Loading...
69-04 OrdinanceRECORD OF ORDINANCES Dayton Le~nal Blank, lnc. Form No. 30043 Ordinance No. 69-04 (AMENDED) passed . 20 ___ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND APPROVAL CRITERIA IN SECTION 153.115 OF THE DUBLIN CODIFIED ORDINANCES (ZONING CODE) - CORRIDORDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WHEREAS, it is necessary from time to time to amend the Code in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Dublin; and WHEREAS, Section 153.115 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances sets forth the application procedures and standard of review for corridor development district approval; and WHEREAS, the City would like to clarify the applicability of a design component to the approval criteria for corridor development district applications; and WHEREAS, the City desires to do this in order to ensure that all buildings and structures constructed or modified in the Corridor Development District are consistent with the surrounding commercial facilities and reflect Dublin's architectural character; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Ordinance on November 4, 2004, January 13, 2005, January 20, 2005 and May 5, 2005 and recommends the adoption of the Ordinance because it serves to implement City Council objectives and the Community Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by Council of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, ~ of the elected members concurring that: Section 1. Section 153.115(D)(2)(g) is hereby created and shall provide as follows: (g) Design. The design of new structures and of new additions to existing structures, including new site improvements and all new and revised Signage, shall take into account architectural style, general design, arrangement, texture, material and color so that the image of Dublin is maintained as a quality community. Evaluation of the appearance of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its relationship to its surroundings. Section 2. Section 153.115(D)(2)(h) is hereby created and shall provide as follows: (h) Signage. Sign material, shape, color and illumination shall be indicated and consistent with the Dublin Sign Code and other signage in the area. The Signage shall take into account architectural style, general design, arrangement, texture, material and color so that the image of Dublin is maintained as a quality community. Evaluation of the appearance of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its relationship to its surroundings. Section 3. Section 153.115(E)(4) is hereby amended to read: (4) Planning and Zoning Commission review. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the plan as to whether the following four conditions are met. Section 4. Section 153.115(E)(4)(d) is hereby created and shall provide as follows: (d) The proposed development meets or exceeds the development standards set forth in Section 153.115(D) of the Dublin Codified Ordinances. RECORD OF ORDINANCES Dayton Leal Blank._Inc. ordinance No. 69-04 (Amended) Passed Form No. 30043 Pa~~ 2 Section 5. This Ordinance shall take effect on the earliest date provided by law. Passed this /~~/~ day of , 2005. Mayor -Presiding Officer ATTEST: Clerk of Council I hereby certify that copies of this Ordinance/Resolution were posted in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 731.25 of the Ohio Revised Code. D,e~uty Clerk of Council, Dublin, Ohio {H0473117.1 } Land Use and Long Range Planning 5800 Shier-Rings Road • Dublin, Ohio 43016 M e m O Phone: 614-410-4600 • Fax: 614-410-4747 CITY OF DUBLIN TO: Members of Dublin City Council . ~yb FROM: Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager V DATE: May 10, 2005 INITIATED BY: Daniel D. Bird, FAICP, Land Use and Long Range Planning Director RE: Second Reading -Ordinance 69-04(Amended) Amending The Deve opment Standards And Approval Criteria In Section 153.115 Of The Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning Code) -Corridor Development District (Case 04- 080ADM) At the January 31, 2005 City Council meeting, Council discussed the applicability of the amendments to the Corridor Development District (CDD) related to signage. As a result of the discussion, a motion was adopted to amend the proposed ordinance to require review of all signage by the Planning and Zoning Commission, whether in a planned development text or not. The Planning and Zoning Commission, at their meeting on May 5, 2005, discussed the motion by City Council requiring review of all signage in the CDD by the Planning and Zoning Commission. As a result of the discussion, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the addition of the following language under 153.115(D)(2)(h) in order to further clarify the criteria for approval of signage in the CDD: That the signage shall take into account architectural style, general design, arrangement, texture, material and color so that the image of Dublin is maintained as a quality community. Evaluation of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its relationship to its surroundings. The revised language is reflected in the Ordinance 69-04 (Amended) attached hereto. Recommendation: Approval of Ordinance 69-04(Amended) as revised by the Planning and Zoning Commission. In addition to the revised language recommended by the Planning Commission for Ordinance 69-04 (Amended), the Planning and Zoning Commission offered the following suggestions: 1) That City Council review the fees for signage in the Corridor Development District to make sure they are fair and reasonable, not only in terms of balancing the costs to the City, but also to the costs of the applicant; and 2) That the Corridor Development District regulations, at least procedurally, recognize eventually that there will be a new Community Plan and have a revised ordinance in place so that the Commission can review a preliminary plan, let the applicant work with staff to revise the plan, and return to the Commission for final plan approval. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION CITY OF DUBLIN_ MAY 5, 2005 land Use and Rmge Planning Shier-Rings Rid n, Ohio 43016-1236 Phone: 614-410-4600 Fax: 614-410-4741 Web Site: www.dublin.ah.us The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 3. Administrative Request - 04-OSOADM -Amendments to the Corridor Development District (CDD) Location: 655 acres bounded by I-270 on the north, the corporate boundary on the south, Sawmill Road on the east, and Riverside Drive on the west. (Existing CDD Boundary). Request: Review and approval of an ordinance to amend the development standazds and approval criteria of Section 153.115 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning Code). Applicant: City of Dublin, c/o Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager, 5200 Emerald Parkway, Dublin, Ohio 43017. Staff Contact: Daniel D. Bird, FAICP, Planning Director. Contact Information: Phone: (614) 410-4653/E-mail: dbird@dublin.oh.us. MOTION: To forward recommendations to City Council regarding this Administrative Request. VOTE: 6-0. RESULT: The motion was approved. The following recommendations will be forwarded to city council: 1) That the signage shall take into account architectural style, general design, arrangement, texture, material and color so that the image of Dublin is maintained as a quality community. Evaluation of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its relationship to its surroundings; 2) That City Council review the fees for signage in the Corridor Development District to make sure they are fair and reasonable, not only in terms of balancing the costs to the City, but also to the costs of the applicant; and Page 1 of 2 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION MAY 5, 2005 3. Administrative Request - 04-080ADM -Amendments to the Corridor Development District (CDD) (Continued) 3) That the Corridor Development District regulations, at least procedurally, recognize eventually that there will be a new Community Plan and have a revised ordinance in place so that the Commission can review a preliminary plan, let the applicant work with staff to revise the plan, and return to the Commission for fmal plan approval. se and Long Range Planning Page 2 of 2 Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -May 6, 2005 Page 5 DRAFT 3. Administrative Request - 04-080ADM -Amendments to the Corridor Development District (CDD) Mr. Gerber said this case had been before the Commission several times, and the Commission had forwazded a recommendation to City Council. He suggested that if procedures needed to be established, the Planning Director could write them and get them in place. Mr. Bird said the only thing Council suggested be added was that all signs in the CDD District come to the Planning and Zoning Commission. He said this amendment would be to add to (g): All new signs and revised signage, if the Commission felt it appropriate. He said the previous amendment addressed and clarified signage issues that would come before the Commission. Mr. Bird said that City Council wanted to treat all signs the same -even if they were revised signs. He suggested that the Commission could either vote on the proposed language as proposed to keep the Code as it currently reads. Mr. Gerber said he thought additional costs were being added to applicants needlessly. Ms. Boring said she thought the Commission should look at all signs. She said there were not many signs that came forward in this particulaz district. She said it was limited in its scope. As an example, she said she wished a revised signage case had been able to come to the Commission for the Frank's Nursery site. She said if Section 2 was not written properly for the CDD, then Section 1 did not have any teeth in it. Ms. Boring asked if it was going to be consistent with the Dublin Sign Code, or with other signage in the azea. Mr. Gerber said if Ms. Boring wanted, then, after the words: ...shall maintain the image of Dublin as a quality community...and also take into account, architectural style, design, arrangement, text, material, and color could be added Ms. Reiss suggested that the architecture of the building did not necessarily have to match, but perhaps it should match an area theme. Ms. Boring said she wanted to be able to say that if an application is in a CDD District, it needed to be reviewed and coordinated. Mr. Gerber referred to the language of Dublin Village Center text that went beyond the Sign Code and stated that the signage shall comport with the architectural style, and the general characteristics of the surrounding areas. He suggested that language. Ms. Boring asked if that would give the Commission more discretion. Steven Smith, Jr. said it would. However, he said for signage in these areas, the Law Director's office looked at a lot of other city codes. He said many are written this way for areason - in essence to give wiggle room to avoid being locked into something. He said what Ms. Boring was proposing would not do that. Mr. Gerber asked if it was the intent of City Council to expand upon the Comdor Development District, defining a broad azea of the City where this Code amendment is going to be applicable. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -May 6, 2005 DRAFT Page 6 Ms. Boring said she was not sure of what was the intent of the other Council members. Mr. Gerber said the Commission was spending a lot of time on this sign issue. He said a Corridor Development District case was reviewed a few weeks ago and all they had to say was: Folks, here's the Code, you are going to approve it. He said that night, and since then, the Commission has discussed putting in more discretion. He said he would rather take on the whole project and send it all to Council. Ms. Boring said there had always been a discussion between the former Law Director and some of the Commissioners on how it was interpreted. She said she got the impression that this Code amendment was the first thing that they thought needed to be dealt with immediately. She said she did not know if that was being coordinated with the new Community Plan or if it was something that should be thought about separately. Mr. Gerber said it could be addressed in the Community Plan, but this is part of the Code. Mr. Bird said normally, the Community Plan would be done first, and then as part of doing it, adjustments to the Code would be made. He said if the Commission wanted, staff could check the priorities for the Corridor District Development District study. He said staff is going to look at the adjustments to all of the zoning districts and along the line, the revamping of the whole Code. However, he said there are certain things that cannot wait, and he thought this was what Mr. Gerber was saying. He said the Corridor District Study was done in the early 80s. He said at least, the study would be updated. Mr. Bird said there were different approaches to an overlay district. He said he classified this overlay district as minimal, as opposed to other types of overlay districts. Mr. Bird said relative to the signage, if the Commission wanted to recognize that signage should be compatible with the architectural design of the center, (g) states that, and the Commission could go with the language that is being recommended by Council with the direction to the staff that they propose an administrative process. He said staff could make a judgment on the merits of what is presented. He said if in staff's judgment, if it does not meet those standards, staff can deny it. Mr. Bird said then, if the applicant wants to pursue it, they can pursue it with the Commission. Ms. Boring said when it comes to signage, the Commission has never been comfortable with doing it administratively. Mr. Bird said basically, what is substituted now is the Sign Code. He said an example was shown at the last meeting with a sign that met the Sign Code, but was out of scale with the architecture and the site design. He said the reason that case was brought before the Commission was because it was a new structure, and signage was part of the original proposal. Mr. Gerber said that case would fit under this proposed amendment and with what the Commission recommended to City Council weeks ago. He asked what would happen if the building had been there for ten years, and they wanted to come back with that same type of signage. Mr. Bird said since it was not part of the original approval, they would have to meet the Sign Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -May 6, 2005 Page 7 DRAFT Code. He said however, with this Code amendment, it would have to come back to the Commission for review and approval. Mr. Bird agreed that this might be the first step to addressing larger issues with the Code. He said information was provided at a previous meeting which indicated that there were 76 signage cases since January 2002, and 29 percent of them were in the CDD, which was an average of six to eight applications a year. He said perhaps that did set the stage for this as the first action in looking at the Code, and maybe the feedback that the Commission would like to provide to Council would be that there was a need look at the overlay district. Mr. Gerber asked about application fees and costs to the applicant. Ms. Wanner said if the application was for a sign only, it would still require the same CDD fee that is assigned [$1,600], unless Council amended the fee ordinance. Mr. Gerber said the Commission wants the signage in the overlay districts to be compatible with the area, the architecture, and design regardless of whether it met Code. He asked if Mr. Bird believed the language in (g) protected the Commission and gave them enough flexibility to address that. Mr. Zimmerman asked if a location could be added. Mr. Gerber suggested that:...it's relationship to its surroundings...was close enough. He asked if that could be added. Mr. Bird said it was already included in (g). Mr. Gerber asked if Mr. Bird if (g) was adequate. Mr. Bird thought it was adequate, and said if "...and all new signage and revised signage" was left in, it pertains to that also. Ms. Reiss said she agreed with Ms. Boring that she would like to see (h) elaborated. Mr. Bird asked if the Commission wanted same language under Signage that is under Design. Mr. Gerber and Ms. Reiss agreed. Ms. Reiss wanted the same language because she was afraid that an applicant just to change a sign would skim through to find Section 8, Signage, and think that is what they had to follow it. Ms. Boring said that was what she also was thinking. Mr. Bird said then, after "...quality of community," the same sentence could be added. Mr. Gerber suggested "...or shall take into account architectural style, general design, arrangement, texture of material and color... He said it sounded that it should state above: "...and its relationship to surroundings" also because that is not in there. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -May 6, 2005 Page 8 DRAFT Mr. Gerber asked if this Administrative Request should be held for the new language to come back to the Commission for approval. Mr. Bird said he did not think so. He said the motion before City Council was to approve it, and send it back to the Commission for comment. Mr. Gerber asked if a Commission vote was necessary. Mr. Bird said yes. Ms. Reiss suggested that the Commission's comments to City Council should also include looking at the fee structures to include a Signage Only Fee in the CDD District. Mr. Gerber made a motion to approve this Code Amendment and forward three recommendations to City Council: 1) That the signage shall take into account architectural style, general design, arrangement, texture, material and color so that the image of Dublin is maintained as a quality community. Evaluation of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its relationship to its surroundings; 2) That City Council review the fees for signage in the Corridor Development District to make sure they are fair and reasonable, not only in terms of balancing the costs to the City, but also to the costs of the applicant; and 3) That the Corridor Development District regulations, at least procedurally, recognize eventually that there will be a new Community Plan and have a revised ordinance in place so that the Commission can review a preliminary plan, let the applicant work with staff to revise the plan, and return to the Commission for final plan approval. Mr. Bird said he thought the essence of the motion was understood. However, he noted that in (g), it already read: "...design in its relationship to the surroundings..." in the last sentence, so it would be redundant to include the phrase. Ms. Boring said that was okay, because an emphasis that it was really important was needed. Ms. Boring seconded Mr. Gerber's motion above. The vote on Mr. Gerber's above motion to send the three recommendations to City Council regarding this Administrative Request was as follows: Mr. Messineo, yes; Ms. Jones, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Ms. Reiss, yes; Ms. Boring yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Motion to Approve and send recommendations to Council Approved 6-0.) STAFF REPORT DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY 5, 2005 CrfY OF DUBLIN_ l.id Uso a.d >u.y Rawer Ph~Yl.y ' Shia-Rugs Road 1 i, Ohio 43016-1236 4.,.~: 614.410.46 Fmc: 614-410.4747 Weh Site: wiwrduh5aah.us 3. Administrative Request - 04-080ADM -Amendments to the Corridor Development District (CDD) Location: 655 acres bounded by I-270 on the north, the corporate boundary on the south, Sawmill Road on the east, and Riverside Drive on the west. (Existing CDD Boundary). Request: Review and approval of an ordinance to amend the development standards and approval criteria of Section 153.115 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning Code). Applicant: Ciry of Dublin, c% Jane S. Brautigam, Ciry Manager, 5200 Emerald Parkway, Dublin, Ohio 43017. Staff Contact: Daniel D. Bird, FAICP, Planning Director. Contact Information: Phone: (614) 410-46531E-mail: dbird(a~dublin.oh.us. UPDATE: At the January 31, 2005 City Council meeting Council discussed the applicability of the amendments to the Corridor Development District (CDD) related to signage. As a result of the discussion a motion was adopted to amend the proposed ordinance to require review of all CDD signage whether in a planned development text or not. Basically the Planning and Zoning Commission would review all signage in the CDD (See attached Council meeting minutes dated January 31, 2005). Attached is a revised version of the ordinance. The change per City Council motion is reflected in Section 1. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND APPROVAL CRITERIA IN SECTION 153.115 OF THE DUBLIN CODIFIED ORDINANCES (ZONING CODE).- CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT DLSTRICT WHEREAS, it is necessary from time to time to amend the Code in order to protect the health, safety and welfaze of the citizens of the City of Dublin; and WHEREAS, Section 153.115 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances sets forth the application procedures and standazd of review for corridor development district approval; and WHEREAS, the City would like to clarify the applicability of a design component to the approval criteria for corridor development district applications; and WHEREAS, the City desires to do this in order to ensure that all buildings and structures constructed or modified in the Corridor Development District are consistent with the surrounding commercial facilities and reflect Dublin's azchitectural chazacter; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Ordinance on November 4, 2004, January 13, 2005, January 20, 2005 and May 5, 2005 and recommends the adoption of the Ordinance because it serves to implement City Council objectives and the Community Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by Council of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, _ of the elected members concurring that: Section 1. Section 153.115(D)(2)(g) is hereby created and shall provide as follows: (g) Design. The design of new structures and of new additions to existing structures, including new site improvements and all new and revised signage, shall take into account azchitectural style, general design, arrangement, texture, material and color so that the image of Dublin is maintained as a quality community. Evaluation of the appearance of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its relationship to its surroundings. Section 2. Section 153.115(Dx2)(h) is hereby created and shall provide as follows: (h) Signage. Sign material, shape, color and illumination shall be indicated and consistent with the Dublin Sign Code and other signage in the azea and shall maintain the image of Dublin as a quality community. Section 3. Section 153.115(E)(4) is hereby amended to read: (4) Planning and Zoning Commission review. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the plan as to whether the following four conditions aze met. 04-088ADM i"°5'u"-' } Amendments to the Corridor Development District c .,,, Section 4. Section 153.1 i5(Ex4xd) is hereby created and shall provide as follows: (d) The proposed development meets or exceeds the development standards set forth in Section 153.115(D) of the Dublin Codified Ordinances. Section 5. This Ordinance shall take effect on the earliest date provided by law. Passed this day of , 2005. Mayor -Presiding Officer ATTEST: Clerk of Council, Dublin, Ohio {~,u~.~ } 04-088ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District City of Dublin Land Use and Long Range Planning 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District N Feet 0 800 1,600 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Mimrtes of ~ Dub~r City Courral Meeting January 31,2005 Page 2 Hefd 20 CODE AMENDMENTS Ordinance 69-04(Amendedj Amending the Development Standards and Approval Critecia in Section 153.115 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning Code) -Corridor Development District (Case No. 04-080 ADtNj. Mr. Bird noted that this ordinance previously came before Councr~ upon the recemmendatan of the Planning Commisswn. Some danfications were requested and the legislation was referred bads to the Conunission. The memo in Council's packets provides an explanation of the amended languages, which is exdusively related to signage within the Corridor Devebpment District. Review of signage by the Planning Commisson would occur whenever. • A building is constructed or modified and as part of that new construction, new signage is proposed. • signage is modified in such a way that the modification results in a deviation from the Dublin Codified Ordinances. • A previously approved Planning and Zoning Commission signage package is modified in any way. • Review is mandated in the text approving the development. if a signage application meets the requirements of this ordinance, it would proceed through the normal administrative review and approval process. Ms. Salay inquired if the intent is that if there is no deviation from the sign code, the Planning Commission would rat have any purview over the signage. Mr. bird responded affirmatively. Mrs. Boring added that is correct, with the exception of sgn packages that are part of a rezoning. In those cases, even if the signage meets Code regulations, the application must come balk to the Planning Commission to approve the package. The administrative review would apply only if there was an existing sign not part of a rezoning. Mr. Smith stated that in the case when the zoning text has signage inducted, the developer must return to P8Z if they want to change the signage section of the zoning text. In the case where the signage is part of the whole padkage, [evisions must be heard by P&Z The reasoning is that if P8~Z has acted on the development, they should be the reviewing body. The developer, of course, retains appellate rights. However. when a business is within a CDD district and the business owner does not want to build, but simply wants to change signage and nothing else, administrative reviewlapproval would be sufficient. Mr. McCash inquired if the signage were not part of a previously approved COD, the signage would then receive no review, other than by staff? Mr. Bird responded that is correct Mr. McCash stated that the overall intent of a CDD is to deal primarily with the aesthetics and land use issues in that area. signage is an aesthetics issue. !t is not a health, safety and welfare matter. It makes no sense that one applicant who wants to change a sign in compliance to the Sign Code must undergo full Planning Commission review, simpty because the development was initially part of a COD review_ Yet another applicant who wants to change a sign in compliance with the Sign Code may apply for a permit and be approved. It makes more sense for everything within a COD to be required to undergo Pt3Z review, because the City is trying to address the aesthetics of the district. This constitutes discrimination. Mr. Smith responded that this is a common ok;currence throughout Dublin. Much of the older zoning text didn't indude signage requirements. In the last id years, signage requirements have been inducted in the zoning text. He inquired if Mr. 04-088ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS _ Iufnutes of Dubdn City Council Meeting .~ January 31,200.5 Page 3 Iidd ZO McCash's is that ad items within a CDD. even if never before reviewed by PBZ, be required to have P8Z approval to amend their signaige. Mr. McCash responded that if the City wants to be true to the intent of the CDD - to address the aesthetics and land use within that area - a full sigriage review would be appropriate. If a development had not been reviewed by PSZ in the past, this wnuM give the City the opportunity to review the aesthetics. and perhaps improve the overall aesthetks of the district Mrs. Boring asked. that shoukt occur. what justification would P8Z have for denying an application if it is in compliance with tfie Sign Code? Mr. Smith responded that the staff report would indicate if the applicant is sanely changing the name on the skin with no change in the other components. There weuki be no basis for a denial unless there were a change in color, size or fighting that also was not in compliance with Code. He recommended passage of the legislation tonight However, he will discuss Mr. McCash's suggestion with Mr. Bird and others. Mr. McCash suggested tabling the legislation until staff has had an opportunity to consider his perspective. He noted that this is part of the COD overlay. Mr. Smith agreed that it is part of the overlay, but in his view, there would be no advantage in tabling the IegislaGon. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that Council take a vote. if the ordinance does not pass, Council can give additional direction. Mr, Ledclider inquired what the drawback would toe in delaying action for two to four weeks to allow P8Z and staff to consider Mr. McCash's suggestions before the ordinance comes balk to Council. Mr. Smith commented that there is no pending case that could be affected. It would involve re-wrrOng the legislation and forwarding it for P8Z review. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher inquired how many cases would have been affected. in the last three to five years? What would the cost be to the developer and to the City if this requirement were in effect? Mr. Smith responded that legal staff would investigate that issue. Mrs. Boring asked staff to summarize the discussion that took place during the P8Z review. Mr. Bird responded that the Planning Commission's position was that if the case were either new constnrction, a modification. previously part of a development that received P&Z review, or a deviation from Code - it should have P8Z review. The Planning Commission did not want to act as a Sign Commission. They believed that staff could administratively detemune if the application were in compliance with City Code_ Mr. McCash stated that, currently, when a development undergoes a CDD review and a sign is approved, and if a short time later, that business and sign is solo. the new owner, to effect a change of the name on the sign, must undergo P8~Z review. Another business, not part of an earlier CDO review. would not need do so to effect the same change. Mrs. Boring stated that it is the zoning text that makes the difference. The City ~~ requires any development which includes a zoning text to have P8Z review/approval for any modifcaton. 04-~88ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District ~.,= RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin t^,ity Counc~ Meetinf Jarxiary 31, 2005 Page 4 Held 20 Mr_ McCash responded that businesses with a zoning text in a planned district need onty an administrative review for a change in signage. Mrs. Boring stated that there has always been concern that COD guidelines were - not suffiaeMly strict. This was intended as a way to improve that. Mr. McCash noted that this ordinance deals with the CDO overlay, and yet treats businesses within the CDD overlay differently. Mrs. Boring stated that some businesses are `grandfathered' and that is nomtal procedure. Mayor Chinnid-Zuercher suggested a motion is in order to bring this to conclusion. Mr_ McCash responded that he w~! vote "no' om the legislation before Counc~ tonight. It creates a disparity between property owners and does not meet the intent of the CDO overlay district. Mr McCash moved to amend the ordinance to include review of all COD signage. whether in a alarmed district text or not. Mr Lecklider seconded the motion. He asked if the amended legislation would be reviewed again by the Planning Commission. Mr. Smith responded that as a courtesy, it would, as it constitutes a modification from what they had sent to Council. Mr. Keenan inquired if the City has other corridor development districts. Mr. McCash responded that this is the only corridor development dstrict in Dublin - the area bounded by Martin Road, Sawmill Road,1-270 and Riverside Drive. Mrs. Boring inquired. assuming this amendment passes, if an application is made for a sign which was never a part of zoning text, and the sign is in compliance with the sign code, would P&Z have any right to request something different? Mr_ McCash responded that Sectior 1 of the ordinance reads: 'The design of new structures and new additions to existing structures, inducting new site improvements shall take into account architectural style, general design, arrangement, texture, material and color so that the image of Dublin is made as a quality community.' A change-out in a sign could be considered a site improvement. The Planning Commission would be reviewing the new sign to ensure that it fits the image of Dublin as a quality community. Mrs Boring requested permission to amend Mr. McCash's motion to add to Section 1-G that the CDO review shall be inclusive of all signage, There was no objection. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher invited public testimony. Wallace Maurer 7451 Dublin Road referred to the December 8"' merrm in Council packets, the top of page 8, 1 paragraph, lines 3-4, where there is a reference to a community devebpment district. is "community' a misprint? Ms. Brautigam responded that it is a misprint; it should state "corridor.' Mr. Maurer inquired what has prompted alt of this legislative activity. Have there been violations or challenges to these provis'wns? Mr. Bird stated that developers have raised questions. Mr. Smith added that when cases have been before the Planning Commission, questions have been raised about the meaning of "aesthetics,' and whether' 04-088ADM Amendments to the RECORD 0t= PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin Ckv Cou>c~ Meeting Jarxiary 31, 2005 Page 5 HcM 20 applies to signs. The City has aMrays interpreted it that way, but there was a need to clarify it to avoid future oonfuswn aboirt whether signage is part of the aesthetics. Mr: Maurer tested that there are a couple of references to a 'quality community.' At solos point, that should also be defined_ He w~l try to tackle that definition -there are aU sorts of moral and ph~osophicat implications Mayor Chinnid-Zuercher suggested that if Mc Maurer pursues the definition of a quality community, he share that definition with Carson Combs who is leading the update process for the Cotnrtwnity Plan. Itwouid be helpful to have the discussion in that context Vote on the motion to amend: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr Keenan, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Mr. Leckfider, yes. (The ordinance was referred to Planning Commission as amended) Ordinance Amending tions 137.01 and 1 .08 of the Dublin fled Ordinances Regardin niawfui Manufactu ,Importation, Po ssion, Purchase, S e, or Tra er of Assauk Weap s. _~ Mr_ ~th stated that it was al staff s intention ule this he. F ary 7° Counc~ mee ' .They have oomm icated that date to eople who plan to att that meeting. Then re, they request tha ordinance be pos ed to the February 7~' sting. It was the copse s of Counc~ to po a the hearing until th et Council mee ' _ 8/D AWA Ordin 01-05 Acc flog the Lowest/Be id for the Killtlea P Project in the D in, Ohio. re were no additio questions. Vote on the Ordina Ms. Salay, yes; M ecldider, yes; Mr. R McCash, yes; M .Boring. yes; Mr. K n, yes; Mayor Chinni Zue ECONOMI EVELOPMENT INC T1VE Ordtnan 02-05 Autho ng the Provision o erWn incentives f Purposes of F the Aerations of Autom on and Control Tec ology, loc. (ACT rkforce to the City, Authorizing the cution of an Econ~ evelopment Agree ent Ms. Brautigam not that a map has proposed site. Mayor Chi ~ci-Zuercher invited p lic testimony. Wallace aurer. 7451 Dublin d inquired the g exile a to attract 28-78 em oyees. Is there a p Mr cDaniei responded t when the City disco reement with a comp y, the company is as of jobs. That determi s what the annual ff the projections reasonable, the City silts Mr. Maurer i wired if the City the past 1 ears to legitimize Mr. M niel responded that futon rget withholdings to co any to understand t indicating of the you for an anticipated n ed profit curve? es an economic dev pment t to project their gro in terms Holdings will be to a community. them. hard evidence, suctyras a profit curve for wfir<aPChY does not. The pany must meet ve the incentive. a City works with thi their growth path is fit appears adequat~l the 7th yes; Mr. cher, yes. Its warrant ~~ 04-088ADM Amendments to the f,ITY OF DUBLIN Land Use and Long Range Planning 5800 Shier-Rings Road • Dublin, Ohio 43016 Phone: 614-410-4600 • Fax: 614-410-4747 TO: Members of Dublin City Council M e m o FROM: Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager~a.w~.~ J!. ~ ~~ DATE: January 26, 2005 INITIATED BY: Daniel D. Bird, FAICP, Land Use and Long Range Planning Directorf/~ Stephen J. Smith, Law Director RE: Second Reading - Ordinance 69-04(Amended) Amending The Development Standards And Approval Criteria In Section 153.115 Of The Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning Code) - Corridor Development District (Case 04-080ADM) SUMMARY: Attached for your review and consideration is the updated Ordinance for the amendments to the Corridor Development District (CDD). The amended language, as prepared by the Law Department, is shown in bold italics. The purpose of the amended language is to clarify the intent of the Ordinance as it relates to how signage is treated in the CDD. The proposed language provides for review of signage in the CDD whenever: • A building is constructed or modified and as part of that new construction, new signage is proposed. • Signage is modified in such a way that the modification results in a deviation from the Dublin Codified Ordinances. • A previously approved Planning and Zoning Commission signage package is modified in any way. • Review is mandated in the text approving the development. RECOMMENDATION: Adoption by motion of Ordinance 69-04(Amended). ~~SCHOTTENSTEIN ZOX & D U N N ~~~.,~r3h MEMORANDUM TO: Jane Brautigam, City Manager Dublin City Council FROM: Stephen J. Smith, Law Director i Jennifer D. Readier, Assistant Law Director DATE: January 11, 2005 RE: Corridor Development District Revisions At the December Council meeting, a discussion ensued regarding the applicability of the new amendments to the Corridor Development District ("CDD") to signage in the District. In the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting first considering the revisions, there was some discussion as to the applicability of the revisions to signage in the District. However, there was some confusion as to the manner in which some of the statements made on the record should be construed. In order to clarify the true applicability of the revisions to the CDD ordinance, the Legal Department, in consultation with the Planning Department, believes that the best course of action is to ask the Planning Commission to clarify their position with regard to signage. This is scheduled to take place at the January 13, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. The CDD revisions have also been advertised for the January 20, 2005 Planning Commission meeting in case the Commission desires to consider additional amendments as a result of their conversation on January 13th. As a result of the foregoing, we request that Council postpone its discussion of the CDD amendments until the February 7, 2005 Council meeting. We understand that this delays the amendment process, but we feel it is imperative to clarify the record so that the City is in the best ': defensible position should any challenges be made to the amendments. Please do not hesitate to contact this office if you have any questions regarding this issue. {H0506765.1 } RECORD OF ORDINANCES Ordinance No, 69-04 (Amended) Passed , 2U AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND APPROVAL CRITERIA IN SECTION 153.115 OF THE DUBLIN CODIFIED ORDINANCES (ZONING CODE) -CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (CASE N0.04-O80ADM) WHEREAS, it is necessary from time to time to amend the Code in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Dublin; and WHEREAS, Section 153.115 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances sets forth the application procedures and standard of review for Corridor Development District approval; and WHEREAS, the City would like to clarify the applicability of a design component to the approval criteria for Corridor Development District applications; and WHEREAS, the City desires to do this in order to ensure that all buildings and structures constructed or modified in the Comdor Development District are consistent with the surrounding commercial facilities and reflect Dublin's architectural character; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Ordinance on November 4, 2004, and recommends the adoption of the Ordinance because it serves to implement City Council objectives and the Community Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by Council of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, of the elected members concurring that: Section 1. Section 153.115(D)(2)(g) is hereby created and shall provide as follows: (g) Design. The design of new structures and of new additions to existing structures, including new site improvements, shall take into account architectural style, general design, arrangement, texture, material and color so that the image of Dublin is maintained as a quality community. Evaluation of the appearance of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its relationship to its surroundings. Section 2. Section 153.115(D)(2)(h) is hereby created and shall provide as follows: (h) Signage. Sign material, shape, color and illumination shall be indicated and consistent with the Dublin Sign Code and other signage in the area and shall maintain the image of Dublin as a quality community. Section 3. Section 153.115(E)(4) is hereby amended to read: (4) Planning and Zoning Commission review. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the plan as to whether the following four conditions are met. Section 4. Section 153.115(E)(4)(d) is hereby created and shall provide as follows: (d) The proposed development meets or exceeds the development standards set forth in Section 153.115(D) of the Dublin Codified Ordinances. Section 5. This Ordinance shall take effect on the earliest date provided by law Passed this day of , 2004. Mayor -Presiding Officer ATTEST: Clerk of Council f,ITY OF Dl'ELIN TO: FROM: DATE: INITIATED BY: Department of Development Division of Planning 5800 Shier-Rings Road • Dublin, Ohio 43016 Phone: 614-410-4600 • Fax: 614-410-4747 Members of Dublin City Council Jane S. Brautigam, City Managert.)<~~~-- `~ +J,~~~~-~ December 8, 2004 Daniel D. Bird, FAICP, Planning Directo a,c, Memo RE: Second Reading - Ordinance 69-04 Corridor Development District Amendment to Development Standard and Approval Criteria -Section 153.115 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning Code) (Case 04-080ADM) SUMMARY: The purpose of the proposed amendment to the Corridor Development District (CDD) development standards is to clarify existing regulations with regard to the design of structures and site improvements, as well as signage. Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment at its meeting on November 4, 2004, and approved it unanimously and recommended the amendment passage by City Council. The simple and straightforward amendment will affirm the importance of architectural design, site layout and signing as significant factors to be considered by the Planning Commission in reviewing proposed development/redevelopment in the CDD. BACKGROUND: The CDD was established in 1978 as a special district covering the geographic area bounded by I-270 on the north, Sawmill Road on the east, Martin Road on the south and Scioto River on the west. (See map.) The purpose of the special district is: "...to provide overlay requirements to ensure that existing and anticipated corridor land uses and traffic improvements within the district will be developed in a manner that protects the health and safety of residents of Dublin and maintains the image of Dublin as a quality community." (emphasis added) The Planning Commission has reviewed and rendered decisions within the CDD over the years based on three conditions being met: 1. The proposed uses are permitted as so specified by the zoning district in force for the subject land Memo to City Council Members Re: Ord. 69-04 -Corridor Development District Amendment September 28, 2004 -Page Two 2. The proposed development is in accord with the Sawmill 161 Quadrant Plan and other appropriate plans for the area. 3. The proposed development will be in keeping with the existing and or proposed land use character and the physical development potential of the area. Some notable examples of development reviewed under the CDD overlay standards include Wendy's Corporate Headquarters, La Scala Restaurant, and Lowe's Home Improvement Center. The total acreage of the CDD is 655 acres of which 75 percent (495 acres) of the land is currently developed. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission and Staff recommend passage of this amendment. KEY PLAN 1 ~' CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT --r- ~ ; i , ~*- ', ' _m-~ _-fir ! -T r r -'-- ; _ ~' - -~~`~'- - - _ - a-l ~ ~ - ~' "'~- s ¢ J iE~~ ~ "LLER~RD-~._ :~~ I ~ r_~ _ ~.,, ~ 4 -I T_ I _ __ ,~ rm-- ~ W -~ ~ 1 ~' ' DU WS3kNT -~ `~ ~ I ___~ I ~ y 1 ~ - I I J j ~ rTl ~~ ~It ~ I~ - ~~ ~ ~ ~-~ I ~ X~ N_.~ '- ~ ~I ~~ ~ 'r ,I 111 w _,~ ~ R~~~^R I ~-~Uz' ~ y i ~Ey' ~~r ~ ~3~ ~oTIU~ - L_ tf,-~- ~' _.~y ~ '~'I i N ~ ~~;~~ ~ ~',- Qom; i I~ ~~ -- ~'~ 1 (' ~-~ ~~ _ I T` T ' ~r j J-~-~ K II~ ~~Or'~ (~~ [ ~ I ~- "• _.1~i _ -_ ~'_ II -_ m~-~~ r~~'~~r ~BANIfE R-Cj __ r '--~ -ll3kTCl i r"~ ~ ii J ~ _ ___F -{ .Y l~F- 4--~tr-~~ --' ~ - `t- _ ~L l•C:1`nt~At3 ~:T E ~ W ~~i~t ~~ ~ ~ ~~c4 .- ~I ~II Sf'11&J~' t i~ ti -" ~ j ~-'-~ r '~ _`k1AR7M1~R0~hfiAE3TIPJ RD~ ~ o~ ~StOti '-~. ~ i ~ ~~ T ~~.+ i I ~ ~ ?mac ~ .. " 4~ .--, r~~--~, - . E3 , ' 2 ~.. ~~ 4 1 L_J City of Dublin Division of Planning 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District N Feet 0 800 1,600 Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -November 4, 2004 Page 8 5. Administrative Request - 04-080ADM -Amendments to the Corridor Development District (CDD) Dann Bird explained that the Corridor District is located in the southeast portion of Dublin. It contains about 655 acres and is bounded by I-270, Sawmill Road, Riverside Drive, and the road fronting on Martin Road. Essentially, the purpose of the amendment to the Community Development District is to clarify existing regulations pertaining to the design of structures and improvements. Currently, the general provisions of the City's Development Standards have been used to deal with architectural design and signage issues. This amendment will specify both architectural review and signage as key components to the review in the CDD District. The ~ Commission in the past has consistently applied these and other standards to various developments within the districts. Since the ordinance was adopted in 1978, it has reviewed and approved such developments as LaScala and the Lowe's Home Improvement area. Wendy's Corporation is including these architectural and signage issues. Mr. Bird explained in terms of the Code, the two or three provisions of the Ordinance that are being changed are added design and signage; also, under the procedures referring to those elements. The Commission packets have the actual language for those additions. They refer to the consideration of design and on the next page, in terms of signing, a provision that relates to application of those standards. He said it is a rather simple and straightforward amendment to reaffirm what has been done since 1978. Mr. Gerber asked if anyone wished to speak to the application. There was no response. He said -~ , he had noticed in the minutes that. a couple of Councilmember asked that the [CDD] application be forwarded for Commission review and comment. He explained that although the Clerk of Council takes very good minutes, it is not clear what concerns they were raising. He said it appeared to be an administrative clean up, and they Commission has been trying to reach this point for a very long time. Mr. Bird agreed that his statement was correct. Council did ask on this issue that, relative to signage, all the applicants within the district would use the same standards (i.e., everyone would be treated the same). They also noted that the CDD District has not been looked at for some time. He asked if there would be an opportunity to do that, in terms of expanding the geographical area, as the Comprehensive Plan is prepared, and bring it before the community and the Planning Commission. Mr. Gerber concluded that the expansion could be done in the Community Plan update. Ms. Boring stated that she was a little confused at the Council meeting, and she asked Ms. Wanner if she could clarify a few points, because of past history, which Mr. Bird would not know. She said a lot of times when the CDD comes up, it's been statements like "We don't want the signs to go anywhere else." She asked doesn't that address every time we have that kind of question, and isn't that why it came up. LJ Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -November 4, 2004 Page 9 Mr. Bird responded that signage wasn't specifically mentioned within the current ordinance, but it was implied relative to the image of Dublin and all the components to site design, and that's why the signage phrase was being added. Ms. Boring said she gets confused between the CDD and the overlay for the Dublin Village Center. Ms. Wanner responded that was the a Corridor Review Text. Ms. Boring stated they want it in that text that the Commission had to review the signs all the time. She said this now says when you change your sign you have to come back to the Commission, no matter what. She asked if that prevented variances to the Board of Zoning Appeals, and did they always have to come back to the Commission for approval. Mr. Bird replied the intent was that it still would go by the Planning Commission, as part of their approval in the CDD. Mr. Gerber summarized that previously if an existing tenant's sign was not approved by the Commission, but the sign was approved by staff, then before they wouldn't have to come back to the Commission for a new sign, if it met the Code. He said now, all signage has to come to the Commission, and they would not be allowed to go to the Board of Zoning Appeals for variance. Mr. Gerber said everything stopped at the Commission level. ~, Ms. Boring agreed that in her mind it was what they had been asking for many years. Ms. Reiss commented that under Procedures, Section 4, the very first sentence there talks about the Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the plan as to whether the following, and we've just added a condition, so that word three needs to change to four. Mr. Gerber made a motion to approve this Administrative Request because the recommended changes to the CDD Zoning Code will clarify the planning and Zoning Commission's role and responsibility in reviewing CDD proposals, and they will affirm the importance of architectural design, site layout, and signing as key elements to be evaluated in rendering decisions on development/redevelopment in the CDD. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ms. Reiss, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; Ms. Boring, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. (Approved 6-0.) Mr. Gerber adjourned the meeting at 7:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lois Willard, Acting Administrative Assistant Division of Planning ~+... '' iii.. `L~ _ _~~ ~~..'~ ^f ~~• .4-.;~.f -. 17 ~~ ,+-'/i~7'f. !' ~{e~.. it 7_..~ i,~y3 ~ ~!?. eG~ se ,4 ~ ~. ~+ t-: c * # y--w;!~w.. ~ct,;1,....~ ~ . ~t1'y ~,,~- ~'S s f ~L, ~ :. r. ~ 1 ~ , , rr,Y~`. l t '.>f 3 ~E-i..__-E~ yl ~` ~' r ~g,~ ~ _'{ • , a ~ ~+..,~., ' sl 4~'i'~ r ;,~` ~ z { i f;::~ ytJ i~ ;- ~C.~ ~~gY~ '.5. ~4 ~ `' . ~ . ,~ ~ i rt S. R~i3`r ~~~a ~i -._~ _ :n »~ ..,1d ~~ >tlSarTgt~EAe+ .,xscr ~'.• -,4,~--•r. ~ L~ - ~; . l r..~, ~.~ - ~ ~ _ ~ - ; r .ifs .~~ R ' 'aF.iA"cfyi' Y ~'tl+`.,re J -~~.F~ i"~f 'r~~~~ ~ ~ W , ! a 1iiu1~' ~ :-_.~ i i- ~- t-~.~a x _ -~~:~~~t~ o-^ ~~'y ~ i- ~f ;,., I+-~ i'`1.~;, U "" { `""'~ ` ~~ - ,~-~ ~ ':~i¢ t'~ '~ . - ~t ~~ ~ - 1 n.+-, ~-a ~ ~.- sirs ;~ a..+ ~; '` ` f - ,F >r„ • "mss - ~- ..tp ` -T r~1'.f"` ; t ~ i ~ .~G i :-. ~~,., rJt~ ~~f'°`- 4 ~1F~,:,' { - ~ ~ r • ir' i '~ r ~' c + ... f 4- ~ ~ y~ ~. ~~ ~ L-'1'~t-L-iz.e ~ ;~-~ ~ ~~ 4-''f~' '! - ys i _ -~~---La.~;ic„}, ~ _ ~ {„ -Yr. ~.t~ 'y O - E-.~ ~ 1 ~ ~__. `L O s-- z. ~ `~ ~ r !<~"' iii .. v'-. ~'.-li: ~'~~ i~~~a :.€ s .r~j~~~~~ ~ : ~{.. F .i~. _. ~ tlx_ ~ t~'y H 3 a.~$ '}{,e ~ -k _ "F~. ~! ~x- { y ~. 1c ~ ''i -ter" s +7-„1~~ ~..-- ~ y. ~.; t~ . - r ~ ~ ~ ~s.w, i.ieax,...~-.,t ~` i?~ f ~`" ~ 1.A! ~S{~1-+'~ :s ti 1+E ~' r~ . x ~ r ~ ~,-,~ar:. ~ •~ ~.-~r,~ ~ per..... t -F '~~ ~~ ~,-~.~=~~a~ {,.~rof+i so~r~-~ 1~`f~'~"v~~ - ~ ~ aV . ' ~Y~.i -~~ ~if~ '' i t r -~ f ^ ~`~~ .. _ ~k+~..~~7-~+" may. S~` ~~ 9`+M'c;+ s-~ y a+~s r . ~ t~ ~ sx ~-?~~ ~"~TF' r ~. ~ T a~5n• ~-1: 1 ~~j~'~nif{-' ~ ~ ;ij P .~' ,-'S~'`t. ;. ~~i• "` -~~ 4C ~~l' `e'- "" tL'~-t"y«O~'~^„~ ~` ~ r~~ ~ ~: ~ O ~ ~c° aP'~'~ ~ ns.>A` :Y~ v ;~ er- .~,±F f ,~„ ~ - '^ ~ ~t ~i04 ~'' x'SL~ . '~1.:7 t ~" ''~`sr'L,>f~y,,, f {". i p~. J ~'tilj; 't~. YF ~~`~~~e~• "(' _~ ~ _~? ~ n cef..f+i ~ - : 3~ -- •..~ .- ~`° r.: ~. ~3p ~ ~~^~, .r--~-~ st-s ~ ~. ~rS w,. ~ ~:tlx« trs- ~r _ .K ; rte. • f~ ~ z ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~, ' ~'~. a' ~ 1 r - ~.aGKSZ +f•' ~ ~n~,la° N.. ' ~ ~ 'l 3 y ~'... ~ ¢ t ~3F j S 7"~ s S ~.~; l ^ ~ ~ ~-, is 4~'iA.~:-L L ~-C i' ~r~ ~ ` ~ '~ ti 74 r~;,4~' d Y4 ~ ~~.t.," s {. r,-~,s ,ti *~~y'y~ ~~J4 ~V' .: ' F ~'•` a• ~ ~ ~` f s ~ ./' ~•wi(. ~- 111, ~y ~ Ig L-e E ~ si'9`~- :.r ` ' '7EMifi~«r.. ~~Ac ~ ~1~i'tSF~ .-i. t i~ r,t " ~e•~. ~~ STAFF REPORT DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 4, 2004 CITY OF DUBLIN,. Division of Planning 5800 Shier•Rings Road iblin, Ohio 43016-1236 lone: 614-410.4600 rux: 614-410-4747 Web Site: www.dublin.oh.us 5. Administrative Request - 04-OSOADM -Amendments to the Corridor Development District (CDD) Location: 655 acres bounded by I-270 on the north, the corporate boundary on the south, Sawmill Road on the east, and Riverside Drive on the west. (Existing CDD Boundary). Request: Review and approval of an ordinance to amend the development standards and approval criteria of Section 153.115 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning Code). Applicant: City of Dublin, c/o Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager, 5200 Emerald Parkway, Dublin, Ohio 43017. Staff Contact: Daniel D. Bird, FAICP, Planning Director. Contact Information: Phone (614)410-4653 or E-mail: dbird@dublin.oh.us. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE: The purpose of the proposed Zoning Code Amendment to the CDD development standards is to clarify the existing regulations with regard to the design of structures and site improvements, as well as signage. In the past, the Legal Director has used the general provisions of the City's development standards as authority to look at architectural design and certain signage components. While a more thorough review can be undertaken for the CDD in the future, this legislation will clarify the regulations regarding design, site layout, and signage. These simple and straightforward amendments will affirm the importance of architectural design, site layout and signing as significant factors to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission in reviewing proposed development/redevelopment in the CDD. CONSIDERATIONS: Zoning Code History: The CDD was established in 1978 as a special district covering the geographic area bounded by I-270 on the north, Sawmill Road on the east, Martin Road on the south and the Scioto River on the west. (SEE ENCLOSED MAP AND AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH.) Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report -November 4, 2004 Page 2 The CDD was established as an overlay district to maintain the image of Dublin as a quality community and to protect the health and safety of residents. The development standazds that aze ~""`` an integral part of the CDD serve to guide new development and redevelopment of sites in the district. Role of the Planning and Zoning Commission Under CDD: The Planning and Zoning Commission is responsible for reviewing all site plans exterior construction and modifications within the Corridor Development District under the provisions of Section 153.115 to ensure: That existing and anticipated corridor land uses and traffic improvements will be developed in a manner that protects the health and safety of residents of the City; • That existing and anticipated corridor land uses and traffic improvements maintain the image of the City as a quality community; • That development maintains traffic flow and accessibility so as to encourage compatible land uses and to protect property values requiring special emphasis on traffic planning and frontage treatment; • That proposed uses are permitted uses as so spec fed by the zoning in force for the subject land; • That the proposed development is in accord with the Sawmill 161 Quadrant Plan (SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENT) and other appropriate plans for the area; and • That the proposed development will be in keeping with the existing and/or proposed land use character and the physical development potential of the area. The Planning Commission in reviewing and rendering decisions on development in the CDD shall also see that the following conditions are met: The proposed uses are permitted as so specified by the zoning district in force for the subject land. The proposed development is in accord with the Sawmill 161 Quadrant Plan other appropriate plans for the area. The proposed development is in keeping with the existing and/or proposed land use character and the physical development potential of the area. The Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and approved various development proposals over the years including Wendy's Corporation Headquarters, La Scala Restaurant, and Lowe's Improvement Center. (SEE ATTACHED PICTURES.) ZONING CODE AMENDMENT: The Planning and Zoning Commission has consistently applied the development standards stipulated in the Zoning Code for the CDD over the years in evaluating and rendering decisions on development. The development standards applied relate to lot requirements, site requirements (including structures and traffic concept), utilities, parking lots, landscaping and overall Code conformance. In reality, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed all site development improvements including building design, architecture and signage in rendering decisions. The proposed amendment (SEE ATTACHED Section 153.115 CORRIDOR Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report -November 4, 2004 Page 3 DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT Zoning Code with amendments highlighted), now clearly identifies these latter elements as reviewable components in all future CDD proposals. In addition to the proposed modifications to the current CDD Zoning Code, City Council identified some concerns and raised issues for the Planning and Zoning Commission to consider at the First Reading given to Ordinance 69-04. The City Council concerns and issues with the CDD are reflected in the Record of Proceedings of Dublin City Council dated October 4, 2004. (SEE ATTACHED MINUTES.) The concerns and issues of City Council regarding the CDD Zoning Code may be summarized as follows: Signage: If an existing tenant in an existing building whose sign was not approved as part of a CDD, they would not be required to get approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission for a new sign, but would be regulated under the existing Sign Code. The approach would create a situation in which one business would be treated differently than another. Staff Comment: All signage modifications in the CDD are subject to review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission to establish a sign policy for the development. Expansion of District: The CDD was established in the late 1970's and the District was an isolated location on the western edge of the City. City Council has discussed expanding the CDD to include other areas along SR 161/LTS 33 and north of I-270. They discussed a strategy to expand the CDD to include other areas along major east/west connectors through Dublin. Staff Comment: The expansion of the District will be a topic of discussion as part of the Comprehensive Plan update process which is currently underway and is estimated to be completed in Late 2005/Early 2006. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The recommended changes to the CDD Zoning Code will clarify the Planning and Zoning Commission's role and responsibility in reviewing CDD proposals. The amendments to the Code as proposed will affirm the importance of architectural design, site layout, and signing as key elements to be evaluated in rendering decisions on development/redevelopment in the CDD. The staff recommends the approval of Ordinance 69-04 (See attached ordinance) that amends Section 153.115 by adding subsections 153.115(D)(2)(g) -Design, 153.115(D)(2)(h) - Signage, and 153.115(E)(4)(d), and a forwarding recommendation to City Council for adoption. Dublin Planning and Zonin€ ~mmission Minutes -November 4, 2004 Page 7 5) That all i rovements, inclu ' g storm water anagement facilit' s street paveme t restripin includin left lane if constru d, and proposed frastructure meet e requir ents of the City E weer; 6) Tha architectural div sity matrix be su 'tted and a lied ere a ro riate; M' ael Close, represe ing the applicant ,agreed to the ame d conditions: That the three- and wire fence removed, prior site constructio subject to staff approval. 2) That all bi paths be install with the infrastruc a improvements d that Lots 6 and 7 e develop with the maxim~tfn side yard setback dj acent to the bike ath easement; 3) That e proposed front~afiilding setbacks be 'ed to meet the r uirements of the to ; 4) Th the sanitary sew drawings be revise to include existin rees; 5) at all improve ents, including s water mana ent facilities str t pavement restriping, incl ing left turn lane if constructed, proposed infrast tore meet the requirements f the City Engineer ,~ f. 6) That an ar itectural diversity trix be submitted d applied where appropriate; 7) That th o-Build-Zone alo Lot 4 be revise d extended at an afgle consistent wi the other ots within the deve pment; 8) the final plat be ended to include " ee Note F" on Lot Z; 9) at the developm t plans be revis based on comments within the re rt, prior to approval of build' g permits; and ~ ~ ,F 10) That all revis'` s be made tot final plat prior to scheduling a pub 'c hearing at City Council. Mr. Gerbe abstained from vote [as he worked for the same fi s Michael Close, a rney for the plicants] and ask if there was a motion. ~" . Zimmerman made a motion to approve this Final De lopment Plan wit a above ten onditions becaus the proposed finaL'development pl provides the oppo pity for a high quality resident' development, consistent with the C unity Plan; the p posal will conform to the adopt Thoroughfare Pl and Bikeway Pl ,and, the proposal 11 be compatible " adjacent r idential developme Mr. rague seconded t motion and the v to was as follows: . Saneholtz, yes; ". Boring, n , Mr. Sprague, yes; .Zimmerman, s; Ms. Reiss, no; Mr. Gerber, abst ' : (Approved -2-1.) 5. Administrative Request - 04-080ADM -Amendments to the Corridor Development District (CDD) Dann Bird explained that the Corridor District is located in the southeast portion of Dublin. It contains about 655 acres and is bounded by I-270, Sawmill Road, Riverside Drive, and the road fronting on Martin Road. Essentially, the purpose of the amendment to the Community Development District is to clarify existing regulations pertaining to the design of structures and ~~ ~. Dublin Planning and Zonin commission Minutes -November 4, 2004 Page 8 improvements. Currently, the general provisions of the City's Development Standards have been used to deal with architectural design and signage issues. This amendment will specify both architectural review and signage as key components to the review in the CDD District. The Commission in the past has consistently applied these and other standards to various developments within the districts. Since the ordinance was adopted in 1978, it has reviewed and approved such developments as LaScala and the Lowe's Home Improvement area. Wendy's Corporation is including these architectural and signage issues. Mr. Bird explained in terms of the Code, the two or three provisions of the Ordinance that are being changed are added design and signage; also, under the procedures referring to those elements. The Commission packets have the actual language for those additions. They refer to the consideration of design and on the next page, in terms of signing, a provision that relates to application of those standards. He said it is a rather simple and straightforward amendment to reaffirm what has been done since 1978. Mr. Gerber asked if anyone wished to speak to the application. There was no response. He said he had noticed in the minutes that a couple of Councilmember asked that the [CDD] application be forwarded for Commission review and comment. He explained that although the Clerk of Council takes very good minutes, it is not clear what concerns they were raising. He said it appeared to be an administrative clean up, and they Commission has been trying to reach this point for a very long time. Mr. Bird agreed that his statement was correct. Council did ask on this issue that, relative to signage, all the applicants within the district would use the same standards (i.e:, everyone would be treated the same). They also noted that the CDD District has :not been looked at for some time. He asked if there would be an opportunity to do that, in terms of expanding the geographical area, as the Comprehensive Plan is prepared, and bring it before the community and the Planning Commission. Mr. Gerber concluded that the expansion could be done in the Community Plan update. Ms. Boring stated that she was a little confused at the Council meeting, and she asked Ms. Wanner if she could clarify a few points, because of past history, which Mr. Bird would not know. She said a lot of times when the CDD comes up, it's been statements like "We don't want the signs to go anywhere else." She asked doesn't that address every time we have that kind of question, and isn't that why it came up. Mr. Bird responded that signage wasn't specifically mentioned within the current ordinance, but it was implied relative to the image of Dublin and all the components to site design, and that's why the signage phrase was being added. Ms. Boring said she gets confused between the CDD and the overlay for the Dublin Village Center. Ms. Wanner responded that was the a Corridor Review Text. Dublin Planning and Zonin commission Minutes -November 4, 2004 Page 9 Ms. Boring stated they want it in that text that the Commission had to review the signs all the time. She said this now says when you change your sign you have to come back to the Commission, no matter what. She asked if that prevented variances to the Board of Zoning Appeals, and did they always have to come back to the Commission for approval. Mr. Bird replied the intent was that it still would go by the Planning Commission, as part of their approval in the CDD. Mr. Gerber summarized that previously if an existing tenant's sign was not approved by the Commission, but the sign was approved by staff, then before they wouldn't have to come back to the Commission for a new sign, if it met the Code. He said now, all signage has to come to the Commission, and they would not be allowed to go to the Board of Zoning Appeals for variances. Mr. Gerber said everything stopped at the Commission level. Ms. Boring agreed that in her mind it was what they had been asking for many years. Ms. Reiss commented that under Procedures, Section 4, the very first sentence there talks about the Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the plan as to whether the following, and we've just added a condition, so that word three needs to change to four. Mr. Gerber made a motion to approve this Administrative Request because the recommended changes to the CDD Zoning Code will clarify the planning and Zoning Commission's role and responsibility in reviewing CDD proposals, and they will affirm the importance of architectural design, site layout, and signing as key elements to be evaluated in rendering decisions on development/redevelopment in the CDD. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ms. Reiss, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; Ms. Boring, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. (Approved 6-0.) Mr. Gerber adjourned the meeting at 7:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lois Willard, Acting Administrative Assistant Division of Planning ~} ~ . ~2 ~~ ter`" >~ v.-5{~ I~ p~ {l{ ~~ : C ll 8 i ;.F t .. }r v Y i. 1._ k. {, { k;~ ~: ~: ~" 6i~'. t=, y ~: !`` A}it ~2 } ~ [-- t 4. q~ ,~ ~ i ~_ .. C: ~. ~, t_` °. 2- ~: ~~ 8 ~ „VS{~, ~~ . $ F,+`e \ ~S -~:.s--' {,' ... y ' #h'. ~ i~ `r~( f `~ ~Y `S`.~~ ~ 2~~~~~ •~l~ 7' `^ExyP~ E *: j i k~ ,,~, -, F N~ .~: ~ -. '~'` . ~`~ ~~ dS r':; .~ s M ~b rr -:~- ~.~-'^: . ~a( 5 ~ ~. ,:,, - ~. y.. ,i~ ~ F,. ,~ ~~ ~ M ~ ,.~ " «~ ,~a }3 h ^Y ' .~~' x :. ' . k1_` '.~i~ .: y ^~4 +~ a , ~ a ' - alt: ~' ,{ _ }L 1 . 1)f y ~ k- t ~ y '1J. mot` '~- y~ •_w~ , _ / ~ Y ~ ~ ~ ` ,+tr ,. + r' rr -. Y _ i s', -,~: P ~: J. 1 § 153.115 CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. Table of Contents: ~: New portion of CDD amendment (A) Purpose (B) Jurisdictional boundaries (C) Permitted and conditional uses ~ (D) Development standards (1) Lot requirements (2) Site requirements (a) Structures (b) Traffic concept (c) Utilities (d) Parking layout (e) Landscaping (f) Plan conformance (g) Design (b) Sig~rage (E) Procedure (1) Permit required (2) Application required a-,~ (3) Plot plan required (4d) Planning and Zoning Commission review (subsection 4d added) (F) Appeal "~ (A) Purpose. The purpose of the Corridor Development is to provide overlay requirements to ensure that existing and anticipated corridor land uses and traffic improvements within the district will be developed in a manner that protects the health and safety of residents of the city and maintains the image of the city as a quality community. The importance of maintaining traffic flow and accessibility so as to encourage compatible land uses and to protect property values requires that special emphasis on traffic planning and frontage treatment be achieved through the use of a special district. (B) Jurisdictional boundaries. The Corridor Development District (CDD) shall be bounded by Sawmill Road on the east, Martin Road on the south, the Scioto River on the west and 1-270 on the north. (C) Permitted and conditional uses. (1) Permitted and conditional uses shall be consistent with the provisions of the zoning ordinance and the use districts as determined by the official zoning map and are not materially affected by this section provided that any nonresidential use within the Corridor Development District shall conform to this section. (2) Residential uses are exempted from conformance with this section. 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development >i~tri (D) Development standards. In general, a use of land or structure shall conform to the development standards of the zoning district requirements in force, however, the following additional development standards shall also apply for those lands within the CDD: (1) Lot requirements. (a) Minimum yard requirements. As otherwise listed in this chapter, except that in all cases, buildings shall be a minimum of 20 feet from all side and rear property lines. All pavement areas shall be a minimum of 15 feet from all side and rear property lines. (b) Maximum lot coverage. Structures, pedestrian areas, parking areas and other hard-surfaced or paved areas shall not cover more than 70% of the lot. (2) Site requirements. The application and development plan shall show the following: (a) Structures. All proposed structures shall be located, showing square footages, tenant types and expected entrance, service and pedestrian areas for the first phase of the development plan. Structures planned for subsequent phases shall be schematically indicated. (b) Traffic concept. All points of ingress and egress onto public roadways and the overall traffic distribution scheme shall be shown, indicating traffic flow patterns and traffic control points. The criteria that must be followed includes: 1. Combined curbcuts, especially for any uses that are incorporated in a commercial center; 2. Minimization of conflict points between auto traffic and pedestrian traffic to include adequate design and demarcation of pedestrian walkways from parking or driveway areas; 3. Service traffic separation from customer or commuter traffic; 4. Frontage service drives or other such improvements maybe required by the Planning and Zoning Commission if area traffic conditions warrant. (c) Utilities. The proposed provision of all utilities, storm drainage retention or detention, trash collection systems and the lighting system shall be specifically detailed. Trash containers shall be sufficiently screened to avoid nuisance. All litter shall be controlled on site. (d) Parking layout. A detailed parking layout must be shown to include the following: 1. Number of spaces indicated by total number of on-site spaces and to be summed by row; 2. Access points and expected movement through and between separate parking lot areas; 3. Expected pedestrian access routes from parking areas to structures. (e) Landscaping. All proposed site landscaping shall be indicated as to type and size of material to be used, proposed locations, mounding and other features. (f) Plan conformance. All development plans and traffic layouts shall be in general conformance to the recommendations of "The Sawmill 161 Quadrant Special Study" which constitutes the comprehensive plan for the Corridor Development District. (g) Design. The design of new- structures and of new' additions to existing sh•uctures, including new site improvements, shall take into account architectural style, general design, arrangement, texture, material and color so that. the image of Dublin is maintained as a quality community. Evaluation of the appearance of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its relationship to its surroundings. (h) Sig~zage. Sign material, shape, color and illumination shall be indicated and consistent with the Dublin Sign Code and other signage iii the area and shall maintain the image of Dublin as a quality cotnmunit~~. 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District (E) Procedure. (1) Permit required. A certificate of zoning compliance shall be required prior to issuance of a building permit. For affected properties within the CDD, a certificate of zoning compliance shall be issued only upon review and approval (matters deleted) of the required plan and applications. (2) Application required. Copies of an application provided by the municipality shall be filed with the Manager, which application shall be accompanied by copies of the proposed development plan, which shall comply with division (D)(2) above. Such copies shall be filed at least 15 days prior to the next regularly scheduled Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. (3) Plot plan required. The application shall be accompanied by copies of a plot plan drawn to an appropriate scale showing the following: (a) The boundaries and dimensions of the lot. (b) The size and location of existing and proposed structures. (c) The proposed use of all parts of the lot and structures, including accessways, walks, off-street parking and loading spaces, lighting and signage locations, screening, landscaping treatment and other such information required to demonstrate the development standards. (d) All reserve parcels and anticipated development phases. (e) The use of land and location of structures on adjacent property. (4) Planning and Zoning Commission review. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the plan as to whether the following three conditions are met: (a) The proposed uses are permitted uses as so specified by the zoning in force for the subject land. (b) The proposed development is in accord with the Sawmill 161 Quadrant Plan and other appropriate plans for the area. (c) The proposed development will be in keeping with the existing and/or proposed land use character and the physical development potential of the area. (d) The proposed development meets or exceeds the development standards set forth in Section 153.115(D) of the Dublin Codified Ordinances. (5) Planning and Zoning Commission action. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall make recommendations, within 30 days, approving, disapproving or approving with modifications the plan and accompanying documents. Such modification may be a limitation on the extent or intensity of development, a requirement for additional screening by fence or landscaping, a change in the method or plan for lighting, control of access or other conditions of development as maybe required. Each applicant shall be notified of the reason for disapproval or modification along with the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission notifying them of such action. (6) Council action. Council may, within 30 days, review the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission concerning the application and either adopt and approve, disapprove or approve with the same or different modifications the proposed application. If Council fails to act within such 30-day period, the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission shall become final. (7) Issuance of certificate. If the application is approved, or approved with modifications, and the recommended modifications are completed within 14 days, a certificate of zoning compliance shall be issued. (F) Appeal. Any applicant whose application herein is not approved (matters deleted) or any applicant whose application herein is approved subject to modifications in accordance with division (E)(5) above, may appeal to the denial of the certificate of zoning compliance to the Board of Zoning Appeals in accordance with the provisions of § 153.235. 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development Distric"`~'~ RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ___ Minutes of Dublin City Councl Meeting_ CODE AMENDMENT Ordinance 69-04 Amending the Development Standards and Approval Criteria in Section 153.115 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning Code) -Corridor Development District. Vice Mayor Lecklider introduced the ordinance. Mr. Bird stated that this ordinance provides clarification of existing regulations regarding design, site improvement and signage within the Corridor Development District (COD). The regulations for the. Corridor Development District were written in 1978. This amendment would be referred to the Planning Commission for review. Following their review, the ordinance would return to City Council for a second reading and public hearing. Ms. Salay stated that she recalls some issues in enforcing CDD guidelines that occurred when she served on the Planning Commission. Have there been recent issues that have indicated a need to clarify the guidelines? She would view the ordinance as an opportunity to "tighten" the guidelines more than the ordinance proposes. Mr. Bird responded that, recently, some developers have raised questions about the CDD regulations. Ms. Readler stated that in the past Legal has used the general provisions of the City's development standards as authority to took at architectural design and certain signage components. While a more thorough review can be undertaken for the entire Corridor Development District, this legislation would clarify the regulations regarding design, site layout and signage. Ms. Salay stated that this would put the CDD review at a midpoint between the Zoning Code, which has more lenient guidelines and the PUD regulations, which are more discretionary. Ms. Readler responded that CDD regulations provide an additional layer of review. This amendment will clarify that review of architectural design and signage is a component of the CDD review. Mr. Keenan inquired about the timing of this amendment. Would it apply to those applications currently under preliminary review by staff? Mr. Bird indicated that it would. Vice Mayor Lecklider inquired why the City's general regulations regarding signage would not be applicable in Corridor Development Districts. Why is an additional ordinance necessary? Ms. Readler stated that in recent weeks, the City has experienced challenges regarding the Planning Commission's right to include signage in a CDD review. The argument is that their signage must comply with the Dublin sign code, and nothing more. This amendment clarifies that in addition to compliance with the City s signage regulations, a review of the signage package will be part of the CDD review. Vice Mayor Lecklider stated that this ordinance would then provide P&Z with discretionary review over and above the basic requirements of the current Code. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher stated that currently, even without this ordinance, the applicant must comply with Dublin's sign code. What does this ordinance achieve? 04-480ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Meetin --g--- Ms. Brautigam responded that it requires the applicant to indicate the signage plans at the outset. If the applicant should agree to something more strict than the general sign code, the applicant could not come back later with a different plan that may still comply with general signage regulations. It is the "indicate" requirement that is new. Mr. McCash inquired about the scenario in which a present tenant in an existing building in a CDD desires to install a new sign. Could they apply for a sign permit for a new sign that meets Dublin's sign code, or must they go through a CDD review first? This language would seem to indicate the latter. Would it be possible for an applicant to agree to one signage plan as part of the COD review, then 30 days later, apply for a sign permit and erect a sign substantially different from what was approved by P&Z? Mr. Bird responded that in a CDD review, a package is approved, which relates to architectural design, site layout and signage. If any part of that package were proposed for change, it would require P&Z approval. . Mr. McCash responded that if ii were an existing tenant in an existing building whose sign was not approved as part of a CDD, they would not be required to do so. That creates a situation in which one business would be treated differently than another. Ms. Brautigam responded that is exactly the issue. Existing buildings would not be required to undergo a CDD review for a new sign. If the current sign code is not adequate to handle such situations, it should also be amended. If it is adequate, but the City desires that tenants of existing buildings undergo a CDD review for a change in signage, then the Planning Commission would need to modify the language in this ordinance referring to City Council. Mr. McCash stated that it would not be appropriate to put a new development in a CDD at a disadvantage due to a timing issue. Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher requested that Planning staff forward a copy of the minutes reflecting Council's concerns to the Planning Commission for their review of this ordinance. Mr. McCash stated chat the CDD was established in the late 1970's. At that time, it was an isolated location on the western edge of development. Previously, Council has discussed extending the Corridor Development District (CDD) to include other areas along SR 161/US 33 and north of 1-270. This addresses straight-zoned districts. There are many straight-zoned districts along SR 161, e.g., the former Chi Chi's site. He inquired if it would be strategic to consider expanding the CDD to include some of the other areas along the major east-west connector through Dublin. Mr. Bird stated that the CDD is an overlay district and it would be appropriate to provide the same type evaluation for those other areas. Mr. McCash stated that Council previously identified a desire to do so, but did not assign it as a high priority. Pefiaps the Planning Commission could discuss a possible expansion of the CDD. Ms. Brautigam noted that it would be appropriate to include that topic in the Community Plan update. If the Community Plan review identifies expansion of the CDD as a desirable change, the City could begin the process. 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ___ _ . . _ _ _ Minutes of - Dublin City Council _ ____ Meeting _ Mr. McCash stated that it is essential not to delay too long, as there is significant development activity along that corridor. The City should take advantage of the opportunity for a CDD review. Vice Mayor Lecklider moved to refer the ordinance to the Planning and Zoning Commission for review. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mayor Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. McCash, yes; Vice Mayor Lecklider, yes. ECONOMIC VELOPMENT AGRE ENT Ordinance -04 Authori ' g the City Manager Enter into an Econ is Development Agree ent with Battelle Me orial Institute, and Glaring an Emergen Ms. alay introduced the o finance. . McDaniel stated that attelle Memorial sere government and find try in eveloping new techn ogles and products. ttelle has secured a research and development c tract and desires to r Gate 25 jobs to Dubli .rom within the region, as well a dd approximately 55 w jobs within the ne o years. Battelle has to atively selected Dubli or its location, pendi approval of this agreement, the City's available ilding space and zoni coincides with Battelle's eeds. The details oft City's offer are provi din the staff report. will be a second read' g/public hearing at th ctober 18 Council a request for passa y emergency. ~ BID ACCEPT, Ordinance 71-04 umber corrected fro 6-04) Accepting the owesUBest Bid fort Hayden Run Retai g Wall Repair Project, an eclaring an Emerge y. Ms. Salay ' troduced the ordinan Mr. Ha ersmith stated that t ' is a repair project th Council has discuss on sever occasions. The faili stone veneer on the aining wall that runs ong th orth side of Hayden n Road within Dublin' corporation limits will e oved and replaced h a new stone venee The new veneer wo replicate that which has been ed successfully on s ral of Dublin's bridg and elsewhere through t Dublin. Staff reque s passage by emerg cy so that the repairs can com ence immediately. Ms. Salay mo d to dispense with th public hearing and tr this as emergency legislation. Vice Ma r Lecklider seconded emotion. Vote the motion: Mr. Rei ,yes; Mr. Keenan, y ,Mayor Chinnici-Zuer er, yes• s. Salay, yes; Mr. M ash, yes; Vice Mayor ecklider, yes. V eon the Ordinance: r. McCash, yes; Mr. enan, yes; Vice May ecklider es; Mr. Reiner, yes; . Salay, yes; Mayor ~nnici-Zuercher, yes. .~ UTILITY EAS ENT Resolution -04 i~ Authorii g the City Manager Execute an Easeme with Columbia Gas f ~~ Ohio, c. fora 20-Foot Wid asement along Bra Road, in the Parkl d of We ury, Phase 3, Secti 1, for System Impr ements. i~ V' Mayor Lecklider intr uced the resolution. ;' r. Hammersmith stat that the details are i uded in the staff rep .Staff recommends passa Vice Mayor Leckl' r inquired if staff anti ' ated this action. Mr. Hammers responded that if C mbia Gas had antici ed the need for l the easeme hey would have com unicated it to staff, a staff would have 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District RECORD OF ORDINANCES Oa~v.n l,.~al fllmk. 6w•. Orzlixaruc No 69-04 Fmn N... tM+7 P~+~scd . Zo AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND APPROVAL CRITERIA IN SECTION 153.115 OF THE DUBLIN CODIFIED ORDINANCES (ZONING CODE) - CORRIDORDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WHEREAS, it is necessary from time to time to amend the Code in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Dublin; and WHEREAS, Section 153.115 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances sets forth the application procedures and standard of review for corridor development district approval; and WHEREAS, the City would like to clarify the applicability of a design component to the approval criteria for corridor development district applications; and WHEREAS, the City desires to do this in order to ensure that all buildings and structures constructed or modified in the Comdor Development District are consistent with the surrounding commercial facilities and reflect Dublin's architectural character, and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Ordinance on and recommends the adoption of the Ordinance because it serves to implement City Council objectives and the Community Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T ORDAINED by Council of the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, _ of the elected members concurring that: Section 1. Section 153.115(D)(2)(g) is hereby created and shall provide as follows: (g) Design. The design of new structures and of new additions to existing structures, including new site improvements, shall take into account architectural style, general design, arrangement, texture, material and color so that the image of Dublin is maintained as a quality community. Evaluation of the appearance of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its relationship to its surroundings. Section 2. Section 153.115(D)(2)(h) is hereby created and shall provide as follows: (h) Signage. Sign material, shape, color and illumination shall be indicated and consistent with the Dublin Sign Code and other signage in the area and shall maintain the image of Dublin as a quality community. Section 3. Section 153.115(E)(4)(d) is hereby created and shall provide as follows: (d) The proposed development meets or exceeds the development standards set forth in Section 153.115(D) of the Dublin Codified Ordinances. Section 4. This Ordinance shall take effect on the earliest date provided by law. Passed this day of , 2004. Mayor -Presiding Officer Attest: Clerk of Counci 04-O80ADM Sponsor: Division of Planning Amendments to the Corridor Development District CITY OF DUBLIN TO: FROM: DATE: INITIATED BY: Department of Development Division of Planning 5800 Shier-Rings Road • Dublin, Ohio 43016 Phone: 614-410-4600 • Fax: 614-410-4747 Members of Dublin City Council Jane S. Brautigam, City Manage~,~,,,"_,, $ . (~j~,,o ~,,,,,,~ September 28, 2¢04 Daniel D. Bird, FAICP, Planning Director /'~ ~' ~ Memo RE: Ordinance 69-04 Corridor Development District Amendment to Development Standard and Approval Criteria -Section 153.115 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances (Zoning Code) SUMMARY: The purpose of the proposed amendment to the Corridor Development District (CDD) development standards is to clarify existing regulations with regard to the design of structures and site improvements, as well as signage. The simple and straightforward amendment will affirm the importance of architectural design, site layout and signing as significant factors to be considered by the Planning Commission in reviewing proposed development/redevelopment in the CDD. BACKGROUND: The CDD was established in 1978 as a special district covering the geographic area bounded by I-270 on the north, Sawmill Road on the east, Martin Road on the south and Scioto River on the west. (See map.) The purpose of the special district is: "...to provide overlay requirements to ensure that existing and anticipated corridor land uses and traffic improvements within the district will be developed in a manner that protects the health and safety of residents of Dublin and maintains the image of Dublin as a quality community." (emphasis added) The Planning Commission has reviewed and rendered decisions within the CDD over the years based on three conditions being met: 1. The proposed uses are permitted as so specified by the zoning district in force for the subject land 2. The proposed development is in accord with the Sawmill 161 Quadrant Plan and other appropriate plans for the area. Memo to City Council Members Re: Ord. 69-04 -Corridor Development District Amendment September 28, 2004 -Page Two 3. The proposed development will be in keeping with the existing and or proposed land use character and the physical development potential of the area. Some notable examples of development reviewed under the CDD overlay standards include Wendy's Corporate Headquarters, La Scala Restaurant, and Lowe's Home Improvement Center. The total acreage of the CDD is 655 acres of which 75 percent (495 acres) of the land is currently developed. RECOMMENDATION: The ordinance is in first reading. Second reading/public hearing will be scheduled upon receipt of recommendation from the Planning & Zoning Commission. KEY PLAN CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT --. i l 1 ~ 1~ 1 ~ _. ~ -~ ~' lT ~ ~ -i -~ - _ b - ~ r~ ___ Ir- ~ ~ I --~ J ~ , L{ER RD~~_ -L -- -._ -'_ .~_. .~ ~C i, , ~_ ~ ~- ~ 1 ~ g - ~1 ~ -_-~ } j~ - __.~_~ fir,' J i ^!- ~ L ~ .,. ._._-_- ~,~ [ y R11tJ~ ~ ~r ~~2~ ~ ~ I~ I i i Ji~~ - ~ _ ;'~ ~--n~ ~ ~_ - - ,rely-, ~ ~` , I i ! 7 ~ ,, i ~ ,i<<I ~- !I~ ~ ~ I O i _ 1 .. ~ ~=\' f [ N ' h ~ ~-~~__ -~'~ ~ r--~ ~ ~ 1 ~j ~~L~{ ~ ~S~ it ~ ~~~ ITT?- -r U Q ~' _- Y ~ i ~+i I ~ _.-rL'16LYrM1~A~~}".T E- ._~~__~~~, '~ 4' 1 4i r'2 ~~~ T~}~[~' A¢•TIN1Fl~~>~~p(:~~ i ~ ~ I ~(, ~ i ar~W ~- ; , ` ~r2 ' L~ ~ ~,' a z. r~ ~~ ~~ rr {{ ~y~T1T~ - I -iQr a r r: ~'68.:~ 4~is. .:, r}'`}~i~ ~ ~ ..~ is Sawmill Road / SR161 Study 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District } ~ .{ .~ _ 7 ~ A 7 } W Cs O ~ ( ~ W O ~ ~ ~ U .-1 1 M •7 7 G W wz .c ~ E L to O O Oct ~ w G 'O ~ m 3 H 'p W O C. V N f+ T (L A j ~ ~-~ ~-1 .N N N N N ~ ~ 3 W u H ~ ~ W G i a o c c. .~t . v s ~ I z t -~ o u .1 f-3 O t0 ~•' O u N ~ ~ X ` ! H z i o c ~- f-. - a N :i ' _ ::: ~ C:. ~ ..~ V w w W v b ~ ~ z ~- w ~ ~ =~• x % w ro a c =~ .7 - J ~ •- n C~~J s~ ~~_} c~ ~' r `- ~ i- ~. 'L~ ~ 04-080ADM t_ ~ Amendments to the . ~:~-%I Corridor Development District + U 1 I i 1 1 1 f .. ^ :J a :J 'f. :J G •r• :~ •r. ~ - ~ is :q 1 N ~0 1 u N N W •~ _ ••• .. u W •O ~ N X u H M L E - C :J U G N O 1~ U O u H ••i u t-~ J N •.1 N u N u N N . :~ w r_ v, N N N 'o G o u t In y r. r- N c3 G .O Iq •ri N N .-t •ri ~p of an E v o u .~ H o u v m .•+ 3 E N G _ C7 N G a o ~: r. i c~ 0 -`~ .Ji u o> Ica N rJ u u u E a w c~a o .Ti N ••i •: +1 H G N F F fI1 N O F N G N n', •' u u N •••1 A u u H .-1 0.N N U •O M> 3 ~•+ u N N 3 N •V A H rl •ri U .S •.1 •O •O O N C u N F O G u t V H N rl C H o. of C C 3 +-~ ••+ N ~ 3 -~i tNL G o y ~ N0. s E u u u •o~o d O O N w H 0 3 '+ N o a •:i H N 7 H •7 H G^. 7 N ri •,i H t u o 1n t o G A :t r, •n -+ w .C v ~ u .-i .--1 3 w o0 0 8 •~ U C u 10 Vl N O w •rl •~+ u J 1. ~ G l 0 'M H IrJ N u b N W v >/ c cl 3 U o..-i •p •• N co v rn .-+ a u> N N 0. 0. O •-i C C N •.•i L> O u W 'O ~0 N U A •.~ N H N O •ri 7 N N ~S N H C +i U •rl ~i •.i -- '• N N G M N U H G1. N U v ^ r J V F o X u F N N G G .. ...^. :C ~~ - •.~ C.^. •.i Sa C! E H •-1 a G, CD N O G C ^1 u+ G G N C "V •r1 N 7 G G .-i •ri G ••a ~ r W w •.i •.1 In 3 .G u N w -.+ u .+ .i •.. r• •a ~ •.+ c N 3 ••+ a+ O G L m a o E u •~ u ~ 1- t7 N N +i G j L •~• q N .-1 O O O N L C Q 7 G~ .G W N G 1 N u G I ~ N H C 7 N O G O u N 0 N N u N w W N 7 t CO tl ~ O G H U rl d O 0. •p0 G w l A B u y L 0 •• O c0 H C E H W W -umo0ioaoawa a•o co N o •° `° ~ tdaf uH I c iha rroo~ dv N N w O U fn u O N G N W 00 L •O N N H H fq b v1 d G E6 -••1 O u w ~ ro '{ mo ~ d G `~ o a u a a i ~ . •. + •' + O W ~ G H N N A C b N W A N W o G.G o w o •.+ H o a G u N O O L y u oo W a C b F W H ~ E u E M N H N 'O rl O F O M •O u ~ ~ N 6 ~ O N w N 7 W N G . -1 + ,+ - N O '-1 O G H J t N G tq •.d G C H N O W G u o G H •. i U u .,i -1 •r•1 Iq . 10 E C N N N W G O L M G +~ d M~ F Yi rl •rl 0.+•1 w •.i C 0. H N H N u ,G H 8 •O •~ N •.~ d N .C 'O v1 aJ H O N +i b U H .-( U u b G N w ri a N A H N b ~- O N O N 0. 0 7 N F W C O' ,Z $ N H L N L A 0. u o t0 u v G u +i ~ N o ~ c o o H i a + o a . c o . - H G R' u U aJ rl L u L rl N l~ ~••~ ^O J'~J rnO ~-1 r~ -----, r.. _. :.- ~~ ;---_~ 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District 1 I '~` >" i = '¢= : s: ~ ~< 1 ' i r~ .~, :~'~ ~ ~, ~ C r, Cu 0: t! 1 U t u C 1 N 01 H r/ l+ •C .--1 U •.i CO C U •rl N rl 'p d 00 d r C q 0.u -.o •C H C 1. •.a w .G C ro N N .Y C t7 ~ K ~..:',~: ' :.i •.+ :+ F. ro u O •~i O L w .u O 7 N 7 6 H C C Y u u ^ C! u a 0. u 3 ro q N o• >, 1+ •rl o ro ro d ` ; :~ u 3 •~+ o N o 0. U t u .-~ q ro al 3 6 rt .c :+ c v. u C! V •.a :1 > u t+ S+ O u 'O u u ro F N '-i u rt t+ d N ` ~ :J 'i N E 3 N Q1 d u •G N ro .C u .G ro t~ ro 7 t H N b :. ~ ~ ~'~ u w O) N ro O C w u •r1 H C ro U u u ro -rl C C q Vf 7 1 O ~ O . ~ + . c w E d OG o 0 3 0 7 i •. tL 'O >. • ' ~$ roW Ow u CdCrl «.-~ `U O HL u •ri O • O i. ri tJ r H N U GI O u ^i a.' U C b 00 b .] u oo .:'_ i +• c Cl .-~ E>> ro -.i q •p t+ •n t+ rl u u ro N c d ro b : u C .•+ CJ 4:.i r9 C •.1 ro O •.i N c u u 0 w d b C b C rl u '~ + -• L O q- « 7 L v q~ u E C E w ro -. ro -r1 t C ro •O •.i v 3 w -. O C o0.O q ro C T d ro . w w ro ~ ro w ro a -.+ w w w eo c .-~ a, u~ c u• i 3 >; L: •.+ C :~ O T 00 .-. to N E b >.+ u F r1 G b ro C 0 _ - r_ v7 s. :. .-~ C tl - u u 0. -.+ -+ u u ro •.~ C ri O -• 0. ro Q - . r O r, M u ro .L c b C Q O N q C u - O CJ O E C. U L u 0 ~+ C ro ro N 0 .C 1+ N O N -i O7 • l I i :. ~ti i! iQ r T >1 r ^ L L •rl Cl C) U -r1 O q U vl U i. l CJ L L X .-1 O 'G p J W :: r O q u N - U N 1+ O L •rl >. U •.a N C •rl d 1J M .-i W .C 11 d c ro F ro d H W d '+k ~~ W u u ,,,~ :J d 'O u b b ~O •,~ u H A YI U C d d F N U u C N b d .-i C N 7 N 1+ P. i+ W N f. _ O •^i C b ro ~ C ~1 C! U 'ri N N M N ro r1 ~ b l.i U ro N O) O O ro -.i N 'O ~ E rl f.. > -ri rl Gl a U +i C H C .G L W H Uri O d .. :J L C 1+ r, 4 x O u C •O u N g ro o N N C P. ? u ' 0 7 U J L f~ U N Ol 7 Ol W E >> N N q ro CO C J C S •r~ U N C N ro t 0 ro G ?+ w 0. •O N C u C~ .._• ,'-:a T - ^' .: C ro l U C4' O N W O N 7 N L O N `rl C ~ i , .- .- > -, J i. •.+ Y H u N d •ri rl 01 G 'rl C d u ^ C : ~ - •' ~ •' q GJ > L L OU d H Tf >> ro L •ri N N .qC `:?a : j . t_ ^,; u G "• r ~ .•-1 CJ U N a~ ro ro C C> H d b M Uri d -.~ _ _ , ~ •'i •j .1 •U a rl rl F+ •rl q F .-~ ro +i d ro u C 7 C .o ,O x N ^~ ',' -" 7 t. u 'q ro O' -.d .-1 ro u 7 -. C •C7 C N ro 7 O W W O •ri U d E U' .--1 N r1 U •t7 C u y ~•3 L W Q L 7 _ ' .-i L U L CJ U C .--1 rt 7J ro ro •O C •.d N N C H ;) •a . ~ ^ C •~ O 7 U .~ L ro x g ti w ..1 •ri 7 .-/ C ro t~ W d O w 7 ro ro v_ C :. _ r, H v1 cl u E o 3 u v a q ti+ o o t>: ++ o E u> t\ f~ 1(; ~ ±.~+ .. ~: ~; } `~ l;~ . ::~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ . - - . ~ ~~ •~~ .r. ~~ Cl0 ; u ~ 04-OSOADM O ~ ~ Amendments to the ment District idor Develo C _, _ p orr f ~~~ ..... i ~ "~ ~~ 1 ~ ~..~ ~_ 04-080ADM Amendments to the " Corridor Development District ' ;=' =~- ;~. 1 [ n ~~ j ; =.:•j 4 • ~- .r' .. < ~ ~. ~ G A `:~,. ~ ,~ ~' _ . H •.'. L - U 1 C •~ '~-• u N O • u 4: ~: v J T N C O VI D •rl 1 •O ~ . ~+ ~ s N r, CI rJ :-I CI G t cD 1. C u ff{{~1 G I T J '7 .•+ C~ :J O C -, U J u 1 .C F u t+ N O 6 M M •p L .( ~: •.~ 3 U -• 7 ."- Cr ~C G u VI 0..--I C/ •O •r/ a! ? 4+ 7 G E :.~ U O~ 1+ •~ ^ •.~ C vl ~O A C u LI N N O L C1 0 C = C 1- a' N J N G +/ ,C .-1 E •r~l U l0 .C C .C N •rl a.~ ~ ~• C O ~-• .= •J C N O .C .C N 7 •C N N u }~ U G H ~~ '%: .: .- C1 O u •-+ , CI ++ U u 1+ Cl C G L+ d •rl O N O 1+ -: a •f• U u •rl •a C) u b G U C, U •C •.i t N ~. _ .: .:: w c o v •.+ •= 3 G~ u .~ o o G 3 +J u >. •~ .y, u c ~ u •cs 3 o m 7 u o o N q 3+ u J :. :_~ IA 7 U •D Y O a C1 0 tJi OI U N U w ~ 1+ G- .;;. :.+ ~:- L.-~ J .: i_ L C G r: G :+ t+ U b .--i E 1J O O U N Q7 -?`G - ^~ ..: •-+ •.i - ~ ti U r O O e0 C7 00 N W Cl l~ G .•1 CIA N ~ ~ _ _ c: r~ = ~ > U G '•-1 3 C u ,C O .--I Cl d d /+ •C7 '- '. La i _ ••: ••./ •.r _S 'J. Vl L la V •rl N 11 .ei N N U Sa 'G A J. E d CD w ~ fll v `*~. u~ U r N •.~ U +! ti L 7 O L L •ri .-1 O L y L '!7 7 3 +J a .-~ u to cn O L .•-I 7 1+ O N u •d u III v _ L C: O - . J G •.1 C •rl O •*~ N 3 W O 0. W U •r1 1 - C. :f: u O :1 u .-. •.1 .] C/ .C N N d X L ro C U d •O C c1 C/ ~ ~ 0. O PC E J 7~ 61 3 •O > W u N H N C H 1+ •C t . .^. •J. •.+ C.. O 7 CI A N N lC O CI L y N ~,' IA l+ ro CI L U L .. ~:. ' .-1 U CI O u k O L E O vi .C d .O H O +J 00 O d d ,C aJ rl N :l: L .-a C L •O N CI N 7 L d r•i L•• q M 7 3 U N ro L O ••+ O r; U CO d d ro u .~ u 00 •G •,~ L u r-1 O~ 3. 3 ++ ~ < 1.+ Cl u> C aJ .~ G E L N N b .-1 C u N C W IU 0.W 0 •-1 .^_ cr. ;J O q .~ O 1+ >, W G •.i w O OD W O r•1 tll -+ G .-1 N u ~ u •O ~ u •.i W u vl u CO 3 0 .•~ - 10 0 1+ 7 8 0 b •.•1 u y L U ^' r, v E v w G C) .-~ d b L w U N gg w al a d d G -+ Z C :1 ~ N +1 'O E b N W C +~ N ,C L 7 L >~ U L O 'U N u N O q •rl l+ d L O O C 3 M N C7• Y .C U ~• :s u `n ~ Q aw O v ~ W ' G - - r u ¢i u • ~ ~1 m w w E w m x d q •r + ~ C •. 3 7 7 O t+ :y •Jp •p O u W 0. U CI cp C r^I 0. -+ •Cf .'~ 1J t W .C R' tl -• c u r o u r, •-• .~ ul -.-I .-i -,-t E N N .~ 3 o W~ W u 3 •.~ :^. o o u c~ s ~0 4. w E +J d •ri o .-•I G g 3 N O - w -•~ ~ G =+ .-1 C b L u G O W O N L EE }a N 'p •{y L f~ t0 N w :J /: O '^ O •~ G C H +'~ td U G u$ N~ N u g 7 U N CI CI N •.-. O .•-1 C vl N ~ r7 r1 O Cl N 1. d O r7 td q/ C/ L 7 O .i d 1 N tl) 1+ v C C'1 i •.+ 4+ •~ ••-+ f+ u u E u 1.. U 0.N C 't7 H U t+ U N H q? +d i ;~: i. _. ~ .: s~.~. i ~/ `~ 1~ ~, v~ • - '~ •. .. ~ . ~ i tw: 04-O8OADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District ~r_.»~ ' ~~ C"' f~ .. a;. ~. y .-~~ raa~a r• K.: ae~ G'!:F:J1~z3 F"~\a-•"•e Ss':u3~1 ~vi~_'aZS? ~u'f'.lai3 ~fcl Ci~315F1 %1 Ifi3 .~.1 wr, eaacnsa tra~,ms'~ w~MEfl IeeeslxY~ ~ ~ ~II•iKl r ,ry..~r~ ~ ~ 'tr: • • _. _ ..- - ' ~ t ~, _ _._~r---~:.~~~ ~` ~ii it ~we-_: ,~- ~~ ~ _~t l ~.; . - . -~~+'..~.. ~ _V : ? . ~ ~ ~ ~\ t--- `-~_--mot-'. ~'7~~`. ~ ~ ~ tl { y,...~.....,-...mow _K ~'+ ~ •• -`"~::i • - - - r ^ ~ :. ~: 'r. 1 ... - 'f ~ ~•'t ~~~~ F. - ,~; Gam: ~_1 --•:~° i ._ of _ lf~iw wA fi!':11~ ~ .,. .~ R. ~r .~ ,. 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District i. • .~. u 1 '-1 O .C 1 N 31 -~'< '~ C i. F u d 7 ? -. a, rv o •.+ N u ro o0 1 1a v u .~ 1 >, to i+ Qt L L .. U q -+ •.-1 >+ ,C C N O U •C d !' :y ro o0 •rl O u p u .••+ n > O u F W w d ,y O N .-+ 3 .e a,, a al ro x + , _ O tr u$ u u N W U N U O N .C W +i M C ` ' _ - -s,':. q O CJ L U C E 7 N 11 H M N iJ W f.. G Y1 -• G +~ •.a .^. O •-1 .-~ C O .D ro r1 .C X La W •rl N - , 3 c> u o u .~ .O G/ C1 U C1 N d ro u y y 1. al E >. ~~ ~) J: U Ci u C ro ri ri .C C E VI E 01 L v .C O> Q u W E c; [. s. o o q .-1 u v C N ro 0 00 ~ w 3 w rt o Ir C .: C: 0.u •rl U T N ro U O ro N c,7 N >, N u r1 ,X N : O V .+ .-•1 u l+ O N L. L u .-i E u of or aG •ri d C ro ~ _ - ~•+ u L C N N w -. 7 ro u •n M U N .-i C vi L N 1+ N> vi ^ a, . - -r ,. - u •,~ ro o a v> ro ro ro •.~ o> a+ w o o d .-1 C a 3 : =:: , :~ > C c~ C .-~ ~ u ro C N > H rl •C 3 a b r1 ' L c .c coy c: ~ v w s .-i ,-1 u o u m eo .-! j •:•+ - O o x .~ u •.-+ u u C c> >. q u .~ v> •.ti u E N C .o =. _ O < w N r1 u O w r-1 f. r1 O .i G N W ro N ro 0 7 . FE 7 ., O u ro u 0 >> .C 3 0 W C r. U N W 1. q ; . Q^ r. u d f+ u - O U •ry •O 3 N u C W N •O u :J :J _ {.+ 1'} Vf N O QI N p N N W N N ro 7 d N O ^ C• ~+ .-! 1+ V 0 0. u 0 lr E U N ro .C O O .C W u u u= ~ ;; r. E: w C - •.~ N U u N w C •O U roc - . U +.. ~: O •ri N M '• •-: t+ :J L :, ~'1 2 ~-' H O •O 4. W U 7 d H ro u N C - L C N •dl J L ro L CJ N O C N 'G O .-1 O ro ?C ~' • -~ :~ .-i O aC !, J J ;-. •rl ro C 00 G w 1+ U ^ : -J _ .-~ tJ .~ ^ .G •O N 1+ N u •.-1 C ~J OD 0. u N ,~ .-. _ E > O C H N +-+ O O C N F +1 W ro - ~ " ;~ N_ :q u .[~ N 0.u C N •p .D u _ _ v ' -.-1 ~ u C 'J :• •.~ N .C L M a CJ •rl C q •ri 0. •rl Cl O .••1 U l+ L , ti .. ..: j • _ = = u u U r .--+ r„ O 7 G r-1 .•-t r-1 M ? b •.~ 3i; u t' u 3 J .~ f+ t+ N U g H N ro A N O •O q u r . ~ J ~ •" - .. . . : u - ~+ O ••-+ g C 7 u u -.1 0. 4f W L a •,..1 7 .C C a G =_ w C •-+ r V ' ~ ~. -~ _ J : C W V) + 3 J --. N N> O 1+ u u C N N N ro O' U `' •' . ~~._J~ . r_-- _. ~ r-- - ~----~ (4~ ~~---; t;= _~ ~~ _~ -.~ •i ;~` O ~~ C -~ ~% _..7 ~ r-- ~.'__~ r-~ 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District ~:. ----I cn „.~ ~,,~ ~"° ~~ ~ /~~~,y.,',.y' /~~ ~ r 1 ~, 1~' ' 1 J1~~ 'I i_ i.r i . [. .. L i i II) ,E - ~:~ ~ z i. Ftt F. ~. ~- ,•. t ~ur• .,..~s~~:teY~BC'lsur_~:i`t:.,its::ia~_.aas:iin_i!ns~;4~fi.'.- .._... .. ...;x ~:-_ .l P: III ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~---~-~:.T=-~-~~1-- ~'~j E3~~a-~f.. .._ ~~ 1 ~ ~ . ~•~ ~.:..~~__.. ~ _ _ ~~-- ' ~ _~`'~ ~~~ off, ^'' . 1 ~ .E ~ 1 ~ rte. : \ '~" ~= ---T~~ t y ~' ~.~-;. ~~ r:.`•. :'-.«-.. • u. -c •~.:y ._ '1 -• t:J n ,-~-' ~~- 'i-~._._-....i re _ ._ i :-- .. --- - -LI - r 'I -~_~U ~.. .}S '_~~'~---- ~~ y ~ a' .- ~' ~ • -~ 1 +~ Q ~~ r; _~%' r ~'_~ o~~.~/Yl . _~~= ° . i-- ,:, _. ,t, ._ ~O P~ W W ~~ ~~- `+, 4~ J~..-Z Q~ w. ~~ ... is ~ ~ xR~`---.. ~• 1 ~ ;? ~ ~: r.~,• - "+ ~• • --~`'``. 04-080ADM l Amendments to the - ~~ Corridor Development District ~ 0. ~ u +-+ 7 ld sJ O H C. V O U O d W .. U G1 H .-7 f1 N M '.~ L a .. y E W W b Y! 0 b H ~ / ti O r d N O N ,Y O L: H N N vd .-1 ,tl •; .G 'O N L, 7 0.L e •.. : L F .-~ t. .J :r c: ~ .- i U 7~ U vl M q o u d d g o w e ;~ s . ^ o wcwo H.-~aru aHmw.-~.au hc~ t° n N w > 7 a d d a v ar o i ~ v • t t i .--r w . , ~ c , n c ' N ^` ~ u °° o o >, eo m R 7 ..i 1 -a °3 i . . L G Ci :+ 'O . i E . . a C) L vOj F E C W N L M W N J W N~ . J 3 t~• ~ .-~ : y U S..-i J Y L C 'O .C O •r1 H ~ L A d "" u u r..- ; _ ,o ten .c > N C p u a q 3 +J w d a, 7 E •o c ~ •~ J L ~ 00 al vi .-{ ~ q [Y N 4 ~ E ~ C 0. ~ •~ ~ ~. . U ^ GC U ~ . O O ~ a ue ^ =+ " :. 7 r u H 0 7 u u ,t u d 3 + + O f + > R. eJ d s . q U N 00 H H rl e-1 iJ O y u 00 L ~ .~ -'• : ^ ~ ^ ~. `O' u ~ b Op O) ,--1 M vl aJ N N H y u • ' "% • - r :! •: ' 7 c .. '~ : • • r c . '- J , O G ri N M L O H G W W u tJ ,., H d O a.t H X Vf .-i w ' :>'~,y~ _ ... c ~ _' _ .^. u a+ .--1 u . .~ of u .-~ v m w a o H E >> N N G W H G r-i 7 0.L •O qi H"i L M 'O ,7 3 u C aJ L+ N fa cJ :q a a+ Gl U r-f T X N N ~ ~ 'U ? 1, ql aJ E ~ :. _ ~. L b ul U O V! L q O q N N u ' ' O H 0. 'O F> G N .C W a J T O b M o u E o H s U q E o a L: h u .-t N c t • i , ~ N . C w ro ~p w o a ? . .-, •a a ti-+ 3 a 3 o w u aI ~ E w a v u Sa :~ . ,~ 0 f , .~ .: ~. ~• ~~ ~J~ ~ '~ ~~i . 04-080ADM Amendments to the ~~ O Corridor Development District ~. ~°' [:..J ~ [~„~ ~: L.i.. s_ r.. :€~ r ~. e~ .~ ~'i~ - ~ r i t ; ,.1 r C~ ~V ~... '1.~- ' ~• ~ nl Q~.`JY J~~r' ;i v ~ .. ~ :.. - - ..- - . ,-- . ~s r^V_ I / Y', I i i '- i i` ~~~~~.~. ~~-= r- . - ~~ :: _ ~,,; ,,: ~~: . ~~ - _ ~~. /^ r ~,, l~ 04-O80ADM ~'~.~ ~` Amendments to the ~~.____r- Corridor Development District r ~~ ~ ~ ~` ,... Y-.,~ , ~ t • ~, ~. f\)111_- •^!..... ~,_, -`_~ ..l~r~- 'i ~~ ~ . '~~ _ ,'~. L f U ., • .. U ~. n 3 ' ' ~ '~` ;. - ~ ~ ~_ a .=~ v - '' L u : ~ f 7 -. •r. ~ M La w ~a _ ~. u j ;; :J r. u 4_ _ ~ ~+ _ u U 3 O .. , -Y - L ~ •,•~~' ~ - ~~ . ~~ .~ .~, -~ .•pc . • S~ ~~ ~~ •. •Q ' A . G H r C t ttl ~ u H N M I • O y ~ ~~. u .. C .^ :v CJ .--1 Cl .C .•~ U d C ` ~ w a ` ~ ''' •p •O y W p t O M ~ ~ C p _ . ~ .. v; y H ro N a/ oo M H y -- -.- c 's o~ a .1 L L ••t u .C c w 7 E . l ~ M H 7 •r 1 f + b u u u w - - u F y=~. t ! '^ S u • + v . ~ d P 3 al ar al __ . : : ~ U M J -.-1 N N C W C N G GI G . n C y 3 E 7 ww .C •ri ~O y M W P: N dl y L O Ol W 10 ~">~ ` O HMr1M 'O O b N u p .--1 L 7 U rl y H.C~ 6Fb RI Nb.-1 .C 7 y p d M --r:. :.N. :J r M ld M b O Cl N O N p G u M • ^ i H L y C4 ? O y ~• d r-1 u •p d H O W .-1 00 F . ~ _ . N G .-1 H y H .O N G u L~ ^' :/~ "a C u f~ y N Q) N .^ N u U G C G CJ W N N d U U ~ , O y 0 0.A M w U G 7 C .--1 > y -. T G y d u • N - y$ 7 M a0 0 W 0 y H G N M M •O O N •-I N d? W M G C ;,. . ' - ~•..:'i .~ C >. d 0) H .~•~ r1 W N C U W r. :7 c7 v •+• 'O . '7. u N b N ~, QI L L u O U O . . y PL y N N H H u$ G O 7 S. .•i F O 7 •O 01 N -= A .L - ~. --~ = CJ d M •.-1 O? G H u M G G C rl W C •ri H H V, y U u •rl O y~ M U d M W L H H 41 ~! '~ p L M u ~. Op y l I Y jj[[ N x a C~ v d y E N O y H H L W G o0 •O r, H 'O C C W Ol N H O y L {.~ ld t1 N? b M L L -a p p G }, L C !J W rl ql N y N .::0.: b 00 . , S~ ••~1 .-1 U W N 'D T 00 U .C H O C ~ •r = •v •` C " - ~ u p L .C M. C O L .-1 S U N RI rl N 00 QI G d 00 •ri y L , - . ~n . . U .C W H G O G O 0.W G •ri y~ 7 G rd O u y u O M O M E E M 0. a0 vt of r•I •O y +~ 3+ p d 3a 7 of <~ 7 +-~ O U ~. N W U .^.C 'O 3 U M~ d • B • .C d .d ..{ H V M ~C d d 00 n H M y 7 d .G .C u p, L _ :. r, U r u - N Cl G O u w O y ,C "" ~ 7 CO y b 0.u 7 .-1 O O O 00 U H u . C. N h C: W tJ N U .G 3 y G u ~: ~ q •-r C~ u G 7 N x al O u G C N 7 ^ u M .C N M y H U L. y{ y y G a/ W O 00 .~ y C E R -"-. .. _ Q? y •ri .C t U U H QJ W •r1 N U .C :^• u u ••a G U H y H t C W 00 y U L . O N y ,C y >. y C. rO b ++ G M "._~•.-~;;. O •U U .O M ~! y 7 u O .a N N rl O M u N 00 a ti•I L -r1 u LI L M td C 7 M C U C u qI F W el -^ ' •- I'°"' - r.-p p A t y E~ M u ul y 3 " •a G C H u COO O •O N u y W W M y J.! O u> "'f _ - u , ~-' C v •.r C ~. ~7 G u •O O q 3 al U G G W C .--1 p4 W rl G G E 0. E d y H M M 10 O / ' . ~ ~ ~~ ~~+ H 7 0 V N V u n7 C H U U C N N .-1 '- : t b rV 0.E H e-1 fu H u y a ~ ~ ~ i. .- - `. ~ e : _ U 71 .--1 V y U 0 tti w M H M E E .O r u ~ i+ 7 : y •p L 3 'G .-1 u G O rl G . „ .i . . U L W y .~ _ -- c c o w l u y U M o1: a y o o u ~ x ro ., .-1 . 0 0> .•-1 •o .. .. CJ .C :~ c .^ T M b U t-0 y C d {+ ri y U$ R u .-1 -J U 7 G y M C U M N 0. H .G d r{ fA M y D• r-1 d u N u d H u . s: ~ r•_ a v •~ u ra n c ea N>> E EE G u +i E O al N oo S o a/ ~ O ~ :: ~ J a o •u ~ c 'o u ..-~ o •.+ .-s c d o i w a .c .c c ro M .c .c a H q u . . .. U U N ~: a U •O u F•+ u M to u u u 6 CD H p ~ u E q ;- `: .~ ,'., ~~:: :~ ~© •~~~ _ ~ j ~i/i (•./ .- t_\~~ i •,, .~: 04-080ADM Amendments to the Comdor Development District ~,~,~ f~~ ~~Q^~ t-- L Q 1 4 ~s v n ~ Q ~ ~ W o ~ K ~ r Q ~ Q ~~ r (~o'd r V L~ ~ p; ~ `n d1 ~ `~ ~~ ~ ( ~ ~ 4' 1 `~d :~ ~ V J ~ Lrl.. 6d.>o 1 . ~ is' ~ F i ~ ` t N R 1.4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ -' t -Y ~~ ~ ? . ~ S - 1 ~' 1 Y i i f 1 .. ~ 1 t \.....~ ~ .~. . ~ ~ ~•.i t~; l.. i ... , E`>;_- i i ~ ; `~~'~~" ~:~~ :. ~~~~ ,: ~: {~ . ' ~'. , ~ ~~,~ .. _r ~i 1 ' ~ ~ r., -. ~` _;: .; r ~~ y~K'~GS:u a . ~ ~ ~--- ----- f=y -- ~: ___. ~, ,_ -__. - ._: ,, =~;. - ~' >i- 1 ~-:x ! ;:~.. ,~- =: ..-.. . i. :~. .... 'r 04-080ADM ' • Amendments to the Corridor Development District . _ .~. :~~ `;' . _ _ -.._~ ;,~._ L b G r U f. +•~ ro N d d N A •rl r•1 H 1+ ~4 "'.1 G d d L! 1.1 N W .C d ?w u cu d l+ u a ro d u i H a - L O .. w w 0 o 'i G 0 o L .I p •. 4 i . v o al l + >, ~ m Ir. In a s. a •v B •u .C a ~ w~ L q U rl d H ro d d L _.~ ~'. U 7 U J •O 1+ t0 LI O ~••I 0. (p J .-1 C ro H w •.~ u G .0 Ei rl 0 0 ~.. .J . U L .-a ~ rob a ; a U 7 ? G ~ •r w i ro .-i :J U U L L O .-I W d d W - .^ ~+ L O N f~ E O O N G N O d ; .,.i v r U K N C t+ pL •.•1 G it d H d s: u N '•1 M u N ro 0 N ro DO • u G cl 7 ro W G w r1 H •.i N +i ro _ l.. ~ : •N ~ M L O N iJ L y1 E d f. 1 - z~ r C. L u C L U .-1 M G b H K L C O F u U d H Q DO •G .-. ~ '~ E 7 ~%~ . I { •. R >. n f _ :~ L N G U 1+ U G vl N O H H H O N O L1. d ~ L _ 3 • ~ G ^~ ..1 U L •p .t ••i ' ' .C d •••I ro r•1 of b .-1 C •-1 d F C . N r: -7 ~n Q rl 0.~ 3 ro ~ .. ~ ;~ ~~~ 1 U •o u d ~ x ~ ~ 1 .- 1 1 C N -7 T OD '"1 N . 1 C: C u N C ro eJ U u ro W S++ +~ ( N " >+ >, 7 0 0 0 E t+ +~+ C N rl G J./ ro 'u N U •rl d .~ f , :/ U =• a :-, -.~ 0. U •./ -.i M O O d~ G? u . ~ > ^ C: 1r i. :J >: C/ ~ p H d H ~i O H d d . r _ .y W F C? O :r V: N R U d u CC 0. •r/ b r-1 +/ ? .C E W w+ -~,~ u w u U N E .C 00 O C E N •ri ro d al U L ro F O I C G .C U u ro f+ •.•1 O N >~ N 00 a H a+ ~; ~ . c• C C :J E +~ U U ~ 0.u U d ro d d ro rl 00 O ro H : ., v: R H U' U .-1 N rl N U U N 3 H '~ +•I O G L 0. W O , t t. .-~ C. q u w 4. •.~ q •r1 O •rl t7 u ro W ro G N •r1 O s~ ~ - U .^-.. •.+ u 0 > u% ro L d ' W .G O N N H ro ,. j 1 - ~. .... g t U N N H u U .C r w O H u w1 N d +~ H U 1: U u 0 U d N a] U rl W N W •ri 6 d .C O d ;~ .G 1. q .Y q N u C C w C d d d 3 W O U 0 6 d ~ l+ i. 3 0 0. U d G ro ro W ro 00 •G G N O W n1 W 0.00 R -rl t w E q 1+ •• f+ q U ro 1+ G +~ +1 d H H ~i O C 7 v.~ w ../ .-1 ey u O M N i+ •O •ri .•i E H u H .i ro t t C cl u w p. d C u ro u G ro ro d d u d ' cl~ U U O U d T ro a 0 7 N O H H G •~ •••1 iJ C. > N C t, •.+ •.•+ :t > L~ G v d .-i •~ w cT rl ro ro ro vl L O d ro ~ -- u G ••+ u 7 E N L q u O X 00 d 0. d vi ,C d H •O , -~y , L 3 7 -,+ u u •./ u u> u W d G .-1 F U 3? 'd r•I ~.:~ .. U .-+ G G' N N N v C .C •rl U H +~ d ro rl .i U C. •rl N M GJ q U/ Y. w T u O L OD N O 0.N H a ' W ro •ml ` " .~ ,.:, u v. - W U> d O L O •rl G •r1 00 rf N N O V t1 .k, W ~} ~ C~ G •~•/ C ,C L •rl G H N N LI 1i rd C: G ro •O d W U W ~ U :J 0. U u L d u d 0. v-1 ? N ro •r1 O ~ d d U d U b ro '_~ ~~ m E t o? •.+ oo G a > o +1 u L u U +-~ U L VI W 41 W O U O L rl +1 H ,•+ a u N H u b F d N •.i ro d e d d N +~ u ai ,: ~ '• Is"'3#! I :-~ C .-1 L u O O o1 E la -C 1+ OD M 0. N ro F a 7 d O W ~..: .,~ = a Cl F c u cl a H 0. 7 u Ip U E C J m l+ Y. .~ O 7 U CS H •e/ ro +~ u 0' d o w N d H O •• 0. H d~ ~ ~., 1 f L - :~ u o o R u c~ w s. v a w •.+ H a d d d •cf W~ :'.~5. 1 .-. ;~ .: •~ C ••+ .. u u C7 .C .C >. A G .: •f. L J FS M 7+ L H G N 7 u L L .O ro •T d .D N O b N F H •O .C G L O a .C d d N W •C - "r ~ ,~,: ~ ••-1 CI •.+ R Gl >. O R u 0 T G U M M r•1 • - •, ^7 ci ~ •= u C i+ a '.^, :.1 •n ,:; G 1~ G d ri O H U _ _~ •.+ r- .-+ u K^ N R C CJ t -. .~ ..+ ..: [; V. •r1 •.1 U F--. U E :.+ rl N c•1 ~T ro d •C O G d G '}r•• .O ,3 iJ ro L .r1 r•1 ~ .-:j3 : ^~ -,~ v,• ` .. .~ •~ ', ~ S~~ '•• ~ . ' O~ U • ~ .~ • ~ [ ~-~~~ ~^ 1 ~ V t ~ _ V 04-O80ADM _ - - • C~ vv Amendments to the _ • ~ ~ Corridor Develo ment District _ p ~•~ ~; ~ .; - ----. ~~ s~ w ,~ ~` o ~ .~ ~ E.Z.I ~ ~ ~ ~:: - ~. ~ < ~~ ;:r:. ~Mi ~ ~ ~3 ~"~ ~~{/ ~, /\ , ~~; y ~~ Z 1 1 ! ~ •' 1 ` J/ N', J F i y i Ls ~ i? 1i 1 f i (1 t i 1 ~! ^ - { -~t t• I ~ ~ a. ~ .t ~ i`` ~ ~ < 3 ~ . -~~~ j~ _ s. u ~. ~~I - ,.'' :>.:~ r c. .~:-"` _ ~~; ~ 04-080ADM " ~ s Amendments to the 1 Corridor Development District ~.. ~_. ., .: ~c ::..i ^~W _~i~~ . 1~ :: }~.: j,,_ - ~: `f'. "'.i :: ,l, _~ ~` ~~' ~2~ /nt~ n~~ ~/' / 'r .~ -. ''~ ',f Y `-l~- i.: y. Y~ 'i .t~. .. T~ .•~ 'Y :L :'~ :.; 3_-s= ::: i T :i. ~_' ~~~ ' '~•` ~i ' ~~. .. .~~w _ 04-080ADM -~_ Amendments to the Corridor Development District ._ r ;~,:~: .~~ R ~ . -.:,;: . .;€ _; - ::•~ ' ._a ~.': .~~~' - i" • • } • ~ a .. C N Cl ~ :~ .~ 4 - Q N A U ro tl N Ll N 7 L , - 7 J E 0.L •.~ U 7 ~ O ,: '-/ u tl C +~+ N C O tl q) ~ tl tl tl M N N '` •.~ u W o N ro^ .c - o T 3 > >^ T •' t 0 C • t > N N ~•1 C E u N .O ~ _ ' ~.x • 7" ' , . _ ) : r G 7 b t . O 1: •.+ h E G U u •O 7 •ri u td O~ C O u ,~ 3 0. •ri tl tl W'~? O O N U N ~ + `r ...ry- ~ 1+ O C •lt L ro f: O .-1 C F •'1 N V .C A rl O V- - 0. u w u u r u ~ ~ W ,C u 7 c d O C ^•1 ro C N O + > N N 'O O W + U L v .r •ri U O ro l+ •.~ a, q u O b rl V N O H tl O r_ :! ~ u t, •.~ u o u G N u tl •.a C u p tl b tl tl •O u c: •.+ :n o u •.a w •.+ w tl w C ou u N tl ro eo o tl a H +•+ ~ .. a ^,,.-~v sou .••+o>ozwNro u ~ v ~•.~eoowaa .; . ; w -.- M .-t 'O •ri •a W U E :-1 b 0. O •'/ L ro H O 6 tl ~'-; ..- + O -• C tl :J tl C .-i A u J: 7 0. •-+ C tl O tl `.••• N r•i 0. N •r~ ~ _ U 7 E A tl 0 tl •r+ H U E O •.i tl U U r1 'O .-1 tl O V W ": :- : ? u •r, L L E 0.U N N 7 .-+ >@@ N U 3+ N O U~ H N 0. ro E N tl E C O tl H ~ H C rl •C N O ri , .. ,•~ .y: .. O •~ O O U N O 0 0 tl ro> tl 0 U U tl tlJ N M Sri ~ G •o M 7 s! •r1 i C 0. c tl O u .-i w 0..-1 H E tl J= u 1+ > -! ~ E ~! ro 7 N O N •O L tl U tl tl H R H O 'f O to d _ ;r :~ .:. 7-. ~ • . 7 .-•i O q H •A G M W H tl H G w rl N V 7 0 .C U b .C N U L iJ L~ . - - _- ~- '. :.~~~ . .ti - ~ tl T U •rl C N u w > .-1 G tl 'O 3a H C1 •C O •r/ N /A H 7 •r+ .. W W •O +-i W tl tl H .-I tl •C H T61 t~pp B ~ N ~~ ~ ' ,_~:t~•.`~•1: ~y • U +-+ O p F U N N L tl tl b tl W .C b J~ r.. row •.i u u tl •.~ u 3 tl N N u C u A N N tl •.~ U U G L, tl N •.1 tl •• N H f + R W 1 7-+ O tl l7 p U 6 y N d tl q H 0 Jr H ! tl _' ti ~, ' '~. ~' , yy ro •- .C u X 7 u rob tl 3 H - r E J O O U I! a0 tl ro ri U G d C C E tl T •• a.+ •.1 tl N H rl U N O r-{ ri (.. N tl .G }r iJ tl O i., tl ro 4+ .-•t H H O O ro U ro •rl w .-{ .-i O W H ro O tl U .C tl rl tl •rl tl tl N tl ro z N tl O tl ,C ro ~ H V V L .,•1 .G d q L N L L N 0. N tl H \ •rl H N H L b H H •rl {', y! ,G W ~! _ ++ 0 7 m ro ro ••~t H ro tl F ro ro tl W tl > ~ O tl o0 u W N N •Jl {, u tl 0. G •O •-i T N b •O > > ~.' V LJ E('. 00 d O W n >. c ~, s. co U v ro •.t ^+ T u H H •.~ O O W tl tl •.~ C • .C H ~ .-+ D o u ro o •.+ H E .-+ v •.+ tl ro> tl C .~ x ,~ o u N tl 'r tl G w ~; v E tl ro a t 3 o tl a H H N N u +, C L u w O C tl O L tl ro U u O L O H {".. y E O O rl O N {".. H q u vl tl U G H G U A N •.~ N L O L L1. ~ N f•1 H p rl $ •d ~' L q •r1 :j • • ^Q f ~J • ~: ~ . ` 04-O8OADM ~~ _ Amendments to the Corridor Development District •a :~3a.. -~~:.: :_ ` . y, F' ~'--,. - U N u u~ m H m C C N 1 > +~ w u .C •-( O N 'O / H rl Y Y d •rl O - - w u ri ~ tU O O O +1 ri N m 1 +1 ~~ ro q ,YC •O~0 G N ro C H d F .-1 b b H t+ H •-1 b D u u u m~ .~ ~, ' u a v .-+ w o 0 0o u ro ~ ro u es u a M u .c % m r' •Np w C OO u .--~ ~J u C H a E •O O N W W d H > b AI 00 O- .''. s ': •~ ~ o p Y e a a E m room ,~ ae ~ Y F F> o Y s ,.+ I: H ;.,' „ I o rl u -.~ w o H .-1 C ro .-1 m F u u ,rt H u a H .+ a _: O .. v p a u o .-1 0 0l tl w :-~ o u v u a s o u td .; .{.::: ~- u U .Y o OO C ro v-1 H T ro H O .~ U L W 00 N .~/ W G ,,: cJ C H m .-~ C u H u ro .O W O W w W 0 C: b +I d O u :- u U ro 0 ro N +a ro N N U H E ~C p H O W s-1 H> C U N- '=-~. m in •.+ u $ .C > .~ .C .C > N al 'O ro H 3 •O a~ rl .G y t~ N O ~ O: :~' . cc e u> H ., Y •p u u o m .e Y T o4 ro Y C C t:.i u o b v H': :- L N N .O O N H O W Ny `r1 H U T W .7: iJ .~ a!^. .oi M tai W [OL C O Q N E OO N O +1 A x ro .~ 6 Y ro .~ d ar tq . =: : U F^. 1] m ~ +'~ O .C Y t: .C 3 H H L b m L ~ d ~ J./ m Z tl H -- 3• _ I: g ro H +~ v u u u •~ H u o Y Y u T ro b > of G ti d vl b b~ . 0. a w •./ C `~+ m H w. +~ H N •• 7 H ? H O N •.i / d u t: IY.: .; ~ m b u 0 .-1 w 0) u O T 7 C U O +1 y p u O ro H t0 H O >. O +~ . CJ row u H m 'O +i L ro W H ~.' tl O vi > p. rG O L W O b 'rl b r ~, .-~ u -7. C U ro L O N u m H d O N L tl~ t~ n m b O +~ H- q fJ O +-1 H ro w .-~ ro 'V C 'tl N ro q u H u C .-1 ri •rl N .C +i L rl CI.S-~.^Z.. C .-~ u v-1 L u w p N N W rl .C N U H +1 W O a 3 t b u m m b b~ 'L - .. OO 6 C N rl N N ro -> E m W U .C ro <. O U O 'O H N O N b Or -. .• ' .C ri C -•a T H 00 .-~ 0.O W 0.m 11 H ~ m W C C > F H Y b~~ - {.. GO m m rl > H U C p 00 ro m •.i O a m ro tl m N a0 0 O 0 .C:: '-! u,.:.,- a .i C o ro O ro C u •-t x '-1 u m +i b F ~. ~ u ,C b +1 .C H O b L O •C .,r~`r..'` H O H H N OI H H +-1 ro U N m tl C U m ro G: N N G L N O. i.~ V N tl i. ^~ H O 0.N .C u y C E ro> r1 00 .G ro 0. N +1 ai 0 u 8 m W m N .:.. a u O N u N 'C G cJ u d 'O ro U ro •rl O H O 1.' W +1 d W •d m 0 0 -. O pp .~;- u O C U W u +-1 ro u 7 N b a +1 r. N .C U of P. u H L m 0 m Q • Q 3' %•. ~. O c L Y ca ro m r+ m p .o N .C m H m W a d W H CI !1 O H m 0 0' '~ ~. w •.a eo 3 a ro H a4 T H o b u m T of u H V +1 H F+';~ ~ av au c o ~oay -TO u"•~ y •oomatouu uaum a, ~. d C u N U .-i L .r1 .>= C~ U a rf W .-1 Q g O tl R W u ~:Y'/~( m ,a Y+ ro .+ p Y a~ .-1 m ro --+ u ro w al .+ u .1 o In p m~H -rat w •.~ m N 0 ~O H~ O m 6 .C b H U H u t! ~ N C M .c u a a^ ~c ~ • X' ro O ro L T w N H U •-1 .i d L d •O b b O CS 1J Q.,~~':!;:. U .-~ N .~ ro ro a C •-1 .•-1 u dd H O m N ro +~ !d •r1'O tl ~ 0 cr a, H C C }• d o 0 o w ~3 .0 0 PG o 3 u o F o b ro C .C a H ~t W> ro ,i o u w u u w o o .-1 rl H W u ro A. +.' c+: W a 6 ro +~ +' 'O a .'?~' . 1 eD ro ' ~~: w C ' ~. b 1Y+ m ''~`~- u E p - C I H Cl N H ro O w~ ~. ~= R U O N C ~ }••. u b -.-1 N u •ri ro 0 >. •.~ 'rt H 00 O H L 01 •r T G u H .C.+1 td- U: U G w- m m 00 t u N .--i F b O Q W ro {r .-1 C! C> ro W d 00 (: L N H •-i u 'p W +'1 d r1 •I b O ro O '~ u, H y: H •.+ E .-~ q tI ro C o c. a ro -.+ ro C m ro •.i 7 u .p IYi w~ O' tl :s:~. H rt •.a H -v u u 3 v o Y ar H H Q u •o' •~ . :-i C/ w u a N C L G N u •rl aJ N N> H O m 13 ro ?~ +~ 6 H. ~~:~' a H O O ~++ N O to ro u E OD N- u •rl ro O a H of .. = .,. w c, u 0) V1 H N C ro 0 b C ro 00 L T u N O T O m ~~ . +,~•.. u ,G. m •d ro 'O W H ~7 rob .•-1 G U T 00 W H .O b 3 w .g} - H ~~. to m v C u d a oo Y E ro 6 .-1 a +1 d 'O O $ +~ vi F a d r _.. O ~O __ u ..i cr U P C +~ L w 0. a~ u •n 7 •.i m a u u u 6 m - H +~.-/k:• ro C w E O U Y •.~ ro N> H O N m p ++ C O1 N C H m ro rl O W ;e. - tl U w C7 u a H u F +t O N •O N U L •rl O m O H U 61 O H N W i+_: H U row m N u ri H E w> C >< N w ro R N N W U K1~j. h^ H C d m ...1 p a O OO N T O d W •n d F OD H~ •tA m:#tiY~ti p u ro .-/ OI d X tq of E u 7 .i U F OO r-1 •.O- F N ai G 00 ro M .G:'Oh C U H .O ,G m tJ W u -.~ u ro CJ C ^'~O u C W ro ++ > ro F Q ~ m L~'- .. o .a o a =. ~ H H -r~ L 7 u V: A OOH O N L N +/ C Y O ro u Y ro G U ro .a U u C u O N H 6~ U H .d - Ot{~`.~~'• H t: u. ro •'o .C 'O •.i c,1 W u ro H rt m v-1 N O H H u ro~ t..~Tr'1' O G ^ 0.Y C H C u w Cl H v1 O m w O rl u m ~+ L w ~ m M: ~O.1 ~'{:. w H. E m ro ro a '•+ H ro u G tl 0. .~C X ••'1 a u c~ u u 3 `~ E ~, ro ro c m G a H w •o Y v A ro Y :u ao r= H m 01 7 rl 7 0 •O d CI T ro ••1 ~- . d- G q H • ca w E ro H u al cl E ro m 3 u ro a u u o N q u <Ys ..+ .~ O .~ tl x O N N O .C m N y H u u H T s+ +~ P4 O b t{. ~•rl 7 C ,.~ a •,.~ u 1i 3 'o +~ a> H N a N N o d +~ H• i .i N 7 OO Q ~ w cvctl a.,NC.,e~ oroFa.nG a ~j .~~@ r. C r~ 3 0 N T d N H -v H OD 0. I+ N ro p •"1 1 O R O ~ O i! .~ ' ,~ C u m m T C O O C 0. T +1 u U a y U a ro H H •r>t .i >-H "- K •O 0.w ro E b F ro O -rl m m .i b ~ ~ 0.1•+.; ~.:j. p• •~' ~ H C U N m .Y C u 7 u 0 •-1 •rl 7 d t+ W W ro N N f-• :J -.a Y O ro H O +{ u •.i H v +i .i H w O O W O O .C W F O O d T O W~LI U t w .r g .C o> w m w 0.d .C O m ro rob ro H H o a H ti N 1~ H 10 b '. F O ~;~ ~..,.... u w p 3 ++ w w it u p R •-i H :• ~.,~ ro to v CJ u oo ro tl ro d G~ N O d 7 u ~ :g~~ ~ G H H C N N H L H .C d w .C TI .C O • • .,''-~i. p r+ u ro ro a C ro u u u u E 3 •rl L u u U ro .•1 N c•1 ~ h :(•_s: i ' ~~ ~x • Y ~~. a ~;; ,t: S• r~ ( 1 j`~~~t'{,~-~~J nn nVn ,. -.? ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ 04-080ADM ~~ :'_: ~ Amendments to the `~ Corridor Development District :., ~,;, N a . •., L u u H N 1 N t .,. d N a .~ a ,••1 >, :~ 00 W T P. er 3 0 •v -+ x >, u ,w./ b F rl C W R r 3 7 ^, •-GI U u•Ll y~v •• t+ e U upq N ~~H H _:; a •O u V > 7 G >, d ro •~ Q• ro ro N R d d ,: y 0 y '-, •ai E 10+ 1 3 W u ta+ 0. d .i L G H 1-1 N G N C 00 U ~ ~' $~; H U .1 :.. .C N W v •O b •.~ ro O L ~O G N b U a G H L o0 O +~ G 7 ::.~:.. r-1 L ^/ y1 e0 a0 u v1 N O G a L •rl N ;s-,::+ 4+ ^~ O u ++ E ro G a O= O L, a O •rl C P m G ~, ;w O H LJ .••, _ r 3 O w 7 N > w w a a W b t11 N H L • O r1 O O - - ^ u w d F a 0.H •O H O H ,C a 0 0 O W p. •.i •c7 p. N •.i N% N t, _ U U G u O •= a H ^I •O G O u ~ u u SG-, .-Oi •.GI H a G .aC 7 u 1~+ U •G a s •W ~ - -• Q a 7 O a., ~ ,y a H 0. d y G a~ u N d u O% ro a u 0 U N W -_ a r•-t ~C O v7 G 4+ u a 0.a •O O ro ,C H a a .]C U a T N +~ •r1 a M •-1 •-1 =: - o o ro u o u E H u N u0 u .C al H ~+ w u u " :J C - .--, U >. ++- •.-, •p •p H 00 ,~" •rl aJ ,.! G fp - r-/ a t0 N w U G ro v es :~ .. .n C •C M ro :J > .-i w R O G > O L b W ~ u a O R W •C u !; ^i U ro u •p 0..C H 7 O O G •~ O H W of •.i O a M =+ ,II :J ~. •rl C- H u a O p• > u a O a U .-1 N L .,{ u G N C u O w w 0 0 .-'~ N •L H ro ro G N H M •.•1 C •p U p x y •:$ :J L Vi ~••, O w U N O ro ^ y ro u N O L ,6 b d ^I d - a R •p 1.1 a G -• rJ F U C- y >• a N 00 ro N •O N •.i •O N .J a C -~ ,C H u N H N .•'~ •O H d G a L O b l0 a u v1 r•1 G 3 7 0. P a. ci •.u+ " '.wc 7 u ai `° F .ai u ro 3 ••+ u G F 8 C .C a N v a O P o a .c > a ,•1 u ro G u a v .-1 7 a •v O H > N w O .-( •• U a a ro H .-. U N u O y W .-1 •ei •T H M ~ .-1 N U .-1 H 0. L N 47 a u H> a .C 7 L 7 •= N Q. N O W ,-1 0. V cl d ~ w ^I cJ a .C u O' a O W b O a N 6 U a .-1 w 0 H N. U O ro N 7 G •,a u H a u O N - a G OD H O G > N a 0 ,0 W Z - d u c~ a N u .c a v .,, u .~ .C H q N of u ++ a H u •r1 0 ~-~ A c •v q w H a •.a .C u of > a > a .a N a •.~ a u N ,., >, L ~, ,..1 - u ~; CL ro U w u r, C a H N ,C rl •C u H G ~ O U .-1 u N 'd G G ,0 •c o u ro u w c •~, z o a a u 6 6 u o0 O u 6 a a •rl a a a G .-1 U O •.a a 7 ••~ a O H u y> 3 O 7 U d O G W E H N u 00 ~ .. > L v: b •U u 7 O G ro H 0 0 .C E W W w ••~ p u ai O N ••1 - u v u < E .,~ N w N .~ u ro u o d N w •.~ .-a a d N S M a ~•U +, N :. - H O w O C Q a a h a b >+ u a H N ^1 a N u H b .-~ a O ( N ,C . .~ H •rl ro d N ro .--1 d •C u H OD a o0 G G ^i u N .C •O M O 7 L ,O U G U a a G U• 7 u H b H 3 a •.~ C .'~ u ro u •rl O a w w •• H a u 1.1 M b O N d d O~ E O .~ G a N u u a G W b V .•i (' R1 N ,0 ~ H W ai ~ u .-t L a u ••~ O a H a C 1--t •tl ro ri a ro O a1 L, ,-i +•1 a.t N p d N N +-1 r! C L E ro H O d a N .C O O ~n a w H a ,0 ~ a :C a N •O 3 a a U eo u a d b L ro H a u U O U O .o d a a. $ •7 ~ d ,7 •v > >. L C ro A N G +/ ro w u a U .-I •n x +~+ T b' •r1 .-i N [A a 0 b N R~ H N 7 b > 0!• 1-1 a H S ro .-1 rob - L a H a L C N V• O a E 7 b •rl L N d N 0 0 .-1 H rl ,-1 O b W •.~" E .-+ F d F H - ro C •~ a w C u a u u •u o0 H •O O •p M •n a N 0 O O u 0. u a ++ O O b N u G H G a G u •C O ro a 6 N cy N N~ d O tt O 0. >, H a C o o a a W •.1 +~ 3 o x $ •.i H O m .-/ W d 3 a) 3+ t+ o- .o c, m a H L 7 GI G r1 u E > u H ~ u W .G 0. -rl W Vl H O. W C1. W H~ ": .-~ a 7 V u O P L C a a ro •rl O v to u c0 O .G .C b O - 0.' '~' _; N •O a L A u d U •rl > ,C N C ro H 0 H L i, u G O ~ G G C 0 7 .C C - .G P a O L N O a 11 00 O 0. •T W ro e-t O •.1 O t0 :.~.'''.~%7 u n u a .~ u E N O E d ro to H ,-t G u G O P - -rl 1 •.1 -,-_ .'..7 V U .7 H O 'C H ~ ++ u G .-1 •d O O a i~ a rl .-1 •O N tt a t~ T~,;;' (s•:; •-+ . v: C •-i O H .-1 ant G ro ro G •rl N 7 111 r-1 N +t A H W ~O d 00 U> - U b. ~_;;~'=w) .~ u u: d es G w 7 u I H F u o~ •r1 H O N K at •O a .-I ro ~ ~ u ~~" .. "•.. i; •.~ r. > •C O O G t-, 7 u (A •ri O .C H a rl G a .C b0 t+ rl u L G b .C •rl +•~ +~ r-I H O 00 U b a O~ M d es •• > G b G 3- 3r O >. C9 H ro N a v .C U r-t u d G U •v .G pG N +~ G~ w O O ~ " q w .O C O 7 0 b .C u a t0 a ro U •r/ ro ro u •• O +d G N U a U a - N rl n L (..,/ L q u W •O h N `rl G H. a O ••i •~ ~ L ' v o N r-i o a C o H - u a> a r-1 - G b d a u oe d u a >. u >, u u u G CJ i u .-d ~ C O .-1 a H a •O G H N .-i H ^I .-i O •r1 •O ro +~ ed ro u~ o a .-+ w~ ~+ .G +~ ro d~ d o O rl o a a W 3 't+ 3 w N O :7 rl a •.-1 H •C ~ L G O E N r•1 W O O r•1 ~ u d N L b O •O O e n V u o E .+ E a a u o •.+ x a a N 3 H= a ca H ' en ea ro C. t+ U u 0 3 •-~ •-~ N 7 U 'V > a 'O •rt 00 a~ N L N G O d O a. O U C. a H a CJ vl r-1 O N a a d rl O N a U G G •is JJ N ~ •~I d H 00 H OD U •~ 47 w> V: U a .--i H 'G U r-1 E v N H'•rl d ro ll 00 .i N .C •O b. - H w ~, H q a •.a H U 3 G •.~ •r1 O d 3 8 3 a G 1-t oo +~ .•~ u W d ro es' - d w C J •.~ T. •.~ O u O G a> E G 'tl O. ~ O a •O G +1 'y G G W u r~ u •p ro •• u •rl d 0 •-1 a u H H a 0 .-1 > t0 G> w O +1 y - •.C/ L N •,G+ E~ tU••• o u L u Hm u cxi N h u u 0.U ro E U U N ro 6 0.d .-I N t't `"' •G ~. '=.%, t v . ~E -rs- •, 7- s :~ .~ { y-_ i ~'A `V • ;.i •~<s -.. 04-O8OADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District . .~. i... `~I ~..~ ~ :...-1 ::~.-,. Q W?~~~ ~ .: :c: ....~ ; y>: ~ w ~-< o ~ ESQ O ~-- V ~ ~~j ~ ~v=QO ~V- lkV~;~v~4~ '_` ;;rig.; ~-~ ,<< . ~~.•: s ~ ~~~ ~ ~~, ~ a ~ ~ v, ,x ~ . ~ Peoa 11!wMe$ f_y~~ ~ ~ .c yr„ar~ i -- ~ ~ .. . l ~ U ~ ~~~ f Q 't Q . . - -'~ m . = ~ -_ ~ _~ ~. r_j ~ ; .. `~":~ ', _~.r.~-.900 ® _ ' lia.r'p{7~r t r ^ a ~~~ 1 r a. 9 - .~_ --~ -1--.' '~ - :7 ~~ --- 857 ~ ~ - ~: • '---- ~ ~ ~\i i ~ 1 :~ i . t _. _rJ u ~ ~ +. _ l ~~ ~~ t 1 \ i ~,D: F~?= ~~ :i _. ~ _~ ~ ~. ~; ~ 4 • ~, s Q ~- ' ' ~` wYr~ ., . A ~ x `~ ~.. ' ~., ~. ~ ~ {[r.: .tom ~ a. - ~« 0 ~Q. i.. ~ :::AJ ~rr;;~~ er ~`' . ~,i}` :.- ,y~~: c:3`. ~ `?' ~ v ~; v ~~~-~"'~e s. _~:_. 04-080ADM ~ Amendments to the Corridor Development District ... 'L.rJ ~ 5~~..~.. 1.. ~---- ~--• ...-~ - J O u = N U N CI L G u 3 •a O G C +~ ro T •-i L N 1+ G N PJ CI M cEL O u N N w a u o O C G r. M O u t~ !J u L a N ro ••"~ •p l+ '-I G O +~ ro ~ u M 7 . N C G •y •.~ U '-+ L N N tr m m ca rJ ..J' L u •' 1 w ro N I F U r. O N O u u 0 0 •1. :1 .,~ u N O O O 1 L O ~ C w d p H c E u o N u ..+ 0 3 .[ O :' u ~ U ... .-1 ~ N 7 v7 •G w ro u u U -.0-1 d N H L 1-~ T C •-~ L ro O O N L u m ro O ~ .--1 Vi :+ 1+ 0.'i L ro L U >. L 0. G W 00 1. ++ U u u L m aJ . O •r1 CI :-: U h 1 rl m N •ri N m ro u :~ C O L O~ p N u H •-1 'U '.-1 d +~ 7+ O C X n m a.f p O L v O N •p L~ .-+ T H q •.~ P4 ro H 3 '-1 U 'J CJ ro ~O .-1 L •rl N .C q W 00 O ? u d s+ O N .-1 c-1 u a a .C O E O -.~ G E ro u N u ro H 1a O L DO ~, :. ..+ E u~ az uv~ o~~ o uwv ~ O~ O U O t•1 >. O 0.U T~ m 0 0 "uro" ~" .p v~6roro-.aya4 E G u 'O b to T b •:-1 •d o x 3 H ro m p +i :J C.t O W •"1 N N ro S+ L b O H '/1 ~-1 L+ O L'7 N O S rl oo m O W ro U .i .-i > n ro C ••~ H N m H r1 cd G N. pN 'O O ~"1 G m v U N G N N .-1 q •d N NU N N rl m G 0 `rl m 0 1+ `ri O ro o u -a a •,+ +r 3 m uv uw a o~-.~••rn t+ u G In t+ u u N ro t+ w o •n 00 u >~ uuucl +,romo-.ao ro 7H~roammo ~ ~ fA .'~.t..: • ;> :. ;• .x ;t .~ • m m ~ y L m '~ N L L W q '~ 7 >. ~ N •rl H H •.>I N u u w~ y m-~. ~~ ~~ O b O N 3 ro al r-1 •rl O V O >`-~ .: .c o o p u upw o ++ *~ L iJ L 0. O m O W L 1~ rl •d of $il .C W 0. 0. rl m m U ~ •r1 i~ P. q ~ :: ro L O >. 0. J.r O vr~ 'O W m TI L .. 1~ 1+ LJ m u .~ O w O q vi 1J a.t p. :i-. b W m L b U m l+ •O OI O~ +~ W g 7 q a m m ui q u .+. u?taawwuq~ m~ .uS aml 0 .Oi b~ O u m q >~ rl m >. H 1~ > m rl 1J ,C Y q m O rl H .-1 sl . b q 'mo ~ }mi w~ . y O~ u u Am V q v m o a, u H u ~i m++ .+ qu.-1m> ro+ioaomubeoq •.i g q m m 3 w 3 M> •.~ q p m; m W W O N u •O W m m m •rl >, ~D W Iq N q o1 W m 'Ci b m q- m m m m O N O q ii 1~ .O- O ~ u ~ O H Id >. •r~l H 1q N ri O 10 . ~ r-v-. rd eo q q eo a m 3 ,m •.1 e0 W m:.:.- -; u o of ,+ m •ci ~ .i• u •yt .-1 .~ ~ a::~ : _f uuFSm+o wm3 ami~o•~iro°`mci; '- 1-+ of u aN Ga~a~•oW ~> u++m: 04-080ADM . ~ Amendments to the Corridor Development District ~~ o N ~N a z 41 tcl ~ a ~/I? o 0 1 ~ ~ ao a~ 0 o 0 0 O ~ 0 ~ 0 0000 ~ h~9o0k~ ~_ ; ~ ~~ 4 :. _ N ~~ ~ G,r. ~ Z '4 ~.J Q w W v v_ 3 ~ o~c ~' ?- , F ° F c Q ~P !"-Ba'~e ! -- ~~- ~,~, i, ~~ .. i~-`_ i~ "'~~m . `~_ ~=~'~c 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District„ i •~~1 t~ , ~- - l~ ~~ • / 1 N U ~ .a~ N 1 rl . 0. L - 1~~ 7 l a C C G d G W H 1 q u W N B .-i 1 q B m -.+ q q> a. v m m m m 6 6 .+ w H u q~ a v - v~ -~•~ ~,, ~~.~~... •O O a C A> lr L ri @ ~L .G u O: QQ q m C V O V O H •O m •ri a CL DO 7 U 6 H N +~ C lJ m N v L ~. q 'O •ri N h q to a m O C •.i O N O O u O q "'~ N W• P. O N W H N .-1 L m LL+ F 7 ri 7 0g~ m ri ,C PL H C u .-~ .--1 a u b u ra u 0 0 H •p •ei .O q V a H 0. 6 ri > F m b N u .C ri q q Q. •.~ N m m N u w 7 . ~:. m C H? 7 B O q m u ,G C N g L q C m N m A > >• O . ~; - a 7 0 L N w w O U C b O u q a~ A m _w m O H C N~ U C ••C-1 w -i~- ~ p, ~~ b L O m v m m .-1 A Ora . i-. - O O m H a ~L L u q N L .-1 C b ra O A U U a] q •.i rl a ri y ~ H U a a 0 g q m W C .i ri rl q m •.i O rl B m w u 0 0 -~ L pp W (. H W C N OD s - a oo a mu++H++ gg b •.~ a s l+ y as C i~ ~ 3 H F G F~ o a •.i m N q q 0 ~;;;_ m maoa goaaB mgAq vmy,,Na•.I~ao.-lu"roq t~ a H a L 'O m 0 b .C ri to m g q a u •.~ q a v as w .+ a+,~ N B Cw ~~ aLli m N u m 3 a ao- ' 8a. o .+.cx w a q.e oomoa :. ' w .~ x .c u oo u m o m ao a ai a u x o .C .~ > •.+ m ~c H O .., m ai m o u N H m B O w sm+ u G u~q~ ~ aA•mv ~3 ~ 6 y • a¢ ~° v o G 3 o w eo ~~ Lm+ o `° u w °' N W mA 6 N •.~ b a o •O o y Er w ri m ri L a m g q w >,•o o m •rl v a ~c .G a m .e m F a v •- s - -y 7 p a L a ri m b G .C C O o H a+ q +1 O F O a • r id. 2 a, m 0 .-1 q a N n e-i a m 7 g m u u 7 ri W H 7~ v U >, m ' ~` .ri: ;~ ~".O pl ~ •O N ri •O m O w rl q q •O L H •ri al a m m 0 [/1 a al +, H m •:::~_ := F :- ;!_. H m .. •ri C L N .-i •ri m ri a F 7 L m> rl V U OD $ q N ri U L ~•:-- _ r, W m > •'i a m q W m U H > L L~ L . A m •q q a m O C q q ~r ~: 6 H O q ••1 E m m O W H q O m •.1 q rl N •b •d m rl m L JC •d O •.a '~+~, ~ yr iy yr .~.~ @ N V m w .C 3 G 3 C N G •d W O q m m O H `` o av>,o V++ m o ~••+ aal o 00o q++ cru B a m vi ~rn a ;.:~ :r-. _ w •n u s+ .-1 v w eo.a q eo m ra m .i a u > o m ri o tL a o 0 .>'": ~: Q Q O m C m O W g F O rl O C C N ~O a i./ •ri B O L a 00 +~ a 0 U m H '+~<.~ •' ~~: ~ s m H B O H N o J.1 O U L H •ri •ri a ri ~-i b o iN.r u Q• m m vai N N aJ N L rHl Oa. i.. ~i' ~~=. ~"~ ~': .U m C a N a a 17 f a •ra a~ q> q a.i q C m m m T N q •rl O S q .C m •G C C :~:_. ~.: ~i' _ ~ H V ~ N C1 H ~ H ~ N ri ~ L1 N 13 U .•T •p L m •.i ,~ i 1:;.' ~. l #~ ~~ :~: ~' ~~ ~ •..1 ~~:~,:.~. o G ~.. ._ N p m q U m O. m q q ^ ri ~ •.a w .C A N U U t~ ~r - .. q q ri F N m •ri 7 O Q r-i 0. N u .r w O u H H C N C ~: i~ •C •-1 X +~ O >. •'1 B w b .-i O LLB >~ m W C .t W 7 O H O :'' ,. ~- y,1 q p/ L H m 0 ri m ri •ri q L O m .--I q C C A B U m U q w c C o u a N m> m >. 3 o B .-+ H o •~+ a o +' .. F m ri m ri b e0 H N E m > .-i N 'O O N LL q u •.-1 N w N O rl . aJ H W F m m q q ri •O m H q q a' U G H u >. t~ ?,. q. N OC 3J L 0. N ri Li b •• N O C H N r/ U Li H y w w q 0.N H m q N> q m rl O m ,-., m C H q EO u b u ri > o •.a u .-+ w u b b q ~` ~ N ~. •O i7 •rl m U OD C H C G N O H ~' : •rl b m g C> C •.+ H m q m H H O H q q d L O q q C C H .~ tl1 7 ri .C O m ri •.~ C V> m q a. v O u A •Q C C H C N H q q +~ q L r-1 L N H g C 0 .C O~ A -- -~1 ~ t a q vd r1 N 00 a 'J. •cf H w y H .-i o u a~ m 0. ra N •d ,.,~ ~~ 0. U .-i ri A u tqp •r1 •O ri m b C H E N q 'O O b .--i H N N ri u m -.t~r ~''..~ Fi m y W ri C 6 r•1 .C m a >? q 0 •O 0.•.i Ol 0.F q q N q .-1 C H ~. '•~ m .G m w+ vi ri m m q u O q ai U GD q O u N q ri m q m a-1 F r 1ma a, A A /+ q •.~i sa u u 0.N •C N m a 0 H C q a~ b •• H H B N }~ - ~- N~ ri PG 0. m A >+ C m N q m m m of w b O m L a m C •.i ri a m •ri d b b u >, m C m > rl b :{.,,"~- ': 0 0 .~ O @~ C m N m 00 V a1 - m .C C N C .-i q •.i q •,a V b •ri N r-1 O 0. i' ~ L 7 •O 6 7 H O b C M vi > 1~ 00 7 7 •--1 N N Uri •ri W O q B m i-..; m 0 O ri .C •rl •.i L V •ri O O ri m m H g V N m •ri C O F F` °`" t-•~.- -.. L 00 U N V O H L a C C H •L C V H H gg C H g 0. q m b m U q U L ''_i3<:' y.:-', C q +i > O m O g m V •'i m m H 3 r{ 1 q 0.H q 0. H ~w,, ._ ~~• 'rr.. q ar L >. H H N ~ m H .C 7 q B C T U q m N T m m ,C 00 ~,;,- , ~ L C q u L m m 0 m m •n m e0 N N H O b Uri H u L 6 q 0 •ri ~..H mFH+-IA aw >, HA O •• A a .C •ri m C 7 m q q q B "+~'f ~ O u 3 a c +~ v to 0 7 +~ .a m - +~ u U B 7 m m 0 m A > ~•,- - a, y, p ,-1 m• ri w a w o c .c o m ri N ni m •o >, H u u H m ~ E y •p Sri L T a O q L 'J 'r •d A 1~ n 'O q '~ ~ ri 'C7 Uri U it ri t, _ '+.,. ri 0. m 6 '•i C ri C U C H m a H N ii N N N 7 W •d q .C s > eo 0 3 ••-1 'd m m m H ~c q o o >+ i O o F m D. m +~ o w a o .C U ~.~_.. ;• ~ ~~ a w m a V C b m N U U ri H 4+ A H H u u a N H N H O q H u q ' ~; i ~. H B g N •.i q ri N r-1 b L W O W W •-1 N ~:~Y 1 f~~";.. ... ~ _ r~ Y~'<- . ': ~ y fi'b'' ~~~ (lJ V ,..~:: ~/ ~w } c. • ~ ~~ t~` ~. ~.s.fr. . ~~~~•_ F •~ .F. •~ $ti. _.1 <~`l. -~ x ~:~ Amendments to the ~~ ~:. ,~ Corridor Development District ~Lk-~- ~ , c C • w ~ O u ~ s+ w a u o a u aUi p v o C u a o ~S a o ~ .-~ ~yw~ u o u . c ~ o a .~+ N w a N a v •.+ +~ y v u v •.~ : ~: j ~: u E W r. 0 a 00 N b~ N N O A U C u N u O . .. 0 b V a u O V •'CI N N G O a T u w ~ ~ . C .-1 N t+ N O U a .-1 3 O l+ a u a t0 b a •r~ a s CO U a U u p t+ O +1 > C H •n l ' 7 G H W ~. ~ C O> E C q1 U N a .-1 N u H r 0.a 6E •.i- V U .i •U .i ?C p W A ttl .-1 G +~ r... -. _ •O O COO O +~ N~ H O~ a N U a '~ a s. u w ,a o act N w .3 O o.c v >. b o o u a c f - C td 7. v b H U~ G H N a ~ u .--1 O ; 3+ N 8 •.~ N rl - a a u v a a .-i O u +~ o ~ N U a u a p.-1 u E O u O -ri - ~b.~ U ,~ , O_.,v, x o a Q, N .n ~ b O b N U a w y .-i rl N G a U L cd w o0 H ~O - • , a .C ~ ti 1+ a c a ++ a L 0 ri N C u N Q R. .G N t w > O ~ •ri a q C oo N ••~ u O O P4 O. u u w a O w ~tl 3 F o0 >. 3 ~ `fsc '• L r~ - IQ a W •.i PG w •rl L U u i6 E~ CO O N w 1+ .G O U u +1 b O .-1 O a ' >. ,G 6 C O L? O u U OO N v OD u .-1 rl •C N ':~'S ~ U L O 3J N f.. CD a a 0 •r1 M H .-l l] ~ ' G ~ O N O w P. 0Q0 N ~ .-1 b .C ri O j~ i -1 O N U L1 L N u td ~ ~ a •rl H p. . t0 C. ••-1 U 6 •r~ O 7 W N •.i:ri a l+ a U T N a s N a O. G u > a .-t u v N r+ a x .+ .G 0. u u ~ ~ •O a t1 O r1 a S+ u tO C. N L •rl N O N +~ 0. v ~ G l~ .C .C f+, N .C. O G +i a N O .C 7 •..a t+ l u E W•'•~ u -.1 p. ~ a W ' p N~ O U L ,:; , -~. r U L N E L N w; L'; ~~ li+~t ~~ 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District ~~ k~. :~- ---------- ----------------_.._.~.-- ~~ ~ =~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ Q °'~ ~~ -~ .-,` :Ltd ~ o o to A ~ ~i `~ , = , K~ ~ ~ Q ~ A ~ ~ q h- ~0 4`Z W ;I:: -;:~:...;.. . ® =~%: .. •: -. ;.. . ~. . .a :.,. } .> .. :y .;. ~.~__.~_...~~ ..~.... _.~~_____~._.__.._.. ._ _~_.._..___~~~~_~ wj^~. .~6 '~ _ .. _ N tY.~~lJt~rrl:C.RS-~'KWY~~ ~4[~~.i:.lv._ ~ :AtnYA 4'.`vW~3~ .. .. '.`/ .., Y ` I ~ !. .<,t... .S ~'t4:az ~w N`f~.~t `: r .> ~ S fir • ;: •''in f •~ ~; ~ :~: ` { P i i'~//<. str ter. ~ , ~.. = ,. .i~'4y .~~:%/ii~,~.~..,i;%/~ }~~ E'' •-~- „~~ Ia,, tacos . ~ ~•., : C`' ~•_ - _. ,~ - ; - - ''~ t ~ d i ~ ~ ~ ~' - •4a ~~ ~. to i ~ ~ ~ ~, . l A:^ <... ` . ~ S i 4 t~ ~ J :• _ J7 . ' ~. I ~ i ~. F~ ~~ ' '` r. hZ ~ v ;` :..3 ii> " ~ Ft (j, ~ ~~r °~f ~.~. ! •• Q a ~. "-~- -` ~ _--- ~ 04-080ADM .;,h: _ ---~-_-=--~I-Y ~~-'~'`, _ _ Amendments to the ' ~•: !'~ ~. '`• ~` .ems • 3. ~` ~ '! ~ ~~' _ _ - Corridor Development District =,t` `':. ~. -~~:- ~~ f • t k' f . . T ~:" r ~- P•~ , i:•~ ... y ,y. ^' > ~ - H 'F .~1. .. W m O av o e0 N L L .m m .-1 f.i W ~L~ z m O ~ H b b N L b L - Q ao ~ ~ W C tq m O O L .•~ .-~ u p u a~ U c +~•~ ~ °~ O QI •.-1 u w g W z W t7 '-i ~ ..ui ~` - 'O s ~ > a 'ueo °v ro e u .,% .•i d H w w ~ .~ .~ o m u o a u root m w o•.~ u.-i O H C •.~ m C U •.i •G m f+ W U ro .-i G m u 8 m ,•r ~ N1 N iJ 01 a .a .-~ m q C vro .mi ama U m R .~-1 H aNi A00 u g H m~ ogama.cao,~og7umm> s .+~++ma ++o yH ++oa~ m m u.ao>a, a+mm oHO .c m .-1 U W vi q L m ro~ W m a.~ m H ro m ,C W J..1 W U m Op p -G C A m q q U u H 'O q v/ m L o u m q m.+ La O ro q+1 rob.C .i U H u m 6 W W b ro •O m •••I H w w ro g q ,n m ep 6- m q -+ q o.~ o m >a m m,e a, 7 ro o u oui o u a6i •.UI H ~ L~ q o .e m H m N N >~ q H .q M r•1 m L m w L 0.'1 L L m W L iJ w 71 > ,C •.-I q u •.-t EE~ tR ,C ro ro y m q u 00 .i O m +•~ +~ .i E •.1 m U m fq •O H O U -ri M H H 3 A U ,C ~ N 00 O ro u U ai x M 1Ti ro m H H 0 ro m c V •r~i aroi m N .-1 O N u '~ O `0.'N w 0. O m V W .C M ••t b ro q fq .--1 ~ O w O H S u aui u d 3 o w ~ o Me0 ~ a' ~ u "• ~ C~ .mC C C M~ N .mi O m N~ 1m~+ y O W ~-•1 O u •.~1 ,7 ro ri b m 0. H A ro ro 7 W ~ • a ,•°a :+aNiami mo L O O L ro ~ q ++u~ mom 7 M U .-1 ro > ~ m e ro a m m ~ ~ Aa m C ,Ni u q 7 g C L U L y L 0.u •r1 C O1 N 0 0 ,O i°.~eouc uo •ri O C rl 'O rl >. > U .rl L g ro m d q e•.°'~ a,~x w ai w ami or -"~+ o ogHU.-~v ro O ro ~ V1 L W H 10 to H q O~ ~ q L ami~" U H m,+ aam>osi~.. H Q W ~ 1+ m PA b q m H H .'qi a • y w ~ a m aN1 ~ ,~.i u c .'i-i Leo c o N O •rl O~ 'O • m Fj ro ro •r1 a u p. u~~ vi u- .~-~ q ..vm w my~.a mu q 3 aqi N dp m u q c~0 u m •.Oi an d +-~ o UU q b u •.qi q u u C w u u .••~ d v v u a00i a~ aNi N ~O ~ Ol q tq > 7 ar •.1 ro aw`~ w E u•`icw ooagi u u c as a°u ~~ mx a m ro U m p04 a1 H 7 of ? .i H ~p. W U H m g y m q m 0.~ L O+•1t Lrl•,•~Ar1,C -m w++ ro 0 O u= Ub O ro m Vf 0. Lj u p• N q H .cxm ro ro~ L G V b ~ q O ,O .•-1 .--1 m m 1+ 0 U ro m ro H L rl ~ U L W ro ro p~ m u L N H •n .-i w ro ~ .c .a y a m .•~ >. y ~ • N 1 ~ m u i ~ >+ a 3 ~ ..qi me o e i .-~ vi N u . -~ o a d v $ ~O 1+ . . 0.L L ti 00 r-t q H L m 'f H m - +~ uc H ro u L q ro m '~ v~ '~ 'O L m U ro w q q C FOi Y1 y m m m m •n m U ro B ~ W g N m w C 6 ~d ro~ oy0 O ,' ~ A O L ~ u O q •rl ~ u '-' u "~ 'i G m w eo m 'd " t D. v~ u m 3 m >, o 0 i i a,A ro row ro g m v H o u•,a a .-~ •. i ~ a roL m u .-~ a ~ u ~ m m 6 m o u .-i ro m a~ 3 3 v ro ro a •.~ m a i . -~ -Y y ro U C O~ r ~ ty m g ro > ~ O M u m H E W CI a ro m y,f u y~ y a' 0 ~ ro q ,C m q 7 ro m ~ O O H 0.t+ H O ~ •.i b H u1 7 .G d 0 y y N m A 0 H q •. ~1 u ro W M ti J-1 N q O W b N 1m1 0.H ~ m > m> >, X H m u y u•. + m uw q D.ro •u m ro~ m ro w.c q u ° H a i a p m m m a~.mia oero~`~ ~ w u m ~ ro-m+•-~o~iu m u H 0• 1~ieyw°N v H,L >i" Q U y O N •' ~i d W L C ' O N W H . 6 U ,!E q N , b g , ? •- . >". •. ! O .C X W O .ml d of D O $ O G W C N X O u ~ Er u m w H m ++ am N [-~ roN•.~ u O C H m•.av ro O O - -i Hw 3 ~ N M v ul r } '~ k' ~•. f'~ •. ~~. -~Z .: .'i .. ki?- - •: 4. .^` [~~ .=F: ~ '• - :.00 ~, ,.s •Ni~s I \si, :;f,'° { .,~~~' . 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District ....~ ._ :. ~ :._ ~ ~-- _l~. , ~ ~ t'" 3' ~ss ~_ 1 ~ ~ ~~ ,! .. ii1 F ~; '_{ ~\ "a:;1 :~ ~_ `% 1 .5 ~j n{~w ~;~ ~` 2 w ~~ ~~ ~.w. O 3~H ~~ t w`~~ -~ w - ~~ ~ ~ }W ~ ~W ~- ~ .~~- Q~~w w~ ~ ~~v` uiQ ~~ ~~ ~ o~os ~ ~~ v 3 ~.. ~L1 ~ ~ W~ ~~o~1c vv~.QO ~~' v~P. • 00 (., C~ v v ~w ¢ ~ p~~L tu= w~ =-~ ~ ~ V~ ~~ ~~ ~~ pk.. ~o ON ~ ~ ~ w ~~ w~ a. ~~ Q~p ~ z ~~ W d~ ~~ ,~ ?p ~O v tiuai. V 1~-. ~ ~ /(Y f-' _. `, r ~~ ~~~~ fi ~~]~ F -t'-~} 1 .:" '~ ~ ~~~~ ~~r~h. ... ~M r ,• --°`~ i_ __ 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District _i' ~+ :1; ,~ :~~f s F~! !~: -.y_ , zy~. .k~;: >. •~ :.~. i - ~ ..~. . '. is ~;~,' ~CYa7+ . :i _ J i. i C .d q d H L } d .. !0 ~, H o, ~ d :,; « ~ • i.r'~. N O •~ . : ~' '~ _ N ~~ •.:~` ~~< z: ~ ip L •r1 L q 'O 'O O1 M C l+ b A a o V w ,•~ q q V? E O .C ..i •-1 .C H C] O W N u N V u V H ..a H u w eoa u d a.~ q o .C G +i •C ~C W L vi W •d [r L iJ ,C C1 +~ .~ = . C C u 00 s ++ ro d a r o q C 3 F-Cl L ~ C~+Ei u U O d O C q .-i W ELp L C1 01 {U +~•~ N 6 V C ~, CJ t+q O• q vi M +i L ,Jr 'O u .C G' M L T d eu v .-~ 3 G c v .c O aD ? is. r•1 u Q u L cw.01•i,Daagmy .D ~ L L ~ a ~ .C m •vv'~ v evoow u•o ri G 8 b Op q W amp ? W ?t C? C H O O •-t H O +~ O L •CJ m al 3 •.Hi .-1 u ~ N aC0 +~ ~ N G N y W U 0 to ,.~ G Ql 3 g o W u t/1 ~ O O u u 0 O 7 ~ u N N -ri u N d ~ d T~ O 0 . ~i g C •p •. a 6 V 1 6 0 O e0 C W u H C y i u .O .~ q + • G N O C ~ U 7 N ~ i •. I i M H H •••1 G d W L ~'. O d y ~ O ! u v •1 ~ O u G 0.'V •ei C d .-t V N U 1 d a1 W~~ N O N N ,l] L e-1 N N W O . L1 0 W U V G 0 n ~0 +i •C d C b . ~ .O L q u 0 L N +i W O H? M ? C U a~ W p u u U 0. O" W N O y G ~ H M C N H W Ol tq G E O b d •C .O 0. >. N A O C ? G H W U OD N .-i .G O vi •.-~ ~ q u O V~ V q Ol N a/ 7 H H G E •.~ U to u .C .C O O d M N q? v " U N > 0p .i a} •C 'O W H L L W i.~ u N JJ 41 b .O M d O O n•1 00 ~! n^t O L q .G 41 N H f- H H C H ~O W O u> H('. i~.l y M rl N H H N >• H ,O •r1 H ~ 0.L S ~ ~ N O +i O b X q 0 .-i W .O N W C) C .•i C. W tll J.A .'i m N p 7 g q qt /-~ W .O -ri 4' -.i p ~ N > N _ t + L •1 i O u d N L ' '~ u q N H q •E i+ U q ~ •• 3 q o C u .G ~ E p, q ? d +-i q 3 W~ . •.a a vd N N .C a~ tQ L U ~ N DO H u t X B L W ad d ~ N 0 q ~ '~ ~~ k o W W y g M M p q i0 00 6 C r .1 W N O EE .C iq ~,~` ~-i e•i • l O W W N N 'O •rl •.~ Cl 'U M q u rg 6 O Y U u M O N •.1 N RI u l . 1 ~ •~ ~ U a v ,•i u a w V u> m y vi o ' V N C: d b 'O R q N v1 L W At G W N N O N v1 0 ,.+ v ,a u u >, ,O H +~ u o L U u ~ 00 00 G o0 ~ H d L ••i vi •rl fn U qLq~~ rl .•1 • y q q i g d b C U~ L . q q .-i L t•' N R O 0.N ,O ? N g T b ~ N W V tp 6 rl O i N • 3 N y 'i 0 W p •ri U C . p q C. b b b d 0. N y O C O Ol ,C a 1~ L ~ C W G u t L . $ a1 N g H o ° L ~ .-{ H q N g L N •ty Q ~u 6ood ~.,oo.cG,.~ M~ qi V O/ N N . t O 'cf .c a i -a u uow~aaraauoro O ,c ,G 3 M to C a0 a.i a0 .-1 ~ow W u H ,rl O> v q m +1 0..-i G w.,. O q b ~ O N lMM1~ t 1 ~'••. :~~ :: ; 04-080ADM ~,,~ j,., ~~~:~:~ Amendments to the ' '- ~" Corridor Development District ~:: . - i i - 1 ~--_" . '. =- ' f ~~ v F %.Ti F~ _ O W v°i m V .t~•_ v°.oA v ~:3:-.'~:: . u a £ H a ' '~ ' . u .o .~ . ~ 4 a u .a u G u .. N 7 m U q h . -rl N l1 y a m q L ~ m U q u d 6 q V O ~ ~ ~ ~ +~' 7 H m @ M.rl 5~'M ap 6a 4 r/ m M N .~_. ~ .n ~ m v m '~r•~s E S 'O ~ L m O u 0 a~ -~- L ~H L b G `~ ~`' ~ „u,1 ~ u v Pa a a m 6 6 N u p, i+ r ~' ~. k~°. :( .`.. .~ ~•:. { j- ~~ ' } i :~. ;~ 2_ a 1 ~, _. i i, i i ~~ ~~s~'- .-1 .p T .d G U Vml V ? u m u n b y • CO EO L N a0'O u m u a m a~ ~ ~uao->io~d Q ~ r Ep,{ u e tm. p F o F F a w T yl .1 u a O .1 w H a u m ~ N t u u, u 7 a NH+~+N ymppy~..uH ~ ap H L E m a .a ~.al meaiua°ua U ~ •.Ci V H m >. rl -.+ v l+ a oo a H w w N m -.i H a 3 a •"~ w .b m 7 m H 'O H m a G~p 4 Q F H a m al ~r1N H 00 ~/ 4 O"~ F ~a u O N uv T m >,l.v W u L 1 m F a + u l YdO ~ ~uw0 •'d u m 1 ~~ oa a F N .a ., °' . a x ud c cnuo c . u a p N a 7w v 7 7 a u N ~ vlp Q '~ p a 7 , -i t J ~ a t p O u °' u u b l+ t . . a m a O> m L rl Y u U L ° ~ Vl L F m Vj L u - u b v o f F a.F as t N m u F+ + H "a Oal V O O U 1 ~ N y ~ u v -+ a 'J t+ 4 A Y N al a h a G u > • G m" p'Nw . av a~ ,~, Euu>m V 7 m N y al .ti w G .-~ O E u .a1 A O m b p, u y E a E v, u a G •~ d it C N D ~ {+ y{ m L L .d H m ~ H w a C!' ty L N H N W m +~ u V d x u w > u m H y l°., w „u.~~H u o•o. m y.-~mm„Ei~i C a u a b N q u a -. amu umi > •O O T W O. O a a Fawn ~ ~ ~".°+ a x •o 1, u m.i m +~ ral U O -' > a F N p 'O YI .~ a 0 .. a m •.a G u u u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m 1.+ ~ a 4 •rNt mN W +~ O N E O ~ubmmyF'ouuu 1 ..N1 T w p N U L L m M rv~ao .,a uu-.>. ~~ H N u N y suJ w Vl u y a m y F vl ~,a> a~ ala yUOm.-io moa p O. a N Q •.i O U„ p. A y .q a a 7 a d pm y m s j N A N d N a ~' 'O „ 7 b b u N 6.x-1 u m Hal d aci -°. y U "a 3 o uH -. @ E o. N N m u v -+ a m a m ~ u 0 a u p N ~ p y H ..~ •c a ~ .-i O .~~i 3~ p u O N T ~.1 a O m b r1 N N +-1 ri m X U m y T 'd . p 4 a1 F N O a T al .'l o.a m ~ o,ab? ~, •I a m eD N O 1p L 7 al u .•a{ W p, ~ H N •n OD a w o o t a.v t o .uoNUU m+'b o. ~ H .Fl ~ ro d o ~ o m o b@~ u u .a E F H a o o O~ 7 U -.°i 7 0 p d ,~i m E 4 N~ N~ ~ ..~ H O O p O N v m v a u L 'd Y+ u a u " ro u m .-t N b •"1 x o o s.a~1t o++ a m N w F V p, u u b E 1 .-.{ N ~ J C 1 u N V N O +i H L w m m p 3 w m ~ 0 p ~ m a ~.ab 6a u s E o H m o m ,o m ° yHbF",.,uwmc -. o m ~ ~ ,.~ Fat E xpu.Tiu~mo u..~ u F a -. m u v u eaiv ate' m u .>.t 6 o E F u a 8 a a+'~~ p a.~.i•O.mG C N u~ ~ eui tua~>u um u AH u.d..+s a u o0 vmHmvla~u.+odu~+ u q N a.w u rl ~ ~ oa ro a m Euuo.~utoo mu E a wd,~ u E H m N N a N m ''f u u Hal o m -+ w u p v ..,ai ..+ -mi ~L L> a a'O O d a y H Y O m O U w C N p O- A O~ u N u m a E "'~ H u .t "`~ u m •.~ a a a E w •.1 E u L L F J u N 3 V y L Y 0 H +~ 7 a m ~ ;~ °s a t. m ~ a H m a u V~ L O u t `~ ~ M .. a H u a u~ u ~ ~ d u b Hal L • u~~ m y H~ u eo d ami d 1. t m 3 u u m o m u w u +L' -~ u m _ o'''~ l+ H .~ '° -. m m m p ua o a E G m Y u C G A > a o u o E m"a ° u . i N p F u O. u C N C N N T a a N U~ p a N N r u V V 7 N a u v v l u u a -. d o. H m 0 0 0 O H m w ~ > p' N d o L > N u m ~ V O m> a d v a a a ..+s o v c •- m ~ ~ V L Ll L+ N rl j u~ ~~ b w E a a ..l •.~ b ~yu HFO'ac~ ~H p V y mE w b -.1 L ~ m~ u °D •o a E " N G O a 7 a '~ c mac c +l a m . .1 . ommnr+'+ mm q ms w > N p v a a .-~ o0 E .. E ~~ Q ~. i.. , i 1=. t ~ ^~. ~~„JJ ~ ~y, ~'' " ''~'~ Z•• _ ` ' • -'tom w . h„~i~; ~~ ~4i~ j ~ ,l :+ : . -- t.. r - . t`s ~ ~ ~~ C t 04-080ADM Amendments to the Corridor Development District