ Izo m ~ I _ I IN~ ' I I II ~ _ I I~ i Igo I I'~ ~ IW~ I I ' i --I. I ' I I I I j r~l I i I I I I I~ w II I I' I I II - ° y~ li I 1 ow I ~ I I ~ 'I owo - ` I. I I I - ~ ~ I~ i I I j I gw o~~c ~i W II 11 I ~ o w~ o I' i I I I I I ~ o~ G I _1., 1 ~ o~ O ~ ~ I' i I I I I I ~I `oN ~ ~ 1~ 7 ~ u 1r T1 ~I II ~ I I 11 I I 4~ Q~ ^ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ I JN OO av O I' I ~ 1 1', A~ o~? ^ ~U ~ ii I ~ }~I .I ` - J w m~ ~ ~MO1 i I I - I ~ ~ ~ w N W ~ o _ _ _ ~ '~Ifih I I I I - - - - - ~~--~"1/` ~ owe N w p d ~ ~ ~ ~ o _ ~ ~ s I ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ III _ y ? ~ LL a ~1 C1. i I I i ~S - J - Fz ~ ~~s~ ~ q y £ ~ ~o €R - - I F - - - - r ~ ~ , Y ~ ~ x ~ " ~ ~ ~ - ter; z E~,~ - - - - w _ ~ I i ~ , 1 i i i - _ ~ \ I `~I i ~ I ~ L _j- - ~ _ - _ _ ~ L~- t _ ~ ~ ~ _ r r ..I ' I III 1 P/ 1 i i l; a) a. ~ ~ i ~ ~n ~ - 'I~ I I I ~ ly w I I ~I ~ w 4I l '3 ~ N K N Ny 1 ~ W ~ a/ _v ~ w W °a a U I Q < ~ w .--r I - w i~ P ~ ~ _ - Q ~ I, ! w ~ -r ! _ ~ w _ i, ~ ~ ~ I - ~ _ ~ i , I1 ,1 O I ' ~ ~ I i W o i ~ ~ ~ ~ L I ~ ~ I w ~ _ •a~19 ~31V13W _ _ _ _ -_l 1~1 ~ ~ _ - _ _ ^ ^ ~ ~ ~ _ ~s _ - - - ~ Q~~>~~~ ~o i ~ ~~~~~y~ o Z ~ II ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ / +a; z / X \ % / w S % ~ N r ~ ~ o 1• I I _ _ _ - - - - - s -1 H K % - o ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ I i / ~ i I ~ i ii ~ / ~ ' I - _ ~ ' ' i r >o I , !I III ~ m° m~ m~ ~ ~I i ~ ' I 9 _ y/ Y ~ I I• g ~ i I I. a I i i ri a a I ii j i it 8 ~ ~y II ~ 1! I ~ - ~ Ib I I ~ 1 ~ II I 11! I; i 1 I I I ° I I >z o Ii I ~ i i I I ~ ~ i 1 L._._ l i I I © ~ Ii II _ ® y/ 1 I © O~ ! I rw. I, I ~ O _ ~ i; li ~ I l ~i _ _ _ _ 11 II kll ~ , ! z [W~~ j I tl~ l ~ O a °`aY r ~ I i L' I' III / I II ' I~ I I I O~ I ~ ~ II / ~ ~ ~ 1Z a Ili i i ~ I • i. ~ Is 11 1~ ~ O a ~ III li I ~ ~ F ~ ~ ~ W ~o II I i I I I ~i'iE~ ~ 4'~'~ ~ I I I i ( i i 1 >E;j ~ ~ i {s ~ ~ _ W~ _ _ a I l9 ~31b'13}y.--- ----h+------- ~ Ur n a ~ I I I `.r-.~~-_1 O ~1 I ii ~ l i l ua wa w ooreeao ooicoira O+ry++O-+~\a+n\c2o\0062\saaa(wy OweT[[Of\N G~ - ~ ,J Z LJ 1 ~ ~ .J c~ ~ W ' ~ ~ / ' } / I ~ / - n~ ~r 1 it j. ~ ~ r~ li ~ it ~ ~ ~ R y ~ ~ < ~ ~ ~ ; o i I , . \ , ; ' , ~ I~1 i i I ~ ~ a ' j ` ~ I ~ ' i r I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; J ~ 1 , _ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ; I ~ ~ i / . 11 I ' I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ij 11 ' I k ~ 1 1 ~ ' ~ t Ssl ~ i~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ i/ fj ~ I~~ I , s I t ~ ~ i; i i~ I ~ ' ry ' # e ~ ~ A _ ~ ° ~ 'i J ( i ~ ~ - ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~I i' i a ~l}}4 i~ I i i i ~ i~ ~ i a''' 1/ ~ I, s ' I i i r-- ~ ! s + ~ i ~ ~ ~ i I I ~ it ' ~ i ~ + ~ A ~ w j ~ I ' I 0 j~ i j ~ ~j ~1t ~~i~ ~ ~ i ~ U ~ t ~ i ; _~~vl~--- W o _ _ a U I ~ ~ _ z ~T~ N l F-~I ~ a=; ~ L,_A ~ z ~ ~ I~n~~ U ~ ~ r~.o \ F x 0 g ~ ~ C1 L" ® O ~ e ~ Q U L-J ~ ~ Q r oo ~ ~ ~ 'Q' i ~ ~ 1MMMnJJJ ~ o U~ ~ ~ o yg ~ o ~ Ih "1.~ .JI ~q' ' IT~ -l ~ 1~ Y 1 i /!l 1't~ it / ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ I L~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a,~ ;F~~ < o~ o °b o o Oo o ~ ~ ® z ~I ~ ~ 0 ~ 8 ~ O / a I 0 0 ¦ ~ p I 0 a o 0 a o u o o~ ~,a e o I o err LL ~ ' ' ( 4 tp ZYY ~ ~ ~ P y ~ ovw oev 0 J I ~I III ~ ~ / a LL ~ aye _ ~ ~u ~ 1~ OL ~ I I ~ J w NLL ~ 11 ' O W ~ ~ ~ LL F t l l I U ~ ~2 ~ N ~ Z r., ~ w Z ~ LL ~ o m au N ~ N ~ O ~ Z ~ ; ~ ~ 9 1 ~ _ pia goo _ ~ oaoaoao 0 r°~lo ~ o ~u ° aL_j~ ,I ~ ~~I V °l.a co a - - - h+~l 6 1 Y I a o ~ ~ > ~ I ~o I ~ N ~J~ w ~ ~ LLw I N ~ U ~ I I ~ d~ ~ i ~ I II ~ ~ V 4 'b ~ ~ w m Q N ° F _ ~ m ' x o o ° I ` ~ O I ~ I L J ~ ~ b ~ u ;;w E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a s ~ ~ ~ n ~ I f-~ - ~ ! I a~ • I 1 n i i. JJ ~ ~ pp} E W / Z i/ ~a ~ = i i x E~eF ~ O f W ~ i rte' Nz ~ i ~ ~y h~M Vl~~ ~ ~ z o ~ = A + o ~ ~ 0 3~ ~ ~ o i ~ p2~ Q d 'U F-1 ® ~ ~ z i ~ i / L ~ i ~ ® ~ 1-~ W i ® ~M~'I'o i. o ~yM \ ~ ENO ~1 c~ i ~ i ® o ^ o / ~ - I-1 ~ ® a 25 BUILpING SETBACK 'S cB ~ 0 - r - n i. <U ~l- i i f~~ 9N1 atld .5£ i ! ~ 0 ~ j% N~VB135 'JNIO'll(1B 5L ~ II ~ o / z i ! i ~ ® ® ~ i~ ~ ~ I 1 ~ Q ~ I 'I ~/+yy~ i / ~ I "'1 ® i ~ i r - . I , ~ U. 1~~/ I / r I ~ / ~ I / I I z kr O i ~ I O Ili, ~'I I o Q it I r ~'l ~1 ~ I G t ~ t i, : 1 I : O I I U I ~ 1 I I I I I } - ~i I r- - I 1 I I i~ 1 Q 1 'I I H r •1 1 I ' lJ ~V~.y.IIJ ~~...yI p~ W •+ti i.n Il, 1 II II I 1- p /1 ~ 1 ® I ~ I'~ I II ~ ® ® ® I I I Zj° ~ v ` I a a T II s~W ° ~ li I ~ ® i I i m~ ~ N O ~ II < I i ° M Cad • CSC i ~ W ~ _ a~ o !l • Ili 1,, ? W ° I, II II ? ~ ~ y ~ y I I` ~ ~ i~ I ~~.1 dalUGlr~irs:C7x~;~;~I~~ZOa.aO~ ,I I !i ; I ® Zw I ~I ~ ~ ® © ® Q ~ ° w i i 11 ~ r I m = i l ~ . 3 i l ~u m ~ I ~i ~ I, Z ~ ~ JI ~ o ® 1~ I I o ~ ~ ~ i pN I n l i ~ i I a ~U ~ ( , i ~ ~ i ~ ~ N I i l n , i I ~ ~ c I ~I ~'I I ~ II l ~m <m I in y ~ ' I~ I I I F F I i I I l i ~ © ~ ® O I ~ ~In V7 ry l0 l ~ I ~ I O C7 I ~ •3 .O i I12 Z cp.. I ~I ! x o M € O _ ~I ! i III f.-AVM 3N0 I I~a m ~ O ~ N fii vi ^ l w 11 I• I h iA CAS \ 'O O ! 1 I. by ~ i I r' r tt °O b 'd O 00 ~.1 1 I ' (I AYM 3N0 I ~ ~ ~ .--I ~ ~ 7 G I 1 ~ W l ~ N O N M ~ ~ wi~,l I 1-~ ! 1 M ~ N ELI/ ! I I ~ ~ c W lI1 N I O W 1 1 ~ •y ^ •V (yN} O why I l ~ I W ! II I f~ III ~ ~ ~ ~ d I II O ~ I II ' C~ ~ ~ M ° ~ ~ ~ t0 ~ ~ • I• f i ~I y > o ~ vii ~ v § A ; c 00 y 'aSe ~ y ~ ~ 1. ~ o o 3 x o ~ N o ~ :5 o a ~ i ~ ~ i ~ H E-y C7O O aa.`~''a ~ ~ O I L__---- ` ~ i I. 1 i ~ ~ ~ 'Qill9 ~~lb'13W ~1 ~ l j ~ ~ - i _ I ~ i' , o j I ~r ~ -may W N< ~~,V1.7~tl# w p ~ / - m 5 ; a°~ v Z ~ ~ (//~/J W O ° W H / Z Z \ Y W N Z ~ Z j Q'1/ ® V OL < F O % p ~ ~ > Z ~ i W OL ~ / w < ' :'i d 3 i ° Z ~ ~ W ~ O ~ ~ z, y i/ _ _ i i y i i ~ ~ ~ o ~ it ~ ~ ~ z ! ® ® / 1 i / f I I I ® ~ , / z i ~ / ~ z 1 o 1 ~ / ~ i ~ ~1~, 1 i ~ I • I ~ ~ I 1 _ _ _ _ ~ ' 0 i ~~~I 1~1 I~ ili~T~~~~~~~~II~ ~~~~il~ll~'If~~~~~il!Il I ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ I~. I ~I I I 1 I ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ 1 i ~ I I~ I I ~ I I ~ I 1 I I . F 21 I 3I I i 1 I I i~ - I I i I I I j l 1~ I I I I I I I i~ 11 I ~I 11 ~ ® I. I 6 II~~--I~CC• 1 aa s ~ it-iii Tii-JJ' I ~ ~1 I IiDN in in ilt I • ~ N N ~ N N NI ~ Y `Y N f tl1~ ~w JJ °I I I ~I' + il~ i~ ~1 ® 8 Ii •li g ! ~ I I I I ~ i 1 I ~ EI ~ I _ I 11 I~ I ~ I ~ I O ~ _ I I I a ~3 I S~ , i ~ S Iz I lu- ~ IN ~-jL al~ 8 I~I~a~=~ 8iS I ~ ~ ~ I I cI;I I Is~il ~ _ 3 ~ ( ~;=°I'~C .e" €I I I i i ~ O I I S 1Lj 1-..r-~- 1 1 N 3 N t~ i ~ l N N I w I[ I I I I I~ 8 ~ I I I I i 1~ I I I 1/~?1 • , ~ ~ ® ® ~ ~ ~ •P ~ ~ ~ j ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ I I I ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ I -s~ ~'v ~ ( I ~ I l ~ I ~ 1~1 II . I W 11 I(~ ~ V I I I I I~ ~ ( I ' 1 NI I I ~ I dlti ~I i i ; i A O I I '!1 m I dl ~ ill ~ I I , S~ ~ r 1 ~ ~_xLL~=~~ I ^ 1 ~ ~ ~ N~+~ ~ ~ a I~ ~ li I I I g ® © ® ® O I o o ~E '~tx~ o LLl ~ ~-i- N ~ - ~ - - ~ - G, W ~ Q . I II p . N =r ~1 ~ ~ W ~ O W Q ~ N Z I ~ III ® ' ~ t~tII, l/-~~/J, I I` ~ ,I I3 • ~1 1~'~ ~4~ ! 1 I 11_ II ~ = O 1 III TTTi . -N' ~1 i' i i II $ ° .i 1 o w r i t ~ W~ w 5 1 ,I I,I I.~ g •~1 / ~ o0 o~~~~m g ~ ^ c !I ~ W ~a ~~u=~3 o'z" ~ !~1 I li M >L d~ ~w swzui tL~ w W SOpCw ~ m ~i '1 II j~ O I zG 0C~_m~c~~w~ z _i it i ® ~ ~ p I •j ~ ~s °~oo<°~~<<j~~~ ~ W •li i 1 ~ wY I I ~I 1 OC ~~<OC~W N As=W I 1 I I O ~~~~~~-AdM 3N0 I ~ ~ ~~,",~cp~`~` ~w~~ ~ ~In~ i ! I~ O , V-- ~ z>~~- c`~~~owc~`~a °j = w <J7S I~ ~ oeu7u V w~r m m N~z j i I ~I~ d VM3N0~'~ ~ z btm~oc Fu~`~~mS~S" w~ m~5 ~ 111 i ~ •I ° 0~~7}EWE W~W ~ <wwZ 1 O~ti ~ ,I ~ I l.l~ wJFw ww~ m1~Iy x W ~ yy11 ~w~ pC lp~p~~OC ~ ~S ° W I i '~I X11 •1i Z ~ j N W y.Fd W O OU1 W O. < Zhu O y ~~m i' i Q h 1J1 ~°~5momm~~g`iu,'`'~?"~moGi< ~ 1 ~ ~ ~I . O I I ~ ~ (V In d' 1n O ~ I I. ~ t ~ ~ ~I I 1 1 I ~ I ~ I w ~ / m, I 1 _ o I ~ ~ ~ ~ tom, I ~ ~ W W 1 ` , 11 ~ ~ s O 8 i ~ ~ I F~i t~1") ~ ~ 3t~ i ~ W y w _ ~ ' /eC~ .J r i, ~ ams I I - ~ _ L,,. ~ ~ Ii ~ i i ~ ~ ~ / ~899£L ~ ~ / I I i0 . / I en / I I I / I I / \ ' / / ~j J / V / / I I ~ / I I o / y~y N / ~ I O[ C / J Q ~ I ~ ~ j ~ - r / I I ~~O ~ 11 / Z W ~ ~ / ~a W ~ ~ r _ ~ _ _ o < _ / I I Y ~ _ ~O FJ~ I I Xa~ w - I i ova Y _ I I w o ~ 1 / I I fig" / I i I t ,%j / ~ o I I / ~ ' ~ ~ et" 8 I I ~ / ~ II I 1 4~ i~~ tl U I, i ~I ~ i. I I,'' / II a rS >j ~ ~ I I 'I I IMM pg I I~ W o 1 _ ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ ~ u~ Huh - w~ ~ m~ Z w < F I.. ~ ~ I I 1 ~ ~~s mLL ~ 4- ~ w~ I'i I I ~ ~ ~ 1 I I ~ Z ~ o =~SR 8~ ~k' m~ < ,°,o ~ ~ z ~ ~ I it I ~ ~ ~ ~ I' ,I 15%~._~ Z Fm ~ ~'k~ ~~G m~ ~ g= ~ ~ oo I i I I i \ ~ I I III C ~ ~-m ~7°~ S$ ~:i o~ ~ ~ x I I F I I I / _ V G ~ ~ of ~ ~ w ~ o W I III / / ~ 'p4w ~ ~LL ~z ~-Yiw l~zz 6, ~ F b<~< ~ 1 ~ ~ I I I 1/ - 1 W ~ 57 =°t<o ~3 ~<m j< 2~ ~ 3 W S ~ w I - z~ I II ati rYm ~~°uR~ ~w W~ r~ p a ~3 ~ g 1 I zl U I ~ ~ \ W LL~ 1 ~ it0 Z - ~ rc 5 1 ~~'I. ~ of W.p ~I,o I Ili I~ \ \ O~Li iim io~~ ~w ~~m ~m J ~ N< 3d I I W W I ~ (n Zt ~ \ I 1-- I I II I I ~ ~ F~ O ~ ' I I Iql I_J ~ err ~ I I ~ 1 ~ ~~I ~ ~ ~ ~ I I i ~ I II ~ I,~ 11 I I ',,\~`1 3~~ e~ I ~ ~ Z I I~~ i I i ~ o ~ 3 > I 1 I~ p ~ ~ I L . - annaaa $ ~ I i } o ~ .si I I ~ ~ z I I I I~ Z m I I I I I I r I IF~~ ° I I II J L, I~ I W~ o w II I ~ U I ~ to ~ ~ I I I I' i ~ I I~ ~W ~ I I j W W I I i I ~ ~ I I' U I I I , ~aI ~ j, ' I ~ a H I; 1 I I I Ili I II ~ I I I III ~ ~ I ' I I ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~T1 I ~ . I II ~ ~ ~ ~~I ~ ~..i..~ ~ ' ' I I I _J Ci I II I I ~I II I ,s I ~ I I 1~ II I I `I I ~ II 'I ~ I I ~~~"1 ~ ~ I I. I i I 1 11~ I ~ ~ ~ II II ~ I ~I ~ I I I II ~I ~ ~ I 1:, I'I ~ ~ b I I I ~ 1 II ~ ~ ~ I~ I I 1 I I' ~ I I I ~ II I ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ O I I I ~ ~ I ~ ~ I 1 ' x I I I .~~-L,-- ~ ~w 9 I ~ I I ~ - - - - _ _ _ I _ _ ~ r', ~ NaR w O I __----f~- , / / / : /,i A~g~~~ ~ dl ~ % ; ~a~ % ~ .,x ~ t1 ~ ~ z W W w ® 1V~ i i \ ® y o ~ _ ~ n I ~ ~ / ~ i _ g i Q ® ~ ' ,i I ~ ~ I i I ~ / , ! ~ ~ ' ' ~ ; 11, 1:1 O ~ I ~ , 1 I I I,I !I 1 I i,, O I ~ 1 i; ~ '1 O i I I \ ' 1 I ~ I 1 ~1 I I _ - 1 I i ! I 1 I i~ O 1 I I I 1 1~,..1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ® i I i _ I i~ I ~ li 0 ® ® i i I ~ Q i ~ I, ~ '\1 ~ ® 11 1 II ~ I~ 1 I I I I 1 ' II 1 1 II ~ 1 i 1 I I 'T~J I I l i j i v j I it ( \ . I 1; 1 1 ® ® © ® 6 I r \ I ~1 `i I I ~ I J I ~ I ~ \ ~ W o ~ ~ ~ I II F ~W ' L, ?j ~ JII ~ ~m a I I ~ I I, ~ ~ ~ o N .I1 I I~y n ! ~ ,il ~ ~ ® ~ ~ Ili Z ~ ~ ~ 1~1 1 1, j ® O ~ j . i ~ ~ W~ ~ 1 I m W 1 ~ 1 j ~ 1 'I `'.J ~ ~'j 1[~ ~ F 1 i i it ~ ~ < 1{j ~ 1 i jI i ~ J~mW O 1 ~ I I ® I, J H < ~ a ~ ~ ~ c ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ? V 1 I, U ~~W ~ II j N f 1~ I n I I ~ ~i I I I' 1 ~ I ~ ! ~ O I i ( ~ 4~ i l if ~ ~ O ~ I' I 1 I 'I ~ I I I ' ii I~ j 'I I ~ ® Q O ® ~ ~ ~I ' i I CCU i % i 11 j I I i ~ ~ E-- LVM 3N0 I I I ~ Q I I I ~ ~1~1~ dM3N0~~ ~ ~ Al II '1~ ' .I 'I l ~ m ! ~ O ~i i~ ~ ~ ~ i 1 II j 11 ~,II 1 O f ~ 1 O ~ v~ i ! i '~1`` 1.1 it ^w ~1 A' ~ ~ ~ r r, I i 'I 111~~~11 I I i O ~ 4~ i , ' 1 1 I 1 1 1 ~ W~ I 1^J U 1 Ali i ~ i 1 / , i ij i i i 1 O ,1 ~ r T' cd i. ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ i lI 1 ~ i ~ 'I 1 1 1 I ~ ~ y I C ! i ~ ~ ~ C o 0 O 8Q ~I ! ~ ~ 11' 11 • ~ ~ ~ N•v I 1. I(~~^'~ ~ 0 II ~ t , a Wdd 'a~19 ~31'd1~W _ A^ a ~ "sss _ OC C[ K li _ - ~ _ _ - - - r _ _ ~ ~ • 1 ~ 1 i I / _ - jl I ~ 11 ~1 !a"... `mil _ ~ ~ ~a~~s• ms / C~ ~ ' / I I V i ~ ~I / / ~899£L ~ I ~ / ~ / i / i I I / / I I $ / / / / I I ~ i I I uxi I I ~ / W J / I I ~~Z / J i I I oWem~ ~ / <<o _ /i I I zwo I I ~ ~ W f - f - O - ,,rte.` 1 I ~W~ / - 0 i I I ova / i I I wrz~ ~ x ice/ I I j ~ I I ~ , f N I I i ;r ~o I N I I ~ / I 1~ ~ I i it U r i{ jl ~ I I y / i! I I I ' ~ .l II ( iS ~ I I ~ ;4 i i iI i , i - _ - _ i t-- N I I~, ~ ~ , I ~ , ~ ~ ' I I I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I i 15~~ - V I) ~ ~ I I I ~ ~ ~ ~ I i I I\ i ~ ~ I / ` I ~i i ~t i ~i ~ ti i $$I t y/ . I of , ' i / j ~ \ I I I o zf i- I I I Q~ r.z t i,l~ r7l ~ ~ ~ ~ j r ~ ~ 4) I i i n 13 I I l I ~ I i r/~ 1 II I° I I~I ~ U v 1 I ~ I I ~ I '`J ~ I d I i~ ~ ~ O I ~ I I I III 1 ~ J ~ I < I I~ ~ ' I ~ I i~$? V 1 I .W Wm ~ I ,I o ,st i ~ ~ ~-II I 4 IF~~ II II I'I ' W I I ~ I~ w I ~ I ~ ~ ~ I o< I I I I I I ~ I 1 I W of I i ~ F(~1~/'~, I ~ i I~ ~ i ~I I ~I I ,I I ~ I- i I p I 1, j I I I I v i I ~ I I I i I i I ~ I I I ~ C I 1 I I I I I I ~ S W V ~ I ~ ` I I ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ 1~ I ~ ~ I I ° ~ 1 I I I I I, ( ~ s~ m ~ V 1 I I, I I t , ~ °~o= ~ w I' I I ~ I 1 'I,~• I ~ ~a ~ o I I i i II I o Z ~ ~ o I~ I I 1 I I w y~J V I 1 I ' ~ F~ W W} ~ T I I II 1 1 II 11 ' I Z o W~_ I~ ~ I I ~ I I V F-~ Z>~ W I I I I I I I 1 ~ 1 ~ d N~ I I U ~ < J W Z • I I I O ~ I I W~ Z~~ rl x I I I Q I ~ W ~ n~ i--I I _ ^ n , I - _ , ~ 1 ..p. - _ - - r _ 4 ~ a ~ ~ V iAi ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~~.i n,,.~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 • ~ F _ P ~ ct~ ~ ~ g I ^ d ~ ~ - •~~o-y ~x ~ - . ~ ~ ~ 0~ I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ' . a W ~ U ~ ~ ; ~ ~ i' ~ \ ~ , - _ .aa ~ . , a - ~ ~ ~Id [ana7 loans Surptmg ~fioM-an~T , - I _ i - ji I~~ ' I . I s oral ~ y,` cu7 009 I - ?'711W a710M ~hyy ~ypM ' ~ i14 A7ZI ~VXs a70M 97Yd4 71~IGM . I I~ r ~ RI . ~ w71~M7 ~JIiY7 ~O~1N~D _ awl r sn t ~ I yn I _ Jn i . i i ~NM!"OIOI'13ti_ _ \ ~l1~7~.111y Z ~ ' 97yy177Vi Z- _ I • - I I aoReno[g;uat3 ga!PImH ~[=oM-anr7 © ~ _ i dim .rqy~, `r°n Pn•r!.>t +IC m.ae,~ ~IMn w+~art ~Ipnw - _ i ~ .~a~aa~ ia~aun~ad ~g pBa;sauTOg sat~iunuz~uo~ p~a~sauzoH io3 uBisaQ aneu><agas s~TUn x.~o~-ani7 ' I I acr>lenoiii ~I BuIPi!nS xsoM-onFZ I I 1 y_ ~ - ~ _ i y ~ u. I ~/eu!W.S+~9!dtmuuJ 1 / mISoNS 4~~Y 1 i ~ j. ' . r ~ - 9 A 0 z a ~ ~I 7 ~ - 3 a ~ ~ ~ ? ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~i . y - ~ B € ~ J N ~ .p ~ ~ b a c/~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ m s ~ ~ ~ gooa aWS ~ ~ ~ Q o p ~ - , ~ - . - - x . ~ . ~ ~ _ ~ _ _ a 3 J ~ - d ~i~ 1 ~ 3 ~ ~ j39 m a' ~g N y~y - F ~ _ , ~ ~ a ~ ~ r aU ~ ~ _ '1 ~ a e I x _ _ ! ~ ~ ~ , nib ~j - a5 J I E J 1V - ! . ' „M ~ z ~ ~ r 1, ^S f ~ ~n~ ~ y+ w'~, b ~ 1, 5 y, ~ _ • ~~r.::. _ _ . ~ 4Y . + ~ f ` `r ~~.1 I ~ ~ ~ / ~ , ~ ,'s ~ ~ ; F - f f / '~l -V ~ t a . , w ti ~ ~ ~ II '1 ~ } ~ i r- ; ~ s . ~ ~ - - t; ~ 1 ~ i ~ -11 ~i. t - ~ - ~ - r . ~ - v r , J ~~i u fi 1. _ I~_ 1 ~ r , ,4 - - I ~ 111 ~ ~ ~~~-~~-t~+~ ~ ~ - w 4 _ - ~ t - 1 ~ r~ I c ~ J _ k ~ . ~ ~ , is :f ~ - ~ a f 1 i ' ~ - ~ r ; i, I . ~ ~ ~s - 4~ ~ ~ r ~ I~ ~ x ~ i ~ ~ ~ I _ r • ~I - I y ` , ~ ~ 4 „ r 4 f r ~ ~ ~ ' J ~ ~ ~ U ~ - `-r--- - ~ . ~ i ~T ~ ~ o ° ~ ~ ~ 'a ~ ~f~ o :7 ( 3 a ~n,~, ~ ' ~ is r ~ . , ~d ~ rs. } i' $ ~ 1 , >V 11.E t!,\ ~ t 1 t ~'a s~ tip} . r ~ ~ - ~ 1 I J C' a , ~ r v ' s Ff r_ ` > 1 ~ ~ . 1 1 L ~ i a ~ ~ y. ~ k ~ ~ x~~ f`{{{~~~~ ~~Y O ~ Z \ h / ~ N O 0 ~i ~ ~ X ~ 1 ~ ~ j O PPP i - _ Ar~.~-- ` ~ ~ r 't llJ, a I I ~ ' / / f ! ` ' ~ ~ ( i I~ I r ~ ~ , ~l 1 r it ~ i i ~~I ~ ~ I ~I . , tom.. 1 ~ ~ % I ~ ~ bl ' ` _ i ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ! ~ ~ ~ , 11 _ 8 • ~ ~ J I ~ 11 t I it 1 jI _ - iI i i j I° ' o ~ x ~ O l 7~~.j I , i , 1 ~ I I I I~ o ~ ~ I~~ O i I~ I j ~ xno~ I I I I o 1 j I II ~ li ii ~ e ~ v 1 r l i I - « I 'i~ f I j , ; ~ 0 ' ~ ' I I ^ ~ `1 I %"-1- I I " ~ ~ 1 ; ; ' ~ ~ o i ~~li ' , iii a ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~I i I j 1 H j j ~ ~ ~ nog xnr'1 xoz o. ~ I i Z C~ 11 j~~ Ili ~ ~ o ~ I I ~I w II 1 j~~ j ~I I I ~ g . / I 1 I/ O a ~ ~I a 1 t W ~ II I. j ili-_ _ - I _ - _ ~ o ~j - _L------ ~ ~ ~ !I , ~-I l8 X31 d1~L- ~ a~ ~ ~X~~', b ~,-I- DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION July 6, 2000 CIT1 lIF I)( BI,1\ t~ Division of Planning 5800 Shier-Rings Road ubGn, Oha 43016-1236 it Phone/1DD:til4-761-6550 Fox: 614-161-6566 Web Site: vmw.dubGn.oh.us The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 2. Rezoning Application 00-0302 -Preliminary Development Plan -Homestead Communities Location: 22.462 acres located on the southeast corner of Metatec Boulevard and Post Road. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Cornmerce District (Perimeter Center Subareas B and C). Request: Review and approval of a preliminary development plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.056. Proposed Use: A multi-use development of 60 detached residential units, two live/work buildings containing 12 residential units and eight office/commercial units, and 3.2 acres of open space. Applicant: Continental/NRI Office Ventures Ltd, c/o Jonathan Kass, P.O. Box ~ 12, Dublin, Ohio 43017; represented by Gary Gray, Homestead Communities, 150 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215. MOTION 1: To approve this rezoning application (with no access to Post Road) because it protects and enhances the scenic character of Post Road, provides a transition between Perimeter Center and the residences, includes quality architecture, pedestrian amenities and "Wow!" elements, with 20 conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code to the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to meet Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) That plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; A8 BtJ~~Af f 1ED 1t! Page 1 of 4 p~ POR M ~ 5 DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION July 6, 2000 2. Rezoning Application 00-0302 -Preliminary Development Plan -Homestead Communities (Continued) 6) That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated once to the satisfaction of staff; 7) That the text be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subarea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfaction of staff; 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no parking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff; 10) That the applicant work with staff and fire officials to meet all health, safety and welfare issues regarding the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches; 11) That no direct vehicle access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 13) That all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15) That street names be provided to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 16) That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; 17) That two units be eliminated; 18) That the applicant utilize dimensional shingles or a mix of shingle types, subject to staff approval; 19) That stucco be eliminated from the proposed materials; and 20) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council. * Gary Gray agreed to the above conditions, except Condition 11. VOTE: 1-5. RESULT: The motion failed. Page 2 of 4 DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION July 6, 2000 2. Rezoning Application 00-0302 -Preliminary Development Plan -Homestead Communities (Continued) r MOTION 2: To approve this application with all conditions from Motion 1 listed above except Condition 11. VOTE: 3-3. RESULT: The motion failed. MOTION 3: To approve this rezoning application (with no access to Post Road) because it protects and enhances the scenic character of Post Road, provides a transition between Perimeter Center and the residences, includes quality architecture, pedestrian amenities and "Wow!" elements, with 20 conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code to the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to meet Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) That plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; 6) That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated once to the satisfaction of staff; 7) That the text be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subarea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfaction of staff; 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no parking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff; 10) That the applicant work with staff and fire officials to meet all health, safety and welfare issues regarding the design of all private drives; parking areas, and drive approaches; 11) That no direct vehicle access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; Page 3 of 4 DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION July 6, 2000 2. Rezoning Application 00-0302 -Preliminary Development Plan -Homestead Communities (Continued) 13) That all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15) That street names be provided to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 16) That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; 17) That two units be eliminated; 18) That the applicant utilize dimensional shingles or a mix of shingle types, subject to staff approval; 19) That stucco be eliminated from the proposed materials; and 20) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council. * Gary Gray agreed to the above conditions, except Condition 11. VOTE: 4-2. RESULT: This application was approved. It will be forwarded to City Council with a positive recommendation. STAFF CERTIFICATION Carson Combs Planner Page 4 of 4 w Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 6 Mr. Fishman was concerned about the precedent, but he felt this established business should be supported. He is not making the business worse and will be improving the looks of the site. He said a body shop is a necessary business. The landscaping will improve the appearance. Ms. Boring said it is not their job to worry about the market forces. Those forces might suggest housing at 12 units per acre, and they should follow the Community P1an..Mr. Fishman said that would only be true on a vacant site. Mr. Eastep said Dublin's Code directs the Commission to disapprove conditional uses when the conditional use is not applicable in that zoning district; the applicable development standards are not met; the proposed development is not in accord with the area plans; it will have an undesirable effect on the surrounding area; or it is not in keeping with land use character. Mr. Fishman made a motion to approve this conditional use because the landscaping treatment respects the Thoroughfare Plan, the Avery Road appearance will be substantially improved, and the right-of--way conforms to the Thoroughfare Plan, with five conditions: 1) That the applicant reconfigure the front parking lot; 2) That the applicant no longer use and properly dispose of the existing paint booth; 3) That the applicant provide a site plan including the recommended landscaping for staff approval; 4) That landscaping be installed by October 15, 2000, and that project be completed in one month, subject to staff approval; and 5) That exhaust vent be painted to blend unobtrusively with the rest of the building. Mr. Irelan agreed with the conditions as stated. Mr. Eastep seconded, and the vote was as follows; Ms. Salay, no; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Lecklider, no; Ms. Boring, no; Mr. Eastep, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes. (Disapproved 3-3.) Mr. Lecklider made a motion to direct staff to explore the process for establishing a Dublin zoning designation on these industrial and commercial properties along Avery Road corridor. Ms. Salay seconded, and the vote was as follows; Mr. Sprague, yes; Ms. Boring, yes; Mr. Eastep, ~ yes; Mr. Fishman; yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes. (Approved 6-0.) Mr. Lecklider announced the eleven o'clock rule. Mr. Lecklider called a short recess at approximately 10 p.m.. 2. Rezoning Application 00-0302 - Preliminary Development Plan - Homestead Communities Carson Combs said this is a rezoning through the PUD preliminary development plan for a multi-use development of 60 detached residential units and 12 live/work units. The site also has 3.2 acres of openspace. The concept plan was approved in December 1999/January 2000 for 60 detached, and 15 multi-story live/work units. The Commission was supportive of the project, provided it would have sufficient buffering adjacent to PCD uses to the south and west. The Commission also indicated a desire to reduce the proposed density. He showed a few slides. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 7 Mr. Combs said the "J"-shaped site is located on the south side of Post Road and includes the existing retention pond. Recently completed Wall Street runs along its south border. Mr. Combs said the live/work units are next to the pond. Many amenities are proposed. The tree line in the center of the site will be removed. This is very near Coffman Park and the park along the North Fork. Buffering along Wall Street includes stone walls and evergreens. The Post Road Buffer will be reconfigured and landscaped more heavily. A water feature runs along the length of Post Road. The applicant will work with the daycare on buffering. The Post Road ponding must look natural. He said staff requests that the plantings be replaced. Mr. Combs said the architecture mimics Perimeter Center. Four-sided architecture is proposed for the live/work units. The materials include stucco, Hardi-plank, and manufactured stone. The 60 houses will be a mix of ranch, 1'/Z story and two-story buildings. The architecture will define the streetscapes and village greens. A variety of stone walls and fences will provide a continuous pedestrian environment. The density proposed is 3.2 du/ac with a maximum of 7,650 square feet of net leasable space for offices or commercial uses within the live/work area. The Community Plan recommends office or mixed use with employment emphasis. The Plan holds residential use to five du/ac. He said Wow! Elements were incorporated. A 100-foot building and pavement setback along Post Road is proposed. The Wall Street setback is 50 feet and along Metatec Boulevard, 25 feet. He said staff has expressed concern about buffering. He said the Landscape Inspector confirmed that the are 151 caliper inches on this site, and staff recommends those be replaced according to the Tree Preservation Ordinance. The openspace requirement for this site is 4.41 acres. This will include 1.9 acres for the Post Road buffer and 13 acres along the existing pond. Mr. Combs said in the past, the required setback usually got one-half credit toward the park requirement. Based on this, the plan is 1.21 acres short of the required park space. The 24-foot wide streets are proposed to be private. Post Road would receive access for bicycles through the existing bridge, linking it to the bikepath system. Mr. Combs said this is a unique mixed-use environment. It emphasizes architecture and is compact and pedestrian-oriented. It has quality materials and detailing. The Community Plan recommends office, but this will have a lower traffic impact. The plan also incorporated Wow! features. Staff recommends approval with 17 conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code to the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to show the location of specific species and meet all Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) That plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; 6) That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated to the satisfaction of staff and that plans be revised to reflect the same; Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission ' Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 8 7) That the text be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subarea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfaction of staff; 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no pazking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff; 10) That the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Engineering Division; 11) That no direct vehicular access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 13) That all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standazds of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15) That street names be provide to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 16) That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; and 17) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council. Mr. Combs noted it was about 10:00 p.m., and he asked, for the benefit of the remaining applicants, if the Commission was willing to waive the 11 o'clock rule. The Commission discussed the issue and deferred its decision until 11:00 p.m.. Mr. Eastep said he continues to have a problem with the density and too little pazk being provided. A payment instead of part of the pazkland is being offered which seems inappropriate. He did like the Wow elements that were incorporated. He thought several buildings should be eliminated and turned into park. Mr. Combs said the site is quite small and very lineaz. The stormwater pond cannot be .moved. It is very hazd to find adequate appropriate land to meet the Code park requirement. Ms. Clarke said ideally, eliminating buildings would be good, but those economics do not work. Staff thinks this is a good project with a good site plan. Staff has tried to be consistent with its recommendations on other sites for park location and credit given. A combination of land and money to meet the park requirement is appropriate for this site. Ms. Boring asked about the community gardens previously shown along Post Road. Ms. Clazke said not everyone liked that concept. Ms. Boring wanted more open space. Mr. Fishman thought more open space should be added near the ponds. It looks too dense. He could not support the extensive length of the private road shown for this project. Future residents always want them converted to public streets. This has happened several times. Mr. Combs said the streets would be 24 feet in width, and this is consistent with the design intent of the plan. Engineering has agreed to this plan. Mr. Hammersmith noted that private streets need to meet the public street standards, including full curb and gutter section. Ms. Clarke said the advantage of a private street is that building setbacks will not apply. Mr. Fishman was concerned that Dublin may own these streets in ten years because a homeowners' group was unprepared to pay for major street maintenance. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 9 Ms. Boring said at times, a condo association wants to maintain control, schedule its trash pick- up times, etc. She did not think it was City policy to give 50 percent credit for setbacks and buffers. Mr. Combs said when amenities are added to those areas, consistent with developed parkland, the staff has endorsed giving park credit. There are ponds, waterfalls, landscaping, a stone bridge, pedestrian links, etc. The frontage is 1,400 feet. The park area will be dedicated to the City but maintained by a forced and funded homeowners' association. . Ms. Boring said the pool is at the east edge, and inconvenient to most residents. There needs to be limited colors, without pink, blue, and white houses as seen in Florida. Colors should be subject to Commission approval. Mr. Combs said the color palette will be determined later. House elevations will be assigned from that approved color palette. The chimney material was not specified. The Metatec setback is 50 feet; Wall Street is 40 feet; and Post Road is 100 feet. All internal setbacks will be 10 feet. Ms. Boring said she favored stone fencing strongly over wrought iron. Mr. Combs said there is an internal sidewalk along both sides of the internal roadway. Mr. Combs said the concept plan had a Post Road entrance, and it caused a lot of debate. Staff has consistently tried to de-emphasize Post Road by encouraging alternative access. Ms. Clarke said the Post Road access shown on the concept plan was a very big problem and inconsistent with a variety of adopted plans and policies. She did not recollect that the Commission shared that view, at least after hearing that the neighbors supported it. Mr. Combs said the substantial grading needed will remove the tree row. The staff supports the land use and plan. It has been redesigned and includes many amenities. It does not match the Community Plan, per se, but it will have a lower impact than an office. Mr. Fishman noted staff has changed its recommendation since the concept plan. Ms. Clarke said this site was never rated as a prime office site, and it now has almost no architectural controls. Aflat-roofed office building along Post Road could not be disapproved based on current zoning. Given that, staff considered this redesign and architecture as it related to Post Road and the impact on the neighbors. This seemed to be a very good alternative. Staff supports the density of 3.2 du/ac. Ms. Clarke said the Community Plan was based on impacts, and offices have higher impacts, especially in peak hour traffic, than residential uses. Staff believes this is an acceptable change from the Community Plan. Mr. Fishman asked about the lack of parkland within the development. Ms. Clarke said there is limited on-site park, but Coffman Park and the parkland assembled along the Indian Run are very close. Those provide for a wide range of recreational experiences. She reported that Council recently bought the 14-acre Halloran property just to the north on Post Road. Mr. Eastep and Mr. Sprague said it would make a wonderful park. Mr. Fishman said it is too dense with nowhere for children to play. Mr. Eastep agreed and predicted that the future residents would demand a tunnel under Post Road. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 10 Mr. Combs said the detention pond was pazt of the total site acreage and density calculation, but it was not counted as open space. Ms. Boring said the layout looked tight. Mr. Fishman asked if the pond at Perimeter Center counted for openspace. Ms. Clarke said no, but it is a lazgely commercial development without a parkland requirement. She noted that the ponds at the Asherton Apartments were included in the gross density. Mr. Lecklider said the pocket parks at the golf course were comparable with other parkland nearby. There is a bikepath to Coffman Pazk from here, and these residents will probably not have young children. Ms. Salay agreed, and said people can make an informed choice in buying here. She said this is not a typical Dublin development. Mr. Eastep thought that the upcoming Emerald Parkway bridge over US 33 will improve this as an office site. This is income-producing land, and it should remain that way. He considered this to be a spot zoning and detrimental to Dublin. Mr. Fishman agreed. Mr. Lecklider disagreed and said this is a transitional use. He hoped it will keep the commercial traffic off Post Road. Mr. Eastep said commercial traffic has no access to Post Road. Post Road is being de-emphasized. Mr. Fishman wanted buildings eliminated near the pond. He could support this plan if the space was opened up next to the retention pond. Mr. Lecklider asked if the live/work units were moved from the entrance at staff's suggestion. Mr. Combs said yes due to higher traffic impact and direct access right from Wall Street. Mr. Combs said park should be dedicated. A 100-foot setback along Post Road and the area around the pond would be included. The proposal is about 1.2 acres short of Code for park, and the fee for this would be $45,275. The internal village green spaces were not credited toward the ~ pazkland, and half of the 100-foot Post Road setback was credited. Mr. Sprague suggested the pool and community center be sited closer to the corner (Columbus Laser Surgery). The 1.2 acres should be put into greenspace, and he did not support accepting a fee instead of land. They should eliminate some of the units and move the live/work units. He said the residents deserved a park. Ms. Salay did not oppose re-siting the community center and pool. She noted other subdivisions were approved with Wow elements that affected density. This proposal "Wowed" her. Ms. Boring said this azea is classified as a River Heritage, but this design is European. It contrasts with the .existing older neighborhood. She said the Wow identification should be carried all the way through. The design conflicts and needs modification. Ms. Clazke encouraged the Commission to be clear about any problem observed in the architecture, layout, or design. She noted the program has not yet been adopted. At about 11 p..m. o'clock, Mr. Lecklider took a straw poll on waiving the 11 o'clock rule. The Commissioners were split. Steve Caplinger said M/I Homes would accept being deferred until the next meeting. Mr. Lecklider said it would be the first case on July 20. r~ Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 11 Gary Gray, Homestead Communities, showed proposed renderings. Site amenities include a Dublin dry-laid stone wall, an archway and a trellis along Wall Street. This is a condominium project for empty nesters, and the buildings will cost $100-$150 per square foot to construct. The pool is located away from the residential to avoid noise from visiting grandkids. He said accessory structures are permitted such as a greenhouse, tool shed, and woodworking shop. The first two bays of the liveJwork building will be the community center that includes a cafe, a living room, a fitness center, and two private offices for business and sales. Mr. Gray said the square footage in the text has been limited to be low impact. He said the original plan had 75 units, plus 15 commercial spaces. The commercial space had the greatest impact due to how the parking cuts into greenspace. Seven commercial spaces were cut. The plan now has 72 total units with eight commercial units. ' Mr. Gray said they agreed to all the above conditions, except 4 and 17. They asked that the full landscape plan be submitted at the final development plan. Regarding Condition 6, they would like to relocate the trees along Post Road to the pond area. This is needed due to regrading, and if the trees are moved twice, they might not survive. Ms. Newcomb said the trees are part of the Post Road Buffer. Staff does not want them moved twice, but to be relocated elsewhere along Post Road. Mr. Gray agreed, but said half of the trees are already dead. He proposed that new trees be planted also on Post Road. He agreed to put the existing trees where staff wanted. Ms. Newcomb agreed. Mr. Gray said regarding Conditions 8 and 10, they can meet the Fire turning radii standards, but Dublin's standard may be higher. They want to maintain an appropriate scale and will work with staff and the fire department on this. Regarding Condition 11, they want vehicular access onto Post Road. Staff recommended removing it, and they complied. Now, however, Mr. Gray said they definitely want Post Road access. He said adding a left turn stacking lane on Post Road will change the roadway character and increase traffic. Mr. Gray said private streets for a condominium project make sense. It is very difficult legally to convert a private street to a public one. Mr. Fishman disagreed and said the homeowners cannot afford to maintain them. There was additional discussion on this issue. Mr. Gray said the homeowners' association would be fully funded. Ms. Salay said the decision of public or private street is a City Council decision. Mr. Gray said the building colors will be similar to those in Perimeter Center, probably limited to three or four earthtones. The same color will not be used on side by side buildings. He said there is no stucco, only stone and Hardi-plank. The street side of the houses will be stone. The walls that divide yards will be wrought iron with a few exceptions. He said the 2,000 square foot units will average $300,000. Mr. Gray said it would be about one-third stucco stone to two-thirds Hardiplank. There will be a stone water table or a stone gable with siding on the sides. There are no chimneys; any fireplaces will be direct vented and on the same elevation as the electric and gas meters. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 12 Mr. Gray said two units could be eliminated, leaving 70 units. They would like to move a commercial building near the entrance. Mr. Fishman wanted more water frontage. Mr. Gray said the openspace is not all green. It includes a plaza space. He feels this development is higher quality and better than anything he had worked on in Dublin. Mr. Sprague said this is obviously high quality with a lot of thought given.. He said the live/work concept was interesting. Mr. Gray said they were being pioneers in the industry, but they have received much positive response from potential residents. Mr. Lecklider said it made sense to locate the pool away from the residences due to the noise. He saw merit in an access at Post Road and liked the live/work units. Because this is a residential development, it related more to the north side of Post Road than to the commercial development along Wall Street. It will not generate much traffic. Ms. Boring was still concerned about the layout. She liked the Post Road Buffer plan as a good transition. She said she did not think the residents on rural roads wanted another curbcut. Ms. Salay said access becomes a physical connection to those homes on Post Road. Ms. Boring said this would be true if it were a standard single-family neighborhood on public streets. It has a pedestrian connection, and no vehicular connection is desirable. Mr. Lecklider said the Post Road access was originally acceptable to most of the Commissioners at the concept plan. Ms. Salay said the condominium developments near her neighborhood have 70 to 90 units and a car is never seen, regardless of the time of day. Mr. Lecklider preferred to see dimensional shingles. Mr. Fishman noted that Donato's was required to have shake roofs. Mr. Gray said they were too expensive, and they would rather put ~ that money in the stone walls. Mr. Fishman suggested using artificial slate or something that gives dimension and high quality. Mr. Gray said they might be able to do something on the two work buildings because they were larger. Mr. Fishman said if shake shingles are put on properly, they can last 50 years or more. Mr. Gray agreed, but said the initial cost is extremely high. Mr. Fishman said standing seam roofs might be used. Mr. Gray said the Elkline slate-look shingle with three different layers and a thick shadow line was proposed for the single-family units. Paul Hammersmith said staff would only support the proposed access on Post Road if it includes a westbound left turn lane. Mr. Fishman agreed. Ms. Salay and Mr. Sprague did not think the left turn lane was needed for 70 units. Various Dublin examples were then discussed by the Commission. Mr. Gray said stucco would be eliminated as a material from the text. The buildings will be of stone and Hardiplank with wood trim. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 13 Mr. Lecklider asked about signage on the awnings. Mr. Gray agreed to work awning signage out with the Code and staff. The live/work units, per the text, will have one sign parallel to the street, a smaller sign perpendicular and nothing on the awning. Mr. Gray said proposed conditional uses will be better defined in the text. Mr. Combs said conditional uses needed to be listed by category. Mr. Gray will work with staff. Edith Driscoll, representing Post Road residents, said she had previously conveyed the neighbors' support for this proposal, and they enthusiastically welcomed this high quality residential expansion on Post Road. It is slightly distressing to hear some of the Commissioners' speculation about the future of Post Road. This development would be a tremendous asset to the community. She said one nearby resident was concerned about when the dumpster would be serviced. She said the Post Road residents would like the Commission to approve this. Chris Cline, Post Road resident, said they strongly favor this proposal. The site will never have an A or B-class office. This is very appropriate and nicer than flat roof offices. Mr. Cline said the Post Road access was very important. He said in his letter (distributed to the Commission), they need a project to relate with Post Road. The residents want the highest quality feasible and a project that is tied into Post Road. He said there were no definable standards for a left turn lane. There should be a rational, reasonable, and measurable reason for it. A left turn lane should result only if the traffic justification is furnished for it. . Mr. Cline said the Wow! Ordinance shows this site as Dublin Model, not River Heritage. Mr. Lecklider preferred no left turn lane. However, he was concerned about the curve heading west. Mr. Hammersmith said that was somewhat away from the site. Mr. Lecklider wondered if a left turn lane could be created at Metatec Boulevard as an alternative. Mr. Hammersmith said no, not for this site. Mr. Fishman opposed Post Road access, especially if Engineering says a left turn lane is needed. He expected the other entrances to be beautiful, and the fewer breaks on Post Road, the better. If the Post Road access is approved, a left turn lane is needed, but he opposes Post Road access. Mr. Eastep and Ms. Boring agreed that there should not be a Post Road access. Mr. Sprague hated to lose the greenspace, but he thought Post Road access was okay and that it did not necessarily require a turn lane. There needs to be a study. Ms. Salay agreed. She did not expect much traffic impact from 70 units using three entrances. Mr. Fishman said it was a safety issue, and rear end collisions can occur with only a few units. Mr. Gray said there are three entrances and agreed to do a traffic study. Ms. Boring said the developer should construct the left turn lane now. Otherwise, Dublin will have to pay for it later. If people do not want a turn lane on Post Road, it should not have Post Road access. She said connectivity is provided by bikepaths. The Post Road access and left-turn lane issues were discussed at length. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission • Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 14 The Post Road access and left-turn lane issues were discussed at length. Ms. Salay said Post Road access makes the existing neighborhood more viable. Mr. Lecklider preferred the access from Post Road. He could not support it over the objections raised by staff about a turn lane. Ms. Clarke said the only case where staff could not recommend adeveloper-funded turn lane was a recent "site plan review" in an R-4 District on Martin Road. The site was zoned for 20 years, and there is no Code or policy basis to require anoff--site improvement in a site plan review. This, however, is a rezoning application, the appropriate point of the process to include needed off-site improvements. Part of the PUD process is to show how a project fits into the overall system. This is a two-lane road with roadside ditches, asub-standard road, which requires a left turn lane for new development, to avoid rear-end collisions, etc. Ms. Salay noted Metatec has no left turn lane. Ms. Clarke said it was the first commercial building on the south side of Post Road, 15 or more years ago, and it predates this policy. She said there is no stacking lane at Commerce Parkway because it was designed to be converted at some point to a cul de sac, with no connection with Post Road. Ms. Boring said the Recreation Center and Gorden Farms have left turn lanes. Ms. Clarke said if a left turn lane already exists, no left turn lane is required of a new development. This is usually included at the preliminary plat or rezoning of the property. Mr. Hammersmith said he and Balbir Kindra concur that this development needs a left turn lane, if access to Post Road is approved. Post Road is a collector with a lot of traffic. The golf course has the same requirement. Ms. Salay said those are larger developments. Ms. Boring said the policy saves the City from doing future improvements. It makes good sense. The policy is to get the road improvements with the developments. Mr. Gray said they still want the access and would like to study it with the City Engineer. If it is a matter of public safety and liability, they will build a left turn lane. Mr. Fishman thought it was better for the Post Road residents without the north entrance. He wanted Post Road to be as green as possible, and it is dangerous to go against the Engineer's recommendation. Mr. Lecklider agreed. There was more discussion on the access issue. Ms. Salay said she would like to see quantifiable evidence for left turn lanes. It should not be arbitrarily required without a traffic count and study by the applicant. Mr. Lecklider referred the left turn lane issue to staff. He said Conditions 4, 6, 8, 10, and 17 had been addressed and resolved. Mr. Gray said any exterior chimneys will be masonry. Ms. Clarke said the access issue did not need a determination now. It could be decided at the final development plan. However, she said it was necessary that the developer be put on notice that it may be required, due to its cost. Mr. Gray understood. *Cily of Dublin, Division ojPlanning. 5800 Shier-Rings Road, Dublin, Ohio 4316-1236 Telephone/7'DD: 614/761-6550 FAX.• 6/4/761-G56G Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 15 Ms. Boring made the motion for approval because it protects and enhances the scenic character of Post Road, provides a transition between Perimeter Center uses and the residences, includes quality architecture, pedestrian amenities and "Wow elements, with 20 conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code to the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to meet Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) That plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; 6) That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated once to the satisfaction of staff; 7) That the text be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subarea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfaction of staff; 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no parking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff; 10) That the applicant work with staff and fire officials to meet all health, safety and welfare issues regarding the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches; 11) That no direct vehicle access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 13) That ail utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15) That street names be provided to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City ~ Council; 16) That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with „wj the final development plan; 17) That two units be eliminated; 18) That the applicant utilize dimensional shingles or a mix of shingle types, subject to staff approval; 19) That stucco be eliminated from the proposed materials; and 20) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council. Mr. Fishman seconded the motion. Mr. Gray said his partners would withdrawn their application if the Post Road access were not included. Ms. Boring noted that the applicant had the staff report and recommended conditions for a week. She said this was a power play after three hours of discussion. Mr. Gray disagreed. Post Road was a critical part of this application. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 16 Ms. Clarke said this is a PUD, and the Commission has three choices: approve, approve with modifications, and disapprove. She said the modifications do not need to be accepted by the applicant. The applicant can withdraw the application at any time. Mr. Gray requested a vote, and agreed to the above conditions, except Condition 11. Mr. Lecklider asked what options exist for Commissioners who favor Post Road access; the above motion rules out Post Road access. Ms. Readier said if there is a tied vote, Council can make the decision by a majority vote. It can include the conditions it wants, and the applicant can make the same argument at Council. Mr. Gray apologized. He said they are not asking for the curbcut without a turn lane. The curbcut was very important to the project. He asked that the entrance issue be considered separately. Ms. Boring said the drawings presented to the Commission show no Post Road access. If this is pivotal to the applicant, it should be on the drawings and/or announced much earlier, not at the time of the motion. The Commission should not be blamed for the meeting running until 1 a.m. when applicants play games. The vote: Mr. Sprague this was a great project with much improvement. He said the project would be good without the access point, but he voted no. Ms. Salay wanted the access resolved and would like the condition reworded. She preferred having Post Road access and voted no. Mr. Eastep, no. Mr. Lecklider did not favor Condition 11. Because he otherwise favors the project, he voted yes. Mr. Fishman favored the application but disliked the tactics. He did not want a safety hazard by ignoring City Engineer's recommendation and voted no. Ms. Boring voted no. (Motion failed 1-5.) Mr. Spague made a second motion to approve this application with all conditions and bases above except Condition 11. Ms. Salay seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Eastep, no; Mr. Fishman, no; Ms. Boring, no; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; and Mr. Sprague, yes. (Motion failed 3-3.) Ms. Readier said for the record, the two motions failed, and this application will be forwarded with no recommendation. Ms. Clarke said no conditions were recommended. Ms. Salay said it is a wonderful project. Mr. Fishman it needs a compromise on the turn lane. Ms. Boring made a motion to adjourn due to the tactics used and the late hour. There was more discussion. Mr. Eastep seconded, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Fishman, no; Ms. Salay, no; Mr. Lecklider, no; Mr. Sprague, no; Mr. Eastep, yes; and Ms. Boring, yes. (Motion to adjourn failed 2-4.) Mr. Fishman made a motion for approval (with no access to Post Road) because it protects and enhances the scenic character of Post Road, provides a transition between Perimeter Center and the residences, includes quality architecture, pedestrian amenities and "Wow elements, with 20 conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code to the satisfaction of staff; Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 17 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to meet Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) That plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; 6) That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated once to the satisfaction of staff; 7) That the text be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subarea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfaction of staff; 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no parking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff; 10) That the applicant work with staff and fire officials to meet all health, safety and welfare issues regarding the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches; 11) That no direct vehicle access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 13) That all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15) That street names be provided to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 16) That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; 17) That two units be eliminated; 18) That the applicant utilize dimensional shingles or a mix of shingle types, subject to staff approval; 19) That stucco be eliminated from the proposed materials; and 20) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council. Mr. Lecklider seconded, and the vote was as follows: Ms. Salay, yes, and she favors a vehicular connection on Post Road. Mr. Sprague, yes, and he favors a Post Road connection. Ms. Boring, no. Mr. Eastep, no. Mr. Lecklider, yes, and he favors access on Post Road. Mr. Fishman, yes, and he resented working for three hours to resolve issues in the best interest of Dublin followed by threats from the developer. He noted the drawings reflect no access. (4-2 Approved.) 3. Final Plat 00-OlOFP -Westbury Section 5 -Lots 147 through 155 This case was postponed due to the late hour without discussion or vote. 4. Revised Final Development Plan 00-067FDP -Coffman Park - 5600 Post Road This case was postponed due to the late hour without discussion or vote. publin Planning and Zoning r'~mmission ' Staff Report -July 6, 2000 Page 5 2. Rezoning Application 00-0302 -Preliminary Development Plan -Homestead Communities Location: 22.462 acres located on the southeast corner of Metatec Boulevard and Post Road. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Perimeter Center Subareas B and C). Request: Review and approval of a preliminary development plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.056. Proposed Use: A multi-use development of 60 detached residential units, 2 live/work buildings containing 12 residential units and 8 office/commercial units, and 3.2 acres of open space. Applicant: ContinentaUNRI Office Ventures Ltd, c/o Jonathan Kass, P.O. Box 712, Dublin, Ohio 43017; represented by Gary Gray, Homestead Communities, 150 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Carson Combs, Planner. BACKGROUND: The Perimeter Center development was zoned PCD, Planned Commerce District, in 1988 for a variety of uses. The proposed site contains portions of Subareas B and C and is generally zoned for offices, daycare and other similar uses. This proposal is for amixed-use, residential development that includes some limited office/commercial space as an extension for a home occupation or small-scale business. The Commission approved a concept plan (4-2) in December 1999 for 60 detached residential units and 15 multi-story, live/work units (15 residential units with 15 office/commercial units). The Commission indicated overall support for the project, provided that sufficient buffering was created between the development and adjacent PCD uses. The Commission also indicated a desire to reduce the proposed density. City Council approved the concept plan 5-0 in January of this year. Under the PUD provisions of Section 153.056, the Commission will make a recommendation on this rezoning application and forward it to City Council for a public hearing and final vote. A two-thirds majority vote is necessary to override a negative recommendation from the Commission. If approved by Council, the rezoning will take effect in 30 days. All development is subject to final development plan approval by the Commission prior to the start of construction. CONSIDERATIONS: Site Characteristics: The site is a flat, "J"-shaped parcel on the south side of Post Road. The site has roughly • 1,450 feet of frontage along Post Road and wraps behind an existing office building. It also has 250 feet of frontage on Metatec Boulevard and approximately 1,700 feet along Wall Street. An existing tree row runs from Post Road to Wall Street through the center of the site. A large man-made pond is also located at the southeast corner of the site. • To the north across Post Road are estate lots zoned R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District and properties purchased by the City of Dublin to expand the open space corridor along the South Fork of the Indian Run. The site surrounds the Columbus Laser Center Dublin Planning and Zoning "ommission Staff Report -July 6, 2000 Page 6 offices located along Post Road, zoned SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District. To the east and southeast are office buildings zoned LI, Limited Industrial District. .CheckFree and the Ohio Credit Union League, located within the Perimeter Center PCD (Subarea C), are south of Wall Street. The Perimeter Flex Office is located just south of the pond (Subarea C). To the west across Metatec Boulevard is the Metatec Corporation (Subarea B-1). An existing daycare (Subarea B) is located at the corner of Wall Street and Metatec Boulevard. The site lies within Subarea B, which permits office, research, daycare, institutional and drive-in facilities associated with permitted uses. Permitted uses for the southeast portion of the site (Subarea C) include commercial uses, light assembly, manufacturing and wholesale, as well as most uses allowed in Subarea B. • This request is for a rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development District. Two subareas would be added within the current Perimeter Center plan and text. Subarea B-2 includes detached residential units, while Subarea B-3 includes a mix of detached residential units and "live/work" units that permit a combination of residential and small commerciaUoffice spaces. Community Plan: • The Future Land Use Map in the Community Plan indicates that the site will be "office" and "mixed-use with employment emphasis." As a result, no residential density has been assumed for this site in the Community Plan. This rezoning request is for amixed-use residential development at a density of 3.2 du/ac and a maximum of 7,650 square feet of net-leasable space. Similar uses are recommended in the Community Plan to have a maximum density of 5.0 du/ac. While the proposed uses would generate low revenues compared to office or research, the development would create substantially less peak- hour traffic (consistent with the strategy for de-emphasizing Post Road). • The Community Plan designates Post Road as a "scenic road." The Community Plan recommends setbacks of 200 feet for all scenic roadways. Over the past year, the "Road to Wow!" was proposed to take a closer look at preserving scenic roads throughout Dublin. Post Road has been designated as "River Heritage" character, requiring a 100- foot scenic setback in the current draft. The proposed text is consistent with "Wow!" setbacks. Substantial "Wow!" elements such as cascading ponds and streams, pedestrian spaces and a stone bridge have been integrated along the Post Road frontage. Additional internal and external "Wow!" elements have been integrated throughout the entire site. Site Plan and Development Standards: • Homestead at Perimeter Center will include one access point on Metatec Boulevard and two along Wall Street. The main entrance into the development has been relocated from Post Road (concept plan) to Wall Street and will align with the Olmstead Office development. Curb cuts along Wall Street must align with, or have a minimum offset of 100 feet from across the street. • The Homestead development is intended to be a more compact, pedestrian-oriented neighborhood. The design of "traditional" streetscapes is intended to provide offsets and courtyards that will slow traffic and provide very defined views terminating on green spaces or building facades. The existing pond to the southeast will be utilized as a core of mixed-use activities that include residential, small-scale office and commercial and a variety of pedestrian amenities. Streets within the development will be private with Dublin Planning and Zoning "~mmission ' Staff Report -July 6, 2000 Page 7 access via service entrances to rear garages. Layout emphasizes the architectural detail of buildings, walls and fences along streetscapes. Integration of street design, small greens and a variety of "Wow!" amenities throughout the development provide apedestrian- oriented environment that is intended to encourage pedestrian movement through the development and adjacent open space system along the Indian Run. • The western half of the site (Subarea B-2) includes detached residences only. Subarea B- 3 includes some detached residences and live/work units. Permitted uses within the proposed live/work buildings include residential, community facilities, small offices, J°""~" studios and pedestrian-only ATMs. Individual office or commercial space within the live/work buildings cannot exceed 1,200 net usable square feet. Permitted uses have been selected with an emphasis on creating minimal traffic impacts. All uses not specifically permitted for Subarea B-3 are considered conditional uses and must be approved by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the condominium association. Staff recommends that proposed conditional uses be specifically listed in the text. • The preliminary development plan indicates a total of 72 residential units at a gross residential density of 3.2 du/ac. The plan includes 60 detached residential units, in addition to 12 residential units and 8 work units within the live/work buildings. Approved concept plans indicated a total of 60 detached residences and 15 live/work units (15 residential units plus 15 work units). • Proposed setbacks along Post Road are 100 feet for both building and pavement. Building setbacks along Metatec Boulevard and Wall Street are 50 feet and 40 feet, respectively. The proposed pavement setback along Wall Street is 15 feet, while the pavement setback along Metatec Boulevard is 25 feet. All other property lines would have a minimum building setback of 10 feet. Staff recommends that pavement setback requirements for those property lines also be indicated at 10 feet. • A maximum 75 percent lot coverage is permitted. Plans indicate approximately 65 percent lot coverage. Tree Preservation and Landscaping: Sufficient buffering was a Commission concern for the south edge of the site. Stone walls and substantial evergreen plantings have since been incorporated along Wall Street. ..a. Rear garages will line the service road to provide additional separation between residences and uses to the south. Additional setbacks and reconfigured units have also been added along Metatec Boulevard. The applicant will meet with the existing daycare to develop a suitable buffering plan along that property. • A 10.5-inch hackberry is located along Post Road, approximately 200 feet west of the Columbus Laser building. Staff recommends that protective fencing be installed during all phases of construction, as needed, for the site. • Approved street trees for Post Road is the Red Oak and for Wall Street, the Summit Green Ash. Submitted landscape plans indicate a proposed plant palette for the site. Landscape plans should be revised to reflect specific species. • The site contains a tree row and specimens along the existing pond. Staff has confirmed that the site contains 151 caliper inches covered by the Tree Preservation Ordinance. The ordinance's intent is to preserve existing trees, instead of removing them. The proposal does not include the existing trees. Caliper inches must be replaced on-site, in addition to Dublin Planning and Zoning ~'ommission Staff Report -July 6, 2000 ~ ' Page 8 all other landscape requirements. All notes and plans should be revised to reflect- 151 caliper inches. • Original Perimeter Center plans included a landscape buffer along the south side of Post Road. The buffer consists of a large mound with a mix of evergreens, shade trees, and ornamentals. The applicant is proposing to substitute interconnecting pools and streams with no mounding. Any landscape materials removed should be replaced along the public right-of--way if feasible to the satisfaction of staff. Landscape plans should be revised accordingly. During the final development plan stage, detailed landscape plans should also coordinate species along the Post Road buffer. • Some vehicular use areas are not screened according to Code requirements. All HVAC units, dumpsters, transformers and meter pits must also be screened to Code. Revised plans should be submitted prior to being placed on the agenda for City Council. Open Space and Amenities: • Required open space for the site is 4.41 acres for 22.462 acres and 72 residential units. Half of the Post Road buffer (1.9 acres) and 1.3 acres around the existing pond has been counted toward open space requirements. According to current calculations, an additional 1.21 acres or an equivalent fee ($45,375) would be required. No pond surface area required for maximum stormwater retention is included. The Post Road buffer and the existing retention pond area should be deeded to the City of Dublin and be maintained by a forced and funded association, or an equivalent combination of dedication and fee payment. • During the concept plan stage, the Commission emphasized that pond area could be included in calculations if amenities are incorporated to achieve a "park-like" appearance. A pedestrian path around the southern and eastern sides of the pond will be constructed. The pond will also be improved with seating, as well as a pedestrian deck, community swimming pool and pavilion that will overlook the pond. Significant landscaping has been included. Live/work units have been relocated to the pond to de-emphasize automobile access while creating a core of pedestrian activities along the pond's edge. The linear shape of this site, a recommendation to prohibit curb cuts on Post Road, and an existing pond that cannot be redesigned due to stormwater functions place significant limitations on the layout and design of open space areas in this development. Because of the stormwater functions, the pond area has not been included in open space calculations despite the incorporation of recommended amenities. • Naturalistic ponds with landscaping will also be created in the Post Road setback. Streams and waterfalls will be constructed that link the pond levels visible from Post Road. The existing Post Road bikepath will be reconfigured to provide access to the water features. A stone bridge will also provide abikepath/pedestrian connection from the development to the Post Road system. Stone steps will provide access to the ponds from village greens within the development. • Community facilities and a swimming pool will be located near the existing pond. Throughout the development, small village greens will be created to provide small gathering spaces and aesthetic amenities such as fountains. Additional common areas will be utilized for landscaping and other features. Limited common areas will be provided for individual residences. Low stone walls or wrought iron fences will provide areas for private outdoor activity. Dublin Planning and Zoning mmission Staff Report -July 6, 2000 Page 9 Architecture: • The architecture will exhibit a very colonial or Old English style, comparable in quality to Craughwell Village. Detached residences within the condominium development will include ranch, 1 %Z-story and 2-story structures with optional basements, screened porches, sunrooms, etc. To provide architectural diversity, a total of at least four different house floor plans will be used. No house in the same orientation will be permitted twice in a row. Colors will also be assigned to provide further diversity and compatibility. Residences will utilize a variety of natural materials that include manufactured stone (Ohio Limestone "Buff'), stucco and Hardi-plank. Vinyl windows will be single or double hung. Roofs will have a 6/12 to 10/12 pitch with asphalt shingles. Color palettes for elevations and shingles will be required at the final development plan. • Live/work buildings contain highly detailed storefronts similar to those found at Perimeter Center. Four-sided architecture is a commitment. The proposed palette includes residential materials, in addition to brick from the Perimeter Center palette. Buildings will be highlighted with wooden storefronts along the streetscape. Rear and side elevations include a combination of Hardi-plank and cultured stone. A range of roof pitches and elements such as awnings, balconies and chimneys will be added. Streets and Utilities: • Wall Street has recently been constructed according to the approved plat. streetscape amenities have not yet been installed. Wall Street has 32 feet of pavement (back to back of curb). Concrete, 5-foot sidewalks will be constructed on either side, and street trees and lighting will be added. • Streets within the development will be private at a minimum width of 24 feet (back to back of curb). Streets and parking areas, as well as drives within the public right-of--way should meet Engineering requirements for strength, durability and geometry and visibility triangles. Turning radii and curves must account for waste hauling and emergency vehicles. Service roads through the development must be a minimum of 12 feet in width to allow for limited traffic with no permitted parking. Staff recommends that signs indicating "one way" circulation and "no parking" be provided as needed. Parking for all live/work uses will be provided per Code. Additional limited on-street parking within the development will be provided for residential guests. • The development needs to meet all City requirements for stormwater management. Plans utilize the existing retention pond at the southeast corner of the site for runoff. Ponds along Post Road are being created for aesthetic purposes. No alterations should be made to the design of the existing storm water retention pond that will affect capacity. • Water will be provided from lines located around the perimeter: 16-inch line along Post Road, 6-inch line along Wall Street, and a 12-inch line along Metatec Boulevard. Sanitary sewer is available to the site from Wall Street and would connect into lines along Perimeter Drive. No building footprints, including footings, should encroach upon any sanitary sewer easements. Signage and Lighting: • Identification signs will be limited to 6 feet in height and a maximum width of 12 feet. The development will have a maximum of three entry signs along major streets that Dublin Planning and Zoning "~mmission , Staff Report -July 6, 2000 Page 10 include Post Road, Wall Street and Metatec Boulevard. Maximum sign area will be 50 square feet with external illumination and base materials to match architecture. • Street signage within the development will meet Code for dimensions and text styles. Proposed lighting for the development consists of post and wall-mounted coach lighting. Lighting should be consistent with the Dublin Lighting Guidelines. • Permitted signage within Subarea B-3 (live/work) includes one wall sign, a projecting sign and an awning sign for each tenant space. Wall signs are limited to a maximum of 15 square feet. Projecting signs for pedestrians will be limited to a maximum 3 square ~ feet and will match wall signs in color. Awnings will be permitted according to Code to display business names, addresses and/or year established only. Residential address plaques will be permitted on the live/work buildings. Staff recommends that awning signage be deleted from the text and that standards should also be included for detached residences. • Residential address and identification signage in Subarea B-2 (detached residential) will permit a maximum sign face of 2 square feet. Accessory Uses and Service Structures: • Accessory structures (swing sets, personal swimming pools, flag poles, satellite dishes and television or radio antennae) will not be permitted for individual use. Only community-wide facilities can be constructed and may include: a greenhouse, garden tool shed, gazebo, trellis, arbor and swimming pool. The maximum height of any accessory structure is 15 feet, and all architecture must be compatible with residential units in scale, materials and color. Maximum permitted square footage for accessory structures is 400 square feet. • All screening for waste containers must be enclosed by a solid fence or wall and will be architecturally compatible with adjacent buildings. All service structures throughout the development must be screened per Code. • Private areas will be enclosed by stone, wrought iron, trellises, arbors and small accessory structures. Other similar elements in common areas will be constructed according to the submitted preliminary development plans and details. RECOMMENDATION: Homestead at Perimeter Center provides the opportunity to create amixed-use residential environment unique to Dublin. This particular development emphasizes the creation of architectural spaces and a focus on pedestrian scale through the integration of small courtyards and greens that connect to a larger green space network. Site design is intended to provide a more traditional streetscape design with offsets that will exhibit architectural focal points, while lowering traffic speeds to protect residents. Particular emphasis has been placed on the quality and detail of architecture and visual amenities. While not specifically a use indicated within the Community Plan, the Homestead proposal creates a significantly lower traffic impact than the recommended uses that will also help to preserve the scenic character of Post Road. The incorporation of detailed and varied architecture with a variety of interior and exterior "Wow!" elements will enhance the character of Post Road with an incredibly high-quality mixed-use project. Staff recommends approval with 17 conditions: Dublin Planning and Zoning r' ~mmission Staff Report -July 6, 2000 Page 11 Conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code to the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to show the location of specific species and meet all Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) That plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; 6) That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated to the satisfaction of staff and that plans be revised to reflect the same; 7) That the text be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subarea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfaction of staff; 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no parking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff; 10) That the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Engineering Division; 11) That no direct vehicular access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 13) That all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15) That street names be provide to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 16) That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; and 17) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council. Bases: 1) The project serves to protect and enhance the scenic character and visual quality of Post Road. 2) The plan provides a transition between the warehouse industrial uses in the Perimeter PCD and existing residences along Post Road and the Indian Run. 3) The plan exhibits substantial architectural quality and an emphasis on pedestrian amenities and "Wow!" elements. 4) The proposed rezoning would provide substantially less impact on Post Road and the surrounding transportation network during peak hours. DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION I2~CORD OF ACTION May G, 1999 or ouQUn Qrisiaet a{ P(anceiceg 800 Slaer~ings Rand tee, Ohia 43016-1236 J100: 6{4-761-b550 fmc 614-761 ~Sbb Site: wwvcdv6(aiah.as The Pla~g and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 1. Informal 99-028I -Perimeter Center - homestead Communities L~cafion: 28 acres located at the souflieast corner of Post Road and Metatec Boulevard. I;1.~sting Zoning: PCD, Ptauned Commerce District (Perimeter Center Plan, Subareas B and C). Requcsf: Aa informal review of a development proposal. Proposed Use: 85 single-family homes and 5.3 acres of parkland. Applicant/Owner: Gary E. Gray, Homestead Communities L.L.C., 150 East Broad Street, Suite 505, Columbus, Ohio 43215. RESULT: The Commission generally Liked the residential use of this proposal. They felt however, that since it violates flee Community Plan, it should be an outstanding, unique development with a lower density. Issues discussed included: additional greenspace, parkland requirements, setbacks, buffering, and masonry building materials. Ties was an informal review and no vote was taken. - STAFF CERTIFICATION Christopher Iiermann Planner 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan Homestead Communities Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -May 6, 1999 Page 2 Ms. Clarke said the go is that informal es be discussed o more than 3 inutes. This time limit does not inclu time for public timony. Info al reviews are r the Commission to give feedback to developer, with n abbreviated s f report. Mr. klider wanted to make an exception fo ublic comments this case. The er commissio ers agreed. 1. Informal 99-028I -Perimeter Center -Homestead Communities Mr. Lecklider said for the record that Mr. McCash has recused himself from this matter due to a potential conflict. Chris Hermann presented this informal review of a condominium project in Subareas B & C of Perimeter Center. The plan has 85 units on 22.2 acres, including 5.3 acres of park, which is primarily the existing retention pond. There is one access on Post Road and a 60-foot building setback. The plan extends Wall Street. Mr. Hermann said the community Plan recommends this site as office and mixed uses with employment emphasis. The zoning is PCD for office along Post Road with additional industrial uses along Wall Street. This development is primarily for empty nesters. He said the density is 3.83 dwelling units per acre, including the pond. Amenities are planned for the parkland, including a path around the pond. Given surrounding zoning, much buffering is needed. Mr. Hermann said if the pond is used solely for storm water detention, no park dedication credit would be given. Adding enough amenities to bring it up to park standards would justify some sort of credit for parkland. It may be a percentage credit. Jonathan Kass, Continental Real Estate Companies, said this is a better proposal then Care Matrix was. It meets park land and density guidelines and accommodates the Wall Street extension. Gary Gray, Homestead Communities, said this product is appropriate for the site, providing the transition line from Post Road to WaII Street. He said this type of use creates more amenities. They will improve the lake, but they do see the area around the pond an active recreational area. Mr. Gray said the condos will have basements. He said there are garden area at the corner of Wall Street and Post Road, at the east end along Post Road, and by the lake. He said the architecture would be traditional Colonial American, with a white, gray and beige color scheme. Edith Driscoll, 6230 Post Road, said the neighbors were in favor of this change of usage. She said they prefer the residential use instead of office use. Chris Cline, 6060 Post Road, said his house adjoins this site. He said the community would like to see this area residential. This is a great transitional use and ideal for an older population. They favor pushing the project as close to Post Road as possible. Julie Halloran said she is opposed to the shopping centers. She asked about the space between each building, the square footage, and the number of condos. 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan Homestead Communities Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -May 6, 1999 Page 3 Mr. Harlan believes this is a land use issue. He believes this makes a good transitional use on Post Road. He likes the idea, the structure, and the quality. He thinks there needs to be more green space with Colonial-type town square or common area. It is too dense. Mr. Fishman said when a proposal contradicts the Community Plan, it has to be of exceptional quality. He said the residential density is already too high around this area. He said in the past, water was not included as parkland. ~ Mr. Gray said units range of 1800 to 2200 square feet, not including the basements. Mr. Fishman asked what was the distance between the units. Mr. Fishman said he would like to see a lot of masonry. Mr. Peplow said he is open to the residential possibility, but he is concerned with setbacks and buffering. He is glad Wall Street is continued. He felt it should be open more and maximize on green space. He said it does not have to be close to Post Road to provide a residential feeling. Mr. Eastep said land usage is important. The pond seems inappropriate to meet the parkland dedication. He said at this density, this project would be considered multi-family. He supports the Community Plan at a density of 2 du/ac for asingle-family project. He said there is a potential for switching the usage if they can reduce. the density to 2.5 du/ac, have 100-foot setbacks along Post Road, and dedicate the required parkland. Mr. I.ecklider said this is an improvement over other proposals. They need to take into consideration the neighbors' view. He said the alternative on this site might be unattractive office with greater traffic impact at peak hours. He questioned the viability of office use along Post Road. His concern is with density. The building setbacks off Post Road should be 100 feet. He wanted landscape buffering throughout the perimeters of the property. He is willing to compromise on the pond and it consideration in the equation of parkland. He may be willing to compromise on the pond as park. He would Like to see a guarantee of high quality materials in the text, use neutral colors, and have a forced association. Mr. Eastep said the density is 3.3 du/ac with the pond and without the pond it is S du/ac per acre. He is in favor of a muumum 100-foot setback. The plans do not meet the new Fence Code. Mr. Lecklider announced the Commission's rule not to start any cases after 11:00 p.m. 2. Development Plan 99 DP -Wyndham V' lage Park Lisa Fierce said this fo -acre park is locat on the north side of T lymore Drive. She said there is an eight-fo concrete bikepath ong the entire fron e. This is a mixed-use neighborhood park ith play structures, gazebo and a stone 1 are proposed. Toward the middle of the site is a volleyball area, nd at the southwest co er is a circular basketball area. The eastern po ion of the site is to a an open play area. T ere is a 3'h-foot mound along the western po 'nand evergreen tr throughout. She said bikepafli would be connected to flee existing p 1 flirOUg110Ut the par 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan Homestead Communities DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION December 2, 1999 rrr~ ~iH~ nt~t;l.r dam' ioa of Planning 4 Shier-Rugs Road OuFlha 430]6-1236 iane/iDO: 614761 ~b550 Fmc 614-161.6566 'e6 Site: www duhtut.ohus The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 3. Concept Plan 99-071CP -Perimeter Center PCD, Subareas Band C -Homestead Communities Location: 22.2 acres on the southeast corner of Post Road and Metatec Boulevard. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Perimeter Center Plan, Subareas B and C). Request: Review and approval of a concept plan under the PUD, Planned Unit Development District provision of Section 153.056. Proposed Use:. A development of 60 detached residences and 15 live/work units with S.1 acres of parkland. Applicant: Continental NRI Office Ventures, Ltd., P.O. Box 712, Dublin, Ohio 43017; clo Gary Gray, Homestead Communities LLC, 150 East Broad Street, Suite 505, Columbus, Ohio 43215. MOTION: To approve this concept plan with four conditions: 1) That a more intense buffer be implemented between this project and the light industrial and commercial uses; 2) That the site layout be reconfigured and units are dropped to achieve a lower density and create better open space; 3) That the plan enhance the scenic roadway with elements from the "WOW" program; and 4) That pond amenities be added per the staff report. * Gary Gray agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 4-2. RESULT: This concept plan was approved. It will be forwarded to City Council with a positive recommendation. STAFF CCRTIFICATION 00-0302 ~ ~r~~~- ~iL ~ ~'IGc~-~v~ Chris Hermann Preliminary Development Plan Planner Homestead Communities Dublin Planning and Zonin~ "'ommission Minutes -December 2, 1995 Page 13 13) hat 20 percent solar gray tint be used on windows; 14) That the play struc e be restricted to neu al earthtones; 15) That the five secon story windows be s uare and be spaced ove every other low r story window; and 16) That revised site lan and building elev tion drawings consis nt with the discussio at this meeting be s mitted within two w eks, and be approve by staff. r. Sampson agreed t the above conditions Mr. Peplow secon d the motion, and th vote as as follows: Mr. prague, yes; Mr. klider, yes; Mr. Mc ash, yes; Mr. Haria ,yes; Mr. Eastep, yes; Mr. eplow, yes; and Mr Fishman, yes. (App ved 7-0.) Mr. Lecklider tha d Mr. Fraas and Mr. Sampson for their pa ence. Mr. Lecklider call d a brief recess. Up n returning, he anno ced the 11 o'clock ru e. 3. Concept Plan 99-071CP -Perimeter Center PCD, Subareas Band C -Homestead Communities [Mr. McCash did not participate in this case.] Chris Hermann said this concept plan is for 75 condo units on 22.2 acres. He said this concept plan has been revised significantly since last May. The Commission had asked for a really special plan. The area uses include daycare, office-warehouse, and offices. He said the sections of Wall Street will be connected through this site. The stormwater pond at the southeast corner is included to meet the park requirement, along with internal greens and the external setbacks. He showed several slides. Mr. Hermann said the entrance from Post Road has three-story buildings with "live-work units" and a community center in the median. The balance of the buildings will be two stories and have residences only. The Post Road 100-foot setback will have a linear pond, stone walls and includes several "wow" features. The overall density is 3.38 units per acre. Mr. Hermann said this is amuch-improved plan, and the units are very striking, but the r proposed land use is a problem. Some industrial uses are permitted on the adjacent property, and this plan does not have transitional uses or area or any buffers. Staff believes this will lead to long-term incompatibility. He noted some residents have expressed support, and positive letters from Metatec and Cardinal Health were distributed. Mr. Hermann said some of the uses, existing or future, can be 24-hour, seven-day a week operations. Residents usually expect protection from such uses. He said staff recommends disapproval based on the following: 1) The plan is not consistent with the land uses recommended in the Community Plan. 2) The proposed residential use is not compatible with the surrounding, non-residential zoning, and neither transitional uses nor proper buffering is provided. 3) The plan does not provide the necessary open space. 4) The plan is not consistent with the established City Council policy of de-emphasizing Post Road. 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan Homestead Communities Dublin Planning and Zonir commission Minutes -December 2, 199y Page 14 5) The plan does not meet the 200-foot setback scenic road setback recommended in the Community Plan. 6) 'The plan exhibits inadequate setbacks in some areas, such as Metatec Boulevard. Mr. Peplow asked if the concern would be alleviated if the surrounding land were totally . developed. Ms. Clarke said uses change over time. She said the land use rights run with the land, and these have not been addressed. Changes of use, which meet the PCD text, do not ~ require Commission review. She reviewed some of the Perimeter Center zoning history. The entire site had LI, Limited Industrial zoning, and the areas along Post Road and US 33/SR 161were downzoned to office-only. Some industrial uses were retained in the middle section, including part of this site and the land to the south of it. She said if the industrial rights were to lapse, the staff would withdraw its opposition, but no one is offering to downzone the land right next door. These are probably the least compatible, on their face, types of use in Dublin. Mr. Sprague said this was a proactive and cautious approach. He noted that Metatec is a local industrial business, and had retained good relations with the neighborhood. He said this property was a challenge to develop. Mr. Hermann said this is a concept plan, and, if approved, the next phase will be a PUD rezoning application. Mr. Fishman said this is a rezoning for apartments, and he feared that the outcome may not be "special." The players and the product might change. Ms. Clarke noted that many PUD rezonings are very specific, and some are looser. That will be determined in a future phase. This review is on the general land use, not the plan specifics. Mr. Fishman said this plan should be very specific. He did not want the possibility of unpleasant surprises. Mr. Lecklider agreed and said the special-ness should be a binding component. Mr. Fishman said approval of the concept plan starts the process, even if it is a "non-binding" review. Ms. Clarke added that approval of the concept plan authorizes the filing of the PUD rezoning, and the developer needs genuine feedback to determine if moving forward with the expenses of engineering, etc. makes sense. She urged the Commissioners to be very clear in their comments. Mr. Lecklider said the concept plan record should include their caveats. If the rezoning plan does not address their concerns, the Commission should not approve it. Mr. Sprague said it should be clear that an unimpressive apartment project that barely meets the density requirements will not be approved. Mr. Eastep said this could have been filed as a rezoning request instead of a concept plan. Gary Gray, Homestead Communities, said the Commission had previously supported a residential use for this site, if the development could "knock their socks off." This is their. goal. He understood the non-binding nature of the concept plan and that the PUD rezoning will need to be very specific. The plan was revised to address density, layout, and materials. 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan Homestead Communities Dublin Planning and Zoning 'ommission Minutes -December 2, 199y Page 15 It uses a European layout. The Post Road entry comes cross the pond. He showed several renderings. Mr. Gray said there will be stone bridges, and a community center at the entrance. The buildings have 15 live-work units; each of these townhouses has a garage below and a 400 square foot shop in front. These were a response to market research on empty nesters. The rest of the site is more open. There are steps down to the water and a stone wall along the pond across half of the Post Road frontage, similar to the pond at the Dublin recreation center. This is a condo development on private streets without lots. He said the curb and gutter will ~1 not be standard. Mr. Gray said the Wall Street side has a wall as a land use transition. This area will be at the rear of the dwellings. There are 15 live-work units and 60 residential condos. The units will be from 1,600-2,200 square feet and all have basements and two-car garages. The condos are stand-along units without common walls. The exterior materials. are stone and stucco. Mr. Gray said the greenspace area excludes the existing retention pond, and they believe this area exceeds Code. He disagrees with the staff report that indicates a park shortfall. He noted a letter in support from Cardinal Health. He estimated the cost as $250,000 per unit. Mr. Lecklider wanted data on the park calculation. Gary Schmidt, the project planner, said the Code requires 4.7 acres. The three green area are: the perimeter road open space of 3.95 acres, including the Post Road pond; the Wall Street open space is about seven acres, including the pond; and the internal greens are 0.85 acres; yielding 11 acres overall. He said they then subtracted the pond of 5-plus acres, and they have 6.8 acres of open space which qualifies under the Code. Mr. Fishman noted the land for open space is very linear and thin strips. Mr. Hermann said the area needed for storm water detention facilities will be subtracted. However, if amenities such as paths and benches are added at the perimeter, that land area should count toward the Code requirement. He noted that setbacks are not usually counted for park. There are some "wow" factors, but this has not been finalized. Mr. Ezell noted that this site is located in the "River Heritage" area, and the recommended setback is 100 feet, as shown on this plan. Mr. Fishman really liked the design, but he was undecided. He said Willow Grove was also "transitional" housing with buffers, etc. However, when Emerald Parkway was built, Dublin had to install a very expensive buffer. The residents packed the hearing room asking for walls, landscaping, etc. He fears this will happen here and noted that Metatec will increase manufacturing in Dublin. The future is not set for this area. He said this plan is too dense and has inadequate buffers. Buffers should be funded by the developer, not by Dublin later. He said the buffer should be as good as the one at Willow Grove. He expressed concern about future residents having complaints about night deliveries, commercial noise, etc. 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan Homestead Communities i Dublin Planning and Zonir :ommission Minutes -December 2, 1999 Page 16 Mr. Lecklider did not thing that Willow Grove was a like situation. Mr. Harian agreed and said any new buyer can see the commercial buildings and will make an informed decision. Mr. Fishman said he could not vote for this concept plan as submitted. While it is beautiful, it still needs a lot of work and buffers from the industrial use. The site needs a broader perimeter, and he suggested surrounding it with water. It should be spectacular. Mr. Peplow said the density was not decreased since the first hearing some months ago. Mr. Gray said the project was reduced from 85 to 75 units. Mr. Gray said the greenspace and personal space have been greatly increased. The townhouses in the center have the highest density, and the rest of the units are now bigger. Mr. Gray said the townhouse and the commercial space are sold as a unit, for people who work at home. Mr. Peplow had concern about commercial traffic from those units on a non- public road. Mr. Fishman said the restrictions on these units will have to be spelled out in the text, as general commercial would be unacceptable. Mr. Gray said the condominium association itself decides what uses are acceptable and polices it. He said their market study indicates it is largely for the semi-retired or part-time professional. Mr. Lecklider noted that Metatec is a known use, but they're a number of land use unknowns. He noted that Checkfree is the second occupant of the building, but there are some protections against really noxious uses. Mr. Hermann said Subarea C, south of Wall Street generally, includes industrial uses. Along Post Road, in Subarea B, office and daycare are permitted. Mr. Fishman said teaches that Dublin should not create incompatible land use situations. He reiterated that the density is too high. Mr. Eastep noted the density has dropped from 3.8 to 3.3 units per acre if the pond is included; without the pond it is 5.5 per acre. Mr. Gray said the land use issue already exists with the residents on Post Road. Mr. Harian said he liked this concept and thought it was a good use for the area. The quality will have to be very high as this goes forward. He liked the wall along Wall Street. He said it may be too dense, but he likes it overall. Mr. Fishman there needs to be more distance at the rear; it is a quality of life issue. It is not just afour-sided architecture issue. He restated that the density should be lower. Mr. Gray asked if raising the wall height along Wall Street to four or five feet would solve the separation problem. Mr. Fishman said, no, it should be increased space with landscaping. Mr. Peplow said this plan provides a good housing choice if you do not want a big yard. Mr. Eastep agrees with the staff that this is the wrong land use. He previously stated he could support a density of 2.5 units per acre with proper park dedication, but he disagrees with the applicant's park calculation. Park dedication should provide new amenities. He believes the 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan Homestead Communities Dublin Planning and Zonin 'ommission Minutes -December 2, 1999 Page 17 density is really five units per acre, because the pond should not be used in density. He thought "European" design was another way to describe over-developed or too dense. A wall is used to provide privacy, as the last resort, and it indicates inappropriate development. Mr. Eastep said the area is already zoned properly--for office and Research and development uses. He saw no justification to rezone revenue-producing ground for anon-productive residential project. He thought the units were acceptable, but they were more appropriate for German Village. He did not feel his comments were incorporated from the previous hearing. Mr. Sprague said overall, there were many things he likes about this. The live-work units are interesting and should work here. He thinks the wall makes an effective demarcation between uses. The architecture is attractive and does not need much work. The density should be lowered, perhaps by 20 percent, and the buffer should be enhanced with "wow" features. This provides a good transition. The text needs to be very specific because he would not support just a standard housing product here. This site should have something special. Mr. Sprague noted that decreasing the density may make this project financially unfeasible. Mr. Lecklider liked a number of things about this plan, but there are some problems. The Post Road frontage treatment and entry, and the concept and design are attractive. He appreciated the drop in density, but it should be lower as the "live-work" units offset it. The setback on Metatec Boulevard is too close. The Wall Street setback is acceptable to him. Mr. Lecklider said this site is unique, and improvements around the pond will benefit the area. He was sympathetic to the views of the Post Road residents and noted that there are other residential uses along the south side of Post Road. If this slate were clean, this might be the preferred use. The text will need to be very tight if this application goes forward. Mr. Peplow said most of the Commission's comments were made at the former meeting. Chris Cline, Post Road resident, said Perimeter Center land uses have changed over time. He said this land has been serviced for years, and he fears that a future use will be less compatible. The former Deluxe Check plant is no longer used for manufacturing, and the area does have a strong industrial future. He said Metatec has been a good neighbor and a special case. Mr. Cline said the text will need to be locked down at the rezoning stage. Mr. Cline said this land is class "B" or "C" and is not prime for commercial purposes. He said this is similar to the Weatherstone section in Muirfield Village. Mr. Fishman said Weatherstone is situated next to a large open space. Mr. Cline said the garden plots along Post Road seem inappropriate. He noted that the WOW program is not yet enacted. He supported the project. Mr. Harian said the density question should be answered now. Mr. Fishman agreed. Mr. Fishman thought the concept could work, but the people will need a buffer. He said the Commission should not put in land uses that will create problems later. Density and openspace are the questions; more open space and fewer units should be shown in the elan. 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan Dublin Planning and Zonir. 'ommission Minutes -December 2, 199' Page 18 Mr. Gray said from a density standpoint, they were at the edge already. If that is the dividing issue, they will withdraw the application. Mr. Sprague also liked the entry feature. He said it was first class and beautiful. He said EMS will appreciate having multiple entry points. Mr. Peplow did not know how the additional buffering and openspace could be obtained without decreasing the density. Mr. Lecklider said this was an unique concept which required a certain density. Forcing the density down may create "just another neighborhood," which is not appropriate along Post Road. He suggested dropping some units on the west side along Metatec Boulevard and a couple around the pond. He thought the concept did fit the area. Mr. Harian agreed. Mr. Peplow said if the buffer could be provided without lowering the density, the project could still work. He wanted to protect the current residents as much as possible, but did not want to have a wall built. He asked how residential units could be placed so close to the light industrial uses and still assure some type of buffering between the two. Mr. Peplow said the requested architectural changes had been made. He would support this project if arranged differently and with greater landscaping along Wall Street. Mr. Sprague liked the plan, but would like to see it reduced by five or six units, or perhaps have the interior greenspace expanded. Mr. Gray said the plan is close to equilibrium without much room for negotiation. They need adequate revenue to pay for the amenities. This should be as a high quality and unique. He wants this to be a trophy project. Any reductions in density mean giving up something else. Mr. Sprague suggested evaluating a density reduction. With a slightly reduced density, stronger buffering and a "wow" or two, he would support it. If the density cannot be reduced, it is not the right use. The pond and quality need to remain the same. Mr. Lecklider said the Commission would like to see the density reduced slightly, but his greater concern was buffering. Mr. Gray responded a 20 percent density reduction would not be possible, but there are many buffer possibilities for Wall Street. Mr. Fishman did not have a specific density in mind. The Community Plan indicates this area for revenue production, not residential use. Given that, it had to "knock their socks off". This is too dense, and zoning should only be changed for solid reasons. Bill Dargusch, a partner in the project, thought the Commission should support this because the residents support it. They will work on the Wall Street buffer, but it will not be lined with trucks. He said landscaping, Dublin walls, etc. could be used. Their entry gatehouses and landscaping create the proper image at the entries. They have worked with staff for four months on a plan to "knock people's socks off'. He wanted clear direction on the Wall Street buffering. 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan H~mesteac~ (~~mmunities Dublin Planning and Zonin, :ommission Minutes -December 2, 1999 Page 19 Mr. Fishman said his responsibility is to obtain the best results for Dublin and for the neighbors. He noted that staff recommends disapproval of the rezoning and that the Commission has given two hours of feedback. This is anon-binding hearing. In addition to buffering of Wall Street, they had a problem with density and open greenspace. Mr. Lecklider said a majority is inclined toward this as an appropriate land use. Mr. Eastep said he still had a problem with this land use. Only if it is fantastic should they vote to forego the tax revenue potential. He noted the many area improvement that have increased the opportunities at this site. He did not support changing the land use to multi- family with the potential loss of tax dollars. He agreed with the staff report. Mr. Gray said they are the only buyers at the table, and this is the highest and best use. Ms. Clarke said the product "knocked the socks off' the staff, and she has not heard the same level of excitement from the Commission. She asked for clear direction. Mr. Lecklider said his "socks were coming off'. He said this might be an appealing place for him to live as a future empty nester. There are not many places like this existing in Dublin. He said this issue is less about density than buffering, but a lower density would be welcome. He said the applicant had come a long way towards meeting the concerns of the Commission. Mr. Peplow and Mr. Harian did not want eight or ten-foot wall along Wall Street. Something similar to Emerald Parkway would work. Mr. Fishman said density was a big issue for him. Mr. Lecklider the majority does not expect a 20 percent reduction in density. Ms. Clarke said during the Community Planning process, the existing zoning was examined to see if it still made sense. The Perimeter Center Plan PCD was considered to represent good future land use. When the Steering Committee did not like the land uses shown on the zoning map, etc. and they proposed alternates. No alternate was proposed here. Mr. Fishman said he worked on the Community Plan. The consultants figured the revenue streams, etc. based on the zoning in place. Ms. Clarke said one big decision made in the process, was not to roll back the existing zoning. The bias of the subcommittee was to leave the zoning in place unless it stood out as a problem. Ms. Clarke said Metatec built when the land had its original industrial zoning.' Metatec cooperated with Dublin in rolling its land in with a Planned Commerce District, agreeing to architectural review, etc. Ms. Clarke said the company is a good, responsible corporate citizen. Mr. Lecklider agreed that Metatec (aka Discovery Systems) has been an outstanding neighbor. Mr. Harian made a motion to approve this concept plan with four conditions: 1) That a more intense buffer be implemented between this project and the light industrial and 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan Dublin Planning and Zonis commission - Minutes -December 2, 1999 Page 20 commercial uses; 2) That the site layout be reconfigured and units are dropped to achieve a lower density and create better open space; 3) That the plan enhance the scenic roadway with elements from the "WOW' program; and 4) That pond amenities be added per the staff report. Mr. Peplow seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Fishman, no; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Mr. Eastep, no; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Peplow, yes; Mr. Harian, yes. (Approved 4-2.) 4. Rez ing Application 99- 08Z -Revised Com osite Plan -Tuttle ossing PCD, Su rea A4 - Kinko's Co y Store - 5520 Paul G Blazer Memorial Par ay This c se was postponed wit ut discussion until De tuber 9 due to the late our. 5. Development Plan/C nditional Use 99-109 CU -Tuttle Crossin CD, Subarea A4 - McDonald's Resta ant - 5170 Tuttle Cr sing Boulevard and intro's Copy Store - 5520 Paul G. Blaz r Parkway This case was postpo ed prior to the meeting There was no discussi nor vote taken. 6. Rezoning 99- 16Z -Tuttle Crossi PCD, Subarea C - ffices at Tuttle Cro sing - 4800 Tuttle rossing Boulevard This case was stponed without discu sion until December 9 e to the late hour. 7. Develo ent Plan 99-107DP Tuttle Crossing PC ,Subarea C1 - Offi es at Tuttle Cross' g - 4800 Tuttle Cross ng Boulevard This cas was postponed withou discussion until Dece er 9 due to the late h r. 8. velopment Plan 99- 7DP -Perimeter Ce ter PCD, Subarea -Rea Building - 775 Perimeter Drive T s case was postponed ithout discussion until ecember 9 due to the ate hour. he meeting adjourned t 12:08 a.m. Respectfully submitted, ti~ Flora Rogers Clerical Specialist II Planning Division 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan Homestead Communities RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutessif Meeting Dublin City Counctl Meetrng Page 13 Held TannarvJ.$ ~(H10 ~rewa~ Co unity Development Comm' ee: John Reiner (Chair), Gr Peterson, Bob Ad mek; Public Services Comm' tee: Marilee Chinnici-Zuere er (Chair), Cathy Bo ~ g, T McCash. r. Adamek seconded the mo on. ote on the motion: Mrs. B 'ng, yes; Mayor ICranstuber, es; Mr. Reiner, yes; r. McCash, yes; Mr. Peterson, es; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, es, Mr. Adamek, yes. Concept Plan -Homestead Village Ms. Ciarke explained that the concept plan is the first step in the PUD approval process. The 22-acre site, located on the south side of Post Road, is currently zoned PCD, primarily for office purposes, but partially for industrial purposes. It is part of the major Perimeter Center development that stretches from Avery Road eastward to the Justice Center property. This is a residential proposal for 60 attached residences and 15 live- work units (units that have home office attachments). Staff initially recommended disapproval on the basis of land-use issues. The proposal was heard by Planning Commission twice and was approved December 2, 1999 by a vote of 4-2 with four conditions: (1) that a more intense buffer be implemented between this project and the light industrial and commercial uses; (2) that the site layout be reconfigured and units are dropped to achieve a lower density and create better open space; (3) that the plan enhance the scenic roadway with elements from the "WOW 'program; and (4) that pond amenities be added per the staff report. The developer agreed to the above conditions. Ms. Clarke added that staff was pleased to see a residential proposal for this area, and there is considerable support from the neighbors on Post Road. The beauty of this project is impressive. The Planning Commission believes it is the appropriate development for the south side of Post Road. Mr. Peterson asked if this multi-family development serves as a transition from the single-family homes on the north side of Post Road to the commercial uses to the immediate south. Ms. Clarke noted that the residential properties on the north are buffered by the parkland along the stream, but the multi-family will add additional buffer for the Post Road homeowners. Staff is more concerned about buffer for the multi-family project. There is no control over land use to the south of it, and there is no option of downzoning the land to the south. Mr. Peterson asked if [here is any way to address the additional traffic which will come with this project. Ms. Clarke responded that the access for this site has not been determined. Staff would prefer to see the access continue to be south from Perimeter, Wall Street, and Metatec and not directly to Post Road. Twenty-two acres developed as residential will generate much lover traffic than the use for which it is currently zoned. Mrs. Boring noted that Metatec to the west has expanded a couple of times already and inquired if there would be room for further expansion if this project goes in. Ms. Clarke responded that Metatec has developed most of their space. Mrs. Boring inquired about staff's recommendation to install community gardens along Post Road. Mrs. Clarke responded that the community gardens were in the original draft of the WOW catalog, but at a joint work session with staff and Planning Commission, the idea was discarded. Mrs. Boring requested that sufficient buffering of lights and traffic be considered in the PUD, so that residents of the new development do not request those at a later date. 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan Homestead Communities RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Mim~~P~ .,f Meeting Dublin City Council Meeting Page 14 Held ran~~a ;,1 R ~nnn , <~R~ Gary Gray. President of Homestead Communities, thanked Ms. Clarke for her positive description of his project. He addressed the issue of anticipated uses for the land south of this project. He explained that of the three adjoining areas, one parcel has been sold and there are plans for an office building; CheckFree recently purchased the second parcel, probably for parking expansion; and one undeveloped comer parcel remains. All of those are one-story commercial uses. He described the different levels of buffering planned for the project, the benefits of the transition it will provide between residential and err commercial, and the minimal impact on traffic it should have. Mrs. Boring inquired if there will be fountains in all the ponds to keep the geese away. Mr. Gray responded affirmatively. Edith Driscoll. 6230 Post Road, testified, representing the citizens on Post Road between Emerald Parkway and Avery Road. Over 75% of the neighbors have been contacted regarding this proposed development. There has been no dissenting vote. Their opinion is that this development will be an asset to their neighborhood, and they encourage Council's approval. Chris Cline. 6060 Post Road, stated that he.and the four other adjoining residential landowners all strongly support this project. He noted that this is the former site of the proposed Wellington School. Since that project was discarded in the 70's, there has been concert about the type of development that would eventually come in. They are very pleased with this proposal; it is high quality and will provide a great view on Post Road. They have discussed with the developer the possibility of complementary landscape and use of common elements in the development, such as the stone piers, up and down Post Road to bring an integration of the view. He added that the residents prefer the access be to Post Road. The current traffic problem is due to the fact that traffic speeds up in the open spaces. Curb cuts and fuming movements on the road would inhibit its use as a major thoroughfare. He encourages Council approval. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher moved to approve the concept plan for Homestead Village with the conditions as stated. Mr. Peterson seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Peterson, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr.. Adamek, yes; Mayor mew Kranstuber, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes. Coun it Round Table/Committe Re orts ~ Ms. hinnici-Zuercher reminded ouncil members of the Poli accreditation meeting on Mo day, January 24m, at 7:00 p. . in the Mayor's Courtroom t the Justice Center. M or 1Cranstuber stated that c rrent Council policy provid funding for the chairman of Panning and Zoning Commis ion to attend inservices and aining, including the annual APA conference. He propos d extending this benefit tot other members of the Commission. He estimates at the cost of the APA conf rence, including airfare, ~vo d be approximately $2,000 - 2,500.00 each, and, conseq ntly, suggests that amount. However, he clarified that a does not propose designa ng the money only for APA conference, but for any r ated education. Mr. McCash agreed th if the intent is to have the b st informed individuals on t is Commission, it is bes to provide them the opporlu ity to remain current with a antes in land planning and of er relevant information. Mayor ICranstuber oved to approve $2,500 pe Planning and Zoning Com fission member annually or relevant travel and traini Mrs. Boring seco ded the motion. Vote on the mot on: Mr. Adamek, yes; Mr. eterson, yes; Mr. McCash, es; Ms. Chinnici-Zuer er, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; ayor ICranstuber, yes. Mr. Peterson nquired what the consensu f opinion was in cegards t he letter distributed Mr. Smith concerting ca aign contribution limits. ould it be prudent 00-0302 Preliminary Development Plan rr ..............a n....,......_.~._..