Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Ordinance 003-16
Dayton Legal Blank, Inc. Ordinance No. 03 -16 RECORD OF ORDINANCES Form No. 30043 Passed . 20 AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 30 ACRES, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PERIMETER LOOP DRIVE, NORTH OF US 33 /SR 161, SOUTH OF PERIMETER DRIVE AND VENTURE DRIVE FROM PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (EXISTING MAG PLAN) AND PCD, PLANNED COMMERCE DISTRICT (PERIMETER CENTER, SUBAREA D) TO PUD (MIDWESTERN AUTO GROUP PUD) TO INCORPORATE APPROXIMATELY 5.4 ACRES INTO THE MAG PUD TO EXPAND THE AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP CAMPUS TO ACCOMMODATE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A COMBINED SHOWROOM FOR THE JAGUAR AND LAND ROVER BRANDS, THE FUTURE DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING LAND ROVER SHOWROOM, A NEW SHOWROOM FOR THE PORSCHE BRAND, AND THE ADDITION OF AN ELEVATED SHOWROOM ADDITION TO THE MAIN BUILDING FOR THE LAMBORGHINI BRAND. (CASE 15- 113Z /PDP) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, of its elected members concurring, that: Section 1. The following described real estate (see attached legal description, Exhibit A), situated in the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District, and shall be subject to regulations and procedures contained in Ordinance No. 21 -70 (Chapter 153 of the Codified Ordinances), the City of Dublin Zoning Code and amendments thereto. Section 2. The application, including the list of contiguous and affected property owners, and the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, are all incorporated into and made an official part of this Ordinance and said real estate shall be developed and used in accordance there within Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after the earliest period allowed by law. /J Passed this ay of LL. Y , 2016. 1 qa yo r - Pre i n g lcer TTEST: Clerk of Council ORDINANCE 03 -16 ADOPTED 02 -22 -2016 WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL/ MODIFIED CONDITIONS: 12) That the applicant revise Signs D2, D10 and D 11 to meet the development text requirements; 13) That the applicant return to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council for a comprehensive review and approval of a Master Sign Plan prior to the issuance of sign permits for Subarea C; 14) That the applicant work with staff to explore the elimination of the aesthetic pond on the west side of the southern boundary of Subarea C and provide undulated mounding in its place to the extent possible. Office of the Cloty ManN . * -* Dublin, OH 43017-109 I*tv of Dubli n Phone: 614-410-4400 * Fax: 614-410-4490 4citj To,s Members of Dublin City Council From,* Dana L. McDaniel, City Mana Date: February 18, 2016 Initimated By: Vincent A. Papsidero, FAICP,, Director of Planning Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Senior Planner Council members expressed concerns regarding the sign provisions proposed in the development text and requested the applicant provide an inventory of the campus signs. Additionally, Council members asked the applicant to address the changes requested by the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the east elevation of the proposed Jaguar/Land Rover building. The development text has unique sign requirements that identify special sign needs for this campus with the multiple vehicle franchises. The proposed development text follows similar sign requirements, except as noted. The applicant has provided an inventory of all signs on the campus with a site plan indicating their locations. During the previous rezoning stages, staff has Memo re. Ordinance 03-16 Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan MAG PUD February 18, 2016 Page 2 of 4 worked with the applicant closely to create appropriate sign categories for the different wayfinding needs. The proposed text permits five different types of signs for the MAG campus,,- campus identification, dealership identification, directional, brand, and wall signs. Specific requirement for each sign type are as follows are included in the text, I In Subarea A. the Commission approved a development text modification as part of the Final Development Plan review that permitted the specific wall signs at the specific heights shown for . 0 the new proposed combined Jaguar and Land Rover dealership. This provision continues to be included in this development text. The preliminary drawings for the future Porsche building include a red wall sign along the northern elevation of the building. The Commission previously permitted wall signs in Subarea B, one for each vehicle brand. In Subarea B, wall signs were required to adhere to the 15-foot height limitation of the Zoning Code and each sign was limited to 50 square feet. Memo re. Ordinance 03-16 Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan MAG PUD February 18, 2016 Page 3o 4 0 A- The remaining elevations include CMU, metal and metal cladding as building materials. Th!�O; changes in materials, use of windows and recessed in the elevations creates interesting viewpoints and continues the contemporary look of the campus, The applicant has provided an additional drawing of the south elevation to illustrate changes t- the articulation of the service entry wall as well as enhanced landscaping. The elevations ar attached to this memo. I liq The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan to City Council on January 7, 2016 with the conditions listed below. Memo re. Ordinance 03-16 Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan MAG PUD February 18,, 2016 Page 4 of 4 10)That the applicant work with staff to provide either additional articulation, landscaping or layout changes for the service drive for the southern elevation of the service area at the final development plan stage, and; 1I)That the text be revised to limit the sign size of a single wall sign in Subarea C to 55 square feet. Planning recommends City Council approval of Ordinance 03-16 at the second reading/public hearing on February 22, 2016 with one additional condition: 13) That the applicant revise Sign D2 to meet the development text requirements. Dealer Identification Sign DIS1 10'x S' Campus Identification Sign SIGN Cl 1 S'x 30" VENTURE DRIVE SHARED CURB CUT Ago SIGN C2 1 S'x 30" SIGN 0 1 S'x 30° Midwestern Auto Group Master Sign Plan page 1 Directional Signage a e SIGN D1 SS' x 42" Apr SIGN D3 SS "x 21" � Y SIGN DS SS "x 21" NEI SIGN D2 60" x 48" Er -� SIGN D4 SS "x 21" :i. SIGN D6 SS "x 21" Midwestern Auto Group Master Sign Plan page 2 SIGN D7 SS'x 21" Ph, I se..i Directional Signage SIGN D9 40 "x 33" r 6a ©VOLVO SERVICE _ owl SIGN D11 40 "x 72" SIGN D8 SS "x 21" lilo aw 'S SERVICE Ina an' SIGN D10 S2 "x42" Sign D12 12" Letters Midwestern Auto Group Master Sign Plan page 3 i Sign D13 12" Letters Directional Signage Midwestern Auto Group Master Sign Plan page 4 Brand Signs JJJ .� 6— N w° 111". 4 L r � i.. -'_EY SIGN B1 40'x 48" 1� ,�,., SIGN B3 39 'x 11 S' 1. %a Qm Z I SIGN BS 40 "x 72" SIGN B2 40 "x 48" Mir Iwo% SIGN B4 39 "x 96" ■II a- y�9 C SIGN B6 40 "x 36" J Midwestern Auto Group Master Sign Plan page 5 Brand Signs 1 !� �� � � - -nom � � • SIGN B7 40 "x 72" SIGN B9 40 "x 60" JLR BRAND SIGN SIGN B11 40 "x 72" SIGN B8 40 "x 72" SIGN B10 1' -2 'x 2' -2° PORSCHE BRAND SIGN SIGN B12 40 "x 72" Midwestern Auto Group Master Sign Plan page 6 Wall Signs SIGN W1 48'X 84" mim. �r T SIGN W3 29 'x 17' -3" JAGUAR LETTERSET W/ LOGO SIGN WS I'-9'x 22' -8 1/2' SIGN W2 4' -7 "x 13, -6° SIGN W4 29'X 20' -6" LAND ROVER LETTERSET W/ LOGO SIGN W6 2' -1 'x 2S' -S 1/2" Midwestern Auto Group Master Sign Plan page 7 think. create. do. PDRIMSTDR DRIVE - 80' 1 / I I� m Cy b� II I I NOTE- ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN INCLUDED FOR GENERAL REFERENCE ONLY - REFER TO ii DOCUMENTS FOR ACTUAL SITE LAYOUT AND DIMENSIONS. REFER TO LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTS FOR ACTUAL PLANTING LOCATIONS AND SPECIES archall A R C H I T E C T U R A L A L L I A N C E 165 NORTH FIFTH STREET I COLUMBUS OHIO 43215 P614.469.7500 I F 614.469.0500 1 www.archall.com DRAWING SET E Ot 129I 20th preliminary 13 check O� bid 13 permit Cz W :M111 O O � ao zz �a W W Q Cz -a DRAWING SET E Ot 129I 20th preliminary 13 check 13 bid 13 permit 13 construction REVISIONS A A A A A A A A SEAL PROJECT NUMBER A15 -046 SHEET TITLE MASTER SIGN PLAN SHEET NUMBER 1.03 y 4 �s�s^ JAGUAR I LAND ROVER - PORSCHE - LAMBORGHINI MAGCAMAPUSn �Iarchall MAG CAMPUS s II ^pIarcha nanccnnnrus ���I��archdII MARBIRG o_a , N think create. do. _A O a AREA A a AREA a a AREA archall :o.....o.o,,:,. PER DUE BLDG B PA a EP A�A°UAPam,�PAoPAARO.«AER °.°�L�AAIN.G m �.° .P MA ,A' DEE,,.P �E,E REa°E°PARKNA °A�An°NS A °�°a „s� a aE °PAA.N °G« °a. s 3� MPA,.s� ° -ME a.AREaE KI ZG b °_� r, 22 MINI I'll AT OR LARECORCHI °M °EA °E gAERCE °A� ,. E.A� SPACES °172,1GA TOTAL °E °aE° PANG s3. MAIM NAG BLDG 'UK MAND 4ao .°.��a.°E IS RXTRYLKLEA N°. °E °°EE�NGE °An.27CA«= OCTAL ETE - PA,z.g (SwACA6) CH AT RUSH. �aIN AE. o P° °.NS . ; HASP PPED GR °CE = °ON' =,E o°E, %.,z. AF (P� °E OCTAL ATE) �ARKINA ° ° °EA °E =EROME BRAS s =.A� �. �.EAA °E ,mA. PAIGN° PR °N °m RAb TOTAL _�,E - 3,P,„° BE cal° ACRES) ,mA. a,o�° °��a..PA °E ,SEA 777°7, o °HAN °CAPPED SPACES ON Ei,E A= A,o� SUMMARY p W OCTAL ,., , n °E.°. BUT) LU - TOTAL PARKING ,o.A� ° °,o ° °A °EP,A.,PA�E AREA. ,P ss, EE —1 PROPE AAK ACTUAL A E . ME° s. o — SHARED BE ARES OF TOTAL C, TOTAL REACHED PAID . °.A. a,oECEa ° EPa. =PAGE AFEA SUBS AF a o zz Site Plan -Phase 2 Lu A CHITECTURAL ATE PLAN INCLUDED OCR GENERAL REFERENCE CIO ONLY — REFER FEE CCAL DOCUMENTS FOR ACTUAL H LARCAT AND RAR P IA DOCUMENTS FOR — AACTUAL W uun �cnn °NN AND SPECIES - _ - --------------- G CQ S ©; k AI \-�j AINUND .......h.... I LE OIL TANK I�LRYa'151f� think create. do. archall rese�ne SITE PLAN 1 �,.,.. 1.02 min •_ > e - •• nN o �a ® S',9TS9O O •> o. speaa..a ex .emsry og6yo a`. °g SITE PLAN 1 �,.,.. 1.02 H think create. do. m 0 0 db o FAR F7 7B -64- o � o o r-m r-11h r-m IS 9 - o E -1 i o 0 d ---- - - - - -, H, HA,v.o... E, Ll ___ __ ��y ��yuro imex yy O O OY m �a FLOOR PLAN 10 1 archall d 0 CZ W O p aZ 25 H= LU 30 ° ° -a .Q 0 0 e 3.01 I SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE 332 �1 EAST ELEVATION 31 NORTH ELEVATION 40 WEST ELEVATION think create. do. GENERAL NOTES NE To nuarv'MI ADJACENT muworvs ALS FOR ro MATCH ADJACENT KALL FINISH ALL — HER LOUDFRA TO BE MANTER TO MATCH ANJACENT FINISH 0 FINISH LEGEND ru m. nw r �c sn neou SHAREM T nrvu pwxwu�"u"(cuss i] °'M ENT FINISH ALUM NM «¢s3 „ °sM T ..Is ALUMINUM °¢Lass "�) ` ALUMINUM AMMEARE:TE : o aWS. MATERIAL "MA,na "S CHAMPAGNE mE:aMI;M OM� Cbac �a "3�Ld " -�.rvN E` 3 M "., "sK� DoE" �.6M,TO" aucus o CA,o" To MATCH GMPMs archall ....,....n......... ,..o,,..�.r ,o......o.o, „,. d CZ W O ao z LU W 30 o cc ALL0 0 e 4.01 JAGUAR LANOeROVMER 11 p. a r�ha ��� JAGUAR LANOROVER�M�p aCChall 6" 3" 1 616 m 3" 0 076 0 07 m DOUBLES IDED MONUMENT SIGN ALUMINUM /ACM FINISHED SUNSHINE GREY SATIN SILVER ANODIZED ALUMINUM EDGING &TRIM INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED WITH WHITE LEDS ROUTED GRAPHIC OPENINGS 3D CHROME LEAPER & 3D JAGUAR CHROMED LETTERS WHITE KEYLINE ILLUMINATION LAND ROVER DOME FORMED ACRYLIC FACE BRIGHT POLISHED STAINLESS STEELACCENT RING DARK GREENVINYL BACKGROUND OPAQUE SILVER CHROME LETTERS WHITE KEYLINE AROUND LETTERS ACCENTS & BORDER NOTE: Due to the natural effects of the environment, differences in raw materials and possible variances in the paint finish, an exact color match cannot be guaranteed between the new sign cabinet and your existing brand sign and /or tower. ',lPAITISON III b lermers lead He1(416) 759 111 1 TM1eartl ticw orks depicted herein are copyright and are the sive Fl uoreScenC Neon and HID lamps contain Mercury IDmnM IS- p Canada MI Rafe Fax (416)]59-4965 properryor Faroson sign Group and as cannot reproduced Dlryose of these I amps accord mgro SIGN GROUP Povow . Pam sonsig n. com mu Free l 1111. E536 In whole or In partwlMout prior written consent Local, Provincial, state or Federal Laws. Job No. DD1 15 o Dale: EVector Artwork Required High Resolution mage Requlred Final Colours Requlred yo[ Check Requlred ❑ Conceptual A rtwork edf ProduR cnor Elsonralla-mranems 22 8 1A ED 1 438 in 5 139 in ERG A 22 708 X 1 812 — 41 158 SQUARE FEET 25512' ]60m 20 441A 31 121011 621 in 0420 4 LAND ROVE R FED LINE DENOTES BOXED SQUARE FOOTAGE 25416 X 2.083 - 53.3]0 SQUARE FEET 2,_1. 0638m PROTOTYPE SIGNAGE Chromed Leaper& Letters Individual Letters Logo Facade Slgnage ■ AT 2191 Opaque Green Background Film JAGUAR: R] 3635- 1100paque Silver Chrome Letters 3D Chrome Leaper& 3D Jaguar Chromed Letters Accents & Border White Halo Illumination Barrelled on the Horizontal Axis LANDROVER OVAL Dome Formed Aayllcface Bright Polished Stainless Steel Accent Ring Dark Green Vinyl Background Opaque Silver Chrome Letters 1/4 'White Keene Around Lettere Accents &Border No Halo Illumination LANDROVER LETTERS: 3D Land Rover Chromed Letters Barrelled on the Horizontal Axis White Halo Illumination O SOUTH ELEVATION NOTE: Due to the natural effects of the environment, differences in raw materials and possble variances in the paint finish, an exact color match cannot be guaranteed between the new sign cabinet and your existing brand sign and /or tower. ', PATTISON WSS Ellesmere Wad Her (416) 759 111 1 TM1eartl sticworks depicted herein are copyright and are the exduSNe Fl uoreScenC Neon and HID lamps contain Mercury Tromp onhM1 p Canada MI BaL3 Fax(416)]59-4965 propertyor Fattlson sign Group and as cannot reproduces olp of these I amps accord mgro SIGN GROUP ww. pats sons IF n. cum mu Free l A1a168E536 In whole or In partwlMout prior written consent Local, Frovinaar state or Federal Laws. Job No. Prof ect lD'. AD24BB6 Date. Dec1,2015 Sale'. Salem A.DIM'rFo D lgrv. GR Dale: EVector Artwork Required High Revolution mage Required Final Colours Required Soo Check Required ❑ concepmal Artwork edf ProduR onor Elsonralig-r iranemi CI ■ broadocustomers 0®0 SHE O SOUTH ELEVATION NOTE: Due to the natural effects of the environment, differences in raw materials and possble variances in the paint finish, an exact color match cannot be guaranteed between the new sign cabinet and your existing brand sign and /or tower. ', PATTISON WSS Ellesmere Wad Her (416) 759 111 1 TM1eartl sticworks depicted herein are copyright and are the exduSNe Fl uoreScenC Neon and HID lamps contain Mercury Tromp onhM1 p Canada MI BaL3 Fax(416)]59-4965 propertyor Fattlson sign Group and as cannot reproduces olp of these I amps accord mgro SIGN GROUP ww. pats sons IF n. cum mu Free l A1a168E536 In whole or In partwlMout prior written consent Local, Frovinaar state or Federal Laws. Job No. Prof ect lD'. AD24BB6 Date. Dec1,2015 Sale'. Salem A.DIM'rFo D lgrv. GR Dale: EVector Artwork Required High Revolution mage Required Final Colours Required Soo Check Required ❑ concepmal Artwork edf ProduR onor Elsonralig-r iranemi CI ■ broadocustomers �1 think create. do. mx�cc•i� mix N ,KmPo K . K. .mom ONE xxxxx DeECIDUMS TNEE PLANTING ma ou..A.m•n,Eemr EVENGNEEN TPEE PIAMING SHNU9 PLANTING GROUP PENENNW MD GHOUNDCOVEN INSTALLATION �m AREPOOND70iOmOixxxxxxim Km S GQ6 Fim. 3 4 x immix •...m xmnI m ,mPo rm . m OF emm .r PLANT SCHEDULE cP TRANSPLANT SCHEDULE mix N ,KmPo K . K. .mom ONE xxxxx o DeECIDUMS TNEE PLANTING ma ou..A.m•n,Eemr EVENGNEEN TPEE PIAMING SHNU9 PLANTING GROUP PENENNW MD GHOUNDCOVEN INSTALLATION ' S GQ6 2 3 4 x • K �. ramrxmov�ungmami..wnnw em.e emm .r PLANT SCHEDULE cP TRANSPLANT SCHEDULE Site Data Notes .y G K . •.r..ner.e...�....nrn.r.. p �.mKA, uxramiuwrwv�.K. K.erm ® K e .suemeFM /m.��asen' u.. ifu S.J TrPoMePvaKY -B WVUhAKbEeuPe� nm •Y e Pq. mmenemm.rnwme...amr .K mxaem� a¢ ffi 6veMFKMr.M.l=xxKneeMAmbnxe.b W] 611'. e — xvumlwixxA O x m �m ..e �m maAa •.m,mmr�...x�,wxm.re wKUttulwmert cenAtt mrtw. AReMPevKIU MUNmKa Aum/W UVa mxvur ® A PYY4AWebxW.uW A�mIn.JKnrrq v�r�x.e. �. rt �� wunnne>Aln.nuam•uvW u.e x4 w o�vAxvnrcme�[u�e ® w.m��iwvWi.AVA v.A�m ® Po le YtlnAnrm /IbneY B.B @SXf.� - mm ��.eyy�esp�1a.mum emu vASansw� OW �� uW wvcW w�urv�mr'myaus' u.. xa u.en,�w,n.Aeiu m..nwwKVwnvn M iw,.e•.on Kmmxm,rrt xu O f1 velYZ4lb.es PePJmn. vAK.ue¢.mic PM4AWebxJVYUNbmYlpWmaY) pmlg.6flMBf/.TM MO �. ue �� m.�u ms�imV s.e m w .a�wrmr rsrau��ml M�A6s4 i weu xo.ix wuedx &¢ieinesAfFauvxnK. 0 A mm o L&9L 8H ffi S GQ6 SO IS x • K �. ramrxmov�ungmami..wnnw .y O e, n wnxrummunlnewmmru Wxv cP p a m mv..�mprrAipn...rm.om .y G K . •.r..ner.e...�....nrn.r.. eM ® re A mmenemm.rnwme...amr .K mxaem� a¢ ffi � ae�uau eax �m maAa •.m,mmr�...x�,wxm.re r da IMK.rI.'JOJnpbrV••Ab WeM ®: M PYY @A W e bWe. ue! b xs1 miJmmM Ts PY4Grr rmas.mYUennenrvr onr &.wmi w'. r.rumr.nmoW mnne..a Pwerm.newiKrx-xmMgbx. Pdx� ��= mrlxm�mBNBmxquW.w umW vnwmivAav4.ytO�vnvima 6e K,u ®xenaIX sK.x wyuxmvq,IMAREiex—wiY ®-1A eo�uoNAmiwx.�emu6rnex KrzK�OLiai �..�."��a uo�P.wrmu.w think create. do. ro a archall 0 i IL i 1. W Cg la O p mo w- LU C ,a e� la �� A — a ®- a OT ® — r.m �rxm�m�mxnm� TP -1 ---- -t -i -� - - - -- think. create.da 1 „1o.....Arpro1— L,C..,u_al —A... �. archall ARCH ITECTURAL ALLIANCE I.- S-W w� Eas,a�.a..00.s -�� oH 5 c Lot Pa v 4411 me of of o w m °E b w fs ww..i.nbeio.. canwC,,Ma• S.wns DECKHR CPS CL CaLU C7 W 0 Q _ ao L W_ h W .x 30 o cs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6. EX19ING COMPARES C1.00 ---- -t -i —� - — — - think. create. do I archall CL CaLU C7 W Q 0 CZ C2 z W COD W 30 o cs _Q can esa.rWas � 0 0 0 0 0 S.wns DECKHR CPS 6-- ,14- PROMSED GMDING PO C 1 . 0 1 ---- -t -i —� - — — - think. create. do I archall CL CaLU C7 W Q 0 CZ C2 z W COD W 30 o cs _Q can esa.rWas � 0 0 0 0 0 S.wns DECKHR CPS ,14- C1.02 think. create. da archall LU C7 W Q 0 ao z W COD W 30 o cs _Q can esa.rWas � 0 0 0 „OP,„ s.wns 0 DECKHR r L r CPS AMMURNEHIMS C1.03 SUB AREA A a AREA a a AREA a rcEha :o.....o.o,,:,. AT p.� J , .NL „,e. QA. "RAVE OF � °AR�oD ROVER CULAN° _ o,mo.,.,,o.mo.......... • °. ° EF 11 ,. ., �� °° SS „ ES NANR�r aDPKR 11 SEAS OCTAL PARKING IR.GD.. 111 0 H1 ... ..B e HANDICAPPED SPACER ON SITE DISPLAY TRY 1 GAS - 2 A, AAHG. LIKE TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING 234 \ mAL REEF ED PARRNa WORK , WALLS s,E e. ED (rew ADR6) PROSS SPAS ° TOTAL AL GREEN E LANE DE SE ACE RAYS e, =A� , HANDICAPPED WACES ON S,E o D,.,E. EF DE OCTAL ATE) TRUTAL PARKING PROVIDED N ' rzs TOTAL AT US 7D n °us) rorn. wmwrc °mur IPA" Preen 21 OR a oe HE AC LPS` 1° "` GREEN SPACE SUMMARY W TOTAL GTE - a �° .. OF MITE) e°,.°,EF OCTAL TOTAL ,PACE AREA- 49.993 EE ro`..L PARIoEDRPK . p GO, GREEN WA E SHARIA SE c36. , °, .°.., ,�> TOTAL REw RED p OC qe .D.AL a,o�R D tea. SPACE AREA AF Q G �\ a FLY i Site Plan - Phase \ y SPACE t ©8 «e i auunnD LOCATE °NE AND SPECIES DOCUMENTS FOR ACTUAL W Q ONLY FEW ,o CNL DOCUMENTS FOR ACTUAL D,E LAVeue AN A.N °MENEDNS. REFER TO LANDSCAPE DD �a ¢ o cc ©� — - -_� PALO w ��e o - �� , k� ARAT � 00.: I ��....� 1.01 think create. do. PoRS ° "EMS6archall °RSCHI MS Iarchall UIMBORGHINI Siff BRXIBGE IIS larchall ar�ha�� UIMBGRGHINISKYBRIBGE Il�p Members of Dublin City Council ee From,: Dana L. McDaniel, City Man r Datex. February 4,, 2016 Initi"ated By,,.% Vincent A. Papsidero, FAICP, Director of Plannin,#,,i Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Senior Planner The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this application on January 7, 2016 and made a recommendation of approval to City Council. A concept plan was reviewed by the Commission on October 1, 2015. The Perimeter Center Planned Commerce District was originally approved in 1988, encompassing land between Avery-Muirfleld Drive and Emerald Parkway, divided into subareas A through M. Permitted uses include commercial, industrial,, residential,, and office. A 14 -acre Subarea 3 of the Perimeter Center plan was created in 1998 specifically for auto dealerships and other uses, with several automotive franchises as a part of the Midwest Auto Group (MAG) campus. In 1998, a separate Land Rover building was added to the site. The Planning and Zoning Commission has approved several amended plans for the site, In 2010, City Council approved a rezoning with preliminary development plan that removed Subarea J and portions of Subareas D and J-1 from the Perimeter Center PCD and established,01 Memo re. Ord. 03-16 — Rezoning — Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) PUD February 4, 2016 Page 2 of 7 Changes to Subarea B include two interior access points to the west to Subarea C. Memo re. Ord. 03-16 — Rezoning — Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) PUD February 4, 2016 Page 3 of 7 Future Land Use The western portion of the site is designated as General Commercial on the Future Land Use Map, while the central portion and the vacant parcel are designated as Standard OffIce, which includes sites with frontage along major collectors to include medical and dental offices, professional offices *at * and large-scale office buildings wirn single or multiple tenants,, While the proposal does not strictly adhere to the Future Land Use designation, the proposal is an expansion of the existing MAG campus, which includes the dealership headquarters, automotive sales and service uses and a residencef City Council has previously expressed concerns regarding numerous car dealership fronting along US33. As a landowner, MAG has a history of working with Planning to achieve a high quality (.:ampus appearance with appropriate mounding, landscaping and site layout. Additionally, the permitted uses within the proposed development text include office and retail uses, which would provide the opportunity for future redevelopment that more closely meets the Future Land Use. Development Text This development text establishes a new Planned Unit Development District with development regulations that are applicable only to these 30± acres. It also removes approximately 5.5 acres from the Perimeter Center District Subarea D and incorporates them into the new, larger MAG Planned Unit Development District, Similarly, in Subarea A, the applicant has made minor revisions to this development text to updat language regarding future development. i Memo re. Ord. 03-16 — Rezoning — Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) PUD February 4, 2016 Page 4 of 7 The applicant has modeled the proposed development text for Subarea C on the existing language for Subareas A and B. 15e - The list of uses is identical for all Subareas and permits the sales and services of new and used automobiles. The applicant is also proposing to permit office and research uses, similar to what is currently permitted in Subarea D of Perimeter Center. The proposed text continues to permit a number of ancillary uses within the primary structure., which includes automobile service, sales of automobile parts and accessories, non-retail coffee shop and automobile rental services. The proposed rezoning will permit a non-retail car wash, which will be approved with the final development plan application. Setback Requirements The pavement and building setbacks text for Subarea C is consistent with the requirements for both Subareas A and B, including the areas impacted by Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) right-of-way takes for the US33/I-270 interchange project, and are as follows: Density The proposed development text does not specify density, so the maximum building site will be determined by parking, setbacks and lot coverage. Code permits up to 70% lot coverage. Architecture and Building Materials The proposed development text requires "'contemporary and innovative architecture." The proposed building will continue the contemporary style and will provide a visual presence along US 33/SR161. Permitted building materials include glass, metal, EIFS, stone/stone veneer and concrete masonry units. The preliminary development plan shows a similar building design to what Venture Drive SR16."V-US33 Eastern Boundary Density The proposed development text does not specify density, so the maximum building site will be determined by parking, setbacks and lot coverage. Code permits up to 70% lot coverage. Architecture and Building Materials The proposed development text requires "'contemporary and innovative architecture." The proposed building will continue the contemporary style and will provide a visual presence along US 33/SR161. Permitted building materials include glass, metal, EIFS, stone/stone veneer and concrete masonry units. The preliminary development plan shows a similar building design to what Memo re. Ord. 03-16 — Rezoning — Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) PUD February 4, 2016 Page 5 of 7 was shown at the Concept Plan stage. The Jaguar/Land Rover showroom includes a rectangular elevation with deep recesses for each storefront. Metal and glass are the primary building materials along the front elevatione The remaining elevations include metal and metal cladding as building materials. The changes in materials, use of windows and recesses in the elevations create 'Interesting viewpoints and continue the contemporary look of the campus, The plans show the use of EIFS in the legend but not on the actual elevations. I All final details for the building, including colors of materials, will be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the final development plan stage. Landscaping and Tree Preservation Site landscaping is required to meet Code, except as noted. Code requires a six-foot wall, planting, mound, hedge or combination thereof plus one tree for every 30 feet to fulfill the property perimeter screening requirement along US33/SR161. During previous rezoning approvals for the MAG campus, the applicant was granted relief from this requirement, The proposed text for Subarea C requires a three-foot mound and one tree per 30 lineal feet of frontage along US33/SR161, to continue the design existing along the southern property boundary. Along the eastern boundary of the site, the Code-required vehicular use area screening is required. The Zoning Code requires one deciduous tree per 40 feet along a vehicular use area with a 31/2-foot wall, hedge or mound to screen vehicular use areas, gns The development text has unique sign requirements that identify special sign needs for this campus with the multiple vehicle franchises. The proposed development text follows similar sign requirements, except as noted. The proposed text permits five different types of signs for the MAG campus: campus identification, dealership identification, directional, brand and wall signs. Specific requirements for each sign type are as follows and are included in the text. 919 IvIerno re. Ord® 03-16 — Rezoning — Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) PUD February 4, 2016 Page 6 of 7 In Subarea A, the Commission approved a development text modification as part of the Final Development Plan approval that permitted the specific wall signs, at the specific heights shown for the new proposed combined Jaguar and Land Rover dealership. This provision continues to be included in this development text. The preliminary drawings for the future Porsche building include a red wall sign along the northern elevation of the building, The Commission previously permitted wall signs in Subarea B, one for each vehicle brand. In Subarea B,, wall signs were required to adhere to the 15-foot height limitation of the Zoning Code and each sign was limited to 50 square feet. The existing retention basin on the north side of the main building at the Perimeter Loop Road entrance provides stormwater management for Subarea A and is not being modified per the proposed development. Any site modifications to Subarea A will require the applicant to analyze and make any necessary modifications to the current stormwater management plan for Subarea �1 to ensure stormwater requirements as defined in Chapter 53 are satisfied,. The applicant will be required to work with staff prior to the Final Development Plan to identify and incorporate appropriate safety measures along the south side of the proposed western retention basin to protect vehicles traveling on westbound US33/SR161. Memo re. Ord. 03-16 — Rezoning — Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) PUD February 4, 2016 Page 7 of 7 A proposed storm sewer will outlet the eastern retention basin to an existing catch basin along Venture Drive as a means to discharge the site runoff. The underground storage chambers and western retention basin will outlet into the eastern retention basin. The western retention basin provides water quality for both Subareas B and C. Preliminary calculations submitted demonstrate compliance with stormwater requirements as defined in Chapter 53. All technical comments associated with stormwater management and civil plans will need to be addressed prior to the Final Development Plan. The applicant will also be required to submit additional information and details for the proposed retaining wall along the eastern retention basin,, 1!!1111� ir- 111 1111, 111 q� 111111111111� I! q 1111111:��Iiiiipi;i A Anw, The Planning ana zoning Commission recommended approval of the Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan to City Council on January 7,, 2016 with the conditions listed below. iijqI 111111 11 1 � I 1111111 �r Staff recommends City Council approval of Ordinance 03-16 at the second reading/public hearing on February 22, 2016X Dayton Legal Blank, Inc. Ordinance No. 03 -16 RECORD OF ORDINANCES Form No '10041 Passed . 20 AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 30 ACRES, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PERIMETER LOOP DRIVE, NORTH OF US 33 /SR 161, SOUTH OF PERIMETER DRIVE AND VEUITURE DRIVE FROM PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (EXISTING MAG PLAN) AND PCD, PLANNED COMMERCE DISTRICT (PERIMETER CENTER, SUBAREA D) TO PUD (MIDWESTERN AUTO GROUP PUD) TO INCORPORATE APPROXIMATELY 5.4 ACRES INTO THE MAG PUD TO EXPAND THE AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP CAMPUS TO ACCOMMODATE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A COMBINED SHOWROOM FOR THE JAGUAR AND LAND ROVER BRANDS, THE FUTURE DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING LAND ROVER SHOWROOM, A NEW SHOWROOM FOR THE PORSCHE BRAND, AND THE ADDITION OF AN ELEVATED SHOWROOM ADDITION TO THE MAIN BUILDING FOR THE LAMBORGHINI BRAND. (CASE 15- 113Z /PDP) NUW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, of its elected members concurring, that: Section 1. The following described real estate (see attached legal description, Exhibit A), situated in the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District, and shall be subject to regulations and procedures contained in Ordinance No. 21 -70 (Chapter 153 of the Codified Ordinances), the City of Dublin Zoning Code and amendments thereto. Section 2. The application, including the list of contiguous and affected property owners, and the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, are all incorporated into and made an official part of this Ordinance and said real estate shall be developed and used in accordance there within. Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after the earliest period allowed by law. Passed this day of Mayor - Presiding Officer ATTEST: Clerk of Council 201-6. 15- 1132 /PDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan 0 250 500 MAG - Porsche /Jaguar /Land Rover mossommE� CI�of Dublin 6335 Perimeter Loop Road Feet CITY OF DUBLIN- Land Use and Long Range Planning 56X shlkef -pxlgs Rcud Phcnc! -_D 614416 -4663 Fax. 614 -1 I6-174" Web Si-e www.d !brh oh.us February 2009 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPLICATION (Code Section 153.232) I. PLEASE CHECK THE TYPE OF APPLICATION: ❑ informal Review ❑ Final Plat (Section 152.085) ❑ Concept Plan ❑ Conditional Use (Section 153.056(A)(1)) (Section 153.236) x❑ Preliminary Development Plan / Rezoning ❑ Corridor Development District (CDD) (Section 153.053) (Section 153.115) ❑ Final Development Plan (Section 153.053(E)) ❑ Amended Final Development Plan (Section 153.053(E)) ❑ Standard District Rezoning (Section 153.018) ❑ Preliminary Plat (Section 152.015) ❑ Corridor Development District (CDD) Sign (Section 153.115) ❑ Minor Subdivision ❑ Right -of -Way Encroachment ❑ Other (Please Specify): Please utilize the applicable Supplemental Application Requirements sheet for additional submittal requirements that will need to accompany this application form. II. PROPERTY INFORMATION: This section must be completed. Property Address(es): 6335 Perimeter Loop Drive / Venture Drive Tax ID/Parcel N umber(s): 273-011297/009976/008212 Parcel Size(s) (Acres): 15.507 ±acres 5.400 ±acres 9.127± acres Existing Land Use/Development: Existing automobile dealerships and vacant land IF APPLICABLE, PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: Proposed Land Use/Development: Add new automobile dealership to the site that i compliment the existing dealerships Total acres affected by application: 29.938± acres III. CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER(S): Please attach additional sheets if needed. Name (Individual or Organization): CARS CNI -2 LP and CAR MAG PARK LLC 8270 Greensboro Drive, Suite 950 Mailing Address: McLean, VA 22102 (Street, City, State, Zip Code) Daytime Telephone: 889 -2571 Email or Alternate Contact Information: Barry Lester Fax: 793 -7963 Page 1 of 3 IV. APPLICANT(S): This is the person(s) who is submitting the application if different than the property owners) listed in part III. Please complete if applicable. Name: Midwestern Auto Group / Brad Parish Applicant is also property owner: yes[] no [3 Organization (Owner, Developer, Contractor, etc.): Tenant / Lessee Mailing Address: (Street, City, State, Zip Code) 6335 Perimeter Loop Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017 Daytime Telephone: 889 -2571 Fax: 793 -7963 Email or Alternate Contact Information: Barry Lester V. REPRESENTATIVE(S) OF APPLICANT / PROPERTY OWNER: This is the person(s) who is submitting the application on behalf of the applicant listed in part IV or property owner listed in part III. Please complete if applicable. Name: Jackson B. Reynolds, III / Brad Parish Organization (owner, Developer, Contractor, etc.): Attorney / Architect Mailing Address: 37 West Broad (Street, City, State, zip Code) Columbus, Ohio Street, Suite 460 / 165 North 5th Street, 43215 j Columbus, Ohio 43215 Daytime Telephone: 221 -4255 / 469 -7500 Fax: 221 -4409 Email or Alternate Contact Information: jreynolds @smithandhale.com / bparish @archall.com VI. AUTHORIZATION FOR OWNER'S APPLICANT or REPRESENTATIVE(S): If the applicant is not the property owner, this section must be completed and notarized. Barry Lester the owner, hereby authorize _ Jackson B. Reynolds III & Brad Parish to act as my applicant or representative(s) In all matters pertaining to the processing and approval of this application, including modifying the project. I agree to be bound by all representations and agreements made by the designated representative. Signature of Current Property Owner: Date: U Check this box if the Authorization for Owner's Applicant or Representative(s) is attached as a separate document Subscribed and sworn before me this day of State of County of Notary Public 20 VII. AUTHORIZATION TO VISIT THE PROPERTY: Site visits to the property by City representatives are essential to process this application. The Owner /Applicant, as noted below, hereby authorizes City representatives to visit, photograph and post a notice on the property described in this application. I Jackson B. Reynolds, III , the owner or authorized representative, hereby authorize City representatives to visit, photograph and post a notice on the property described in this application. Signature of applicant or authorized representative: s/ �j� �LL, _ Date: WV1 Page 2 of 3 VIII. UTILITY DISCLAIMER: The Owner /Applicant acknowledges the approval of this request for review by the Dublin Planning and Zen Ing Commission and/or Dublin City Council does not constitute a guarantee or binding commitment that the City of Dublin will be able to provide essential services such as water and sewer facilities when needed by said Owner /Applicant. Jackson B. Reynolds, III . the owner or authorized representative, acknowledge that approval of this request does not constitute a guarantee or binding commitment that the City of Dublin will be able to provide essential services such as water and sewer facilities when needed by said Owner /Applicant. Signature of applicant or authorized representative: / 1"c'""Y y U fc U11— I Date: �! V/ 5— IX. APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT: This section must be comoleted and I Jackson B. Reynolds, III the owner or authorized representative, have read and understand the contents of this application. The information contained in this application, attached exhibits and other information submitted is complete and In all respects true V4correct, to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature of applicant or authorized representative: Zl "7 1&p ,UaL'IL I Date: (I / (r ✓) Subscribed and sworn to before me this `( OState of ' ) County of ( Notary Publi( day of , 20 Natalie C. Timmons Notary Public, State of Ohio My Commission Expires 09-04.2015 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Amount Received: Application No: P &Z Date(s): P &Z Action: Receipt No: Map Zone: Date Received: Received By: City Council (First Reading): City Council (Second Reading): City Council Action: Ordinance Number: Type of Request: N, S, E, W (Circle) Side of: N, S, E, W (Circle) Side of Nearest Intersection: Distance from Nearest Intersection: Existing Zoning District: Requested Zoning District: Page 3 of 3 I L 6329 Perimeter LLC Hawkins Family Partnership Ltd First Place Bank 5112 Harlem Road C/O Dwayne Hawkins 185 East Market Street Galena, OH 43021 600134"' Street North Warren, OH 44481 St Petersburg, FL 33714 Mt. Carmel Health System Hawkins Family Partnership Ltd BOR Associates LLC 6150 East Broad St, Floor 3 600134"' Street North 5850 Venture Drive, Ste A Columbus, OH 43213 St Petersburg, FL 33714 Dublin, OH 43017 5870 Venture Drive LLC RJCM Biondi LLC TriVentures LLC C/O ECS 8400 Industrial Parkway 1430 Collins Road NW 5870 Venture Drive, STE C Plain City, OH 43064 Lancaster, OH 43130 Dublin, OH 43017 DBD 6000 Venture LLC AHF Management Corp John M Fitzgerald 6000 Venture Drive 5920 Venture Drive 6617 Heatherstone Circle Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017 *CARS CNI -2LP and *Midwestern Auto Group Case #15- 113Z /PDP CAR MAG PARK LLC 6335 Perimeter Loop Road 8270 Greensboro Drive, STE 950 Dublin, OH 43017 McLean, VA 22102 *Jackson Reynolds, Esq. *Brad Parish Smith and Hale LLC Archall Architects 37 West Broad St, STE 460 165 North Fifth Street Columbus, OH 43215 Columbus, OH 43215 Discovery MC Investments Nationwide Childrens Hospital Realty Income Properties LLC 7007 Discovery Blvd PO Box 7200 PO Box 460069 Dublin, OH 43017 Columbus, OH 43205 -0200 Escondido, CA 92046 I L 6329 Perimeter LLC Hawkins Family Partnership Ltd First Place Bank 5112 Harlem Road C/O Dwayne Hawkins 185 East Market Street Galena, OH 43021 600134"' Street North Warren, OH 44481 St Petersburg, FL 33714 Mt. Carmel Health System Hawkins Family Partnership Ltd BOR Associates LLC 6150 East Broad St, Floor 3 600134"' Street North 5850 Venture Drive, Ste A Columbus, OH 43213 St Petersburg, FL 33714 Dublin, OH 43017 5870 Venture Drive LLC RJCM Biondi LLC TriVentures LLC C/O ECS 8400 Industrial Parkway 1430 Collins Road NW 5870 Venture Drive, STE C Plain City, OH 43064 Lancaster, OH 43130 Dublin, OH 43017 DBD 6000 Venture LLC AHF Management Corp John M Fitzgerald 6000 Venture Drive 5920 Venture Drive 6617 Heatherstone Circle Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017 (A) The proposed project re- organizes current brands found on the MAG campus as well as creates the opportunity to expand operations with an additional brand. Three (3) automobile showrooms are proposed for the project. On the North side of the campus in Subarea A, the existing Landrover facility will be removed to make way for a 9,000 sf stand alone Porsche Facility. A 5,900 sf addition proposed for the North side of the main building on -site will be the Lamborghini showroom. A 30,000 sf automotive showroom for Landrover and Jaguar is proposed for the vacant land to the east of the campus. Jaguar will be the new brand to the MAG campus. Alterations to Subarea B are required to provide access to the new development. (B) The proposed auto dealership complements the existing dealerships abutting the site that are owned by the owner /applicant. The development pattern has been established by the previously approved rezoning to the west of the site. The frontage along SR 161/33 is very advantageous to automobile dealerships and the owner /applicant is taking this opportunity to expand its operations on the proposed site and continue to bring upscale products to the City of Dublin. (C) The Dublin Community Plan shows this vacant land to the east as a general office area. The proposed automobile dealership is a change from the Community Plan but the use has been established by previous actions of both the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. The introduction of one (1) new automotive brand is consistent with the existing dealerships established to west of the subject site. The new brand will be combined with a current brand into the proposed facility. Although the site is not being developed with general office uses, the proposed automobile dealership has been along the SR 161/33 right of way and the use has benefited the community by bringing in commercial traffic and tax dollars in the city. DESCRIPTION OF A 15.497 ACRE TRACT SUB AREA A WEST OF VENTURE DRIVE, SOUTH OF PERIMETER DRIVE, CITY OF DUBLIN, FRANKLIN COUNTY OHIO Situated in the State of Ohio, County of Franklin, City of Dublin in Virginia Military Survey 2999 and being 15.497 acres, comprised of the remaining portion of a 14.780 acre tract conveyed to CARS CNI -2 L.P. by Instrument Number 201211060169155 and a 0.912 acre tract conveyed to CARS CNI -2 L.P. by Instrument Number 201211060169165 (all deed and plat references being to the Franklin County Recorder's Office) and bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a %" I.D. iron pipe found at the south end of a curved line connecting the east right -of -way line of Perimeter Loop (60 feet in width) and the south original right -of- way line of Perimeter Drive (80' R /W) as shown in the Dedication of Venture Drive in Plat Book 89, Page 43 also being a corner of the south line of a 0.142 acre Right -of -Way Take in Instrument 201007010082837; Thence along the said south line, North 40 °45'30" East for a distance of 28.28 feet to a point; Thence continuing along the south line of said Right -of -Way Take North 85 °45'30" East for a distance of 603.51 feet to a point on a right -of -way line connecting the south right - of -way line of Perimeter Drive with the west right -of -way line of Venture Drive; Thence continuing along the south line of said right -of -way line South 47 °12'24" East for a distance of 30.24 feet to a point; Thence continuing along the west right -of -way line of Venture Drive a curve to the right having a radius of 220.00 feet, a delta angle of 21 °24'42 ", a chord bearing of South 10 °32'03" West, a chord of 81.74 feet and an arc length of 82.21 feet to a point; Thence continuing along the west right -of -way of Venture Drive South 21 °14'24" West for a distance of 156.04 feet to a point; Thence continuing along the west right -of -way of Venture Drive with a curve to the left with a radius of 330.00 feet, a delta angle of 79 °57'41 ", a chord bearing of South 18 °44'25" East, a chord of 424.07 feet and an arc length of 460.54 feet to a point; Thence leaving the south right -of -way line of Venture Drive along the east line of the above referenced 0.912 acre tract South 05 °16'15" West for a distance of 512.44 feet to the southeast corner of said tract also being the north right -of -way line of US Route 33 and SR 161, Thence along said north right -of -way line North 89 °16'34" West for a distance of 30.24 feet to a point on the easterly corner of a 0.052 acre tract conveyed to the Ohio Department of Transportation, Instrument Number 201506150079550; Thence along the north of said 0.052 acre tract and continuing along said north right -of- way line of US Route 33 and SR 161 the following courses: North 83 °02'56" West for a distance of 127.28 feet to a point; South 78 °14'32" West for a distance of 50.00 feet to a point; North 86 °16'34" West for a distance of 332.07 feet to the northwest corner of said 0.052 acre tract, on the original north right -of -way line of US Route 33 and SR 161; Thence continuing along the north right -of -way of US 33 and SR 161 North 57 °34'28" West for a distance of 19.03 feet to a point; Thence continuing along the north right -of -way line of US 33 and SR 161 North 89 016'34" West for a distance of 29.93 feet to a point; Thence along the centerline of Wilcox Road /Perimeter Loop Road North 04 °16'30 West for a distance of 122.47 feet to a point; Thence leaving the centerline of Wilcox Road /Perimeter Road on the south line of Wilcox Road as dedicated in Plat Book 85, Page 51 South 89 °16'34" East for a distance of 30.11 feet to a point; Thence along the east right -of -way line of Wilcox Road as dedicated in Plat Book 85, Page 51 North 04 °14'14" West for a distance of 952.29 feet to TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 15.497 acres total, more or less. This description is based on records on file at the Franklin County Recorder's Office and information provided by Architectural Alliance and NOT based on a boundary survey. Basis of Bearings is from the west line of the 5.099 acre tract as described in Instrument Number 200906170087819. E. Cameron P.S. 7395 Date ► OF 11► F�� •.•• Oy MARK o ;yf E. * i CAMERON • p 7395 OT ���STE��.• ��11� �/0NAL S�I►A 2 O cz J V N V 2 CL z Z .9 CCp aq OO a o U � v Q � o W w cif p a�i o o �� go r OT wtltl dy 'dN 0 0 x� a�Y U P a � o O p � h ° ••z � Li 4 Y �S- S•T •QaO�� o � o � R^INN ^^ 5 v$ % 99189199UZWZ,48ul °DY Zl8'0 dl Z -- 3 98-3 M ( _�__ -__� o 2 g yam .x ®mo SN22NSSSN �1 a gpgB Q O NY K[V G o P� OJ G \f b x� a�Y U P a � o O p � h ° ••z � Li 4 Y �S- S•T •QaO�� o � o q R N ^^ 5 v$ % 99189199UZWZ,48ul °DY Zl8'0 dl Z -- 3 98-3 M ( _�__ x� a�Y U P a � o O p � h ° ••z � Li 4 Y �S- S•T •QaO�� 66Z12 -_��• / 10 % 99189199UZWZ,48ul °DY Zl8'0 dl Z -- 3 98-3 M ( _�__ -__� o 2 g �1 a gpgB Q O NY K[V G o P� OJ G \f b +N V a 11 Fz E it M AEbI•V9 N -/ ,9Z'ZS8 9�Peatl aool jamwya �_— 9l ��. N ZONING DESCRIPTION OF A 5.404 ACRE TRACT FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO Situated in the State of Ohio, County of Franklin, City of Dublin, in Virginia Military Survey No. 2542 and 2999, being part of a 4.842 acre tract, part of a 0.397 acre tract and part of a 4.600 acre tract, conveyed to Car Mag Park LLC of record in Instrument No. 201205310076228 (all deed and plat references being to the Franklin County Recorder's Office), being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a point referenced by %" iron pipe found in the curved southerly right -of -way line of Venture Drive (60 feet wide) as shown on the plat of "Dedication of Venture Drive, Easements and Vacation of Existing Sanitary Sewer Easements" of record in Plat Book 89, Page 43, said POINT OF BEGINNING also being at the northwest corner of "Children's Northwest Medical Office Building Condominium" of record in Condominium Plat Book 107, Page 37, and in Instrument No. 200210290274285. Thence South 06 °11'35" West along the west line of said Condominium for a distance of 24.56 feet to a point of curvature; Thence continuing along said west line along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 111.50 feet, a delta angle of 80 °07'59 ", a chord bearing of North 40 °40'02" West and a chord length of 143.49 feet, along an arc length of 155.94 feet to a point; Thence South 04 °11'24" East continuing along said west line for a distance of 320.93 feet to a point on the north right of way line of US 33, the north line of a 0.257 acre tract conveyed to the Ohio Department of Transportation, Instrument No. 201506150079554; Thence along the north right -of -way line of US 33 the following courses: South 76 °38'05" West for a distance of 32.82 feet to a point; North 89 °16'05" West for a distance of 350.02 feet to a point; North 83 °33'56" West for a distance of 50.25 feet to a point; North 89 °16'40" West for a distance of 147.17 feet to a point; South 81 °26'48" West for a distance of 4.22 feet to a point; Thence North 05 °19'22" East leaving said right -of -way line and crossing the above referenced 4.600 acre tract for a distance of 447.16 feet to a point on the south right -of -way line of Venture Drive; Thence South 89 016'34" East along said south right -of -way line of Venture Drive for a distance of 408.70 feet (passing a 3/" iron pipe with a Bird and Bull cap at 23.43 feet at the northeast corner of the above referenced 4.600 acre tract) to a point of curvature; Thence continuing along said right -of -way line, along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 330.00 feet, a delta angle of 0 °32'42 ", a chord bearing of South 89 033'23" East and a chord length of 3.23 feet, along an arc length of 3.23 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 5.404 acres, more or less. Together with and subject to covenants, easements, and restrictions of record. Bearings are based on an assumed bearing on the south right -of -way line of Venture Drive as South 89 016'34" East. This description is based on records on file at the Franklin County Recorder's Office for the purpose of zoning and is not based on a boundary survey. 0 00 December 17 2015 !/ 7E OF o y Mark E. Cameron, P.S. 7395 Date k� •.• o 41 MARK * E. yt CAMERON �� •p 7395 O• �i ONAL S� /// S o � o 0 Ull H N g UU 8 � � •O i4 'N� r o.•aw w� �: a� b V• 1 W �•� UnG. 2�, 76 O� � rb •. ..� yy�4 / n •\ LL O I7 Z R 5Z �gN 9 yl Z, Nmmmb o a wb Z dm 9gqZJ00 •,� ¢OHH 6 � 3 3.4 &LL•6 S h1 s� 1 I a b� CO w vI N n /�.��� LLI Lw 60NNpW Q O .L Md �5O C N C O r'W LLI h� m5• � � h yrc� b 9�J Ob N K 2 � WOO i m s` a��o �nb o Vog °a u0 4 `fi i q YM b m a�aa MOO° C W NW b O dos C L N 3 I I � B I CZ -- -- -- - - -- _`--- ----- ----`- _`__ ;- 3 p o 4_____________ _ _ -_ N - ° Im (s V 999'4 PuIBu9 i° Nud) O O e w z O a 7Im I N °b a cc U W bS o m �2 Q + g I 1 IpI PO W S•� LL I � _ March 15, 2006 DESCRIPTION OF A 4.842 ACRE TRACT OF LAND WEST OF 5675 VENTURE DRIVE DUBLIN, OHIO Situated in the State of Ohio, County of Franklin, City of Dublin, in Virginia Military Survey No. 2542 and being the residual 4.842 acres out of an original 5.172 acre tract of land conveyed to Mount Camwl Health System by deed of record in Instrument No. 199908120205494, all references to Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio, and bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a'' /, -inch I.D. iron pipe found in the curved south line Venture Drive (60 feet wide) as shown upon the plat of "Dedication Of Venture Drive, Easements And Vacation Of Existing Sanitary Sewer Easements" of record in Plat Book 89, Pages 43, 44 and 45, at the northwest comer of "Children's Northwest Medical Office Building Condominium" of record in Condominium Plat Book 107, Page 37 and in Instrument No.2 00 21 02 902742 8 5; Thence S 04° 53' 12" E along a west line of said "Children's Northwest Medical Office Building Condominium" and along an east line of said original 5.172 acre tract a distance of 24.56 feet to a 34" I.D. iron pipe found at a point of curvature; Thence southeasterly along a portion of the curved southeasterly line of said original 5.172 acre tract and along the curved northwesterly line of said "Children's Northwest Medical Office Building Condominium" and with a curve to the left, data of which is: radius = 111.50 feet, sub -delta = 80° 07' 50 ", a length of 155.94 feet and a sub -chord distance of 143.54 feet hearing S 44' 57' 07" E to a 3/4" I.D, iron pipe set; Thence S 02' 53' 01" E along the wen line of said "Children's Northwest Medical Office Building Condominium' and crossing said original 5.172 acre tract a distance of 349.18 feet to a 3/4" I.D. iron pipe set the north limited access right -of -way line of US. Route 33 and Ohio Rome 161 as shown on Sheet 1 I of 24 of Ohio Department of Transportation plans for FRA- 270 -7.47N and at the southwest comer of "Children's Northwest Medical Office Building Condominium"; Thence N 87' 56' 25" W along the north limited access right -of -way line of U.S. Route 33 and Ohio Route 161 and along a portion o£ a south line of said original 5.172 acre tract a distance of 384.15 feet to a 3/4" I.D. iron pipe set at an angle point in the north limited access right -of -way line of U.S. Route 33 and Ohio Route 161 and said original 5.172 acre tract, Thence N 87° 58' 11" W along the north limited access right -of -way line of U.S. Route 33 and Ohio Route 161 and along a south line of said original 5.172 acre tract a distance of 85.79 feet to a 3/4" ID. iron pipe found at the southwest comer of said original 5.172 acre tract, at the southeast comer of an original 10.497 acre tract of land conveyed to Mount Caravel Health System by deed of record in Instrument No. 199908120205493, in the east line of Virginia Military Survey No. 2999 and in the west line of Virginia Military Survey No. 2542; Thence N 02° 43' 33" W along the east line of said original 10.497 acre tract, along the west line of said original 5.172 acre tract, along the east line of Virginia Military Survey No. 2999 and along the west line of Virginia Military Survey No. 2542 a distance of 471.64 feet to a'/. -inch I.D. von pipe set in the south line of Venture Drive, at the northeast comer of said original 10.497 acre tract and at the northwest comer of said original 5.172 acre tract; Thence S 87° 58' 1 t" E along the south line of Venture Drive and along the north line of said original 5.172 acre tract a distance of 368.00 feet to a % -inch LD. iron pipe set at a point ofcurvature; Thence with a curve to the left, data of which is: radius = 330.00 feet, sub -delta = 00° 33' 39 ", a length of 3.23 feet and a sub -chord distance of 3.23 feet bearing S 88° 15' WE to the place of beginning; Containing 4.842 acres of land mom or less and being subject to all easements and restrictions of record. The above description was prepared by Say R. Miller, Ohio Surveyor No. 8061, of C.F. Bird & R.J. Bull, Inc., Consulting Engineers & Surveyors, Columbus, Ohio, from an actual field survey performed under his supervision in March, 2006. Basis of bearings is the centerline of Venture Drive, being N 87 58' 11' W, as shown of record in Plat Hook 89, Pages 43,44 and 45, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio. An exhibit of this description is attached hereto and made a part thereof. 0108$ 'E O,c Alt of ,00 y filer �/ g O� C'?� Ohio Surveyor #8061 % 'J IoNVEBIr�D ��r, l� nESCRIrr �, m ! o DF/tN NGLE Y.EPS. Sn " r4 . - Page 1 of 1 06 -039/D4_842AC.DOCdoc O "I V v °n O.. O � rev 44N p01 e m O N ad °HO 0 o °mo Z Nagg F m u no vSS � a O pr N o Y n .c E c O h ¢ d4 wa m 2 •odd ,�. as �_ � U 3 �o �o NO 4N _T... 0 LL t �^ d a ,erssr a lo .m bz pi a'y.�V'N Vt.I��f 9Uyffi J Z b � YB'tCi M.j't��NO 'PY LBB'0 Y N 4NIi F w q � o 0 N a d M WV 62 -62,11 9002/61/t BMP'Ztl208LPH7H \BMP \aVOV \6E0 \9002 \saor\VH Rev. October 19, 2004 October 14, 2004 DESCRIPTION OF A 0.397 ACRE TRACT ON VENTURE DRIVE, SOUTH OF PERIMETER DRIVE AND EAST OF PERIMETER LOOP ROAD DUBLIN, OHIO Situated in the State of Obio, County of Franklin, City of Dublin, in Virginia Military Survey No. 2999 and being 0.397 acres out of an original 10.497 acre tract of land conveyed to Mount Carmel Health System by deed of record in Instrument No. 199908120205493, all references to Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio, and bounded and described as follows; Beginning, for reference, at a P.K. nail found at the intersection of Perimeter Drive (80 feel wide) and Venture Drive (60 feet wide) as shown upon the plat of "Dedication Of Venture Drive, Easements And Vacation Of Existing Sanitary Sewer Easements" of record in Plat Book 89, Pages 43, 44 and 45; Thence S 29° D4' 47" E a distance of 872.29 feet to a %-inch I.D. iron pipe found in the south right -of -way line of Venture Drive, in the north line of said original 10.497 acre tract and at the northeast comer of a 5.500 acre tract of land conveyed out of said 10.497 acre tract to Brentlinger Real Estate Company, LLC by deed of record in Instrument No. 200403150056068; Thence S 87° 58' 11" E along the south line of Venture Drive and along a portion of a north line of said original 10.497 acre tract a distance of 430.04 feet to a 3/. -inch I.D. iron pipe set and at the me place of beginning of the tract herein intended to be described; Thence continuing S 87° 58' 11" E along the south right -of-way, line of Venture Drive and along a portion of a non], line of said original 10.497 acre tract a distance of] 7.34 feet to a %h -inch I.D. iron pipe act at the northeast comer of said original 10.497 acre tract, at the northwest comer of a 5.172 acre tract of land conveyed to Mount Cannel Health System by deed of record in Instrument No. 199908120205494, in the east lint of Virginia Military Survey No. 2999 and in the west line of Virginia Military Survey No. 2542; Thence S 02° 43' 33" E along the cast line of said original 10.497 acre tract, along the west line of said 5.172 acre tract, along the east line of Virginia Military Survey No. 2999 and along the west line of Virginia Military Survey No. 2542 a distance of471.64 feet to a/,-inch I.D. iron pipe found at an angle point in the north limited access right -of -way line of U.S. Route 33 and State Route 161 as shown upon Sheets 12 and 14 of 14 of Ohio Department of Transportation plans for FRA. 33-0.34, at the southeast comer of said original 10.497 acre tract and at the southwest comer ofsaid 5.172 acre tract; Thence N 86° 52' 30" W along the north limited access right -of -way line of U.S. Route 33 and State Route 161 and along a portion of a south line o£said original 10.497 acre tract a distance of 56.45 feet to a'' /. -inch I.D. iron pipe set; Thence N 02° 01'49" E crossing said 10.497 acre tract a distance of 468.94 feet to the place of beginning; Containing 0.397 acres of land more or less and being subject to all casements and restrictions of record. The above description was prepared by Jay R. Miller, Ohio Surveyor No. 8061, of C.F. Bird & R.J. Bull, Inc„ Consulting Engineers & Surveyors, Columbus, Ohio, from an actual field survey performed under his supervision in October, 2004. Basis of bearings is the centerline of Venture Drive, being N 87° 58' 11' W, as shown of record in Plat Book 89, Pages 43,44 and 45, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio. An exhibit of this description is attached hereto and made a part thereof. DESCRIPTION VERIFIED RINam P.EYS. By. o�ts a-7�OG tEOF0 Hen 0ic&A SCP,..._.._...,, 1\ 0�' l (�V �� Two to15� F`: . ;L 5�.rdgi.�s'J@ Page I of I 04- 140 /DO 397AC.DOCdoc 0 F NCO Z�$ dmmc 114� q y 000 Q P o — oa O m q 8 Vg Q �rc rOOO � q U� tilN¢ q0 dO 40 -61 -01 A 40 — OI 2,9 OZ — A2a LL ` � sue• �_..%�5�`J i ��� Pfk 1piiG a � asp_ 51 =��� ,YL'89i BY.fAZON 'JI 488'0 1�p y W $ od q N zI C pSl' F it WWWWWW 1. ti€ q F IN :t ts yy � tiLL A h4 i / Fd� • CLARENCE E MINGO II FRANKLIN COUNTY AUDITOR MAP ID: jbr DATE: 9/4/15 i a e 7i / Q P I I I I op °q II ■ y o vxs. o Disclaimer Scale =400 Grid This map is prepared for the real property inventory within this county. It is compiled from recorded deeds, NOS survey plats, and other public records and data. Users of this map are notified that the public primary information sources should be consulted for verification of the information contained on this map. The county and the mapping companies assume no legal responsibilities for the information contained on this map. Please notify the Franklin County GIS Division of any discrepancies. Real Estate / GIS Department Will 1 I O O +v ? ter.; O 1 -1 I IIII 1 u� I �(� �}fIVGS aHi �,In -,-c,�le-nia�[�►�. - -- ��1���d1� "if%ls�r�� Il =�- UIL IS ql Its MORWORM NOW s- "1Fq Disclaimer Scale =800 Grid This map is prepared for the real property inventory within this county. It is compiled from recorded deeds, North survey plats, and other public records and data. Users of this map are notified that the public primary information sources should be consulted for verification of the information contained on this map. The county and the mapping companies assume no legal responsibilities for the information contained on this map. Please notify the Franklin County GIS Division of any discrepancies. Real Estate / GIS Denartment �'- CLARENCE E MINGO II FRANKLIN COUNTY AUDITOR MAP ID: jbr DATE: 9/4/15 a ul: IJ` f �izll s A'C it All �1 ' . s �`'Li l• rl fill �4 aid - - =- ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY DATE 2014 Scale =300 Disclaimer Grid This map is prepared for the real property inventory within this county. It is compiled from recorded deeds, NOS survey plats, and other public records and data. Users of this map are notified that the public primary information sources should be consulted for verification of the information contained on this map. The county and the mapping companies assume no legal responsibilities for the information contained on this map. Please notify the Franklin County GIS Division of any discrepancies. Real Estate / GIS Department PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 MIDWESTERN AUTO GROUP (MAG) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PUD) CAMPUS SUMMARY This application contains Subareas A, B & C which reflects the existing and proposed MAG sales campus. Subarea A contains approximately 15± acres of the developed automobile sales campus originally approved in 2010. Subarea B contains 9± acres, which was added to the MAG dealership campus for a total of approximately 24± acres in 2012 (MAG Planned Unit Development District). Subarea C will add approximately 5.4± acres to the MAG campus to allow the relocation of existing dealerships and the addition of new facilities for a sales campus that consists of approximately 30 acres. Subarea C will contain a new automobile sales building, repairs facility, ancillary parking and other amenities for additional dealership franchises. The addition of new dealerships will complement the high quality dealerships abutting the subject site to the west. The goal is to provide a unified campus thru the use of similar architecture, signage and landscaping that will provide a unique sales facility in central Ohio. The addition of the dealership will increase the tax base for the City as well as provide additional skilled jobs that helps to support the community. The completed automobile sales campus located along the SR 33/161 right -of -way will provide an attractive entrance way into the City of Dublin and provide a draw of customers to the community shopping for high end cars. SUBAREA A L Summary The subject site consists of 15.507± acres of real property bounded by Perimeter Drive to the north, U.S. Route 33 /State Route 161 to the south, Perimeter Loop Road to the west, and Venture Drive to the northeast. IL Development Standards Unless otherwise set forth in the submitted drawings or in this written text, the development standards of Chapter 153 of the City of Dublin Code shall apply to this PUD. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 III. Permitted Uses (A) The following uses shall be permitted in the PUD: (1) New and used automobile sales and service (2) General, administrative, and business office (3) Medical and dental office (4) Research, synthesis, analysis, development, and testing laboratories (5) Ancillary uses within a structure primarily devoted to automobile sales or service uses including, without limitation: (i) Automobile service (but not including auto body work) (ii) Retail sales of automobile parts and accessories (iii) Non - retail, coffee shops selling beverages and snack food items for on- premises consumption (iv) Automobile rental services (6) One executive suite providing a single residential suite and related office space for the automobile dealership. (7) Detached non - retail car wash operated in association with automobile sales and /or service facilities, provided that it shall be used only by employees of the dealership in conjunction with sales and /or services to customers. This car wash also shall be permitted to serve an automobile dealership located on the property to the east of and adjacent to this PUD should such development occur. IV. Setback and Yard Requirements (A) Venture Drive: The minimum setback from the Venture Drive right -of -way shall be 25 feet for pavement and 75 feet for buildings. (B) Perimeter Drive: The minimum setback from the Perimeter Drive right -of -way shall be 25 feet for pavement and 65 feet for buildings. (C) State Route 161/U.S. Route 33: The minimum setback from the State Route 161/U. S. Route 33 right -of -way shall be 60 feet for buildings and 45 feet for the display 2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 areas impacted by ODOT right -of -way takes as part of the US33 /I -270 interchange project;. (D) Perimeter Loop Road: The minimum setback from the Perimeter Drive right -of -way shall be 25 feet for pavement and 75 feet for buildings. (D) Eastern Boundary: For all portions of the eastern boundary line of this PUD that are not adjacent to Venture Drive, there shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of 25 feet as measured from the eastern boundary line. In the event that the property to the east of and adjacent to this PUD is rezoned to allow an automobile dealership use, then there shall be a zero setback requirement for both buildings and pavement from the eastern boundary line of this PUD. (E) Interior Property Lines: There shall be no minimum setback requirements from interior property lines within this PUD. V. Parking, Loading, and Stacking Requirements (A) Number of Parking Spaces: The number of required parking spaces on this site shall be calculated as follows: (1) Parking for automobile dealership uses shall provide parking at the rate of 1 space per 300 square feet of building floor area for sales and related office uses, per 1,000 square feet of outdoor display area, and parking at the rate of 1 space for each service bay for service uses. A single parking space shall be required to serve the executive suite. (2) Parking for uses other than what is accounted for in Section V(A)(1) of this text shall be provided in accordance with the City of Dublin Code. (B) Employee Parking: Parking for employees of any permitted user shall be located behind buildings so as to minimize visibility from State Route 161/U. S. Route 33. (C) Automobile Storage: Automobile storage shall be located behind buildings so as to minimize visibility from State Route 161/U. S. Route 33 and shall be screened from the view of other public rights -of -way. For purposes of this text, the term "automobile storage" shall be defined to mean the storage of vehicles that are not intended for sales display but are instead awaiting service or removal to another location. (D) Loading Docks: Loading docks shall be fully screened from the view of adjacent PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 rights -of -way and properties and shall be integrated into the architecture of the buildings. (E) Car Wash Stacking: There shall be no minimum automobile stacking requirement for the non - retail car wash. VL Architecture (A) Building Height: The maximum height for the car wash shall be 25 feet and for all other structures shall be 65 feet as measured per the Dublin Zoning Code. (B) Design Intent: Architecture in this subarea is modern and innovative and features the extensive use of glass and metal to promote transparency and a sleek, signature look across the front of the buildings while emphasizing sharp edges and angles. The buildings are positioned to run parallel to and follow a crescent - shaped access drive that outlines the campus. Buildings implement a high quality of finish consistent with the architectural style and materials that are found throughout the property. (C) Plans: Architecture shall reflect the general design and character of the architectural drawings that accompany the preliminary development plan application. (D) Permitted Materials: Permitted primary exterior materials shall include glass, metal, EIFS, stone /stone veneer and concrete masonry units (CMU). (E) Roofs: Flat roofs shall be permitted in this PUD. Metal roofs may be found on visible low -slope conditions and membrane roofing on flat roofs that are not visible to the public. VII. Landscaping and Screening (A) Landscaping: All landscaping shall be in accordance with the Dublin Landscape Code unless otherwise specified herein. (B) Property Perimeter Screening: Along U.S. Route 33 /State Route 161, the site shall be required to provide an average of one tree per 40 feet of lineal frontage to meet the intent of the arterial screening requirement and shall be exempt from the 6 -foot tall continuous screening requirement, as referenced in Appendix A of the Dublin Zoning Code. (C) Display Space: An automobile dealership shall be permitted to display automobiles along the street frontage as approved in the preliminary development plan. 4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 (D) Eastern Perimeter Buffer: It is anticipated that the property to the east of and adjacent to this PUD will develop relatively shortly after this application is approved. Therefore, the property perimeter buffering requirements of the Dublin Zoning Code shall be waived along the eastern boundary of this PUD. In the event that the property to the east of and adjacent to this PUD has not developed with a use that is compatible with an automobile dealership on or before the first anniversary of the effective date of the approval of the preliminary development plan for this PUD, then a plan showing the details of the proposed buffering to be installed along the eastern boundary line of this PUD and adherence to the perimeter buffering requirements of the Dublin Zoning Code shall be submitted and installed by the applicant, subject to approval by Planning. (E) Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be containerized and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence. (F) Storage and Equipment: No materials, supplies, or equipment shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of the parcel outside of permitted structures. (G) Mechanicals: All roof - mounted or ground mounted mechanical units shall be screened from the view of all rights -of -way adjacent to the site. VIII. Signs (A) Design Intent: This site is unique in that it has frontage on four separate public roads and utilizes three widely dispersed vehicular access points, creating a need for a comprehensive sign plan. The current approved sign package for this site recognizes the development of the property with a campus -like feel and accomplishes the goals of providing identification of the various automobile manufacturers offering vehicles for sale on the site, identifying the dealership itself, and providing ample directional signage to allow customers and visitors to identify sales and service areas for different product types. The intent behind the sign standards in this text is to continue to utilize this same package while maintaining some limited flexibility to accommodate future changes to manufacturer types. (B) Alteration of Signs: Sign panels on the campus identification, directional and brand signs that identify automobile manufacturers on ground signs may be changed without further review by the Planning and Zoning Commission provided that verification of the new panel's conformance with this text is made through the sign permitting process, or as otherwise specified herein. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 (C) Sign Plan: Signage for automobile dealership uses shall be in accordance with this text and that which is approved as a part of a final development plan. Signage for all other permitted uses shall be in accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Code. For purposes of this text, signs shall be placed into one of five categories, for which separate standards are set forth below. These categories are: (1) Campus identification signs (2) Dealership identification signs (3) Directional signs (4) Brand signs (5) Wall signs (D) Standards Applicable to All Sign Types: The following standards shall apply to all signs in the PUD, regardless of how they are categorized: (1) Materials: All signs shall consist of materials that are complimentary to and of a similar quality as the buildings found in this PUD. (2) Interior Signs: Signs located on the interior of buildings shall be permitted provided that they are not more than 3 feet in height and are not readily visible from rights -of -way that are adjacent to the site. (3) Illumination: All signs found on the outside of buildings shall be externally illuminated, except for campus identification signs, which may be internally illuminated. (4) Prohibited signs and displays: The following types of signs and displays shall be prohibited outside of buildings: (a) Balloons, flags, streamers, metallic wind vanes and similar visual attractions (b) Painting or other types of surface graphics displaying prices, slogans, or other advertising, except (i) as included on informational stickers provided by the manufacturer and (ii) a two -digit graphic shall be permitted on the windshield of used cars to indicate the year the car was made, provided that such graphic does not exceed 5 inches by 6 inches in size. (c) Logos and/or signs located on the interior of a building that is easily 6 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 readable from an adjacent public right -of -way shall not be permitted without approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission (E) Campus Identification Signs: The following standards shall apply to campus identification signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "campus identification sign" shall be defined as a ground sign located at a major vehicular access point to the property from an adjacent public roadway and that identifies the name of the automobile dealership and all or some of the automotive brands that are sold from that dealership. (2) Number: A maximum of two campus identification signs shall be permitted. (3) Location: One campus identification sign shall be permitted at the site entrances into the PUD from Perimeter Loop Road and another shall be permitted to the southeast of the intersection of Perimeter Drive and Venture Drive. (4) Overall Size: Each campus identification sign shall be a maximum of 15 feet in height and a maximum of 30 inches in width. (5) Panels: Each campus identification sign shall be permitted a maximum of 6 sign panels for the purpose of identifying the automobile manufacturers whose vehicles are being sold on -site. (6) Sign Area: Sign panels identifying automobile manufacturers shall be no greater than 1.5 square feet in area The portion of the sign identifying the name of the automobile dealership shall not exceed 5.5 square feet in area (7) Logos: The display of automobile manufacturers' logos shall be permitted on sign panels. Logos may exceed size limits set forth in the City of Dublin Zoning Code. (8) Colors: Each individual sign panel shall be permitted to utilize three colors. (3) Dealership Identification Signs: Not permitted in this Subarea 7 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 (F) Directional Signs: The following standards shall apply to directional signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "directional sign" shall be defined as a ground sign used for the purpose of directing customers and other visitors to various destinations on the campus, including service area signs. (2) Location: Directional signs shall be permitted internal to the site. Additional directional signs shall be allowed without an amendment to the final development plan if they are 3 feet or less in height and are not easily visible from an adjacent public right -of -way. (3) Size: Each directional sign shall be permitted either a maximum of 55 inches in height and a maximum of 42 inches in width, or an area of 16 square feet (G) Brand Signs: The following standards shall apply to branding signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "brand sign" shall be defined as a ground sign located between the front fagade of the primary building in this PUD and the parking lot and identifying a single automobile manufacturer whose products are being sold in the building. (2) Location and Type: Brand signs shall be permitted adjacent to the individual brand sales entrances. Any additional brand signs on the site shall require approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission as a part of an amended final development plan. (3) Size: Brand signs shall be permitted with the following size limitations: (a) Sign Type A (such as signs labeled K, L, N and O): Maximum height shall be 40 inches and maximum width shall be 72 inches for sign identifying a single brand. (b) Sign Type B (such as sign labeled M): If multiple brands are identified at the same entrance, the overall sign may exceed 20 square feet in area, but each individual brand sign shall be limited to 6 square feet in area. The overall height shall not exceed 40 inches. (4) Content: Each brand sign shall be permitted to display the name and /or logo of a single automobile manufacturer. Logos shall not exceed 50 percent of the maximum permitted area of the sign face. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 (5) Colors: Each individual sign panel shall be permitted to contain three colors, not including black and white or the sign background, only in the event that the standard logo of the automobile manufacturer is being displayed and such logo contains more than three colors. (H) Wall Signs: The following standards shall apply to wall signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "wall sign" shall be defined to have the same meaning as provided in the Dublin Zoning Code. (2) Number & Location: One wall sign shall be permitted in this PUD, located on the north fagade of the northernmost building in this PUD. This sign shall identify a single brand of automobile that is being offered for sale from this building. (3) Height: Wall signs shall not exceed 25 feet in height. (4) Sign Area: Each wall sign shall not exceed a maximum area of 35 square feet. (5) Logos: The display of an automobile manufacturer's logo shall be permitted on the wall sign. (6) Amended Final Development Plan Application (14- 046AFDP): In lieu of the wall sign regulations above, the developer is permitted three wall signs in Subarea A as proposed as part of the approved Amended Final Development Plan on September 18, 2015. IX. Lighting (A) Lighting for this campus shall be consistent in look and feel throughout the PUD. (B) Unless otherwise set forth in this text or approved as a part of a final development plan, lighting shall conform to the standards of the Dublin City Code. (C) Light fixtures shall be installed at a maximum height of 28 feet and may include 400 watt lamps. (D) Lighting poles and fixtures shall be consistent in color and appearance throughout the site and shall be dark in color and constructed of dark brown, black, or bronze metal. 9 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 (E) External lighting shall utilize cut-off type fixtures. (F) Cut - off type landscape and building uplighting shall be permitted. No color lights shall be permitted to illuminate the exterior of a building. (G) All lights shall be arranged to minimize light trespass onto adjacent properties. (H) Lighting of the dealership after business hours shall be of a low intensity. Interior lighting in showrooms during these hours shall be subdued so that the full interior is not illuminated. Highlighting of specific cars during these hours shall be permitted. SUBAREA B L Summary The subject site consists of 9.127± acres of real property bounded by the existing MAG dealership to the west, U.S. Route 33 /State Route 161 to the south, and Venture Drive to the north and vacant property to the east. The site is developed with vehicle sales and service buildings and the necessary ancillary parking and landscaping. IL Development Standards Unless otherwise set forth in the submitted drawings or in this written text, the development standards of Chapter 153 of the City of Dublin Code shall apply to this PUD. III. Permitted Uses (A) The following uses shall be permitted in the PUD: (1) New and used automobile sales and service (2) General, administrative, and business office (3) Medical and dental office (4) Research, synthesis, analysis, development, and testing laboratories (5) Ancillary uses within a structure primarily devoted to automobile sales or 10 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 service uses including, without limitation: (v) Automobile service (but not including auto body work) (vi) Retail sales of automobile parts and accessories (vii) Non - retail, coffee shops selling beverages and snack food items for on- premises consumption (viii) Automobile rental services (6) Non - retail car wash for the sole purpose of serving the users and/ or customers of a permitted automobile service facility located in this subarea or Subarea A (or the users and/or customers of an automobile dealership associated with such afacility) IV. Setback and Yard Requirements (A) Venture Drive: The minimum setback from the Venture Drive right -of -way shall be 25 feet for pavement and 75 feet for buildings. (B) State Route 161/U.S. Route 33: The minimum setback from the State Route 161/U. S. Route 33 right -of -way shall be 60 feet for buildings and 45 feet for pavement for the display areas impacted by ODOT right -of -way takes as part of the US33 /I -270 interchange project; (C) Eastern Boundary: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of 25 feet as measured from the eastern boundary line. (D) Interior Property Lines: There shall be no minimum setback requirements from interior property lines within this PUD. V. Parking, Loading, and Stacking Requirements (A) Number of Parking Spaces: The number of required parking spaces on this site shall be calculated as follows: (1) Parking for automobile dealership uses shall provide parking at the rate of 1 space per 300 square feet of building floor area for sales and related office uses, 1 per 1,000 square feet of outdoor display area, and parking at the rate of 3 spaces for each service bay for service uses. (2) Parking for uses other than what is accounted for in Section V(A)(1) of this 11 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 text shall be provided in accordance with the City of Dublin Code. (B) Automobile Storage: Automobile storage shall be located behind buildings so as to minimize visibility from State Route 161/U. S. Route 33 and shall be screened from the view of other public rights -of -way. For purposes of this text, the term "automobile storage" shall be defined to mean the storage of vehicles that are not intended for sales display but are instead awaiting service or removal to another location. (C) Loading Docks: Loading docks shall be fully screened from the view of adjacent rights -of -way and properties and shall be integrated into the architecture of the buildings. (D) Car Wash Stacking: There shall be no minimum automobile stacking requirement for the non - retail car wash. VL Architecture (A) Building Height: The maximum height for all structures shall be 65 feet as measured per the Dublin Zoning Code. (B) Design Intent: Existing architecture in Subarea A is contemporary and innovative and features the extensive use of glass and metal to promote transparency and a sleek, signature look across the front of the buildings while emphasizing sharp edges and angles. Contemporary style and the use of glass and black/white metal to highlight each brand is permitted. Buildings will be positioned parallel to State Route 161/U. S. Route 33 and Venture Drive and provide a visual presence along both roads. Automobiles may be placed in various window areas to provide additional venues to display products that are sold on the premises. Facilities will implement a high quality of finish consistent with the architectural style and materials that are found throughout this area. (C) Plans: Architecture shall reflect the general design and character of the architectural drawings that accompany the preliminary development plan application. (D) Permitted Materials: Permitted primary exterior materials shall include glass, metal, cast in place concrete, EIFS /stucco, stone /stone veneer and concrete masonry units (CMU). (E) Roofs: Flat roofs shall be permitted in this PUD. (F) Colors: Limited areas of bold colors shall be permitted on the buildings to provide architectural highlights. 12 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 VII. Landscaping and Screening (A) Landscaping: All landscaping shall be in accordance with the Dublin Landscape Code unless otherwise specified herein. (B) Property Perimeter Screening: Along U.S. Route 33 /State Route 161, the site shall be required to provide a minimum 10 -foot wide, 3 -foot tall mound from the pond in an easterly direction to the easterly property line and one tree per 30 feet of lineal frontage. In addition, the property perimeter will continue the formal grove design approved and installed along Subarea A. (C) Tree Replacement and Diversity Allowances: Tree replacement for both Subareas A & B may be varied to increase the diversity of tree species on the total campus area by allowing up to 33% of the replacement trees to be evergreen or ornamental trees (no pines). A 7' or 8' high evergreen tree will count similar to a 2.5" caliper deciduous tree. An 8' to 10' high evergreen is equal to a 3" deciduous tree. The final landscaping design will include evergreen trees of varying heights from 6' to 10'. Evergreen trees that are used to satisfy the tree replacement requirement may be used to supplement the buffering of service areas, loading sites and service structures. Replacement trees may not be used in place of other trees providing specific landscaping requirement. Replacement trees for Subareas A and B may be planted on the adjacent property to the east as it is owned by the same developer /owner of the automobile sale facility. (E) Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be containerized and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence. (F) Storage and Equipment: No materials, supplies, or equipment shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of the parcel outside of permitted structures. (G) Mechanicals: All roof - mounted or ground mounted mechanical units shall be screened from the view of all rights -of -way adjacent to the site. VIII. Signs (A) Design Intent: This site is unique in that it has frontage on two separate public roads and utilizes two widely dispersed vehicular access points, creating a need for a comprehensive sign plan. The current approved sign package for Subarea A recognizes the development of the property with a campus -like feel and accomplishes the goals of providing identification of the various automobile manufacturers offering vehicles for sale on the site, identifying the dealership itself, and providing directional signage to 13 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 allow customers and visitors to identify sales and service areas for different product types. The intent behind the sign standards in this text is to continue to utilize this same package while maintaining some limited flexibility to accommodate future changes to manufacturer types. (B) Alteration of Signs: Sign panel modifications that identify automobile manufacturers on ground signs may be reviewed and approved administratively provided that the new panels conform to this text. (C) Sign Plan: Signage for automobile dealership uses shall be in accordance with this text and that which is approved as a part of a final development plan. Signage for all other permitted uses shall be in accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Code. For purposes of this text, signs shall be placed into one of four categories, for which separate standards are set forth below. These categories are: (1) Campus identification signs (2) Dealer identification sign (3) Directional signs (4) Wall signs (5) Brand signs (D) Standards Applicable to All Sign Types: The following standards shall apply to all signs in the PUD, regardless of how they are categorized: (1) Materials: All signs shall consist of materials that are complimentary to and of a similar quality as the buildings found in this PUD. (2) Interior: Logos and /or signs located on the interior of a building shall be permitted without requiring approval if the signage is not internally illuminated and shall be located a minimum of three (3) feet away from any window or exterior walls. (3) Illumination: Signs may be externally or internally illuminated (4) Prohibited signs and displays: The following types of signs and displays shall be prohibited outside of buildings: (a) Balloons, flags, streamers, metallic wind vanes and similar visual attractions (b) Painting or other types of surface graphics displaying prices, slogans, 14 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 or other advertising, except (i) as included on informational stickers provided by the manufacturer and (ii) a two -digit graphic shall be permitted on the windshield of used cars to indicate the year the car was made, provided that such graphic does not exceed 5 inches by 6 inches in size. (E) Campus Identification Signs: The following standards shall apply to campus identification signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "campus identification sign" shall be defined as a ground sign located at a major vehicular access point to the property from an adjacent public roadway and that identifies the name of the automobile dealership and all or some of the automotive brands that are sold from that dealership. (2) Number: A maximum of one campus identification signs shall be permitted. (3) Location: One campus identification sign shall be permitted at the Venture Drive right of way. (4) Overall Size: The campus identification sign shall be a maximum of 15 feet in height and a maximum of 30 inches in width. (5) Panels: Each campus identification sign shall be permitted a maximum of 6 sign panels on each side for the purpose of identifying the automobile manufacturers whose vehicles are being sold on -site. (6) Sign Area: Sign panels identifying automobile manufacturers shall be no greater than 1.5 square feet in area The portion of the sign identifying the name of the automobile dealership shall not exceed 5.5 square feet in area (7) Logos: The display of automobile manufacturers' logos shall be permitted on sign panels. Logos may exceed size limits set forth in the City of Dublin Zoning Code. (8) Colors: Each individual sign panel shall be permitted to utilize three colors. If vehicle or brand logos are incorporated into the sign panel, they shall be exempted from color limitations. 15 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 (F) Dealer Identification Sian: The following standards shall apply to dealership identification signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "Dealer identification sign" shall be defined as a ground sign located along the property's frontage on State Route 161/U. S Route 33 that serves to identify the name of the automobile dealerships that operates within the PUD. (2) Number: One dealership identification sign shall be permitted for Subarea A and Subarea B and it shall be located on Subarea B. If either dealership in Subarea A and B is sold to a separate auto dealership then the new owner has the right to request a new monument dealership sign to identify two new dealerships through an amended final development plan process. (3) Location: One ground sign shall be permitted along the State Route 16VUS Route 33 frontage in Subarea B. (4) Overall Size: The ground sign shall be a maximum of 10 feet in height and a maximum of 50 square feet in size. (5) Landscaping: If the ground sign is incorporated within the pond along US 33 /SR 161, no landscaping shall be required around the base of the sign. (G) Directional Signs: The following standards shall apply to directional signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "directional sign" shall be defined as a ground sign used for the purpose of directing customers and other visitors to various destinations on the campus, including service area signs. (2) Location: Directional signs shall be permitted internal to the site. Additional directional signs shall be allowed without an amendment to the final development plan if they are 3 feet or less in height and are not easily visible from an adjacent public right -of -way. (3) Size: Each directional sign shall be permitted either a maximum of 55 inches in height and a maximum of 42 inches in width, or an area of 16 square feet (H) Wall Signs: The following standards shall apply to wall signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "wall sign" shall be defined to 16 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 have the same meaning as provided in the Dublin Zoning Code. (2) Number; Location: Three wall signs shall be permitted in this PUD. These signs shall identify a single brand of automobile that is being offered for sale from the building to which the sign is attached. (3) Height: Wall signs shall not exceed 15 feet in height. (4) Sign Area: Each wall sign shall not exceed a maximum area of 50 square feet. (5) Logos: The display of an automobile manufacturer's logo shall be permitted on the wall sign. Logos shall be excepted from color restrictions and size limitations. (1) Brand Signs: The following standards shall apply to branding signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "brand sign" shall be defined as a ground or wall sign located along or between the front fagade of the primary building in this PUD and the parking lot and identifying a single automobile manufacturer whose products are being sold in the building. (2) Location and Type: Brand signs shall be permitted adjacent to the individual brand sales entrances. Any additional brand signs on the site shall require approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission as a part of an amended final development plan. (3) Size: Brand signs shall be permitted with the following size limitations: (a) Sign Type A (such as signs labeled K, L, N and O): Maximum height shall be 40 inches and maximum width shall be 72 inches for sign identifying a single brand. (b) Sign Type B (as shown on Sheet 4.01 of case #12- 072AFDP): Maximum height of eight feet, six inches and maximum size of 2.7 square feet. (4) Content: Each brand sign shall be permitted to display the name and /or logo of a single automobile manufacturer. Logos shall not exceed 50 percent of the maximum permitted area of the sign face. (5) Colors: Each individual sign panel shall be permitted to contain three colors, not including black and white or the sign background, only in the event that 17 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 the standard logo of the automobile manufacturer is being displayed and such logo contains more than three colors. IX. Lighting (A) Lighting for this campus shall be consistent in look and feel throughout the PUD. (B) Unless otherwise set forth in this text or approved as a part of a final development plan, lighting shall conform to the standards of the Dublin City Code. (C) Light fixtures shall be installed at a maximum height of 28 feet and may include 400 watt lamps. (D) Lighting poles and fixtures shall be consistent in color and appearance throughout the site and shall be dark in color and constructed of dark brown, black, or bronze metal. (E) External lighting shall utilize cut-off type fixtures. (F) Cut - off type landscape and building uplighting shall be permitted. No color lights shall be permitted to illuminate the exterior of a building. (G) All lights shall be arranged to minimize light trespass onto adjacent properties. (H) Lighting of the dealership after business hours shall be of a low intensity. Interior lighting in showrooms during these hours shall be subdued so that the full interior is not illuminated. Highlighting of specific cars during these hours shall be permitted. SUBAREA C L Summary The subject site consists of 5.40± acres of real property bounded by the existing MAG dealership to the west, U.S. Route 33 /State Route 161 to the south, and Venture Drive to the north and the Children's Hospital facility to the east. The property is currently undeveloped and the applicant /owner is seeking to add additional dealership space to the existing array currently operating to the west in Subareas A & B. The site will be developed with a new vehicle sales and service building and the necessary ancillary parking and landscaping. The request is expanding a permitted use found in the adopted area plan and the submittal will complete the automobile sales campus as 18 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 envisioned by the applicant/owner. The proposal will be to extend the landscaping elements east on the subject site to create a unified theme for the larger development. This PUD will permit the same uses and same development standards as are currently applicable to the property to the east while making accommodations for the expansion of the dealership. The rezoning of this site will take the ground out of the Perimeter Center Planned District Subareas D. IL Development Standards Unless otherwise set forth in the submitted drawings or in this written text, the development standards of Chapter 153 of the City of Dublin Code shall apply to this PUD. III. Permitted Uses (A) The following uses shall be permitted in the PUD: (1) New and used automobile sales and service (2) General, administrative, and business office (3) Medical and dental office (4) Research, synthesis, analysis, development, and testing laboratories (5) Ancillary uses within a structure primarily devoted to automobile sales or service uses including, without limitation: (ix) Automobile service (but not including auto body work) (x) Retail sales of automobile parts and accessories (xi) Non - retail, coffee shops selling beverages and snack food items for on- premises consumption (xii) Automobile rental services (6) Non - retail car wash for the sole purpose of serving the users and/ or customers of a permitted automobile service facility located in this subarea or Subarea A (or the users and/or customers of an automobile dealership associated with such afacility) 19 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 IV. Setback and Yard Requirements (A) Venture Drive: The minimum setback from the Venture Drive right -of -way shall be 25 feet for pavement and 75 feet for buildings. (B) State Route 161/U.S. Route 33: The minimum setback from the State Route 161/U. S. Route 33 right -of -way shall be 60 feet for buildings and 45 feet for pavement for the display areas impacted by ODOT right -of -way takes as part of the US33 /I -270 interchange project; (C) Eastern Boundary: There shall be a minimum building and pavement setback of 25 feet as measured from the eastern boundary line. (D) Interior Property Lines: There shall be no minimum setback requirements from interior property lines within this PUD. V. Parking, Loading, and Stacking Requirements (B) Number of Parking Spaces: The number of required parking spaces on this site shall be calculated as follows: (3) Parking for automobile dealership uses shall provide parking at the rate of 1 space per 300 square feet of building floor area for sales and related office uses, 1 per 1,000 square feet of outdoor display area, and parking at the rate of 3 spaces for each service bay for service uses. (4) Parking for uses other than what is accounted for in Section V(A)(1) of this teat shall be provided in accordance with the City of Dublin Code. (B) Automobile Storage: Automobile storage shall be located behind buildings so as to minimize visibility from State Route 161/U. S. Route 33 and shall be screened from the view of other public rights -of -way. For purposes of this teat, the term "automobile storage" shall be defined to mean the storage of vehicles that are not intended for sales display but are instead awaiting service or removal to another location. (C) Loading Docks: Loading docks shall be fully screened from the view of adjacent rights -of -way and properties and shall be integrated into the architecture of the buildings. (D) Car Wash Stacking: There shall be no minimum automobile stacking requirement for the non - retail car wash. 20 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 VL Architecture (A) Building Height: The maximum height for all structures shall be 65 feet as measured per the Dublin Zoning Code. (B) Design Intent: Existing architecture in Subareas A & B is contemporary and innovative and features the extensive use of glass and metal to promote transparency and a sleek, signature look across the front of the buildings while emphasizing sharp edges and angles. The new facility will continue the contemporary style and employ the use of glass and black/white metal to highlight each brand. The new building will be positioned parallel to State Route 161 /U.S. Route 33 and Venture Drive and provide a visual presence along both roads. Automobiles may be placed in various window areas to provide additional venues to display products that are sold on the premises. The new facility will implement a high quality of finish consistent with the architectural style and materials that are found throughout this area (C) Plans: Architecture shall reflect the general design and character of the architectural drawings that accompany the preliminary development plan application. (D) Permitted Materials: Permitted primary exterior materials shall include glass, metal, cast in place concrete, EIFS /stucco, stone /stone veneer and concrete masonry units (CMU). (E) Roofs: Flat roofs shall be permitted in this PUD. (F) Colors: Limited areas of bold colors shall be permitted on the buildings to provide architectural highlights. VII. Landscaping and Screening (A) Landscaping: All landscaping shall be in accordance with the Dublin Landscape Code unless otherwise specified herein. (B) Property Perimeter Screening: Along U.S. Route 33 /State Route 161, the site shall be required to provide a minimum 10 -foot wide, 3 -foot tall mound from the pond in an easterly direction to the eastern property line and one tree per 30 feet of lineal frontage. In addition, the property perimeter will continue the formal grove design approved and installed along Subareas A & B. 21 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 (C) Tree Replacement and Diversity Allowances: Tree replacement for Subareas A, B & C may be varied to increase the diversity of tree species on the total campus area by allowing up to 33% of the replacement trees to be evergreen or ornamental trees (no pines). A 7' or 8' high evergreen tree will count similar to a 2.5" caliper deciduous tree. An 8' to 10' high evergreen is equal to a 3" deciduous tree. The final landscaping design will include evergreen trees of varying heights from 6' to 10'. Evergreen trees that are used to satisfy the tree replacement requirement may be used to supplement the buffering of service areas, loading sites and service structures. Replacement trees may not be used in place of other trees providing specific landscaping requirement. (E) Waste and Refuse: All waste and refuse shall be containerized and fully screened from view by a solid wall or fence. (F) Storage and Equipment: No materials, supplies, or equipment shall be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of the parcel outside of permitted structures. (G) Mechanicals: All roof - mounted or ground mounted mechanical units shall be screened from the view of all rights -of -way adjacent to the site. VIII. Signs (A) Design Intent: This site is unique in that it has frontage on two separate public roads and utilizes two widely dispersed vehicular access points, creating a need for a comprehensive sign plan. The current approved sign package recognizes the development of the property with a campus -like feel and accomplishes the goals of providing identification of the various automobile manufacturers offering vehicles for sale on the site, identifying the dealership itself, and providing directional signage to allow customers and visitors to identify sales and service areas for different product types. The intent behind the sign standards in this text is to continue to utilize this same package while maintaining some limited flexibility to accommodate future changes to manufacturer types. (B) Alteration of Signs: Sign panel modifications that identify automobile manufacturers on ground signs may be reviewed and approved administratively provided that the new panels conform to this text. (C) Sign Plan: Signage for automobile dealership uses shall be in accordance with this text and that which is approved as a part of a final development plan. Signage for all other permitted uses shall be in accordance with the City of Dublin Zoning Code. For purposes of this text, signs shall be placed into one of four categories, for which separate standards are set forth below. These categories are: 22 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 (6) Campus identification signs (7) Dealer identification sign (8) Directional signs (9) Wall signs (10) Brand signs (D) Standards Applicable to All Sign Types: The following standards shall apply to all signs in the PUD, regardless of how they are categorized: (1) Materials: All signs shall consist of materials that are complimentary to and of a similar quality as the buildings found in this PUD. (2) Interior: Logos and /or signs located on the interior of a building shall be permitted without requiring approval if the signage is not internally illuminated and shall be located a minimum of three (3) feet away from any window or exterior walls. (3) Illumination: Signs may be externally or internally illuminated (4) Prohibited signs and displays: The following types of signs and displays shall be prohibited outside of buildings: (a) Balloons, flags, streamers, metallic wind vanes and similar visual attractions (b) Painting or other types of surface graphics displaying prices, slogans, or other advertising, except (i) as included on informational stickers provided by the manufacturer and (ii) a two -digit graphic shall be permitted on the windshield of used cars to indicate the year the car was made, provided that such graphic does not exceed 5 inches by 6 inches in size. (E) Campus Identification Signs: The following standards shall apply to campus identification signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "campus identification sign" shall be defined as a ground sign located at a major vehicular access point to the property from an adjacent public roadway and that identifies the name of the automobile dealership and all or some of the automotive brands that are sold from that dealership. 23 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 (2) Number: A maximum of one campus identification signs shall be permitted. (3) Location: One campus identification sign shall be permitted at the Venture Drive right of way. (4) Overall Size: The campus identification sign shall be a maximum of 15 feet in height and a maximum of 30 inches in width. (5) Panels: Each campus identification sign shall be permitted a maximum of 6 sign panels on each side for the purpose of identifying the automobile manufacturers whose vehicles are being sold on -site. (6) Sign Area: Sign panels identifying automobile manufacturers shall be no greater than 1.5 square feet in area The portion of the sign identifying the name of the automobile dealership shall not exceed 5.5 square feet in area. (7) Logos: The display of automobile manufacturers' logos shall be permitted on sign panels. Logos may exceed size limits set forth in the City of Dublin Zoning Code. (8) Colors: Each individual sign panel shall be permitted to utilize three colors. If vehicle or brand logos are incorporated into the sign panel, they shall be exempted from color limitations. (F) Dealer Identification Sign: Not permitted in this Subarea. (G) Directional Signs: The following standards shall apply to directional signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "directional sign" shall be defined as a ground sign used for the purpose of directing customers and other visitors to various destinations on the campus, including service area signs. (2) Location: Directional signs shall be permitted internal to the site. Additional directional signs shall be allowed without an amendment to the final development plan if they are 3 feet or less in height and are not easily visible from an adjacent public right -of -way. (3) Size: Each directional sign shall be permitted either a maximum of 55 inches 24 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 in height and a maximum of 42 inches in width, or an area of 16 square feet (H) Wall Signs: The following standards shall apply to wall signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "wall sign" shall be defined to have the same meaning as provided in the Dublin Zoning Code. (2) Number: Location: Two wall signs shall be permitted in this PUD. These signs shall identify a single brand of automobile that is being offered for sale from the building and will face the State Route 16 VUS Route 33 frontage. (3) Height: Wall signs shall not exceed 25 feet in height. (4) Sign Area: The total sign area for wall signs in this subarea is permitted to be 100 square feet to be allocated between the two permitted signs. The total maximum sign size is 55 square feet for a single sign as long as the total size does not exceed 100 square feet. (5) Logos: The display of an automobile manufacturer's logo shall be permitted on the wall sign. Logos shall be excepted from color restrictions and size limitations. (1) Brand Signs: The following standards shall apply to branding signs: (1) Definition: For purposes of this zoning text, a "brand sign" shall be defined as a ground or wall sign located along or between the front fagade of the primary building in this PUD and the parking lot and identifying a single automobile manufacturer whose products are being sold in the building. (2) Location and Type: Brand signs shall be permitted adjacent to the individual brand sales entrances. Any additional brand signs on the site shall require approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission as a part of an amended final development plan. (3) Size: Brand signs shall be permitted with the following size limitations: (c) Maximum height shall be 40 inches and maximum width shall be 72 inches for sign identifying vehicle brands. (4) Content: Each brand sign shall be permitted to display the name and/or logo 25 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TEXT As Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 As Submitted to City Council For Introduction of Ordinance 03 -16 of a single automobile manufacturer. Logos shall not exceed 50 percent of the maximum permitted area of the sign face. (5) Colors: Each individual sign panel shall be permitted to contain three colors, not including black and white or the sign background, only in the event that the standard logo of the automobile manufacturer is being displayed and such logo contains more than three colors. IX. Lighting (A) Lighting for this campus shall be consistent in look and feel throughout the PUD. (B) Unless otherwise set forth in this text or approved as a part of a final development plan, lighting shall conform to the standards of the Dublin City Code. (C) Light fixtures shall be installed at a maximum height of 28 feet and may include 400 watt lamps. (D) Lighting poles and fixtures shall be consistent in color and appearance throughout the site and shall be dark in color and constructed of dark brown, black, or bronze metal. (E) External lighting shall utilize cut-off type fixtures. (F) Cut - off type landscape and building uplighting shall be permitted. No color lights shall be permitted to illuminate the exterior of a building. (G) All lights shall be arranged to minimize light trespass onto adjacent properties. (H) Lighting of the dealership after business hours shall be of a low intensity. Interior lighting in showrooms during these hours shall be subdued so that the full interior is not illuminated. Highlighting of specific cars during these hours shall be permitted. 26 Iof Dublin Planning 5800 Shier Rings Road PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 one 614.410.47 fax 47 RECORD OF ACTION www.dublinohiousa.gov JANUARY 7, 2016 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 3. MAG PUD and Perimeter Center, Subarea D — MAG, Land Rover, Jaguar, Porsche 15- 113Z /PDP 6335 Perimeter Loop Road Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan Proposal: A rezoning for approximately 30 acres from Planned Unit Development District (Midwestern Auto Group plan) and PCD (Perimeter Center, Subarea D) to PUD for the expansion of the Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) campus to incorporate an additional 5.4 acres into the PUD to accommodate the construction of a combined showroom for the Jaguar and Land Rover brands, the future demolition of the existing Land Rover showroom, a new showroom for the Porsche brand, and the addition of an elevated showroom addition to the main building for the Lamborghini franchise. Request: Review and recommendation of approval to City Council for a rezoning with preliminary development plan under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050. Applicant: Brad Parish, President, Architectural Alliance. Planning Contact: Claudia Husak, AICP, Senior Planner. Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675, chusak @dublin.oh.us MOTION: Ms. Newell moved, Mr. Brown seconded, to recommend approval to City Council for a Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan because it complies with the rezoning /preliminary development plan criteria and the existing development standards, with 11 conditions: 1) That the applicant work with Staff to ensure replacement trees are not counted to fulfill other requirements; 2) That the applicant work with staff to relocate as many newly planted trees as possible and to find appropriate locations for replacement trees on site; 3) That the Traffic Impact Study be updated to address Engineering comments, subject to approval by Engineering, prior to introduction of this rezoning Ordinance at City Council; 4) That the applicant update the proposed plans to accurately indicate the required setbacks along the southern property line; 5) That the proposed development text be revised to address the sign allowances in Subarea A to more accurately reflect the sign needs for the single brand building anticipated; 6) That any site modifications to Subarea A include the analysis and any necessary modifications to the current stormwater management plan to ensure stormwater requirements as defined in Chapter 53 are satisfied; 7) That the applicant work with staff prior to the Final Development Plan stage to identify and incorporate appropriate safety measures along the south side of the proposed western retention basin to protect vehicles traveling on westbound US33 /SR 161; 8) That all technical comments associated with stormwater management and civil plans are addressed prior to filing a Final Development Plan application; 9) That the applicant submit additional information and details for the proposed retaining wall along the eastern retention basin as part of the Final Development Plan; Page 1 of 2 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION JANUARY 7, 2016 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 3. MAG PUD and Perimeter Center, Subarea D — MAG, Land Rover, Jaguar, Porsche 15- 113Z /PDP 6335 Perimeter Loop Road Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan 10) That the applicant work with staff to provide either additional articulation,, landscaping or layout changes for the service drive for the southern elevation of the service area at the final development plan stage, and; 11) That the text be revised to limit the sign size of a single wall sign in Subarea C to 55 SF. *Brad Parish agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 7-0. RESULT: The Rezoning /Preliminary I recommendation of approval. RECORDED VOTES: Victoria Newell Amy Salay Chris Brown Cathy De Rosa Robert Deboral Stepher Yes to City Council with a STAFF CERTIFICATION Claudia D. Husak, AICP Senior Planner Page 2of2 Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 — Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 5 3. MAG PUD and Perimeter Center, Subarea D — MAG, Land Rover, Jaguar, Porsche 15- 113Z /PDP 6335 Perimeter Loop Road Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan The Chair, Ms. Newell, said the following application is a request for a Rezoning for approximately 30 acres from Planned Unit Development District (Midwestern Auto Group plan) and PCD (Perimeter Center, Subarea D) to PUD for the expansion of the Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) campus to incorporate an additional 5.4 acres into the PUD to accommodate the construction of a combined showroom for the Jaguar and Land Rover brands. She said this is a request for review and recommendation of approval to City Council for a rezoning with preliminary development plan under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050. Ms. Husak said she could do a presentation but it se there might be a few questions that would not require a full presentation. Ms. Salay said she wanted to talk about architecturNdeveent Ms. Husak said this is a rezoning andjo�¢liminary stage and theNare ki ng at an entire site that is now 30 acres by trying t� incorporate 5.5 acres of vacant land on the eastern side of the campus. She said when the applicant was here in October with the concept plan which is a requirement of the rezoning to the PUD for this particular applicabp, they had presented the Porsche development in the northern portion of the site to take the place clwthe existing Land Rover building to the north and expanding the main campus building across the pond for their Lamborghini franchise and specifically to talk about Jaguar and Land Rover on the vacant parcel. She said there were conversations of shifting some of the buildings around and looking at switching Porsche with Land Rover or Jaguar building and they talked about it after and they were concerned with the lack of size that the Porsche building would have on that particular parcel and the applicant has ore information on why they chose that locations are they are p ting. She said the application is head of the programing schedule for Jaguar and Land Rover and oqq is lagging behind in �l1f Ms. Hu ak said Subarea A and B are 'ng and cr ing a third Subarea C for the additional five acres which is currently an office subarea wi erimeter Center and would take it out of and incorporate it into the MAG PUD which the applicant has asked to do to create one large PUD for MAG specifically. She said the Community Plan shows this par as proposed as well as Subarea B more as an office and Intuitional District and less of a mercial District. She said they have had conversations at the Commission and City Council on the erits of having a more commercially oriented use on this site and in the Planning Report thN gave more etailed analysis as to why the applicant thought it made sense here and staff thought it was an appropriate land use on that site. She said office is always a permitted in the PUD for MAG so if anything were to happen for redevelopment that would still be an option. Ms. Husak said the details show a continuation of car display with the finger like arrangement, which is unique to MAG. She said there are two stormwater retention ponds that are wet ponds on site. She said access is shared with Nationwide Childrens Hospital in the top which was a requirement when Childrens Hospital went in and the easement for cross access was already in place. She said the main change is that they have made the service area at a lower level because of the concerns of the overhead doors being visible from US33/161. She said the landscaping is in line with what exists today with a lower screening along the highway but having trees in a symmetrical pattern along the are display. Ms. Husak said the architecture has not changed significantly from the concept plan except for changes to the side elevations. She said the architecture is very modern and simple in terms of the form and the elevations show how recessed the doors are and how the angles are created with the windows and how Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 — Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 5 it flows with the campus as a modern and innovative design using a lot of metal and grey color schemes like the remainder of the campus. Ms. Husak said there are some allowances in the proposed development text for the signs essentially allowing wall signs which the Commission had approved for Audi as well as for BMW and Mini along the US33 frontage and the applicant is requesting an overall allowance of 100 square feet to be divided between the two signs where one is proposed to be larger than 50 square feet, but the other is smaller so together they are still at 100. She said the other signs being proposed are in line with what is approved on the campus in terms of a campus identification sign on Venture Drive at the access point and the smaller lower brand signs that they have now and are visible for the users of site as they are driving in to make sure they know where to go for service. She said they are not requiring logos to adhere to logo size requirements. She said the height is at 20 feet across those buildings, where the Commission held steady at 15 -foot requirement for BMW, Mini and Audi. Ms. Husak said there are some conditions for the stormwater management requirements and the applicant has been working with Engineering to make sure that they have all the information needed and there is more information to come at the final development plan, which is required to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. She said the traffic study there are comments a the expansion of the site on vacant land there is a traffic study componen equired and they had comments the applicant is to address prior to Council view. Ms. Husak said they are recommending approval to City Coun the following nine conditions: 1) That the applicant work with Sta en eplacem rees are not counted to fulfill other requirements; 2) That the applicant work with staff to relocate as many'aewly plantfd trees as possible and to find appropriate loc tions for repl cement trees on site; 3) That the Traf%Impact Stu a updated to address Engineering comments, subject to approval by Engineering, prior to int uction of this rezoning Ordinance at City Council; 4) That the applicant update the propo d plans to a ately indicate the required setbacks along the southern property line; 5) That the proposed development text b ise address the sign allowances in Subarea A to more accurately reflect the sign needs for g e brand building anticipated; 6) That any site modifications to Subarea A inc a the analysis and any necessary modifications to the current stormwater management plan to ensure stormwater requirements as defined in Chapter 53 are satisfied; 7) That the applicant work with staff prior to the Final Development Plan stage to identify and incorporate appropriate safety measures along the south side of the proposed western retention basin to protect vehicles traveling on westbound US33 /SR 161; 8) That all technical comments associated with stormwater management and civil plans are addressed prior to filing a Final Development Plan application, and; 9) That the applicant submit additional information and details for the proposed retaining wall along the eastern retention basin as part of the Final Development Plan. Ms. Newell wanted a clarification for what is envisioned for the safe barrier along SR161 and the retention pond. Ms. Husak said for the BMW and Mini site, there is a pond that is not a stormwater management pond and is close to the roadway and with the unfortunate incidents where vehicles have driven off the road in other areas of town, they have been working with Engineering to provide a barrier that is aesthetically pleasing and cannot be seen because it blends in and will not be noticed. Mr. Miller said the entrance to Childrens Hospital space between the entrance to MAG and to the road is only about 20 feet and asked if it could be moved farther from the main road because he witnessed a fire Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 — Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 5 truck accessing the drive and was surprised by the speed of traffic along the roadway making the maneuver into MAG unsafe. He asked that Engineering take a look at it to make the access safer. Ms. Husak said Venture Drive is not considered a front door for the MAG campus and ideally it is not where patrons will enter the site and she will have Engineering take a look at it. Brad Parish, Architectural Alliance, said Jaguar and Land Rover National decided to change their prototype and they were 90 percent complete on construction documents ready to submit to start the building that was approved last year. He said they turned off 40 projects across the country and that is why they are back. He said during this process with Audi, BMW and Mini coming online MAG's business has grown substantially. He has the opportunity to master plan some of the other brands that are available with Porsche that they did within the Volvo addition and now that is growing into their own facility being proposed for the north side of the campus. He said in the Land Rover deal he is able to get Jaguar as a new brand to Dublin. He said the question last time was could the buildings be flipped and after that meeting he did a site plan and because of the scale of the buildings Audi is such a small gem between two larger building that are close enough that it works, where this site is a bit removed from the BMW because of the display fingers. He said they felt the scale of this building needed to be larger to accommodate the displays. He said the area behind become the employee and ove ow inventory lot for the MAG campus, with a larger building on this site it would take away from the oplJKional side of MAG and is why they didn't want to have t inventory employee lot along the SR161 dor and kept it confined to the Venture Drive side whi h is not the main entrance to the campus. Mr. Parish said this is a new prototype for Jaguar and Land Rover and they are very excited about bringing this to the market with the hope that this location to be one of the first in the United States for this prototype. He said MA"Kexcited about the opportunLto brip#his online. Mr. Parish said the concerns from last review was that servic*rive was on the side which is uncharacteristic MAG campus and he redesigned with the sunk in service drive, two tiered much the same experience that exists which was not approved by Jaguar /Land Rover National and he had to redesign it with it in the middle of the building and tucked it around the side much like the Audi facility and removed the service sign that was above. He sai'Oe other concern was that the front elevation was a flat elevation and they tried to do additional h6ves and design ideas on the front elevation and being that this is their first new prototype going natiWffally across America they wanted to stay with the current design and could not give leeway on their first facility that they are building in North America. Mr. Parish sai did allow to drop the signage down from the second panel from the top which exceeding curren itions on campus. He said the two proposed signs go to 20 feet and is a matter of the proportion of the building. He said the prototype has six blocks as a base and six blocks as a top. He said if they shrink the building it would be by two bands across but the building becomes smaller against the context on the corridor, so BMW and Audi buildings are over 30 feet tall and with taking two bands away they would be the stepchild to those buildings at 24 feet. He said in an effort to give the scale of the front elevation it is flat with beveled display window on the first floor, to give a scale that is equal to the Audi they did the entrance in the center has been recessed back an additional five feet from where it was to create two jewel boxes that have the cars aligned in the front. He said it was an opportunity that with speaking with Jaguar /Land Rover that they were willing to compromise on setting it back and dropping the elevation and getting the service drive around and keep the new prototype as a flat elevation. Mr. Parish said they removed the car wash component from this building to reduce it down and removed one of the display fingers to handle the placement of the pond for retention and they are working with Engineering with final civil requirements. He said he will be back for the Lamborghini and Porsche in the next coming months with further details on those two buildings. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 — Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 5 Mr. Brown asked what the building materials are. Mr. Parish said composite panel with a closed system with metal in the back and is a dark mat gray finish and will bring samples at the final development plan. Mr. Brown said the service drive has a large expanse of blank wall and in that evaluation there is showing many trees in front of it, though he does not have a problem with it, the view from SR161 and angle of the service drive exposes the wall. He said it is the angle and the way they enter the service drive it will not effectively screen from SR161 because the trees will not be IaYered in front and if they bring the service drive parallel then they could put trees in front. X Ms. Husak said they had asked that they break up that Mr. Parish said they are doing further articulation accommodate that with sliding it over to get it less dov k wall and is happy to Ms. Salay said the architecture is a prototype and they do not want to change it because it is the first one out of the box and so they are getting the plainest vanilla of the buildings that will be built because they are the first and going forward they may be willing to deviate, but is is what they will roll out for the initial example that will be shared with everyone across the country. She said she is concerned that this is not going to be as spectacular as the rest of the campus and not in keeping with what they have done out there. She said this is the entrance as they drive east to west. Mr. Parish said the discussions with themiey were steadfast on the sloped roof, the green color and they feel they have gotten rid of those things that was not preferred and created it more about the vehicles and less about the architecture so that this can be a jewel box much like the competitors. He said they are going to be more steadfast on this is the prototype and this is what they are keeping because they are not asking for a lot of the out of the box elements such as towers etc., they are just keeping the architecture simple and the only deviatireif the service is on the side or in the middle of the building. Ms. N-Adpll askeNan a from the p lic would lik address the Commission. [Hearing none.] Ms. Newell saik she is fine with the architecture of the building and it is going to be their out of the box prototype but aLfinishes on the building with the overall campus she likes this proposal better than the previous applica s that were submitted for the architecture with the building. She said the plainness and simpleness of this can complement everything else that is on the campus. She said in whole congress with this campus is probably one of the finest designs auto dealership she has ever seen anywhere that she has traveled. She said they have done a fantastic job. She said it will look nice when it's done and she would have liked to see more play with the two front jewel boxes so that there was a bigger recess or maybe a little wider separation but she still likes the architecture of the building. Ms. Newell said the proportion of the buildings are not going to look right if they squash down the glass or building so have the signage at that location and the deviation in height it fits the architecture of these buildings. She said she would like to see the condition of where the sum of the signs to the 100 square foot, because they could have a potential 100 foot sign and they need to limit one of the signs at the maximum of 55 square foot and the condition needs to include that no sign can exceed the 55 square feet. Ms. Newell asked Ms. Husak to revise the conditions and read them into the record. Ms. Husak said there are two additional conditions added requesting approval with 11 conditions as follows: Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 7, 2016 — Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 5 1) That the applicant work with Staff to ensure replacement trees are not counted to fulfill other requirements; 2) That the applicant work with staff to relocate as many newly planted trees as possible and to find appropriate locations for replacement trees on site; 3) That the Traffic Impact Study be updated to address Engineering comments, subject to approval by Engineering, prior to introduction of this rezoning Ordinance at City Council; 4) That the applicant update the proposed plans to accurately indicate the required setbacks along the southern property line; 5) That the proposed development text be revised to address the sign allowances in Subarea A to more accurately reflect the sign needs for the single brand building anticipated; 6) That any site modifications to Subarea A include the analysis and any necessary modifications to the current stormwater management plan to ensure stormwater requirements as defined in Chapter 53 are satisfied; 7) That the applicant work with staff prior to the Anal Dev ent Plan stage to identify and incorporate appropriate safety measures along the south side proposed western retention basin to protect vehicles traveling on westbound US33 /SR 161; 8) That all technical comments associated with stormwater mana t and civil plans are addressed prior to filing a Final Development Plan application; 9) That the applicant submit additional information and details for the propo taining wall along the eastern retention basin as of the Final Development Plan; 10) That the applicant work with rovide either additional articulation, Ian scaping or layout changes for the service drive southern elevation of the service area at the final development plan stage, and; 11) That the text be revised to limit the Mr. Parish agreed to th ions. Motion and Vote I e w all sigylin Subarea C to 55 square feet. Ms. Newell moved, Mr. Brown seconded, tdWcommend approval to City Council for a Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan with 11 conditions. The vote was as follows: Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Stidhem, yes; Mr. Miller, yes; Ms. Mitchell, yes; Ms. De R *a, yes; Ms. Newell, yes; and Mr. Brown, yes. (Approved 7 — 0) City of Dublin Land Use and Long Range Planning 5800 Shier Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 phone 614.410.4600 fax 614.410.4747 www.dublinohiousa.gov City of Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Planning Report Thursday, January 7, 2016 MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, and Land Rover Expansion Case Summary Agenda Item 3 Case Number 15- 113Z /PDP Proposal A rezoning for approximately 30 acres from Planned Unit Development District (Midwestern Auto Group plan) and PCD (Perimeter Center, Subarea D) to PUD for the expansion of the Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) campus to incorporate an additional 5.4 acres into the PUD to accommodate the construction of a combined showroom for the Jaguar and Land Rover brands, the future demolition of the existing Land Rover showroom, a new showroom for the Porsche brand, and the addition of an elevated showroom addition to the main building for the Lamborghini franchise. Requests Review and recommendation of approval to City Council for a rezoning with preliminary development plan under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050. Site Location 6335 Perimeter Loop Road East side of Perimeter Loop Road, south of Perimeter Drive and Venture Drive, north of US33. Applicant Midwestern Auto Group Representatives Brad Parish, President, Architectural Alliance Case Manager Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Senior Planner 1 (614) 410 -4675 or chusak @dublin.oh.us Planning Recommendation Approval of a Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan In Planning's analysis, the proposal complies with the rezoning /preliminary development plan criteria and the existing development standards. Planning recommends approval of this request with nine conditions. Conditions 1) That the applicant work with Staff to ensure replacement trees are not counted to fulfill other requirements; 2) That the applicant work with staff to relocate as many newly planted trees as possible and to find appropriate locations for replacement trees on site; 3) That the Traffic Impact Study be updated to address Engineering comments, subject to approval by Engineering, prior to introduction of this rezoning Ordinance at City Council; City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 2 of 19 4) That the applicant update the proposed plans to accurately indicate the required setbacks along the southern property line; 5) That the proposed development text be revised to address the sign allowances in Subarea A to more accurately reflect the sign needs for the single brand building anticipated; 6) That any site modifications to Subarea A include the analysis and any necessary modifications to the current stormwater management plan to ensure stormwater requirements as defined in Chapter 53 are satisfied; 7) That the applicant work with staff prior to the Final Development Plan stage to identify and incorporate appropriate safety measures along the south side of the proposed western retention basin to protect vehicles traveling on westbound US33 /SR 161; 8) That all technical comments associated with stormwater management and civil plans are addressed prior to filing a Final Development Plan application, and; 9) That the applicant submit additional information and details for the proposed retaining wall along the eastern retention basin as part of the Final Development Plan. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15 -113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 3 of 19 15 -1132 /PDP Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan 0 200 400 MAG - Porsche /Jaguar /Land Rover City of Dublin 6335 Perimeter Loop Road Feet City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 4 of 19 'acts [Site Area —M Approximately 30 acres Zoning PUD, Planned Unit Development District (MAG PUD) and PCD, Planned Commerce District (Perimeter Center, Subarea D) Surrounding Zoning All surrounding sites are zoned PCD, as part of various Subareas within the Perimeter Center Planned Commerce District. Specifically, North, across Perimeter Drive: office warehouse in Subarea C 1 North, across Venture Drive: office and vacant land in Subarea D West, across Perimeter Loop Road: Crown Auto Dealership in Subarea I and the Learning Experience daycare and Talmer Bank in Subarea F3 South: US 33 /SR 161 East: Nationwide Children's medical office in Subarea D • The MAG PUD includes approximately 24 acres to date and is divided into two Subareas. This proposal would incorporate an additional 5.3 acres into the campus. • Four buildings across the site, with the main building in the center, the existing Land Rover building to the north and the recently completed buildings for Audi and for BMW /Mini to the east. • Subarea A has two buildings: • An approximately 122,754- square -foot dealership building with several automotive brands such as Aston Martin, Volvo, Bentley, Volkswagen, Rolls Royce, Louts and Maserati. This building also includes a residential penthouse and roof garden. • A 7,335- square -foot building to the north houses the Land Rover franchise, facing Perimeter Drive. • Subarea B has two buildings: • An approximately 44,900- square -foot dealership building for BMW and Mini • An approximately 11,000- square -foot building for Audi Frontage: 0 650 feet along Perimeter Drive 0 1,000 feet along Perimeter Loop Road 0 2,000 feet along US33 /SR 161 0 1,950 feet along Venture Drive Subarea A has 472 customer and employee parking spaces and 96,000 square feet of vehicle display area along all sides of the buildings. Vehicle display areas are designed in a unique finger -like arrangement along the northwest and southwest portions of the site. Site Features City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 5 of 19 A retention pond is on the north side of the main building at the Perimeter Loop Road entrance. Mature landscaping and significant mounding are along the site perimeter and provide screening for the loading and vehicular use areas. Subarea B has 264 customer and employee parking spaces, and 50,000 square feet of vehicle display area along all sides of the buildings. The vehicle display areas in this Subarea are also designed in the finger -like arrangement along the western and southern portions of the site. A decorative pond is located along the US33 /SR161 frontage. Subarea C (proposed) is a vacant parcel, owned by the applicant, accommodates the retention pond for the stormwater management for Subarea B. This parcel also includes mounding and landscaping along the US33 /SR161 frontage and around the pond. Background The Perimeter Center Planned Commerce District was originally approved in 1988, encompassing land between Avery- Muirfield Drive and Emerald Parkway, divided into subareas A through M. Permitted uses include commercial, industrial, residential, and office. A 14 -acre Subarea J of the Perimeter Center plan was created in 1998 specifically for auto dealerships and other uses, with several automotive franchises as a part of the Midwest Auto Group (MAG) campus. In 1998, a separate Land Rover building was added to the site. The Planning and Zoning Commission has approved several amended plans for the site. In 2010, City Council approved a rezoning with preliminary development plan that removed Subarea J and portions of Subareas D and 1 -1 from the Perimeter Center PCD and established a new 15.6 -acre MAG PUD. The Planning and Zoning Commission simultaneously approved a final development plan for the Volvo addition, which also included the residence. At the time of the Volvo application, the applicant also introduced the concept of a relocated BMW and Mini facility from Post Road to the parcel located to the east of the existing MAG campus. The Commission and Council approved an expansion of the MAG campus in 2012, which incorporated approximately 10 acres into the PUD as a rezoning from the Perimeter Center PCD. This expansion facilitated the relocation of the BMW and Mini dealerships from Post Road and accommodated an additional building for the Audi brand. There were City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 6 of 19 Background concerns raised at that time of future westward expansions to the campus, especially at the Council meeting. Community Plan On September 18, 2014, the Planning and Zoning Commissions approved an amended final development plan for the demolition of the Land Rover showroom and the construction of a new 30,000- square -foot showroom for the Land Rover /Range Rover and Jaguar franchises; a sky bridge connecting the proposed building to the main MAG building. The Commission also approved minor text modifications to decrease the pavement setback to 45 feet along US33 /SR161, permit parking at a ratio of 1 space per service bay in Subarea A and permit three wall signs as proposed in the amended final development plan application. The Commission reviewed and provided non - binding feedback on a Concept Plan for this proposal on October 1, 2015 and agreed that an extension of the MAG campus to the east was appropriate particularly given the company's commitment to high quality architecture, landscaping and site design. Some Commissioners requested the applicant investigate whether or not the Porsche building and the Land Rover /Jaguar building could be switched and encouraged a less flat design for the latter. The Commission encouraged the applicant to place less emphasis on the proposed wall signs. The western portion of the site is designated as General Commercial on the Future Land Use Map, while the central portion and the vacant parcel are designated as Standard ice, which includes sites with frontage along major collectors to include medical and dental offices, professional offices and large -scale office buildings with single or multiple tenants. While the proposal does not strictly adhere to the Future Land Use designation, the proposal is an expansion of the existing MAG campus, which includes the dealership headquarters, automotive sales and service uses, and a residence. City Council has previously expressed concerns regarding numerous car dealership fronting along US33 /SR161. As a landowner, MAG has a history of working with Planning to achieve a high quality campus appearance with appropriate mounding, landscaping and site layout. Additionally, the permitted uses within the proposed development text include office and retail uses, which would provide the opportunity for future redevelopment that more closely meet the Future Land Use. The applicant has indicated that the Jaguar component is a new brand 'acts - Plan Overview City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 7 of 19 being offered at the dealership campus and that the success of MAG as a high quality, long time business within the City may warrant a deviation from the Community Plan. The applicant is also suggesting that Dublin is currently not benefitting from the vacancy of this 5.5 -acre site, which is owned by the applicant, and that the incorporation of the parcel into the auto campus will provide for an additional high quality vehicle brand and the continued success of a long -time Dublin business. Given the previous concerns regarding any potential campus expansion, Staff has carefully considered the potential impacts of this proposal and determined a deviation form close adherence to the Community Plan Future Land use Map is warranted given the high quality site design, architecture and landscaping the applicant has consistently delivered. Additionally, MAG has consistently ranked among Dublin's top employers in recent years. Plan Rezoning to a Planned Unit Development requires approval of a development text to serve as the zoning regulation for the development requirements noted; the Zoning Code covers all other requirements. The development text typically addresses permitted and conditional uses, setbacks, parking, landscaping, signs and architecture, among other subjects. A preliminary development plan is also required as part of a rezoning application to a PUD. The preliminary development plan serves as a plan document illustrating the proposed location of access points, buildings, parking, stormwater management facilities and any other site improvements. For this preliminary development plan, the applicant has focused on the undeveloped Subarea C to be incorporated into the campus, as the Jaguar /Land Rover portion of the site is advancing on a faster schedule, according to the applicant. Future modifications to Subarea A, as shown in the Concept Plan, for Porsha and Lamborghini will require final development plan approval in the future. A final development plan for the proposed improvements to Subarea C will also be required. The preliminary development plan does not show modifications to Subarea A as the proposed Porsche and Lamborghini additions have yet to be finalized. The applicant has provided Phase 2 plans to illustrate the future changes to this Subarea. These future expansions do not require modifications to the current development text for this Subarea and will require City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 8 of 19 Preliminary Development Plan Commission. Changes to Subarea B include two interior access points to the west to Subarea C. Subarea C includes a main access point off Venture Drive through a shared access with the Children's Hospital site to the east. This shared access was provided for in the approval of the development of that site. Access is also shown from the west through interior drives connecting from Subarea B. The proposed building is located in the center of the site to the east, which allows vehicle display to continue in the finger -like layout unique to this campus. Vehicle display is also accommodate in front of the proposed building. The proposed building includes the two showrooms for Jaguar and Land Rover, office space, and a service reception area, which is located at a lower level as requested by the Commission and Planning during the Concept Plan review. The service, parts, and detailing areas are proposed to the rear of the building. Two stormwater management ponds are shown, one along the US33 /SR161 frontage and the other in the northeast portion of the site. Development Te This development text establishes a new Planned Unit Development Overview District with development regulations that are applicable only to these 30t acres. It also removes approximately 5.5 acres from the Perimeter Center District Subarea D and incorporates them into the new, larger MAD Planned Unit Development District. For administrative purposes, Planning has requested the applicant combine the Jaguar and Land Rover site with the existing MAG campus to create a single MAG PUD. The proposal will create three subareas (A, B, & C), two for the existing MAG campus, A & B, and one for the new Jaguar and Land Rover site, Subarea C. Subarea A is the existing main campus. The applicant has made minor modifications to this portion of the development text, as suggested by Planning, mainly to update the text to eliminate references to future development, which at this point, has already occurred. Similarly, to Subarea A, the applicant has made minor revisions to this development text to update language regarding future development. The applicant has modeled the proposed development text for Subarea C I on the existing language for Subareas A & B. J The list of uses is identical for all Subareas and permits the sales and services of new and used automobiles. The applicant is also proposing to permit office and research uses, similar to what is currently permitt ed in Subarea D of Perimeter Center. Density /Lot Coverage :1 Setl Architecture City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 9 of 19 Rezoning/ Preliminary Development Plan The proposed text continues to permit a number of ancillary uses within the primary structure, which includes automobile service, sales of automobile parts and accessories, non - retail coffee shop, and automobile rental services. The proposed rezoning will permit a non - retail car wash, which is not currently shown on the plans. The details would be approved with the final development plan application. The proposed development text does not specify density so the maximum building site will be determined by parking, setbacks and lot coverage. Code permits up to 70% lot coverage. The pavement and building setbacks text for Subarea C is consistent with the requirements for both Subareas A & B, including the areas impacted by Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) right -of -way takes for the US33 /I -270 interchange project, and are as follows: Road /Boundary Setbacks (ft.) Pavement Building Venture Drive 25 75 SR161 /US33 45 60 Eastern Boundary 25 25 The plans do not accurately show the building and pavement setbacks based on the revised southern site boundary. While the requirements are The proposed development text requires "contemporary and innovative architecture ". The proposed building will continue the contemporary style and will provide a visual presence along US 33/ SR 161. Permitted building materials include glass, metal, EIFS, stone /stone veneer and concrete masonry units. The preliminary development plan shows a similar building design to what was shown at the Concept Plan stage. The Jaguar /Land Rover showroom includes a rectangular elevation with deep recesses for each storefront. Metal and glass are the primary building materials along the front elevation. The remaining elevations include CMU, metal and metal cladding as building materials. The changes in materials, use of windows and recessed in the elevations creates interesting viewpoints and continues the contemporary look of the campus. The plans show the use of EIFS in the legends but not on the actual elevations. All final details for the building, including colors of materials, will be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the final development plan stage. 7Tree Preservation City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 10 of 19 Preliminary Development Plan The text requires parking at one space per 300 square feet of building area for sales and office, one per 1,000 square feet of outdoor display area, 3 spaces for each service bay, which is consistent with the requirement within the other Subareas. The Commission has previously approved this lower parking ratio for service bays for Subareas A & B and Planning supports continuing with this provision. Site landscaping is required to meet Code, except as noted. Code requires a six -foot wall, planting, mound, hedge or combination thereof plus one tree for every 30 feet to fulfill the property perimeter screening requirement along US 33 /SR 161. During previous rezoning approvals for the MAG campus, the applicant was granted relief from this requirement. The proposed text for Subarea C requires a three -foot mound and one tree per 30 lineal feet of frontage along US 33 /SR 161, to continue the design existing along the southern property boundary. Along the eastern boundary of the site, the Code required vehicular use area screening is required. The Zoning Code requires one deciduous tree per 40 feet along a vehicular use area with a 31/2 -foot wall, hedge or mound to screen vehicular use areas. The text continues to permit diversity for replacement trees to increase the diversity of tree species on the total campus area by allowing up to 33% of the replacement trees to be evergreen or ornamental trees (no pines). Replacement trees may not be used in place of other trees providing specific landscaping requirement, and the plans will need to be updated at the final development plan stage to ensure replacement trees are not counted to fulfill other requirements. The applicant should work with staff to relocate as many newly planted trees as possible and to find appropriate locations for replacement trees on site. The development text has unique sign requirements that identity special sign needs for this campus with the multiple vehicle franchises. The proposed development text follows similar sign requirements, except as noted. The proposed text permits five different types of signs for the MAG campus: campus identification, dealership identification, directional, brand, and wall signs. Specific requirements for each sign type are as follows are included in the text. Campus Identification: One ground campus identification sign is permitted in the development text at the Venture Drive curb cut. This sign may be up to 15 feet high and 30 inches wide with up to 6 sign panels for vehicle brands. Logos are permitted to be displayed and may exceed Code required size limitations. Lighting- City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 11 of 19 Preliminary Development Plan • Dealership Identification: Only one ground dealership identification sign facing US 33/ SR 161 is permitted for the campus. It is located in Subarea B. • Directional: These signs are permitted throughout the site and provide wayfinding to the various sales and services areas internal to the site. The text permits directional ground signs at a maximum height of 55 inches and a maximum width of 42 inches. • Brand: These signs are permitted between the front fagade of the building and the parking lot to identify a vehicle brand. Brand signs shall have a maximum height of 40 inches and maximum width of 72 inches in Subarea C consistent with these types of sings in the other Subareas. • Wall: Two wall signs are permitted along the building fagade, one each for Jaguar and Land Rover. Wall signs cannot exceed 25 feet in height and 100 square feet in size combined. Logos are permitted on wall signs and are exempt from color restrictions and logo size limitations. In Subarea A, the Commission approved a development text modification as part of the Final Development Plan approval that permitted the specific wall signs, at the specific heights shown for the new proposed combined Jaguar and Land Rover dealership. This provision continues to be included in this development text. The preliminary drawings for the future Porsche building include a red wall sign along the northern elevation of the building. Planning recommends the applicant revise the walls sign section of the development text for Subarea A to more accurately reflect the sign needs for the single brand building anticipated. The Commission previously permitted wall signs in Subarea B, one for each vehicle brand. In Subarea B, wall signs were required to adhere to the 15 -foot height limitation of the Zoning Code and each sign was limited to 50 square feet. The proposed signs in Subarea C are higher than what Code permits and what the Commission approved for the adjacent Subarea. The total combined sign size of 100 square feet will potentially permit a single sign to exceed 50 square feet (the Land Rover sign is shown at 53 square feet, while Jaguar is shown at 41 square feet). Given the height of the proposed showrooms and the 74 feet of length of each, which would allow a 74- square -foot sign (but not one for each brand), the proposed sign language in the text and the details in the preliminary development plan are appropriate. The proposed text requires that all lighting across the site is the same and limits the height of poles to 28 feet and requires similar types of City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 12 of 19 Preliminary Development Plan E::=Ifixtures throughout the site. The poles are taller than Code permits to match the existing poles. Utilities The development will include proposed utility services. Connections can be made to the existing sanitary sewer and water main along Venture Drive to accommodate the proposed site development. The proposed development will be required to meet stormwater requirements as defined in Chapter 53. The proposal includes the conversion of a "regional" retention basin into two smaller retention basins coupled with underground storage chambers that will serve Subareas B and C. Both retention basins and underground storage chambers are located within proposed Subarea C. The western proposed retention basin is located along US33 /SR161 while the eastern proposed retention basin is along the eastern property boundary near Nationwide Children's Hospital. The underground storage chambers are located underneath the southeast parking aisle. The existing retention basin on the north side of the main building at the Perimeter Loop Road entrance provides stormwater management for Subarea A and is not being modified per the proposed development. Any site modifications to Subarea A will require the applicant to analyze and make any necessary modifications to the current stormwater management plan for Subarea A to ensure stormwater requirements as defined in Chapter 53 are satisfied. The applicant will be required to work with staff prior to the Final Development Plan to identify and incorporate appropriate safety measures along the south side of the proposed western retention basin to protect vehicles traveling on westbound US33 /SR 161. A proposed storm sewer will outlet the eastern retention basin to an existing catch basin along Venture Drive as a means to discharge the site runoff. The underground storage chambers and western retention basin will outlet into the eastern retention basin. The western retention basin provides water quality for both Subareas B and C. Preliminary calculations submitted demonstrates compliance with stormwater requirements as defined in Chapter 53. All technical comments associated with stormwater management and civil plans will need to be addressed prior to the Final Development Plan. The applicant will also be required to submit additional information and details for the proposed retaining wall along the eastern retention basin. Traffic Study The City has received a traffic analysis study for the entire MAG campus that determines any necessary roadway and /or intersection City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 13 of 19 Preliminary Development Plan improvements required as part of the proposed development. This study evaluates the effects of traffic generated by the development on the existing roadway network. The applicant will be required to work with Engineering to finalize the TIS prior to the introduction of the rezoning ordinance of this proposal at City Council. liminaryA op Ian Process Section 153.050 of the Zoning Code identifies criteria for the review and approval for a rezoning /preliminary development plan (full text of criteria attached). Following is an analysis by Planning based on those criteria. 1J Consistency with Criterion met: This proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Dub /in Zoning Zoning Code, except as appropriately altered in the proposed Code development text. �, 2) Conformance Criterion met: The Future Land Use Plan of the Community Plan with adopted identifies the land use for Subarea C as Standard Office /Institutional. Plans This proposal expands upon uses permitted for this site including office and retail uses. This provides the opportunity for future redevelopment to more closely adhere to the Future Land Use classification. 3) Advancementof FUrillberion met: The preliminary development plan encourages general welfare development as a cohesive, high - quality automobile sales campus, & orderly sensitive to its location and the surrounding area. development 4) Effects of Criterion met: The proposed development fits well within the existing adjacent uses development pattern of this area. L 5) Adequacy of open space for ]rApollcable. residential 6) Protection of Criterion met with Conditions: The proposal includes the natural features replacement of previously removed trees. The applicant will have to and resources work with Staff to ensure replacement trees are not counted to fulfill other requirements. The applicant should work with staff to relocate as Conditions 1 & 2 many newly planted trees as possible and to find appropriate locations for replacement trees on site. 7) Adequate Criterion met: All required public infrastructure is in place. infrastructure City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 14 of 19 liminary MopuWplan 8) Traffic and Criterion met with Condition: The applicant provided traffic analysis, pedestrian which accounts for the square footage of the proposed building at build - safety out. The applicant will be required to provide a revised TIS, addressing Staff comments prior to the introduction of the rezoning ordinance at Condition 3 City Council. 9) Coordination & integration of bui lding & site relationships Conditions 4 & 5 Criterion met with Conditions: The proposal provides for a coordinated and integrated automobile dealership campus with consistent architectural and landscaping details. The applicant will be required to update the proposed plans to accurately indicate the required setbacks along the southern property line. In addition, the applicant should revise the sign allowances in Subarea A to more accurately reflect the sign needs for the single brand building 10J Development Criterion met with Condition: The proposal meets all other /ayoutand applicable laws and regulations. intensity 11J Utilities Criterion met: Proposed sanitary and water services can connect to the existing sanitary and water mainline along Venture Drive. 12) Stormwater Criterion met with Conditions: Preliminary calculations submitted management demonstrate compliance with stormwater requirements as defined in Chapter 53. Any site modifications to Subarea A will require the Conditions 6 -9 applicant to analyze and make any necessary modifications to the current stormwater management plan for Subarea A to ensure stormwater requirements as defined in Chapter 53 are satisfied. The applicant will be required to work with staff prior to the Final Development Plan to identify and incorporate appropriate safety measures along the south side of the proposed western retention basin to protect vehicles traveling on westbound US33 /SR 161. All technical comments associated with stormwater management and civil plans will need to be addressed prior to the Final Development Plan. The applicant will be required to submit additional information and 13) Community Criterion met: The consolidated campus proposal facilitates the benefit retention of a successful business and its workforce within the city. The proposal provides for a modern and striking automobile dealership campus. r 14) Design and Criterion met: The proposed development plan encourages the use of appearance high quality materials consistent with the previously approved City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 15 of 19 liminary Development Plan F ] site design encourages a cohesive development. 15) Development Criterion met: The proposed development plan shows a future phase phasing or the relocation of the Porsche and Lamborghini brands to Subarea A. These modifications do not require addressing in the development text, but will require future approval as a Final Development Plan. 16) Adequacy of Criterion met: There are adequate services for the proposed uses. public services F-17) Infrastructure Criterion met: No public infrastructure contributions are required. contributions Recommendatio ezoning /Preliminary Development PI40 Approval In Planning's analysis, the proposal complies with the rezoning /preliminary development plan criteria and the existing development standards. Planning recommends approval of this request with nine conditions. Conditions 1) That the applicant work with Staff to ensure replacement trees are not counted to fulfill other requirements; 2) That the applicant work with staff to relocate as many newly planted trees as possible and to find appropriate locations for replacement trees on site; 3) That the Traffic Impact Study be updated to address Engineering comments, subject to approval by Engineering, prior to introduction of this rezoning Ordinance at City Council; 4) That the applicant update the proposed plans to accurately indicate the required setbacks along the southern property line; 5) That the proposed development text be revised to address the sign allowances in Subarea A to more accurately reflect the sign needs for the single brand building anticipated; 6) That any site modifications to Subarea A include the analysis and any necessary modifications to the current stormwater management plan to ensure stormwater requirements as defined in Chapter 53 are satisfied; 7) That the applicant work with staff prior to the Final Development Plan stage to identify and incorporate appropriate safety measures along the south side of the proposed western retention basin to protect vehicles traveling on westbound US33 /SR 161; 8) That all technical comments associated with stormwater management and civil plans are addressed prior to filing a Final Development Plan application, and; 9) That the applicant submit additional information and details for the proposed retaining wall along the eastern retention basin as part of the Final Development Plan. City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 16 of 19 REZONING /PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN CRITERIA The purpose of the PUD process is to encourage imaginative architectural design and proper site planning in a coordinated and comprehensive manner, consistent with accepted land planning, landscape architecture, and engineering principles. The PUD process can consist of up to three basic stages: 1) Concept Plan (Staff, Commission, and /or City Council review and comment); 2) Zoning Amendment Request (Preliminary Development Plan; Commission recommends and City Council approves /denies); and 3) Final Development Plan (Commission approves /denies). The general intent of the preliminary development plan (rezoning) stage is to determine the general layout and specific zoning standards that will guide development. The Planning and Zoning Commission must review and make a recommendation on this preliminary development plan (rezoning) request. The application will then be forwarded to City Council for a first reading /introduction and a second reading /public hearing for a final vote. A two - thirds vote of City Council is required to override a negative recommendation by the Commission. If approved, the rezoning will become effective 30 days following the Council vote. Additionally, all portions of the development will require final development plan approval by the Commission prior to construction. In the case of a combined rezoning /preliminary development plan and final development plan, the final development plan is not valid unless the rezoning /preliminary development plan is approved by Council. Review Criteria Section 153.050 of the Zoning Code identifies criteria for the review and approval for a Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan. In accordance with Section 153.055(A) Plan Approval Criteria, Code sets out the following criteria of approval for a preliminary development plan (rezoning): 1) The proposed development is consistent with the purpose, intent and applicable standards of the Dublin Zoning Code; 2) The proposed development is in conformity with the Community Plan, Thoroughfare Plan, Bikeway Plan and other adopted plans or portions thereof as they may apply and will not unreasonably burden the existing street network; 3) The proposed development advances the general welfare of the City and immediate vicinity and will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding areas; 4) The proposed uses are appropriately located in the City so that the use and value of property within and adjacent to the area will be safeguarded; 5) Proposed residential development will have sufficient open space areas that meet the objectives of the Community Plan; 6) The proposed development respects the unique characteristic of the natural features and protects the natural resources of the site; 7) Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, retention and /or necessary facilities have been or are being provided; City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 17 of 19 s) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on the surrounding public streets and to maximize public safety and to accommodate adequate pedestrian and bike circulation systems so that the proposed development provides for a safe, convenient and non - conflicting circulation system for motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians; 9) The relationship of buildings and structures to each other and to such other facilities provides for the coordination and integration of this development within the PD and the larger community and maintains the image of Dublin as a quality community; 10) The density, building gross floor area, building heights, setbacks, distances between buildings and structures, yard space, design and layout of open space systems and parking areas, traffic accessibility and other elements having a bearing on the overall acceptability of the development plan's contribution to the orderly development of land within the City; 11) Adequate provision is made for storm drainage within and through the site so as to maintain, as far as practicable, usual and normal swales, water courses and drainage areas; 12) The design, site arrangement, and anticipated benefits of the proposed development justify any deviation from the standard development regulations included in the Dublin Zoning Code or Subdivision Regulation, and that any such deviations are consistent with the intent of the Planned Development District regulations; 13) The proposed building design meets or exceeds the quality of the building designs in the surrounding area and all applicable appearance standards of the City; 14) The proposed phasing of development is appropriate for the existing and proposed infrastructure and is sufficiently coordinated among the various phases to ultimately yield the intended overall development; 15) The proposed development can be adequately serviced by existing or planned public improvements and not impair the existing public service system for the area; and 16) The applicant's contributions to the public infrastructure are consistent with the Thoroughfare Plan and are sufficient to service the new development. Detailed Site History 2015 On October 1, 2014, the Commission provided non - binding feedback on a proposal for a future expansion to the Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) campus to incorporate an additional 5.4 acres into the PUD for an approximately 29,000- square -foot showroom for the Jaguar and Land Rover franchises, the demolition of the existing Land Rover showroom and the construction of a new 9,000- square -foot showroom for the Porsche franchises, and the addition of an elevated showroom addition to the main building for the Lamborghini franchise and all associated site improvements. The Commissioners agreed that an extension of the MAG campus to the east was appropriate particularly given the company's commitment to high quality architecture, landscaping and site design. Some Commissioners requested the applicant investigate City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 18 of 19 whether or not the Porsche building and the Land Rover /Jaguar building could be switched and encouraged a less flat design for the latter. The Commission encouraged the applicant to place less emphasis on the proposed wall signs. This Concept Plan is scheduled for review by City Council on October 12, 2015. 2014 On September 18. 2014, the Commission approved the demolition of the Land Rover showroom and the construction of a new 30,000- square -foot showroom for the Land Rover /Range Rover and Jaguar franchises; a sky bridge connecting the proposed building to the main MAG building; and text modifications to decrease the pavement setbacks along US33, decreased parking for service bays in Subarea A and wall signs for the new building in Subarea A. 2013 PZC approved a material change for the rear elevation of the Audi building. 2012 • PZC approved amended final development plan for a separate Audi showroom and the incorporation of a non - public car wash for the BMW /Mini building. • PZC approved an amended final development plan for the BMW /Mini showroom with conditions to remove the proposed Audi building from the plan and to revise the architecture to be more in line with other campus buildings and the approved BMW /Mini building. • City Council approved a rezoning on March 12, 2012 for a 40,000- square -foot building with approximately 4,000 square feet for expansion area, 225 parking spaces and 57,000 square feet of vehicle display area for the BMW and Mini franchise. • The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of a rezoning with preliminary development plan and final development plan to develop additional land into the MAG PUD for the Mini and BMW franchises. 2011 The Planning and Zoning Commission informally reviewed a proposal to incorporate additional land into the MAG PUD for the Mini and BMW franchises to move from Post Road. 2010 • City Council approved a rezoning with preliminary development plan that removed Subarea J and portions of Subareas D and 1-1 from the Perimeter Center PCD and established a 15.6 -acre MAG PUD. • The Planning and Zoning Commission approved a final development plan with the recently constructed addition for the Volvo and Porsche franchises. The addition includes an owner's residential suite. This rezoning moved MAG out of the Perimeter Center Planned District and into a separate PUD (MAG plan). 2008 City of Dublin I Planning and Zoning Commission Case 15- 113Z /PDP I MAG PUD — Porsche, Jaguar, Land Rover Expansion Thursday, January 7, 2016 1 Page 19 of 19 • City Council approved a rezoning with preliminary development plan to remove part of Subarea D place it into Subarea 1 -1 to accommodate a free - standing parking lot for the MAG dealership. • The Planning and Zoning Commission disapproved an amended final development plan for exterior building modifications and a wall sign for Porsche franchise. • The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of a rezoning with preliminary development plan to remove part of Subarea D place it into Subarea 1 -1 to accommodate a free - standing parking lot for the MAG dealership. • The Planning and Zoning Commission informally a proposal for exterior building modifications and a wall sign for Porsche franchise. • The Planning and Zoning Commission informally reviewed a proposal to accommodate a free - standing parking lot for the MAG dealership. 2005 The Planning and Zoning Commission approved an amended final development plan for the construction of an 18,081- square -foot expansion and skywalk addition for the MAG dealership. 2004 The Planning and Zoning Commission approved a revised final development plan for architectural and site modifications to the Rolls Royce brand within the MAG dealership. 1998 The Planning and Zoning Commission approved a development plan for the construction of the 7,335- square -foot Land Rover building within the MAG dealership. 1997 • The Planning and Zoning Commission approved a development plan for the construction of the 71,000- square -foot main MAG dealership building. • Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval and City Council approved a rezoning to create a 14-acre Subarea J of the Perimeter Center plan for auto dealerships and other uses, with several automotive franchises as a part of the Midwest Auto Group (MAG) campus. ici of Dublin Land Use and Long PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Range Planning 5800 Shier Rings Road RECORD OF ACTION Dublin, Ohio 4300 16 -1236 phone 614.410.4600 fax 614.410.4747 OCTOBER 1, 2015 'Nwv -.,,. W- The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 2. MAG PUD — Jaguar, Land Rover, Porsche Expansion 6335 Perimeter Loop Road 15 -091CP Concept Plan Proposal: An expansion to the Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) campus to incorporate an additional 5.4 acres into the PUD for an approximately 29,000- square -foot showroom for the Jaguar and Land Rover franchises, the demolition of the existing Land Rover showroom and the construction of a new 9,000- square -foot showroom for the Porsche franchises, and the addition of an elevated showroom addition to the main building for the Lamborghini franchise and all associated site improvements. Request: Review and non - binding feedback for a Concept Plan prior to a formal rezoning application under the provisions of Code Section 153.050. Applicant: Midwestern Auto Group, represented by Jackson Reynolds and Brad Parish. Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II. Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675, chusak @dublin.oh.us RESULT: The Commission provided non - binding feedback on a proposal for a future expansion to the Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) campus to incorporate an additional 5.4 acres into the PUD for an approximately 29,000- square -foot showroom for the Jaguar and Land Rover franchises, the demolition of the existing Land Rover showroom and the construction of a new 9,000- square -foot showroom for the Porsche franchises, and the addition of an elevated showroom addition to the main building for the Lamborghini franchise and all associated site improvements. The Commissioners agreed that an extension of the MAG campus to the east was appropriate particularly given the company's commitment to high quality architecture, landscaping and site design. Some Commissioners requested the applicant investigate whether or not the Porsche building and the Land Rover /Jaguar building could be switched and encouraged a less flat design for the latter. The Commission encouraged the applicant to place less emphasis on the proposed wall signs. STAFF CERTIFICATION 441C Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner II Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission October 1, 2015 — Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 13 2. MAG PUD — Jaguar, Land Rover, Porsche Expansion 6335 Perimeter Loop Road 15 -091CP Concept Plan Ms. Newell said the following application is a request for an expansion to the Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) campus to incorporate an additional 5.4 acres into the PUD for a showroom for the Jaguar and Land Rover franchises, the demolition of the existing Land Rover showroom and the construction of a new showroom for the Porsche brand, and the addition of an elevated showroom addition to the main building for the Lamborghini franchise and all associated site improvements. She said this is a request for review and informal, non - binding feedback for a Concept Plan under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050. Claudia Husak said this is a concept plan for MAG. She said the campus is approximately 30 acres north of US33 and south of Perimeter Drive with Venture Drive wrapping around the northern portion of the site to the east. She said approximately 24 acres is currently developed with the MAG campus. Ms. Husak said the Planned Unit Development process consists of three steps, the first is Concept Plan review and are required when the site is over 25 acres and when the proposal does not meet the Community Plan as is the case with the application tonight. She said since the applicant is requesting feedback on an expansion of five acres, the Community Plan is determining the review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. She said the comments and feedback as part of this application is non - binding and very similar to an informal application. Ms. Husak said the applicant is able to take a concept plan application to City Council for their feedback as well. She said the next step would be a Rezoning with a Preliminary Development Plan with more details and a development text with the applicable development standards. She explained that the third and last step is the Final Development Plan. Ms. Husak said the proposal includes the two existing subareas, Subarea A is the largest of the subareas and includes the main MAG building which is the first building built for the campus and houses the majority of the automotive brands sold by MAG. She said, in 2010, the applicant had an expansion approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council to add the Volvo dealership which was a new dealership to the MAG campus. She said Porsche is currently in the rear of the Volvo portion of the main building, which also includes the penthouse suite. She said Subarea A also includes the 7,300- square -foot Land Rover /Range Rover building, which was approved to be demolished in 2014 with a new building to house Jaguar and Land Rover in its place. She said it included a sky bridge connection between the main building to the new building, which as part of tonight's proposal is no longer a complete bridge connection but rather the elevated showroom for the Lamborghini brand. Ms. Husak said Subarea B is in the center of the site, which was included into the MAG campus in 2012 to move BMW and Mini from Post Road to this campus. She said at that time there was a reluctance to any additional expansion of the campus specifically concerning car dealership land use and the view of cars along US33 and the applicant mentioned that the BMW /Mini expansion as their last. She said any kind of expansion of this campus would have to go through all of the approval processes. She said during the approval of Subarea B with the BMW /Mini building, the Audi brand made a plea for their own free- standing, 11,000- square -foot building which was then incorporated into the campus expansion as part of Subarea B. Ms. Husak said that Subarea C would be created if approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. She said it is currently a vacant 5.5 -acre site owned by the applicant. She said the adjacent neighbor to the east is Nationwide Children's Hospital. She said there is currently a large stormwater management pond on the western edge of the site that handles stormwater management for the Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission October 1, 2015 — Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 13 neighboring sites. Ms. Husak pointed out that this pond is eliminated as part of this proposal and stormwater management will need to be addressed in more detail to the satisfaction of Engineering if this case moves forward. Ms. Husak said the expansion of the campus and creation of Subarea C is being driven by Land Rover and Jaguar requesting a new building creating a new showroom and with Jaguar a new brand at the dealership. Ms. Husak showed the Future Land Use Map from the Community Plan which was approved in 2013. She said the Subarea A portion of the site is designated as General Commercial on the map and the remainder is a Standard Office Institutional District which the proposal would not adhere to with Subarea BorC. Ms. Husak said MAG has always been great in working with staff and figuring out creative ways to create architecture and interest on the campus with landscape screening and site layout. She requested feedback from the Commissions regarding the Future Land Use designation and the applicant's wish to expand the campus farther east. She said in all the subareas office is a permitted use, however, the office areas within each of the showrooms are small. Ms. Husak said the proposed access point conflicts with the existing Nationwide Children's Hospital access point off Venture Drive and being immediately adjacent to this access is not something that would be supported by Engineering. She said in the northern portion of the site, the Land Rover building will replaced with the Porsche building, which is slightly larger than the existing building. She said there is currently a test track for Range Rovers that will be eliminated creating more display area. Ms. Husak said the main building does not have wall signs and the Land Rover building has a sign on the green panel and three walls signs were approved at heights higher than 15 feet stipulating that the green panel would be eliminated. She said the applicant is proposing one wall sign above 15 feet. Ms. Husak said the sky bridge was approved in 2014 in a similar design, but this proposal eliminates the connection between the two buildings and only includes the elevated showroom. Ms. Husak said Subarea C includes a proposal for a 29,000- square -foot building for Jaguar and Land Rover to be set in the center of the site at an angle and taking advantage of the views that might be provided from this location traveling along US33. She said the applicant has continued the "fingers" design of display spaces within the campus and provided landscape screening. She said the Code allows for a lower screening for vehicle display areas as opposed to parking lots where the screening has to be higher. She said there are display areas near the building as well as visitor and employee parking spaces. She said the building would include a non - retail car wash to the rear and there is a portion of the building that includes vehicle service areas that front onto US33. She said MAG has done a good job in lowering those types of uses or placing them along the sides of the building and this is a different design with having them in the front. Ms. Husak said the building incorporates both brands with a main entry door in the center and the details related to height and size of the signs has not yet been submitted. She said the Planning and Zoning Commission allowed wall signs for the BMW, Mini, and the Audi dealerships but required them to be at the 15 -foot height that Code would require. She said in the northern portion of the site the Planning and Zoning Commission did allow taller signs and staff has requested feedback related to those details. She said there are two signs proposed in addition to the brand identifications, one says "Dublin" over the central door and then there is a "service" sign. She said that service signs have typically been low to the ground and not required permits. She said the Service and Dublin wall signs seem unnecessary in this particular instance. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission October 1, 2015 — Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 13 Ms. Husak read the proposed discussion questions: 1. Is the proposed land use appropriate? 2. Is the proposed layout sensitive to the previous concerns? 3. Does the Commission support the proposed architectural concepts? 4. What sign allowances would the Commission consider appropriate for the proposal? 5. Other considerations by the Commission. Brad Parish, Architectural Alliance, said he has been the architect for MAG for several years. He said they were here back in 2014 and asked for approval of the Jaguar and Land Rover on the north side of the campus. He said they were working on construction documents with hopes of breaking ground in August when Jaguar and Land Rover stopped 40 projects countrywide because they redesigned their image and brand to be more competitive in the US market. He said the building design being proposed is their new prototype that will be rolling across the country soon and it is MAG's goal to be the first of this prototype of 2017 Jaguar /Land Rover line of cars. He said it is that motivation for MAG to be the first to get the dealership done. He said he comes before the Commission humbly because he knows the history of the last five acres. He said it is important to Mark Brettlinger and MAG that his business keeps growing and he is seeing the growth potential with adding Jaguar to MAG by an immediate impact to his business being able to sell Jaguars having two years to build the facility. He said through this process he wants to look at the high line brands with Rolls- Royce, Bentley, Porsche, and Lamborghini and try to grow those within the Dublin market as well. He said this master plans takes all the cars and brands and shuffles them up and gives them a new home and identity so that he can grow his business. Mr. Parish said the high line would all be interior modifications without any exterior modifications. He said the new architecture of the Jaguar prototype fits the style that is consistent along the corridor with BMW and Mini as well as Audi with a clean line, modern, and innovative with glass and metal. He said they began by orienting the building to give a three - quarter view to the building adding interest and help with the internal workings of the showroom to work better with the finger design that is common to the MAG campus. He said it was an artful way of creating display space. He said they are proposing some additional ponding in the front to handle some of the storm water and does have other means working through the engineers to provide details. Mr. Parish said the curb cut conflict has been resolved by finding the shared access agreement with Nationwide Childrens Hospital that is in place and they tie into the existing drive and clean up the elevations. He said they will continue with the grove of trees along SR 33 to create a nice campus. He said the architecture is consistent across the frontage and the display fingers. Mr. Parish said they proposing to tear down the existing Land Rover and slide the Porsche facility to be more on center with middle finger display and create more displays. He said they chose to put Porsche on the northern edge to continue with the curved edges of the front fagade with the keyhole slot that plays nicely with the existing MAG massing where there is the concourse spin going down the center, which made Porsche a better fit. He said he does not know the exactly heights but would like to conform to Code. Mr. Parish said he has changed the Lamborghini because of the concourse spin which is a CMU wall that is curved is going to continue on past to create an adult version of a Match Box car display as seen in the grocery store where there are Lamborghini's hanging out over the water. He said instead of creating the back concourse area that connect downward, he wanted to create a showroom and cut behind the wall that he created off the concourse wall that is a cantilevered elevated showroom with some structural post underneath. He said they are creating an outdoor vestibule space that will host Lamborghini events where the customer can go in and outside during the events creating a unique space. Mr. Parish said he would like to get feedback on the staff questions, specifically on the remaining 5.4 acres and adding the Jaguar franchise to the MAG campus. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission October 1, 2015 — Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 13 Ms. Newell asked if they are re- working in the test track. Mr. Parish said it is not a requirement any longer and they have opted not to do it Ms. Newell asked if there were anyone from the public that would like to speak to this application. [There were none.] Ms. Newell said she likes the design of the elevated "Match Box" design of the building and it will be a spectacular part of the campus. She said she is not concerned about the extension of the campus and knows that City Council may have different priorities, but from a planning stand point if the same level of architectural detail continues through the site and it remains well developed and unified across the whole site she is comfortable with expanding the territory to provide new business opportunities and to expand the business operations that are here. Ms. Newell said she agrees with the curve of the building for Porsche, but when she looks at the mass of the plan she would like to reverse the two buildings because of the size difference. She said because the Porsche building is smaller in scale, it could potentially be more palatable on that smaller area of the site. She said because the retention ponds are squashed in around the fingers and not well integrated into the design, having a smaller building on that location could provide more opportunity. Ms. Newell said the east elevation of the Porsche as the drive through area returns around at the east side of the elevation it abrupts short and with the massing of the building she would want to extend that element further across that particular fagade. Ms. Newell said regarding the height of the signs, the previous concession allowing a change in height worked with the architecture of the building which is why they allowed the higher signs and in exchange for getting away from the green which was out of place given the whole campus grey, white and black scheme that goes on with all the architectural elements. She said when she looks at all the elevations of the new signs it does not hurt the building to lower them to a 15 -foot height. She said keeping the aesthetic appearance of how the signage works on the fagade will be important. Ms. Newell asked for the Land Rover building service entrance to be explained. Mr. Parish said at the backside of the Audi dealership there is a service drive around the corner with the high -speed doors that open and close quickly. He said this will be a service reception and is a single story building so that the customer could exit their car at the service drive and enter immediately into the showroom and enjoy the shopping experience where the existing MAG campus they enter below and have to climb steps which is problematic for ADA requirements. He said they tried to provide some screening for the western view and there is an opportunity at the fingers to provide additional landscape screening against the overhead doors. Ms. Newell said they are using the space similarly to new car delivery. She said the adjacent site (Crowne) has a similar arrangement on their site with glass doors with some screening, where the doors appear to be windows on the building and asked what MAG is proposing for the opening for the doors. Mr. Parish said the new service reception is typically tiled and finished almost like a showroom finish when done. He said the doors proposing are "Rytec" high -speed doors that are two seconds up and two seconds down. He said they are the same doors on the Audi building with a full vision panel that are approximately four inches. Ms. Newell said she agrees with staff on the signage of the service that is proposed over top, that it can be handled more discreetly. She said the elevations of the building with the materials that are being Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission October 1, 2015 — Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 13 proposed do match within the campus. She said she is struck with the flatness across the front of the building and would like to see more play in the elevation. Mr. Brown said it is appropriate on the proposed site stating that is what the area is and their buildings are superior to any other along that road. He said there is a certain vocabulary that goes on with the established block and it works. He said he assumes the panels are a dry joint rain screen, nice crisp, clean panels. He said he shares Ms. Newell's notion that it appears flat with nothing dynamic going on. He said in the Mini /BMW building there is the two opposing colors that is dynamic and striking and then the Audi after that is a wonderful presentation. He said he would hate to see anything that does not live up to the standard. He asked for the color of the panels. Mr. Parish said the darker panels are a dark grey material with a dry joint with a more contemporary linear fashion and the other is a bone color that demarks the entrance to the facility. He said the inside is a different color grey that looks chiseled back to the butt joint glass system with mullions behind the glass similar to Audi. He said so that it looks like a clean sheet of glass. Mr. Brown said he shares the opinion of staff and Ms. Newell about the service area. He said there is a certain signage vocabulary on this site that has a nice rhythm on this campus and this would be different and progressive in logic to the signage and they should maintain that as best you can as they have with the layout. He said he loves the Lamborghini site. Mr. Brown said he appreciates the nice manicured screening being provided along US33 and he said the Porsche building and the signage fits the vocabulary of the rest of the campus and integrates well with the rest of the campus. Mr. Brown agreed that they have to figure out the pond issues. Mr. Miller said he agrees with the land use. He said if they move the Porsche building over to where the Land Rover building is it would soften the impact on Children's Hospital by making it smaller and would provide a transition into the building. He said the campus is awesome. He said he agrees the building on the Land Rover is too flat. He said to soften the signs and he asked if the Porsche building were moved would the Land Rover building fit on the Porsche site on the plan. Mr. Parish said the reason they chose this site for Porsche was to provide some employee /overflow parking in the corner towards the back away from US33 and they like to have the pool of parking in the back because the vegetation has heavily grown. He said from a site strategy it does make sense to move the buildings but they lose the parking function if moved. Mr. Miller said it would be easier to gain his full support if the building sites were switched. Ms. De Rosa said she loves this campus and likes to drive by and loves the Audi building as it is her favorite. She said they have done a nice job on the campus so an additional five acres to this is more attractive than an office building. She said she is a huge Jaguar fan and is glad it is coming to Dublin. She said driving down into a service area and walking into a showroom is a nice experience and there has been a nice job done interior that makes people want to look at the new cars and she thought it works well. She said she agrees that the building looks a little less interesting then the other ones but may be hard to see on a rendering. She said she is supportive of the land use and looks forward to what they bring back. Mr. Stidhem said he is in support of the land use and is a great fit on the land and he does not have a problem with the building locations. He said the signage and all the discussion is surprising since the cars are their advertising and he knows where the Porsches are because they are there and he does not need Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission October 1, 2015 — Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 13 to see a sign to know they are there and he does not understand the issue with the signage. He said he is in complete support of the building and the campus. Mr. Brown asked if the Land Rover and Jaguar rollout is the unified building. Mr. Parish said they have had a prototype on that for years with Jaguar and Land Rover, but they had two sacred items of the slopped roof and the green pylon was Land Rover and Jaguar had a round rotunda, which was collaborated in the last design. He said the signage is not a problem while on the campus. He said it is the 70 mph traffic getting to the campus from US33 to pull them in that says there is a Porsche or Jaguar showroom to the interior. Ms. Newell said the presentation that is being shown went through several times to get it down to the version that was approved. She said she has worked for car dealerships before and car manufacturers love their signage and branding and always they always what they want presented to a Commission first before they will yield to something else. Mr. Brown said he has seen plenty of dealerships and looking at the Porsche sign is to scale and appropriate with the building. He said it is interesting about the branding about the Jaguar and the Land Rover because next to the other buildings, it is flat and they are trying to do something with the glass and the jewel box will look cool but those are dynamic buildings that are next to it. He said the returns and terminates on the ends have been handled gracefully on campus by a taller wall or something to demark the front elevation or the presentation how it returns to the service. He said there has always been isolation as they catching different elevations there is not an abrupt transition from the clean sleek panels to stucco or block or corrugated panels, it is always an important concern especially how the building are rotated slightly off axis. Ms. Newell asked if there were any more questions for the Commission and if they had provided enough direction. Mr. Parish said it has been a great dialog and he hopes to have a similar dialog at City Council. He said it has been an ongoing process of the MAG campus and it has evolved and is bigger than they had envisioned through the years. He thanked the Commission for their comments. 3. NE Quad PUD, Subareas 5A and 5113, Kroger Marketplace and Northstar Retail Centers 15- 093AFDP Sawmill and Hard Roads Amended Final Development Plan Ms. Newell said the following application is to modify a previously approved final development plan to include black as an approved awning color for retail centers located at the northwest corner of Sawmill and Hard Roads, east of Emerald Parkway. This is a request for review and approval of an Amended Final Development Plan under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050. The Commission is the final authority on this application and we will need to swear -in. She swore in those who intended on addressing the Commission. Ms. Newell said this is on the consent agenda and did not need a formal presentation. Ms. Newell asked if there were anyone from the public that would like to speak to this application. [There were none.] Motion and Vote Ms. Newell moved, Mr. Brown seconded, to approve this Amended Final Development Plan because the proposal complies with the applicable review criteria and the existing development standards. la of Dublin Land Use and Long Range Planning PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 5800 Shier Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 phone 614.410.4600 RECORD OF ACTION fax 614.410.4747 www.dublinohiousa.gov SEPTEMBER 18, 2014 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 1. MAG PUD, Land Rover /Range Rover /3aguar /Lamborghini 6325 Perimeter Loop Road 14- 046AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Proposal: Demolition of the Land Rover showroom and the construction of a new 30,000 - square -foot showroom for the Land Rover /Range Rover and Jaguar franchises; a sky bridge connecting the proposed building to the main MAG building; and associated site improvements at the southeast corner of the intersection of Perimeter Loop Road with Perimeter Drive with a text modification to decrease the pavement setbacks. Request: Review and approval of an Amended Final Development Plan application and text modification under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050. Applicant: Brad Parish, Architectural Alliance; and Jack Reynolds, Smith & Hale LLC. Planning Contact: Claudia Husak, AICP, Planner II. Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675, chusak @dublin.oh.us MOTION #1: Mr. Taylor moved, Mr. Zimmerman seconded, to recommend approval of the following Minor Text Modifications: 1) Decrease the pavement setback to 45 feet along US33 /SR161 for the display areas impacted by ODOT right -of -way takes as part of the US33 /I -270 interchange project; 2) Provide parking at a ratio of one space per service bag in Subarea A; and 3) Permitting three wall signs in Subarea A as proposed as part of the Amended Final Development Plan (14- 046AFDP). * Brad Parish agreed to the above modifications. VOTE: 5-2. RESULT: The Minor Text Modifications were approved. RECORDED VOTES: Chris Amorose Groomes Yes Richard Taylor Yes Amy Kramb Yes John Hardt No Victoria Newell No Todd Zimmerman Yes Amy Salay Yes Page 1 of 2 City of Dublin Land Use and Long Range Planning PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 5800 Shier Rings Road Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 phone 614.410.4600 RECORD OF ACTION fax 614.410.4747 www.dublinohiousa.gov SEPTEMBER 18, 2014 1. MAG PUD, Land Rover /Range Rover /Jaguar /Lamborghini 6325 Perimeter Loop Road 14- 046AFDP Amended Final Development Plan MOTION #2: Mr. Taylor moved, Mr. Zimmerman seconded, to recommend approval of the Amended Final Development Plan with four conditions. 1) That the plans be revised to address building material inconsistencies on sheet 4.01; 2) That the applicant work with Planning to identify additional areas for replacement trees, prior to submitting for a building permit; 3) That the size of the brand identification sign be reduced to 40 inches; and 4) That the applicant revise the application to remove the green building materials from the application and replace the material with a material and color reflecting existing characteristics on campus. * Brad Parish agreed to the four conditions. VOTE: 6-1. RESULT: The Amended Final Development Plan with four conditions was approved. RECORDED VOTES: Chris Amorose Groomes Yes Richard Taylor Yes Amy Kramb Yes John Hardt No Victoria Newell Yes Todd Zimmerman Yes Amy Salay Yes STAFF CERTIFICATION e�'W &s Claudia Husak, AICP, Planner II Page 2 of 2 Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 18, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 23 1. MAG PLID, Land Rover /Range Rover /Jaguar /Lamborghini 6325 Perimeter Loop Road 14- O46AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Chair Chris Amorose Groomes introduced this application for a request for demolition of the Land Rover showroom and the construction of a new 30,000- square -foot showroom for the Land Rover, Range Rover and Jaguar franchises; a sky bridge connecting the proposed building to the main MAG building; and associated site improvements at the southeast corner of the intersection of Perimeter Loop Road with Perimeter Drive with a text modification to decrease the pavement setbacks. The Commission is the final authority on this application. Ms. Amorose Groomes swore in anyone who intends to address the Commission on this case. Claudia Husak said this application will require the Commission to make two motions. She said there are three Minor Development Text Modifications proposed for this application. She provided a quick overview of what has since changed since the Commission last reviewed this application informally in June. Ms. Husak explained the site was rezoned in 2010 to incorporate the entire MAG campus. She said it accommodates a multitude of auto franchises within the City. She said the zoning district is divided into two subareas, where Subarea B was created specifically for Audi and BMW /Mini and Subarea A on the west side includes the Lane Dealership building with several automotive brands such as Saab, Aston Martin, Bentley, Porsche, Volkswagen, and Volvo. She noted the existing Land Rover and Range Rover building to the north on the subarea map, which is about 7,500 square feet. She said within that Development Text, it was written to take that building as it existed into account. Ms. Husak said the proposal includes the demolition of the existing 7,335- square -foot Land Rover building and replace it with a new 34,000- square -foot building to house the Land Rover, Range Rover, and Jaguar franchises and provide the connection between the new building and the existing main dealership building via a sky bridge across the pond. She said the sky bridge is intended as a showroom for the Lamborghini brand. Ms. Husak reported Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) is working with its design consultant and the City of Dublin to complete the plan design on the US33 /I -270 interchange upgrade. She explained that ODOT is in the process of acquiring rights -of -way to align pavement setback requirements which will decrease due to the right -of -way takes. She said there are a lot of parcels within the City that will be impacted and MAG is included going as far west as the Crowne Kia site. She said Staff has been working with ODOT in determining zoning impact compliance of right -of- way takes in terms of sign location, setbacks, landscaping, and tree removal, etc. She said MAG has been informed that required right -of -way takes impact compliance with the pavement setbacks required in the development text. Ms. Husak reported the taking of right -of -way will make the site non - compliant and Planning suggested the applicant request a minor modification to the development text that slightly decreases the pavement setback requirement from 60 feet to 50 feet to ensure zoning compliance. She added that ODOT has said the setback encroachment will be less than four feet but 10 feet is suggested to allow ODOT some flexibility but is concerned that 50 feet might not be enough so she now recommends 45 feet. She said one area impacted is in front of Volvo where the vehicle display area is designed with a unique finger -like arrangement along US33 at the southern boundary and the other is on the very eastern portion of the campus where again there is vehicle display fingers for BMW and Mini. She pointed out the black line to illustrate the existing right -of -way and the red line is the new right -of -way. Amy Salay asked if there was a condition attached to that, which would state they are not allowed to change anything basically ODOT is doing the changing but MAG is not, now or in the future. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 18, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 23 Ms. Husak clarified as in the site remains as approved and offered to tighten up the language for the text modification. Ms. Husak said the pond that is located along the Perimeter Loop frontage is decreasing in size, which was discussed in June. She said the pond is increasing in depth to manage stormwater. She said the applicant at the building permit stage will also be required to demonstrate they area meeting quality and quantity for stormwater management. She reported the building increase in square footage would require some removal of parking. She said in June, the Commission was generally supportive of allowing a development text modification that provides less parking. She recommended the applicant provide parking spaces at a ratio of one space per service bay in Subarea A as opposed to requiring an overall number for the site. Ms. Husak said there was a lot of discussion in June about the elevations to evoke more of the MAG style /character, where the development text requires striking and modern architecture. She said building materials were discussed providing what is on the remainder of the campus, creating angles, sharp edges, and points of interest within the elevation. She reported that overall, the applicant has changed rooflines to create more of these angles; increased the glass along the front elevation to provide transparency; provided some horizontal metal accents; diminished the overall beige material originally proposed and only focusing that on the Jaguar entrance; and the stone water table is only one of the more rugged pieces within the Land Rover and Range Rover portion of the building. She presented some perspective drawings to show what that would look like. Ms. Husak said the applicant is proposing a lot of glass and metal for the sky bridge which serves as a showroom, suspended over the pond which requires concrete and metal support legs that extend to the ground. She presented an illustration which showed more industrial and modern materials for the front fagade with floor to ceiling windows, corrugated metal and light and dark grey stucco for the rear, and a fiber cement rain screen with visible fasteners to provide a connecting element between the two portions and is the material used on the Audi service write -up area. Ms. Husak said the proposal includes three wall signs on the north elevation. She explained the development text did not anticipate this new building and sky bridge and currently only permits one wall sign identifying a single brand on the north fagade of the northernmost building in this Subarea, permitted at a height of 25 feet. She stated this proposal requests a 33.5- square -foot wall sign of the Land Rover oval logo and a 21.65- square -foot wall sign for the Range Rover franchise. She explained text limits the size of wall signs to 35 square feet. She reported that both signs are proposed along the metal accent band on the north elevation at a height of 23.2 feet. She said a third sign was proposed for above the entrance to the Jaguar showroom which has chrome letters and the chrome Jaguar logo, 35 square feet in size and at a height of 24 feet. Ms. Husak said the proposed signs would require a development text modification. She said Planning suggests the applicant eliminate one of the three proposed wall signs and supports a development text modification to permit one additional wall sign at a size of 35 square feet and a height of 25 feet. She presented some images of the campus as it is proposed. She said the applicant is allowed a brand identification sign which is shown at most of the entrances to most of the dealership buildings but should be limited to 40 square feet. She said the plans call out a green metal material in this area near the Jaguar entrance but believes that is a mistake. Ms. Husak stated the plans show the removal of 354 inches of healthy trees about six inches in diameter and 224.5 inches are shown to be replaced. She said Planning recommends additional areas where trees could be replaced, particularly in the detention basin. Ms. Husak summarized the conditions for this proposal to be approved Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 18, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 23 The Chair invited the applicant to state his name and address for the record. Brad Parish, Architectural Alliance, 165 N. 5' Street, set up samples for the Commission and thanked them for the opportunity to speak on behalf of MAG. He indicated that Jack Reynolds was also present to assist. Mr. Parish said since the June meeting, he has tried to make Jaguar and Land Rover understand MAG as a campus and be given the opportunity to mold their prototype building into something significant on MAG's campus. He indicated he sent the June meeting minutes to them to review the Commission's comments and they gave him the opportunity to come up with something creative, thinking outside the box. However, he said, there are three sacred cows that must be adhered to: 1) Land Rover tower with the sloped roof; 2) Jaguar portico; and 3) the associated signs on each of those elements. Mr. Parish started with the Land Rover sloped roof and tower as this was the most foreign element to the campus, creating a vernacular form in a contemporary way. He explained the long showroom body is a long bar with a low sloped pitched roof providing a very thin profile, much like BMW. He added he went from grade to roof with storefront, allowing heavy beam trusses to be visible, marrying the traditional and contemporary element from inside out. He said this gave purpose and scale to the Land Rover tower on the building elevation. He explained the Jaguar portico is the hinge -point to the three fragmented boxes that contain the new car delivery, the showroom, and the service reception area, providing organization and purpose on the site. Mr. Parish addressed the comments from the June meeting, which spoke to the service area on the backside of the building and provided a design reminiscent of the original MAG building and also addressed comments made about the sky bridge. He explained that corrugated metal was used throughout the campus: as equipment screening up on the roof adjacent to the sky bridge; above each of the entrances into each one of the diamonds; and on the sky bridge. He explained his design for the ramp, windows and back elevation. He provided a story about how he was inspired to create the Lamborghini suspended showroom, based on a matchbox car display in a store. From a site standpoint, he addressed issues with the test track. He said he would like to relocate the one that exists, creating more of a forest around it, so the test drive was redesigned to simulate going through a rocky mountain which enhances the experience. He said this will also help screen the overhead doors on the service write -up, too. Mr. Parish recalled a phone conversation with the owner of MAG (Jaguar /Land Rover) and he told him the history of when Land Rover came to Dublin when the tower and emblem were a hot button in 1997. Mr. Parish indicated that without that tower and emblem, Land Rover would have never come to Dublin. He said it has been discussed as to who can have wall signs and who cannot and explained that they have three brands, much like BMW and Mini. He said they want the right to be competitive in the market, being that BMW /Mini /Audi are of the same. Mr. Parish said he had told MAG that there is a difference between Subarea A and Subarea B for signs but MAG wanted Mr. Parish to show all three signs proposed and as they exist today per their corporate branding globally. He conveyed that each brand dealer must have a sign to be an authorized dealer for Jaguar, Land Rover, and Range Rover. Mr. Parish said he reduced the text for the Jaguar sign so it was fall within the conformity of the square footage requirement. He said Jaguar is new to the campus and is expected to bring in $20 million in annual revenue for a total between these two franchises of $36 million annual revenue to the City and 10 additional employees. He said this design is more expensive but MAG believes this is an investment back into Dublin. The Chair asked if anyone was present from the public that would like to comment with respect to this application. [Hearing none.] Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 18, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 23 Victoria Newell asked what color materials are proposed for Jaguar cylinder and confirmed the only green on the building is the Land Rover tower. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if the Jaguar portion was stucco or manufactured panels. Mr. Parish said they do have an option for EIFS. Ms. Newell said she appreciated all the effort Mr. Parish had put into the design of this building. She said she has always liked the sky bridge as it is really creative and a welcome addition to the building. She stated she is struggling with the Range Rover green element and requests for signage. She said she perceives that whole column, being highlighted in green, as the whole sign. She indicated she understands that is what the dealership is looking for but it stands out more than everything else on the campus that is a nice neutral gray palette. She said she finds the overhang awkward in proportion to the rest of the scale of the building. She indicated she was a lot more comfortable with the Jaguar component and the way that it is presented this time. She said she has not completely studied the test track but would appreciate an attempt at making it more integrated into the design of the building. She indicated she still struggles with the signs proposed. Amy Kramb said she was ok with changing the setback because of the ODOT takes and agrees that a condition be written whereas MAG cannot alter the layout and extend their pavement 10 feet closer in those areas. Ms. Kramb indicated she was still supportive of the reduction in parking. She agreed that the Land Rover sign with the green looks like the whole space is the sign. She said she understands that is the color they want and would be more apt to give the applicant a sign for Land Rover and one for Range Rover if that whole tower was not green. She said she would prefer a brushed metal or something different. She asked that the Land Rover and Range Rover signs were reduced so combined, they would meet the 35- square -foot requirement and noted there is a smaller version in the ground sign. She indicated the height is what the text allows. She said she could be persuaded if the applicant wanted to change the text and remove the ground sign to have three wall signs; otherwise, two wall signs would be the limit. She believes there are options available to the applicant to achieve their logos, just smaller. She said the architecture looks better than the original proposal. She suggested if that green had to be used, she would prefer it be repeated somewhere else. She stated she likes the sky bridge over the water that is allowed to go right up to the building. She concluded her biggest concern was signage. Todd Zimmerman asked about the Jaguar sign. Mr. Parish explained the individual letters would stand off. Mr. Zimmerman said he could live with the way the signs are now. He asked if Lamborghini would be coming in for a sign for the sky box. Mr. Parish reported that Lamborghini provided a proposal that was turned down. Mr. Zimmerman said he likes the architecture and understands how the test track can be better integrated to hide the doors, which would be an improvement he could support. He indicated he understands the setback is more for ODOT and is fine with a minor text modification. He said he can see how this proposal will blend into the existing buildings and campus. Richard Taylor said he appreciated Mr. Parish's efforts trying to design a building where every occupant is an individual client. He said this proposal is better than the previous design and said the long low pitched slope roof better integrates into the building. He indicated he does not have a problem with parking or setbacks. He said the only thing that bothers him about that elevation is that symmetrically placed entryway, but that is his personal preference. He said the number or placement of the signs on the entire campus is not unattractive or inappropriate, but reviewing this in the context of all the other businesses in the City and especially the ones across the street from this that are also car dealerships and are restricted on signs for multiple brands. He stated he would be in support of two signs but not three as he has to consider other applicants that come in and hard to explain why MAG would get all the signs when someone else does not. John Hardt said he is appreciative and sympathetic to the work Mr. Parish has done. He stated he had no trouble at all with the test track, especially if it is integrated into the landscape. He said the display by the Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 18, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 23 front door is out of place, effectively becoming a sign when they park cars on it, elevated into the air. He said there are no other dealerships in town that the Commission gives that courtesy. Mr. Hardt requested clarification when Mr. Parish was speaking of a new location. Mr. Parish explained that both still exist in the new proposal. He said the test track is relocated but there is a Jaguar and a Land Rover display, and if there is a six -inch grade difference; it is like sitting up on a curb but would be happy to minimize it. Mr. Hardt said he was ok with it as long as the height is measured in inches, less than 12 inches. He said the current one is every bit as tall as he is, which he has an issue with. He recalled a lot of discussion about the treatment of the edge of the pond the last time. He said with the current proposal, it seems to be primarily a concrete edge /the retaining wall. He asked if there was a system proposed /or already there today to maintain that water level both up and down. Mr. Parish explained the current pond is regulated by a well in that area and there is a proposed fill way so it can and will keep it at a constant level. He said it obviously has to handle the stormwater and will bump up to handle that and if it exceeds, it goes over the spillway. Mr. Hardt said this is obviously a PUD and there is development text that is agreed upon that allows for certain things to occur that often times are outside the bounds of Code but there are tradeoffs to allow for that. He said Code is the underlying foundation on any given site. He noted in this case, Code allows the wall signs, typically facing the highway, which gave him a comfort level for approving the BMW and Mini signs. Conversely, he said, Perimeter Drive has no wall signs anywhere. He stated the only way he would support this application would be if there was a holistic look of the campus. He said when the original project was approved, there was a very well done Master Sign Plan that described the collection of signs with high quality and purpose. He said since then, another building was added and the request for a sign was reasoned to be because this building was not anticipated at the time the Master Sign Plan was created. He indicated now there is a sky bridge and a third building we did not anticipate. He said in each case, the solution was to add more signs. He said that is a trend he grows increasingly uncomfortable with. He said if there was an attempt to go back and take a fresh look at everything, and anticipate, not only this project but what is coming next based on what we know today as compared to 1990. Mr. Hardt said Mr. Taylor referenced the "neighbors" across the street, he had the same concerns but is also concerned about this property and not altogether convinced, a year from now, Volvo or Porsche is not going to say we want a sign on our showroom, too. Mr. Hardt summarized that the architecture and building is great, and fundamentally he does not have a problem with the project but signage he is not comfortable with. Mr. Parish said the Code we are talking about was done in 2009, during the Volvo project. He said prior to any knowledge of BMW, Mini, Audi, rezoning that site developing new text for that site. He reported that he and Ms. Husak took pictures of all the signs and wrote the text to conform to the signs that were there. He said the text was written based on existing conditions. Mr. Hardt said that was his point. He said we have existing conditions that evolve from individual projects and individual needs and continually revising the text to allow for those conditions to continue to exist. Mr. Parish said the adjacent property is a PCD, part of the Commerce area, so it has stricter guidelines than what our PUD has, which is a fundamental difference. He said in 2004, when he first came with the first sign for Jaguar and Land Rover, Volvo was part of the brand, that building was approved with this signage (with a larger Jaguar leaper). He said revisions were made in 2010 and now we have a new body in 2014 but what has fundamentally changed in the Code that disallows this proposal. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 18, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 23 Mr. Hardt said he believes it is time to create a careful, thoughtful, and comprehensive Master Sign Plan for the whole campus. He said it is not just the proposal in front of us that is of concern, it is the unknown of what comes next. Ms. Amorose Groomes said we have heard "we are done on this property ", no less than three times. Mr. Hardt suggested a conversation with all the brands on the campus. Mr. Parish said he would be happy to do that but where does that leave us today with this application and moving forward with this project. Ms. Salay said she likes the changes. She said the "pile of rocks" does not belong and is happy the test track is going to be a drive through a forest. She said one thing that has not been said is in Dublin, it is more about identification and not advertising. She said signs are needed to find the dealership and there is a balance between a certain look with the leaper and the green for Land Rover, however, we balance that with our community standards. She agrees there is probably not a better location in Central Ohio for these dealerships. She indicated she is comfortable with Land Rover and Range Rover but if the green could be removed and back it with stone or something that matches would be preferable. She said great work has been done on this impressive, modern, architecture but all of the green comprises the sign. She noted when you look at the boards here it is easy to see what does not belong'. She said a lot of times there is a choice between wall signs and ground signs, ground signs being much more directional in nature versus advertising. She indicated there is way more good here than bad and appreciates all the changes and material boards but she is just not comfortable with the green tower. Ms. Amorose Groomes said the architecture is fantastic, outstanding, and impressive. She is really impressed with the way the water treatment is up against the building. She believes this will be really cool at night with fantastic lighting options and is thrilled. She said her only concern is with the sign and not particularly the Jaguar sign. She said the ground sign graphics and colors were appropriate. She indicated she could get comfortable with both Land Rover and Range Rover being on there but the way this sign is treated with this small portion in green and then these letters mounted on this much muted color, if the tower were of a muted color, and these were imposed here, she could probably support this application tonight. She said she really appreciated how Mr. Parish integrated this element that they had to have, exceptionally well done. She said she likes the rooflines, glass, Lamborghini showplace but the only thing she is not thrilled about is this green tower as it stands in isolation. She noted she would not want to see any more green on this building. She said just as your client has pointed to the others, everyone else is going to point to you that comes in here after you and we have to have a good reason to defend the position that we took here this evening. She said what we see before us does not give us a very sound perspective to defend our decision. Mr. Parish said the color green is very important to the brand The Chair said the green within the sign is probably palatable to the Commission but the green tower is not. Mr. Parish said in this proposal the green element is a climax between the contemporary and the traditional design and heightens that experience. Ms. Amorose Groomes said the applicant could defend this all day from an architectural perspective and would probably be right because he an architect but to the Commission it is a sign. Mr. Parish said the client is committed to bringing Jaguar to this campus and he is willing to remove existing signs on -site to get these wall signs specifically at the curb cut entrance on Bencher Drive and Perimeter Loop. He said he is willing to remove a 15 -foot pylon sign that has every brand indicated along with MAG to get these brands here in Dublin. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 18, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 23 Ms. Amorose Groomes said maybe it is appropriate to do an inventory and a vision of what we want to pass. She asked the applicant to look back and forward and come holistically with that. The Chair said she believes he could walk out of here tonight with approval on the building with no problem and the only exception she has heard strongly is this green tower and the only part of that is the greenness of the tower and not the signs themselves. Mr. Parish said we are committed to our new brands coming out in 2016 so the clock is ticking on our side to make that happen. Mr. Hardt said it is not uncommon at all for the Commission to review a project for its architecture and site layout approval that with a condition the signs have to come back later for approval. Mr. Parish said the project does not move forward unless the signs are approved. He asked if there were additional compromises were could make here to get additional signs onsite. Ms. Amorose Groomes said the Commission will give you the signs we just will not give you that architectural feature behind the signs. Ms. Salay said for this proposal that is honestly a compromise. Mr. Parish said he would like to pull the signs from the application for the Commission to vote on the building itself and will come back. He said there would have to be a caveat about the "greenness" of the building. Ms. Newell said she loved the architecture of the building; it has a distinct color palette, and green is not one of those elements. She said she would not support the architecture of the building from the viewpoint of having green on the faSade. Ms. Salay said it belongs on the sign and not on the building like that. Mr. Hardt said he could not guarantee any outcome but suggested the applicant ask for approval tonight of the architecture and the signs, minus the green; realizing that is a sacred cow, it potentially allows the applicant to get going. He explained there are a lot of weeks of construction and things that have to happen before that material goes on the building. He suggested the applicant use that time to come back with a revised Master Sign Plan after looking at the site holistically. He said at that point, it would just be an issue of materials. Ms. Amorose Groomes interjected the color of the materials would be the issue. Mr. Parish asked if the color green was pulled from the proposal, could a straw poll be taken. Ms. Amorose Groomes said to have a condition that the green is not there to then come back with a Master Sign Plan, later. Ms. Kramb suggested Mr. Parish could return to the client in the meantime and say that he successfully obtained three signs. Mr. Hardt said his suggestion is predicated on the assumption that the applicant wants to put shovels in the ground. Mr. Taylor said to be clear, according to Ms. Amorose Groomes, the applicant would still retain the green background in the oval. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 18, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 23 Mr. Parish clarified the materials. Ms. Amorose Groomes said it could be the same materials, just a different finish; she said the commission is really talking about a color change. Mr. Zimmerman said, as a non - architect, he offered the suggestion of lowering the sign for Land Rover and Range Rover, to the size that the green is a base. The Chair said she wanted to see what the applicant comes backwith. The Chair told the applicant she thought he could get an approval with the exception of the background color of this particular architectural element. She recommended that the applicant return with a Master Sign Plan to request approval. The applicant, Mr. Parish agreed. While Ms. Husak was rewriting the conditions, Mr. Parish asked for clarification on the ground sign to be 40- inches as in the development text. Ms. Husak clarified three wall signs have been requested. Ms. Amorose Groomes noted as proposed in the application. Ms. Husak said she changed the first development text modification to state the following 1) Decrease the pavement setback to 45 feet along US33 /SR161 for the display areas impacted by ODOT right -of -way takes as part of the US33 /I -270 interchange project; 2) Provide parking at a ratio of one space per service bay in Subarea A; and 3) Permitting three wall signs in Subarea A as proposed as part of the Amended Final Development Plan (14- 046AFDP). Ms. Kramb requested that the applicant not be allowed to increase parking to meet the new setback or do anything different than what is on the Final Development Plan. Jack Reynolds, Smith and Hale said nobody can change it without first coming back to the PZC and requesting it so this appropriately reflects that. Ms. Kramb agreed. Ms. Husak said the change to the conditions for the Amended Final Development Plan are as follows 1) That the plans be revised to address building material inconsistencies on sheet 4.01; 2) That the applicant work with Planning to identify additional areas for replacement trees, prior to submitting for a building permit; 3) That the size of the brand identification sign be reduced to 40 inches; and 4) That the applicant revise the application to remove the green building materials from the application and replace the material with a material and color reflecting existing characteristics on campus. The Chair called for two motions and two votes. Ms. Newell asked for height limitations before voting. Ms. Husak responded, 24 feet is the height limit Ms. Newell asked what the standard height that is proposed in the City of Dublin. Ms. Husak responded,15 feet. Ms. Newell clarified that the development text was being modified where the limit is one sign at the 23 foot height and three signs are being proposed. She said she thought it was only fair for other businesses that are limited to 15 feet for height and is sorry for being a stick in the mud for signs for an otherwise beautiful project. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 18, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 23 The Chair said when the applicant returns with the Master Sign Plan, all of those things would be up for discussion. Ms. Newell clarified the text actually said they were allowed one wall sign so these two items are actually together in that because the applicant is asking for more signs, which she is willing to support but not willing to support going above that 15 -foot sign regulation that the Commission is enforcing citywide. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she was willing to let that go until the Commission sees the Master Sign Plan. Mr. Hardt said he remains uncomfortable with the signs. The Chair asked the applicant if he agreed to the three conditions as written. Mr. Parish said he did. Ms. Husak said most of the Commission is ok with the signs as they are proposed today if the green goes away. She said she did not catch the coming back for a Master Sign Plan' portion of the discussion. Mr. Hardt said he suggested if the applicant wanted to get the green back, they could come back and make an argument for a Master Sign Plan but there is nothing that says the applicant has to come back with a Master Sign Plan, although that is what he would like to see. He said if the client decides they can live without the green, it can be built as approved. Mr. Parish said not necessarily because he still needs to submit material for the green. Ms. Husak said the condition was written that the applicant select a material already existing on campus and it stands approved. The Chair said she needed to take a quick straw poll. She said she was comfortable with what Ms. Husak stated. Mr. Hardt said he was not and the irony here is he is suggesting an approach that he does not support but he believes gets the votes. Ms. Kramb said she was ok with that because the whole tower will not appear as being the sign. Motion and Vote Mr. Taylor moved, Mr. Zimmerman seconded, to recommend approval of the Minor Text Review with three conditions: 1) Decrease the pavement setback to 45 feet along US33 /SR161 for the display areas impacted by ODOT right -of -way takes as part of the US33 /I -270 interchange project; 2) Provide paring at a ratio of one space per service bay in Subarea A; and 3) Permitting three wall signs in Subarea A as proposed as part of the Amended Final Development Plan (14- 046AFDP). Brad Parish agreed to the conditions earlier. The vote was as follows: Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Hardt, no; Ms. Newell, no; Ms. Salay, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 5 — 2) The Chair asked the applicant if he agreed to the modified conditions for the Amended Final Development Plan. Brad Parish agreed to the conditions. Motion and Vote Mr. Taylor moved, Mr. Zimmerman seconded, to recommend approval of the Amended Final Development Plan with four conditions: 1) That the plans be revised to address building material inconsistencies on sheet 4.01; Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 18, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 23 2) That the applicant work with Planning to identify additional areas for replacement trees, prior to submitting for a building permit; 3) That the size of the brand identification sign be reduced to 40 inches; and 4) That the applicant revise the application to remove the green building materials from the application and replace the material with a material and color reflecting existing characteristics on campus. The vote was as follows: Ms. Salay, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Hardt, no; Ms. Newell, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 6 — 1) 2. Deer Run PUD, Subarea C- Cortona Dublin Road and Memorial Drive 14- 062FDP /FP Final Development Plan /Final Plat The Chair Chris Amorose Groomes introduced this application for a request to plat and develop 37 single - family, cluster lots with 7.3 acres of open space and associated site improvements for Subarea C within the Deer Run Planned Unit Development, at the northeast corner of the intersection of Dublin Road and Memorial Drive. Three motions are required, one for the Development Text Modification, one for the Final Development Plan and one for the Final Plat. The Commission will forward their recommendation to City Council for the Final Plat. Ms. Amorose Groomes swore in anyone who intended to address the Commission on this case. Marie Downie pointed out that there were some public comments that were provided to the Commission, prior to the meeting. Ms. Downie presented the site and said the Rezoning, Preliminary Development Plan, and Preliminary Plat were approved by PZC and City Council in 2011, including a tree waiver due to the large number of trees planted by the owner. She said Subareas A and B have both been approved for Estate Lots. She said Subarea C was approved for cluster lots and is the first subarea in the Deer Run site to continue with the Final Development Plan and Final Plat. Ms. Downie reported the applicant did arrange a public meeting with the surrounding Amberleigh neighbors a few weeks ago, however, there was zero attendance. Ms. Downie stated the site is approximately 17.6 acres at Dublin Road and Memorial Drive, surrounded by PUD residential areas as well as the Amberleigh Community Park to the south. She said the proposed Final Development Plan includes 37 single - family lots, clustered behind two main tree preservation areas along Memorial Drive and Dublin Road to preserve the surrounding trees. She said there are 7.3 acres of open space proposed that will be owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association. She explained that access is provided from Memorial Drive by Sapri Boulevard, a gated private drive aligned with the intersection of Autumnwood Way. She said the streets are all proposed to be private drives which was previously approved by City Council at the time of the rezoning. She said there were no internal sidewalks proposed, which was also approved at the time of the rezoning, however, there is a five -foot sidewalk proposed to the north of Memorial Drive and a four -foot path that connects Pesaro Way to the Amberleigh Community Park. Ms. Downie reported that the text has specific requirements for each lot. She said there are four lots that are not meeting the minimum 120 -foot lot depth or the 60 -foot minimum lot width requirements and there is a text modification included in this application for those lots. She explained the minimum width and depth requirements are to ensure that houses will be able to fit on these lots, while providing space for other amenities. She reported the applicant has provided examples of lot configurations in Cityof Dubl'n Land Use and Long Range Planning PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 5800 Sh er R ngs Road Dublin, Oh o 43016- 236 RECORD OF ACTION phone 614.410.4600 fax 614 410.4747 www.dublinohlousa.gov JUNE 51 2014 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 2. MAG PUD, Subarea A, Land Rover /Jaguar /Lamborghini Informal Review 14- 046AFDP Amended Final Development Plan 6325 Perimeter Loop Road Proposal. An informal request for review and feedback for a proposal for the a proposal for demolition of the existing Land Rover showroom and the construction of a new 30,000- square -foot showroom for the Land Rover, Range Rover and Jaguar franchises, a sky bridge for the Lamborghini franchise connecting the proposed building to the main MAG building and all associated site improvements. Request: This is a request for informal review and feedback prior to the formal review of an amended final development plan application. Applicant: Midwestern Auto Group, represented by Brad Parish, Architectural Alliance and Jack Reynolds, Smith & Hale LLC. Planning Contact: Claudia Husak, AICP, Planner II. Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675, chusak @dublin.oh.us RESULT: The Commission commented informally on a request for review and feedback for a proposal for the a proposal for demolition of the existing Land Rover showroom and the construction of a new 33,000- square -foot showroom for the Land Rover, Range Rover and Jaguar franchises, a sky bridge for the Lamborghini franchise connecting the proposed building to the main MAG building and all associated site improvements. The Commissioners complimented the applicant on the development of the MAG campus. Commissioners largely agreed that the proposed building for Land Rover, Range Rover and Jaguar does not exemplify the same innovative and distinct architecture and massing as the existing buildings. The proposed materials were another concern in terms of proposed colors and number of materials and how they differ from materials currently used on the campus. The Commissioners requested additional details regarding the proposed sky bridge including details regarding the area below the bridge, the pond edge treatment and the rear of the bridge where some Commissioners were concerned about the heavy block proposed for a large portion of the elevation. The Commission agreed that a reduction in the required parking may be appropriate but did not support the request for additional wall signs for this Subarea. Commissioners requested the applicant work with Planning to provide as marry replacement trees as possible. STAFF CERTIFICATION Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner II Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 22 Ms. S ay said she likes the a rnative design ands ng that there are 12 s ces for stacking but t�►� real wo events shows that th a is a need for more d a solution needs to prepared prior to bringing s back as a formal ap 'cation. She said kno ' g that Starbucks now ells food this will be a business th will have business thr gh the noon hour an anted them to be pre ared for the increase. She aid this is a better to ion for Starbucks and glad to hear about th arking agreements wit \fare nding businesse Ms. Newell said reservations for usi this site with a drive- ru and the layout pro sed in response to staents is the best arra ement that they coul ccommodate. She sal she would e to see screi low stone wall featu or a combination of dscaping nicely integ ted with th building. S she's concerned with stac ' g and that they will n just busy during mor ' g hou they servfare d expects this locatio to be used frequently pecially with students fter school ours. Sm em with changing the t to allow a drive -thru t certain uses and ask or operatio I det Starbuc drive -thru as well as cking data and peak ' e use data. Ms. Amorose roomes said losing th entrance to the east i of a hurdle, but it wo d be interesting to see how traffic attEe s would circulat through the parking to and would not want a ss to the drive - thru lane from th adjacent parking area. She requested operat nal details for compar le Starbucks for busy times of the diky. She said the buildi is well done. She sai she thought it would nice if this location would have tdoor seating. Ghidotti said it will h e some outdoor seatin \hn r three ca pe tables but they h e not sho nit and would welco \applicant k on where it located. Ms. Am \ty saiopposed to tru concept, but f it had to be the right user and ondype of appliclimited to a coffee s p type use and not a ice cream typith the univeng there might be so opportunities in the area. Mr. Ghidavbac and hopack the next 60 days with f ormal applicati's. Amo t plicant an sill look fo rd to seeing the appli tion. 2. MAG PUD, Subar ea A, Land Rover /Range Rover /Jaguar /Lamborghini 14- 046AFDP Amended Final Development Plan - informal Review 6325 Perimeter Loop Road Ms. Amorose Groomes said the following application is a request for an informal request for review and feedback for a proposal for the a proposal for demolition of the existing Land Rover showroom and the construction of a new 30,000 - square -foot showroom for the Land Rover, Range Rover and Jaguar franchises, a sky bridge for the Lamborghini franchise connecting the proposed building to the main MAG building and all associated site improvements. Claudia Husak said the applicant has filed an amended final development plan application and wanted to get some informal feedback from the Commission first on a couple of issues. She said this application is focusing on Subarea A of the MAG PUD, which was created in 2009 to accommodate the expansion of the Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 22 main building to accommodate Volvo on this site and there was a subsequent rezoning to create Subarea B to allow for the BMW /Mini building and the Audi building to be constructed. Ms. Husak said the Land Rover building to the north of the site is 7,335- square -feet and includes a test track and display area along the Perimeter Road frontage. She said main dealership building which accommodates a majority of the franchises for the MAG campus is about 111,000- square -feet. She said there are approximately 96,000 square feet of display area on the campus within Subarea A which is generally located in the fingers in the northwest and southwest corners of the site. She said the site also has 472 parking spaces for employees and visitors. She said the evergreen screening to the east of the pond that has grown substantially since the inception of the campus. She said there is a detention basin in the northwest corner of the site with mature landscaping all around the pond, street trees, as well as vehicular screening trees and landscaping along US 33. Ms. Husak said the proposed site plan calls for the demolition of the existing Land Rover building and in its place the construction of a new building that is approximately 30,000 square feet and to connect the new building to the existing building with a 6,000- square -foot sky bridge. She said a similar proposal was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission in 2005 and actually went through building permitting as well but was never constructed. She said with the rezoning of the site, the creation of the MAG PUD specifically, those approvals have become invalid. She said the development text doe not have a limit on square footage for buildings for this site and the intensity is regulated by setbacks, lot coverage, and parking and landscaping requirements. Ms. Husak said the display area is proposed at 82,000 square feet with this plan and provides 405 parking spaces which is less spaces than currently on site. She said the approval of this plan would require the Planning and Zoning Commission to make a minor modification to the development text to decrease required parking for the site. She said the owner wrote a statement regarding inventory requirements and customer behavior as far as how many people are really shopping on site. She said they have discussed with the applicant is the amount of parking spaces required for the amount of displays spaces on -site which is 83 parking spaces. She said the existing pond will be shortened in the area where the Land Rover building will be with increasing depth of the basin as part of the stormwater management which will require some removal of substantial trees. Ms. Husak said the proposed building is to accommodate the Land Rover, Range Rover, and Jaguar franchises with the sky bridge as a connection between the two buildings on the second floor of the main building which will go to grade at the new building and include a showroom for the Lamborghini brand that will hover over the pond. She said the building materials are EIFS and glass with stone proposed at the bottom of the building that is beige or natural color tone. She said the portico for Jaguar is beige EIFS and she would like feedback if the proposed architecture of the mass and scale of the building as well as the materials are complementary to what exists on the campus and also meets the development text which calls for modern striking and innovative architecture. Ms. Husak said the applicant is proposing four wall signs for this portion of the site. She said the development text was written with the existing Land Rover building in mind so it permits one wall sign, which is essentially the existing wall sign, a 35- square -foot wall sign at a height at 24 feet. She said the front elevation of the building that faces north proposes two wall signs for the Land Rover /Range Rover portion of the building located on the green metal accent panel and the Jaguar entrance on the portico shows a sign with the Jaguar copy and the logo which is three - dimensional and affixed to the entrance at a height of 24 feet. She said there is a fourth sign proposed which is the sign for Lamborghini on the sky bridge which is also exceeding the size and height requirements. She said the signs as proposed would Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 22 require a few development text modifications from the Planning and Zoning Commission, one for the number of signs, height, and size of proposed signs. Ms. Husak reviewed the discussion items as follows: 1) Are the proposed architectural elevations consistent with the rest of the MAG campus? 2) Are the proposed building materials complementary to the campus? 3) Does the Commission support the proposed signs for the franchises and the required text modifications? 4) Would the Commission support a reduction in the required amount of parking spaces for this site? 5) Other considerations by the Commission? Brad Parish, Architectural Alliance, 165 North 5' Street, said he is joined with Andy English from Plan -It Studio to expand upon some of the landscape question that they have. He said they are proposing a 33,000- square -foot multi -brand facility that will include Land Rover, Range Rover, and recently acquired Jaguar franchise. He said the new brand will bring about 20 million dollars annual revenue to the City and create 10 additional employees. He said in 2005 they presented an 18,000- square -foot addition to the existing facility plus the connector bridge from the main building, they received approval, pushed through construction documents, received a permit and they were one week away from putting a shovel in the ground and they has internal problems with the Ford Company and the project stopped. He said in 2008 Jaguar and Land Rover were sold. He said MAG signed an LOI at the beginning of 2014 with Jaguar and Land Rover and they have committed to open a show room before the fall of 2015 and hoped to break ground early fall of this year and hopefully open 12 months later. Mr. Parish said his goals are to present the project, identify concerns, and focus on the sky bridge and he said he is looking for some feedback. He said since they are not adding to the existing facility, it allowed him to adjust where the building is located in relationship to the site and he centered on the display fingers which allowed them reduce the length of the bridge and create a shorter connection between the two and allowed for some additional parking on the northeast corner of the site. He said the Jaguar/ Land Rover building design continues the curb service area. He said the front of the building depicts elements that are important to the multi -brand facility which are the Jaguar portico, the multi -brand entry at the center part, and the Land Rover landmark tower and sloped roof. Mr. Parish said the sky bridge is planned to be the Lamborghini showroom on the campus and the design was intended to create a glass showroom elevated over the current pond. He said behind the showroom the floor drops down toward the grade and is designed to slowly reveal a glass box showroom where cars would be displayed as it went down toward the Jaguar /Land Rover facility. He said the sky bridge is really a collaboration of all the materials found across the campus. He said his goal is create one last signature piece for the MAG to set them off from other dealers in town. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there were anyone from the general public that would like to speak to this application. [There were none.] Mr. Hardt said he is thrilled that MAG continues to grow and congratulated the architect for being able to create another example of dynamic contemporary architecture. He said the landscaping replacement of trees should be per Code. He said the only concern is design in landscaping for underneath the sky bridge. He said he does not have an issue with parking as proposed and as a customer of the business he has never had a hard time finding a place to park. He said this is a unique business with a unique need that does not fit into a Code box and would refer to the owner on that issue. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 22 Mr. Hardt said as the campus has evolved they have reached the proliferation of signs significantly and they need to pay some attention to signs. He said he cannot support the new wall signs on the elevations as proposed although there are signs along US33, which is different in character and of a much different nature than the side facing Perimeter Drive. He said there was no information about the proposed height of the signs and it was mentioned heights of 24 to 25 feet but in the text is limited to 15 feet. Ms. Husak said in Subarea A there is an allowance for a wall sign to be at 24 feet, which is what exists and was written specifically for the existing sign. Mr. Hardt said the Jaguar sign does not appear to be measured per Code in the proposal. He said the text limits it to 40 inches in height and he would not be supportive of the ground sign. Ms. Husak said that was written for the brand identification signs that they have at the entrances. Mr. Hardt said the quantity of signs that are providing wayfinding guidance to doors and entrances, and the main building has four showrooms that house different brands that do not have this kind of identification that is being proposed. He said it causes significant concern with the quantity and the location of those signs. Mr. Hardt said the architecture is generally pretty good and they have done a nice job on the campus with the recent buildings and the original building. He said there is concerns with the underside of the roof overhang, EIFS is a material proposed but the original building was completed with stucco which is a better material of higher quality with more character, he said he will reserve judgment of the block being used under the sky bridge along with the landscaping choices for the underside, and the broader architectural themes with the two entry porticos for Land Rover and Jaguar although he is sure of the brand standards and prototypes, they are the weakest part of this proposal and the whole campus. He said branding the entrances based on what is on the inside is a foreign approach to the campus and feels not cohesive with the other buildings. He said he agreed with the concerns of staff comment in the planning report of the beige Jaguar entry while the rest of the campus is grey which contributes to the concern. Mr. Hardt said he would be very cautious of the materials on the campus, with an eloquent existing building with simple clean lines and contemporary materials and expanded nicely which is running the risk of adding more materials to the campus and encouraged them to simplify the palette. Mr. Taylor agreed with Mr. Hardt's critique. He said he appreciates the 3D elevations in the packet. He said the two existing signs have room for additional branding and would like focus on those areas and not on signs on the building. Mr. Taylor said he likes the sky bridge and the two towers of the building are the weakest part of the building. He felt the Jaguar tower could be resolved with the colors but the Land Rover is out of place and is a traditional architecture stuck on a modern building. He said the stone base does not exist anywhere else on the campus and is out of place. Mr. Taylor said the signs of the Jaguar and Land Rover work against the building and for the existing buildings the architecture speaks louder than the signs do and it reminds him too much of the Porsche addition that no one liked that was proposed a few years ago which seemed stuck on as entrance pieces. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 22 Mr. Taylor said that the building on the Perimeter side needs to be a signature building at a different scale and the end of the building falls apart and he would be thrilled to make a stronger statement with the building that does not need the signage. Mr. Budde said he agrees with the comments as stated and complimented Mr. Parish on the great work and quality of the proposal. He said he thought the parking plan made sense and would agree with the proposal. Ms. Kramb said she agrees with the parking plan with fewer spaces but would like to determine a ratio rather than stating in the text a number of spaces. She said she likes the sky bridge and is concerned with the footing and landing near the pond and the landscaping on the underside. She is supportive of not replacing the pine trees because of the bridge and the reason they were planted in that location but would want others replaced by Code. Ms. Kramb said she would like to see the placement of the bridge and the building so as not to reduce the existing pond size because she would rather see the wet pond over a dry detention. Ms. Kramb said she is okay with adding new brand signs but not the way they are being added and would not exceed the height code. Ms. Kramb thought the entrances would be more appropriate if they mimicked the main building. Ms. Kramb agreed with the architectural comments already stated and thought the rear was boring and she would like to break out with texture and colors matching the other buildings. Ms. Salay said the sky bridge needs to have something better than the black block and could be more interesting. She said to stay consistent with the rest of the campus architecture this proposal needs to be brought up into the existing standards of the existing campus. She disagreed with the proposed stone. She said the signage that will be on the inside of the Lamborghini showroom is still a sign and should be regulated with a more creative way for all the branding. Ms. Salay agreed with the parking proposal and felt it was a business decision but agreed with a ratio requirement. Ms. Newell said the sky bridge is unique and she said she loves this campus and the design of the existing buildings. She said she would like to know more about the retention pond and the design of the edges related to the building. Mr. Parish said there will be a more natural edge with the use of stone with an interesting modern look and would be bringing back renderings at the next review. Ms. Newell said the colors of the building should stay within the grey scheme and the features for the Jaguar and Land Rover are used for signage and are not integrated well within the overall building as proposed with the width and proportions being very thin and the ends should be wider across the end of the building and not used as signage elements. Ms. Newell understands dealerships desire to brand their buildings and have their names on them but this wall signage is not appropriate along Perimeter because other existing buildings have been held to monument signs. She said the heights of the signs are limited to 15 feet height elevation and the 24 foot height is only remaining because of an existing sign and should be consistent with the other areas. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2014 — Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 22 Ms. Newell said she is concerned with the back areas because the landscaping provides screening and asked that the back of the buildings look great and not use landscaping as a screen for a weaker part of the building structures. She said the CMU on the sky bridge should be considered in lieu of the split face or sand blasted or polished face to add some interests like the rain screen. Ms. Newell said she supports the reduction of parking and asked for available visitor spaces and that every vehicle is parked in a designated parking space and not on the test track which should not be used to display vehicles. Ms. Amorose Groomes thought that the water abutting the building such as done at the Sutphen building could be an appropriate way to treat this pond with the building and that there is a number of ways to regulate the height of the pond with spill ways and make up wells. Ms. Amorose Groomes said architecture should be simple and consistent with the existing campus. Ms. Amorose Groomes said they should spade the existing trees out and store close by this site and spade them back in because it is difficult to plant trees with the needed size of the ones being removed and bring them back, they are beautiful trees and you cannot buy them like they are currently on site. Ms. Amorose Groomes said the existing entry feature needs to be improved as part of this package and the existing plants are past their useful life span and the entry feature needs to be brought up to speed because there are really nice landscape displays on the balance of the new buildings. She agreed with the comments regarding the back of the building should not be just screened with landscaping and the stone water table is not appropriate. She said the signs to be well done and meet Code. She said to explore with the staff the tree replacements and looked forward to a tree survey and suggestions of their horticulturist for the plants that are required reach maturity. She suggested that there is no limit to the informal review and if he would like to return with material options or proposals that the applicant was welcome to return for further comments. 3. U -Haul 6419 Old Avery Road Conditional Use . Amorose Groomes id the "The following pication is a request r the use of an existin building as retail space, wareho a and storage space f \wareho cated on th south side of US 33, st of Ave \theb Garn presented this pplication for a use for U -Hau\openarea. d to utilize the Hillire store with their urrent locatiost along Old Ae said the plan dividing and is looking t rovide a sha with a nice support facilorthern end with indi ' ual stora in a climate a indicated for med. a said the last space ill be go left as a Mr. Gunderman said a site was revise d w n the building was ex nded in 2003 when th site rnprovements were br ught up to Code at th time and there are fe changes proposed to a site. He S; 'd the addition is a dri way connection rel ting the dumpster an emoving a few parkin spaces to pro ide the second access. He said the proposed levations of the buildi are unchanged exce for re- paint g the building. tCityof Dublin land Use ana to,q PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Ran" Plannlaq 6 110 kr 130 Rasa RECORD OF ACTION o,aw, tna 43616-1136 614.4164660 MAY 2, 2013 rm 61a416,41v .m+Jieunonwun, qa: The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 2. Midwestern Auto Group PUD - MAG Audi 5875 Venture Drive 13- 035AFOP Amended Final Development Wan Proposal: Modification to the application of exterior building materials for the Warren Fishman service reception area of the approved Audi showroom building for the Amy Kramb Midwestern Auto Group dealership campus. The site is located on the John Hardt south side of Venture Drive, north of US33 /SR161. Request: Review and approval of an amended final development plan under the Victoria Newell provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050. Owner: CAR MAG Park LLC, represented by 8radley A. Parish, Architectural Alliance. Planning Contact; Claudia D, Husak, AICP, Planner II. Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675, chusak @dublln.oh.us Motion: To approve this Amended Final Development Plan application because the proposal complies with the development text, the amended final development plan criteria, and existing development in the area. VOTE: 7-0. RESULT: This Amended Final Development Plan application was approved. RECORDED VOTES: Chris Amorose Groomes Yes Richard Taylor Yes Warren Fishman Yes Amy Kramb Yes John Hardt Yes Joseph Buckle Yes Victoria Newell Yes STAFF CERTIFICATION Claudia D. Husak, AICP Wanner II 2. Midwestern Auto Group PUD — MAG Audi 13- O35AFDP Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission May 2, 2013 — Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 1 5875 Venture Drive Amended Final Development Plan Ms. Amorose Groomes introduced this Amended Final Development Plan application requesting review and approval for a modification to the approved building materials for the service reception area of the approved Audi showroom building for the Midwestern Auto Group dealership campus. She said the site is located on the south side of Venture Drive, north of US33 /SR161. She said that Commission is the final authority on this application. Ms. Amorose Groomes swore in those intending to speak in regards to this application, including the applicant Brad Parish, Architectural Alliance, (165 N. 5' Street, Columbus, Ohio) and City representatives. Ms. Amorose Groomes confirmed that the Commissioners did not need to hear Claudia Husak present the Planning Report for this previously consented application. She asked if the Commissioners had any questions or comments. John Hardt said that they only thing that caused him hesitation about the previous building was the fact that the entire campus was made up of a variety of materials and forms and this was a pristine view. He said he thought this was an improvement because it brings the building more in concert with the rest of the campus. He said he appreciated the applicant's consideration. Ms. Amorose Groomes confirmed that there were no comments or questions from the public or any additional ones from the Commissioners regarding this application. Motion and Vote Mr. Taylor moved, and Mr. Hardt seconded, to approve this Amended Final Development Plan application because the proposal complies with the development text, the amended final development plan criteria, and existing development in the area. The vote was as follows: Mr. Fishman, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Newell, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Budde, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes, (Approved 7 — 0.) City of Dublin Land Use and Long Rings Road Planning 5600 S hier PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 5800 S Dublin, Ohio 43016 -1236 1l� 614,410.4600 RECORD OF ACTION fm 614.410.4747 w .dublinohlousa,gov NOVEMBER 1, 2012 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 4. Midwestern Auto Group PUD — MAG PUD 5825 and 5875 Venture Drive Subarea 2, MAG Audi, BMW, & Mini Amended Final Development Plan 12- 072AFDP Proposal: A new 11,300- square -foot car dealership for the Audi franchise and the incorporation of a 1,440 -square-foot, non - public car wash into the previously approved BMW /Mini building for the Midwestern Auto Group dealership campus. The site is located on the south side of Venture Drive, north of US33/SR161. Request: Review and approval of an amended final development plan under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.050. Applicant: CAR MAG Park LLC, represented by Bradley A. Parish, Architectural Alliance. Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II. Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675, chusak@dublin.oh.us MOTION #1: To approve the Minor Text Modifications to the development text to: 1) Allow three wall signs in Subarea 2 and require the signs be located on the building that offers the particular brand for sale. 2) Exempt logos from the size restrictions of 20% of the permitted signs size or 10 square feet. 3) Allow a brand sign to be a wall sign; and 4) Permit a brand wall sign at a height of 8 R. 6 in. VOTE: 6-0. RESULT: The Minor Text Modifications to the development text were approved. RECORDED VOTES: Chris Amorose Groomes Yes Richard Taylor Yes Warren Fishman Yes Amy Kmmb Absent John Hardt Yes Joseph Budde Yes Victoria Newell Yes Page Iof2 Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission November 1, 2012 — Meebng Minutes Page 8 of 9 r. Kelley agreed t he conditions. Mr. shman seconded emotion. The vo was as follows: . Amorose Groom ,yes; Mr. Hardtes; Mr. B de, yes; Ms. New yes; Mr. Fishma yes; and Mr. Tay yes. (Approved — 0) 4. Midwestern Auto Group POD — MAG POD 5825 and 5875 Venture Drive Subarea 2, MAG Audi, BMW, & Mini Amended Final Development Plan 12- 072AFDP Ms. Amorose Groomes introduced this request for review and approval of a new 11,300 - square -foot car dealership for the Audi franchise and the Incorporation of a 1,440- square -foot non - public car wash into the previously approved BMW Mini building for the Midwestern Auto Group dealership campus. She said the site is located on the south side of Adventure Drive, north of US 33f SR 161. She swore in those intending to address the Commission on this case, Including the applicants' representatives, Ben W. Hale, Smith & Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Columbus and Brad Parrish, Architectural Alliance, 165 North Fifth Street, Columbus, and City representatives. Ms. Amorose Groomes determined a Planning presentation was not necessary since the applicant had previously indicated consent to the conditions. 3ennifer Rauch pointed out that two separate motions for the Text Modification and the Amended Final Development Plan were necessary. Ms. Amorose Groomes invited public comments regarding this application. [There were none.] Motion #1 and Vote - Minor Text Modification Mr. Taylor moved to approve the following Minor Text Modification: 1) Allow three wall signs in Subarea 2 and require the signs be located on the building that offers the particular brand for sale. 2) Exempt logos from the size restrictions of 20% of the permitted signs size or 10 square feet, 3) Allow a brand sign to be a wall sign; and 4) Permit a brand wall sign at a height of 8 ft. 6 in. Mr. Hale agreed to the conditions. Mr. Fishman seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Budde, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; Ms. Newell, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 6 — 0.) Motion #2 and Vote — Amended Final Development Plan Mr. Taylor moved to approve this Amended Final Development Plan application because it complies with the applicable review criteria and the existing development standards with two conditions: 1) That the plans be revised to clearly indicate that the glass proposed for the Audi building will be clear, prior to submitting for a building permit; and 2) That the applicant eliminate the copy "Audi" from the incidental directional sign. Mr. Fishman seconded the motion. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission November 1, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 9 Mr. Hale agreed to the conditions. The vote was as follows: Mr. Budde, yes; Ms. Newell, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 6 — 0.) Ms. Amorose Groomes said she looked forward to seeing the buildings being built. Mr. Hardt thanked the applicant for providing the information the Commission requested last time. Commission Roundtable Mr. Langworthy announced that Eugenia Martin, after 12 years with the City, was leaving on November 2nd to pursue her own landscape architecture business. Ms. Amorose Groomes said that Ms. Martin would be missed. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there were other comments. [There were none.] She adjourned the meeting at 7:16 p.m. As approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on December 6, 2012. LandU Dublin and Ln PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Land Use and Long Range Planning 5906 Shier Rings Road RECORD OF ACTION RubHn, ONO 43016.1136 phone 614.4110.4600 tax 614.410.4747 SEPTEMBER 61 2012 www.dublinohiousa.gov The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 4. Midwestern Auto Group PUD — MAG Audi S87S Venture Drive 12- OS7INF Informal Review Proposal: Architectural revisions to an approximately 7,900- square -foot car dealership for the Audi franchise for the Midwestern Auto Group dealership campus. The site is located on the south side of Venture Drive, north of US33 /SR161. Request: Review and informal feedback. Applicant: Tim Galli; represented by Bradley Parish, Architectural Alliance. Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II. Contact Information: (614) 410 -4675, chusak @dublin.oh.us RESULT: The Commission commented informally on this application for informal feedback on architectural revisions to an approximately 9,570 - square -foot car dealership for the Audi franchise for the Midwestern Auto Group dealership campus. The site is located on the south side of Venture Drive, north of US33 /SR161. The Commission appreciated the applicant taking the Commission's previous comments into account by creating a building that meet the high quality, innovative and striking architectural requirements of the development text and the existing and approved MAG buildings. The Commission requested the applicant lower the proposed sign to 15 feet and provide information regarding the durability and maintenance of the proposed metal rain screen building material. STAFF CERTIFICATION .�d-°� I J K CiQ Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner II Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 6, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 19 of 22 Mr. Ghidotti sal t the Shoppes at very for FedEx th established thre dedicated parking aces at heir front door for rop offs. He said ost retail tenants ve that because eir customers can ark at t it front door. He id that might be a option. Ms. ell said she actua would like to se he retail foot tra encouraged. Sh aid when there a intercon ected walking pat from one location o the other and it a pleasant transit n, people who go to restaur is want to wande fore or after din r or while they ar waiting for tables. Ms. Amorose roomes said there as nothing that She thanked Mr. hidotti and said tftq Commission to 4. Midwestern Auto Group PUD — MAG Audi 12- 057INF ired a vote an she concluded forward to great 1kings. 5875 Venture Drive Informal Review Ms. Amorose Groomes introduced this application requesting an informal review and non - binding feedback for architectural revisions to a dealership for the Audi franchise for the Midwestern Auto Group dealership campus. She said the site is located on the south side of Venture Drive, north of US33 /SR161. Claudia Husak presented this case. She said that the Commission reviewed an application recently for the BMW and Mini portion of the MAG campus to incorporate the Audi building as a free - standing building and at the meeting, the Commission requested that the Audi building come back for another review of the architecture because of concerns regarding the form of the building, the materials used not meeting the development text or complementing the campus. She said as a first step, the applicant requests informal review and feedback before filing a formal application for an amended final development plan. Ms. Husak said that the MAG campus incorporates approximately 25 acres. She presented the site plan the Commission previously reviewed and said the building footprint in the center of the site remains the same size as before. She said the service reception area has been moved slightly to the west and the plaza in front of the building to the east has decreased in size a little. Ms. Husak said architecturally, the applicant has increased the height of the building to accommodate a second story, mainly in the service reception area with offices and the showroom, close to US 33 is a lot higher. She said while previously, the building was mainly glass, the applicant has incorporated metal and cement fiberboard to the building elevations. She said glass is primarily along the front elevation and a metal panel with a honeycomb pattern overlay has been applied in a manner to create angles and edges which was something that the Commission honed in on as being prevalent on the MAG campus. Ms. Husak said while the building is still modular in its form, the application of the metal material was intended to mirror what the style is of MAG. Ms. Husak presented a sample of the proposed metal panel with a honeycomb pattern overlay. Ms. Husak said that Planning had concerns about using the dear glass along the roofline to screen the mechanical units. She presented an elevation showing how the metal screening would look. She said on the elevations, a dotted line indicated a window where the metal backing would be cut out so that there would only be the honeycomb pattern over it so that you could see through it, but it would still be covered. She presented perspectives showing the building views from different angles. Ms. Husak said the discussion points provided ask whether or not the applicant has addressed the Commission's comments and concerns from the last meeting with either the form of the building or the materials of the building. Ms. Husak said the applicant has proposed two signs for the building. She said both signs require development text modifications as identified by Planning. She said the wall sign on the south elevation that faces US 33, is proposed to be a logo only without any letters or copy which requires a text modification to allow an additional wall sign in the subarea because the subarea was limited to two wall Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 6, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 20 of 22 signs when it was thought there would be one building in the Subarea with two vehicle brands, BMW and Mini. Ms. Husak said the second text modification would be for a 50- square -foot sign that is only a logo. She said typically, the Code or the development text would allow a logo 20 percent of the sign area or ten square feet in this case. She said by using just the Audi rings as their sign, it would require a text modification to that particular stipulation. Ms. Husak said their sign is proposed at a height of 26 feet, four inches on that elevation and the development text limits the height of signs, as does the Zoning Code, to 15 feet. She said the sign would require three text modifications. Ms. Husak said the 4.5- square foot sign proposed on the east elevation by the front door could be considered as part of the signs permitted in the development text as a Brand sign, but Brand signs are identified as ground signs. She said therefore, it would require a text modification to allow a wall sign to be a Brand sign. Ms. Husak said the signs are limited to a height of three feet, three inches and the proposal is for eight feet, six inches. Ms. Husak said another discussion point is what the Commission thinks about these proposed signs. She reiterated the discussion questions: 1) Has the applicant made sufficient architectural modifications to address the Commission's concerns regarding development text requirements? 2) Are the proposed architectural elevations consistent with the remainder of the MAG campus? 3) What architectural details should the applicant consider to address screening requirements? 4) Does the Commission support the proposed signs for the Audi building and the required text modifications? Ben W. Hale, Jr., Smith and Hale, (37 West Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio) said they had heard what the Commission said last time, and their architect has addressed the issue. Brad Parish, Architectural Alliance, 165 North Fifth Street, Columbus, Ohio) explained the typology of the architecture and from where it was derived. He said this facility in the Audi brand is known as the Audi terminal which was a special prototype originally from the iconic imagery of a 1930's racetrack in Germany. He said it became the DNA behind the typology of this architecture for the showroom. He said instead of a single building type which is sized to fit the program, the Audi terminal concept is based upon a clear defined car presentation area so every car is allotted a certain square footage, has to be space exactly away from each other, and oriented into a racetrack or a roadway. Mr. Parish said the car presentation area is reminiscent of the racetrack image shown. He said the arrangement of the presentation is site specific, so it depends on where the showroom is located and its relation to its major thoroughfare. Mr. Parish said not one Audi terminal building is the same. He presented diagrams showing the different relationships of the raceway and how it cuts the mass and creates the roadway. Mr. Parish said the raceway is unique because it slices the back wall of the showroom. He said what begins to happen is the floor of the showroom is now rolled up to create the back wall of the showroom and sort of get to the embankment of a racetrack. He said it really starts at the entry piece at the slash on the front elevation which is the side of an Audi R8. Mr. Parish said it creates a high -end showroom where cars are arranged in a linear fashion along the curved back wall. He said that the interior of this facility really impacts what the exterior of the building looks like. Mr. Parish said typically, in an Audi facility, there are three defining volumes the showroom room, the service write -up, and the sales area, but in this case, there is no service area since it is handled in the other building. He said that each distinct volume is clattered with different materials. He said the first material used is the honeycomb perforated metal proposed with a two part system. The ancillary windows for interior offices begin to disappear during the daytime and the perforated material continues past. He said the second material that defines the other volume is the fiber cement board. He said the Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 6, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 21 of 22 product is not part of the Audi prototype, but it is something they would approve. He said he was trying to match the cast concrete on the site, but with a pristine look. He presented daytime and nighttime images of this building in concept with the MAG campus. He said the intention of the cuts and voids in the glass are to start to dematerialize the box building and give it the character of what MAG is about. He said they extended the parapets higher to interiorize them, knowing that MAG has a lot of dynamic rooflines. He said the building takes on another element in the night versus during the day. He said it was really a three - quarter view building. Mr. Parish said given the building type, it seemed fitting not to have signs on the glass. He said they simplified the sign by removing Dublin' and Audi' and just having the Audi rings mounted on the perforated metal. He said it was simple, clean, and elegant. He said a modification on the sign height would be necessary because there was not a location on the building elevation. Ms. Amorose Groomes invited public comments in regards to this informal case. [There was none.] Richard Taylor said he loved the building. He asked about bird nests being built on the building. Mr. Parish said that Audi stated they had no problems with them the other terminal facilities. He said it would be Audi's first terminal building in Ohio. Mr. Taylor said with his first impression of the building, he was struck with the automotive detailing. He said he loved the small reveal that to him was a gasket on a car between two body parts. He said the building is the design issue which is good and bad. Mr. Taylor asked if Audi decides not to sell cars in this building, what will happen to it. He said he really liked the iconography of the ring as opposed to the name on the sign. John Hardt said he liked the building, but it was different and not what he thought the expectation was when the development text was written. He said if Audi has done research regarding bird nests, he would like to see it. He said as mentioned in the Planning Report, he was also concerned about the rooftop mechanicals at the top, and how they are screened. He said the way the signs with the rings were done was interesting. He said he was not comfortable with the sign height. He said it was something that they had been firm on for this campus and throughout the City. He suggested they solve the sign height issue some way. He said regarding materials, he would like to see the colors, fit, and finish on the panel, about the joints and whether the fasteners are concealed or visible. He said that information needs to be included in the packet when the final development plan comes back for review. Amy Kramb said that she liked this much better than last time. She said she would like to see information how it will be maintained, especially with snow and ice melting. She said she liked just having the Audi rings on the sign, but the sign was too high. She said they needed to be specific how the text is worded because she did not want to change the entire area to allow wall signs that are 8 feet, 6 inches high. She would only want the logo and Audi underneath on the sign. She said she might agree to a slightly higher logo, but that 26.5 feet high in the air would not work. Warren Fishman complimented Mr. Parish's presentation. He agreed that they should stay within the Code as much as possible. He said the building concept was exciting. Joe Budde said that this was 'way cool; and he liked it. He said this was a really cool sign and addressed the Commissioners request for something unique and different for signs. Victoria Newell said that she appreciated that the applicant listened to the Commission. She said what she saw was much improved. She was also concerned how the honeycomb material and glass will be maintained. She said with the automotive details, the whole building is one big Audi sign. She said she felt that this was the top drawer that Audi was putting on the street. She said she was okay with the Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission September 6, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 22 of 22 name logo and did not object to the branding sign; however, she was concerned that they were setting a precedent with the branding. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she really liked the building. She said she shared the concern that the rings were too high. Ms. Amorose Groomes said that the Commission would give leeway for size -brand specific, but she did not think there was enough support for the height of the rings. She said there were many opportunities to lower them. She said all the other buildings had ground signs indicating directional specific brands and she did not see where a similar sign could be on this particular plat in terms of branding. She said she was not very concerned about the maintenance of the honeycomb because her experience was that Audi takes care of their things. Ms. Amorose Groomes said to make sure that the mechanicals are not visible. Ms. Amorose Groomes said the building was very exciting and she appreciated the fact that they had gone to the trouble to come up with something more appropriate for the site and does the surrounding architecture justice. Mr. Parish thanked the Commission. S. ComNunity Plan AdministKative Request Chris Amorose oomes stated tha the following appik,,ation is a request r review of draft to the area plan i the 2007 Commu?qy Plan as part of tke 2012 Communi Plan Amendme )u in Goodwin prese ted slides and ex ained the intent dealing with adj en to the ni Area Plan He said overal, there were not lot of huge ch ges to the exi 'ng graphic plan and recom ended land use . He said they nt to reflect rec t development at was not en ti ly consiste with what area were drawn. H said Delta Ener and the Coffm Park Plans werig examples. a said with the ception of area p ns being replace with new plannin areas like Bridge Street/ ther were no major ch ges. He said the will thoroughly re 'ew the planning i ues and design recommendati s described in e h area plan to ke sure they do t need adjusted. Mr. Goodwin said that they nt to integrate so a of the new pla ing initiatives an ive planning are boundaries e city has devel ed over the past ew years. He sal that the first we of October, the ill begin b 'nging specific are tans for the Com fission to review. Ms. orose Groomes i ited public comm ts. [There were ne.] Ms. Amo se Groomes requ ed that in the fu re, for these pre ntations, either a eeting agenda b cleared or special meeting be scheduled. S said even with ' hter agendas, i might be more appropriate t set aside a separ a time or somethi different could b done. Ms. Husak said t t there were bac o back October m etings and only o meeting in Nove ber on the %st of the month ich was filled. S said that they we considering addi a November 8"' eeting. Ms. be that feedbabk from the Mr. Langwo by pointed out th all the cases on nigh He said that . Husak had done %noutstanding job nc Ms. Amorose Gro es asked if were other com eeting at 9:58 p. Asa roved by th%Pla ng and Zoning \dXnmission on ers regarding`t<<November 8"' 's agenda wire very complex A h many issues. he was really oud of her. [There we% none.] She adjbVrned the 11, 2012. & PLAMNZNG AND Omg DAWN �l x ; w r ;::l� �o.I . H me..m �, . =, TM .�,Pa,o�be Pl, .,,,Oam��mn9�M, .a 9 T"" Im veTFAiL ererk wiA lw izuuw iil cIM1 CW mrly lalll in uc Ier4j w. 3$r nrFSfyYegm�eeOw J a,rtW,meiv me mnp:m,n[c Wmg [m Jusevh dq /nJ me ; w r ;::l� �o.I . H me..m �, . =, TM .�,Pa,o�be Pl, .,,,Oam��mn9�M, .a 9 T"" Im veTFAiL ererk wiA lw izuuw iil cIM1 CW mrly lalll in uc Ier4j w. 3$r nrFSfyYegm�eeOw J a,rtW,meiv me mnp:m,n[c Wmg [m Jusevh dq /nJ me Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 13 1. Midwestern Auto Group PUD — MAG Audi, BMW & Mini 5875 Venture Drive and 5825 Venture Drive 12- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Chair Chris Amorose Groomes introduced this application for review and approval for a revision of an approved final development plan and minor text revisions to accommodate an approximately 7,900 - square -foot car dealership for the Audi franchise and all associated site improvements for an existing car dealership campus located on the south side of Venture Drive, approximately 750 feet south of the intersection with Perimeter Drive. She said that the application contains two components and therefore, two motions were necessary. She swore in those intending to address the Commission regarding this case, including, the applicants, Jackson B. Reynolds, III and Ben W. Hale, Jr., Smith and Hale, LLC, (37 West Broad Street, Columbus), and Brad Parish, Architectural Alliance (165 North Fifth Street, Columbus), and City representatives. She noted that this application was a consent case, but she had received requests for additional information from the Commissioners. Claudia Husak said that the Commission and City Council approved a rezoning for this approximately 24- acre site earlier this year, which allowed a consolidated campus of vehicular, car dealership, and service uses which included two existing buildings. She explained that the subject site on the eastern portion of the campus was most recently incorporated into the campus for the BMW and Mini Dealership being moved from Post Road. She presented a drawing showing the two Subareas. Ms. Husak said the plan approved as part of the rezoning with the final development plan included the BMW and Mini building in the center of the site and the display fingers on the eastern portion of the site to finish the campus as it was on the west side. She said it was built out at 44,000- square -foot building for BMW and Mini, which included the showroom for both franchises on each end of the building, as well as the service component for them to the north, and a car wash along the Venture Drive frontage to the north. She said the plan had a larger parking area in the eastern portion of the site and included 57,000 - square -feet of vehicle display with lot coverage of 59.5 percent. Ms. Husak said the applicant was almost ready to pull building permits for the development when they were approached by Audi to make changes to their operations. She said they decided to accommodate Audi's needs and revise the final development plan, which is before the Commission tonight. She said the applicant is creating a free - standing 7,900- square -foot showroom for the Audi franchise and moving the previously approved BMW and Mini building east, moving the parking on the eastern portion of that site, more around the site instead of having it in one centralized area, continuing with the fingers and display approved in the plaza areas. Ms. Husak said each of the three franchises now has a plaza area and there is the previously approved display for Porsche. She said the applicant has flipped the previously approved BMW and Mini building. Ms. Husak explained that the retention pond to the east has gotten thinner, but all of the changes have been accommodated within the confines of Subarea B. Ms. Husak said that what was before the Commission was a 45,000- square -foot showroom and service building for BMW and Mini with a 7,900- square -foot showroom for Audi. She said that Audi does not have a service area proposed in this building. She said that the applicant has chosen to eliminate the car wash to provide extra room. She said there are now 233 parking spaces, and 56,000- square -feet of slightly smaller vehicle displays. She said the lot coverage is now 61.1 percent. Ms. Husak said that the development text does not cap density, development is regulated by lot coverage, and 70 percent would be the maximum. She explained that it is also regulated by how much parking has to be provided for the uses and display, and how much landscaping has to be provided. She said the proposal is within all requirements. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 13 Ms. Husak said that a traffic study was submitted when this site was rezoned to be incorporated into the MAG campus, which had a density cap on it from a traffic impact point of view that has not been exceeded with this plan. Ms. Husak presented the proposed elevation approved by the Commission earlier this year for the BMW and Mini building and the proposed south elevation, showing the changed locations of the showrooms with many of the same building elements. She said all of the other elevations have glass, metal, and stucco as the primary building materials. Ms. Husak said the Audi building was simpler with glass and metal building materials. Ms. Husak explained that Planning had concerns about the north elevation, and asked the applicant to add a little more interest. She said the applicant has recently provided an elevation showing windows on the north elevation. Ms. Husak said the applicant is proposing to add 'of Dublin' text to the BMW and Mini wall signs which meet the size and height requirements previously approved with the sign now facing what is on the southern wall facing SR 161. She said the 'MAG Mini of Dublin' sign is on the western elevation, facing the Volvo building. Ms. Husak explained that the proposed Audi sign on the south elevation is the subject of the text modification required as part of this application to approve the sign. She said when the text was originally written for BMW and Mini, it was for one BMW and Mini building with their sign needs in mind. She said the text allows two wall signs in the Subarea, and with Audi, a third wall sign would be introduced which is a text modification requested by the applicant and Planning is supportive of allowing it. Ms. Husak said the proposed Audi sign is approximately 21 square feet, well within any wall sign size requirements and the 15 -foot height requirement. Ms. Husak said this plan shows the existing dealership sign removed from Subarea A and the MAG dealership identification sign, as it was earlier this year proposed in the pond, and the campus identification sign on the Venture Drive curb cut. Ms. Husak said there were some changes on the landscape plan, but the applicant has moved forward with the 31/2 -foot mounding on the eastern portion of the site where the fingers are and the orchard -like arrangement of trees are located. She said that Planning was concerned about three areas of interior landscaping the applicant was counting as their vehicular use area interior landscaping. Ms. Husak said that Planning would like to work with the applicant to find other areas not being counted that could be used instead of those. She said another area of concern was the removal of a shrub row and trees on the demolition plan. The landscaping needs to be shown as being replaced to not create a gap along the drive aisle. Ms. Husak said that Planning is recommending approval of the minor text modification to allow one additional wall sign within Subarea B for the Audi building. She said Planning is also recommending approval of the Final Development Plan with the following four conditions as listed in the Planning Report: 1) That the plans be revised to incorporate a curtain wall system on the north elevation of the Audi building similar to what is shown on the west or east elevations; 2) That the applicant work with Planning to decrease the number and /or intensity of the fixtures to avoid light glare and irregular lighting; 3) That more interior landscape islands totaling 1,050 square feet and containing deciduous trees be incorporated to break up the large parking lot north of the proposed Audi building; and Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 13 4) That the row of shrubs and trees removed in front of the Volvo display plaza be replaced and continued to meet the first display finger to the west. Ben W. Hale, Jr., Smith and Hale, representing the applicant, said the finish along US 33 is probably better with this revised plan than the old plan because the employee and car storage lot was relocated behind the buildings. Brad Parish, Architectural Alliance, said that they received a letter from Audi stating that their current facility did not meet their prototype standards and that in 2013, if MAG did not sign a letter of intent with Audi to create a new stand -alone facility, they would lose their incentives for future years. He said they re- evaluated the BMW development and fit the Audi showroom onto this site. He said knowing that the Commission and City Council did not want them to go any farther east towards Children's Hospital, they explored how to efficiently design the BMW site to fit the additional square footage as well meet the parking requirements for Audi. He explained that they mirrored the BMW and Mini building because for the Audi building design, he wanted to create a pure cube between the two complex buildings backing over on the Porsche area as well as BMW and Mini. Mr. Parish said from the standpoint of Mini, looking at the BMW to the Mini building, the Mini scale matches more proportionally to the Audi showroom design. He said it seemed to have a better rhythm across the site. He said also like the existing building and the Land Rover building, there was always a nice relationship between the inventory and the showrooms. He explained that the previous plan the Commission reviewed had a disconnect between the two showrooms and the fingers. He said that this proposed plan gives a better relationship to the inventory for sales representatives to look from inside the showroom out to the fingers. Mr. Parish said the original design had 225 striped parking spaces, not including areas that were indicated with tan on the plan. He said if that 56,000- square -foot area was included, it could hold another 250 average sized cars on those plazas and in the display area. Mr. Parish said the total number of parking spaces for the site is close to 550 medium -sized cars. He said for each of the three manufacturers' there were requirements for parking, guidelines on required inventory, storage, service component, customer parking, and demonstration areas. He said MAG allotted around 500 cars a year for each of the brands, which brings approximately 1,600 cars per year to this site, or if divided by 12, 125 cars inventory on the site. He said they obviously have much more storage for inventory than what they require. Mr. Parish said that Audi's operations do not require as many vehicles for sale at one time as it is typical for other brands. Mr. Parish said from the operational standpoint, MAG feels that there is a sufficient amount of plaza space on either side to handle new car delivery and the new and certified pre -owned vehicle sales. Mr. Parish said they are maxed on this site as it is and they know they will not be developing past this development to the east due to parking requirements. Amy Kramb said her questions about parking and adding additional islands had been answered by Mr. Parish. She was concerned that if islands were added, they would lose parking spaces. She asked what size the islands should be if trees were placed in them, noting that trees placed in the islands would be near the vehicles for sale. Ms. Husak explained that Planning would like to see an island located along the Audi expanse of customer parking as well as somewhere along in front of the large row of parking in front of the BMW Mini building. She explained that the vehicular use area interior landscaping is intended to break up large areas of asphalt, and the Code does not say that the display areas cannot be used. She said that Planning felt the need to add islands along the customer parking areas in front of the proposed buildings. She said there is a little extra parking on the site and so they are not concerned about taking away a Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 13 couple of spaces. Ms. Husak said there are also other areas on the site that could potentially be counted as vehicular use area interior landscaping, if they have the right trees in them. She said that was something Planning wanted to explore more with the applicant's landscape architect and the City Landscape Inspector. She said it was preferred to have the islands located in the parking areas instead of the vehicular use area. Ms. Kramb asked if they were being asked to locate parking islands north of the new building. Ms. Husak said that they were not. She clarified that the condition was that Planning needed to figure out the location with the applicant, without specifications. She said there were several ways that the condition can be fulfilled and she was confident that the Planning can figure it out to meet Code. Ms. Kramb asked if Planning was confident that no more buildings can be added to the site, or did there need to be something included in the text stating that there could not be any more buildings on this site. She pointed out that they were allowed to have a car wash, and they took it away, but the development text still said they can have a car wash, and she did not want them to come back. Ms. Husak clarified that the text said they could have a car wash, but it did not say they had to have one. She explained that basically, the text can be changed to say they cannot have any more buildings, but if they wanted more buildings, they would have to come before the Commission to modify the text anyway because there was no way they could meet parking or lot coverage. Ms. Kramb said she liked the new circulation pattern with two entrances onto Venture Drive because she thought that would help with the truck deliveries of vehicles. She said she did not think the buildings looked as nice as they looked on the previous design which had more shadow lines and roof overhangs. Ms. Kramb said the proposed wall sign looked randomly placed on the building at 15 feet because it was as high as it could go. She asked how it would be mounted and if it was above a door. Mr. Parish said the entrance to Audi on the east elevation had a portal element and the mullion line above that was striped around the front of the building, and that was really how it was set. He said there was an eight -foot door and it was ten feet to the top of the portal required by Audi. He said there was a mullion line on top of that and then the sign. He explained that instead of centering the sign, they book - ended it so that it was away from the other dealerships. Warren Fishman said his concern was where the cars would be loaded and unloaded because there did not seem to be any room for that. Mr. Parish explained that vehicle loading and unloading would take place on the heavy -duty pavement which leads to the dock area and in the current area behind the existing facility. Ms. Husak said that on this revised plan the circulation was opened up through both of the Venture Drive curb cuts. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked what the pavement distance was? Mr. Parish said it was 24 feet. Ms. Amorose Groomes said that was a tight radius for a semi to turn Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 13 Mr. Parish said that in the application, they provided an AutoTURN using a semi, which demonstrated that they could meet that. Mr. Fishman asked what would prevent the semi truck drivers from taking the shortest distance to unload the vehicles. He said he had seen them unload on the road because there was no one directing them otherwise. Mr. Parish asked if MAG vehicles had been seen delivered on the road. Ms. Amorose Groomes said that she had verbally confirmed it with the drivers. She said that it probably was not a huge problem now, but there is a lot of undeveloped land nearby and they have to make plans for it to be built out and to be functioning at full capacity on the roadways hopefully soon. Mr. Parish demonstrated how the delivery trucks would circulate on the heavy -duty pavement, turn, and go back up in a giant loop. He said it was an operational standpoint that MAG will have to work on with their drivers. He said MAG's regular drivers have been trained how and where to drive. Mr. Fishman said he had seen all makes of vehicles being delivered by trucks everywhere. He said it was dangerous and he would like a solution. Mr. Fishman noted that the detention pond size had been reduced. Mr. Parish said it was longer and skinnier. He said it still holds the same quantity of water. He explained that was because at the highest water level, the pond had to be located on the site instead of splitting a property line. Mr. Fishman asked if there was a way to landscape the pond to make it more attractive. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she did not see the depth listed for the pond. Mr. Parish said the ponds are connected and supplied by a drilled well on site. He said that they wanted it to be a visible full pond. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she was talking in terms of a living eco- system versus water storage. [Victoria Newell arrived.] Ms. Husak said the water elevation was at 903, and the last contour was 896. Ms. Amorose Groomes calculated that the pond at its deepest point was roughly 8 feet deep. Mr. Fishman asked if the applicant could be required to install more than one sprayer or fountain. He reiterated that long ago, they agreed that they were to be a very attractive focal point when this property developed. He said that from what he had experienced with detention ponds all over Dublin, it will not be. Ms. Husak said that both ponds are to have an aerator. Mr. Fishman said he thought it should be required to be designed with approval of the Landscape Architect and that it has three or four fountains in the long skinny pond, and be something that is an amenity. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 13 Ms. Amorose Groomes said the pond to the east would require a lot of aerification to have a chance of it being a living system. Mr. Hale said that they would agree to a condition saying they will work with staff to adequately aerate the ponds. He said he understood they had two in each today, and if there needs to be more, they would be happy to do that. Mr. Fishman said he would like the condition to say that this will be a landscaped amenity to the both properties. Steve Langworthy said what constitutes an amenity will be the difficult interpretation for Planning to design. Mr. Fishman asked Ms. Amorose Groomes for a suggestion. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she would say that they need to be designed and function as a living ecosystem, and as long as it was a living ecosystem that would control the vegetative growth within the water itself so that it could sustain aquatic life. Mr. Fishman asked how many fountains would the skinny pond need. Ms. Amorose Groomes said it depended on the fountain size and the volume of water that it would push through. She said what needed to happen was a calculation of how many cubic feet of water needs to be aerated per hour, and then the pump size would be set to that calculation. Mr. Fishman said he would like the applicants to bring it back to the Commission to show what they have designed. Mr. Langworthy agreed to bring it back to the Commission like an Administrative item. Mr. Parish said the current pond was stocked with Koi. He said a maintenance program exists on site at the MAG site. He said the proposed pond would not be an eyesore. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if the water intake for the irrigation system was in the eastern pond. Mr. Parish confirmed that the irrigation system was in the pond to the east. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked what would happen when the land is sold where the pond is located. Mr. Parish said there would be a written easement. He said they currently owned all the land including to the east. He reiterated that if it was ever sold, there would be an easement put in place. Ms. Newell asked if the easement should be put in place now. Mr. Parish said they could not because it was the same owner and an easement cannot be granted to yourself. Ms. Amorose Groomes clarified that technically, it had not been divided, and it was considered one parcel. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 13 Mr. Hale explained that if you owned land and buy the land next door with an easement on it, the easement gets extinguished automatically. Mr. Fishman said he did not care if there were fish in the pond, because he could not see them from the road. He reiterated that for 20 years, the City has been thinking both the ponds were going to be a pretty amenity, so that was what he wanted to see. Mr. Hale agreed they would work with Planning and bring the ponds back to the Commission. Ms. Amorose Groomes said they were looking for what the bank treatments would be, and how they intend to establish the bank and hold it. She said she guessed that now that it has been narrowed, the banks are going to be compromised, and suggested that they probably will need to do some stone outcropping or something to hold them in place. Mr. Fishman suggested pretty stone walls or something that was an amenity Mr. Fishman asked if there would be an Audi service area. Mr. Hale said Audi had an onsite service area, not at this building, but in the main building. Mr. Fishman said his minor concern was that they might add an addition to the Audi building someday Mr. Hale said the requirement on this lot is 70 percent occupancy which includes the building, parking, walkways, and anything that is hard surfaced. He said they are at 64 percent and have 36 percent green on the lot. He said it was not a crowded lot in terms of providing the required green space. Mr. Hale said that the road is public and they do not control it, but if the City feels the parking of the delivery trucks is causing a concern, it has the absolute right to ban any parking on it. Jennifer Readier said that parking could be enforced through Dublin's Police regulations. She said it was just a matter of getting enforcement and sending notification. John Hardt said he agreed that the site, circulation, citing of the building and presentation to US 33 was better. He said his only concern was the delivery of vehicles. He said whether or not a driver can get into the site does not necessarily mean that they will. He said if it is too difficult, they will not do it until someone makes them. Mr. Hardt said his only concern was the external radii on the two curb cuts. He said he would like to see them on the inside so that not only could a truck get in, but also that a truck could get through with ease. He said the architecture of the Mini and BMW building was consistent with last time and he thought it was still a striking building even though it was flipped. Mr. Hardt said he did not feel that the architecture of the Audi building was consistent with the quality of the rest of the buildings on the campus. He said looking at the original building, the recent addition, and the proposed Mini and BMW building, although they are all striking modern architecture, they all have things in common. He said they all make use of a variety of materials, and have various different massing elements put together such as overhangs, shadow lines and creative use of window mullion patterns that add visual interest. He said the Audi building to his eye, did none of that. Mr. Hardt said he was fine with the sign proposal with one exception. He said the Mini and BMW signs are detailed and mounted on the building with certain elegance with the tube on the bottom and the extension sticking upwards. He said the Audi sign, in contrast appeared to be just stuck to the face of building. Mr. Hardt said that it just did not seem to be of a quality that is consistent with the rest of the campus. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 13 He said in both the current and proposed development texts, under Architecture, 'New facilities shall have a high quality of finish consistent with the architectural style and materials found throughout the area' is discussed. He said he did not think they were there with this building. He said in spite of the impressions he had with the overall application, he thought the architecture of the Audi building was something he could not get past tonight. Richard Taylor referred to the two new display areas proposed at the front entrance and asked how many cars would be displayed. Mr. Parish said both displays are about 1,000 square feet so there would be about five cars displayed. He said they were within the display window along Venture Drive. Mr. Taylor said he liked the new site plan, the overall circulation flow, and the stronger entranceway. He said regarding the ponds, he did not see anything he did not like, but there was not much detail shown. He said his impression looking at it was what appeared to be turf grass down to the water's edge, a fair amount of trees and landscaping, and he guessed the intent of the pond is to be pristine. He said he would expect that it would have a sharp edge at the water. He said that Mr. Brentlinger would more likely to sterilize the pond than he would be to have it alive, which visually might be very clean and sharp which probably was not a good thing. Mr. Taylor said he did not see anything that would make it look unattractive assuming it stayed full of water. He said that given the quality of the rest of the development, he would be surprised if it ever got bad. Mr. Taylor said he wondered if another 1,000 square feet of landscape area was needed. He said that he was amazed that they were that close on landscaping on this large a site. He said that was a compliment to the designers and their ability to use literally every square foot of the site. Mr. Taylor said if there was any way through radii and maybe other pavement and curb issues to visually encourage drivers to get their trucks back there, he was in favor of that. He said he thought they had provided ways for trucks to use the site properly, if they do not, someone will have to get onto MAG's case and make them do it. He said other than enforcement; he did not think there was another way to do that. Victoria Newell said she was disappointed in what the overall elevations looked like of the Audi building, especially the south elevation along Venture Drive. She said even with Planning's condition that windows or a curtain wall assembly be provided; it is mostly storage /janitorial spaces, so they will end up with spandrel glazing. She said the building does not have the same mix of materials that are on the other structures. Ms. Newell said a better solution might be incorporating some of those to create different plays of materials within the building to take away the blank fagade. Ms. Newell apologized for being late and said that although the Commission had already discussed it tonight, she had a question about the Mini and BMW elevation on Venture Drive. She noted that she did not see on the elevations any roof mounted mechanical units proposed. She said she saw the potential where they could be there and not screened and she was concerned about that. Ms. Newell said she was not in love with the Audi sign. She said she did not think it was as integrated with the building as on the BMW Mini building where the sign fits better. She said she was not crazy about the red line on the Audi sign because it really stood out a lot in comparison to the other signs. Ms. Newell asked since the retention pond is off site, what in the future will make them put the easement in place if they try to develop that property differently. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 13 Ms. Husak said the issue really was shared stormwater management across different ownerships. Kristin Yorko said the applicant has already been asked to provide the legal description of what that easement would look like for the future. She said they needed to finalize it a little more because some things have been changed. She said it was onerous on the both property owners and not a City of Dublin issue. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if an easement granted rights to the water that is in the pond and asked Ms. Readier to speak to who owned the water in the pond and if an easement will grant them the ability to take the water out of the pond. Jennifer Reader said if it was a stormwater issue, easements can be described to encompass many different things beyond just the physical use of the land. Ms. Amorose Groomes said to make sure that they do not lose their water source if that is where they are going to locate their wet well and all of their expensive equipment on someone else's property. Mr. Hardt said he understood that although they are drawing water out of the pond for irrigation, they are also replenishing it with a well on MAG's site. Ms. Amorose Groomes said it would be interesting to see what happens if the neighbor wants to use the water too and then MAG will have to make up water out of their well also. She said it was an unusual circumstance that she had not encountered. She said how MAG gets water for their irrigation was their problem. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked to see the Audi building elevations. She said she thought this was a beautiful campus; however, she was not excited about the architecture of this building. She said she thought one of the hallmarks for her of this campus is the way that the drives are lowered to the service bays. She said that feel is lost with the Audi building and she did not like it. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she was convinced that they will have to put a Service' sign with an arrow on the corner of the Audi building because every other brand that you drive through, the service bay presented itself. She said she thought it did not match in with the balance of the facilities without having the feel of the varying elevations which were very significant on the other buildings. She said she was not excited about the proposed sign placement. She said it was difficult to find an entrance door on this facility. She said on the east elevation where it was outlined in white looked like it might just be for cars but she did not see another obvious entrance. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she did not like putting the garage on the back of the building. She noted that none of the other buildings had a garage on the back where vehicles could be pulled directly through and if the doors were open on either side, you could see right through them. She said she did not think it matches with the quality in the balance of it. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she had truck circulation concerns as well. She said would rather Dublin's Police to address other problems in the City than where the delivery trucks for the car dealership are going to park. She said she thought the BMW and Mini building is very nice and she agreed that the site is better for the placement of the building. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she appreciated Planning's comments about the missing components of landscaping and she was sure that they would be addressed those through the conditions. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 13 Ms. Newell asked again if rooftop mechanical units were being proposed and what size would they be Mr. Parish said she had forwarded Ms. Husak roof plans for both of the buildings showing where they were locating the screening. He said on the Audi building, the showroom area has a 20 -foot ceiling height and past the glass, the ceiling drops down to 10 feet, so there is a 6 to 7 -foot well behind from the glass line back where the rooftop units can be hidden. Mr. Parish said they were five -ton units, between the 4 and 5 -foot range, and in the curve, another 6 to 12 inches. Ms. Newell asked how deep the well was. Mr. Parish said the parapet height was 127 around, so 27 feet up and you are at 20, so you have 7 feet on the Audi building. He said that in the BMW section of the building, there is an element that occurs on the front, the blade and cantilever. He said no rooftop units will be on the higher roof. He said all the rooftop units will be on the service area. He said they have carried the screen wall all the way across the backside and there is a three -foot opening for service to get to the units, so they have located four ten - ton units, plus the exhaust system for the service area. He said for Mini, there are no units shown, but a 14 -inch exhaust system unit will be painted white, consistent with what was done for the Volvo addition, and there are two screen walls for the three units with an opening. Ms. Newell referred to the Venture Drive elevation where she was concerned that the rooftop units did not look to be screened. Mr. Parish said 75 to 90 percent of the units were covered. He said they were pulled away from the screen wall. Ms. Newell said there was a point where if you were far enough away from a building that rooftop units could be seen when they were only partially screened. Mr. Parish said they made their best attempt to provide screening for the units on site. Ms. Newell said that she realized the control of unloading vehicles is not always within the applicant's control as the owner, but she thought it was important, no matter what is done on the site, that the provisions are provided in a clear way to get trucks in and out of the site and really plan for it. She said looking at the proposed plan, she was not sure that it had been planned for in its entirety. Mr. Parish said they had discussed having a lowered service drive to be consistent with the other facilities, but there would need to be an elevator for ADA access and in order to keep the cost down for this small building, so they consciously made it one -story to avoid the high cost of an elevator. He said they made the attempt to locate the service doors on the backside and provide heavy screening to block the entrances of it. He said they had included in the packets with the brand signs a service center sign with an arrow to be located on the corner. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if they thought another sign was needed. Mr. Parish said they could use an internal directional sign. Mr. Hardt asked if Audi owners would drop their car off at the Audi building but it would be serviced elsewhere. Mr. Parish explained that according to Audi regulations, the service drop -off and write -up area had to be adjacent to the showroom. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 13 Ms. Amorose Groomes asked where the 30 Audi vehicles would be displayed. Mr. Parish said the new car inventory would be displayed on the plaza. He said to the north, by Jaguar, those fingers are used for the overflow inventory for all of the brands. He said those fingers were never really full. Mr. Budde referred to the north side of the building where a piece jutted out on Architectural drawing 3.0.1 - Detailing with six cars shown. He said the printing was too small to read. He asked if that was where the car wash would be located. Mr. Parish said that area is where the vehicles are hand -dried after being in the carwash installed in the Volvo building. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked Mr. Hale after hearing the Commission comments, what the applicant would like to do regarding this application. Mr. Hale said that they understood that they needed to have a conversation with Audi which they were happy to do. He said regarding the concern about truck deliveries, they would be happy to meet with Engineering and to the extent needed, round the drives as a condition, and bring back both the design and signage on Audi, not just as an Administrative Review, but a review and hearing by the Commission. He said because they would like to begin designing the site to meet the schedule, they would like to have this application bifurcated so that they could bring the building back and to have the leverage they needed to meet with Audi to tell them that they have no choice but to make these changes. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she understood Mr. Hale was saying that he would like to get movement on the BMW Mini portion of this application. She asked if he was requesting a tabling of the Audi portion of this application. Mr. Parish said he understood from the Commissioners' comments that the design of the Audi facility needed to be explored a little further. He said they held up BMW to add the Audi facility to the site and they cannot be held up any longer. Mr. Parish said that he would like to have the site plan, as well as the BMW building approved this evening and then he would bring back the Audi building applications and the sign plan. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if legally, that could be done. Ms. Readier said they had done that similarly in the past, but it was not ideal. She said that they especially do not to do that when there is significant impact to the site. She said if they can distill this so that the only thing that is coming back for the Commission's approval is the Audi building alone and the architecture and footprint would not substantially change, she thought the Commission had the capacity to do that. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked what Ms. Readier meant by '...the footprint would not substantially change.' Ms. Readier said the applicant cannot be made to come back with a completely different sized building that impacts the entire site or when they come back for approval because the rest of the site plan is going... Ms. Amorose Groomes said she did not want to paint the Commission into a corner in that they had to approve a building that looked just like this because that was what they said they would do. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 13 Ms. Readier explained that the architecture of the building would be up for complete review and the square footage could not be changed because of the other impacts, it would be practically impossible. Mr. Fishman asked if there were problems with the truck access and the widening of the drives. Ms. Readier said they could be conditioned for Administrative approval. Ms. Newell said regarding the changing of the building footprint, a concern that the Commissioners had in regards to the architecture of the building was that it was very, very flat, so if they are going to do overhangs, canopy structures, or something as they would determine that would aesthetically improve the appearance of the building, that equally can change the footprint associated with it. Ms. Readier suggested a better way to say that was 'the square footage.' She said her main concern was when pieces of an application are approved and things are taken out to come back for a subsequent approval they do not want to have something happen with that subsequent approval that impacts what the Commission had already approved. She said it needed to be cut out as clean as possible. Mr. Hardt asked if it was possible to vote on this application with the condition that the Audi building be removed and then they could come back for an amended final development plan and put it back. Ms. Readier said it could be done and it would be clean that way. She said it would just take them longer. Mr. Hale said that would be okay because they needed time meet with Audi and to prepare for the meeting after next. Ms. Husak explained that July 19"' was the application deadline for the August 9"' meeting. She said that would not be ideal for Planning and it was too concerning if the application were split. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if it was Planning's pleasure that that this application be approved with the Audi building removed from it. Ms. Husak said that it was preferred that the complete application be tabled. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she did not think tabling it completely was on the table. Mr. Hale said that they were okay if the Audi building was removed completely from this application. He said they would file an application for the Audi building that the Commission would approve. Mr. Parish said he would need these meeting minutes to explain to Audi that their prototype would not work in Dublin. Ms. Amorose Groomes said that Mr. Fishman had asked that they look at the ponds to the east. She asked if Audi could be pulled from the application and they could ask for the details for the east pond. Ms. Kramb said she thought there was a condition that staff would look at the east pond details and then it would be brought back to the Commission as an Administrative Approval. Mr. Fishman said he did not want the pond in ten years to be a stepchild that no one had maintained Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 12, 2012 — Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 13 Mr. Hale said that he was not worried about that. He said he thought it was more about giving comfort than what is actually going to happen here and that was okay. Ms. Kramb noted that Condition 1 should be deleted since they were removing the Audi building and removing the reference to it in Condition 3. Ms. Amorose Groomes invited public comments regarding this application. [There were none.] Ms. Amorose Groomes said the first motion was for minor text modifications, and she thought with removing the Audi building, those text modifications would be null and void. She asked if it was procedurally best to table the text modifications and vote on the amended final development plan with the conditions, one of them being the removal of the Audi building. Ms. Husak said it could be tabled if it was coming back, so she suggested disapproval. She suggested that if the Commission would be comfortable approving a text modification to allow three signs in this subarea in general without having specific locations. Motion #1 and Vote — Minor Text Modification Mr. Taylor moved to disapprove this Minor Text Modification to allow an additional wall sign for the Audi building within Subarea B to allow the applicant to refine and revise the architecture for the proposed building prior to the review of an additional wall sign. Ms. Kramb seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; Mr. Budde, yes; Ms. Newell, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Disapproved 7 — 0.) Motion #2 and Vote — Amended Final Development Plan Mr. Taylor moved to approve this Amended Final Development Plan application because the proposal complies with the development text, the amended final development plan criteria and existing development in the area, with five conditions: 1) That the applicant work with Planning to reduce the lighting levels in the vehicle display areas along the southern portion of the site; 2) That the row of shrubs and trees removed in front of the Volvo display plaza be replaced and continued to meet the first display finger to the west; 3) That the applicant work with Planning to design the stormwater retention pond as living eco- system , subject to approval to Planning 4) That the applicant work with Engineering to increase the interior turning radii in the parking lot, subject to staff approval; and 5) That the applicant remove the Audi building from the amended final development plan to allow the applicant to explore revised architecture for this building to better complement the existing architectural style of the campus. Ben W. Hale, Jr., representing the applicant agreed to the five conditions. Mr. Hardt seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Budde, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Ms. Newell, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 7 — 0.) Ms. Amorose Groomes called a short recess at 7:59 p.m. She reconvened the meeting at 8:02 p.m. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Meeting Dubl n Cty Council Ms. G -igsby res Ended that staff cont'nued to Work through the is March 12 2012 _2022t3 and understands at; however, staff came to a resol on late today. Mrs. Bor:9§ stated that there havgAeen suggestions andowyrers, which staff has resy6nded to by memo. mem , or a summary of the, pr °or to the workshc ;EN COMMENTS were no citizen a d by developers and requested copies of th . t Monday. CONSENT AGEND{,/ Mayor Lecklider ed that four items are oposed for action on r consent agent a and as whether any Council ember requests removal-of an item for further consi a -on under the regula agenda. Hearing no , Mayor Lecklider move approval of action on she four tems as proposed the consent agenda. Mr. Rein r seconded the motion. Vote Qfte motion; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici -Zu ther, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; r. Reiner, yes; Mayor Wklider, yes; Vice Mayo/an3 Salay, yes. 1. Approval of Minutes of February 13, 20 ci meeting 2. Correspondgrice — Notice to Legislati a y of New D5I iquor Permit for MHRI Inc., dba Morgan ousurant, 5300 lick Road, Dublin 3. Ordince 15 -12 (Introdu "on /firsing) Au�orizing the City Ma ger to ExNece ary Conveyance D cumentation to Acq re a 0.302 all f which is Present oad Occupied), Mo or Less, Fee terest, a 0.426 Acres, More or Less ermanent Utiding and Drainage Easement, and a .107 Acres, More s, Temporary Construction Ea ment from Bates rty Management, d. (Second readin ublic hearing March 2 cil meeting) 4. Ordinance 6 -12 (Introdu/ised t reading) Amendin Sections 96.23137.06 and 137.0 of the Dublin odified Ordinance to the Regula " n of Firea s to Comply with ase Law Requ" ments. (Sec d reading /public head 6 Council m ng) SECOND REA IN j /PUBLIC NEARING — ORDINANCES Ordinance 13 -12 Rezoning of Approximately 24.33 Acres, Located on the East Side of Perimeter Loop Drive, North of US 33 /SR 161, South of Perimeter Drive and Southwest of Venture Drive from PUD, Planned Unit Development District (existing MAG plan and Perimeter Center, Subarea 3 -1) and PCD, Planned Commerce District (Perimeter Center, Subarea D) to PUD (Midwestern Auto Group PUD) to Incorporate 8.73 Acres into the MAG PUD to Expand the Automobile Dealership Campus with a 45,000 - Square -Foot Building Addition for the BMW and Mini Franchises. (Case V - 049Z /PDP /FDP) Ms. Husak stated that the plans provided for the meeting Include the second curb cut that was discussed at the February 27 Counci' meeting. Staff h�� mi- 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto {group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Meeting Dublin City Council Held _ __ _ _ March" 12, 2012 - - - *. N ` — withdrawn its previous recommendation for a condition related to the mounding. She shared a PowerPoint graphic of the plan as approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC), for which Council indicated support of – including a 3- 1/2 foot mound on the U- shaped, finger -like car display area, and a six -foot mound beginning with the vacant land to the east. Mrs. Boring stated that she assumes there will be a gradua trans.bon between the 3 -1/2 foot and six -foot mounds. Ms. Husak responded that the mound would gently slope upward. Ben date. Jr. 37 W. B d Street, _Col mLus, stated that the applicant has agreed to the conditions appended by PZC. The architect and property owner are present to respond to any additional questions. There were no additional questions and no requests for public testimony. Vote on the Ordinance: Mr. Re ner. yes; Vice Mayor Salay, yes; Mrs. Borng, yes; Mayor Lecklider, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher, yes. DVTRUUi1G11 Tl 1K KCNViI \u — VRV ■ruwc .� Ordinance 14- Rezoning AP ximatel/le 185 Acres,-, orated on the North S' a of Brand Road, Apennied imatel W of Coventry Woods D ve from R and R -1 to P Unit e District (Wellington serve PUD) to Estab ' h a 28 Lot Sy Detached Residenti evelopment and 3.6 Gres of Open S 08- 38Z/PDP /PP) (Wel i _ton rezoning) (Second r ding /public hearing ouncil meeting) ice Mayor Salay intrordinance. Ms. Husak stated th at as re- scheduled this agenda to permit st to address some access " sues with the applicant. These /on, es on the north side of and Road are immed ate adjacent to the on Place subdivision. o the north ;s the Brand subdivi d to the west is u ° corporated land within hington Xsca hip. roposed preliminary pl includes 28 lots on the ;,0 acres for a tota' ty of 1.5 un :ts /acre, 'ch meets the CommuniW Plan requirements. is an access poi off Brand Road and a ger&rous setback off Brand . It is required be 100 feet; there are approximately 100 - 20 feet Road setba in the neighboring subdWisions. lan includ a connection to Wellingto Place, to the east, t hro bridge D ' e. e is a detention area proposcalong Brand Road with a ple ca " g and a form of naturali wooded landscap ng. p n has been revised from at the Planning and Zo " g Commission wed. The applicant has t9en working with Plannin nd Engineering ake some changes to tV potential future access the parcel in the . That parcel may oFAnay not develop, but if 't oes, it is important to re a/g, rcel. • The propereate a small cul -de -s in the northern port o the site, ent from what the Plan ng Commission conside. , which wtial future road conn ling in that particular are . As suggesteer7ng, the applica as provided r;ght- cif -1# a% *hP new plan tial future exte on of Ballybridge Driv 21 -032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi– Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Meeting D. b'n City Courcil February 27, 2012 RP�e 19 Acres, ore or Less, Tempora nstruction Easemen om BRE /COH OH LLC lackstone), and Decla . g an Emergency. Mr ammersm th stated this' the second reading of an dinance to acquire from ackstone the necessary ri t -of -way along Emerald P way to accommodate th Emerald Parkway improv ent project between R.n Road and Tuttle Crossing Boulevard. Ms. Chinnici- Zuerch moved for emergency pa age. Vice Mayor Salay nded the motion. Vote on a mo ' n: Mr. Keenan, yes; Ms. inn'&Zuercher, yes; Mr. iner, yes; Yr. Gerber, yes; rs. Boring, yes; Vice May Salay, yes; Mayor Lecklid , yes. Vo on th Ordinance: Mr. Keenan, s; Mrs. Bor!rg, yes; Mr. R ' er, yes; Vice Mayor S y, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes; s. Ch'nnic.- Z�ercher, yes; 11 ayor Leck !der, yes. XNMODUCTIONIFIRST READING — ORDINANCES Ordinance 13 -12 Rezoning of Approximately 24.33 Acres, Located on the East Side of Perimeter Loop Drive, North of US 33 /SR 161, South of Perimeter Drive and Southwest of Venture Drive from PUD, Planned Unit Development District (existing MAG plan and Perimeter Center, Subarea 3 -1) and PCD, Planned Commerce District (Perimeter Center, Subarea D) to PUD (Midwestern Auto Group PUD) to Incorporate 8.73 acres into the MAG PUD to Expand the Automobile Dealership Campus with a 45,000 - Square -Foot Building Addition for the BMW and Mini Franchises. (Case 11- 049Z /PDP /FDP) Mr. Gerber introduced the ordinance. Ms. Husak stated that this is a request to rezone this property to a p'anned unit deve;opment district (PUD) to allow the MAG, BMW and Mini facilities to relocate from Post Road to the existing MAG campus. This action will incorporate an additional 8.73 acres into the existing PUD. • The proposal is for a 24 -acre PUD, which includes as Subarea A, the existing dealership. There are no changes in that development text. Subarea B nc:udes the proposed BMW and Mini facility, and th's development text -gas been modeled after the existing text, and therefore much of the language and development standards are the same. There 's an additional section of land 'eft in the Perimeter Center planned district that also includes storm water management. • The proposal is for a 45,000- square -foot building 'n the center of the site with an access point off Venture Drive and a loop road that accesses the en 're campus. The applicant reviewed the distance needed for truck maneuver ng on the site, per the Commission's request. As a resu't of that review, staff 's requesting a second Venture Drve curbcut, which the traffic study or gina ly included. • There are two ponds on the site. To the south along the U.S. 33 frontage is an ornamental pond, and a !arge regional stormwater management basin is located partly on the proposed PUD and partly on the remaWng parcel. • The BMW franchise will be located in the western portion of tie site; the Mini franchise will be located in the eastern portion. In front of each showroom is a plaza area for vehicle dispiay. The service function is located towa -d the rear of the building toward the Venture Drive frontage wth an attached carwash. • The elevations will continue the modem 'ook of the existing campus with the use of metal and glass materials and large elements of stucco. • The app.Tcant is proposi -g two wal: signs, one for BMW and one for Mini on the budding. C A landscaping plan was included in CouncCs materials. Approximately 330 'nches of trees were re —oved along the U.S. 33 frontage. Vice Mayor Sa ay asked if this occurred without a permit. 21-032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Meeting DAYTON LfOAL � �N 010 Dublin City Council iic :c. February 27,_2012 _J?B9e 20__ Ms. Husak confirmed that it occurred without a permit. Mr. Keenan noted that it consisted primary of scrub matera.s along the fence line. Ms. Husak confirmed that it was along the highway fence. The City's landscaper reviewed the tree sizes and determined that 331 inches were removed. With the proposal, there will be an additional 30 inches of required removal. The applicant proposes 376 inches of replacement trees. There is also shrub buffering along the display fingers and the drive to the south of the bu'Iding. Vice Mayor Salay requested clarification of the 'ocation of trees versus shrubs on the site plan. Ms. Husak responded that a shrub row will run along the drive, which is the typical screening for vehicle use areas. The dark green circles represent deciduous trees. • The Code requires a six -foot wali, pianting, mound, hedge or combination thereof, plus one tree for every 30 feet to fulfill the property perimeter screening requirement along US 33 /SR 161. However, the original MAG site was not required at that time to provide that screening. With this new development, staff requested that they meet the existing Code requirements for mounding. This request was also based upon frequent feedback from Council concerning the visib'.I' :ty of cars from the freeway. • The applicant's case received two reviews - an informal and a formal review. At the informal review, some members of the Commission disagreed w.th Planning staff's requirement for a six -`oot mound along the Subarea B frontage on US 33/SR 161, believing that the applicant should be permitted to cont nue the ;r existing treatment along the freeway, which is no buffer. At the formal review, an alternative was proposed — a three -foot mound beginn'ng where the pond ends, running along the southern frontage to the point at which the last display finger ends. They would also meet the tree requirement along that line. At the point the display finger ends, a six -foot mound was proposed, which would run along the entire off -site parcel. The Commission approved the proposed three -foot mound along the vehicle display areas. Mrs. Boring asked if the three -foot mound would have trees, as `s norma ly required. Ms. Husak responded that there would be trees. Mrs. Boring asked if the trees would provide any screening, due to the terrain. Ms. Husak responded that they would not provide screening. Mrs. Borng asked if they would be deciduous. Ms. Husak responded affirmatively. Mayor Lecklider asked if the mounding wou ,d transition 'rom th ee feet to six feet. Ms. Husak confirmed that it wou d do so. Mayor Lecklider asked if the Code, as :t is app led to other dealerships ,n the area, requires a s'x -foot mound. Ms. Husak responded that the Code requires a complete six -foot mound. On the entire MAG site, there wou d be a transition from no mound, to pond, to a three -foot mound, and then to a s x -foot mound. Mayor Lecklider inquired the height of the fingers. Ms Husak responded that the app icant has provided two section drawings that dep.ct the three -foot mound, the variations n the terrain and the display fingers. Mrs. Boring asked what would occur ;f the property owner should decide to elevate the fingers Ms. Husak respo ;ded that it is her understand ng that's ikely, as it occurred with the original plan approved. At this point, the grad ng plan shows the fingers at three feet ower than the top of the mound. • The Comm ±ssion rev +ewed the plan twice, and voted to recommend approval with three Condit ons. The applicant has satisfied those conditions prior to Council's review 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Meeting Dub'.in City Council February 27.2012 _ _ _ pp a 21 s. Staff's recommendation is that Council approve the rezoning with the condition that staff orig'nally proposed -- the six -foot mound. The Planning and Zoning Commiss on simu'taneousiy approved the final development plan, which would not be in effect until Counci" approval of the preliminary plan is received. The condition that staff recommends be included would require that the applicant revise not ony the deve opment text, but also the plans. Mayor Leckfder asked if Counc: w'I also be acting upon the final development plan cond'tions. Ms. Husak responded those lave been approved by PZC, and the applicant has satisfied the majority of those at this time. The final development plan approved by PZC required only the three -foot mound. Mayor Leckiider invited the applicant's representative to speak. Ben Hale Jr. 37 W. Broad Street, o,umbus representing the applicant, stated that this dealership is currently located on Post Road. Their space s 'nsufficent, and they must relocate. This move will also accommodate the new Bridge Street Road alignment, which depicts a road going through the BMW dealersh'p property. The'r desire is to consolidate all these dealerships on the MAG property. A strong feature in this plan :s the pond along the road. There is a cons:derable setback, and there is no display area near the pond. The display area is all on the other side of the road. There will be no display or parking facing US 33, which 's a very positive element in this plan. If a six -foot mound were required, the pond would be substantially smaller. Heavy landscaping is included, including a pond to the east. The display area will be paced at the correct grade with a three -foot mound with deciduous trees in front. Only the tops of the cars may be sightly visible. The three -foot mound w "I be gradual and natural in appearance, which they believe is the best aesthetic choice. He ° nvited the architect to speak. John Oney, Architectural_Alliancf;_ 165 N. 5th Street. Cowmbus stated that Brad Parrish would provide an overview and answer Council's questions. In 1988, Mr. Brentlinger opened the dealership in Dubin. It has become very successful and now carr'es 15 luxury brand automobiles. The proposed pan will allow BMW and Mini to move back to the main campus, grow and expand. Council's original charge to them was to provide striking, innovative and noteworthy architecture. They accomplished that with the ong'nal buIdings and are trying to continue the common threads and make this building as successful as the original. Brad Parrish Architectgral Alliance, 165 N. 5th Street. �o'umbus, stated that he has been working with Mark Brendinger the past three years in developing the Volvo Porsche expansion. A critical, goal of that project was to complement and complete the existing facility and bring the energy of the campus toward the US 33 corridor. With this proposed plan, the same goa' would be continued with the overal' sate pla-i and architecture; with the inner, group display where customers can view al: the brands as they come on site; and with continuing the d "sp,ay fingers. It was `mportant to his client not to create a "back of the building" look w th service and emp oyee cars, and the existing pan provides a pond and heavy evergreen screening to hide that area. That concept will be continued 'n the new phase. A dense, evergreen screen will be provided on the backside of the new building to hide the Ioading dock and employee park °ng. The current architectura: elements, materials and colors will also be continued with the new building. To address PZC's concerns about the truck - turning radius, a second curbcut s proposed. They deve oped the elevations with the ntent of assuring that the s�gnage works w`th the architecture of the buildings. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Meeting U�. , C �^* I— Dublin City Cou ^ci. February 27, 2012 Be 22 Mr. Reiner referred to section 2, which is a cut showing a three -foot earth mound. It appears that the base elevation used for US 33 was 915. The screen ng for the cars will be juniper and burning bush. Is that intended to hide a'' but the tops of the cars within the display area? Mr. Parrish responded that the current fingers on the site have broadmoor junipers at the tip, which are one foot in height. On the proposed plan, there is a burning bush that outlines all the fingers, and in the webs of the fingers, there will be dense yews. Layering will be emp oyed. In regard to the slope of the fingers, a grading plan is depicted in Diagram C -6.1. There is a continuous s'ope down to U.S. 33. The cars �k: be screened by the three -foot mound as we', as a two -foot hedge. Mr. Reiner noted that at the display fingers, there will be a pant that grows Fve or six feet tall. Mr. Parrish stated that is the dwarf burning bush. The trimming would be at the discreCon of the owner, as the Code requires only a 24-inch high display screen. Ms. Husak noted that the Code does not a "ow for that lower display along freeways. The applicant is assuring on -y the lower screening that is allowed for vehicle display, which is an internal- oriented display. Mayor Leck'ider inquired T Mr. Reiner is suggesting that this screening is not desirable. Mr. Reiner responded that, typically, car dea'erships prefer a plan that places the cars n a prominent position that is viewable from the road. He was curious because the proposed pla,;t grows 5 -6 feet, which wi] require a rigorous maintenance program, and probably could not be kept at the low height. Mr. Parrish responded that the dwarf burning bush already exists in the current fingers, and they were trying to continue an existing material. Mr. Reiner inquired if all the fingers will be wrapped with this shrub. Mr. Parrish confirmed that they would. Mrs. Boring stated that Council made a conscious effort years ago to assure that the view from U.S. 33 would not be of auto dealersh'ps, and staff has tr�ed to perpetuate that. What percent of frontage does the Code permit for this use? Ms. Husak responded that the Code permits 25 percent of the street frontage, exc uding freeways. All of the City's vehicular use areas – driveways, parking lots, are ~equired to have a 3 -1/2 foot screen. However, the Code permits car dealerships to have a one foot in place of the 3 -1/2 foot shrub along their street frontage. Vice Mayor Sa!ay stated that the applicant has 'ndicated that he wants his disp ".ay to be more 'nterna.'y oriented, so the visibility from 161/33 is not as important to them. Ms. Husak that the on'y area in which they are showing a one -foot screen is in the upper box -;`ke area off Venture Drive. A:s other areas have, at a minimum, a 3 -1/2 foot planting, per Code requirements for all vehicular use areas. Mayor Lecklider stated that, although he has not been enthus'astic about the finger display, he appreciates the symmetry that they are trying to accomplish and ikes the landscaping. Mr. Keenan stated that in his ~ev ;ew of the p'an, he did not see anything re'evant to pond safety issues. He assumes the pond was designed accordingly, in view of recent experiences. Ms. Husak respo ^ded that a barrier is proposed, which wil. match the materials of the ui'd°ng. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Meeting _O.L�� 10_ .'Q, Dublin City Council February 27, 2012 Rage 23 Mr Keenan stated that this development will be located very close to the U.S. 33 right -of -way. He assumes this will not impede the City's ability to obtain right -of -way to expa d the roadway. Is there sufficient room there to add another lane or two? Mr. Hammersmith responded that there is sufficient room within the existing limited access right -of -way. Mr. Keenan asked if such an expansion could damage the pond, causing the City an add'tional expense. Mr. Hammersmith responded that it would not, but staff does not anticipate the need for additiona right -of -way acquisition. Mr. Re'ner stated that in the actual screened area (not display area), which borders the lake, the landscape element has been switched to an evergreen element. Mr. Parrish responded that is correct, but it will also be a two -foot screen that will buffer the customer parking area. Mr. Re ner noted that element will grow to four feet, providing a very good screening element. Mr. Parish responded that the intent is to s- owcase the bui dings and the car display plaza with the goal of attract rig peop!e to the campus. MAG 's a destination. Vice Mayor Salay inquired the approx mate ocation of the sign 'n the wate -. M,. Parrish pointed it out. Vice Mayor Salay inquired if it would be a straight MAG sign with no branding. Mr. Parrish responded that there would be no branding. Vice Mayor Salay inquired the !eight. Mr. Parrish responded that it will be ten °eet from the water leve.. The existing MAG sign, which is low, w1l be removed. There will be one MAG dealership s'gn for the unified campus. Vice Mayor Salay stated that in one of the buildings in the Post Road campus, there s a lit sign located some distance back from the glass. Because of the size of the sign, and the fact that it :s lit, it is prominent. Was that part of the sign package? It was briefly discussed, as reflected in the PZC minutes. Are there plans to relocate that more internal to the building? Ms. Husak responded that nothing in their plan addresses that. The discussion at PZC concerned the Volvo sign. It is three feet behind the window area, and typica ly, the C7ty does not regulate a sign at that internal distance. It was not in their Fna development p'an; :t is not part of their sign package. Vice Mayor Salay resporded that if it is not required to be part of the sign package, the City does not regulate it. Ms. Husak confirmed that is correct. Vice Mayor Salay stated that staff recommends requ ring a six foot mound, yet there is a pond and a 10 -foot sign. She apprec ates what staff is trying to achieve, but she is unsure how that will work with the remainder of the site. Would a six -foot mound hide the pond? The pond is an attractive element. Ms. Husak clarified that the six -foot mound would begi'i where the pond ends and where the car display starts. Vice Mayor Salay stated that there m ght be benefit in an undulating, rather than straight, mound. The City has recent'y moved from very consistent mound restrictions to variations in mound height, and a mound varying from three feet to six feet might be more attract've in this location. Ms. Husak responded that staff has discussed this with the applicant. She requested Mr. Parrish to respond. Mr. Parish responded that there are 60 feet from the right -of -way to the display fingers. They have spread the mound over the area, 30 feet up and 30 feet down, 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Meetine Dublin City Council _ February 27. 2012 jtge 24 due to the existing orchard of trees. This w acIveve a more consistent bend across the frontage. Ms. Chinnici Zuercher stated that her understand ng from staff's presentation was t ^at the development text had been cleaned up a few years ago to continue with a three - foot mound. Ms. Husak responded that the original development text for the MAG site requ'.red o screening. Because the original text was not detailed or restrictive, when the Volvo addition with two acres was later added to the site, staff wrote more detailed text to reflect the existing conditons and requirements for the s'te, but the existing no screening requirement was continued. Ms. Ch :nnici- Zuercher'nquired the -eason that a six -foot mound is requested at this time. Ms. Husak responded that at the time of the expansion for Volvo, Council indicated that they were not supportive of requiring no screening, but because there was an existing condition that would not be impacted by the Volvo addition, approval was given. Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher stated that she cannot support staff's recommendation for two reasons. First, the City typically attempts to have consistent landscaping in front of the same business. In addition, based on Mr. Reiner's comments, what the app�'cant is already recommending will He the cars. Therefore, what would norma: y be accomplished with a six -foot mound wi: be accomplished by the landscaping. Mayor Leck.ider inquired 'f what she is suggesting is something less than what staff has proposed and the app icant has indicated he is wiling to do. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher responded that she does not see the benefit of a six -foot mound; it may actua'ly look very odd. Mr. Keenan stated that he agrees that the lower elevation would be more attractive. Ms. Chinnici- Zuercher stated that she would support the plan as recommended by the P "anning Commission. Mr. Gerber stated that he would also not support the additiona condition for a six -foot mound. Mayor _eck ider inquired f he would not support greater mounding, but would prefer the cars to be more visib e. Mr. Keenan stated that more pond will be visible, but not more cars Mr. Gerber responded that he does not be;leve more cars would be v s'bie, and it is important to have cons stent landscaping through that whole area. Mrs. Boring inquired if the Planning Commission agreed that the mound would be three feet in front of the building, then six feet further down. Ms. Husak responded that the Commission orig nally sa d no mounding would be required, but because the applicant was aware that staff had serious concerns, he suggested a compromise of a three -foot mound beginning at the end of the pond to the approximate point of the yellow line on the diagram, and then a six -foot mou ^c 0" tie undeveloped parcel. Ms. Chinnici - Zuercher stated that she does not have an object on to a six foot moi-nd :n the area of the undeveloped land. Mr. Re'ner inquired if there's a proposed use for the undeveloped parcel. Mr. Parrish responded that none is proposed at this time. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of .►eeun_ Dublin City Council _ February_ 27,,,201 _ ?age 25 Mr. Reiner stated that this plan appears to wrap around in a very conc'usive way, which signals to him that the last parcel will be sold and utilized in some other manner. Mayor Lecklider inquired if Council is in agreement concerning the fourth condition recommended by staff. Mrs. Boring stated that she believes Council does not support staff's recommendation, which was proposed because of their past experience. Council members support PZC's recommendation, to which the applicant has agreed, for a three -foot mound in front of this building and a six -foot mound in front of the undeveloped parcel. Vice Mayor clarified that Council members do not support the fourth condition. Mrs. Asked why the trees are to be placed in a 3 pattern versus being scattered? Ms. Husak responded that the intent was to ach;eve a more forma 'zed grove design. Mayor Lecklider inquired when the landscaping would be installed. Mr. Parrish responded that the project schedule indicates a March 2013 completion, which means the andscaping would be installed in the less desirable planting season of January- February. Mayor Leck ider stated that there are many tree rows within Dub 'n, which are requ red to be preserved. In this `nsta ^ce, he was not pleased to see that tree row removed. He appreciates the business that MAG brings to the community. Unfortunately, this is not the first example of that type of behavior — engaging in a practice prohibited by Code and asking for forgiveness later. Thankfully, he does ^ot see an example of where th's could occur again. However, now the City must look at this site without the screening that could have been provided by a tree row. The indication is that w .I be the cond.tion for approximately two years and he is :ot pleased with this situation. Mr. Reiner stated that he a;so does not support the fourth condition, because there is a 'andscape redundancy. However, he does appreciate mounding, which is a permanent amen'ty, regardless of the shrubbery that may be added. He appreciates staff's efforts, and Council is not d'ssuading staff from those efforts. Vice Mayor Sa.ay a'so thanked staff for their efforts concerning the mound and encouraged them to continue to do the same in the future. --tere will be a second reading /pub: °c hearing on March 12. Council recessed briefly at 9:58 p.m., and the meeting resumed at 10:01 pm.] STAFF COMMENTS Ms. Grigsbv stated that at Counci"s goa - setting retreat on Friday, there was some discussion regarding the proposed regional economic development agreement. This agreement discussion involves the economic development staff and Mayors, City Managers of neighboring jurisdictions. Considerable progress has been ach'eved and a level of satisfaction with what has been proposed. She antic7pates sharing draft information to Council for consideration at their March 26 regular meeting. If Council is satisfied with the information, legislation will be prepared for introduction at the April 23 Council meeting. Mayor Lecklider asked for additional information. Ms. Grigsby responded that this matter relates to the use of economic development agreements. The economic development staff from neighboring jurisdictions have been meeting to discuss this issue, and Mayor /City Manager discussions have occurred 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive �Clityof 6335 Perilnetar Loop Road Dublin Midwestern Aube Group PUD — BMW & Mini Rezoning /preliminary Development Plan Land use and Lang Rnal Development Plan Range Planning Incorporating approximately $.73 acres to the MMwestern Auto Group Planned spat, ShLer Rub ohb ) 4 0 Road gn, 43016.123b PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 0** 614.410.4600 45,000-square-fad building addition for the BMW and Mini ftrichises. The site is rau 614.410.4747 RECORD OF ACTION www, dublinoh lousa. grn Intersection with Perimeter Drive. Request: 3ANUARY 12, 2012 The Planning and Zoning Commisslon took the following action at this meeting: 1. 04AG Punned Dhtrk:t 6335 Perilnetar Loop Road PMJMS r Celrber Planned District, Subareas D and 3 -1 SB25 Venture Drhre Midwestern Aube Group PUD — BMW & Mini Rezoning /preliminary Development Plan 11- CM /PDP /FDP Rnal Development Plan Proposal. Incorporating approximately $.73 acres to the MMwestern Auto Group Planned ]ohn Mardt Unit Development District to expand the automobile dealership campus with a )mph Budde 45,000-square-fad building addition for the BMW and Mini ftrichises. The site is located on the south side of Venture Drive, approArnately 750 feet south of the Intersection with Perimeter Drive. Request: Review and reaorrinv plosion of approval to City Council of a rezoning with a preliminary development plan and review and approval of a final development On under the Planned Dlstrkt provisions of Zoning Code Section 153.o5o Applicant: Tim Galli, Car MAG Park LLC and Brentlinger Real Estate Co, LLC; represented by Ben W. Male, Jr., Smith and Hale LLC. Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner ii. Contact Information' (614) 410Ab75, chusak@dublin.oh,us MOTION #1: To rebommend approval to Qty Council of this rezoning with preliminary development plan because this proposal oomplies with the rezoning/prellminary development plan cMeria, provides the opportunity for the retention of a sumessful business within the city, and indudes a cohesive campus devdopnment, with three a xwitions: 1) That the development text be revised to permit b" replacement off -site on the adjacent parcel to the 2) That the text be revised to permit only one dealership ldentMc tion sign to serve the entire sit ', and 3) That the text be revised to require Interior signs to be located a minlmum of three feet away from any windows or exterior walls. 0 Brad Parish, Architectural Alliance, on behalf of the applicant, agreed to the conditions, VOTE: 7-0. RESULT: Approval of this rezoning with preliminary development plan was recommended to City Council. RECORDED VOTES; Chris Amomse Groomes Yes Richard Taylor Yes Todd Zimmerman Yes Warren Fishman Yes Amy Kramb Yes ]ohn Mardt Yes )mph Budde Yes Page 1 of 2 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION 3ANUARY 12, 2012 I. NAG Planned Dh&k:t 6335 Perimeter Loop Road Perimeter Center Planned Disbict, Subareas D and 3-1 5825 Venture Delve MW W6 tern Auto Group PUD- 8MW & Mini Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan 11- 049Z/PDP/FDP Final Development Plan MOTION #2: To approve this flrhal development On because this proposal complies with the proposed development text and preliminary development plan, the final development plan criteria and existing development In the area with nine conditions: 1) That the plans be revised to eliminate the accent colors proposed on the building elevations; 2) That the applicant provide an aooemsible path from the BMW /Mini building to the public way and the Plans be revised prior to the issuance of a building permit 3) That the proposed campus IderMaidon sign be revised to meet the 15 -foot height requberrient spediled within the development text; 4) That the applicant eliminate either the existing or the proposed dealership identification ground sign along the US 33/SR 161 frontage; 5) That the brand names {BMW and Mini] proposed on the entrance walls leading to the service areas should be eliminated from the proposal; 6) That deddtmus trees be Incorporated every 80 fleet Into the 304 -foot stretch of proposed vehicular use area a" Venttitre Drive; 7) That the exterior building finish materials be revised to match what is used In Subarea A; 8) that a fountain and aerator be incorporated into the eastern portion of the decorative pond and an aerator be Incorporated Into the east stonmwater management pond to provide suffdenrt aeration; and 9) That the applicant work with Planning to field -verify the installation of the proposed junipers along the north side of the decorative pond • Brad Parish, Architecture Alliance, on behalf of the applicant, agreed W the conditions. VOTE: 7-0. RESULT: This final development plan was approved. RECORDED VOTES: Chris Amorose Groomes Yes Richard Taylor Yes Todd Zimmerman Yes Warren Fishman Yes Amy Krarnb Yes ,John Bard Yes Joseph Budde Yes STAFF CERTIFICATION a(q ) /*j 4C Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner II Page 2of2 21.032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 12, 2012 — Minutes Page 1 of 7 1. MAG Planned District 6335 Perimeter Loop Road Perimeter Center Planned District, Subareas D and 3 -1 5825 Venture Drive Midwestern Auto Group PUD — BMW & Mini Rezoning/ Preliminary Development Plan 11- 049Z /PDP /FDP Final Development Plan Chris Amorose Grooms said the following application involves incorporating approximately 8.73 acres to the Midwestern Auto Group Planned Unit Development District to expand the automobile dealership campus with a 45,000- square -foot building addition for the BMW and Mini franchises. She said the site is located on the south side of Venture Drive approximately 750 feet south of the intersection of Perimeter Drive. She said the application also includes a Final Development Plan for all site improvement details. She said the application consists of two components; the Rezoning with a Preliminary Development Plan and a Final Development Plan. She said there will be two motions; the Rezoning Preliminary will go to Council for final decision. She said the Commission has the final authority on the Final Development Plan application. Claudia Husak said this is a combined application for a Rezoning with a Preliminary Development Plan and a Final Development Plan for the MAG Planned Unit Development (PUD). She said the applicant did provide an informal introduction of this case in October 2011. Ms. Husak said approximately 24 acres will become the MAG PUD District, we are incorporating the existing MAG campus which is about 15 acres and currently vacant land into a unified planned district for MAG. She said the applicant is removing portions of Subarea D, from Perimeter Center, which is primary an office center, and Subarea 3-1, which was created for MAG in 2008 for vehicle storage while constructing the Volvo addition. Ms. Husak said there will be two subareas; Subarea A remains unchanged, the development text for the subarea is the same one this Board approved in 2009. She said Subarea B, the new area, is the eight acres being removed from Perimeter Center. She said the development text for Subarea B is modeled along the lines of Subarea A. She said a lot of the language, development standards, and regulations are repeated. She said there is an access point on Venture Drive which is being incorporated with this rezoning; the intention is for customers to use the loop road around the site with primary access from Perimeter Loop Road and Venture Drive. She said there are two additional display fingers along the west side of the site to continue the design from the original campus. Ms. Husak said the retention pond on the east side is included in this proposal; it is designed to manage stormwater for the site to be developed and the land to the east. She said the decorative pond along US 33 is also in this proposal. She said for the existing subarea the applicant did not have to provide screening along US 33 as required in the Zoning Code. Ms. Husak said staff has advised the applicant to place screening in this area for the new development site. She said in October the Commission was supportive of continuing what exists today and to provide a unified landscape area along the highway. She said the applicant is proposing three foot tall screening where the Code would require a six foot tall screen. She said there is a mound and landscape trees. Ms. Husak said staff recommends the applicant continue with the screening as required in the Code due to the concerns of City Council. She said the applicant has provided a section drawing to give a preview of the site, the first section looks across the decorative pond toward the BMW portion of the building. She said there are a landscape screen and a drive aisle. She said the second section looks toward the first car display finger and the three -foot mound is included with the orchard like tree arrangement. She said there is a shrub hedge where the display area would start. She said the last section looks across the stormwater management pond toward the northern area. Ms. Husak said the applicant is proposing a total of 44,000 square feet of building, they are proposing to construct 40,000 square feet and have included a 4,000- square -foot area which would be in the vehicle service area. She said the applicant has revised the floor plan of the building moving both show rooms 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW. Mini. Aurb \ /antura rlri- Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 12, 2012 — Minutes Page 2 of 7 closer to the highway. She said BMW is in the western portion of the building and the Mini showroom is in the eastern portion. She said all of the service function is towards the rear of the building; there is a non - retail car wash for customers only, and a truck route which would have vehicle delivery off Venture Drive. Ms. Husak said the proposal meets the Code in terms of parking setbacks and lot coverage. She said they are including the lower level service drive currently on the premises. She said the modern look is continued with the same material as is on the existing building. She said the applicant includes the brightly colored accents in the Mini showroom which the Commission requested be removed. She said there is a condition to remove the brightly colored accents. Ms. Husak said the applicant is continuing with the sign details which are in the existing development. She said the applicant is proposing a ten -foot dealership identification sign, which will be incorporated within the pond. She said the applicant currently has a dealership identification sign on their current campus, staff is requesting the text be revised to only allow one of the signs and for the Final Development Plan to be revised to show only one sign. Ms. Husak said a campus identification sign is also being proposed, those signs do exist on the other entrances to the site and is an appropriate sign to have. She said there is a detail that shows the sign as 15 feet, 4 inches, it is in the Development Text to be 15 feet. She said we are requiring that is revised. She said the applicant is proposing a MAG Mini wall sign on the eastern elevation. She said there will be a BMW sign on the southern elevation. She said both signs have been revised to meet the 15 -foot height limitation which is in the Zoning Code. Ms. Husak said the applicant shows signs on the two ramps into the service area and those signs include the names of the franchises, staff requests those are removed because they are not permitted. Richard Taylor asked if the signs are going into the service area. Ms. Husak said a service sign would be permitted; it is the BMW and Mini signs that are not permitted. Chris Amorose Grooms said she believes the signs already exist; and asked are those not approved signs. Ms. Husak said they have free standing identification signs near the ramps. Ms. Husak said Planning is recommending approval of the rezoning with the Preliminary Development Plan with three conditions: 1) That the development text be revised to require property perimeter screening from US 33/ SR 161 as required by the Zoning Code; 2) That the development text be revised to permit tree replacement off -site on the adjacent parcel to the east; and, 3) That only one dealership identification sign be permitted to serve the entire site. Ms. Husak said for the Final Development Plan, Planning is recommending approval with seven conditions: 1) That the plans be revised to eliminate the accent colors proposed on the building elevations; 2) That the applicant provide an accessible path from the BMW /Mini building to the public way and the plans be revised prior to the issuance of a building permit; 3) That the proposed campus identification sign be revised to meet the 15 -foot height requirement specified within the development text; 4) That the applicant eliminate either the existing or the proposed dealership identification ground sign along the US 33 /SR 161 frontage; 21- O32AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 12, 2012 — Minutes Page 3 of 7 5) That the brand names (BMW and Mini) proposed on the entrance walls leading to the service areas should be eliminated from the proposal; 6) That deciduous trees be incorporated every 80 feet into the 300 -foot stretch of proposed vehicular use area along Venture Drive; and 7) That the plans be revised to show adherence to the Code - required property perimeter screening along US 33 /SR 161six -foot wall, planting, mound, hedge or combination thereof plus one tree for every 30 feet. Ben Hale Jr., 37 West Broad Street, Columbus Ohio, said the applicant has tried to incorporate the comments from the last meeting. He said in earlier drawings there were cars that faced US 33, where the pond is located; those have been removed so there is not a display in the area of the pond. He said the pond is atheistic; parking faces the building for customers. Brad Parish, Architecture Alliance, 165 North 5t' Street, Columbus Ohio, said with the completion of the Volvo and Porsche expansion last year, it is the desire of MAG to relocate the BMW and Mini facility currently on Post Road to this site. He said the wall signs have been lowered to 15 feet, and removed the vehicle display pad. He said the design has been revised to include the overall footprint of the building by combining some of the programs within the building, which is why the Mini showroom is now located on the front of the building along SR 161. Mr. Parish said we did not see a need to have an additional curb cut along Venture Drive, the elimination allowed customers to be controlled around the loop on -site and create all service traffic on one curb cut along Venture Drive. He said the mounding was reduced on the SR 161 frontage from six feet to three feet. He said the previous recommendation was to continue with what is currently there, which was zero mounding. He said a good compromise would be to propose a three -foot mound along SR 161 and continue the landscape orchard. Mr. Parish said we agreed to have a six -foot mound on the adjacent property. He said the east side of the pond would start a three -foot mound which would gradually go to six feet at the east property line to Children's Hospital. Mr. Parish said for the Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan we would like to keep the three -foot mound as proposed, the development text will be revised to allow the tree replacement on the adjacent parcel to the east. He said the reason we have two subareas for this PUD is there are two different investor groups that invest in both subareas. He said from a tax and vesting standpoint it is best to keep them as separate as possible. He said there is a potential that BMW could be sold to another dealer. He said they would like to keep both signs so MAG has an identity and the adjacent property, if sold, could have its own identity. Mr. Parish said we agree with all of the conditions for the Final Development Plan except for the one concerning the mound, we would like to keep the mound. Ms. Amorose Grooms asked if the signs are on the service bays in the other building. Mr. Parish said they are, the word Service is at the top of the concrete wall, at the top of the ramp there are brand identification signs. Richard Taylor asked if not having the signs will cause problems. Mr. Parish said no, they were wanted on the wall to direct the customers. Ms. Husak said staff is suggesting the signs can be used that are on the exisitng site. She said they are identified in the development text as Brand Identification Signs. Mr. Parish said that type of sign it is a better solution for us. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Comm scion January 12, 2012 — Minutes Page 4 of 7 John Hardt asked if the BMW being proposed is text or a logo. Mr. Parish said text. He said it is his understanding the word service and the arrow would remain but the BMW would be removed. Mr. Hardt asked why not have BMW Service in one line of text. Mr. Parish said they are not objecting to removing the word BMW. Amy Kramb said she is in agreement with the mound going from three feet to six feet. She said she agrees with two dealership signs; specify that only one sign can be placed in the pond. Ms. Kramb asked if wall signs can have logos. Ms. Husak said yes. Ms. Kramb said in the development text it states the logos may exceed size limits imposed by the City of Dublin. Ms. Husak said that does not apply to the wall signs. Ms. Kramb said we already allow them to exceed the logo limit in Subarea A. Ms. Husak said some of the signs have just the logo. She said the wall logos cannot exceed 20 percent. Ms. Kramb asked if the logos can have as many colors as necessary. Ms. Husak said yes. Ms. Kramb asked if the directional signs have logos. Ms. Husak said no. Ms. Kramb said in the proposed development text, page 14, D2, Standard Signs, Interior Signs; should we specify that means not attached to windows. She said this would mean they could attach something to the inside of the window and it can be as large as they want, they can do what they want to the interior of the building. Ms. Husak said it will be specified it is a certain distance from the window. Ms. Kramb said anything can be placed on the interior of the window as long as it is a specific distance away from the window. John Hardt said he is in agreement with the objective of City Council to have screens along SR 161. He said since half the campus has been developed with one type of treatment it does not make sense to change it in the middle of the campus. He said he would like the east and west to have the same treatment. Mr. Hardt said he does not have a problem with two dealer identification signs, the design should match. Ms. Husak said the Subarea A text limits the height of the sign to what is existing, we would have to revise the text to allow the signs to match. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Comm scion January 12, 2012 — Minutes Page 5 of 7 Mr. Hardt said it looks like there are a few catch basins dumping into the pond, he was worried the water may stagnate. He asked what the intent was behind the stucco and materials not being the same as the existing building. Mr. Parish said the intent with the new code of 2009, and making a continuous insulation on the exterior of the building was that EFIS would allow us to do that as opposed to stucco. Mr. Hardt said Mr. Parish is talking about the Energy Code, in order to meet it one has to put the insulation on the outward side. He said he is not in favor of changing the finish materials on the outside of the building. Joe Budde said he agrees that the transition of the mounding from three feet to six feet makes sense. He said the two MAG signs should be of similar material and change the smaller one to one of the brands. He said he likes the Mini colors on the front of the building. Warren Fishman said he is not in favor of the two signs. He said if the ownership does change the applicant should come back to the Commission and apply for two signs. He said if the pond was made larger and made into a retention pond it would solve the flow problem, you said you were going to put a three foot mound behind the pond, it will make for a real dramatic look from the road. He said he would rather stick to the Code and make the mound six feet. Todd Zimmerman said there has to be something that can be done for the stucco problem. He said he agrees with the conditions staff has. He said the mounding is half of what Code requires. He said if we stay with the conditions we can stay with the Code and we can allow Council to remove conditions. Richard Taylor said he would prefer to see a single sign along SR 161 because it is a very distinctive building. He said the original intent of the screening in the Code was along the SR 161 along the lines of car dealerships that had large areas of cars sitting closer to the street; it was intended to avoid the parking lot appearance. He said in this case, there is a lot more architectural and decorative design and a lot of landscaping. He said he is inclined to not want to see the mound increase. Mr. Taylor said by not having the mound it allows the new building to be the signage and stand out. He said he liked the transition to where there is no mound to where the mound begins with a pond and gradually transition up from the three feet to the six feet. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she agrees with the step increase of the mounding, there are no indications in the drawing of any fixtures in the pond. She said it is going to need to have some water moving. She asked if there was a makeup well to assure the elevation of the pond. Mr. Parish said yes, there is a well to supply this front pond. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she would like to see a bubbler on the west side of the pond; on the east end there should be a fountain. She said there needs to be something to help aerate the water to keep it a living system. She said the makeup well is not going to service the pond to the east, there will need to be some sort of aeration in that pond or it will cover with algae. Ms. Amorose Groomes said the pond is a great amenity along there and for that she is willing to sacrifice some of the mound. She said the intention of the mounds was to hide parking lots and there are not any parking lots here, the cars are tucked behind the building. She said she would like the mound on the blank parcel to be constructed at the time this building is constructed. Ms. Amorose Groomes said the Staff Report mentions a relocation of trees to the parcel to the east; why relocate the trees to the east, it is only going to cause a problem when the owners of the parcel build. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 12, 2012 — Minutes Page 6 of 7 Ms. Husak said the intent is to provide additional screening to the vehicular use area and accommodate tree replacement. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there are no other trees being relocated. She said it appears the trees are Seagreen Juniper that will be eight feet off the back of the curb, she said that is a great screening hedge. She said it needs to be held far enough off the curb that it can mature without growing over the curb lines. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she is not in favor of a second sign on the property, if it were to sell; the new owner will need to come back with a sign package. She said she would like to see the buildings look as harmonious as possible and would like to see the stucco continue. Ms. Amorose Groomes said in terms of the delivery truck turn around, she does not agree with how the truck drivers are expected to turn around in a parking lot full of new cars. She said in the long term the delivery issue needs to be solved. Ms. Kramb said she does not understand why the drive aisle that runs parallel to Venture Drive was not extended so they can pull in and straight out. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if the car wash will serve the entire property. Ms. Husak said there is an interior car wash in the existing building. Ms. Amorose Groomes said the stucco issue is outstanding and there is disparity about the mounding. Ms. Kramb asked if there was a way to connect the drive, but put up a gate that can be opened when the delivery truck arrives. Mr. Parish said the applicant is in support for adding a no loading sign on Venture Drive. Mr. Fishman said he would rather see pond rather than mound. Ms. Amorose Groomes said the Commission would like staff to work with the applicant to pursue a resolution to use stucco. Ms. Husak said it sounds like we can move forward with the Rezoning, the material they are proposing is a Final Development Plan detail. She said the applicant is on a tight timeframe and needs to be reviewed by Council. Mr. Hardt said the resolution of the stucco issue is a technical issue about how the wall is constructed. Mr. Parish said the applicant is okay with using stucco. Mr. Hale said we would like to keep the sign in the pond and would like it to be fifteen feet. He said we would like to come back as an Amended Final Development Plan to add another sign. Mr. Parish said we would like to increase the sign to fifteen feet. Mr. Zimmerman said fifteen feet of sign is way too much in a pond. Mr. Parish said along SR 161 for the duration of the pond there is a three -foot safety barrier will be installed which covers part of the sign. Ms. Amorose Groomes said there is support for a ten -foot sign. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 12, 2012 — Minutes Page 7 of 7 Ms. Amorose Groomes said that the first motion is with respect to the Rezoning with the Preliminary Development Plan and there are three revised conditions. Motion and Vote — Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Mr. Taylor made a motion to recommend approval to City Council of this rezoning with preliminary development plan because this proposal complies with the rezoning /preliminary development plan criteria, provides the opportunity for the retention of a successful business within the city, and includes a cohesive campus development, with three conditions: 1) That the development text be revised to permit tree replacement off -site on the adjacent parcel to the east; 2) That the text be revised to permit only one dealership identification sign to serve the entire site; and 3) That the text be revised to require interior signs to be located a minimum of three feet away from any windows or exterior walls. Mr. Parish agreed to the conditions. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Budde, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 7 — 0.) Ms. Amorose Groomes said that the second motion is with respect to the Final Development Plan and there are nine revised conditions there were seven in the Planning Report and they have been amended. Mr. Parish agreed to the conditions. Motion and Vote — Final Development Plan Mr. Taylor made a motion, seconded by Mr. Zimmerman, to approve the Final Development Plan because this proposal complies with the proposed development text and criteria and existing development in the area with nine conditions: 1) That the plans be revised to eliminate the accent colors proposed on the building elevations; 2) That the applicant provide an accessible path from the BMW /Mini building to the public way and the plans be revised prior to the issuance of a building permit; 3) That the proposed campus identification sign be revised to meet the 15 -foot height requirement specified within the development text; 4) That the applicant eliminate either the existing or the proposed dealership identification ground sign along the US 33 /SR 161 frontage; 5) That the brand names (BMW and Mini) proposed on the entrance walls leading to the service areas should be eliminated from the proposal; 6) That deciduous trees be incorporated every 80 feet into the 300 -foot stretch of proposed vehicular use area along Venture Drive; 7) That the exterior building finish materials be revised to match what is used in Subarea A; 8) That a fountain and aerator be incorporated into the eastern portion of the decorative pond and an aerator be incorporated into the east stormwater management pond to provide sufficient aeration; and 9) That the applicant work with Planning to field- verify the installation of the proposed junipers along the north side of the decorative pond The vote was as follows: Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Budde, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 7 — 0.) 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive twA w. ens Lon mows neNd sm shle 4vo ftaa DUIDONONO uM16.1M ftWO/ M. 616 -4104AW IV= 6144104747 w0b $HW W W W4 1b$tph= PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF DISCUSSION OCTOBER 6, 2011 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting; 1. Perimeter Center Planned DimblM Subareas D and 7 -1 MAO BMW Bt Mint Venture Drive 11- 04}92 {PDP Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Final Development Plan Proposal: To Incorporate an additional 8.7 acres Into the Madwvestern Auto Group dealership campus to be developed with an approximately 46,314 square-foot automobile dealership for BMW and MInI as part of an exparrslon of the Midwestern Auto Group campus. The site is located on the south side of Venture Drive, appmxlrnat* 750 feet south of the lnterset#ton with Perimeter Drive. Request: Informal review and feedbadc of a future rezoning with preliminary devebpment plan and final development plan applkation. Applicant: MAG, Tim Gal 11; represented by Ben W. Hale, Jr., Smith and Hale Lit. Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, KCP Planner H. Contact Infonmtlon: (614) 41D -4675, chusak*dublln.oh.us RESULT: The Commission informally reviewed a proposal to Inmrporate an additional 8.7 acres Into the Midwestern Auto Group dealership campus to be developed with an approximately 46,E square -foot automobile dealership for BMW and Mlnl as part of an expansion of the Midwestern Auto Group campus. The site Is located on the south side of Venture Drive, approximately 750 feet south of the Intersection with Perimeter DM*. The Commissioners agreed that &fie proposed expansion of the MAG campus was appropriate, but that any rernalning land along US 33 should not be consider for car dealerships. While the Commisslon cornplemented the applicant on the proposed architecture, trey also suggested elimftwdng the bright colored accents from the elevations. The Commisslon was supportive of the proposed site design, requested that wall signs adhere to the 15 -foot height limit and suggeste l that loading areas be highlighted when the case comes back. A majority of the Comm& -slon wanted to see a continuation of the decreased screening from the highway as Is In place for the adsting dealership. STAN' CERTIFICATION 4,1,44 XQ Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner R 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive Dublin Flaming and Zoning convnlssWn Oftber 6, 2012 — Mirages Page 1 of 6 1. Perimeter Center Planned District, Subareas D and 3 -1- MAG BMW Ili Mini Venture Drive 11- 049ZIPDP Rezoning with Preliminary Development Plan Final Development Plan Chris Amorose Groomes Introduced this request for an informal review and feedback regarding a future rezoning with preliminary development plan and final development plan to incorporate an additional 8.7 acres Into the Midwestern Auto Dealership (MAG) campus to be devek4*d with a approximately 46,310 square foot dealership as part of an expansion of the campus located on the south side of Venture Drive approximately 750 feet south of the Intemectlori with Perimeter Drive. She said that no vote will be taken and no final decision will be made. She explained that the applicant was kx*Jrig for feedback and Input and the Commission typically limits informal discussions to 30 minutes. Claudia Husak said that the applicant had submitted a rezoning with preliminary development application and a simultaneous final development plan application so when this comes before the Commis ion next, they will be reviewing all the details of the development. She said a main reason for the application being submitted simultaneously is that the applicant has a lease for their facility on Post Road that is expiring, so they need to move forward fast to leave the site and find another location. She explained that Planning has requested the applicant rezone the whole MAG site Into one PUD that would be the overall encompassing MAG Dealership campus, mainly for administrative reasons. Ms. Husak presented the subarea map submitted by the applicant which showed Subarea A which includes everything approved In 2010 as part of the Volvo expansion that required a rezoning. She said Subarea B was the portion being discussed. She said the applicant has worked with Planning to create a development next that really models the development standards based on what already exists and what has worked in the past. Ms. Husak said explained that the remaining parcel, owned by the applicant and ,coated east of the proposal will continue to be looted In Perimeter Center, a very large planned district, and Is slated for offices. Ms. Husak said Planning had conversations with the applicant explaining that Planning is looking for an end here to the car dealerships meaning that the remaining site should stay in Perimeter Center, Subarea D, and should develop with office or institutional uses In the future, and that the proposed site while not necessarily meeting the Community Plan for commercial developments since it is calling for office, is the most logical expansion site for the MAG dealership. Ms. Husak said the applicant Is proposing a 46,000- square -foot car dealership for the BMW and Mini car franchises. She said they are proposing to have the building oriented in both directions so that the BMW dealership is to the south, located toward US 33 with the Mini showroom located and oriented toward Venture Drive. She said a car wash Is proposed for customers and vehicle display areas are proposed throughout the site. Ms. Husak said a large parking area for customer and employees Is also proposed. She said a consolidated storrriwater management facility Is proposed mainly on the adjacent parcel which Is intended to acommodate stormwater for this development, what Volvo has temporarily stored and for any development proposed on the east. She said the site design includes a decorative pond without any sbormwater management function. She said there is a required six -foot tall screening mound or combination mound/hedge with landscape and the applicant has towered the area where the pond is located and not done landscaping and mounding all the way across the highway. Ms. Husak said the proposed car display located behind the pond would not be permitted by Code, and the applicant is requesting feedback if the Commission would be supportive of that She said they would have to specifically allow It in their development text Ms. Husak said that City Council In the past has had a lot of concerns about cars being vls)ble from US 33 in this particular area and Subarea A was In the past permitted to not have their six -foot tall screening from the highway. She said that Planning discussed with the applicant that they could not be supportive of it. Ms. Husak said that the applicant has included a six -foot tall mound with trees as required by Code and there are sectlons that they have submitted as part of their application narkpt ttmt akn show that 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive Durbin Plan iing and Zoning Gommloon Odaber 6, 2011— Minutes Page 2 of 6 there is screening along the areas of car displays. She said that the applicant understands and agrees to not having any car display visible from the highway. Ms. Husak said that Planning would like the applicant to extend their mound which they have Indicated to some extent and the landscaping on the adjacent parcel to help with the screening of this particular area when traveling the highway. Ms. Husak said the applicant Is also proposing to continue the sign allowance from Subarea A, having wail signs here which are not in Subarea A. She said they also propose a MAG dealership ground sign to be located In the pond and entry feature-like signs and large directional signs. Ms. Husak said architecturally, the building Is approximately 30 feet tail, and the glass BMW showroom Is visible from US 33. She said on the Venture Drive elevation with Mini, there are higher portions of the buildings on both sides that show vehicles being displayed In those areas. She said the materials are proposed to be the same as are on the existing MAG building. She said the service areas are lowered typically to what Is currently going on where Is sort of a basement level service drive that can be accessed going down. Ms. Husak said that the wall signs proposed, particularly the BMW one, exceeds the Code required 15- foot height. She said that Subarea A has sign allowances at 25 feet tail, and the applicant is proposing to continue that, so Commission feedback is requested on that thought. Ms. Husak said as In the Bridge Street Code, logos are exempted from adhering from the three -color requirement. Ms. Husak said six discussion points were listed in the Planning Report and they were interested In hearing any other Commission concerns. Ben Hale, Jr., 37 West Brad Street, the attorney representing the applicant, said that It was dear that they had to move because the current location does not meet BMW standards, and BMW has told them they have to build a new faculty. He said their building lease expires In a little over a year. He said the owner prefers to have the dealerships where they are where he can control them from a business view. John Oney, Architectural Alliance, said they were complete with the Volvo and executive office corporate expansions, and they were ready to bring on BMW and Mini back to the main campus. Brad Parish, Architectural Alliance, regarding the window of display and the pond on US 33, he said it was at their Intention to use the 25 percent display window along that frontage. Ms. Husak clarified that Code does not allow this display window along highways. She explained that If the Commission was supportive, they were writing the development text so that It could be included as part of the development text, but it would not strictly meet the Code. Mr. Parish offered to answer any questions. Ms. Amorose Groomes invited public comment regarding this application. [There was none.] Joe Budde said from an informal review standpoint, he thought It looked wonderful and he liked the design. He said regarding the signs, the perspective of the size of the glass wall that it Is on looks okay to him. He said he liked the look of what was presented. He said he was not concerned about any of the details. Warren Fishman confirmed that this was going to be as big as the campus was going to get forever. Mr. Parish said that Mr. Brentlinger does not own any other brands that would go any further here. He said this completes the site and they are done with auto sales in this area. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive Dublin Na vkq and Zor" Commission October 6, 2011— M f"w Page 3 of 6 Mr. Fishman asked If there was a way that the qty could control that. He said that the zoning is expanded and there Is still land left. Ms. Husak said that land Is in a different zoning classification as Is the land that Is being discussed. She said what Is being proposed does not meet the Community Plan currently, and they are asking for approval of it anyway. She explained that it would be the same situation for the other property. Mr. Hardt said If they wanted to come back and put an auto dealership on the remaining developed land, they would have to come to the Commission and the applicant is aware that Planning would not be supportive of such a request. Richard Taylor recalled looking at this site previously and discussing the possibility of BMW being on this site. He said It was dearly staffed that was the end of It He said It was recorded in the meeting minutes. Mr. Parish said the way they are setting up the design with the fingers, there Is not a way to cross past the fingers, with just the whole loop of it. He said they were creating a circle, and It was done. Mr. Fishman said he had no problem with the architecture. Todd Zimmerman said the pond car display area just not work and he was not comfortable with It. He said he agreed with Planning's recommendation for the perimeter screening and the vehicle use and display. He said he could go with the signage changing and giving the leeway as Is on the other subarea because he knew It would stop. Mr. Zimmerman said the building was a very modem - looking step down design with the same look as the other side of the building, which was fine. He said he was glad to see the carwash and hoped that It stayed In the project. Awry Kramb asked if the signs are to be a maximum height of 18 feet, Ms. Husak clarifled that it was to be at IS feet on the building, to the top of the sign. She said that it is a variance of three feet from the Code. Ms. Kramb said the architecture was fine, but the red, green, and yellow colors around the doors are bazaar. Mr. Parish explained that the primary door colors were mandated by Mini and It has been carried through this design. Ms. Kramb said the yellow was just a random set of windows that look strange or odd. She said she was not strongly adamant about having as much mounding as is being required. She said she was okay as It was presented, but she did not think they needed to do the extreme that was being asked, but she did not know If there would be support for that. Ms. Amorose Groomes said similar was IGS with their pond. John Hardt said he agreed that this use was appropriate for the site and he agreed with Planning's comment that the eastern property line was about as far as he would like to see it go. He said that whether or not he agreed with the original decision to allow the existing MAG dealership to not screen the parking lots Is irrelevant because it was approved and existed. He said he did not see the logic In changing the landscape treatment In the middle of a campus, especially when they are working hard to make the campus a cohesive whole. He said he agreed, long term, they probably wanted to move away from it but when there Is a site that Is already half developed, changing in the middle of the stream does not make any sense. He said he would have no trouble in this Instance because of the existing development from deviating from the perimeter screening requirements he- hilt thrvinhr nv►rinriinn 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive MOM Planning and Zonlrg [ommimlon October 6, 2011— mhAes Page 4of6 should be required on the ofl4ce site. He noted the decorative pond being proposed does not serve a storrnwater function and he wanted to make sure In spite of that, that it did have Inflow and outflow In the final design so that It does not become stagnant. Mr. Hardt said to terns of architecture, he thought the buildings are very consistent with the existing buildings and he liked them and thought they. were pretty good. He suggested when this application Is seen again, he would like to see the renderings shown extended a little to the west so that the height of this building and the context of the building recently completed next door could be seen. Mr. Hardt said he was okay with the step down described and he understood that this was not going to be the exact same scale, but he could tell that it was not Goo big or small. Mr. Hardt said regarding the odors, he did not love them. He said the MAG campus was originally part of the Perimeter PUD which was populated dominantly by brick and stone traditional buildings, and obviously the MAG campus has been a great deal of latitude In their architecture with outstanding results. He said they had done an excellent job of creating some stellar, striking architecture without having to resort to ticks ks such as outlining pieces of the building In bright primary colors. He encouraged the applicants tD go back with Mini and discuss that. He said he was sure that Mini did not contemplate being a part of a larger campus where an architectural language has been established. Mr. Hardt said the existing development text established 15 feet as the maximum height for the signage and the Commission has held fast to that In the past Ms. Husak corrected Mr. Hardt and said the existing text allowed a 25 -foot maximum height for wail signs. She said the reason was that the Land Rover building has an existing wall sign that is taller than 15 feet. Mr. Hardt asked was when that was approved as a PUD. Ms. Husak said in 1998, when they originally came on board with the MAG development. Mr. Hardt asked If that was specifically approved for the Land Rover sign, or is it approved for the entire campus. Ms. Husak said R was not that specific. She explained that there is language In the text that says wall signs cannot exceed 25 feet. Mr. Parish said he thought the text language also said that it is one per development, but that Is Subarea A, versus Subarea B. Ms. Husak said she thought it was most likely that R was put In for Land Rover, but it was not that specific. Mr. Hardt amended his previous comment. He said whatever the text says today, he was Inclined to stick with and he was not inclined to want to deviate from that for this building. Mr. Taylor dittoed Mr. Hardt's comments about the architecture. He said he had no problem with varying from the screening requirement along the road. He said he liked the pond, but he was uncomfortable with using it for the car display In front. He said he was okay with the break in the mounding and the trees, and the pond, but he was not sure he was okay with the cars out there. Mr. Taylor recalled that the Commission had talked about the 15 -foot sign height In the Code on many different occasions on many different buildings. He said he understood that there Is an existing text requirement that deals with this. He said when the Commission has varied from that, it has been In cases where there was a new building and there was perhaps an error or whatever, but that has been pretty rare. Mr. Taylor said on this building, unless the height Is necessary to have that sign there, he did not see anything on the building Itself that requires the sign to be at that height. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive DubUn Planrft and ioNrg Comm%aw Odober 6, 2011— Minuets Page 5 of 6 Ms, Kramb preferred that signs adhere to the 15 -1oot limit since they are writing a new text Mr. Hardt pointed out that currently there is a parcel line between Subarea A and Subarea B and he assumed that as bent Is developed that will be combined or there will be something in the text regarding setbacks to make sure they deal with that. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she appreclated the architecture. She was not necessarily opposed to the pond being there, but she did not fed like It was a good place to display cars. She said they had been given some relief to see into the `window' as it were to come through there and they will have cars on the other side of that drive aisle which she believed was sufficient. She said she would like to see the wall sign to come down to within Code or maybe explore possibly a ground sign near the pond that could really look sharp and draw attention. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she agreed with Mr. Hardt's comment about the mounding. She said she was In favor of screening and mounding, however to switch gears In the middle of a project might look a little funny, so she would be Inclined to give a little leeway as far as that goes. She said where the pond area starts up, they need to go ahead and get that mounding In even though they do not have plans to develop that land at present. She said she would like to see the mounding go in and see the landscaping go In for the balance of the property that they own so that there will be no question when the next person comes In where the mound starts. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she was delighted that the carwash did not go where It was proposed last time. She said when they come back she would like to see the functionality of this facility and where the cars will be unloaded and so forth. She said she drove through this property yesterday and talked with a salesperson who pointed out that the lot was crowded. She wanted to ensure that there was enough area to unload the delivery trucks without having to be on Venture Drive and there Is enough navigatable space to do what they need to do to be successful at this property. Mr. Parish referred to Ms. Husak's comment about the architecture being two- sided. He said they were trying not to attempt to have a back of a house, but there are some functions such as delivery. He said between the two buildings would be an area where they could unload the vehicles. Ms. Amorose Groomes said right now, they had options, and If they choose not to exercise them, that was certainly their right, but It is not going to be the Commission's job to solve their problem when they are running out of space to park cars in the future. She asked that be on the Record. She reiterated that when they come back, they need to show where they are going to unload the new cars and convince the Commission that is going to work. Mr. Zimmerman requested a straw poll could be taken regarding the landscaping Issue so that Planning knows exactly which way the Commission is going to go. He said his thought was to stay with the Planning Report and have the mounding. Mr. Fishman said he agreed to the mounding because It was not as If you would not be able to see the site. He said he thought they should maintain the Code. Mr. Budde said he agreed with Mr. Taylor and Mr. Hardt that If the existing mounding is set in a certain way, he would like to see that followed through on this development. Ms. Kramb said she thought the mounding should begin at the stormwater pond and extend east. She said the landscaping should be the same as the parcel to the west. Mr. Budde said that the sign in the decorative pond was hard to read on the plan 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive Dubin Planr&V and Zoning Cor =Ww Omober 6, 2011— Minutes Page6Of6 Mr. Parish said the sign would just have the MAG letters. He said currently on Subarea A there are green MAG letters, and they would like to put that this time in the aerated pond for a display feature. He said the sign would not say BMW or Mini. He said the text will be written to include a dealer Identification sign on the pond. Mr. Hardt said he liked it. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked If there were any other questions. Mr. Parish said no, and thanked the Commission for their Input. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of _Dutdit►_Sdty�& Meetint ,m�vOM �ww rC ,pN„O K i Febavary 22, 2010 Page 10 20— da or this prnject vA** is move than 85 peraant plate. Dublin will be read for those costs. as In the agreement ff recbrrvnands tea Mayor Salay asked y the City of CaWmbus requested this change. W. Harrrnvamith that he behaves, on Owl me�eft the bus Leo 9188 now has more acity to take on this rev)t ally, they did not a that capadty. lutrs. Boring - d about the mmhdmum t The memo indica 000, but the redlined n Indkotes $350.000. Mr, mlth responded that ,D00 wag the original a t for both the design a the s quidition opals. number has riot owevef, the expects now the actual cost writ exeaed $350.000. . Soring Inquired N it wou posslble to ensure the a acqulsMon occurs W a van MWth Na m I tad Mr. Hamnwsln ed that the driving force ' be the Ohio Publlc W cornrnl,s o GMK rtte fad atatthe grant res that axrstn,dlon be feted In March 2011. The Cqy of rebus has made a ant to oomplete the Itlon within seven months, ek", a drnefrarM d tthe of the yam' has bee astgnated fo► C131106 4M of uiaitlon. Mr. reiFarred la Paragra/E� f Page othe of is�ff`! , wtraCtt irrdfcates 'Asa result is dt�ge In dirodloCity of CoMunbus, se sections of the AG req rnodiic�allon to all reforanaes to In leadng all property uisltbn for this proJed` ft iyroperty IaKbn In the original and went to Dater in an an adian, h 6e Dublln'9 case to la7 Ms. Readier raspo at Du gaing to and would ftmrom ha n relfturead_ Mr. Kaman irttqu whether. Ise, ►esPedlre perk wgldd punsltale ibr eminent domai Worts rasultttakes wtttdn its own j " dlaitart Ms. Readier nflrtreed that is oMr. Keen aW if each party ave the right to Wtiala a' Irk tetoe' and prooeed with Me o)ect. Ma. filer msp�onded atf M%o P+t'll;, Chinnld -Zuem her stn at the dates are ctttical. tre t7ttto Ptrh c Vlltxk9 missian grant may help ensure ci steyb scthedu the assumes that Dublin Coll nht s will have nt"fts to oanrtuan thV"-aam, ons in their rowecdve )+� " . Mr, Ha Pondod that there will regular me an IrK*nom to slay `On ta*' f�9IT)ef, yea; . BO&Q. yesM9. tGii- ZIICrC�76 {. yESi viC9 jfQr bltay, iBS: fY . I.t3Ckll, SECONR a11.10 ffA&NG - o l ES Ordinance 07 -10 Rezoning Approximabeiy 15AS Acres Located on the Southeast Corr<wr of the InterseWon of PertmeW Drive and Padrneter Loop Bowed wlthin Parirnetar Canter from PCO, Planned CantrnaMe DtWct (Subareas J and D) and PUD, Planned Unit Davelopmotd Dlsbid (Subarea J -1) to PUD, Planned Unit 15avaioprnent District. (MAO, Midwestam Auto Group, Volvo F.xpenslon –Case 09- 108ZIPop) Ms. Husak reviewed the mWor points of the appO wton, which will provide Improvements to the alte for a substantial building addlion to MAG (Midwestern Mite Group) to ac4ommcdsts the Volvo a*9nsiorr. The bulkfing expansion will be 48.000 square fact, To the north of the bulldhg etcpansim will be a carwash exterierto the alts. With this ananston, an'ond pfece' Wit he added to the campus, llnishing off the building with the same erchlkedural materiais and elements as that of the existing bultding. ' The Planning and Zoning Comrnlsston rea nunendad approval on January 21, 20 10 wllh eight condillons. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive Mtmutcs of Held RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS _Dub6n.City_Council February 22.2x10 Metting Page 11 At the first reading. Council raised questions about the landscaping. MAG Is well-mown for b vehicle displays arranged wxthtn urger -ft pavement areas As the memo Indicates, the City's landscape inspector completed an ,rispection when this application was fled In November 2009. The development as it exists meets the originally approved plan from the late 1990s with the display areas being landscaped up to one foot. as permitted by Code. The only exception that was made as per the approved development plan Is the extent or length of the display an:a, which is 40 percent of the sit@. Dublin's Code permits 25 percent display on a sits. This 40 percent was Included In the original development plan approved In the late 1990s. Staff recommends approval of ordinance 07 -10 at this time. Time applicant Is present to respond to questions. Mayor Leddider stated that the updated staff report includes an additional condition wed. based upon CoundPs comments at the last meeting. The edddlonal condition mentioned is that the applicant rest*e the display areas In accordance with the approved site plan and display vehicles only in designated spaces. Me. Husak responded that staff believed this was an Issue when they made a site visit, but the condition should not have been Included. The Issue resulted from the snow cover of the lot on the date of the sKe vWL Further Investigation has confirmed that vehicles are parked and displayed appropriately. Mr. Gerber clarified for the record that this additional condition was not in rasponmse to any comments of Council. Council discussed landscaping Issues, not parking Issues, at the last Ms. Chlnnk�-Zuercher stated that there was extensive discussion about whether the City's expectations for the oniglnal landscaping of the display areas had been met At the last meeting, there was disagreement between staff and Council about that Issue. Staff indicates that the applicant had met the minimum requiremeK but Coundrs Issue is that was not the Intent with the original approval. Mrs. Boring argues that the text demonstrates that there was an expectation that was different than the landscaping that has been provided Mrs. Boring noted that Is reflected on page 7 of the April '0,1997 minutes, In the architect's comments. "Time parking lot at its imvest point Is at a 911 -root elevation. The fingers have landscaping to break up large masses of parking. and they are elevated toward the highest points at the tips.. —three foot landscaping will screen most of the cars.' The intent was dearly reflected in the minutes. Ms. Husak responded that what the landscape platen depicted is also shown on the current plan. Staff asked the applicant to take a thorough inventory of the landscaping that exists on the site and reflect that on this site plan. It Is depicted on 'Overall Landscape flan — sheet 013-1 ." Mrs. Boring stated that This page reflects the mrent landscape as it exists. Ms. Husak responded that Is, however exactly as it was in the 1997 landscape plan At the very tip of it Is the car display landscaping, which Is allowed to be one-foot in height When that curves around, It meets with shrubbery of 3-1/2 feet In height that would be required for the vehicular use anew screening. It is only the tip of each of the rounded 'finger' display areas that has the refief of one -foot In height plant material. Mrs- Boring inquired K three-foot plant material currently exists on the skies, It has not previously Ms. Husak confirmed that It currently exists an the site. Mr. Reiner stated that at the last meeting. staff Indicated that the applicant had met the landscape specifications. Ms. Husak responded that they have done so, and that Is reflected M their development text, as well. Mr. Reiner responded that it Is then a moot Issue. Ms. Husak responded that states assumption is that what was discussed in the meeting In 1997 reflected the speaker's assumption. The speakers assumption was different than what was in their plan, which was approved at thaj tine. What exists on the site today does meet their plan requirements. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Croup PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drivc RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of Dubin.City Cotmcil Meeting Fabniary 22.2010 Page 12 _ 10 Mrs Bantle referred to page B of the 1097 minutes, In the d6u=bn about 25 percent road frontage, whim the City requires for all car dealers. She cannot W that portion of the text in the Perimeter Center development text that is anssed out- A+L4. Husak responded that is the issue with the way the text was written and *a reason staff asked the applicant not to continue with that teal. The WA was written to state, landscaping to Cade, unless other0se approved by th4 PrW Development Plan." Ttnls W dsmping and the m4ef on tt4e landscaping, 40 percent of their frontage. Is something !fiat was in their Plan. IxA not their taxi. Kft. Baring stated that she has been told many thnas pmOmtsty that the text overrides the Phan. Ms. Husak stated that the 1997 approved text stales 'unless approved on the Plan,' so the tail provides for that Mrs. Boring Inqufred the location of the language ooncernfng the reliel In !fie display arm Her emcern is that other car dealers will new ask for 40 parcent for Instance, along Sawriniq Road. How will that appear compered to the Code requhvnant for 25 percent? Ms. Husak responded that the method for the car daetersMps on Szm*H Road to obtain pemtisakm to do so Is by mxdng a variance tram the Board of zoning Appeals, since they are a0 In a standard zoning district. In part two of ft pacML which begins with the Perimeter Center development text! pees Bpi is to be deleted tram the axlating MAG text_ Tha tap of that page reads. 'All landscaping shall be acm ing to the Dublin Landscape Code unless a deviation Is spedflCally approved as part of the Final D&Mloprnent Plan.' Mrs. Bonne asked If staff Is Inducting that when road frontage is used for vehicle display, It Is the same as landscaping plans? Ms. Husak responded of imiatively_ Mra. Boring stated that the text does not mmlion landscaping. It Indicates that 25 permit frontage crf the road will be used for autornobile display. She does not accept that as a landscaping plan. Ms. Husak responded ftl the relief In the Zang Code for the 25 percent Is In the Landscape Code, end the relief I% la pbtg. M-& Soft stated What she cannot equate this to larxiscapkig. HaIL 37 W. STyad StraeL representing the applicant, stated that architects Jahn Cney and Brad Perish, and Tim Gael. MAG. are present to respond to questions. Mrs. " Stated that she would like to clarify her oorxzrft The devebpn*M plan is great h terms or the bLAdhV mansion and add-on. However, ttre City has had Issues with vahide displays aver marry yam. Staff Indicates any variance torn the Code must be approved by BZ-A. end that Is the concern. When the City grants one car dealership relief, it Is very difficult not to grant another car dealership the sum opportunity to display his merchandise, It Is a sense of fairness, and tf ahe wens serving on BZA, she would be oanrpeWhed to grant a variance on that basis. Theretone, ui'6m the percentage Is revised to 25 percent — the intent of the o Nkwf plan — she will not be able to support this remnkV. Apprvvarg fits would have a future negadve Impact on the SR 161 /S,rmTtl Road corridor. Mayor laddhder Indicated that Courcti Is QfeParQd to vote at this time. Air. Gerber raised a point of order- Is It staffs rwornmendfflion to add a ninth aanditim outlined In fie staff report? Ms. Husak responded that Is an error that language should not have been Included in the mom. Tb*re are oNy eleht conditions — those appended by the Planning & 2lining Qw, misaion, which are recommended to Courcl for this rezoning. Vote QO the Ordinance: Vice Meyer Salay, yes; Mayor Leddider, yes, NV. Reiner, yes; Mr lieerran, yes: W. Chlwdcl Zuerdw, yes; Mrs. Boring, no. W. Gerber, ye9- 7F1"JjoqmAppro tae �B- ?0 XlniateWjr 0. Gras LoaeGA e !Diller o the ecUm of Na M at and North Street fn Hfetork Dublin o aBlnesat Dlizhl to KB, Historie l3usa b id. (Oscar's »Cos 149,E hftReadatsta sd Theyaagre o Taff Iq w l4= an a ssue o Va a teen! br at the first read! 2 1 -03 2AFDP Amended Final Development Pldn Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive Minutes of 00-MMO M10 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Held_ - _ - _ .- - [lubl - cw -Couaa February 8, 2010 so legal costa associated obtaining easement ate part of the City's regu serv6ces wltldr+ the leas c t7 Ms, Cirigstry at those costs are betin chargad to the xuttl TtF district that was W* costs were ap ateity 58,000. Hosting Pagel dons Are these legal , or are they In additiq ular serAces, but evyFlow for the ImpromrIvAts. The Mayor r Inquired If krttars were t to the property owners if of Council thanking for their contributions. Ms. , Y responded that lettam sera to the property ors. or Lecklider invited pubs moray. r. Maurer referred to memo, page two, parag three, Was three to five, kh state 'provida funding ortly for costs assodat th the Dublin Road sort sewer D" project from of Historic Dublin to Ire Avenue.' Is there xlsUn9 sanitary sewer I hntrtg between those two rata, and could he or a living a" that roadway h10 the sewer line? W. Grigsby ponded tftat them Is, hilt an Interceptor, which Is Ilse that eotlerJa the other mein santtary er hies. Mr. Wer rowed to dispense the public hear6tg. seoortded the ota Maryor ddider, yea; Mrs. 6odng, ; Vloa Mayor Satay, yes FWner, yes; Mr. C�erbar. : Mr- Keenan, Yee; Mrs tnnld�T.aaerdw, yes. Y& an the Ord Mr. Keenan, yes; Mrs. id- Zuercdter, Yes; Mr. , yes; Mr. Reiner, yea; Leaclder, Yes: twice , Yes; Vk v Mayor salay, Ordtnown 07-10 Rezoning Approximately 15.60 Acres Located on the Southeast Corner of the Intersection of Parlmater Drive and ParkmW Loop (toad wvfttaln Perimeter Center from PCD, Planned Commerce Dlaftld (Subareas J and d) and PUC. Planned Unk Development Dish (Subarea J-1) to PUD, Planned unit Development Dhdriat (MAC;, Mkfweatem Auto, Group, Volvo Expansion - Case 09- jo87JPDP). Vice Mayor Sakay I troduaed the ordinance. Ms. Husk gAted that this ordinanos Is a request for review and approval of a rezor 40retkntnary development pan for 15.69 acres from PCD, Planned Commerce District (Perimeter Center. subareas J and D) and PUD, Planned Unit Oeveiopmertt District (Perimeter 08niar, Sabana 4-1) to PUD NkNostam Auto Gmup Campus) for the Purpose of expandng ttte site to aommmoda w a building addWort and associated site Irrt0m%wrtertt5` The Ptareiii ng and Zor&V C,orrimission revlarwad ttds request and also a anal develcprnent plan at the January 21, 2010 rneetirg. The Perimeter Center Plarined Commerce 17Lstrict was origktally approved In 1988, encompassing laced between Avery- Muirfieid Drive acid Ernarald Parkway, dWsded into subareas A through M. Permitted uses Indtteda aomnwdel, IndustrW. residential. and offrea. A 14 -aero Subarer+ J of the Pertrnetw Center plan was created in 11888 to ailOw MAG to develop. This rezWng proposes to include some Land an the east side of Perimeter C with Subarea J and awte a new PUD for MAG. That PUD would no kxtgw be In the Pertrnetar Center PUP, but would be its own free-sWndktg Rio. The area for redevetoprrtwtt I8 10 #m souttneest comer of tits site, There Is a 90,000 plus square foot btMIng iocated on the site, which horses many different car kanddsea acid the administrative offices. There is a smaller building to the north, which houses the Land 1' mw franchise. The dkplay area, customer parkbV and a retention pond arts Woo on the s& The site fa R* developed with mature landsCION and screening for the low ft atria vehicular areas. The rexonlrrg proposes to add a bulklhV of 48,000 square feet. it Ail Include a four -story expansion, which will conttn w the design that die ngoW*s the MAG campus - the pods that protrude from the from of the building. The expanslotti of MAG's awrpua is necessary due to its recent acquisition of the Llr*A th Volvo daelership. The rectangular parcei Includes two twlkiings u ttr several autornati a franchise showrooms, safes offices, service bays, and al the MAG adrnlnlebaltve offtce rur4ikoniL it will also include a suite for the NAG owner. The erianslon will also include a 2,000 square feel. free- standfng carwash just north of the building, adjacent to Venture Drive. The Manning and Zhniriig Commiisston requests that the terd derffy that the carwash Is not intended for pubic uso. and the applicant he 21.032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutes of IIubllnL%LQ unclL Meeting W'" %Fokft~ -c .Cow o'a FeWUwy 8, 2010 Page 8 ftj 20 made that clarification. The development text and a development plan already exist Many of the deviations from Code were not included in the development text but ware approved as part of the development plan. In working with the applicant throughout this process, staff has requested that they make their development text more consistent with the cement predice of listing all site details listed and described within the text, even though the details are ;fisted on the final development plan. The Planning Commission reoormrnends approval of the rezoning and preliminary plan with the eight conditions as noted on the January 21, 2010 Reaord of Actions. Conditions #3 through 08 have already been met by the developer. t nepresenti0m for the appituant, Brendinger Real Estate. noted that the proposed building Is very stn'kdng, and the architect, John Orley. is present to comment on the architecture. The original rezoning had a height ImIt, and this building does not examW that limit. The development text contains a lengthy description of the slgnage. ft actually describes the existing signage package for MAG, which Is very tasteful; the new sdrrhage will be consistent with the existing. &r'-On-W-' _Arothlt1199"fl Afilartce stated that In 1998. Mark Brentfinger took a 'leap of %W and created the Innovative, award- winning MAG campus. Now, In dff =M economic times, he is again Investing In the conthwed growth and suocess of MAO. creating new Jobs and income for the City. This expansion will result in 18 high quality, luxury automotive brands that will accommodate a large number of Dublin residents. Archilectural Alliance was not the original architect of the MAG campus, who created a design that has stood the test of time. Mr. BrenUftw was involved sigWcantly in that design as he has been with the design of this sMansion. He required that this design remain loyal to the architecture of the existing building and campus and continue its spirit. This design meets that criteria and provides a new center, a focal point. for the MAG campus as can be seen from the 3D PowerPoint presentaffm [presentation shown]. Mr. Keenan requested daritieetlon regarding the fourth stay of the building. Mr. Hale responded that the fourth story will actually be one unit -- the owner's suite. Mr. Keenan ktghtired if that unit is also within the height I mitadons. Mr. Oney responded affirmatively. The height Irnits are 85 feet This addition Is 47 feet. 10 Inches at its highest point. Arts. Husak noted that the service area Is actually below grade.' Ms. ChkkNc- Zusnr*er Inquired if the road Is to be moved to the east. Mr. Hale responded that It would be moved slightly to the east to accommodate the dealat". it will also roplao s the view of a blank wall with a more Interesting view. Mrs. Boring stated that there has been past controversy regarding the landscaping of the individual' fingers.° How will those concerns be addressed with the new plan? Ms. Husek responded that she believes the controversy was whether the landscaping wound the 'fingers• was installed and maintained at the height shown on the development plan. Staff inspections confirmed that It was. There will be no changes; the 'pods' will be maintained as they are with the existing landscaping. Mrs. Boring responded that she believes the height of the landscaping Is too low. Ms. Husak responded that It may be too low based on the Code requirements. but it meets the approved development plans. Nis. CMnnki- Zuercher stated that several of the current Council members were on the Planning & Zoning Commission at the time the development plan was approved, and whtat exists on the site now does not appear the way it was described to the Commission. There was an expectation that It would be further south, closer to SR 33, and elevated more. The description that the attorney provided Council on the case at that time created an expectation of something very Interesting. The landscaping In place may most the text. but It does not meet the spkft of the what was presented to Council. Arts. Husak responded that she has heard that comment from others - that it was Intended to slope downward much more that it actually does. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1211w Clay_ _ Meeting February 8, 2010 Pa" 9 20 Mrs. Boring stated that the plan proposes an Increase of a few trees. A car dealership may be permitted to have a site that Is 40 percent non- landscaped, but she would like to see the new landsca*Q be mom compliant with Code. Vice Mayor Selay pointed out that this is a planned district Ms. Husak responded that it is. Nothing has been proposed to change the landscaping for the Ingers - Mr. Reiner stated that he mat with the architects on this case, and he would like to compliment them an the integration of the old and the new architecture and the use of high quality materiels. He Is certain there are many other communities who would be glad to have a Volvo dealership in the current economic climate. He appreciates Mr. Brentdtnger's loyalty to Dublin and his decision to move (award at the time with this aggressive Mayer Ledklider stated that the 85400t height imitation was In the original text AMhough he doesn't see any height designations in these plans, the statement was made that there Is no butidtrtg over 47 feet, correct? Mr. Hale responded that the highest point Is 47 feet 10 Indies. Mayor Lack[W r Inqulmd the height of the exfstkng buildings. Mr. Hale responded that they are 30 feet In height. Mayor Leckllder stated that the text Indicates that the alleratlon of sign panels would not require review by the Planning and Zoning ComrNsslon. Has that become the custom, or Is It unique to this parfij uiar project? Ms. Husak responded that it is not unique. The Code pemdts adminlstradve approval of sign face changes in a planned unit development district. The design of the sign is not being changed; only the wording or logo on the face of the sign would be changed. Mrs. Boring requested clarification. Is the proposal to take the entire MAG development out of the PUD within which It is currently located? Ms. Husak conformed that is the proposal. Mrs Boring Inquired if the entire area will be rezoned. Ms. Husak responded aflirrnatively. Mrs. Boring stated that if It Is a request for rezodng, It is possible to request different landscaping. Ms. Husak confirmed that Is correct Mrs. Boring stated that she likes the building, but believes the landscaping should be enhanced to most the spirit of what was presented to the City previously. Mayor Leckkder requested W. Hale's response. Mr. Hale responded dot they would be glad to discuss this with staff, but he does not believe the area is under4andscaped. In reviewing the entire package. including the signage. MAG has less slgnage than a business usually Is permitted to have under the City's Code. The complete package rs exeeOlCnally testefuL However. he would be happy to meet with the City's landscaping staff to determIne whether additional landscaping Is needed to Improve die site. Mayor Lac lider asked if the proposed text adualy memorializes what is already existing. Mr. Hale responded that the entire site actually did not need to be rezoned, but only the east side. However, staff preferred to rezone the entire site to bring the text up to date. because the text does not contain all the standards that were approved fn the original development plan. AD the 'mmeplfona° that had been notations on the plan are now Included in the text For future review purposes. the updated text will clarify the rights and duties. Ms. ChirWd- Zuercher asked 9 the other MAG businesses on Post Road would be moved to this area. Mr. Hale responded that the owner of that business Is Interested in doing so, as the site in that location limits their service. He believes their lease expires in 2012. This rezoning request will be followed by an additional rezoning request to permit BMW to move to this area. However. at this time. there is no commitment to do so. The desire Is to conpdek the loop In this area to add BMW and the Mini Cooper, 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Minutgs pf - _ Dublin City.CQUnaQ WI+a.siaxiwS dC Orp '• _. February S. 2010 Page 10 Mr. ReInw asked how n •uch additional land the owner has In this area. Mr. Hale responded that he owns an addition` 'S acres. However. only seven to eight awes would be needed for the additional rezoning. Some land world remain to the east, adfacent to the Children's Hospital facility, that would not be included There will be a second reading/Wc hearing at the February 22nd Council meeting. ORD 08.10 R nog Approximately 0.137 res Located on the N east Comer of the I rszectlon of North High and North Street w n Historic Dublin from entrat Buslnese Dtstr o HB, Historic sualne letricL ( Oscaes — Case •109Z) Mr. Gerber introduced ordinance. Ms. Rauch stated Is rezoning Is for Oscar estaurant and parcels at and 84 North High Street 20 North Street The arty consists of 167 nd is currently zoned CB. The pose) Is to rezone to H k Is located within H c Dublin. She noted the rig: The sit hts of three a buildings with Bred parking lot to the rear the buildMg and patio a deck area located 2 and 84 N. High ABoRde the past year. the (cant submitted an appl for site and arch atkonsand a I was given kr November by the Architectural • The approved site n, as included In the , outlines an approxlma 1,000 square foot bul g addition located 2 and 84 N. High S well as modtllcations the site. Including patio kflcations for 84 and for . High Street along the Igh frontage. The approved arch etatls for this, which i s two-story gabled on the front and rear ikons. • reposed modrtkations a required multiple varia , which the Board of Appeals granted In r 2009. The Plan ' & Zoning Commission evtewed and re approval to City Council the rezoning applica A second agenda item Ight relates to the patio's tlon within the righMf Y. requesting approval an encroachrent. • Based on Plenn analysis. the proposed oring compiles with the Plan and the Community 's future land use fion. It meets the City's 94arm goal of ensuring properties within the H c District are located zoning dasslflca that are consistent with a development pattems dti as those existing In the cl Planning H and the Planning S Commission approval of the rezon request. She oted that the applicant Is t tonight as wet. Lecklider Invited Mr ggspuehler, applicant toAnment. gamer. 705 n Road. applicant 911bred to respond to any Ms. i- asked for clarification a exact location of the idon. not at the addition will be tween the 72 and 84 N. buildings. and patio exist in this a. - 2uercher noted that the tory provided indicates in 1987, when the s originally zoned, as a significant variance nied from parking ts. Currently, there signtlicent Issues raised business owners In Hist ut the lack of their crstomers/dlen Why than was a waiver uirements a d by the City In of 2009, consideffng that e p arking issue Is a rnejor for bushsess . ncluding the owners of rs9 Ms. Rauch responded t the VA granted the ance based on the fed there Is a shared parking ag ant for spaces at rise Edge to be used 5 p.m. by customers of rs. Planning's r ed and the Board agreed t the mix of uses could the parking needs for Ms. Chinn uercher stated that has heard that both a of Oscar's and cxus are not Interested In wal the distance from these parking spots Cu , there Is no valet park or this restaurant that transport cars to the 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive \I CUY OF DMLUL Lala.aa WaawF-.+v ®wad erns Gnt,dq Wib1M flay IDnll"INO k.di "O �Itllc. AML4= PLAR41NG AND ZOMNG Co11IlVDSS1Olg RECORD OF ACTION JANUARY 21, I014 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action of this meeting: 6. Perimeter Center PCD, Sabaeeaa D, J and J -1 —MAG Volvo Even aloe WI09MP/FDP 6w Perknew Loop Rem &WIl"rellralnuy Development Plan Final Development Plan Proposal: Creation of a new Planned Unit Development District (MAG PUD) for an expansion of the Midwestern Auto Group dealership campus for a building addition and esgociated site improvements This site is located on the soutbeast comer of the intersection of Pamneter Drive and Perimeter Loop Road Request: Review end recommendation of approval to City Council of a =0mag with a preliminary development plan and review and approval of a fund development plan under We Planned District provisions of Coda Section 153.M50. Applicant: Car MAC LLC & Car MAG Park LLC; raprestoled by Aaron Underhill, Smith & Hale. Planning Contact: Clan&a D. Hu* AICP, Planner II. Contact blfatmadm: (614) 4104675, rhusok@dubliaoh.us MOTION 0 To recommend City Council approve this RwAninglPreliminary Developoteat Plan because it allows the orderly development and continued high- quafity design of an existing business, and main the development pattern within the area and all applicable review criteria, with eight conditions: 1) An additional 10 feet of right -6way along Perimeter Drive is required to be dedicated to the City; 2) If addifional building square footage is constructed that is not accounted for in the haffic analysis a traffic impact study must be provided, as directed by the City Pngiti 3) The development text be modified to eliminate the option of a will sign for the Volvo brand and permit a brand ground sip adjacent to the Volvo entrance to match the cxisturg brand signs on the MAG campus; and 4) 'Me existing Perimeter Center development text be updated to remove references and requirements for the MAG dealership; 5) Tbat the development text be modified to include regarding lighting from the existing Perimeter Canter teat for Subarea 1; Page 1 of 2 21.032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive PLANNING AND ZONING COMMMION RECORD OF ACTION JANUARY 21, 2010 6. Perimeter Center PCD, Subareas D, J and J-1— MAG Vohv Expansion 09- t08Z/PDP1FDP 6325 parlmeter Loop Rezoning /Preliminary Development Plan Final Development Plan 6) That the development text be modified to restrict the use of the car wash to employees only; 7) That the development text be modified to permit internally i huninated campus identification signs (A & B) and clarified regarding administrative approval for sign laces for the brand and campus identification signs only, and 8) That the development text be modified to eliminate language allowing landscape screening to be deferred. * Ben Hale, Jr., representing the applicant agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 7-0. RESULT: This Rezoning/Preliminary Development plan was recommecded to City Council for approval. MOTION #12: To approve this Final Development Plan application because it complies with the development text, preliminary development plan, the applicable review criteria and existing development standards within the area with six conditions: I) The plans be revised to account for an additional 337 square feet of landscape area and three trees to meet the interior landscape requirement; 2) Four additional trees will need to be planted along the SR161/US33 frontage to meet the planting requirements specified within the development text; 3) The directional Sign S be removed from the pole and ground mounted to be consistent with the existing directional signs: 4) The Volvo wall sign indicated on the final development plans be removed and a brand ground sign be permitted adjacent to the Volvo entrance to coordinate with the existing brand signs on the MACS campus; 5) That the plan be modified to require that the landscape screening along the eastern property line be installed with the building construction; Lion; and 6) A stormwater easement will need to be provided, subject to approval by Engineering. * Ben Hale, Jr., representing the applicant agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 7-0. RESULT: This Final Development Plan application was approved. STAFF CERTIFICATION A44,01 -e'a .4 Claudia D. HusW4 Al 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 2I, 2010 — Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 22 develo ent located in thi . W. Zimme seconded the nw ' n. The vote was foll Mr. Walter, yes- Fishman, yes; M Amorose Groomes, s; Ms. Kramb, yes; dt, yes;lVlr. Zirnm an, yes; and Mr. Ta r, yes. (Approved 7 0.) Motion and Vo 2 Mr. Walter e a motion to hi ght t/ntnr-t Zoning Commissi s discussion regarding t �r concerns with p ng in thct and the once lic patio in the commu ' tion accomp anyin a rezoning City Council. Fishman seconded the ion. The vote was follows: Mr. . Kramb, ye . Zimmerman, y eyior, yes; Ms, ose Groomes, yesyes; and Walter, yes. (App ed 6. Perimeter Center PCD, MAG Volvo Expansion 6325 Perimeter Loop 09-1087,/PDP/FDP Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan Final Development Plan Ms. Amorose Groomes swore in the applicants, Den Hale, Smith and Hale, and John Oney, Architecture Alliance, representing MAO, and those wishing to speak in regards to this case, including City representatives. Claudia Husak said this is a request for recommendation of approval to City Council for a rezoning with a preliminary development plan for 15.67 acres from PCD, Planned Commerce District (Perimeter Center, Subareas J and D) and PUD, Planned Unit Development district (Perimeter Center Subarea J -1) to a new PUD to accommodate an expansion of the Midwestern Auto Group (MAO) site. She said the proposed development includes a substantial building addition, a car wash, and other related site improvements for this auto dealership site M. Husak said this also a request of review and approval of a final development plan which includes all final details concerning architecture, landscaping, site improvements, lights, signs, and other details for this building addition. She showed a slide of the vicinity of the site and said the most recent application the Commission reviewed in this area was for the WD Partners site where the two subareas were combined into one. She said the case is scheduled for the first reading for City Council on January 25, 2010. Ms. Husak highlighted the different subareas within the Perimeter Center PCD and said that the MAO site is in the southern portion of the district in Subarea J, which was created in 1998 specifically for MAG. She said there were several amendments which were approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and there was a building expansion and skywalk which would all be void with this application. She said Subarea J-1 was rezoned last year for a temporary parking lot during an anticipated expansion, but as the needs of MAG have changed, it causes the need for a rezoning. Ms. Husak said MAG is proposing to create a new Planned Unit Development district, which is the 15.69 acres. She said the redevelopment requiring this rezoning is generally located on the southeastern portion of the site. She said the site includes frontage on US 33, Perimeter Drive, Perimeter Loop Road, and Venture Drive. She said that the site includes two buildings, a 7,000 - square -foot building that accommodates the Land Rover franchise to the north and a 68,500 - square -foot building that incorporates the administrative offices and includes all the other franchises that MAG operates in the southern portion of the site. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi - Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 21, 2010 - Meeting N notes Page 10 of 22 Ms. Husak said that the car display is unique to the site and designed in a finger -like arrangement in the western portion of the site, to the north, and to the south. She said the proposal includes the new building addition that is intended to house the Volvo franchise, the service area for Volvo and expanded administrative offices. She said it is a 46,800 - square -foot building addition, She said this is a four -story building that will be located at the southeastern end of the existing building and will continue to use the existing architectural design with pod areas made out of glass protruding from the front of the building. Ms. Husak said the building includes a lower level for services and there is a single executive residential suite proposed on the fourth floor of the building for the owner to reside in while in Ohio. She said there will be a formal landscape and entrance area located at the southeastern corner and there is a carwash facility proposed just to the north of the building expansion, which currently operates on the MAG site but interior to the building. She said the renovations and expansions now require the carwash to be located on the exterior but it is only open to cars being serviced at MAG. Ms. Husak said all the sales activities are located on the main level of the building. She said the building is obviously unique and the height will increase with the addition of the building. She said the development text for MAG has requirements for striking and noteworthy architecture, and this particular design scheme is unique to the City. She said the additional height meets the development text as it existed prior to the rezoning and will continue with this new development text. Ms. Husak said the 1998 development text referred a lot of the development details and deviations from Code to the development plan. She said Planning asked the applicant to rewrite the development text to reflect the current standards and requirements. She said Planning has worked diligently with the applicant to accomplish the task. Ms. Husak said lighting will be the same as it is on the site today with matching fixtures, pole heights and lamps. She said there are some deficiencies in the landscape plan as it was submitted for interior landscaping and additional trees. She said there is an intention of the BMW and Mini dealership, currently located on Post Road, to this area. Ms. Husak said it is important to note that some of the screening is allowed to be deferred for three years if nothing were to occur to the east of the site. She said requirements were waived in the existing text for signs on the site and Planning worked with the applicant to develop standards which would govern the signs in the future, but will allow the existing signs to remain. She said there are several different sign types outlined in development text which are the campus development location signs, one on the highway to the south and the other two at the site entrances, there are also the brand signs on the site as well as directional signs to navigate the site for customers. Ms. Husak explained that two motions will be required for this application, one for the rezoning with the preliminary development plan and one for the final development plan. She said that Planning has evaluated both proposals using the review criteria and is recommending that the Commission recommend approval to City Council of the rezoning with preliminary development plan with the following four conditions: 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 21, 2010 — Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 22 1) An additional 10 feet of right -of -way along Perimeter Drive is required to be dedicated to the City; 2) If additional building square footage is constructed that is not accounted for in the traffic analysis a traffic impact study must be provided, as directed by the City Engineer; 3) The development text be modified to eliminate the option of a wall sign for the Volvo brand and permit a brand ground sign adjacent to the Volvo entrance to match the existing brand signs on the MAG campus; and 4) The existing Perimeter Center development text be updated to remove references and requirements for the MAG dealership. Ms. Husak said that Planning has determined that the proposal meets the Final Development Plan review criteria and recommends approval of that part of the application with the following five conditions: 1) The plans be revised to account for an additional 337 square feet of landscape area and three trees to meet the interior landscape requirement; 2) Four additional trees will need to be planted along the SRI 6l/US33 frontage to meet the planting requirements specified within the development text; 3) The directional Sign S be removed from the pole and ground - mounted to be consistent with the existing directional signs, 4) The Volvo wall sign indicated on the final development plans be removed and a brand ground sign be permitted adjacent to the Volvo entrance to coordinate with the existing brand signs on the MAG campus; and 5) A storrnwater easement will need to be provided, subject to approval by Engineering. Ben Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Smith and Hale, representing the applicant, said the campus identification signs are internally illuminated, not externally as indicated in the text. He said the reason this building grew was because of the need for additional office space when Volvo moved to this location. He said the existing office space is on the north end of the building which is going to be converted to a showroom. Mr. Hale said the owner wants to stay on the top floor where a small apartment is located; the primary part of the building is actually three stories. He said the owner is trying to match the existing architecture of the existing building. He said BMW will need to leave the Post Road location and the preference is to move to the east of the site. John Oney, Architecture Alliance, said Mr. Brentlinger, the owner, has been involved in the design of the campus and the crescent shape of the building is being kept. He said the lower level is identical to what is happening with the service reception area and there will be a private elevator which would go up to the penthouse suite. He said the showroom level matches the designs to make it ADA accessible. Mr. Oney said there is hope to connect to BMW with either a pedestrian walkway or a sky bridge. He said the third level will be the corporate office which will house sixteen brands, located above the showrooms. He said the penthouse level will have a suite for W. Brentlinger to access and there will be a green roof garden feature in the back. He said they would like to create a screen which would not disturb the view with a building. Mr. Oney showed a video animation of the proposed addition and how it relates to the existing building and the overall MAG. campus. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive Dublin Plami and Zoning Commission January 21, 2010 — Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 22 Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there were any comments from the public concerning this application. There were none. Ms. Kramb said she does not have a problem with the architecture but does have concerns about the development text. She asked if it was mentioned that the references needed to be removed from the Perimeter Center text. Ms. Husak said it is Condition 4 for the preliminary development plan. Ms. Kramb said the Perimeter Center Development has a lot more text about lighting for MAG than the proposed text. She said another concern is the residential area above the business. Ms. Husak said that Planning has received many inquiries from owners wanting suites within their business so they have a place to stay while in Ohio. She said the Code does not address this issue. Ms. Kramb said this is not a little apartment, it is large residential area. Mr. Walter said he is concerned the architecture of the carwash is uninspired and very close to the road. He said there are mixed window treatments which are interesting, but the materials of metal are not repeated. Mr. Oney said it is E1PS and the scoring of the material is on the back of the building. He said they tried to blend it in and add a strong landscaping screen to the street side, as well as add more glass. Mr. Walter asked if there is anything within the text which would preclude changing the material on the existing sign on the expressway side of the building. He said the stone is out of place with the rest of the building. Ms. Husak said they could change the material, the text requires it to be a ground sign. Ms. Kramb said there is a provision in the text that signs do not have to come back to the Commission for approval. Ms. Husak said as long as the requirements are met for the development text. Ms. Kramb said it is in reference to a sign permitting process which is not referenced anywhere else and is not explained. She said it states signs maybe changed without further a due by the Planning Commission provided the new panels conform with this text with the sign permitting process. Aaron Underhill, Smith and Hale, said the intent is the make sure that if the brands change the panels can be updated to reflect the change without having to come back to the Commission. He said if the language needs to be changed, it will be changed. Ms. Kramb said to change the language needs to reflect brand signs specifically. Ms. Husak said it says sign panels that identify automobile manufacturers on ground signs. Ms. Kramb said that the categories of signs should be listed. Mr. Walter said another concern is that the addition removes a service parking area that is currently there. He said the need for adequate parking on this site is not addressed; the carwash is going to further eliminate parking. He asked if it is a possibility to have overflow parking in the J -1 area. Ms. Husak said the parking meets the Code requirements and actually exceeds them. She said J -1 could still be used for parking and would require approval by the Commission for conditional use and a final development plan. Mr. Walter asked where the trees for the landscape package wil l be located. Ms. Husak said they are along the SRI 61 frontage. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 21, 2010 — Meeting Minutes Page I3 of 22 Mr. Walter said he is not in support to adding the trees because they might impede the view, the intent is to mirror the rest of the building, but it might end up being the center of the building. He said he would rather not have those trees there. Mr. Hardt said a building of this style is dependent of the detailing. He said the garage door on the west elevation of the carwash is not the same as the others. He said getting the materials to match the existing building are important. Mr. Hardt said he does not have a problem with the carwash. He said the presence of the residence is okay, he does not like that the apartment creates an increase in size by a full story. Mr. Hale said the building does not exceed the approved height. He said the applicant is not asking for the site to be rezoned as residential, just for one residential unit. W. Oney said the glass and showroom feeling on the first floor will carry up to the second floor. He said the height will be 47 feet 10 inches, the allowable in the text is 65 feet. He said they tried to compress everything as much as they could. Mr. Zimmerman said if someone is building a business and wants to reside there they should have the ability to do so. He said the carwash blends with the building and the landscaping is going to cover it up. Mr. Fishman asked if the signs will remain the same and if the only change will be the brand name. He asked if any logos will be changed without approval by the Commission. He said there is going to be congestion having 16 dealerships using one carwash. Ms. Husak said the development text says the carwash is not permitted to be used by the public. Mr. Hale said the carwash is only for cars which are being serviced at this dealership and only employees can take the cars through. Mr. Fishman askew if the text states that an apartment will be allowed at this location. Ms. Husak said yes. Mr. Hardt asked if the applicant wants the ability to change the sign panels of the existing signs without coming back for approval. He clarified that the applicant is not asking to add more signs or change the design of the signs. Mr. Underhill said that is correct. He said this would apply to the signs at the entryway, the brand signs identify the individual manufacturers. Mr. Walter said number seven on page two, says the dealership is not charging for the carwash, but there can still be public access. He said that the phrase needs to be clearly worded. Mr. Taylor asked what happens to the balance of J -1 and D when it is absorbed into the new subarea. Ms. Husak said both stay within the Perimeter Center. W. Taylor asked if J -1 is smaller. Ms. Husak confirmed. Mr. Taylor said it does not feel like a four -story building and it has been interesting how this has evolved and he recalls discussions the Commission had about the potential BMW building moving to 1-1. He said he appreciates how BMW integrates with this building. He said J -1 was supposed to hold construction parking and asked where the overflow parking is going to be placed when this addition is under construction. Mr Oney said this expansion will have very minimal disruption to the existing site. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 21, 20 t0 — Meeting Mnutes Page 14 of 22 Mr. Taylor said to make sure this gets addressed immediately if parking is needed. He said the building will not look like it was added onto it will look like it was designed this way. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she is disappointed the landscape installation has been deferred for up to three years; that is three growing years. She said she would like to see the landscape package go in during construction. She said she would like to see the lighting text amended, it is important and would not be a hardship on anyone to continue the same language from the lighting text into this rezoning. Ms. Amorose Groomes said she would like to encourage the applicant to look across the street where cars can be stored. She said the carwash is located in a tight corner, and asked whether there is anywhere else it can go. She said the first thing people will see entering from Venture Drive is a carwash, and there are gorgeous buildings but the first thing seen is a carwash. She said the applicant has done a great job with the architecture, and ask that the applicant take a look at moving the carwash as the site develops. Mr. Fishman said he is also concerned about the landscaping not being finished. Mr. Hale said BMW needs to be under construction within a year. He said if permission is obtained to move to the Volvo location the landscaping would have to be removed. He said if BMW has not been started within a year the applicant will put in the landscaping. He said if it must put it in now they will, but would like a year. Mr. Hardt said if that timeframe holds, approval for the building will need to be obtained before the landscaping being referenced today is planted. Ms. Amorose Groomes said if the applicant puts the landscaping in and asks for relief the Commission will give relief at that time. Ms. Amorose Groomes said the lighting text will be updated to reflect the original text. Mr. Hale said the lighting will be in compliance. Ms. Husak said conditions have been drafted and will address everything discussed. She said that the Commission is requesting modification of the development text to include lighting from the existing Perimeter Center text for this Subarea, to restrict the use of the carwash to employees only, to permit internally illuminated campus identification signs, A and B which is what the applicant asked for and have it clarified for administrative approval for sign faces for the brand and campus identification signs only and eliminate language allowing landscaping to be deferred. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there is anywhere else on the property the carwash can be placed. She asked if there is an opportunity to include it in the BMW construction. Mr. Oney said the carwash will have to go in with this phase and not the next. He said in the conceptual plan and when BMW is brought on they are planning to have the Perimeter Loop entrance, as it loops around. He said the carwash could move 20 feet closer. He said the area being proposed for the carwash is more of a service entrance; traffic is trying to be downplayed in this area. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked where the loading and unloading would occur. She said the current carwash location is where semis unload cars. Mr. Walter asked if the Land Rover building is going to be maintained. Mr. Oney said yes. Mr. Walter asked what if the Land Rover brand goes away. Mr. Hale said the Land Rover building 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission January 21, 2010 -Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 22 stays, if the brand does go away the building would be altered to become more compliant with what is there. Mr. Walter said that would give time to alter the parking, if Land Rover left. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there were any comments. Motion #1 and Vote Mr. Taylor made a motion to recommend approval to City Council of this Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan because it allows the orderly development and continued a high - quality design of an existing business, meets the development pattern within the area and all applicable review criteria, with eight conditions: 1) An additional 10 feet of right -of -way along Perimeter Drive is required to be dedicated to the City; 2) If additional building square footage is constructed that is not accounted for in the traffic analysis a traffic impact study must be provided, as directed by the City Engineer, 3) The development text be modified to eliminate the option of a wall sign for the Volvo brand and permit a brand ground sign adjacent to the Volvo entrance to match the existing brand signs on the MAG campus; and 4) The existing Perimeter Center development text be updated to remove references and requirements for the MAG dealership; 5) That the development text be modified to include regarding lighting from the existing Perimeter Center text for Subarea J; 6) That the development text be modified to restrict the use of the car wash to employees only; 7) That the development text be modified to permit internally illuminated campus identification signs (A & B) and clarified regarding administrative approval for sign faces for the brand and campus identification signs only; and 8) That the development text be modified to eliminate language allowing landscape screening to be deferred. Ben Hale, Jr., representing the applicant agreed to the above conditions. Mr. Walter seconded the vote. The vote was as follows. Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; and Mr. Walter, yes; Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 7 — 0.) Motion #2 and Vote Mr. Taylor made a motion to approve this Final Development Plan application because it complies with the development text, preliminary development plan, the applicable review criteria and existing development standards within the area with six conditions: 1) The plans be revised to account for an additional 337 square feet of landscape area and three trees to meet the interior landscape requirement; 2) Four additional trees will need to be planted along the SR161/US33 frontage to meet the planting requirements specified within the development text; 3) The directional Sign S be removed from the pole and ground- mounted to be consistent with the existing directional signs: 4) The Volvo wall sign indicated on the final development plans be removed and a brand ground sign be permitted adjacent to the Volvo entrance to coordinate with the existing brand signs on the MAG campus; and 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Jaanaryy 21, 2010 - Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 22 5) That the plan be modified to require that the landscape screening along the eastern property line be installed with the building construction; and 6) A stormwater easement will need to be provided, subject to approval by Engineering. Ben Hale, Jr., representing the applicant agreed to the above conditions. Mr. Walter seconded the vote. The vote was as follows: Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Hardt, yes, Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes, and Mr. Walter; yes; Mr. Taylor, yes. (Approved 7 — 0.) /7.akland terior Modift ' n 4261 W Dublin- Granvil oad 102 orridor Develop t District/Condi ' sl Use As introduced ese two applicati s involving the a tion of an an use for p nt storage and di ay. She said th separate ll he swo in the applicant's epresentative, Mi el A Warner, Oakland Nurs wi ng to speak in egard to this c , including City Claudia sak said the Co ' or Development tc be laced over an ap oximately 500- t r mends approval o he Corridor Devel mei 1) That the p r design and colo omplemi by Plan ' g; riot application r is a wood latti r Foot display She said that anning District app ' tion with three co ions: t the b ' ing and arbor, su ' to approval 2) That plans be revised t emove the "patio" el; and 3) Tha stormwater man ment plan for the er area that comp ' with the S e is submitted as art of the applic for a Certificate Zoning Plan ould the paver a not be reduced to s than 500 square et. W Husak explained fiat the Conditional se application is fo a exi/Iind orage area o bring the grandf erect site into co liance. She said ere are ies located within the City, the issue of out plant display is 'que and e said the intention is to et a designation o here a plant disp can be and limitations would be. s. Husak said Pl Wing is recommen g approval for the pl material ' h the following co itions: That the display a proposed for th arking lot be spaces located sest to Dublin Gr, ' lle Road; 2) That the di y area proposed f the parking lot be March gh June and Septe er through D 3) That th utdoor display located within Vea barn or an equivalent, jest to approval b on&fi' al Use Discussion is Taylor asked tha view of the si Li its concern was t there were two <ve at La Scala. to exclude the t9d'parking to seasonal heration from ; and ng lot be secti ed off with wood ing area and La ;es for this tyros la restaurant /s. , but there is 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive X n RECOR O OP PROCEEDINGS -- Mllaw" of - - - - - NMI- Cb cogow Matting +I Held SeAbvnber Z 2WO Page 4 11 RNOB 4$-09 t�tli� the2809 -ZOis Yaw Copftw 1 Program. hole. 6raudgarn atedad ddautnenfa have , based on the sessions. The ftff do%Vs the tterris d dw" the re were no cshtiriges dked Cottndi durar tare F& Fisher, yes; Kaerian, yes; Vk* , yea; mayor CtAnr , yea, I& Gerber, r. t. pr, yn. Ordln U-N Rea Lng. 0.3 Located on the S Jlde of Brides Sb*K on with Fratdil Street from: help. rift own Center Iq td. , Planned URIC Devrlo n !a) to any gtm0one on matter. took place at the meetiv, and q Ifgr. Leditlldw. Mr. RelRer, yes; Mr. Yes: Mayor i hnic rcher, yep, Mr. Gerber. : Vfoe Mayor Being, Dtts<trfct, tTowrr Center v vlsad �. Case h+lo. Z Rozonhtg Apprapdminieiy 2.1 Acres Located an the South S1de ot: Vamturo Drl", Approidma taly NO Fast Sa,lhhM * of the Interaction web Perlw*w Dirt" thaw. PCp, Planriod Comrnertt a Dlwbid (PWWWtar Cantor, Subarea D) to: PUD, Planned Unit Development blaeriat. (low rnatar Center, Subarea ,H1 -- Case W 03.1122) His, Srautigwn stated that Ms. Husak is present to respond to arty further quesUons horn CcKxa regarding this matter. There wars no fattier questions, VOID 00 9W_QWhWm: Mr. Keenan. yes, Mr. Rskrer, yes; Mr. Cverber, yas; Mayor Chin ilcl-Zuerdw, yes; W. Leddlder, yes: Vida Mayor goring, yes. FEES lrr 132 of CodH%d Omahas the Cltyr of Duf�h)n by rig VIaking Excbpdori Aflowftrp Firing of BtDu 010on when Conduce In JUndfon with a Fu atrlotfa Event, or 8u Aid ty se Specifi Authorised by the Mariager or the City M s Dsel9nee. W. Srautlgam that this Cade amt Is brought to Caen Mlow•up to a 9P who a 21 �Un astute of a peiriatlC e++ant a bc�l hotel. Staff left H was to plane tale in the Code and have the a Hake the on a 0aas46ycasa on me uainanoa- N8YWu; t1MW- 'f�, YW Mayor Sol". yes: Mr abler, yes, *. Keenan. y OnBrlanGa 99-08 Amerrdhrg n 10 {Personal Laavek n t1 (Vacation ), Section 13 (Paid i1 Off for t_rry Pas"1ans) rid 8eedon �15 pnau s'iaimnta) of( in on Plan") fur Non4J n Errrpfayeas). Mr. IntiDduoed the ord' Gerber, yea; W. Leddidp{, yes, on e rTrne Par manat rhea a T3d8 1[,.,,Z Srautteam elated that VCouakaff n Adminktrat mrnttfee of the whole t0 the Cour�rli nee [, Proposed angel Op the Clty"s leeye ra wens dlaamax! in dap - present the ordinattde In ton0k which would Inin hanges cussed at the Mr. Harding ate that as dhu ataR prepared kQisla Impterrmv d,arges p a thhe Ca rrW*V deft Aug 10. The packs &OngeL Sane quo arose in regsrt I �I 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive • CITY OF DUBLUL 1awdwa o 1a•.�.• ».�. MW ad.AW Roos Gtlft dBD M1&1Mfi ft4nW M& dl HI O� F=dl" "ley VA1bS* wrwAA*L0haa C000ft a Legacy PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION AUGUST 21, 2008 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 4. Perimeter Center, Subarea J -- NAG — Porscbe 6325 Perimeter Loop 08- 073AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Proposal: Extemal building modifications and a wall sign for a portion of an existing automobile sales and service establishment located within Subarea J of the Perimeter Center Planned Commerce District, located on the east side of Perimeter Coop Road, at the intersection with Mercedes Drive Request: Review and approval of amended final development plan under the Planned District provisions of Code Section 153.050. Applicant: Tim Galli; represented by Ben W. Hale, Jr., Smith and Hale. Planning Contact: Jonathan Papp, Planner. Contact information (614) 410 -4683, jpapp(@dublin.oh.us MOTION: To disapprove this Amended Final Development Plan because this proposal does not comply with the amended final development plan criteria or the existing development standards within the area VOTE: 7-0. RESULT: This Amended Final Development Plan was disapproved. STAFF CERTIFICATION nathan Papp Planner 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission August 21, 2008 — Minutcs Page 5 of 19 Moti d on Vote • Todd tmmerman made the otion to approve thi ended Final Deve ment Plan because th proposal is cons' ent with the s rds and condition approved with oning/preliminary elopment plan and w' the amended final elopment plan criteri t forth in Section 15 50 of the Dublin Zo ' g Code with the folio ng two conditions: 1) at the trash recept es be moved appro mately ten feet aw from the benches around the ketball court; and That the plant erial, particularly th elow Birch, be ree rated for better site conditio y staff. r. Hahn agreed to two conditions as li above. Richard for seconded the mo ' n. The vote was as fo ws: Mr. Freiman, ; Mr. Saneholtz, yes- r. Walter, yes; Mr. F' an, yes; Mr. Taylor es; Ms. Amorose G es, yes; and Mr. Zi etman, yes. (Appro v 7-0.) 4. Perimeter Center, Subarea J — MAG — Porsche 6325 Perimeter Loop 08- 073AFDP Amended Rinal Development Plan Todd Zimmerman swore in the applicant's representative, Ben W. Hale, Jr., Smith and Hale. City representatives, and all others who wished to speak in regard to this case. Jonathan Papp presented this request for review and approval of an amended final development plan to permit exterior modifications and a wall sign on a portion of the MAG (Midwestern Auto Group) dealership building. He said that the 14 -acre site within Subarea J was created in 1998, especially for auto dealerships. He said the 7,335- square-foot Land Rover building to the north faces Perimeter Drive and a second, 57,355- square -foot building to the south is oriented toward Perimeter Loop Road and SR 161/US 33. Mr. Papp said parking is located on all sides of the building. Mr. Papp said the existing main building includes three angled showrooms for the primary vehicle brands sold at MAG. He said each of the dealership pods is designed to match and provide continuity and cohesiveness to this innovatively designed building. Mr. Papp said the development text considers "box- like" buildings to be undesirable within the subarea. He said this same plan was informally reviewed by the Commission in July, with the Commission offering feedback about the fapade changes and the additional wall sign. Mr. Papp said the applicant has chosen to proceed with the application with no changes to the proposal. Mr. Papp said the Porsche dealership occupies the northern portion of the main building which has showrooms and sales areas slightly elevated above grade and service level areas that are partially below grade. He said the existing design of the building is unique with the three main showrooms mirroring the layout of the vehicle display pods by extending from the main building fagade at angles. He said to accommodate the modifications for Porsche, the northern angled showroom portion would be replaced with a curved wall slightly taller than the remaining walls. Mr. Papp said the Perimeter Center Planned Commercial District development text requires striking, noteworthy and innovative architecture and states that box -like buildings will not be • considered as a use of right. He said the MAG building was designed with a cohesive theme of prominent angled showrooms constructed of glass. He said while this proposal includes a slight curve in the proposed design, the Porsche building tends to resemble a box -like structure. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Connommvn August 21, 2068 - Minutes Pagc 6 of 10 Mr. Papp said the text permits the four existing signs, one at each of the three entrances to the • site, and one facing US 33. Internally oriented directional signs are also permitted for the site as are vehicle brand identificalion signs interior to the site, He said the plan proposes a 33-square- foot Porsche red wall sign with the Porsche brand on the building as shown on the illustration. He said no other vehicle brands were approved for wall signs along the main building fatede. Mr, Papp said this proposed amended final development plan does not meet the applicable review criteria. He said this proposal does not conform to the preliminary development plan or development text for the area in regards to offering "striking, noteworthy and innovative architecture' or that "a dealership with box -like buildings will not be considered a use of right." This modification interrupts the cohesive architectural style that has been created on the site by significantly altering the very form that makes the design innovative, and "non -box" like. He added that a wall sign in this portion of the site would not he in character with the rest of the building. Mr. Papp said therefore, Planning recommends disapproval of this proposed emended final development text as submitted. Mr. Hale said the Commission's input from the last meeting was communicated to the Porsche dealers, but they asked him to file this application bemuse they wanted a vote taken. Mr. Freimann said he had missed the Work Session and he asked why they went with the box. Mt. Hale said that was what Porsche wanted to do. Mr. Saneholtz confirmed that the manufacturer was prompting this structure. He explained that the same thing had been experience with a Hummer dealership, as well as conversations with BMW over brand image, international proclamations of manufacturers from overseas, basically trying to impose their corporate will upon our community. He said in the past, the Commission stood fast that this community was unique in itself, and the fact that we can still govern ourselves locally is treasured. He said this particular application simply does not meet the intent of the local authorities as far as what they envision for this property and he hoped that Porsche would respect that. Mr. Zimmerman and Ms. Amorose Groomes agreed that this proposal had been discussed At The Work Session and nothing had changed. Motion and Vote Mr. Zimmerman made a motion to disapprove this Amended Final Development Plan because it does not meet the Adopted Policies and Plans and the Development Details review criteria and is not consistent with development standards in the Area Ms. Amorose Groomes seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Taylor, yes; Mr, Fishman, yes; Mr. Walter, yes; Mr. SAneholtz, yes; Mr. Freimann, yes; Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; and Mr. Zimmerman, yes. (Disapproved 1- 0.) WOti '"'MN Mr, mm explei the Work Sess' n purpose /dp dures. He add th at ali Ig ments made by t Commission are formal and ng, end arc in nded only to rovide general gui oe to the appli regarding the ap 21.032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS _ - Minutesof. _Dublin City Council _ August 18, 2008 Page f 1 are will be a second bilc hearing at the ptember 2 Council /no. Ordinance 57-08 Resonfng Approxlmatety 21 Acres Located on the South Side of Venture Drive, Approximately 800 Feet Southwmt of tha Intersection with Perimeter Drive from: PCD. Planned Commeros District (Perimeter Center, Subarea D) to: PUD. Planned Unit Development District (Perimeter Center, Subarea J-1 — Case No. 03 -1122) Ms. Salay Introduced the ordinance. Ms. Husak stated that this proposal Is for a free-standing parking lot to serve the existing Midwestern Auto Group ear dealership within Subarea D of the Perimeter Center PCD. PZC reviewed this proposal Informally on June 19 and recommended approval of the proposal at the July 17 meeting. She noted the following: 1. The MAG dealership exists to the west of this site. It Is located In Subarea J of the PCD. The land to the east and aouth is undeveloped. To the north Is the Perimeter Center office district. 2. The applicant is proposing to amend the development tend for a portion of Subarea D to Create a new subarea to be called Subarea J-1. This subarea would continue to allow the uses approved for Subarea 0 — Suburban Office and institutional district and Office, Laboratory and Research district — as well as a free - standing parking lot for 191 spaces for parking for employees and vehicle storage for the car dealership in Subarea J. 3. The applicant Is currently explorirg a building expansion for the MAG deaiemNp'in Subarea J, and this prompts the need for an additional parking lot 4. The PZC discussion centered around whether or not It was appropriate to require a conditional use to allow for further review of this proposal. The development text as proposed does refied that a conditlonat use would be required to allow this lot to exist. 5 The proposal is for a new subarea within Perimeter Center PCD for 2.21 aces wfih frontage along Venture Drive. There are two access points which are internal to the existing MAG dealership. There are no access points off of the pubic road. 6 The text as well as the preliminary development plan Indicates 191 parking spaces. The text limits this to employee parking and vehicle storage. There Is no display or sales of vehicles permitted. Planting's review Indicates that all criteria are met and that the traffic issues and stormwater muanagemrent criteria may be met with the condition approved by the PZC. Staff Is recommending approval at the second readriglpublIc hearing on September 2. with the one Condition as noted In the staff report. Mayor Chinnki- Zuercher asked If MAG owns all of the area In Subarea D Secondly, regarding the landscaping, It appears from the renderings that the landscaping would most only the minimum Code requirements. Ms. Husak responded that the preliminary development plan Indicates where the pavement will be located; the landscaping will be required to meet Code and will be reviewed by the Commission at the final development plan stage. The screening and buffering required would have to be klentified r: r that plan. Mayor Ctdnnici- Zueretw stated that this issue has been a recurring one with all auto dealerships In Dubin, and none have been held accountable to meeting the landscaping code requirements. The dealership along Sawmil Is not meeting the Code for landscaping. Ms. Husak responded that there are some exception for car dealerships when they are selling cars that allows a reduction In these Items. Mayor Chinnlcl- Zuarcher noted that the Cadillac dealership an Sawmill was required as part of an expansion several years ago to build mounds and do landscaping as outlined in the text. This has not been done and they are not being held accountable, The City needs to be consistent In holding card dealerships accountable in view of the amount of asphalt on their sites. Ms. Husak responded that staff will pay particular attention to that 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS MLnms of Oublhn citycound Meeting aownp U ft slomk,c .o"No - 0--* _ August 16, 2008 Page 12 Vim Mayor Boring noted that the Sawmill Road auto dealership newer let the landscaping I at outset, grow endscaphg height shorn on the plea before Council tonight has detident AW time. Jr.. 37 W. Brood Street stated that the real estate of Subarea J. the location of the existing dealership. Is actually owned by a REiT out of Atlanta. MAO owns the business and leases the buildings from the REIT. Subarea D is owned by a corporation that is a subsidiary of the MAG dealership. Therefore, the MAG dealership or an associated company actually owns all of Subarea D. which consists of 15 saes. Vice Mayor Baring noted that an applicant who wants to construct a building has to meet parking requirements, if the parking requirements do not meet what is required by the building. typically, the applicant is InstrixAsd to make the building smaller. If MAG expands their building, this results in a need for parking in another location? She Is confused with the process. Ms. Husak responded that during the construction of an anticipated expansion, which has not been approved by PdZ, there will be a need for vehicle storage for employees. The site does meet Code in terms of parking and will continue to do so If the expansion Is approved and buBt Planning understands this as more related to the needs during construction and a potential requirement of it* fmnchhm to have a certain level of Inventory. Mr. Hale clarified that MAG recently purchased the Volvo dealership, uaurently located in U nworth. They want to bring it to this location. A revised final development plan would allow Volvo to come to this location. Because of the construction that wait occur. the site will be disrupted. The owner made it clear to the Planning Commission that If they saw fit, tie would be willing to have this be a temporary lot. it was the applicants attorneys' position that under the cument zoning of the property, the applicant could build this lot with a condttionel use. There is language that allows a non - attached, free standing lot in association with a permitted use. Staff did not agree with this position and so the applcant tiled a rezoning. The owner has also Indicated that N necessary, he would make this site work without these additional parkitg spares. However, it would require mixing employee parking with guest parking and car display areas. Operationally, this is not desirable. The applicant made It dear to the Commisslon that they would do this as a temporary lot, but the Commission focused more on having a first -class lot, with landscaping. etc. In arse it becomes a permanent lot. His associate. Mr. Underhill rewrote the first draft of this ordinance allowing a car dealership on J-1. He had this portion removed to avoid any rrisurmlerstanding. if there Is to be any additional car dealership on this part of Subarea D, the applicant must come back to rezone It What the applicant is asking tonight Is to allow this lot to be used for employee parking and some storage of overflow cars. They are pursuing a minimal change to the zoning to allow them to ask the Commission for a conditions! use. They will meet all of the landscaping requirements In the Code. Them wig be a second readinglpubUc hearing on September 2. Ordl ae 58-06 ono the City Manager Enter into an Agreeme eee�rpL rehaae a .033 Acres, re or Lon, Fee Simple I rest, and a .D61 Acres, eas, Temporary /nR uction Eassawnt m Robert O. and Jane ckholt, Said Acreage (. mill Road. Ju outh of the Intersection Sawmill and Hard R nd ing an cy. dider in cad the ordinance. h hat this was drafted as a otudon for the last nd because It d rdiase, R ties been re to an ordinance. The pu ase poke i s ilia rice. and staff is request mergency action In order proceed with dosing non asked i<the City the value of the Improv wits being Installed at tJiis . gsby responded wiH have the total d the project available, i hie g-way acquisition d construction costs. 2t- 032AFDP Amended final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi -- Venture Drive The Planning mid Zoning Commission took the foilowing action at this meeting: 2. Perimeter Center, Subarea D — NAG Parking Lot Venture Drive 01122 Rmulag/PrelilinWry Development Plan Proposal: PLAKWG AND ZONING COMNIMION RECORD OFACT[ON CM OF DUBLIN. JULY 17, 2008 wwr southeast of the intersection with Perimeter Drive. w`wa.�w Review and approval of a reaoning/prelimituuy development plan l�oP+.ap am under the Planned Districtprovisioas of Code Section 153.050. aum.awmuiw Brentlinger Rent Estate Co.; represented by Smith and Hale. Mc�/Im;61M16Y� Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II. N[ll�Jlpq,l (614) 4104675; cbu%Jo@dublin.oh.us 1,�miV�.4lN01nA�N The Planning mid Zoning Commission took the foilowing action at this meeting: 2. Perimeter Center, Subarea D — NAG Parking Lot Venture Drive 01122 Rmulag/PrelilinWry Development Plan Proposal: A stand -alone perking lot to serve in existing car dealership within Subarea D of the Perimeter Center Planned Commerce District, located on the south side of Venture Drive, approximately 800 feet southeast of the intersection with Perimeter Drive. Request: Review and approval of a reaoning/prelimituuy development plan under the Planned Districtprovisioas of Code Section 153.050. Applicant: Brentlinger Rent Estate Co.; represented by Smith and Hale. Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II. Contact Infomration: (614) 4104675; cbu%Jo@dublin.oh.us MOTION: To recomni to City Council approval of this Rezonini#Preliminary Development Plan because the proposal is compatible with the development pattem in this arcs and complies with the preliminary development plan criteria aral the existing development standards within the area with one conditions: 1) That the applicant provide a stormwiter management report for the site that complies with the City's stormwater management and stream protection Code, subject to approval by the City Engineer. "Bea Hale, Jr,, Smith and Hale, representing the applicant, agreed to the above conditions. VOTE; 6 -0. RESULT: This BewninglPreliminary Devolopmerd Plan was approved. It will be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation of approval. STAFF CERTIFICATION &-A,� ' Claudia D. Husak, 21.032AFDP Plainer Il Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group Pt1D MAG BMW, Mini, Au&- Venture Drive Dubim Planning and Zoning Commiseioo July 17, 20H — Malting Minutes Page 6 of39 L Perimeter Center, Subarea D — MAG Parking Lot Venture Drive 03 -112Z Rexonhgftreliminary Development Plain Claudia Husak presented this rezoning application. She said the plan is for a parking lot to serve the existing Midwestern Auto Group car dealership within Subarea D of the Perimeter Center Planned Commerce District. She reminded the Commissioners of their previous b&rmal comments on the application during the June 19, 2008 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, namely requesting that an alternate location be chosen for the padding lot which would place it further away from the US 33 frontage. Ms. Husak pointed out that the new proposal locates the parking lot along Venture Drive at an east -west orientation. Ms. Husak described the surrounding uses and explained that the property is located in Subarea D. while the MAO dealarship is located in Subarea L She said the applicant was proposing to rezone the subject property in Subarea D to a new Subarea, to be called J-1. Subarea J -1 would permit the same uses as Subarea D, but also allow for a stand -alone parking lot for employees and vehicle inventory. Ms. Husak explained that plans for an expansion of the MAO dealership would create a need for this parking lot Ms. Husak also said that the development text indicates that a conditional use would be required for the parking lot to exist. Ms. Husak displayed the proposed preliminary development plan and explained that Subarea J -1 would be approximately 2.21 acres with a majority of frontage on Venture Drive. She said the plan and text show a maximum of 191 parking and storage spaces. She said that access is limited through the MAG site and that the development text does not allow for vehicle display. Ms. Husak spoke about the Commission's previous discussions regarding environmendslly- friendly pavement options, but said that the applicant had not addressed this issue in their application. She explained that Planning had created a condition which would require the applicant to utilize pervious pavement in their final development plan. Ms. Husak said that in reviewing the criteria for a preliminary development plan, Planning Sound that all were met excluding the criterion for traffic utilities and storm water management She explained that this criterion could be met with two proposed conditions. She said the Planning is recommending approval with two conditions: 1) That the applicant provide a stormwater management report for the site that complies with the City's stormwater management and stream protection Code, subject to approval by the City Engineer and 2) That the development text be revised to require pervious pavement for this site. Ben Hale Jr., representative for the applicant, explained that the MAG dealership would begun work on their building and that they would require temporary additional parking. He said that the applicant's intent was not to create a larger lot for car sales, but to have an area for parking for approximately 145 employees and some vehicle storage overflow during MAG construction. W. Hale said the conditional use would allow the Planning and Zoning Commission to place a time limit on the parking -lot and that it was intended to be temporary in nature. He explained that the applicant did not feel they would have any issues screening the lot from US 33 now that it was 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive Dublin Plmmining mid Zoning Commission July 17,2W8 — McWng Kin um Page 7 of 39 oriented along Venture Drive. Mr. Hale also explained that access was internal and that there would be no curb cuts onto Venture Drive. Mr. Freimana expressed confusion regarding the temporary nature of the parking lot. He discussed MAG's intentions to expand northward, and questioned whether or not the dealership would be in need of parking spaces after this construction. Mr. Hale Jr. said that the site would meet Code for parking after the expansion. He also discussed the need for MAG to relocate its BMW dealership due to the future Frantz Road imps ovemects. Mr. Hale said MAO would potentially like to move BMW to this site. W. Walter wanted to clarify that the applicant would vacate the proposed lot when an occupancy permit was issued for the future MAG construction. Ms. Husak said that it was Planning's impression that parking spaces would still be needed after the future construction was complete. Ms. Amorose Groomes felt that in the firture the proposed lot would still be necessary for MAO to meet their parking requirements. She had difficultly labeling the lot as temporary and did not feel it would be logical to construct the lot as a temporary one. Mr. Hale Jr. said that the lot was being proposed as temporary, but that the owner would like to have a permanent lot. Mr. John Oney, Architectural Alliance, confirmed that in the end MAG would lose parking spaces. He said that with the proposed future MAO construction and the temporary lot, the site would have 698 spaces. Mr. Oney predicted that this parking not my be sufficient during the business' busiest times. He said that in the long -range sense the applicant would like this lot to be permanent. Mr. SanehDltz felt that the applicants were contradicting themselves and at the last meeting had said the lot would be purely temporary in nature. He said that he was now hearing that the applicant might need this lot to be permanent. He was concerned that if the future MAO construction were not to take place, the lot would remain for an extended period of time. Ms. Husak said that this would depend on conditions placed on the conditional use concerning future evahnation of the lot. Mr. Saneholtz confirmed that this preliminary plan did not give the applicant permission to construct the lot. Ms. Hunk agreed and said that the applicant would need to receive conditional use and final development plan approval from the Commission before the lot could be constructed. Mr. Hale Jr. said the only intention was to give the applicant the right to have the parking lot, and that the temporary or pint nature of the lot was not as important at this juncture. Mr. Freimacm said be saw a need for additional parking as opposed to a desire for it, and that the lot should possibly be permanent. Ms. Amorose Groomes left that it was not environmentally or civically responsible to pave this area and then demolish it in the future. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive Dublin Ptenning and Zoning CammiisWan July 17, 2008 — Mo ft 1lfmia s Page 8 of 39 Mr. Walter asked bow long the construction would last. Mr. Oney replied that the constrw on would be a maximum of 18 months. Mr. Hale Jr. explained that the lot was being requested first because it would need to be tbm: before construction on the dealership began Ms. Amorose Groomes noted that the Commission wanted to help MAG in their expansion and business, but that their decimn needed to be weighed against the good of the community. She expressed that she would like to see the parking lot oonstructed in a pen umat fashion so that it was built right the first time. Mr. Walter was disappointed that the leading edge of the business was a parking lot and agreed with Ma Amorow Groomes. He said the lot should be permanent and oonsm=W with architectural integrity and well integrated into the rest ofthe site. Mr. Tim Galli of Wwestern Auto Group rradeiuted that the dealership needs extra parking during their future eonshuctition. He said that after construction, the parking lot would be tight but that they would not need as many spaces as the proposed lot would provide. He explained that they would be willing to put a time flame on the lot. He said MAG's hope was that they would be permitted to move the BMW dealership to this site. He explained that if the Commission disapproved moving BMW/Mini to the site, they would be forced to disperse their employees and offices. He explained that if this were the end result, MAO would return the site to its original state. Mr. Galfi said that even if BMW/MW were to move to the site, they would most likely be forced to remove at least fifty percent of the lot. Mr. Taylor said that there seemed to be in agreement, and that if BMW/Mini were not to move to this site the parking lot could be used. He said if this were the case it should be designed correctly now. Mr. Taylor said the current proposal seemed like it could be nothing more than temporary because the remaining frontage in front of US 33 would not be large enough for a building. Mr. Hale Jr. said they were attempting to respond to the Commission's concern that the lot was too close to US 33. Mr. Taylor said that if BMW/Mini were to move to this site and the applicant were to request demolition of the parking lot, he would rather this proposal be implemented as opposed to the previous submission. Mr. Walter conf'xnned that the landscaping details would be presented at the final development plan Ms. Husak said this was correct. Mr. Walter asked if the applicant owned the property to the east of the site. Mr. Hale Jr. said a MAG dealership entity owned the site under conadm ion and approximately ten ages around it. Ms. Husak explained which lots were owned by MAO. Mr. Gatti confirmed. that MAO owned all the land between the existing dealership and Nationwide Children's Hospital through a company called Brentlinger Real Estate. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zonntg Commission July 17, 2009 - Mae ft Minutes Page 9 of 39 W. Walter said that thm was more room for MAO to expand and reiterated that they would Lice to see the site designed as something more mat. W. Oney said that this wag diTwutt due to uncertainty of HWMIMini`s relocation. He explained that tberc was a goad likellood that BMWIMW would arrive and use the sites whicb front on US 33. He said that rmwh of the ebages to the site plan were in rowan to Commission's comments repo ing US 33 ftn age. He also discussed the possible argil style of Atture buildings and their willingness to screen the paddng lot from the highway. Mr. Walter asked how march of the parking lot would need to be removed for future development, I& Oney said fifty percent would need to be removed. Mr. Zimmerman asked if this was fifty percent of the proposed tat. Mr. Oney dmn'bed parts of the lot whkb would need to be removed and said it in the best wenario they would keep it all. Mr. Zkmnetman said that if this lot was going to be built it should be done once in a per>niwent fasbiom He asked which layout awn 6o was better for development. Mr. Oney aid that the current plan which oriented the lot east to west along Ven><we was the best option for tilt n building placement. hIr. Frem ann expressed concern that there were competing retests and asked again if the lot was intended to be permanerd or temporary. He said tW if them was potential for this to be a permanent lot, he would like to see the lot done correctly. Mr. Taylor said be would lice to we an athutive lot with ttees and saeening in case nothing is built in the fhtt= He assumed that if new coametion were to take place along US 33, the lot would be aktered m7xdlesa. Steve Langworthy said that it appeared that a conceptual master plan was needed for the rest of the property so that Planning and the Commission could bane a better grasp on MAO s vision. Ma. Amorose Groomes expressed cowem that this would be time consuming and delay MAO's h ninm. Mr. Lengworthy clarified that this plan was only allowing the possibility of parking lot colon and this would give them time to submit a master plan. Mr. Walter questioned whedw or not this parcel was kwgc enough to have adequate swcering. Ms. Husak confirmed there was apprroxmudely thirty fi=t and there was adequate space. Mr. Hale Jr. said that he felt the best option for a pent lot was the design presented tonight, Mr. Walter said he was not inclined to support a conditional use and he would prefer the text be changed to allow for a perrnanent pouting lot. Mr. Langworthy explained that the sppkaza would need to come back Wier with plans for the lot, and that they were approving the use and not the lot itself. Mr. Freim mn expressed tbat, like Mr. Walter, he would like to approve the lot wd oot have the applicant come hack for a conditiowJ use. Ms. Husak explained that the c nditionial use would 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive Dublin Planning and Zoning Ca=issim .tiny 17,2M — Madding bfttztes Page 10 of 39 not necessarily have to tie the use of the lot to a time limit and that the use could simply be approved without a time limit. Mr. Langworthy said that this rezoning would give the applicant the option for a parking lot use. The applicant would then apply for a conditional use and final development plan for the approval of a parking lot. Ms. Amoroso Groomes reiterated that when the applicant applies for the conditional use the Commissioners would like to see a plan that is more permanent in nature. Mr. Hale Jr. requested that the permeable pavement requirement not be in the rezoning due to the significautly higher cost of that type of material and the uncertainty of the permanency of the lot. Mr. Walter questioned whether this issue should be in a rezoning and suggested it should be in a final development plan. Mr. Langworthy confirmed that this issue could be addressed in either the conditional use or the final development plan. Motion and Vote Mr. Zimmerman made the motion to recommend to City Council approval of this Rezoning/Preliminary Development Plan because it complies with the preliminary development plan criteria and the existing development standards within the area with one condition: 1) That the applicant provide a stormwater management report for the site that complies with the City's stormwater management and stream protection Code, subject to approval by the City Engineer. Mr. Zimmerman asked Mr. Halve Jr. if he agreed to the one condition Mr. Hale Jr., agreed. Mr. Walter seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Ms. Amoroso Groomes, yes; W. Taylor, yes; Mr. Freiman, yes; Mr. Sanehoitz, yes; Mr. Walter, yes; and Mr. Zimmerman, yes. (Approved 6 — 0.) 3. r Ran Fdemen School 08- 045AFDP t Mr. Zwermau unced that Mr. Mr. Saneholtz VE he did not require photographs the site. / 8815 Avery Road Amended al Devebpment P hz pulled flue ease m the consent age presentation by C is Husak, but would a to see Todd ' erman swore in tapplicant, Tun D! aw�d 1 others who wished speak in regards to claw Mr. Sanehohz co that if the ion approved could stay in the' form forever. a noticed when vier one end oft mporary classroom as incredibly loud. Ijd ;City Schools, by representatives, ue;s , the units ( rs ?) the site that the HV unit on suggested the HVA moved by 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 4. Perimeter Center, Subarea J — MAG- Porsche 6315 Perimeter Loop 08- 059INF Informal Proposal: External building modifications of a portion of an existing automobile sales and service building located within Subarea J of the Perimeter Center Planned Commerce District, located on the east side of Perimeter Loop Road, at the intersection with Mercedes Drive. Request: This is a request for informal review of architectural modifications. Applicant: Tim Gelli, Midwestern Auto Group; represented by Smith and Hale LLC. Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II. Contact Information: (6141410 -4675, chusak @duhlin.oh.us RESULT: The Commission reviewed this informal request for architectural modifications and a new sign for a portion of the - existing MAG automobile dealership. The Commission did not support the proposed box -like building and metal panels replacing the glass store fronts, stating that changing the shape and making this portion of the building larger would destroy the character of the buildings. The Commission did not support the proposed wall sign on the building main elevation. STAFF CERTIFICATION Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner II PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WORKSESSION RECORD OF DISCUSSION JULY 10, 2008 CITY OF DUBLIN_ bq a..a.rax�v sawsm.ama�aoaa o�em.onm awisiae PW-110o: did alO1Y0 Fox ei umnn weeane:.ewim.on.� Cio.Hn9 a UgarY The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 4. Perimeter Center, Subarea J — MAG- Porsche 6315 Perimeter Loop 08- 059INF Informal Proposal: External building modifications of a portion of an existing automobile sales and service building located within Subarea J of the Perimeter Center Planned Commerce District, located on the east side of Perimeter Loop Road, at the intersection with Mercedes Drive. Request: This is a request for informal review of architectural modifications. Applicant: Tim Gelli, Midwestern Auto Group; represented by Smith and Hale LLC. Planning Contact: Claudia D. Husak, AICP, Planner II. Contact Information: (6141410 -4675, chusak @duhlin.oh.us RESULT: The Commission reviewed this informal request for architectural modifications and a new sign for a portion of the - existing MAG automobile dealership. The Commission did not support the proposed box -like building and metal panels replacing the glass store fronts, stating that changing the shape and making this portion of the building larger would destroy the character of the buildings. The Commission did not support the proposed wall sign on the building main elevation. STAFF CERTIFICATION Claudia D. Husak, AICP Planner II Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 10, 2008 — Minutes Page 11 of 15 4. Perimeter Center, Subarea J - MAG - Porsche 6325 Perimeter Loop 08- 059INF Informal WORK SESSION Claudia Husak presented this informal request by the Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) to discuss changes to the architecture and a sign for a portion of their existing dealership, located in the Perimeter Center PUD, Subarea J. Ms. Husak said there are two buildings on this site, the northern building contains the Land Rover brand vehicles and the southern 57,000- square -foot building has a variety of automobile brands. She said this proposal is to modify the angled portion of the northern building by replacing the front fayade with more of a curved design which increases the width and height of the showroom. Ms. Husak said the MAG development text identifies the need for noteworthy, innovative architecture and does not permit a box design. She stated that Planning's evaluation of the proposal finds it reminiscent of a box design. Ms. Husak said the proposed Porsche building includes a wall sign. She said no other wall signs exist along the main building, but there are ground signs at the entrances. She said a wall sign was approved for the Land Rover building, but the other main franchisees do not have any wall signs along this building. Ms. Husak introduced two discussion points for the Commissioners' input. [The italicized discussion points are followed by the Commissioners' comments.] Ben W. Hale, Jr., Smith and Hale, representing MAG said a new final development plan was approved, but it had not been built. He said that plan has been updated and SAAB has been added to the dealership. He explained that Porsche requested that the Commission be shown what they would like to have done on the site. He said they are also requesting an informal vote, although this is an informal application so they can see how the Commission feels about these changes. John Oney, Architectural Alliance, said the Porsche brand has implemented a facility program, where dealers must comply with the image in order to qualify for an allotment inventory program where they will have access to a 20 percent reserve of vehicles which would put other dealerships at a competitive advantage. He said there are interior and exterior compliance requirements. He said he introduced options to Porsche that were sensitive to the existing architecture, and their position was that all their image requirements need to be met. Mr. Oney said when he presented the proposed architecture to Planning he did not feel they supported it. He said he was guided by Planning to go forward with this informal submittal. Mr. Zimmerman invited those in the audience who wished to speak regarding this application to come forward. [There was no response.] Discussion is requested regarding the appropriateness of the proposed sign for Porsche as a separate identity, contrary to the development text. Mr. Zimmerman said the Porsche sign is on the top of the MAG marquee development, in the number one slot on top of the sign. Mr. Zimmerman and Mr. Walter were not supportive of a Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission July 10, 2008 — Minutes Page 12 of 15 separate Porsche wall sign as proposed. Mr. Fishman said the Porsche sign would have to meet Code. Does the Commission agree with the "box- like" assessment? If so, is the Commission concerned that the proposal is inconsistent with the overall character of the MAG campus in terms of the individualized building element and its impact on the overall architectural style and character? Richard Taylor noted that the existing building was of an extremely high quality in its design, materials, and its execution, and he had no doubt that this addition would also meet those standards. He said the addition shown is an interesting piece of work and by itself, on its own property might be a nice addition to Dublin, but he did not think it should replace one of the triangular pods on the existing building. He said the character of the existing building was consistent from end to end with the three identical pods, which made the building work. He said making one larger with a different shape, materials, and height would destroy the character of the existing building. Kevin Walter said this was his favorite building in Dublin because the architecture was exquisite, and displays cars in a way that makes someone want to buy a car. He said changing the style of this pod will cause the other dealers to want to change their portion of the building and destroy the design of the building. Mr. Walter said he was not inclined to provide a vote as requested in this non - binding situation; but specifically, his feedback was that he was not supportive of this proposed application. Chris Amorose Groomes agreed with the comments made by the other Commissioners and she would not be supportive of changing this specific pod. Mr. Zimmerman referred to the 1997 minutes where the architect spoke compassionately about the building they were proposing. Mr. Zimmerman said the building architecture is a great innovative look, which fits well as it is, and he cannot support changing it. Mr. Fishman said this was not his favorite Dublin building, but he thought in another location, he would consider it. Mr. Zimmerman ended this Work Session confirming that enough input had been provided for the applicant. Cuff OF DUBLEL low =9 041*%Olds40Ibbi2f/ phaw "M 61HIp�Im r= •1"10.1741 Web Ow. ft- L&A v*u& CM26p a tigwy PLANNING AND ZONING COMNIISSION WORKSESSION RECORD OF DISCUSSION JUNE 19, 2008 S. Perhmeter Center, Subarea D — MAG Parking Lot Ventam Drive 03 -112Z R=osh glPrelimtnw7 Developmwt Flan Applicant: Planning Contact: Contact Information: A stand -alone parking lot to save an existing car dealership within Subarea D of the Perimeta Center Pleased Commerce District, located between US 33 and Venture Drive, epproxiamately SOD feet southeast ofthe intersection with Perimeter Drive. Review of a rezonim/prelimh ary development ptan imder the Plate District provisions of Code Section 153 -050. Hrentlinger Real ate Co -; tepresente l by Smith and Hale LLC. Claudia D. Husak, A1CP, Planner Q. (614) 410 -4675, chu &Qcb1l Hn.oh.us RESULT: The Comawimon infondally commeaW on tWo recgmest for a jr development plan for a perking lot to serve the existing Midwestern Ante (Imup (MAO) car dealership to add vehicle parking as it primary use to the permitted uses of the adBfng PCD zoning. Some Commission= questioned the need for the lot aft the proposed modifications to the MAO dealership are completed Other Commissioners surged the applicant to find an alternate loeat an away fivm the pronii=t highway frontage. Mme Cession also discussed the need far a more envimwmentaily scumtive solution timers the proposed paveament. Tls Caeamission prefeszed rellmmft a conditional use to permit the parking lot to allow a review of the proposed association with the existing deWershiip. STAFF CERTIFICATION A9&et_-- 0 h ,t ,e Claudia D. Husain, AICP Planner 11 C 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group POD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture ':rive ;immetmn sworgrin Brien ►flag the aPPil t, other City to this case. The Commissi chose to forego Planning case. Flite for noti for this case, is a nearby resi r . Zimmerman in time wam t w to discuss case came forward] Mr. Z' made the rnotio approve this Am Final Dev Mr. F seconded them The vote was Mows: Ms. As yes; Mr. Fi yes; Mr. Taylor, . Freiman, yes; (A ved 6 — 0.) / Dublin PbodRa av zoning Commnum J=19.2009 —11ruR*X / Page 4 of 9 100 Emerdd ��i14 Poet Road Ansended Dsvelepmeat ies Manager the City of and all who wished to in 7 by Radler him a timely g this consent informative to come form.' (No one Plan application. Groomes, yes; Uy Mr. Ta mnerman, yya. - wokZlt SF,SSi : Mr. Zimm explained the Session purpose procedures. H advised that all eoc ants by the Co on are informal non-binding, and intended only to pro vide guidance to applicant ro e application. Perimeter , Subarea d - 6325 P.er Road al 08.02 Fin went Plan This case was eel prior to the eating. There was discussion or vote 5. Perimetrx Center, Subarea D — MAG Parking Lot Venture Drive 03 -1122 Development Plan Claudia Husak presented this request for an informal review of a pending rezoning /preliminary development plan for a stand -alone parking lot to serve the existing Midwestern Auto Group (MAO) campus. She explained that the application had been submitted in 2003, and then the applicant's development priorities shifted and the case had been placed on hold until recently. She said the site has frontage on U.S. 33 and it is currently undeveloped and has no significant aanual features. Ms. Husak said the Perimeter Center Planned Commerce. District, stretches from Avery- Muirfield Drive on the west past Emerald Parkway on the east. She said the applicant is proposing to amid part of Sub&= D, which is the office portion of this development. Ms. Husak said the applicant is proposing to roll Subarea D into the MAG campus and create a new subarea, Subarea I -1. She said the existing MAG campus has two buildings end an application has bees filed for an expansion of the use on that site which has prompted the applicant to move forward on this parking lot to provide employee parking and to allow for continued vehicle storage. Ms. Husak said that the vehicle storage is necessary while the MAG site is under 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive Dublin Ply and Zoning Commission Ium 19, 20M — Mwin a Page S 0f9 Ccoo on and later on because they intend to add another building which would take out some parking spaces and miqu ire additional space ibr inventory storage. Ms. Husak pointed out that the Commission is really looking at the stand-alone parking lot being a permitted use within the subarea. She said that landscaping and other details will be worked out when the applicant nthnns to the Commission for a final development plan. Ms. Husak said that die current permitted uses we those listed under the SO, Suburban Office and Institutional District, and the OLP, Office, Laboratory, and Research District, in the Zoning Code. Ms. Husak highlighted the design details of the proposed preliminary development plan. She said that the development text proposes that there will be no display spaces on this site and no vehicle sales, rraaxvitrg this lot for inventory and employee parking only. Ms. Husak said Planning has provided two points for discussion. [Each point is italicized below and Commission comments follow.] Ben Hale, Jr., Smith and Hale, representing the applicant, said the existing zoning would allow this parcel to be used as a conditional use because it states that a fmastariding parking lot is permitted in association with a permitted use. He said Planning did not agree on this point, so they we proposing to add this use to the underlying zoning. He said they were leaving the zoning exactly the same, except they would like to allow' the stand -alone parking lot as a Cpermitted use. Mr. Hale said an amended final development plan had been approved for the adjacent site, but MAG has not gone forward with it. He said they have filed a second amended final development plan which they think is a substantial upgrade from the previously approved plan. He said that because they are now in a position where they have to rezone to add this use, they want to have the lot built when construction on the MAG site begins. Mr. Hale said that in order to maintain their development schedule, they need the informal review tonight and when the rezoning application returns to the Commission for a decision, the Commission will have also seen the amended final development plan to consider before a vote is taken on the rezoning. . Flite Freimann said than if and when the other proposal for the MAO site is approved, he would have no problem supporting an off4te parking lot for inventory and employees. Mr. Freiman said he could not support paving 2.8 acres of grass until it is confirmed that they are going to go ahead with the expansion. Mr. Hale said that if MAG does not do the won, they will not need the parking lot. He said they were in total agreement with Mr. Freiman, but becu = they had to do an informal re 'view of the proposed parking lot first, the development timeline was stretched out Mr. Zimmerman invited those present who wished to discuss this curse to come forward. [No one came forward] Ms. Amorose Groomes asked how many parking spaoes were presently on the MAG site and how many spaces will be removed when the proposed construction is complete. John Oney, Architectural Alliance, said there are now 650 parking spaces, and after the construction, there will be 200 less. He said they needed alternative parking in place prior to removing the existing spaces. He explained that they will end up with 512 parking spaces on the MAO site when the 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini Audi Venture Drive Dubhn Planning ad Zacin8 t'.®iseton J=e 19, 2008— Mimilm Page6of9 propmed construction is complete. Mr. Saneholtz confirmed that 138 spaces will be lost in the final formation. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if this property is currently owned by the dealership, and if there are other properties in this general vicinity owned by the dealership. Mr. Hale said that the when the dealership was built, the property was owned by the dealership, but it has since been sold and the dealership is now leasing it. The dealership does, however, own the land where the parldog lot is proposed. Mr. Hale said they also lease and control the property on Post Road where the BMW dealer bip is located. Ms. Amorose Groomes asked if there was any intention of building future dealerships in Subarea D, adjacent to U.S. 33. Mr. Hale said the current BMW dealership location on post Road is inadequate according to BMW standards and it will eventually need to move. He said that they would h1ce to rdocate to this site some day, and the parking lot would no longer be needed at that point. Ms. Amorom Groomes said she would prefer to see car enrage for all of the dealerships on the vacant property between Venture Drive and Perimeter Drive instead, which would not be as highly visible from U.S. 33. She-said that if a lot is going to be built for vehicle storage, she thought it needed to be enviromentally sensitive and include a permanent pervious surface which would help with lot coverage and storm water issues. She suggested that the applicants figure out what tbey are going to do and then build something that would be more environmentally frieridly than three acres of asphalt,. She indicated that this site should be saved for something that might be more sestIict ically pleasing than a parking lot. Mr. Saneholtz asked if there was a reason why this parcel has not been combined with the existiumg dealership parcel to the west. Mr. Hale answered that the two parcels had differed owners, so they can not be combined at this time. Does the Commission sWort permitting an oj% -site, stand -alone parking and storage lot developed in awoctiation with a permitted use as described in the prop aid dewdopmenrt text? Would the Comniirsion prefer requiring a conditional see approval for a stand -alone parting Jot to allow for time restrletions? Mr. Saneholtz said this proposal seemed to be at best an anticipated and temporary use, and t1mv ore, if it was temporary in nature, he preferred a conditional use. He said that a conditional use would give the City an equal amount of feasibility as the applicant in reading to what ultimately happens to the MAO campus, rather than malting a permanent zoning change. Mr. Sanehoitz said that he wanted the City to be able to retain the ability to discontinue the parldng lot after a certain period of time to allow something to develop that might more appropriate for the location. Ms. Husak pointed out that the applicant would be able to combine a conditional use application with the final development plan application due to the sensitive timing of the project. Mr. Zimmerman asked for clarification why a rezoning was necessary. Ms. Husak said that a text revision is being proposed. She said that the Zoning Code states that all auto - oriented uses, including stand-alone paddng lots, are conditional uses. She said that the caveat is that they must 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive Dahlia MWAMg sod Zone s caomuniiOn hue 19, 2008 — t4duk, Pop 7 of9 Gbe in association with a permitted use, and on this site, time would not be a permitted use. Ms. Husak said that dealerships are not area of the permitted uses in the current zoning for Subarea D in which the parking lot is cunrndy proposed. W Hale said that because the Code said that they could have a stand-alone paeidag lot in association with a permitted use like which the MAO dealership, they have the ability to ask the Commission for a conditional use, bit Planning did not agree with him. He said that lire applicant would rather not rezone this parcel, but their only solution is to add this use to the underlying zoning in order to complete the development in a timely fashion. Mr. Hale said that everything else in the zoning classification remains the same. Mr. Langworthy said that Mr. Saneholtz had identified the relevant point — the £act that this is a se;wate parcel and is not owned by the some property owner. He said that this is what made the case to rezone this property to allow a stand -alone parking lot a conditional use. Ms. Amonm Groomes said that can if a parking lot was a permitted use, she did not know first what she saw on the plan reflects what has been demanded of development along the U.S. 33 Corridor for every other tenant regarding setbacks, screening, and parking behind the building. She said that she felt a stand -along parking lot is not visually acceptable. Mr. Sancholtz said that he agreed with Ms. Amorose Groomes' comments. He said he preferred the conditional use because it would allow some sort oftime limitation on the Waage. Ms. Amorose Groomes said that having a place to store cans is always an issue with dealerships. She said that although there may be a time limit placed on the parking lot, the need for vehicle storage will remain. Ms. Amorose Groomes predicted that there may be a need for another parking lot in the fimrre, and she did not know if developing 'a temporary parking lot in the meantime was terribly responsible. Mr. Hale said the BMW dealership will need to relocate;, and that the applicants will work with the Commission to propose an acceptable dealership with adequate parking. He said that they will mound and landscape this proposed lot so that the vehicles are not visible from U.S. 33. He said the parking lot will eventually no longer be needed and the land will be integrated into the overall plan. John Oney, Architectural Alliance, said BMW may be ready to submit an informal application within a few months. Mr. Saneholtz asked if he were inclined to allow the parking lot on a conditional use basis, and based on the temporary nature of the conditional use, how many years were needed. Mr. Hale reiterated that BMW's lease expires in 2011. Mr. Saneholtz confirmed that a three -year limitation on the conditional use may fulfill the business needs. W. Freimann said that he was uncomfortable discussing these things with so many moving parts. He said that he did not wont to tie the Commission's decision to the idea that BMW is definitely going to end up relocating there. CMr. Hale said that that was fine with them and that they would make the parking lot invisible from the freeway. He pointed out that many Dublin dealerships do not have their cars on the lots where they do business. He said they are often stored off - premise, which is not a very efficient way to run a business. 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi— Venture Drive NbUn and Zanins Cemminim Jana 19,2M — Mimma Pals 8 of 9 Ms. Amorose Groomes said she would not be supportive of the proposed pang lot location. However, she said that she realized the need for rmote parlldng and car storage ad she was empathetic to that need. she said that that are bed long team and more envuawncoully responsible ways to achieve that end without, locating the perking lot as proposed. She raitemted she wanted to keep pace with the work that has been done to prewvc that U.S. 33 corridor and work with the applicant to provide alternadvesi that would be more suitable and beneficial to both the City and the business owner. Warren Fishman noted that this site was zoned SO, Suburtm Office and Institutional District, and recalled that when the development originally came before the Commission and City Council, they were apprehensive about changing the zoniog to allow a car dealership. He pointed out that it may be assumed that a BMW dadaship will be located here, but the zoning for that subarea is SO and MR, Office, Laboratory, and Research Distric4 and tharcfore intended for development that would generate rove = for the City of Dublin. He recalled that one of the concerns was that this corridor could turn into a giant auto maII on Dublin's very attmetive revenue- gienerating U.S. 33 oorridor. Mr. Fishman said he, lime Ms. Amorose Groomes, was apprehensive about going down that road, and at this pohat, he did not want to make the decision to allow another car dealership here, W. Hale geoid that this was exactly the some use and zoning teat, but they are aslang for a conditional use for this parking lof~ He said that they were not asking to ptd a desterahip here, Richard Taylor said that if the strand -alone parking lot we m permitted as a conditional use with a time limit an it, he would be apprehensive about mating the time linked to a future deelership three years away. He said he thought it should be linked to the need for the temporary parking lot ,Mix. Fishman said that he was not enthused about paving the 2.8 a of undeveloped land. He said that it would be a chaUwgo to completely scram the lot_ Mr. Zimmerman agreed that if a conditional use was requested, there should be a time limitation. Mr. F'reimrmn said that ho was against a specific three: -year limitation because be wondered'what would happen in three ye'ts when the applicant resturres. He asked if the applicant will be made to jack - hammer it up, Several Commissioners agreed.. Ms. Anwase Groomes said that it is a hardship that would be placed on a corporate citizen. W. Saneholtz pointed out Hest the applicant would have they right to agree or disagree with the time limitation, and it is a business decision dud will need to be made now. He said that the minutes of that meeting are going to have to reflect that in no uncertain terms, so that the aext Comrai"oners can hold them to that decision. lit said that he could not believe deal the financial hardship of tearing up the parking tat would be more than building it. Mr. Hale said that it would be nowhm new the hardship it would be to not have the lot while the l►+lAO site is undergoing aonatruedon. Mr. Reim= ques Toned how removing the parking lot in three years would benefit anyone if an office building were built at that point 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi- Venture Drive rNhEn Pkm=g sad ZO=ff Cnimdum lune 19, 2008 — MmLfts Page 9 of 9 e ?&. Fr+cim= questioned how removing the parking lot in three years would benefit anyone if an office buikiiag were built at that point Ms. Amorose Groomes pointed out that the temporary pa&ng lot would not meet the green principles they say the City is trying to promote. Mr. Langworthy concluded by saying that Planning had a sense of the points that needed to be discussed and asked to meet with the applicant to develop some additional coalfngendes and options to provide zomething more can=te to choose from when the applicant retuom to the Commission for a decision. He said that there may he ways of satisfying many of their emcorns. Mr. Zimmerman closed tbn Work Session by du mking everyone for their di=ssion. 6. ellin�ois 08r838CPIZ a case was pastp� The meBdug was C a prior to the meetingThere was no at 7:40 La'bby F 3144 Brand or vote taken Assistant 21- 032AFDP Amended Final Development Plan Midwestern Auto Group PUD MAG BMW, Mini, Audi Venture Drive PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION JUNE 16, 2005 _CITY OF DUBLIN The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 6. Amended Final Development Plan — 04- 145FDP — Perimeter Center PCD, Subarea D — Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) — 6355 Perimeter Loop Road Location: 14.83 acres located on the south side of Perimeter Drive, at the southeast intersection of Perimeter Loop Road. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Perimeter Center Plan, Subarea D). Request: Review and approval of an Amended Final Development Plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.053(G). Proposed Use: A 18,081- square -foot building expansion and skywalk addition to an existing auto sales facility. Applicant: Brentlinger Enterprises, D.B.A. Midwestern Auto Group, 6355 Perimeter Loop Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017, represented by Christopher Cline, Blaugrund, Herbert, and Martin Inc., 5455 Rings Road, Suite 500, Dublin, Ohio 43017. Staff Contact: Jamie E. Adkins, Planner. Contact Information: (614)410-4644/Email:jadkins@dublin.oh.us. MOTION: To approve this Amended Final Development Plan because the proposed addi +ion generally meets the text and PUD requirements, the applicant has worked with staff' to address issues related to the addition and, the proposal will allow for the expansion of a successful business with the addition of high quality architecture and site design, with eight conditions: 1) That additional information be submitted regarding proposed lighting for the skywalk to ensure compliance with the Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines, subject to staff approval; 2) That the proposed Jaguar statue and MAG wall sign be eliminated from the plans and elevations; 3) That no colored lenses be used for any exterior lighting on site; 4) That all utility connections and /or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Engineering Division; 5) That the applicant indicate text compliance for parking should staff determine there is a parking problem on site, subject to staff approval; Pagel of 2 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION JUNE 16, 2005 6. Amended Final Development Plan — 04- 145FDP — Perimeter Center PCD, Subarea D — Midwestern Auto Group (MAG) — 6355 Perimeter Loop Road (Continued) 6) That existing landscape plans be brought into compliance with the approved plan; 7) The site stormwater management is in compliance with the current Stormwater Regulations, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and 8) That overhead doors utilize either partially opaque or dark tinted glass to further screen the interior service uses. * Christopher Cline, Blaugrund, Herbert, and Martin, Inc. agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 5 - 0 RESULT: This Amended Final Development Plan application was approved. STAFF CERTIFICATION Jamie E. Adkins, Planner Land Use and Long Range Planning Ms, Boring`@sked if these wN single - family Wanner con$rmed that inforrhation, The Mr. G ber made Ile mo 'on to accept the`�oc documen was unanimous. (Approved 5-0.N It was noted ere were no min es to approve Yr. Gerber rea announcements f area ling with Couo 'I and the variou Com the are very inform I meetings, ope foil Involy ant Task Force, d the Plannin times an locations are no on the City's v noted all t applicants for 1 ight's cases I Commission s wished to pull y cases for s. Reiss pulled ases land 6; M Boil es 2 and 3 were of pulled. Mr. ber noted the a heart wanted t order th cases would be rd tonight; published enda order .] in 4 -C, the rthem -most po ' n of the ecommendation 's that the Colo be into lFR record. The vo%to accept the meeting including the onservation De ' n munity PI Area meetings. Bird explain questions discussion \th�obby. itizens 'ommission wil ave presentvarious bsite and on a fl r availabl He a consented to the onditiod if the ques oils. pulled Cakes 4 and 5 fromiNhe Consent Agenda with Case then Case 2. Hnounced the 3, 2, 1, 4, 5 a G. [The mina s reflect the 6. Amended Final Development Plan — 114- 145FDP — Perimeter Center PCD, Subarea D — Midwestern Auto Group (MAC) — 6355 Perimeter Loop Road Mr. Gerber swore in all those who intended to speak on this case. Ms. Adkins presented the case. The site is located north of 331161 and east of Avery/Muirfield. The site is south of Perimeter Drive, consisting of 14 acres, zoned PCD, as part of the Perimeter Center plan, Subarea J, zoned for an auto dealership. Surrounding zonings are PCD, Rl and PLR. Ms. Boring asked for a clarification on the requirement from the rezoning that the remaining 77 acres would not be auto dealerships, as a deed restriction. She stated that Council wanted to ensure that the remaining acreage wasn't all auto dealerships. Ms. Adkins responded that this site, Subarea J, was rezoned specifically for auto dealerships. She did not have a copy of the deed restrictions. Ms, Boring thanked Ms. Adkins, and wanted to clarify for the record, what land the requirement spoke to. Mr. Gerber agreed to clarity the requirement about the deed restriction. Christopher Cline, Attorney, responded that this requirement was in the original conditions. To his knowledge that landowner never put any additional deed restrictions on the land. MAG does own an additional 10 acres along State Route 161/U.S. 33. Ms. Boring asked if Mr. Cline knew what the acreage included. Mr. Cline answered no. The land was not originally zoned for auto dealerships. If we rezone more land, Council and the Commission will have to approve the change. Ms. Boring stated she did know there was considerable concern about Route 33 appearing like an automall. Mr. Cline explained that MAG owns an additional 10 acres east of the site. Eventually we may ask for this to be expanded with another pod, so it will be addressed at that time. Mr. Gerber stated that this was not an issue tonight. Mr. Cline clarified that there is not a deed restriction that prohibits it. Ms. Boring repeated that there are no deed restrictions, as was required by City Council. Ms. Adkins described the proposed site plan for the expansion. 1)The existing Land Rover Building is just over 7,000 square feet and with the addition is 18,000 square feet. The rear of the building will enclose the service bays and the southwest portion of the building will have additional interior display, and the proposed sky bridge, the elevations which you have in your packet. There are minor modifications to the front along the main drive, and to the storage parking in the rear. The Land Rover sign will remain unchanged. The overhead service entrance will be enclosed with an overhead door. There is another central entrance proposed and a western entrance with a Jaguar sign. Materials and colors will be to match the existing building, including the dark tinted glass, and stucco. 2)The proposed sky walk will be elevated above the ground and extend out over the lake, beginning at the first floor elevation of the proposed addition, and finishing at the second floor elevation of the existing buildng. The applicant is proposing similar materials to the addition, and dark tinted glass. 3)The existing Land Rover sign will be resurfaced with the addition. There is a proposed sign for the center entrance with MAG lettering over the doors. Staff has conditioned that this sign be removed. The third proposed sign is for the Jaguar entrance. Staff has also conditioned that the proposed statue be removed. Renderings of the proposed addition were shown. Staff is recommending approval of this application, with the conditions noted in the Staff Report. There are Amended Conditions. Condition 3 was amended to include the word "exterior" in terms of color, lenses, and the lighting, and Condition 6 was stricken. Mr. Gerber clarified Condition 6 was stricken because it is a Code issue. Ms. Adkins agreed and stated that it is a Code Enforcement issue. Mr. Gerber asked Steven Smith if this was correct. Mr. Smith confirmed this was correct. He indicated they had reviewed the project related to what was originally built. The current proposal may comply with Code. There is a landscape height issue, but it is a Code Enforcement issue that will be addressed. Mr. Gerber restated that the Commission does not have to concern itself with that particular landscape issue. Mr. Smith agreed. Ms. Boring asked why that was. Mr. Smith, replied that this site has interesting conditions placed on it by the Planning and Zoning Commission originally. It was clear that because of the unique design, the landscaping requirements of the Code would not apply. City Council, at the rezoning, dictated the landscape plan. The applicant has met all of the requirements. Ms. Boring disagreed with that assessment. Mr. Smith stated that the landscape plan was submitted to Council as part of the text and has the plants labeled. Ms. Boring replied that it says we would not see all the cars on those fingers, that we would only see the cars at the top of the fingers. Mr. Smith said when you listen to the minutes, I don't know that it's that clear. The plant material was specifically named and written in and that is the plant material that they have out there. Mr. Gerber clarified that new landscaping will be reviewed tonight. With respect to existing landscaping, that's a Code issue. This situation is no different from other applications. Maybe Dann [Bird] can report back to us at a subsequent meeting as to the progress. Mr. Smith added that the site is between 85% and 90% in compliance, and 10% of the plant material has been trimmed down. That is a Code Enforcement matter that we will address. Mr. Gerber agreed. Ms. Boring asked again, about the expansion rule in the Landscape Code. Mr. Smith said the Code does provide requirements if the expansion is more than 25 %, however, the site adheres to the text of the Planned District. Ms. Adkins responded that staff had discussed this matter and determined that if there is an expansion of 25% or more, the entire site must be brought into compliance with Code. However, this site had a specifically approved landscape plan at the rezoning that they have followed, and we wanted to bring them back into compliance with that plan, and that has become a Code Enforcement issue. Ms. Boring said the Commissioners had not reviewed the minutes and the history. She was interested in seeing the original landscaping plan presented to the Commission to compare it with what was planted. She said it was a problem if it did not meet Code. Mr. Smith responded that the landscaping will be brought into compliance. Mr. Gerber asked Mr. Smith why Condition 6 should not be a part of this application. Mr. Smith replied that Condition 6 requires a revised landscaping plan to be submitted. He said the landscaping is already in compliance with what Council specifically directed them to use. He suggested the condition state: That the existing landscaping material meet Code. Mr. Gerber agreed with Mr. Hale's suggested Condition 6. That existing landscape plans be brought into compliance with approved plan, subject to staff approval. Ms. Boring asked for clarification about the difference between the Landscaping section of the report and this condition. She wanted to ensure that the requirements of the Code were being met. Mr. Gerber said he believed the new condition discussed will address all that. Ms. Boring asked if that included the uplighting to comply with the intent of Code and to improve the appearance. Ms. Adkins responded yes. With the display lighting, the issue is that it is still visible. That would be part of the Code compliance staff would remedy at a later date, to make sure that the lighting is screened. Ms. Boring asked what the language should reflect. Mr. Gerber responded that the existing landscape plans should be brought into compliance. Mr. Smith stated that the existing landscape, at the direction of staff, be brought into compliance with the original text. Ms. Boring inquired about the plant height within the approved vehicular display area Mr. Gerber wanted the language to be broad enough to cover all. Mr. Smith stated that the plants that Council directed them to plant, are never going to grow to the desired height. Ms. Boring added that it would help if they weren't trimmed. Mr. Smith noted that that is a Code Enforcement matter. It's only in certain areas that they are not tall enough. It does match what was directed as part of their text. Mr. Gerber repeated that if they let the plants grow it will be in compliance. Ms. Boring asked Mr. Smith what was the problem with leaving the condition in for plant height. Mr. Smith explained that the plants are not going to meet the 1 -1/2 -foot tall height required by Code. They are though, the plants approved by City Council as a part of the text. Ms. Jones noted that the report talks about replacing missing trees. She wanted to know where those trees are going to be replaced on the site. Mr. Bird said the existing landacape pretty broadly complies with the approved plan. Mr. Gerber suggested the lanuguage "The existing landscape, at staff's direction, be brought into compliance with the original text." We'll just make that Condition 6. Ms. Boring added that she was part of prior Council and knows what the idea was that was presented, and what we thought we were getting. Mr. Gerber asked Ms. Boring if the language that Dann Bird just read was acceptable. Mr. Bird restated, "That the existing landscaping be brought into compliance with the approved plan." Ms. Boring agreed. Mr. Christopher Cline asked if the Commission would like a complete presentation, or questions only. Mr. Gerber polled the Commission and they decided to ask questions in the areas of concern and interest and through that process the presentation will be made. Mr. Cline represented the applicant, with Dick Pryor and Tim Galley, from MAG; also, John Oney and Ed Parish from Architectural Alliance. Mr. Cline noted that when this campus was zoned in 1997, it was after changes took place in Perimeter Center. That was going to be an enclosed mall, and it turned into a different vision. The Council's direction was that the Commission considered the rezoning, developed the rezoning text and approved it. It also considered all parts of the development plan, including the landscaping plan, the architecture, and the grading. Only after the Planning and Zoning Commission had approved both the rezoning and the development plan did it go to Council for action on the rezoning. It went before Council twice and issues were added to the text. Council got involved in specifying particular cultivars of some of the plants, and having a landscape drawing that they incorporated into the revised text. The original text included a requirement that we would create "A striking, noteworthy and innovative architecture and site design." Mr. Oney, architect, asked the Commission if they had any questions. He could describe the total project, including the review of our reasons and the design, and the specifics of the plan. The booklets and a powerpoint presentation encompass some specific detail, along with overviews of the model, and renderings. Mr. Gerber indicated they would go to specific questions. He suggested that they start with the overall layout and design, and address those issues and questions. The other issues, like the signs, staff has addressed. I understand that the applicant has agreed to those changes. Ms. Reiss had a question regarding the bridge connection between the two sections of the campus and why it needed to be elevated at the existing building. Mr. Oney responded that the main building second floor elevation is at 12 feet, and the showroom pods that are existing are at 12 feet, which is the main corridor level. When we go to the Land Rover building, that showroom elevation is at grade. The only way to connect this from the main showroom level on the concourse, is at the 12 -foot level. It is the same height as the existing showrooms. Ms. Reiss asked if the reason for the sky bridge was to connect showroom to showroom. Mr. Oney agreed. The lower level in the main building is a Rolls -Royce showroom. The main emphasis and what MAG is trying to achieve is to sell you something you don't need. They're expensive products and in a very unusual setting, and to do that, they've created an environment that really is unmatched in the auto industry and pretty unique. The intent is, when you get to these showrooms and go through this concourse, you can embark and be encouraged through, this connectivity to go from that retail environment to all 15 marquis. Ms. Reiss confirmed that because the showrooms in the existing facility are on the second floor, the elevation of the bridge changes. Mr. Oney agreed. Ms. Reiss replied that was fine, and it explained why there's an elevation change, and what she needed to know. She had one other question for staff. The Staff Report states that the applicant is going to sufficiently screen the overhead service doors. However, staff would also like to see partially opaque, or dark tinted glass. She believed this should be conditioned. Ms. Adkins responded that it should be a condition. Ms. Reiss said she felt it should be a condition. The overhead doors in the service area either use partially opaque or dark tinted glass to further screen the interior surface uses. Mr. Oney stated they were in agreement with that and plan to use the dark tinted glass, which is existing in the Land Rover facility. We've reduced the service doors from nine to five, and used the dark tinted glass. We have some visual contact to a customer out in the reception doors. The service doors are screened to Code. There are currently seven doors that view directly into the heavy -duty lifts that service the heavy -duty vehicles, and we have eliminated those seven doors. Now we have two entrance points that go to an aisleway and tinted the glass. We've done additional screening as well. Ms. Reiss asked if that's what staff wanted to see done. Ms. Adkins agreed. Mr. Gerber stated that they needed a condition. Mr. Cline said that when the Land Rover building was done it was the second part of the project and the design was largely dictated by Land Rover. Land Rover has been acquired by Ford Motor Company, which also owns Astin -Martin and Jaguar, and they are integrating that building into the overall look of the complex. Mr. Zimmerman said he really liked the plan. It's unique in the marketing of a lot of different brands. It's a beautiful layout, and they've done a really nice job. Mr. Oney responded that they had 250 feet from building -to- building, plus a corridor behind the administrative wing to begin the swooping curving path with three visual cues. Mr. Zimmerman stated that each brand would have a space. He stated the internal/external setup is nice. Mr. Gerber asked about the landscaping. In this model there are a lot of trees. In time there would be a nice canopy all though there, so I know what Cathy's talking about because in part you do see an awful lot right now. That's in some respects unfortunate, but over time that's going to cure itself with these trees as they grow. I would image that's the whole intent of the landscaping package that's before us. Ms. Adkins stated that the landscaping for the site was installed in 1997 -98. Over time it will mature. Mr. Oney added they will be relocating pine trees and will be adding 52 evergreens as screening. We'll also be adding six shade trees, 10 evergreen trees and 10 replacement trees. Ms. Boring asked about the replacement of 23 inches of trees on the site. These trees screen the storage parking area and the applicant has added a row of evergreen shrubs to meet this requirement. This may be a problem of replacing trees with shrubs. Ms. Adkins responded that the Code requires 3 -1/3 feet in height of screening. The original Development Plan included the larger trees. When they are removed, to comply with Code, they added shrubs. Mr. Oney added that the replacement trees are located in the interior and are designated on the plan. Ms. Boring asked if the trees that they are planting in the parking area are required. Ms. Adkins replied those are required as replacement trees. Ms. Boring noted that the plan is removing parking places. She thought there are a lot of filled parking places. I assume the applicants and staff are comfortable with the removing of those parking places. Mr. Oney stated that approximately 98 parking spaces would be removed, but that parking would not be a problem. Mr. Gerber inquired about staff s solutions if a parking problem exists in the future. Ms. Adkins indicated that this situation would be a Code Enforcement issue and if staff noted a parking problem, the applicant would be requested to add parking in the future. Mr. Cline noted that the parking spaces are typically used for storage, not customers. Ms. Boring asked about the location of the evergreen shrubs screening the storage parking area. Ms. Adkins indicated that additional evergreens will be planted underneath the skywalk to screen the parking area. Ms. Boring asked about the changes to the pond. Mr. Oney indicated that the pond will stay intact, but that some of the caissons will extend into the pond requiring minor pond adjustments. Ms. Boring said the landscaping on site looks gorgeous and has matured well in the short time it has been there. Mr. Gerber reiterated that the applicant had agreed to removing the proposed Jaguar statue and MAG wall sign. He asked if there were other signage questions. Ms. Boring inquired if the Land Rover sign would be modified. Mr. Cline replied that this sign would undergo a refacing, but that the color, size and height would remain the same. He stated that if Land Rover was no longer the tenant of that structure, that green color would be removed from the sign. Mr. Oney also noted that the Land Rover sign would undergo a refacing. Mr. Gerber asked if the applicant agrees to the conditions including the elimination of the Jaguar statue. Mr. Oney agreed, saying that they will remove the MAG sign, and the "Leaper," the chrome ornament. Ms. Jones commented that the sky walk really unifies the campus, and it seems to be consistent with the look. She had no further questions. Mr. Gerber determined there were no other questions from the Commissioners. He stated that the text required this development to be "something noteworthy, striking and innovative," and the proposal meets those requirements. Ms. Boring asked for a recap of the actual approval. Ms. Adkins explained that the proposed MAG sign and the Jaguar statue sign will be removed, leaving only the JAGUAR copy on the building. So what will remain is the glass - enclosed entrance. This is the middle entrance — no sign. The second part of our condition asks that the statue above the Jaguar sign be removed so that all there will be is the Jaguar lettering above the door. Ms. Boring inquired about the size of this sign. Ms. Adkins replied that the sign measures 22 square feet. Ms. Boring requested the removal of the phrase "subject to staff approval' from Condition 2. Mr. Gerber agreed. He asked if any of the Commissioners had additional questions. Hearing none, he asked if the applicant agreed with the eight condtions. Mr. Cline asked for a recap of the additional conditions. Mr. Gerber replied with respect to condition 2, it was modified to eliminate the phrase "subject to staff approval." Condition 6 was amended to read "That existing landscape plans be brought into compliance with approved plan;" and that Condition 7 remains the same. Ms. Reiss stated Condition 8 should read "Service doors need to be partially opaque or dark tinted glass to further screen interior service uses." Mr. Gerber thanked Ms. Reiss and asked Mr. Cline if the conditions were acceptable. Mr. Cline responded yes, we agree to them. Mr. Gerber made a motion To approve this Amended Final Development Plan because the proposed addition generally meets the text and PUD requirements, the applicant has worked with staff to address issues related to the addition and, the proposal will allow for the expansion of a successful business with the addition of high quality architecture and site design, with eight conditions: 1) That additional information be submitted regarding proposed lighting for the skywalk to ensure compliance with the Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines, subject to staff approval; 2) That the proposed Jaguar statue and MAG wall sign be eliminated from the plans and elevations; 3) That no colored lenses be used for any exterior lighting on site; 4) That all utility connections and /or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Engineering Division; 5) That the applicant indicate text compliance for parking should staff determine there is a parking problem on site, subject to staff approval; 6) That existing landscape plans be brought into compliance with the approved plan; 7) The site stormwater management is in compliance with the current Stormwater Regulations, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and 8) That overhead doors utilize either partially opaque or dark tinted glass to further screen the interior service uses. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Ms. Reiss, yes; Ms. Jones, yes; Ms. Boring, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Gerber, yes. (Approved 5 -0.) Meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lois Willard Clerical Specialist II Land Use and Long Range Planning PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION MARCH 4, 2004 The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 3. Revised Development Plan 04- 029RDP — MAG Rolls Royce Auto Dealership — 6335 Perimeter Loop Road Location: 14.79 acres located on the southeast corner of Perimeter Drive and Perimeter Loop Road. Existing Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Perimeter Center plan). Request: Review and approval of a revised development plan under the PCD provisions of Section 153.058. Proposed Use: Exterior architectural and site modifications to an existing dealership for a Rolls Royce sales area. Applicant: Midwestern Auto Group, c/o Brentlinger Enterprises, 6355 Perimeter Loop Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017; represented by John Oney, Architectural Alliance, 165 North Fifth Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Jamie E. Adkins, Planner. MOTION: To approve this revised development plan because it conforms to the existing Subarea J text and complies with the PCD provisions of Section 153.058, providing for the expansion and update of a successful Dublin business with seven conditions: 1) That vehicular display be prohibited on the proposed path and be noted as such on all plans, subject to staff approval; 2) That no colored lenses be used for any lighting on site; 3) That the proposed modifications comply with applicable Stormwater Regulations, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 4) That revised plans be submitted if a second door is required, subject to staff approval; 5) That proposed new signage be submitted that is directional in nature, subject to staff approval; 6) That relocated trees be replaced on an inch - per -inch basis if they die within five years, subject to staff approval; and Page 1 of 2 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION MARCH 4, 2004 3. Revised Development Plan 04- 029RDP — MAG Rolls Royce Auto Dealership — 6335 Perimeter Loop Road (Continued) 7) That the applicant utilize a rock that is more aesthetically suitable, subject to staff approval. * John Oney agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 6 -0. RESULT: This development plan was approved. STAFF CERTIFICATION Frank A. Ciarochi Acting Planning Director Page 2 of 2 perhaps it the other way c pletely to open 't up for every or to leave it is ". Mr. Gerber s 'd Commissione were absent ton ht and it was i ortant that eve ne discuss this. Commissioner present agreed think about it d discuss it at e xt meeting. Mr. erber said it ma sense to form a ubcommittee to ork with staff to etter clarify what i eant by "conse ation design" a to assist City uncil as they rev' w it. It is only in solution form n and more cons' eration is neede to determine ho staff is to receive plications and h w a determinati is made with r pect to what pr erties the Resolutio may apply. He uggested that a bcommittee of ee meet with st to put something paper to pass onto City Cou it and the Code evision Taskfo e ho are looking a s issue. Mr. mmerman, Mr. rber, and Ms. R 'ss volunteered t se a on the subco thi ittee. Mr. ber made a mot n that the Com ssion establish ubcommittee to ddress the Consery ion design pro for further clan cation. Mr. Me ineo seconded t motion, and the vo was as follows: Ms. Reiss, yes; s. Boring, yes; r. Zimmerman, s; Mr. Messineo, y - and Mr. Gerbe , es. (Approved -0.) %Oft�r Readler sa the subcommi ee meetings sh uld be advertis like any oth� ission me Ms. Farley sa' she would be r ponsible for no ' ing the media meeti ngs at the ppropriate time. Mr. Ge er said that any ther Commissio ers who want asked that ll the Commissi ers be notified. Mr. Gundierm \ed d the CQ ad been distrght. Mr. o er the last e s. Mr. erber ashow of tonight. Mr. Gerber nn Cases 1, 2, , applicant's repr iOnect the orde ission that updated Adn ber noted that lot of work were welcome. He Case u accompl f those present�or each case o�kthe agenda ounced that t Informal Case Case 5) would b held first follo d by and 4. [Later ' the meeting, e 4 was table as requested b the entative due to t' a limitations, b ore Case 2 was eard. The minu r o he published ag da.] 3. Revised Development Plan 04- 029RDP — MAG Rolls Royce Auto Dealership — 6335 Perimeter Loop Road Mr. Gerber swore -in those who intended to speak before the Commission in regards to this administrative case. Jamie Adkins said this site is located in west - central Dublin, just north of SR 161 and east of Avery- Muirfield Drive. She showed slides of the site. The site has frontage on four public rights -of -way: Perimeter Loop, Venture Drive, Perimeter Drive, and SR 161. Perimeter Center is located to the west. The site is zoned PCD, Planned Commerce District in Subarea J of the Perimeter Center plan. All adjacent properties are zoned PCD. The area to be modified is at the main entrance of the site on Perimeter Loop Road. Proposed changes are minor and include a pedestrian pathway and modifications to the doors and windows on the north elevation. A small retaining wall will also be added to the existing pond, and a couple of trees will be relocated because of the pathway. The replacement door will be closed except when vehicles are driven inside the building. Ms. Adkins said the applicant would like to have the ability to switch out a second window with the same type of door if maneuvering problems arise. The north side of the building will be modified. Ms. Adkins said staff is recommending approval of this development plan with six conditions as listed in the staff report, adding a seventh condition: 1) That vehicular display be prohibited on the proposed path and be noted as such on all plans, subject to staff approval; 2) That no colored lenses be used for any lighting on site; 3) That the proposed modifications comply with applicable Stormwater Regulations, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 4) That revised plans be submitted if a second door is required, subject to staff approval; 5) That proposed new signage be submitted that is directional in nature, subject to staff approval; 6) That relocated trees be replaced on an inch - per -inch basis if they die within five years, subject to staff approval; and 7) That the applicant utilize a rock that is more aesthetically suitable, subject to staff approval. Mr. Gerber said this is a request to revise a previously approved development plan in the PCD. Because the type of uses and other general development are not proposed to change, the previously approved composite plan remains valid. The previously approved development plan is being revised to address exterior architectural and site modifications to an existing car dealership sales area The Commission is to base approval on conformity to the approved composite plan. Christopher T. Cline, Jr., representing the applicant, said he wanted the Commission to be aware of the contribution that MAG makes to Dublin's economy. Through City income taxes, personal property taxes, and real property taxes in 2003, MAG contributed approximately $741,000 to the community. They are a significant corporate citizen of Dublin. He said when this campus was built, it was the sponsor of a ten -year TIE that made area improvements such as Venture Drive. He said the original improvements were paid off in six years. The TIE is not being reused to provide improvements outside the initial area. Mr. Cline said this would be the only Rolls Royce dealership in Ohio. It is now owned by BMW, and the Phantom model retails for approximately $325,000. The clientele is very exclusive and expects to have a high quality environment when purchasing a car. The showroom must be exclusive for Rolls Royce. John Oney, Architectural Alliance, architect for this project, briefly described the modifications. He said there will be only one or two vehicles on site at any time. One will be in the showroom and the other in the shop area for test drives. Interior alterations will be made to make an exclusive showroom. Mr. Oney showed drawings of the proposed modifications. He said a pedestrian walkway in front would follow the natural slope of the pond. The grade change is approximately 30 inches. They will use stamped concrete in a scalloped fashion as was used at the BMW showroom. There are three ballasters to provide an accent feature. A conforming directional sign will identify the Rolls Royce showroom entrance. He said the Phantom model is 19'/2 feet long. They have also provided vehicle access to the showroom from the rear inventory lot using enough room to maneuver the large vehicle. Two existing pines and two deciduous trees will be relocated in front. The only proposed modification to the exterior elevation is to change the eight -foot door to a ten - foot opening to allow the large vehicle to be placed in the showroom. The glazing and mullions will match the glass. They propose to introduce horizontal mullions to match. Mr. Oney said it might be necessary to come back to the Commission if modifications need to be made to provide access for a second vehicle. He agreed with the seven conditions listed above. Ms. Boring said a Code revision was necessary to avoid having to go through this process for such a minor modification. Mr. Gerber asked why the Commission had to hear this application instead of it being handled administratively. Ms. Adkins said the reason staff thought it should be brought to the Commission is because the modification will be made at the main entrance of the site where it will be visible from the public right -of -way, and it is a PCD. Mr. Gerber agreed, but said only because of the visibility the Commission should review it. Gary Gunderman clarified that if changes to the Code had been adopted to consolidate the PCD with the PUD, this would not be before the Commission. Mr. Gerber understood. Mr. Saneholtz made a motion to approve this revised development plan because it conforms to the existing Subarea J text and complies with the PCD provisions of Section 153.058, providing for the expansion and update of a successful Dublin business with seven conditions: 1) That vehicular display be prohibited on the proposed path and be noted as such on all plans, subject to staff approval; 2) That no colored lenses be used for any lighting on site; 3) That the proposed modifications comply with applicable Stormwater Regulations, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; 4) That revised plans be submitted if a second door is required, subject to staff approval; 5) That proposed new signage be submitted that is directional in nature, subject to staff approval; 6) That relocated trees be replaced on an inch - per -inch basis if they die within five years, subject to staff approval; and 7) That the applicant utilize a rock that is more aesthetically suitable, subject to staff approval. Mr. Gerber seconded the motion. Mr. Cline agreed to the conditions as listed above. The vote was as follows: Mr. Messineo, yes; Ms. Reiss, yes; Ms. Boring, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Approved 6 -0.) 4. Rezoning /Revised Preliminary Development Plan 03 -045Z — NE Quad PUD Retail, Subareas 5A and 5B — Kroger Center — Sawmill Road Mr. Gerber noted this was a very large application. He said a Commission meeting was scheduled for March 18, but there are no applications currently ready to review. Instead of canceling the meeting, it made sense to hear this case then. Ben W. Hale, Jr., representing the applicant, agreed to request a tabling in order to hear this application in its entirety at the next meeting. He said they were ready to go tonight and that they would not change anything in the next two weeks. Mr. Gerber made a motion to table this case and made a motion. Ms. Reiss seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Messineo, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Ms. Reiss, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. [Ms. Boring had left the room temporarily.] (Tabled 5 -0) 5. Informal 03 -139I — Avondale Woods of Dublin — 5215 Avery Road Mr. Gerber said this is an informal review of development options in order to address the objectives of the recently enacted Conservation Design Resolution. The discussion will be limited to thirty minutes. Mark Zuppo said the applicant has filed for a rezoning application to request a change in zoning to PLR, Planned Low Density Residential District, but wanted to discuss the issue of Conservation design prior to moving forward with the application. He said the