The URL can be used to link to this page

13-04 Ordinance RECORD OF ORDINANCES Dayton Legal Blank, Inc. Form No. 30043 _ 13-04 Passed • 20 Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FOR 22.657 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST ~ AND POST ROAD CORNER OF METATEC EOULEVA>ti (NOW KNOWN AS DISCOVERY BOULEVARD), FROM: PUD, T DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, TO: PUD, PLANNED UNI PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (CASE NO. 04- 02EZ -HOMESTEAD AT COFFMAN rARK). I RE ORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Dublin, NOW THE , State of Ohio, ~ of the elected members concurring: Section 1. That the following described real estate (see attached map marked Exhibit "A") situated in the City of Dublin, State of Ohio, is hereby rezoned PUD, Planned Unit Development District, and shall be subject to regulations and procedures ~ r 153 of the Codified Ordinances) the City contained m Ordinance No. 21-70 (Chapte of Dublin Zoning Code and amendments thereto. Section 2. That a lication, Exhibit "B", including the list of contiguous and affected PP property owners, and the recommendations of the rlanning and Zoning Commission, Exhibit C ,are all incorporated into and made an official part of this Ordinance and ce therewith. nd used m accordan velo ed a hall be de 1 estate s said rea p finance shall take effect and be in force from and after the Section 3. That this Ord w. allowed b la earliest period y Passed this 1W1~ day of~/1~.~~ , 2005. I r Mayor -Presiding Officer Attest: 7 ~i»~~/. z Clerk of Council Sponsor: Planning Division I'~ i i I I hereby certify that copies of this Ordinance/Resolution were posted in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section f the Ohio Revised Code. 731.25 0 D uty Clerk of Council, Dublin, Ohio Ij Land Use and Long Range Planning 5800 Shier-Rings Road • Dublin, Ohio 43016 Phone: 614-410-4600 -Fax: 614-410-4747 C11'Y OF DUBLIN Me m o TO: Members of Dublin City Council FROM: Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager ~5. ~-o-r+~J DATE: March 14, 2005 RE: Second Reading of Rezoning (Amended Preliminary Development Plan) Ordinance No. 13-04, Homestead at Coffman Park (Case # 04-0282) INITIATED BY: Daniel D. Bird, FAICP, Land Use & Long Range Planning Director,~~1' SUMMARY: This 22.66-acre site, located at the southeast corner of Post Road and Discovery Boulevard (formerly Metatec Boulevard), was zoned PCD (Planned Commerce District) for office and industrial uses as part of the Perimeter Center in 1988. In September of 2000, the City approved a PUD preliminary development plan (rezoning) for amixed-use development of 60 single- family, detached units and a "live-work" component that included two buildings with twelve residential and eight office/commercial units with a density of 3.12 units per acre (See Record of Action 00-030Z). In March of 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission disapproved a submitted final development plan citing inconsistencies with the approved preliminary development plan (See Record of Action 00-127FDP). Following this disapproval, a revised preliminary development plan (rezoning) was submitted in 2003 that was also disapproved. The current rezoning/amended preliminary development plan application (Case #04-0282) proposes changes in the development text and development plan that reduce the density to 3 units per acre. The current plan features 63 detached single-family condominium units with 3 live-work buildings and a community building, along with pedestrian amenities along Post Road and the regional retention pond contained within the site. Finding the proposal to be consistent with the intent of the Community Plan and sound planning principles, as well as serving as an appropriate transitional use, providing an alternative housing type and enhancing the Post Road Corridor, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval on February 17, 2005 of the amended preliminary development plan (rezoning) by a vote of six to one, subject to the following conditions: 1) That the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches meet Engineering requirements for strength, durability and geometrics; 2) That no alterations for the proposed boardwalk, community center and or walking path be made that reduces overall storage capacity of the pond, subject to staff approval; 3) That all utility connections meet or exceed Division of Engineering Standards; 4) That all required general warranty deeds for parkland dedication be submitted to the City of Dublin prior to recording of the final plat; 5) That complete and revised civil engineering drawings and tree replacement and relocation plans drawn at an appropriate scale, subject to staff approval, be submitted as part of the final development plan; 6) That the final development plans show the extension of the walkway from the pond to connect to the existing bike path in the northeastern area of the site as described in the development text; and 7) That the fencing be a certain design and color other than white, as discussed at this meeting, subject to staffapproval. Conditions 1- 6 have been addressed by the applicant in the submitted development text and will also be part of final development plan review. Condition 7 will be addressed during final development plan approval. RECONIIVIENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance No. 13-04 on second reading subject to the seven conditions recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission on February 17, 2005. A vW... MEMORANDUM TO: Daniel Bird, Planning Director Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Stephen J. Smith, Law Director Jennifer D. Readier, Assistant Law Director DATE: January 19, 2005 RE: Applicability of Conservation Design Resolution I. Issue Whether the applicant in the Homestead at Coffman Park case is vested such that the conservation design resolution cannot be applied to the project? II. Short Answer Yes, the applicant is vested such that the,conservation design resolution cannot be applied to the Homestead at Coffman Park project. III. Analysis The Homestead at .Coffman Park initially received rezoning approval in 2000. It is our understanding that the present revised preliminary development plan alters the original preliminary development plan only as to relatively small matters. In 2004, City Council adopted a conservation design resolution. The application for revised preliminary development plan approval was submitted prior to the adoption of this resolution. A zoning ordinance cannot have a retroactive effect so as to prevent an owner from exercising his full rights in the use of his property. Given the fact that the Homestead property already obtained a rezoning for the site, and the revisions proposed by the revised preliminary development plan are minor in nature, the City would be infringing on the property owner's full use of his property if the conservation design resolution was applied at this stage. As such,. the resolution is not applicable. If you have any questions about this memorandum, please do not hesitate to contact this office. ixoso9~v~.~ ) EX ~-1 i 81 ~ "A" 0 0 0 0 0 o - PUD R-1 PUD R-1 -1 R-1 Post Rd O -1 PCD N o PCD LI 3 PCD ~ ~ LI m peC;~e er D . PC ~ PCD LI PC enture Drive LI PC PCD PCD / City of Dublin 04-0282 Land Use and Homestead at Coffman Park Lon Ran a Plannin Post Road Feet 9 9 9 o soo ~,ooo EXHIBIT "B" REZONING APPLICATION (Code Section 153.234) =s,, tip x9t ~~:b~ TO EXPIRE Uivisioa of Plnndng 5800 Shia-RmpsRoad ORDINANCE NUMBER ~ J~ ~ Duhlin, Ohio 43016.1236 ahane/IDD:614.410.460o CITY COUNCIL (FIRST READING) 1`~ ~ Irox:614-1b1-6566 CITY COUNCIL (PUBLIC HEARING) Web Site: www.dublin.oh.us CITY COUNCIL ACTION NOTE: Applicants are highly encouraged to contact the Division of Planning at (614) 410-4600 for assistance and to discuss the public review process prior to submitting a formal application. FOR faFFIGE WSE ONLY: Amount Received: App ation t~~ ~ ~ P & Z Dates}: P & Z Action: .Receipt No: MIS Fee No: Date Receive - : J ~ Received By: I Type of Requ®st: I. PLEASE CHECK THE TYPE OF APPLICATION: Composite Plan (Section 153.058) PCD Xl Preliminary Development Plan (Section 153.056) PUD Other (Please Describe) - d. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Please complete all non-shaded boxes. Property Address: Post Road Tax ID/Parcel Number(s): Parcel Size: 273-00180 (Acres) 22.6 acres - N, S, E, W (Circle) Side of: South _ Distance from Nearest Intersection: 0 FEET, N, S, E, W (Circle) from Nearest Intersection ~ w~ ~ , Nearest Intersection: AND ~ ~ d_ 1 i_ Existing Land Use Development: - O-~ _ Vacant - - a - Proposed Land Use Development: _ Condominium Communit _ _ Ott` ~ ° .m i ~ Existing Zoning District: Requested Zoning District: Total Acres to be Rezoned PUD PUD 22.6 Rezoning Application Page 1 of 5 Revised 02/13/03 III. REZONING STATEMENT: Please attach additional sheets if necessa State briefly how the proposed zoning and development relates to the existing and potential future land use character of the vicinity: The proposed development transitions from the office park uses south of site to the rural residential uses north of Post Road. State briefly how the proposed zoning and development relates to the Dublin Community Plan: The Dublin Community plan identifies the property as mixed use, which indicates the transitional nature of the property which lies between residential areas north of Post Road and the office-commercial-industrial uses contained in Perimeter Center. Has a previous application to rezone the property been denied by City Council within the last two (2) years: ~ ' YES ~i ' NO If yes, list when and state the basis for reconsideration: ~)w ~ ~ J ' ~.k ~ f y ~ - l ~ H h;.4`. IF A PLANNED DISTRICT IS REQUESTED, IS A COMPOSITE OR PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ATTACHED? YES ' ' NO IF A PLANNED DISTRICT IS REQUESTED, IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN ATTACHED? YES 'f NO Rezoning Application Page 2 of 5 Revised 02/13/03 IV. PLEASE SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING: TWO (2) ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATIONS AND THIRTEEN (13) COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICAITON FOURTEEN (14) COPIES OF A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY that consists of 2 page(s). u ~ ~ FOURTEEN (14) TAX PARCEL ID MAPS indicating surrounding property owners and parcel numbers for all parcels within 500 feet of the site. FOURTEEN (14) SCALED, SITE/STAKING PLANS SHOWING: a. North arrow and bar scale. b. location, size and dimensions of all existing and proposed conditions and structures (significant natural features, landscaping, structures, additions, decks, access ways, parking). c. Proposed Uses (Regional transportation system, densities, number of dwellings, building/unit types, square footages, parking, open space, etc.). d. Size of the site in acres/square feet. e. All property lines, setbacks, street centerlines, rights-of-way, easements, and other information related to the site. f. Existing and proposed zoning district boundaries. g. Use of land and location of structures on adjacent properties. FOURTEEN (14) COPIES OF THE FOLLOWING SCALED PLANS (IF APPLICABLE): a. Grading Plan. b. Landscaping Plan. c. Lighting Plan. d. Utility and/or Stormwater Plan. e. Tree Survey, Tree Preservation and Tree Replacement Plans. FOURTEEN (14) COPIES OF SCALED, ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS (IF APPLICABLE) with proposed colors and materials noted. FOURTEEN {14) OF SCALED DRAWINGS INDICATING: a. Location of signs and sign type (wall, ground, projecting, or window). b. Sign dimensions, including letter sizes and proposed distance from sign to grade. c. Copy layout and lettering styles (fonts) of signage. d. Materials and manufacturer to be used in fabrication. e. Total area of sign face (including frame). f. Type of illumination. MATERIAL/COLOR SAMPLES (swatches, photos, plans, or product specifications). Include manufacturer name and number. V. CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY OWNERS: It is the policy of the City of Dublin to notify surrounding property owners of pending applications under public review. List all neighboring property owners within 300 feet of the perimeter of the property. Information must be in accordance with the County Auditor's current tax list. Electronic copies of lists are encouraged. (Please attach additional sheets if necessary.) PROPERTY OWNER MAILING ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CODE (not Mortgage Company or Tax Service) I - ----I--- - - ~ ~r~~ Cpl - ~;2~~ ~ s ,.rs ~ 4 I~ i ' ~J ~ Rezoning Application Page 3 of 5 Revised 02/13/03 i See Attached List I I I ~ I i i - - -T - I I i I ?I. AUTHORIZATION TO VISIT THE PROPERTY: Site visits to the property by City representatives are essential to process this application. The Owner/Applicant, as notarized below, hereby authorizes City representatives to visit, photograph and post a notice on the property described in this application. VII. UTILITY DISCLAIMER: The City of Dublin will make every effort to provide essential services to the property as needed. However, the rapid growth of the City of Dublin and surrounding vicinities has stretched the City's capacity to provide these services to the limit. As such, the City of Dublin may be unable to make all or part of said facilities available to the applicant until some further date. The Owner/Applicant acknowledges the approval of this request for rezoning by the Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission and/or Dublin City Council does not constitute a guarantee or binding commitment that the City of Dublin will be able to provide essential services such as water and sewer facilities when needed by the said Owner/Applicant. VIII. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT INFORMATION: This section must be completed. Current Property Owner/Applicant: Continental / NRI Ventures,_Ltd.___ t:~y,~ ~-~7_ Mailing Address: (Street, City, State, Zip Code) 150 East Broad Street, _ Columbus, Ohio 43215 ~~-~~~~G~.-__ Daytime Telephone: I rax: ~ r~urt 614 / 883-1081 _ _ 614 / 221-3567 _ Email or Alternate Contact Information: ~ ~f ~ ' is Rezoning Application Page 4 of 5 Revised 02/13/03 VII. REPRESENTATIVES OF OWNER: Please complete /f applicable. Attach additional sheets for multiple representatives. Representative tenant, architect, desi ner, contractor, etc.: Pat Grabill - v^ Mailing Address: 150 East Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43215 (Street, City, State, Zip Code) _ Daytime Telephone: (614) 883-1081 ~ax: (614) 221-3567 Email or Alternate Contact Information: Who is the PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON for this application? IX. AUTHORIZATION FOR OWNER'S AGENT/REPRESENTATIVE S : Please complete if applicable. This section must be notarized. I Pat Grab ill v _ the owner, hereby authorize Ben W. Hale, Jr. to act as my 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 oti w Date: z, o z-~ ~ Subscribed and sworn to before me this y~% day of ~,IA ~ , 20 U~~_ State of ~„~n - ' County of .t,,.i Notary public ~O,~p FIIAI,~S~` LAURA McLOUGHLIN } Notary PubNc, State of Ohio ovesr~~^ ~~~~'o, M1u t;ommissian Etapires 10-23-07 ,XI. APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT: This section must be completed and notarized. I Pat Grab ill ,the Owner/Applicant or Authorized Representative, have read and understand the contents of this application. The information contained in this application, attached exhibits, and other information submitted is complete and in all respects true and correct, to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature of Owner or Date: ~ ^ /y r-~ ^ L/ Authorized Representative: (J L C./ Subscribed a`nd sworn to before me this "J _ day of -~~x~Ll -11~(~l/ ,'L20 ' f~~ir-,:~._,_„_ State of l/' tt~ - u~~ Count of (I`-~1~-•~ Notary Public ~ y ;a;';AtAL S e 1 " ~ . LAURA McLOUGHLiN t Notary PubC~c, State of Ohio ty~~~r ~a`p,,,~ ~y Commission Esquires 10-23.07 NOTE: FAX CONFIRMATION WILL FOLLOW THE SUBMISSION OF THIS APPjI..ICATI PpY Rezoning Application Page 5 of 5 L E ~GiSed 02/13/0 EXHIBIT "B-1" December S, 2002 DESCRIPTION OF A 22.657 ACR]~ TRACT ON POST ROAD AT METATEC BOULEVARD DUBLIN, OffiO, FOR CONTINENTAL/NRI OFFICE VENTURES LTD. Situated in the State of Ohio, County of Franklin, City of Dabtin, partially in Virginia Military Survey No. 2542 and partially in Virginia Military Survey No. 2999, and being a portion of an original 42.542 acre tract ~of land conveyed to ContinentaUNRi Office Ventures ltd. by deed of record in Instrument 1998fl$210213135, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio, and bounded and described as follows: • Beginning at a 3/4-inch I.D_ iron pipe set in the south line of Post Road (60 feet wide), al the point of tangency at the east end of the curve cotanecting the south line of Post Road with the east line of Metatec Boulevard (variable width) toriginally Discovery Boulevard), as Post Road is shown upon "Post Road. Wilcox Road, Perimeter Drive & Easements Dedicatioo Plat", of record in Plat Book 85, Pages 51, 52 and 53, Recorder's Offtce, Franidin County. Ohio, and ss Metatec Boulevard is shown upon "Dedication of Discovery Boulevard & Easements", of record in Piat Book ti6, Page 97, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio; thence N 88° 07' ?A" E along the south line of Post Road and along a north line of said orrgiztal 42.592 acre tract a distance of 598.12 feet to a 3/4-inch LD. iroa pipe set at a point of curvature; thence easterly alortg the curved south Iine of Post Road, along a curved north line of said or-igi- na142.S92 acre tract and with a calve to the left, data of which is: radius = 5,759.70 feet and delta = 2° 01' 00", a chord distance of 202.72 feet bearing N 87° 06' S0" E to a 314-inch T_D. iron pipe set at the point of tangency; thence N 86° 06' 20" E along the south line of Post Road and along a notch line of said original 42.592 acre tract a distance of 342.76 Feet to a 3/4ineh I.D_ iron pipe set at a corner of said original 42.592 acre tract, in the west line of an original 2.024 acre tract of land conveyed to Camberlane Associates by deed of record in Official Record 11732, Pagc E 17, Recorder's Of- fice, Franklin County, Ohio, and at the southwest corner of a 0.234 acre tract of land conveyed out of said original 2.024 acre tract to The City of Dublin, Ohio, for Post Road right-of--way pur- potes by deed of record in Official Record 13444, Page J 06, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio; thence S 3° 54' 2fl" E along a line of said origina142.592 acre tract and along a portion of the west line of said origina12.024 acre tract a distance of 240.13 feet to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe set at a corner of said original 42.592 acre tract and at the southwest comer of said original 2.024 acre tract; thence N $6° 06' 20" E along a north line of said original 42.592 acre tract and along the south tine of said original 2.024 acre tract a distance of 332.49 feet to a 3/4-inch l.ll. iron pipe set at a corner of said original 42.542 acre tract and at the southeast corner of said gait ~ ~ ere tract; r thence N 3° 54' 20" W along a lint of said origina142.592 acre tract and along a portion of the east line of said origins12.024 acre tract a distance of 202.28 feet to a 3/4-in'~h~D:•iron•pi~e5set in the curved south line of Post Rand, at the southeast corner of said 0.23~'acte'Eract and at' a corner of said original 42.592 acre tract; ; ~ ~ ,3. X498-173/022_657.DOC ' Page 1 of 3 December 5, 2002 thence southeasterly along a portion of the curved south line of Post Read, along a curved north line of said original 42.592 acre tract and with a curve to the right, data of which is: radius 308.83 feet and suh-delta = 07° 58' 00", a sub-chord distance of 42.91 feet bearing S 61° 13' 40" E to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe set at the point of tangency; thence S 57° t4' 40" E along the soutls line of Post Road and along a north line of said original 42.592 acre tract a distance of 422.32 feet to a 3/4-inch LD. iron pipe set at the northeast corner of said origina142.592 acre tract and in the west line extended northerly of Lot Number One {1) in "Metro North Business Pazk", as shown of record in Plat Book b6, Page 71, Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio; thence S 02° 53' O1" E slang a portion of the east Iine of said original 4?.592 acre tract, along the west line extcndad northerly of said Lot No. 1 and along a partion of the west line of said Lot No. 1 a distance of 908.74 feet to a 3l4-sorb I.D. iron pipe set at the northeast corner of a 4.230 acre tract of lead conveyed to Perimeter A, Lai., by deed of record in Instrument 199811190298745 (passing a point in the south line - to the east - of Post Road and at the north- west corner of said Lot No. 1 at 12.30 feet); thence S 87° 06' S9" W along the north line of said 4.230 acre tract a distance of 383.00 feet to a 3/4-inch LD. icon pipe set at the northwest comet of said 4.230 acre tract, at the northeast comer of Wall Street {60 feet in width) as shown upon Ilse plat of WaII Street and Easements Dedication Plat of record in Plat Cabinet 92, Page 8. Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio and at tlse southeast comer of a 1.804 acre tract of land conveyed, for Wall Street right-of--way purposes, to City of Dublin by deed of record in Instrument 199911190289555, Recorder's Office, Franldi.a County, Ohio; thence N OS° 52' 3S" W crossing a portion of said ortginal 42592 acre tract and along the east line of said 1.804 acre tract a distance of 435.b7 feet to a 314-inch LD. iron pipe set at a point of curvature; thence northwesterly crossing a portion of said origina142.592 scr+e tract, along the curved norih- eastcrly line of said 1.804 acre tract oxad with a curve to the Left, data of which is: radius = 330.00 feet. and delta = 8b° 00' 05", a chord distance of 450.12 feet bearing N 48° 52' 38" W to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe set at the point of tangency; thence S 88° 07' ZO" ~l crossing a portion of said origina142.592 acre tract and along a south line of said original 42.592 acre tract, along the north line of said 1.804 acre tract and along the north line of Wall Street {60 feet wide), as shown upon the plat of Dedication of Discovery Boulevard, Perimeter Drive. Wail Street and Easements of record in Plat Book 72, Pages 74 and 80, Recurder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio a distance of 823.49 feet to a 3/flinch LD. iron pipe set at a point of curvature; thence westerly along a portion of the curved nortls line of Wall Street, along a curved line of said origina142.592 acre tract and with a curve to the left, data of which is: radius = 1,030.00 feet and sub-delta r 2° 44' 17", a sub-chord distance of 49.22 feet bearing S 86° 45' 12" W to a 314-inch l-D. iron pipe set at a corner 4f Said original 42592 sere tract and at the southeast comer of a 1.432 acre tract of land conveyed to Ruma Investment Company by deed of record in Oftl- eial Reeocd 1.8377, Pagel 18, Recurder's Office, Franlin County, Ohio; 98-173/1U22_657.1)OC Page 2 of 3 - December 5, 2002 thence N 4° 36' S7" W along a west fine of said origina142.592 acre tract and along the east tine of said 1.432 acre tract a distance of i 87. l6 feet to a 314-inch Y.D. iron pipe set at a corner of said original 42.592 acre tract and at the northeast comer of said 1.432 acre tract; thence S 89° 07' 19"'l~V along a line of said origina142.592 acre tract and along the north line of said 1.432 acre tract a distance of 303.95 feet to a 314-inch I.D. iron pipe set in the cast line of Metatec Bauiavxrzl (60 feet wide), at a corner of said origina142.592 acre tract and at the north- west corner of said 1.432 acre tract; thence N 0° 52' 4l" W along the east line of lYletatec Boulevard and along a west line of said original 42.592 acre tract a distance of 52.32 feet to a 314-inch I.D. iron pipe set at a point of cur- vature; thence northerly along the curved east line of Metatec Boulevard (variable width}, along the curved west line of said original 42592 acre tract and with a curve to the right, data of which is. radius = 500.00 feet and delta = 6° 31' 11", a chard distance of 56.87 feet bearing N Z° 22' S5" E to a 3/4-inet~ T.D. iron pipe sct at the point of tangency; thence N 5° 38' 30" E along the east line of Metatec Boulevard and slong a west tine of said origins! 42.592 acre tract a disttueee of 121.43 feet to a 3/4-inch I.D. iron pipe set at a point of curvature at the south end of said connecting curve; thence northeasterly along said connecting curve, along the curved northwest line of said 42.592 acre tract and with a curve to the right, data of which is: radius = 30.00 feet and delta = 82° 28' 50", a chord distance of 39.55 feet bearing N 46° 52' S5" E to the place of beginning; containing 22.657 acres of land mare or less and being subject to all easements and restrictions of record. The above description was prepared by Kevin L. Baxter, Ohio Surveyor No. 7697, of C.F. Bird & R.J. Bull, Inc., Consulting Engineers & Surveyors, Columbus, Ohio, from actual field surveys perfatmed under his supervision in April. 1975, in October, 1985, in Novemt~er, 19R6, in April, 1990, ist 3uly, 1996, and in Iuly, 2998. Basis of bearings is the centerline of Post Road, being N 88° 07' 20" E (east of 1~Ietatec Boulevard), as shown of record in Plat Book 85, Pxgas S 1, 52 and 53. Recorder's Office, Franklin County, Ohio. Ke~~in L. Baxter ~t ~.~P ,r-~--~..~ ~iC, Ohio Surveyor #7647 ~ 14EVt~l ~ ` . i i t" ~ gAXTEF i , 9 $--7697~V ' Fp~~TEP `~URVE`~ M~~ 98-1731D22~657. DOC Page 3 of 3 APPLICANT /PROPERTY OWNER ATTORNEY 1 r~ I ~ ~ ' yl Continental / NRI Ventures, Ltd. Ben W. Hale, Jr. 150 East Broad Street Smith & Hale Columbus, OH 43215 37 W. Broad Street, Suite 725 Columbus, OH 43215 ~ ZROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS Patrick & Valerie Bergdall-Costello Camberlain Associates Checkfree Corp. 5886 Post Road 6017 R. Post Road 4411 E. Jonesbridge Road Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017 ~ Norcross, GA 30092 City of Dublin Christopher & Deborah Cline Jentgen -Klein Company 5200 Emerald Parkway 6060 Post Road 6543 Commerce Parkway Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017 Gary Kinman Peter Klein Meta Holdings, LLC 10171 Olentangy River Road 6543 Commerce Parkway, Ste. T 7001 Metatec Blvd. Powell, OH 43065 Dublin, OH 43017 Dublin, OH 43017 ? " ?unt Carmel Health System Ohio Credit Union League Perimeter A, Ltd. ' ; W. State Street 5815 Wall Street 150 East Broad Street L..lumbus, OH 43222 Dublin, OH 43017 Columbus, OH 43215 REA Real Estate, Ltd. Ruma Investment Company Triplex Company P.O. Box 1020 1152 Goodale Blvd. 6543 Commerce Parkway New Philadelphia, OH 44663 Columbus, OH 43212 Dublin, OH 43017 Homestead-post.lbl (disk 10) 2/6/04 jth JOSEPH W. TESTA FRANKLIN COUNTY AUDITOR MAP AREA :DLH DATE FEB 6, 2004 . ^ 12 C _1.l J, IS I0 _ 5T 56 Sb ~ IS YI I • ~ ~ 59 59 BO BI /BP IB9 iBl ~ 160 ~ i5 _ 80 Y ~6 ~e 9 tf0 0 9 IP9 BO 0 m. o.., 6' "-1 m IBf /B6 f80 IBf IB8 ~m i I6 95 1 d r~ 79 BB 91 11 -i 16 V ° I 09 ~ ?T OI B5 f81 18 f -1 /B FO y// P I9B 91 ~ : >9 ] ~ ~ g l ` IB \ 98 IOB ~ / rT " I / s - ~ If 2 ~ 'm IB pP^~ 8 e\ i 9 ~ 'm' J-' f5f mL ~ 8 19d~. ~ °7 (0 IOT - a 11f ~j 1B ? ,r? ift I V ~ ~ B2 6 ~ ~ 8B `Mf 66 a fiP f 8~'A, I I B 112 , ~m I 9Y I } (i - !01106 I6 fi5 ~~G.` RSI m 91 > 83 5 ~ B » 99 le, OI ~ m f~ IB f ~n~ ~ m f 80 ~ - IO f06 : 14 (.m 6B , 996 f C ~.~6 P60 m mE0 ~ J~~ j9~' r B O. ~ IS 10 m 9 ~ B 6 7P p~ ti PI9 d' 1 i 0 19 B ~ Ib I5 8 .m~ 9 , ?J 4 ~j ~ I ^ ~ : : m ~ ~ k 2/~ 216 I I~ 86 .5'P0 d' 2 PIB ~r~ „YO ly~ I P 6 f5 r~ _ 20620] POB 9 PIO Y1I YfP l / f ~m f 5 m ~ .1: 21f ~ ~ OY ~ f4~ / RBSBRr S rr I~~ BB ~A - P99 Y98 P99 ' ~ m YIS P!1 Y/9 PIP PM _~J / ~ ~J B • ]B 11Fn6 C3 \ I o 0 79 0 ,o I m ~ ~oooo 0 I o - o _ - I ~ m m 'J ~ J 0 D ~ m , ~ I o a o o~ _ ° ~\~m~ p ~ ~ ~ m - _ o ~ P~BgIG • ~ ~ 1 O ~ """°'c _ ~ 'fan k'6~.a D PBMOIC ~ : 1 ~ I I I ~ { O p I 1 I Q B - \ ~ o m p e~ ~ p 0 ~ ad r„ ~ \ d ; m ~ ax_ - - ~ ~ e ~ ' { DISCLAIMER SCALE 1" = 500 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 C'IS 9TH FLR. information sources should be consulted for verification of the information contained on this map. The _ county and the mapping companies ossume no legal responsibilities for the information contained on this map. F ~ ~ 'y k Please notify the Franklin County GIS Division of any discrepancies. GIS DIVISION 0 o g s~serHO'o+w~'sosos~s uv.a'a•aos~ ~ W m ~ ~ N`dld 3~~/dS N3d0 sai;iunwwo~ pea;sewoH ~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ " ~~IdNIWll32id ~aed uew~}o~ }e pea~sawoH ~ m~r ~ n o _.1 ~ 0 g n K t I.. ..S , w~ sm~ i 1 i....._ - =:jo~ : ~ i. 1 ~ , s r E,.........,_.~..,.._.....:~.._ ............_...i ~ _ o r• ~ ` I ~ U R i ~ i i. v-•. ~ ~ r L . ~ ~ 7 ~ gq`~ ~f. ; ~ ; ( ~ 3 ~ ~ /t ~ ;i ~ ~ .s, . ~ 1N li .w i • ~ i 4 N ~ o ~ ~i: i . ~ - 4 ~ ~ ~ v If") 4\ i . ~ U ' i u ~ \ , • N \t~; ' y ~ ~ UO ~ U U % 3 O ~ ~ z o II `n N ~ oo ~ \ ~ O ~ ~ ~ CO ~ ~-I 1 ~ ~ , j 0 ~ II d- m 0 Q J ~ `V + ~f o o ~ _J x ~ w ~ Q ° a ° ~ Q o w w> Q 'w~a ~aanoosw ~ Y O Q. U o~~ o Q ~ a W ~ w II j~ O w w U ~ in ° ~ o Q ,Q o Q ~ u, ~ z z rr o p ~ cn ¢ Q ~ U ~ x V ~ O Q O Q ~ w Y~ z ~ ~ ~ o J Q W Z Z F- Q J J J (O Q Q Q W W (n W ~ ~ f.- ~ O1 N N ~ StZ£4 HO'mQ~W7 'SOf ~5 '1S Vew9 3 OSI fp p d ~ ~ a sagiunwwo Ba~sawo ~ „ ry~ m Q N r N Nb~~d JNIS`dHd ~ " ~om~ N a o " ~ J121t/NIW1~~2~d ~{aed uew}}o~ }e pea}sawoH ~ J ~ 3~~ , LL~ w Q ry S ° n U ;i O 2 ~'S WALL STPEEI i > z ' ~ :ap p~~ _ S i ~a~ <9~ 'a~~s ~~.1LJG-F~•.• ,zO..i'~ R S - '::r::~; t.. t; F::a `I t r R L X ! ~ g t:~ W .w Q o a a m U X Q ~ ~ Q Q _ c0 Z ~ Z N Z r. Z x ~ -I i N -Fi N +I N '.~.a ' Q m Q r.:. X 1 ~ ~ z ~ ~ Q o = ~ Q ° Q w ~ w ~ w N _ ~ z - ~ z c~w~ -Q -Q~ =Q~ w ~ - w w w== ~ wie Aa~o~sia Q ~ V7 (n ~ N ~ (/l = Q Q = Q Q = Q Q W Q & ~ p a ~ SLZ64 H0 'sn9wnla~'SOE ~Y.~S 7SP~9'305L 9:~ ~ ~ p d = ~ ~ ~ Nb'~d JNl~ib'1S/~lIS saglunwwo~ pea;sawoH 3N~~ N .Q o ~ g„ ~1°°'°°°'° ~ e a 1 1~~1`dNIWI~~?~d ~{aed ueua}}o~ }e pea~sauaoH ~ ~ _I < t s ,,v, ~ r- , ; / ~ I I _ 1 i / I ' ~ , / I 1 i .i J~~ i ~i / ~.j~' I 1 / / / / ? / I I m m i a ~ , / ~ ~ I wru s i 1 L_-------~ - ~ _ i 3 ; / _J 61 _ Y j' I ~ iI r'i / ill ~ I E~ " i; If ~ i~ ~ ' 1 ~ i i i i I ~ 1 1 '1 I I 1 I I I I I IY 1 I----~ ~ I 11 11 1 d i ~ 111 . l i l I~ P r I I~ ~ i it 'IIb - ~ jl j II 'I1~ /~(iYP.1 ~ I1 1 . I I 0 ji I ~ 11 I I I i ~I ,I i l I I h I.1 ; ~ ~ II u~ I 11=-! r--~I-- Iii I i I i ~ II III I S - 11 ZI ;III ~ ~ ill , Ig s; i i I II iII IF 11 ~ I ill II ; II IIII ~ II i u tug 1 ~ it II II 11 ~ 1 I , II ,Ijj~ I ~i iI ~t 61' al II I i I ;II II 1 h ;I,I I~ I I III IIi - i~ I I I e I~ ,1 ~IIII~ ' ~ I I t ~ jl I I \ \ f b I 1 I o~ l i 'I ' I -i ~ I I ~a _ ~~11 wl 11~I I ~ Iii ~ 111 I II ~I 11 I 3~ ~ IM II I I Ii Ii. ~ I I ~I~i - ~ ~ ~ I ;I I n I li I I ~ I ~ I I~ a*nxro L I' 1 II I*I r- - II I 'I' ~ II I I; I , I I I~ I ~I II I ~A II I I I ? I ~ 1 I ~ ~ ~ O 0 pi ~ ~ ~ 't •aie ~urwosla o ~ Nb'ld NOI1bn213S3bd'8 SIiEY HO'm9wMo~'SOE ~!a5 ~S P~~83051 8^~~~ b p d O• d a sai~iunwwo~ pea3sawoH g°~~~ ° N ~ a8 J13n2lf1S 3321 Jl21bNIWll32~d ~ x~~ a ~ ~ ~~~d u~w}}o~ p~a~sawoH - J ~ ~ s~~~: ~ , ; ~ . ~ i. _ i 8 ~ hl ~ 9 ` ~ ~ ggrr "I ~ a`E 1 0 ~ _ ~ - ~ j~/ ' ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ m / , ~ _ ~ J G I - - ~ / i ~ 6 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ f ~ z r~ l ~ ' ~ ' o ~ s---- ~ - n ~ , I I ~ ~ I l I _ I o ~ ~ -n ~ I I €r ~ rn,_ ~ I Nc~ c> c~c~uuc>°o°c~c~c~uoc~ouc>oci c~c~uoci c~ouc>v~a°oc~c~c~uuouc~~ao oucao ciouu ~ tt~ I mmmmmmmmmm d m m 1 ~ ~ F ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~4~~~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ i n I J s ~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $ $ g ~ 8 $ S` . 1- r r ~ ~ r ~ r ~ r g $ r r $ $ 5 ~ ~ G ° . s ~ ~ ~ ~888888E~ E4~ii~5~~~88i8.8.8 aEii883 38i~88~:::ii8i8s$ESo88~~ b ' W clx3xxxxl•'~S llxxu< « < xxrxrxrx333 xr rxxs3sxrxxxxxrrrrrxrxr moooxxss x 1 W ' , ~ - - m $~p_P ~ I ~ C9 8as~$~ 8$$a •$8-$-aaaaa'a~~~$° $$$$~$33~8a$$~~$i $$'E$~ Y[F ~ I Z NN• N V'<NNO• w I I ' ~ 171«m bZo .-~o«N~~«b bblp• b• YL• b• • •m 10bb Y«~Obo bo'm boo bo do «°•m •ao ~~bo ~.-So .•iDbbbo• °n n3o° f fyy~E~I I W ~ I I x =.-N111r i1I 1Ch m0~~ ~.~-m~ p~l°V N NNNNtmV NNNYf MfMM1 MI M/1~1~~]•11hY 1 f r ~Y~r f YNNN btll ~flNNnN 1°D iOb Nbb I ~ I I I I/ I I I I I I ~ I 1 I I ~ : ~ I ~ I I Q'! ' I ! , I ~ ~ S ~ ~ ~ II I _ ~ ~ © ; I. . ~,~4 0 ~ ~x n r o N v_ I ~ ° ~ spy ~e W °m~ 1 r < °2~YU1 ZU F j ~~N_ W V ~ 1 OF W~ JU~ O W m S~ N - ~ O orc b ~ oWi~a ~ ~ auoZ }oob fool}u~ °o ° H W VFm m ON¢oWKO 2° p FO` 3~1~Qmm ~ - ~F ~ WUC O W~WZW~ O< r W~~ W3<~ pL~O O< 2 W Z ttff IJ _qq N F~ W $yrc~ ~u~al~> ° u o~~ a r cln m m ~ <xi- r Wo zzoF ~W o 8<i In al 3t~ W o~~ rcyyII ~ ~1 3 2S~Zi ~ o W z> Z ~ r~~ z~ ~ ~ ng ~ auoZ ;ooa fool}u~ o ~ N ~ r Y ~ « H ~s ~ o ~$~n aW u~ 5~$~w '°->~`o c ~ to C u W W o ~ ~^s ~rc< ° o~ z~~~~IW a~ mr= ~9zi m ~ ter` O a ~ z~ !n p[ ° ~ ~c o ~S o~~°y~ypp~~K°y (~UJ~w JJ~~C~¢~ y~1~~~ c «ol° W nF-, NW Ns J tlOOy~n ~n W ~~W 7" 214 O~ fNFO <F~yl O EN } J uri lmcicl.ir: ~wl°J Z '~~~~c1 P~a{jz F8'~S1 m~IZO"~2~aayz ~~~FF YJ°;~i o o~ W W ~ NG3 2~V1 r~ RU ~W•+mW~i O~ siV WU O?~s ` Oil1 O O O) H Y O o~z Q v ~LTi ~iw'~ a~ m~ Z~z< #i~o w um ~ Fes- Z ~ ~ ~ ~SwZ ~ ~mi Js o~ ~~u '~<Xj ~m^ m~y'bla W°?IrczZ pV„ZV a Q ~ ° u S O ~WO Z a~ ~~~~~a Si!W Wn'WW ~°}W W O 2 0 X ~ ~~e~a ~ ~ r W ~lilm gr n Irnn mrc az o~~¢ a w z a~~ O a .s : ~ e ~ la ~ ° ~ N`d~d ~db'~SaNHI StZfVHO'nawnla~'SOfolA3'lSPSa9'305L ~fe~~e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N sad;iunwwo~ pea;sawoH ~ ~i* ~ oo ~ N ~ " " N g~ Jl2Jt/NIW1~~2~d use ~ a ° ~ ~aed uew}~o~ ~e pea~sauaoH -m J s ~~LL; / ~ ~ ~~y f ~~m o _ _c~ ~ r/ ~ . ~ ~ ''-,.-1' # m ~~s J ~ `a' I s ~ ~ 2 Y J ~ ` ~ w I .J~ r~ !A ~J ~ i r~ } fem. r f 4J,~~ ~ !~i}..__ y i Y W ~ ~ e o ~ . { ~ , ~ ~ . ....A f ~ ~ s: 8 _ ; , 1 ,o ' ~ 1 • , , ~ r , F •3 # ~ ~ C 1 ~ t l L_l ~ I ~ r , 1 : I -C. ~ r y f'f kI w ' y , r, ~l 1 om t~ ~I h tt I p...J V r , t •t\ I ~ U ~'M. ' . i f o fn ~ i0. 3~j> ~ ~ l -7~{~p.N e~f.~ r 1 Z i.."""eet ++yy 7 g ~ 'SS~~ _ ~ ` ~ ~ _L.. i i r { r i _ J V i 1 W I 1 5 3 .1 I C, - 9 r o ~ _ ~ 11~ s I w 1-- L ~ i J tlt i w w w z > ~ w ~ oe f ~r _ j~' r ti~ 1 N ~ Z Z Z N O ,y'- 1 ~ z w oe w ~ u ~ o w ~ o ~ o 0 ,l". _ -'y "i...__ i Q of oe ~ ~ 1 Z D o w affil w D 0 SCI ~ ~ ~ ° j ~ 1 ' ' . , , - 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1. v ~ 1 - i 1 g 1 1 ..~_..._.__.._...Y-...__. '1^ li ~i 11 1 i 11 li ,i i it :I I! ~I ~ii is , ~ 0 ~ 9liC/ HO'zngwnlc~ 'SOE aMng '19 OaaB'3 OSL fp ~ O N y ~ ~ sai;iunwwo~ pea;sawoH ~ ~ 3 o y a N "a ~ SN011~3S ~11S qa•~f a ~ 4~ ~~ed ueua~o~ ~e pea}sauaoH ~ J ~ ~~~LL? ~'aa 3 N x z~~ ~~o ~ g w m ®tr ~ z z~8 .t/f C•.E .f•.L ~ m ~ S': ~4, I Z j: ~ %S ~ w v ~ z O[. o, o W z o ® i W 1 A~r'1. ~ ~ . r.,~. t'• ~~;1. ~F~; 4'. t e 7~i•~ ~$i5~~~ S ~ ~s~ i' r~~:9a °se E~xs;ji :sz ~,.~p z ~ i z R'°~ ~finear.tt w i w Z o ~ oaf Y ~ G [D ~.i#z ~if~ a ~ ~ Y•~f~$ N ~ u zAk~ } ~ d [r i~: ~ % A J{ W Q i W~ ~ 1--• 'S' 4 803 ~Y~ ,t ~~~i3 L &oE Z4W ob~, ~,~a`98W 3 d ~ 9 g~~~~~ fa X13 A ~EFs e ~ j:"r °e3 ~ 9 ~p~~ ~f ~ ~si ~_a y ~ ~s ~g9 @ss a~~i ~ a~ ~Fp ~~~ys-6. Epf ~ q~l"p~ qq~ 3~E@~€~8sw ii~~~%~~ ~ s~ Fgfl @ Fs ~~s~ u~ ! ~ ~g° @ga R~~~ ,i~ e~ Sg~i ~ ~i!~~~~4~~ w ~ ink ~c a s'~ ~ ~t Y~sEc~e~~ ~ e Z ~ ' ~'^%ro- Y ~ V Z eva Z y a W a2F~~~i~ z ~ ! f ~ b Q y ~i~g > ~ , f ~ 2i~~~x~f~'a owe pgp ~aa o~e ~ a 6i~ ~l p Z 3~ J ~ "'1' Ul `2 9a~ ~ a~ Fe# a it b ~~tl~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . gga~ gg p.A w ~ s,~ @@ F- 3 8~~~ C e F@ Fig ( z ~ 3 ~'yIX a ~¢~p o „x daR c ;~la y f r j ~~aa 3 ~ Y StiC?HO'+n9Wnlo0 'SOC oMn9 '19 Pso~8'3051 M~~~~ l0 p N ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ sai~iunwwo~ pea}sawoE..~ ~ a3 .o N ~ ~ a N N 8„ gwwaW ~~mm ~ a p N ' ' ' ~ ' SNOIl~~S 311S a ~aed uew~o~ ~e pea~sauaoH ~ J ~~LL; ~ s ~ ~~i ~ a x_ ~ ~ o < x ~ ~ a o~~ 8 , ~ Z~~ a m ~~s S ,i.r., _ tj ~ ~ eke ,3 ~ ~ 1 y , 4..', -.Li - ~ ~ ~ ~~i W j)F ~ F ~~y}p{.: J~.y i.! l - ; Lod ` 1 e ~ W 4 ( ~ ~ t r ~ q ~ 1 ~ 8 ~ ~ . ~r"rc Z h'! ~ _ Z ~ W In l7 0 ~,r,> ~ ~ y =O 1 ° Z Z Z i. ? ~ ac ~ ~ ~ ~ oc Z ~ = 4.~ q Ii{.n ~ _ Y O 4 ~ ti F r. ^ fil~ z z ~ F W 1- r~ ~ Fo ~N ~ ~ s; v4~4 ~ r w4~ ~ wS~ ~ v44~ ~ yr W N JS t. 4 W Ji 3`:' W~ N x T{~`~ 3 ' ~ ~ , +`f _ w c ~ ° M1 u ,~.I J~ `y-- N yin ~ NL` ~ V/ ,3W 3 ~ k ~5 ~ ~ ~ ~r_ I uS s ~ti t ~ ~ 3 t~ i 3u ©q ~ F o~ tsJ tt ~ ~ u'"i mm v. _ ~4tk ~ a ]l F u I~ ~ f ~ T ~ t _ 1'~' yam ~ ~ w ~ 3snox io 3~ri ~ ~ ~,i';. ' S°`!~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 .,s 4 1 4 Y. s W z z o0.:. ~..~n. ~ ~i, ~ T ig3~rd ~ Ul Y gb'~~ ,a~ Q ,a~ a,~~ :~l°, e~Y ~ _ Q ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ O ~ r Y O 4 ~ ~ L` ; a 8 ~ W W J r..~~ J pp :737W W Oi Y ~t 3 1 o i ~ j, .y ~A, / / ~~..a wee>-_^~ .«ms 7:r~izz s ^~-E-`~ ` - ~ _ 9. y / ' %~~'-"y---~-- 8~~++-- Bca ec w o W f d3'S Z 2 0l Z ~ ~,'i~~ 'Fick I 9Ee~--- ~e $ ~ +13 w ~ ~ ~g v. ice' R / t I ~ '~i/.~ I ~a$ ~ ` ~ & ~ We~ ~ 4 '~C r73 ni. Q z ~ ~~~,i ~a l~ i'~ Ey, s S,t 8~ p w 8 S w R ~ O Q ,n §8 S ~ 6 / ; ~ ~ Q en~g U C Z JpFe rv ~ a roaw ~ r'1 ~ r/' F { 1 ncE J r X11 3i ~ v q w ~ t_'' i/V„~ ~ ~I J/ 5 I;i~ p ne ~ 4 ~ p w m S. [mss, o ~ r " ° I ` C~ O IY 00 .o,, .F.~;~'~ ! ~ J ~ ~ j ~ t~ b8 ~ off, ~ ~°o Y ~J~ h ~ r~ a t ~\y h I w U` w 1 U / - ~ 4 e ~~``0°~?9~ r/>/ / .~~I a fi ~49 -~4~ d~' Zti I I / 5 I I' ~I a 3t \ I ~ ie ~~l5so - - ~ z 86~ -o~ ~ e ~1 ss I I i .r I ~ a II _ yec p $ ~ ~ i I ' I ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ III ~ _ X '~I ~ iI/ r r~bi " / I~ / $9$9,q% I tl P~~j 1 I , I ~I ~ 1. I v'` r%//~~ / ~ I/ BK.a I \ C ~ Ili /m ~I I c I~ l /~`~~/e'~ i i~'e ~ an ~~~1~1i ~Ih I \ w' I'. ~ r bt~~ ~ ~$€i Si a 3R. I Flp`i-~. .9 ° I ~ is ii Ai - I r°lq iz! r } ~ 3W aL f;` °a ° ~ I I" V 5L N ° ~~R ij~ rl'+~~~ .J~ ~ a~ i,~ G° tle G° S`c °^°n~ I V~ .~~'i I 5. ~w ' _ I ~v I ~l ~ ' ~ .eA 3r1~ I ~a I ~ °4 4 ~s 'R~ I ~ I'., ° a~ LL ,~'.il _~ac_y-tom= ~~'~L I _ i~ r C ko ~ ~ X~ °t I` I I 1 ~ =-S - ' I I ~ I e' ~'¢o o~ ^ ¢06z I 1 ~1 ~ ~ ti ~y V ~ - I i I ~d 3.~ mN w[ ~ ,915.E I I r ~ ~ \ ~ r{'.:<' - ~ , gW k~ a ~ f %I I`' $ ~ I I"-t VI _ ~ ~yaa-~ 1.% ~`i I CJ~ a¢ k 1£4~ ~o a I i I ~ I `~'~I C; 7~ r I ~ -f ~ , IVY I I W I Z 3~ t I I ( s ~ ,141'\; i.!v _ / x~ 1 15 I 41 ~z a~~ C.Y~fi x z$ ` 8n Fg _ I I¢I & J - Q S 4 s~ ° \ ~ ~1~8 -I `i a; a o a 5'~ `a R R 11 I l[ O it ¢ I ~rl A n>g ~ ~I¢I Si ~6 ~a"~' A~AiW~ i~~8¢ mn~3 1~1" rll _ 4~ ~i w A!g al. I: 'r ~ i ~d <o0 2 ..e k ~n oo I I °;~I f 5 L ~~k I? I' v°s.w ~ '~r~, I i / 6' E ~ ~ 111 q& I y yy I~;. ~~ayl_ I i I I i~ I~ ` f1Y I I. ~ / _z I Y~ I ~II ° l W i'-f { H I I\''~~~r~ I• t` s ~i. :.~~Epl ~L'` ~pe° ~pz F ~5 II d~ _•-I ~ f~ I 91i ~V I ~I 4,6 A~ ~r" R~ ,n f' I I~ `gga` ~~y c pl £~,a I a~~ I~ ~p II 1~ I r:. K K - ^a% L~+ B;F $t a 3i c0 i~ ~ Rs ,1 g; i I ilV } ~f I ,d R~ I ~ £05 g~S iY ~ %4 ' ~I 1 ~ Q, d3 il~ ~ +8 _ ~i I~~~ `oi:e ~$a € F~ 5 `F,I II IV I' ' ~~I tl I<. ~ dra> a' 3a _ E., o I III ,II i i I I ~flV~.. ~ >.r R ~ IF It }r- :'a%§~ 2aE ~a5 fi x<` 4. II r k.. .s . o ~a I !II g'I ~ ~6 n a / ~ R~ J4:;. F ~ ~a~~~ ~°iE ?;Eas" i~ ~ ~ t as til ! ii I~ ~,~x F. ~ a~ A~ X~ u` 4 s ~r~;° ~ .g°s~cg g~ a~~; 5- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.:I ~ ~I~ ;'I &86z I, I 1 I:L; ~ , / ~v.« "~y ~I~~'yd~ $ •^.^82% ~BE~E sc k ~e ...~I cl ~ r I I i n it •4', `k€y 8, E I II a '-~'~~A%.,_; :J ~ ~ 2 ~ - ~ 5 S ~ ~ i c g ~ ~ € `3 ~ € ` I I ~ ~ ~ I o pi I ~ m-r,N~ Y.~ 76 I c. ad 5'° ~uEa ~y g 8' I~ i ff~..rj. a d afi¢.% ~8~'e ~aYs ~~CO Y S~ / I III . ~ p; >a..s -2[ ~ gg p~`' a `s ~ I I i:~ i u'~ .LYM NOSNiS1 ^~L I E~85A .E§2 L~~ ~~s" S' ~a-n X45 ai ; ~ w ~~I i ; ~ c"s ~11 ~ ~I~' ~ ys to L$ M _ ' ~ I I I r (i I ~ 1. ~ ~ I I ~ \ E t- ee\e a'~ T_y-se I 1 A/ _ o'i ~6 ~ rvi~ ni ~Y nY I S: 1~~. I I §r J - 'i ~ ~ /JJ I 1 I flw~ { t r r 'i 8 `~'''i ~ ~ I 3i - ~ < B i~ fl- -Ir f~, ~ ~,LL/109` II ly I I I _ l`\/ ~ I s , / ~~~I 9 / ri.~-.r d i 8,, ~ I 14 I~ I ~ ' ~ I :I ' III ~~~f ~j ~ e 4 s i 'I?~1 i ~ae$ ' , { . "i Nl I tl jd I I I ,~W r s `F3 I ~ i III S ~ ~ ~ I . ~ Q I I',, /I\~+ III ~i~~M~< ,\C. ~ ~ ~l-I - ~ I Y ~I -1 r .t I I ~ n. w I I ~ I ; I a;; tl.. ~y. I I ~ II ` ~.r \~K\. / _ ` %n , ` l 975 _ r I\ / r ~R I t, p~~~B~STREET 0 ' ~ - / vl - - 9 n „ ,y I I t- - 3.. ~ _ - ~ - - ~ Cz _ I I p..=ice.- _ ±y° ~~'~roNl:.J~.y SZZ~-=~ _ g ~ d I - I ~ ~ 'UA79 ,~i713A0.7SIQ ~ ~ „r [ 6 ~ d 9~ o PROPOSED TEXT HOMESTEAD Communities at COFFMAN PARK Zoning Text Submittal PRC~#'O~ED ~E~CT DEVELOP1ViENT TEXT HOMESTEAD AT COFFMAN PARK Section I OVERVIEW AND SITE DESCRIPTION A. Location and Size B. Existing and Proposed Land Uses C. Relation to the Community Plan Section II DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Permitted Uses B. Density, Height & Setbacks C. Access & Traffic Circulation D. Building Architecture & Materials E. Landscaping, Buffering & Open Space F. Dumpsters, Lighting & Mailboxes G. Signage , H. Utilities I. Condominium Association J. Site Development Schedule EXHIBITS A. Buildable Area B. Illustrative Elevations C. Illustrative Live /Work Units D. Illustrative Community Center E. Illustrative Model Matrix F. Rental /Leasing ~E~EIVE~ FEB 2 5 CI ; ~ ~I= UU LII~I A~!~~~ING DIVISION' February 24, 2005 AS SUBMi1TEl)'fG COUNCIL --.--.-_.._>:OR MEETING ON i DEVELOPMENT TEXT HOMESTEAD AT COFFMAN PARK Section I OVERVIEW AND SITE DESCRIPTION A. Location and Size The proposed project would develop approximately 22.66 acres of land located on the south side of Post Road, east of Discovery Boulevazd, North of Wall Street B. Ezisting and Proposed Land Uses The existing site is undeveloped land Zoned as a Planned Unit Development. The applicant proposes to construct 63 single-family detached homes and 3 live/work units to be maintained in perpetuity in a condominium association with a private street system. Each single-family unit will have a two-caz garage and shall have a minimum living area of 2,000 sq. 8. (See Section II, A, 2 for description of Live /Work units.) The applicant is seeking to keep the property zoned Planned Development District (PUD) to permit a maximum density of 3 units per acre. The proposed development is a condominium community designed to appeal to the empty nester mazket. The single-family primazy living areas are located on one level and include a first floor owner's suite and an open floor plan that responds to the lifestyle of the active move down buyer. The architectural style draws inspiration from an early American village character, primarily utilizing horizontal siding, wood trim, and stone. The buildings aze organized to create an intimate pedestrian focused streetscape. The development will provide open space and amenities for both the residents of the Homestead at Coffinan Pazk and the City of Dublin_ C. Relation to the Community Plan This site lies between azeas designated for residential and office. The Preliminary Development Plan includes open space with gently rolling mounds and mixed evergreen and deciduous plant material along Post Road that blend this site into the park character across the road in Coffman Park. The project use is a successful transition between the high-density office uses to the south and other residential uses to the north and west. ~~CEIVE~ FE6 2 52006 CI-~ ~ ~1= LII~! ~~A~!til~l~ D VISIOi~ ,'F~Q~~ED ~E~CT Post Road Theme Using dry-laid stone walls to visually join housing units creates an elegant public open space. Stone walls have wooden gates to add charm and provide for fue and landscape maintenance access while screening vehicles beyond. A shelter at the intersection of Post and Discovery Roads interconnected with stone walls becomes the charming focal point for the community. Horse fencing is utilized to define the unique property and open space at each end, and a colorful array of flowering cherry trees fronting the units directs, enforces and defines the backdrop fringe along Post Road. Adetention /retention pond with low fountains runs parallel to the bike path south of Post Road and creates a reflective image of the features and distinctive homes beyond. Each of these elements helps defime the visual backdrop and connection created between public and private spaces. Meandering along the existing bike path or driving along the adjacent Post Road, this development will provide for an inviting experience consistent with the ambience of the.adjacent proposed Coffman Park improvements. Section II DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Permitted Uses: 1. The development shall include a maximum of sixty-six (66) condominium units with attached garages, Three (3) of which shall belive-work units, common open space areas, pazkland and areas set aside to detain storm water. A maximum 1,800 sq. ft. community center shall be constructed on the edge of the existing pond. Homes may include trellis structures, arbors, privacy fences, sunrooms and screened or enclosed additions and patios as defined on the "home-site plans" submitted with the final development plan but shall not extend into the outside of the home site's designated buildable area, as illustrated on Exhibit `A' attached hereto, or into the limited common azea as defined by state condominium statutes. 2. The three buildings at the northwest corner of the development shall be live/work buildings (Exhibit - C). These buildings shall be utilized as follows: a. The first floor of each building shall be a commercial use. b. The second floor of each building shall be residential or a commercial /residential mixture. c. Live/work building uses shall include: i. Single and double dwelling units. ii. Small-scale general, professional, medical or dental offices. ~E~EIVE® FEB 2 5 ~ -v a- ~ CI~~~1=D~ LIN }LAN ~ ~ NG DIVISIO~~ ~~~~~ED iii. Small-scale studios for arts, crafts, antiques, and photography where the sale as well as display of products is permitted. iv. Small-scale real estate, insurance, and investment and financial advisors. v. No "drive-thru" or other auto related facilities shall be permitted. d_ Parking requirements and scenarios are as follows: Admin/Bus MedfDental Maximum Commercial Scenario ~a,250 SFlsp ~a,200 SF/sp Commercial 2082 SF x 3 units = 6246 SF 25 31 1 dwelling 1246 SF x 3 units = 3738 SF 6 6 9984 SF 31 sp. 37 sp. Maximum Residential Scenario Commercial 1256 SF x 3 units = 3768 SF 15 19 2 dwelling 2072 SF x 3 units = 6216 SF 12 12 9984 SF 27 sp. 31 sp. Limitations on single tenant size: No single commercial tenant shall exceed 2100 gross square feet. Definitions: .Live/work building shall consist of a building with commercial uses on the street level and residential with office commercial uses on the upper level_ Small scale shall mean no greater than 2100 square feet of gross space. 3. The Community Center is a neighborhood amenity for use by residents. Exhibit D depicts an illustrative design. Community Center facilities may include a community lounge, community living room, community kitchen facilities, community sales office, community fitness facilities, community maintenance office and facilities, and other uses covered by condominium association fees. The Community Center is for resident's use and could accommodate a maximum of fifty (50) residents and guests per usage and consists of 1800 SF. 4. Home occupations are permitted in association with each dwelling unit but only in accordance with the provisions of the Dublin Zoning Code. B. Density, Height & Setbacks 1. There shall not be more than sixty-six (66) buildings, (maximum 69 dwelling units) plus the Community Center, constructed within this property at a maximum density of 3 units to the acre. FF.~B 2 5 ~~5~~ ~ _ UBI_IN J 5 ~ ~ ~a.;~i;''~ ! Dl~ISIO~ 2. No building shall be erected, altered, placed or permitted to remain on this property other than the dwellings on the Final Development Plan. and a community building, not to exceed two (2) stories or a height of thirty-five (35) feet as measured by City Zoning code_ 3. The building setback along Post Road shall be a minimum of sixty (60) feet from the existing right-0f-way line. The narrow, elongated nature of this site prohibits a greater setback that would reduce units. 4. The building setback along Discovery Boulevard shall be fifty (50) feet. 5. The building setback from Wall Street shall be a minimum of thirty (30) feet. b. The building setback from the eastern property line shall be a minimum of thirty (30) feet. 7. The pavement setback along Post Road shall be a minimum of sixty (60) feet from the existing right-of-way line_ - 8. The pavement setback along Discovery Boulevard shall be a minimum of fifty (50) feet except at the entrance road. 9. The pavement setback along Wall Street shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet except at the entrance roads. 10. There is no pavement south of the lake except a pedestrian path. i 1. The pavement setback along the eastern property line shall be a minimum of twenty (20) feet. There is a pedestrian path along the eastern property line within the building and pavement setback. 12. The pavement setback surrounding the inset property on Post Road shall be a minimum often (10) feet. 13. The units as illustrated on the Preliminary Development Plan and Exhibit A will be generic in nature. The building dimensions will vary upon specific unit types and future sales_ Individual unit footprints may vary based on the addition of screened porches and patios. A "home site" plan with all possible additions and exterior appointments (i.e. trellis, azbor...etc.) will be provided with the Final Development Plan. 14. There shall be a minimum distance between buildings of twelve (12) feet. A dimensioned "home site" plan will be provided with the Final Development Plan. C. Access & Traffic Circulation 1. All access points shall meet the review and approval of the City of Dublin. Circulation throughout the site shall be through a private street system. There shall be two full access points onto the site from Wall Street. In addition, there shall be one full access point to the site from Discovery Boulevard. ' 2. Cazson Way becomes one-way and a stop street at the intersection of Danielle Lane and will be posted accordingly. ~ ~ ~ / C _ C FbEB 2 ' e G~ ~ ~ ~3UBLIN '~A~~~~NG DIVISIOi~ ~~~~V~~~ 3. Each building will have a two (2) or two and one half (2 %2) car- . attached garage. 4. Private streets shall be a minimum of twenty-four (24) feet in width back of curb to back of curb, alleys shall be a minimum sixteen (16) feet and driveways shall be minimum eighteen (i 8) feet in width and a maximum of twenty six (26) feet at the curb in accordance with the City of Dublin requirement. 5. Sidewalks four (4) feet in width will be installed on both sides of the main street within the site as indicated on the preliminary site-staking plan. In addition, an eight (8) foot asphalt bike path will remain along the south side of Post Road. 6. The development may include modifications to the bike path along the southern side of Post Road to help integrate the landscaping with the existing path and provide lateral paths that lead into the neighborhood. There shall also be a path connection to the existing large pond area from the north that will allow public access. 7. There shall be no vehiculaz access to Post Road from this development. 8. All access points shall meet City of Dublin requirements for visibility within the sight triangles. 9. Each residential building shall have a minimum of two (2) pazking spaces per City of Dublin Code requirements, said parking to be located within attached garages. In addition, the site contains ninety- nine (99) designated exterior spaces located throughout the site. Within three hundred (300) feet of the Live /Work Units, there aze forty (40) parking spaces, including two (2) accessible spaces. The Live /Work units buy design and permitted use are low traffic generators. Also, within three hundred (300) feet of the Community Center, there are twenty-five (25) pazking spaces, which include two (2) accessible spaces. 10. All private drives, parking azeas and approaches will meet City of Dublin standards. 11. Approved street names will be determined in conjunction with the Final Development Plan. Current street names for this Preliminary Phase are for reference purposes only. Final street name selections will be defined for the Final Phase presentation. 12. Street names will be provided, subject to staff approval, along with a digital site plan for addressing purposes prior to submittal of a final development plan. 13. The design of all private drive approaches will meet Engineering requirements for strength, durability and geometrics. D. Building Architecture & Materials l . All detached dwellings shall have at a minimum two-car; rear or side- loaded alley accessed, attached garage with paneled garage door. 2. The exterior building materials, including the enter, shall include all natural materials but not limited ~P~ut~ ~e, ~ ~ ~ C~~ ~~BL~ ~6 '~~~~~;;RIG i~I1~IS nip wood and horizontal siding or a combination thereof. Dimensional _ asphalt roof shingles, cultured stone and wood trim colors will be consistent throughout the community. The Community Center may use a standing seam, or wood shingle roof in lieu of the dimensional asphalt shingles subject to final plan approval. Accent colors will be used for front entry doors, shutters and window boxes. The Community Center will be painted a muted red similaz in color, to the historical office building at 109 S. High St. in Dublin_ An illustrative illustration of the residential units is attached hereto as Exhibit `B'. 3. Throughout the development (i) the same model with the same elevation shall not appear within one (1) house on the same side of the street /open space and (ii) the same model with the same elevation shall not appear directly across the street /open space. "The same" is meant to include unit model names with identical architectural features or use of material placement. (See Exhibit E, Illustrative Model Matrix for example.) Variety is intended to create greater interest by maintaining complementary materials and features without the monotony of identical units. 4. The units shall utilize a stone veneer for at least 50% of the exterior surface of the building duectly facing a public or private street or courtyard. All units shall comply with the requirements of the City of Dublin Appearance Code. 5. Shutters and Window Boxes will be provided on the facade of public and private street front elevations within the complex. Locations will be identified and approved with the Final Development Plans. 6. The color palette for the community will be based on a uniform beige color with accents that vary as follows: (Actual samples to be submitted with the Final Development Plan) A. Black B. Midnight Blue C. Midnight Green D. Burgundy Red 7. Self-sealing dimensional asphalt roof shingles with a minimum 25- year warranty. 8. Units will have the option for a basement, crawl space or slab on grade. 9. Minor changes to the final development home site plans can be made with administrative approval. These approvals may include only rooms, porch, deck, and patio additions as shown on the home site plans approved with the fmal development plan. No additions are to be permitted by any condominium unit owner unless shown as part of a standazd option that will be included in the drawings approved in the Final Development Plan. This authority is necessary to assure complimentary variety based on unit types sold and maintaining azchitectural interest in the community. ~ FEB 2 5 2105 a ~ C1 ~Y t~F ~U~LiA~ ~ LANIViNG D#VISlO1~ 10. The final location and design of house numbers will be determined in conjunction with the Finat Development Plan and City staff. 1 i. Future home models for use within the development will be submitted, subject to staff approval. E. Landscaping, Buffering & Open Space i. Preliminary landscaping is as shown on the attached landscape plans. A detailed landscape plan in accordance with Dublin Code will be submitted in compliance with the Final Development Plan requirements_ 2. Complete and revised civil engineering drawings and tree replacement and relocation plans drawn at an appropriate scale, subject to staff approval, will be submitted as part of the final development plan. 3. The existing trees-along portions of the northern and eastern edge of the property will be relocated or preserved and enhanced. The enhancement will include the addition of deciduous shade trees, ornamental flowering trees and evergreen trees. 4. Applicant will consult with the City Forrester prior to the final development plan to verify the Ash trees remain the preferred species of street tree along Wall Street. 5. There will be a four (4) foot horse fence (design and color subject to Staff approval and is intended to be dark in color and construction similar to a 3 rail horse fence depicted in site elevations and sections on Plan L-7.) and sections of four (4) foot dry-laid stone wall provided on the southern property line along the length of Wall Street. A four (4) foot evergreen hedge will augment the back of the fence. Breaks in the wall shall be provided as indicated on the Preliminary Development Plan; to accommodate fire apparatus access routes (FAAR) from Wall Street and Post Road. 6. The development may include modifications of the bike path along the southern side of Post Road to help integrate landscaping with the existing path and provide lateral paths that lead into this neighborhood creating an inviting setting. 7. There shall also be path connections to the new pond and existing lazge four-acre pond that will allow general public access. Path will consist of compacted gravel or chip and seal type surface. The walkway leading to the pond will be extended to connect to the existing bike path in the northeastern area of-the site. Benches shall be located azound the pond to provide seating opportuniries for walkers and bikers using the path. The paths will allow public access through the site meandering azound these significant pond amenities from Post Road to Wall Street. 8. A water feature will be created along Post Road to provide an additional amenity and a storm water retention facility. Two fountains will be part of this amenity that will be installed along Post Road. A supplemental water source will be provided in accordance with Dublin codes maintain water at a desirable level. Some existing moundi v FEB 2 5 205 Ci i-Y OF DUBLIN - ~'LANNING QIVISIO~~ reduced to allow visibility from Post Road. The elongated nature of this pond feature will enhance the view from passing vehicles on Post Road_ 9. A gazebo shall be constructed at the corner of Post Road and Discovery Boulevazd as a neighborhood amenity. The gazebo amenity ties into the bike path on Post Road as well as the sidewalk on Discovery Boulevazd. 10. Deciduous street trees will be planted within the development and along Wall Street and Discovery Boulevard per City of Dublin Code requirements_ 11. Deciduous trees to meet the city requirement of 1/40' shall be installed in alternate clusters along Post Road to create a series of natural groupings to blend with Coffman Park and Indian Run. 12. Many existing trees shall remain and will be protected and incorporated into the proposed development as will be shown on the approved Final Development Plan_ 13. There shall be three open space areas on the site, including two along the Post Road frontage, and one azound the pond. 14. Within the community there will be courtyard areas that make up part of the common azeas found throughout the development that will include benches and sidewalks. 15. An amenity available to the residents of the condominium complex will be a Community Center that will overlook the existing pond without modification or impact to the pond. Part of the wooden boardwalk will be built over the water azea of the pond and will be constructed to allow general public. access around the Community Center to the path which circles the pond. No alterations for the proposed boardwalk, Community Center, and or walking path will be made that reduce overall storage capacity of the pond; subject to staff approval. 16. A Condominium Owner's Association shall be responsible for maintenance of all common azeas, including but not limited to the Community Center, gazebo, and open space azeas. 17. All yards will be sodded with turf. 18. A six (6) foot tall-vegetated landscape screen shall be installed on the western and southern property lines adjacent to the existing day Gaze center. 19. The developer will provide fees in lieu of land dedication to meet any deficit in parkland dedication requirements in accordance with Dublin City Code. All required parkland dedication fees and general warranty deeds will be submitted to the City of Dublin prior to recording of the final plat. 20. All reserves aze to be dedicated as directed by the City and shall be maintained by the condominium association, with the city responsible for the storm water function of the existing pond 21 _ Details for paver azeas will be submitted with the Final Development Plan. 22. The development will meet all requirements of the tree prese~atieq ~ ~ ` ordinance as will be shown on the approved Final Develop~_~ Z 5 Z~ _ va ~i ~ ~ DU~LiN F~~, ~ ~t~ANN1NG ow~sio~ P~O~Q~~~ T~~~~ - F. Dnmpsters, Lighting & Mailboxes 1. No centralized trash dutnpsters will be used. Residents will store trashcans within the garages. 2. Main entry feature signage shall be landscaped and lit with concealed up- lights. 3. Residential post mounted Lantern-type Street lights shall be provided in front of each unit. Poles shall be a maximum eight 8 feet in height. Poles and the fixtures will be black. Site /street lighting as necessary shall be in accordance with the Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines and cut sheets shall be provided with the Final Development Plan. Street lighting will occur where unit specific lighting does not provide sufficient ambient lighting. 4. Unified group mailboxes shall be provided in accordance with the U.S. Postmaster's regulations, with vehicle access provided to group mailboxes. Exact locations will be defined on the Final Development Plan in conjunction with the assignment of addresses. G. signage 1. There shall be two permanent neighborhood identification signs located at the entrance on Wall Street and Discovery Boulevazd. The signs shall be ground signs as depicted on the Preliminary Development Plan. The maximum height of the sign shall be six (6) feet. The maximum signage area on each face of the sign shall be ten (10) square feet. All signs shall be double sided and externally illuminated (concealed source). Each sign shall be made of wood, wood composite material with routed letters, or HDU. Plant material will be located at the base of each sign in accordance with Dublin Code. Street signage will be used within the development and will be unique to this development and based on City of Dublin standazds, as approved by staff. 2, Permissible live/work unit signage shall be determined with the Final Development Plan, but shall be similar in nature to the preliminary elevation sketch; as shown on Exhibit - C. 3. Internal signage shall direct community center guests to additional parking areas, in accordance with the Dublin Sign Code. 4. Internal signage specifying areas of one-way travel and prohibited and allowable parking azeas will be installed subject to staff approval. H. Utilities Sanitary sewer and water shall be extended to the site from the current termini adjacent to the proposed development area. Surface drainage shall be handled in conjunction with the existing pond and new detention basin. The grading within Reserve B shall be designed to be natural.~d ~ / c incorporate the mounding along Post Road_ ~.s ~ ~ V l~.'~. V FEB 2 52005 ~ ~ G~~~~~~_~?~ ~ t~'NJBLI ~~P~SD ~~~CT All utilities and mechanical units will be designed to meet the City of Dublin requirements. All utility connections will meet or exceed Division of Engineering Standards. I. Condominium Association A condominium association will be formed, for the perpetuity of the development, that shall establish the Association as responsible for the • care and maintenance of the Community Center, all common azeas, landscaping, open space and all reserves (excluding the storm water detention pond at the south end of the site for which the City is responsible), signage, exteriors of the structures, gazebo, benches, and any other item or amenity commonly associated with condominium responsibilities. Exhibit - F is an example of the association's restrictions on Rental / Leasing of Units. J. Site Development Schedule i. Applicant anticipates building the development in phases as shown on the Preliminary Development Plan. 2. Construction of all amenities planned for the reserve Area B and C will be completed prior to the initiation of Phase II and those planned for Area A are completed prior to the initiation of Phase III. 3. Construction on the first phase shall begin soon after zoning and development approval and the closing of the purchase of the property and shall consist of twenty-two (22) units and Community Center beginning on the eastern side of the property. 4. Areas disturbed by construction shall be smooth graded and seeded in between subsequent phasing. Z' ~"aS P trick M. Grabill Date President and CEO, Homestead Communities, LLC Text for Coffman Park-CAT03.bd ~~~I~~~ FEB 52006.. © - 7 U~ ~ C~ ~ ~ U~ UU~IN 'LA~+~~~~G [~Il/IS10~~ EXHIBIT A 80.00 80.00 22.00 13.67 I' ~ 22.00 512.OQ 14.00 21.67 ~ :14`.00 2.67 34.00 ~ 34.00 ~T 12:3~~ 20 00 7.00 ~ ~ 13 0 ~ ~ 11.33 6.00 ~ , THE CARRINGTON THE DEVONSHIRE so.oo 80.00 7.00 s - 22:00 19.67 34.00 ~ ~ 34.00 22.00: 18':00 r : ~ 5.00. 1;4 OS 7.00 THE FAIRFIELD THE HAMPTON so.oo so.oo 2.00 -22.00 ; 15.00 36.67' 34.00 34.00 6.33 10+00 7.00 3.00 1 THE NEW LEXINGTON TYPICAL BUILDABLE AREA DIMENSIONS EXHIBIT B ILLUSTRATIVE PLANS • ~ _ ~~o ~ 6 ~ ~7 i ~ ~ ,-9 M { ~ ~(~i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~H aN ~ ~p a!~ S ~ a~ a ~ ~~~eld ~Id ' I I I r I I I I I j I I j I ~ ~ I I I ~ I i i I I ~ II II I I I I I i i ~ I I ' I i i i i n-• ii oS i. j' II ~r; 11 1= ii ' II > ' ' ~ ii I II ( Y~ II ® ~ i i ~ I j~ ~ I I I I i ti w ~ ~ I ii II p ~;I #1~ ~ I' ii ' 1 1 cn I ~ ~ I I i t i i - l ~i I H II I ~ II ~ I jl ~ I jl I' 1 1 ~ j~ {I ~ ~ I ~ i 1 1 , ~ 11 I { i I I ' II I ~ 11 i .i ~ 11 ~ II ~ r • • I1 ~ 31 i ~ I I - . , I I I~, I.~ II ~ I ` ~I ~ I~ ~ ~ ~ i I ~ ---is--r z ~ i i i o ; i ~ I ~ ~ ~ II f E 11 W I J W ~ i i ij z + II O ! I j ~ i l-~ f • j 1 1 r ~ 11 ~ 11 I ~I ~ . ;i I 1 1 ~ I + II E ! ~ ~ ?~0 11 ~i III 1 1 ? O ~ 11 ~ ~ I is i I 1 I I I II f j I1 i 11 ' i 11 ~ ~ ~ I , ' € ii I ii f II ~ • ' ii ' II I II i ! ~ it -----T-v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 ± = ' eye ~ o ~4~ d i o > ~~b~ ` ; y~~ ~ - g ffi as ~ N n u pee ~ ~ ~e d Q ~ ~ 4' ~ ~Ij ~I~I ~ SIR U R~ . ~ . pia 3! I~~a pia ~ p~f i pica ~ Bla 1__ ' - -___-n i ~ ~ ~ I i i 1 1 ~ i 1 I I I I ! i + 11 y I 1 1 I I a ~lS ~ I I I t I ~ I I 1 I I: i~ I' ~ ~ + ~ ~ ooao 11 ~ j' I i " i i i~ I I I I ~ ii ~ ~I I ii { 11 ii ~ I I 1 i I ii { I !I ~ E ~ ~ I I z ~ { 1 I~ ~ 11 ~ ~ ~ I~ E oaao Q ~ I 1 I,~~ IE E E ~ Ili l1i f oooa IIw ~ E II 1~i 1 1 1 1 1¢ i { { I i i E i l! 11 W 6 ~ ~ II i I 1 ~ II t I_~~ ii 5 ~,II ~ ~ I ~ ii ~I S~I ~ ~ ~ i I I I Ii l;~ 1 ~ 1 II E• I i it i s a. I~+ ~ I I 1 II II "il''ll I ' 11 I + 11 I + 11 II I II l II I I , I ' 1 I ~ i E ~ I I I I Q I 11 W i I i4 ~ ~ II w I -ti w l ~ ~ i ~ I I ~ o i t ~ 1i ~ 1 I I ~ i; ~ ' ii . , 1 1 ~ s ' { i : II ~ 11 I I {I ~ E i { ~ ( S ~ ~ ~ I ~ I I . ~E I ~ r i f u I I , ~ 1 - 1 i ~ 11 i 4 + I 11 ~ ' 1 I I ~ II l j II 1 + 11 ' • L II II 11 i I I I ' ~ t I + II ----U 2 i ~ ~ c aauQ _ a o ~ ~ ~y~~e~ ~f ~ 9 _ - ~ yas ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i~ ~ ~ ~ ~'d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~d ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~I+ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i - -n 8~ i i ~ ii ~ ~ ~ ii _ ~ ~i if ~ ii I I ~ ~I ii --i--- -n ' ii ii ii ii I ~ ~ 1~ ~ ~ ~i i~ 1 ~ z o~ ii ii i~ ~ ~ ii > ii o ii ~ . O p p ii ~ ~ ~ i Opp i i ~ i i w ii ~ ii w ii ~ ~ ii w II€ ~ i1 " C=a " ~ ~ ii ii i~ ~ ii ~ ii i ~j ii ii ii ~ ii C=~ ~ 'i ii --v ---.~----i 1 ~'l 1 jl 1~ I~ 1= 1~ ~1 I~ I ~I I~ 1~ 1~ 1~ ~I 1~ } I~ I ~ ~ ! ~ I ~ ~ j I~ 1~ ~1 ~1 1~ ~1 1~ 1~ 1~ ~I I~ I~ I~ I~ ~1 I~ I~ ~1 1~ ~1 1~ I~ 1~ I~ ----IJ f Z 4 < _ o ~~y~~ t ~q~z O p & Q V ; ~~~~x~~~~ O ~ E~b c c > Y W I I I II II I I I 11 I, 11 I, I I 11 I, 11 11 I, II II 11 11 I, I, II I, I, 11 ~yy . t I I I II I1 I II ' I yap .,I ~T ~ ~T• ~ f ~ I k:: . e a ~ ~ Ij C d R d 6 d I `i•: I, ~ 1 . I 11 I I _ _ 1 - ~--rl - s I j I ~I 11 ~ ~S ~ ~ j ~J I I ---L-- I _ u II I ii ii ~ : ji--------- I I I I _ ii ii ii ¢ C_,i ii zo i i ~p ~ ~ ~ w I I ~ ~ ooao ~ ~ oaoa aooo ~ ~ I I II II ----u --~------U I 1 I Ij I I II I - ~I I I p p ~ ~IE ht I ~I I ~ R ! Ad ~a~d E! 6d a i1 ~ i 4 o ~ ~~~Q~~~~~ iii ~ ~ W i c ` ~ S s 4~CaA~3~ ~bSe ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q i I - 1~ 4~ I I I I I I II it . I i . I I . ~ ~ II i II k~a 6 R a k~a Ri ~ I ~ ( Ra ! ~ I _L_~ ~ I I I j~ I I' ~ I I I ~ I I ~ I ~ , II ~ _ ~ II I~ w ® I I i1 ~ ~3 , . II w ~ II Ili B o a o J z ~ it o II I II ~ ` II ~ I I ~ I I z ( ~ ~ ( fi ' ~ ~ I ~I ~ I II ~ III I ~ w ~ I i I I I i~ I i ' I I ~ II i~o II r it ~ II . ~ ----u ~ I I I II II it • i I II ® II II it I II II ~ - -U . ?o ?o ii~~: it I I , y~ a i ~ ~ ~,z ~ ~ ~I~ ~ R a A r ~ ~ ~ a ~ 2 r ~ _ o d ~ o > ~ x" ~ ~ ! a ~ A a pr ~ ~ ~ $ ~ ~ b~ ~ ~ Id I ~ E~a ~ I ~ - ~ ~ I II II aaao II II aoaa II ~ II II II I II II ~ aoao II ~ II ~ II z~ - II Q II > II w w ~ I I w I ~ II w I II ¢ o II w II ~ III i I 1 ~ - ~ i~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ , II ~~II II II I --U II II II ii I _ II ~ II II II II II _ ~ ~I II II II II II II II II I I II I ~I l - fi Y EXHIBIT C LIVE l WORK UNITS ~ ~~s ~ _yt ~ ~ ~ ~ Ada 9$~$ a s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~n ~ b ~ ~ Q ~ i l l l l l l~ II o ® ~ 4 ~ ~ ( O Z I I ~ as a ~ a aooo > ~ ® ~ J ~ ~i W ® W I W a cn aaao ~ i~ ~ W ~9 z ~ ~ ~ z II ~ ~ ~'d ( I ® ® I ( Y Z Y I~ I ~ Z o ~ ~ o ~ a ~ > W I W ~ W I W ~ I ~ Z Q I ~ ~ I II 1- H LL I I I 2 F- I I ~I c~ Z ~ I ~ ( I F ~ I ~ ~ ~I ~ i ~ t ~ ~ a ~ ~ m m ~ p ~ ~ ~ B~ ; ` ~ ~ ~ i w tom': ~ ~ ~ R ~~~I $r~~ g F Q ~ W i rhLL ~r91' A~F Q p ~ J i~ - ~ OC 0 ~ ~ ° ® ~ 3 - ~ ~ N / ~ W Q a ~ Z b ~ W J ro,w a~a~ Q r~u r~ a-a Z Q J 00 a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O R = Q Z a ~ ~ ~ W N '0-'ti O'N A-i a ~ ~ r t. ' Z a J a ~ ~ ~ O 4 x LL I- N a ~ . _ _ ~J. !''d 0'09 Au 1~ N ..a O 0 ~U a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ad Q 6 0 o xs:rxgqasa:c.^srs~zaraca-r-^~~^~^~^-~s~c:sz.~as~aasrs~a Yt N ~i W w ~ F Q ~ d~ ~QOU~ ~ ~Q 3 Z w ; ~ O~ Uw W O _ J :asaxausrmraa.~irz^~ «.••a:rscsxa,•••.•~~.aau a .u^ O C ~ < ~ ~ m RRR//7 o ~ ~ < m ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U z ~ ~ = ~ _ F- x U ne Q w w w Z Q ® ~ i EXHIBIT D COMMUNITY CENTER ~ F )r R- ~ W~ E-,+ ~ t fjk ~ ~ y~ ~ 1 : y'~ `gyp 'lj'~ _ 4V:,4` ~ S ~ - ~ ~ry ~ Y''., 4 _ • t ~ _ ~ i i ,'-'t I ~ ~ , ~ i t 4k- ` 7 _ =~sa_=`ic-~i~-~%~-~~~-`ice SCE -'i~~~ ~ua~~~ _=cs~~=~~~~iG~`i~=tea==~H=~ reC_a- ~i--sae-`i--~ ~B~ G~~ r-=Li-~`rp~ i-=.r i-..eG.-=ip~er-=-a--_i-rr~ - -L'e - - ~ - ~ - ~ - ¦ --r _=e _r __e r s r a r r, ~`=-err- rr-ter -.r -.r --~i~ ~i~G~i~~~i~p~r~~~i~~ rc- sp- rc-map-`ice-`iq `sp-`i~~ ~_~-yip ~ip~ rr~ ape a.- rp-:r-=e ~~C=~~ i ~-i " r-~ `rte- r~ ~~ea~ ~C `y- rte- y- rte- r--~r~~ r G--yip-yip-yip-~~~~~~~-~~~ -~~i ~~i ~`i ~'a_p`i_-`ice-_ `a -~i=~3='~ i ~=ice -i.= _ _i~ ip rte- rte- r'- ~i ~i~ p- ~C _r -_r _-r - pi ~~i =0 ate- 9p~-a-~CS~~ -~~i ip~ i~=- ~~`r~~.= ~ ice= r. app-r r+ =C~ r- - r - rp r:-` - r - a~~v -=i-.ice-_n -o ~~i r. = ~ -Z.3 r pig: 7 ~ ~ r t - _ r_~_r _ ¦ s_c- Q / ~_n r r. apse= aip r a r _ ` ra r Z i•• •-=`a-=`ap=p- ~i- _ rp-`r -a~_eip=`i_-` ~=-r T i ap-' Vii:=_ =Ci ~ ~ O o ~ U rpm a r ~-r ~a~er- _ ~ ===~~~~~~~arp-ate _a~~ ' O - -rp a.- a~tiap_ i rp. a .`ec=r. eep-_=._~er r~~ ra rr r`- ra- ° r ~~t - r-- a-- r-- r-- r--~r~- i ~O =~=i~p?~~ ~B=j yea a-- rp-` r--Grp-`rp-`ra ^aap- -=~i~~ ap_ a ~~ip_ei ~ei~~ r iaaa~ ate- a~Cr~-'i y~~ a _ Ci~~ r-- r ~`a~ rp - 'c-G ti_-____ Gp- - rte- rte- rs- rte- rp- r. r_G-`~%-`r `ip-`~ r - rte- ~r ~~r_- G ~ G~^ ry r. -r. r. _ . - e~-~ 7 psi Gc==ap=~r~-~-Ls ~i-~~ ~ N. =r~~ ••r~3s~c~~r~-map - - - rc fit ! F j ~ i4 i. ~ r k,~, ~ J' 5 ` U - z 'S Il~~ $ W ~ _ ` . ~ ~ ~ V ~ 1 Q m W ~ ~ ' ~ Z ~ .a x~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ A f t+ ~ a ~J ~ ~I, ~ d~ a r~ ~ w,~:~, „ .,k a . . cs z s f n d 'E+ ~ ~ • zAJ - qil ; W ~;C ~ 4 K i O ~ Fl x U _a - • ~ O 5 < i Fry ~h' ~ , ice- • ~ ~ k F ` W - _ i, -~7ap ~ ''-e- ~ - J _ LJJ t'~~~ r ; ~ ~ = _ i~~ ~ ~ ~ y .Z G_~ep'a~_e . r c4 1 ~ r h+ t ~+1.+, n i • r I; ~ ~ , _ f td1\\ A \ f ~ ~ r' y Ott A; ~r r,4 ~r{~ SC ~ r _ ~~4 ~ i I ~1 ~ ! Y - ' ~ tr ' L I {V r ~j -04 F 4 yL j \ '6 Y r ~ 1 y + ' I ~ ~ ~y - Q ~ L~L i~ 1`~ 5 r'~ a ~ ~ i ~ W ~ ~ Q _ ~ ~ J Z~ ~ ~ L1J Q w Ill ~ ~ w r ~ ~ Q~ o O (~'o ~ r~ ~ U ~e: ~ ~ a k ~ 0 , `~~a ti ~ ~ a k ~ r ~ ~rx ~3 • x~ r ~ i ~ ~ n ,u ` ~1._ r ~ i i l~- ~ i r ?iii ~ sv :s ti.?.-- k5;n t,• :.'lS`' ~ . ~ ~ , F ~ , ,c' ~ J V ~ W ~ . , z ~ U Q ~ W ~ t m w w A ~A_, ,i ,h ~r~ w ~ _ Z ~ ~1 > . n ' ~ Q ~ k{'~ / f(~ 'y <J F~../~ Z~ a ~ ~ .0-.OE ~ ~ 0 ~V .L-,E .0-.5 .0-,OZ .0-.5 .Ol-,L w wO OO z 0 in ~ ~ ~ ~o I -_J c~ U Q~ 00 Y ? W I Q W I J Q F- Q J I ~ ¦ W ~ ~L I- U I Q O Qw o ,c O ~ U o I 0 Q o J Z~ ~ uQi I I c I ~c°h LL ~ Z l~ J ~ u I ~ I 0 ~ O~ o 0 ~I oD ~v0 I 0 O I ~Q O Q a O O o¢ - OQ U Z W m F- GG Q W 2 W LL Z Q Q J a~ rT, .y W a ' ~ ~ 0 ~U pp z o ° W ~ Q~Z w ~ ~ ~ W QZ _ ~ ~ O cwi~ p ~ o ~ O o ~ + 3 ~ ~ 3 } } S U z U W F- U a w w z Q a .Jn n Vl Q~ i-~ .q 0 U ~ 3 ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ffi y $ > o ~ p m 1 Z O w ~ ~ Qw w ~U ~ w w z~ ~ w Q- ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ' ~ z Quo O + Q r r U z N F-~ U W H_ U Q ° w 2 w w Z Q a c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q QQ Q N ~ N y ~ ~ c ~U O H J ~ I- Q ~ W p~ 1• a a~ ~ Z O 1- w ~ Qw w ~U ~ ~ Z ~ WQ~-w O ~ p~ o Oro a. U Q O ~p o W W 1~ ~ . a~ Z - N F- U w F- U 3 ~ m W ~ ~ > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a .k ` " ILLUSTRATIVE MODEL MATRIX EXf~IIBIT E :•k'' f•J W C w s. t e +'r +3 ~ f o :R ti w, a fi't'`. • , y.•.':':. i. . i .'.ti'. . t s v .t r i A D ' t- < i ti ~ 4r i S C • ~ l' ~ 3Re ~.t a 'Y`ip I ~ t:•' ~ hr ' ~ ` ~ ,i L - t 0 •fl . t Lr~ • • ~ t ' r ' ` ~ ~ ,t ~ • ~ m, . . r ~ - r • w• s ~ ~ EXHIBIT - F Following is an example of a paragraph from Association By-Laws Homestead Communities uses at other sites in the greater Columbus area and would intend to include similar language at Homestead at Coffman Park. Rental / Leasing No Unit or part thereof shall be rented or used for transient or hotel purposes, which is defined as: (i) rental for any period of less than thirty (30) days; (ii) rental under which occupants are provided customary hotel services such as room service for food or beverages, busboy service, and similar services; or (iii) rental to roomers or boarders, that is, rental to one or more persons of a portion of a Unit only. No lease may be less than an entire Unit. Any lease agreement shall be in writing, shall provide that the lease shall be subject in all respects to the provisions hereof, and to the rules and regulations promulgated from time to time by the Board, and shall provide that the failure by the tenant to comply with the terms of the Condominium organizational documents and lawful rules and regulations shall be a default under the lease. Prior to the commencement of the term of a lease the Unit owner shall notify the Board, in writing, the name or names of the tenant or tenants and the time during which the lease term shall be in effect. In addition, in order to assure that the Condominium, from time to time, meets the requirements of institutional first mortgages and institutional and governmental agency guarantors and mortgage insurers necessary to qualify buyers and owners and/or the Condominium for owner-occupant residential financing, and to maintain, the character of the Condominium as primarily a housing community for owner-occupants, the Board, from time to time, may adopt rules limiting or restricting the number of Units in the Condominium that may be rented, provided, that no such rule shall limit or restrict the right of (i) an institutional first mortgage, insurer, or guarantor which takes title to a Unit by deed in lieu of foreclosure, or a purchaser at a foreclosure sale, or the immediate successor in title to the Unit of that institutional first mortgage, guarantor or purchaser, to rent the Unit(s) so acquired, or (ii) Developer, or Developer's assignee who becomes a successor developer of the Condominium, to rent a Unit or Units owned by Developer or such successor. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION FEBRUARY 17, 2005 ~F t CITY OF DUBLIN_ toad Use and tong Range Ploaaiag 1800 Shier-Rings Rand W61in, Ohio 43016-1236 Phone: 614-410-4600 Fax: 614-410-4141 Weh Site: www.duhlai.oh.us The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 1. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 04-0282 -Homestead at Coffman Park Location: 22.66 acres located at the southeast corner of Discovery Boulevard and Post Road. Existing Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Perimeter Center plan). Request: Review and approval of a revised preliminary development plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.053. Proposed Use: Asingle-family condominium development of 63 detached residential units, 3 live-work units, a community building and 4.37 acres of open space. Applicant: Patrick Grabill, Homestead Communities, LLC, 109 S. High Street, Dublin, OH 43017; represented by Ben W. Hale Jr., Smith & Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Suite 725, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Danielle M. Devlin, AICP, Senior Planner. Contact Information: Phone: (614) 410-4649-E-mail: ddevlin@dublin.oh.us. MOTION: To approve this rezoningJpreliminary development plan because it provides a needed alternative housing type for the community, its uses serve as an appropriate transition from the commercial uses to the south and the residential properties north of Post Road while preserving the intent of the Community Plan by allowing a "live-work" element, it lowers the density from the existing zoning standards, potentially reducing off-site traffic impacts, the landscape treatments and pedestrian amenities will substantially increase the visual quality of the Post Road corridor, and will blend with the proposed expansion plans for Coffman Park, and the appearance of a regional stormwater retention pond will be enhanced, with seven conditions: Conditions: 1) That the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches meet Engineering requirements for strength, durability and geometrics; 2) That no alterations for the proposed boardwalk, community center and or walking path be made that reduces overall storage capacity of the pond, subject to staff approval; 3) That all utility connections meet or exceed Division of Engineering Standards; ~?S8U8MRTED'i~000~• Page 1 oft 3. y_ os 3-ly-oS .,r.._,~t~OR MEEt1NQ ON STAFF REPORT DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 1~, 2005 CTfY OF DUBLIlV_ lead Use eel 100 S`iar-IGass Read Win, Ohio ~301<r1136 Mieae: 614a10~160A ~ al~lo~i~i web Sle: wwN.dul~.ehes 1. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 04-0282 -Homestead at Coffman Park Location: 22.66 acres located at the southeast corner of Discovery Boulevard and Post Road. Existing Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Perimeter Center plan). Request: Review and approval of a revised preliminary development plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.053. Proposed Use: Asingle-family condominium development of 63 detached residential units, 3 live-work units, a community building and 4.37 acres of open space. Applicant: Patrick Grabill, Homestead Communities, LLC, 109 S. High Street, Dublin, OH 43017; represented by Ben W. Hale Jr., Smith & Hale, 37 West Broad Sheet, Suite 725, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Danielle M. Devlin, AICP, Senior Planner. Contact Information: Phone: (614) 410-4649-E-mail: ddevlin@dublin.oh.us. UPDATE On January 20, 2005 the Planning Commission considered this preliminary development plan and zoning request and determined that additional information was necessary in order to arrive at a recommendation. The Commission identified the following issues for further clarification: a) Traffic analysis b) Parking analysis for live-work units c) Walking path material d) Density e) Non-owner occupancy restrictions f) Text clarification oflive/work units floor area and permitted uses g) Diversity matrix The applicants have submitted additional information relative to the above items, and have modified the proposed preliminary development plan and development text as more fully described below. Dublin Planning and Zonir ~ ~.ommission Staff Report -February 1 i, _JOS _ Case 1-Page 3 available options such as porches, decks or lazger garages, subject to final development plan approval. BACKGROUND• Case Summary: The site was originally zoned PCD, Planned Commerce District, in 1988 for office and industrial uses as part of the Perimeter Center plan. In 2000, a PUD preliminary development plan (rezoning) for the site was approved that included 60 detached units and atwo-building "live- work" component comprised of twelve residential flats and eight office%mmercial units that totaled 7,650 square feet (see Record of Action 00-030Z). Copies of the approved site plan and text have been included in the packet overview materials and illustrate the zoning currently in place for this property. In March 2002, the Planning Contmi-motion disapproved a subsequent final development plan (see Record of Action 00-127FDP), indicating that the final plans did not comply in all respects with the approved preliminary development plan. The Commission cited inconsistencies that included building footprint modifications, elimination of the live/work component, entry feature and pond amenity changes, alteration of traffic flow, change in the type and number of units, and general reduction of amenities and overall design quality. The Planning Commission heazd a request for a revised preliminary development plan in May 2003 (see Record of Action 02-1372) with a modified text and plan featuring b8 single-family detached units and a community center. The Commission recommended disapproval, citing inconsistency with the Community Plan, an absence of sound zoning, planning, and design techniques, and a failure to incorporate a mix of land uses properly related to its surroundings. This case was forwazded to the City Council and was tabled per the applicant's request on June 23, 2003. In August of 2004, the City Council removed the case in order for the current revised preliminary development plan application (Case #04-0282) to proceed. The current application was initially placed on the April 1, 2004 Planning Commission agenda, but subsequently tabled at the applicant's request. The applicants now wish to present a revised preliminary development plan and text more similaz in nature to the approved zoning plan currently in place for the property. This plan proposes to construct 63 single-family detached residential units, three "live-work" units and an 1,800-squaze foot community center at the edge of the existing pond. A gazebo, a walking path and aretention/detention pond with two fountains are among the amenities proposed along the Post Road frontage. The live-work units could provide for up to two dwelling units for a potential of 69 dwelling units on the site and a density not exceeding 3 units per acre. Case Procedure: The new Planned Development District (Ordinance 75-03) was approved by City Council on May 3, 2004, and went into effect on June 2, 2004. As described in Section 153A50, the purposes of the new Planned Development District regulations are to: 1) Provide an opportunity for a mix of land uses otherwise not permitted within the standard municipal zoning district classifications; Dublin Planning and Zonir~ ^,ommission Staff Report -February ii, _.~OS Case 1-Page 5 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 azeas; 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 safeguazded; S~ Proposed residential development will have sufficient open space areas that meet the objectives of the Community Plan; 6) The proposed development respects the unique characteristic of the natural features and protects the natural resources of the site; 7) Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, retention and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided 8) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on the surrounding public streets and to maximize public safety and to accommodate adequate pedestrian and bike circulation systems so that the proposed development provides for a safe, convenient and non-conflicting circulation system for motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians; 9) The relationship of buildings and structures to each other and to such other facilities provides for the coordination and integration of this development within the PD and the larger community and maintains the image of Dublin as a quality community; 10) The density, building gross floor azea, building heights, setbacks, distances between buildings and structures, yard space, design and layout of open space systems and pazking 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 faz 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 standazd development regulations included in the Dublin Zoning Code or Subdivision Regulation, and that any such deviations aze 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 azea; and 16) The applicant's contributions to the public infrastructure are consistent with the Thoroughfaze Plan and aze sufficient to service the new development. CONSIDERATIONS• Site Characteristics and Zoning: Site Description. The subject property is 22.66 acres and is located on the south side of Post Road. The "L" shaped pazcel includes 1,450 feet of frontage along Post Road and surrounds a 1.7-acre office development. The parcel has 250 feet of frontage along Discovery Boulevard and 1,700 feet of frontage along Wall Street. The site includes mounding along Post Road, and a tree row runs from Post Road to Wall Street through the Dublin Planning and Zonis ~ ~'.ommission Staff Report -February 1 i, ..105 Case 1-Page 7 Development Standards: Building Setbacks The text and plans show a proposed building setback along Post Road of 60 feet and along Discovery Boulevazd of 50 feet. Minunum building setbacks along all other property lines are described in the text and shown on the plans at 30 feet. Pavement Setbacks. Proposed pavement setbacks for all property lines noted in the text match those illustrated on the site plan. Pavement setbacks along Post Road are 60 feet and along Discovery Boulevazd are 50 feet. The Wall Street pavement setbacks are 10 feet. Access and Circulation: • Curb Cuts. This development plan includes two primary access points on Discovery Boulevard and Wall Street. A secondary access point is also shown along Wall Street. No vehicular access is permitted or shown on Post Road. Streets and Pavement R'idths All streets within the development are proposed as private but meet City standards with a width of 22 feet, back-to-back of curb. The text specifies that all private streets, pazking areas, and drive approaches must meet Engineering ' requirements for strength, durability and geometries and will provide sufficient turning radii for waste hauling and emergency vehicles. Recent plan revisions have addressed fire code requirements concerning fire-fighting accessibility and have been reviewed and approved by the Washington Township Fire Department. Street names used on the plan are for reference only and the text specifies that street names shall be determined with Land Use and Engineering staff approval prior to final development plan submission. Alleys and Driveways. The proposed development includes service alleys for attached, reaz-loaded garages. All alleys have a minimum width of 16 feet to accommodate one-way traffic. Drive approaches have a minimum of 18 feet in accordance with City code. The text specifies that `One Way' and `No Parking' signage will be placed where necessary within the development, as requested by the City. Parking Requirements. The Zoning Code requires a minimum of two pazking spaces per dwelling unit. All proposed units, including the live-work units, provide atwo-car garage and optional third-car addition. The site plan shows 99 additional on street pazking spaces provided throughout the development for guest parking. Of those 99 spaces, 40 spaces are within 300 feet of the live-work units and 25 spaces are within 300 feet of the community center. In compliance with Code, these areas include two ADA accessible spaces each. The text specifies that the Community Center is for residents' use only and limits the number of users to 50 at one time. Staff believes that based on the .internal orientation and low-impact nature of these facilities, the provided parking will be sufficient. Architecture: Architectural Details. The development utilizes a traditional azchitectural style for units that will be one, one and a half, or two-story models with optional basements. Other optional elements will be available following final development approval of a "homesite plan." The homesite plan will showcase the nature and location of potential additions such as rooms, porches, decks and patios. Exhibit A of the text indicates the limits of the buildable area for each unit. The applicants wish to have all the potential options approved by the Planning Commission at final development plan review in order to simplify the permitting process. Dublin Planning and Zonir ^.ommission Staff Report - Febniary 1 ~JOS Case 1-Page 9 sidewalk and. benches will be installed in addition to an 1,800-square foot community center overlooking the boazdwallc and the north end of the pond. The community center is for the use of residents only but the attached boardwalk provides full public access to the sidewalk planned to circle the pond and connect to the bike path along Post Road. Access easements will be required as needed at the final development plan stage. The text specifies that the walkway leading to the pond be extended to connect to the existing bike path in the northeastern area of the site but this is not clearly indicated on the preliminary plan. Final plans should cleazly show this connection. Staff believes that the proposed amenities will improve the aesthetics of the pond and will add to the bike/pedestrian network of the City. • Post Road Pedestrian Amenities. Landscape amenities proposed along Post Road transition from a gazebo at the northwest corner of the site nestled within a grove of flowering cherry trees and flow into a rolling, naturalized setting that continues the landscape themes approved north of Post Road in the Coffman Park Plan. A retention/detention pond will be constructed at the eastern half of Area A along Post Road. Two fountains and a supplemental water source will ensure the pond retains a desirable aesthetic quality. Mounding in this azea will be reduced to enhance the view from Post Road. The pond will lie between the existing Post Road bike path and a proposed compressed gravel or chip and seal walking path that ties into the internal sidewalk system. A sequence of pedestrian and auto courtyazds aze located throughout the development to create azchitecturally defined spaces and visual links to Post Road from within the development. Repeated architectural elements of dry-laid stone walls with book ends and three-plank, white horse fencing provide a backdrop to the -pedestrian area and create a transition from the public space to the interior units and courtyazds. This theme is carried along the Wall Street frontage where it is supplemented by low-lying vegetation. • Phasing of Amenities. A phasing plan has been submitted with the preliminary development plan but does not specifically address phasing of the amenities. The text, however states that the amenities planned for Reserve Areas B and C will be completed prior to the initiation of Phase II and those planned for Area A will be completed prior to the initiation of Phase III. Landscaping and Tree Preservation: . Tree Preservation. A preliminary tree survey and preservation plan has been submitted. The site has scattered trees along Post Road (including a 12-inch hackberry) and a fencerow along the east property line that will be preserved. Other trees along Post Road in Areas A and B will be relocated in order to continue the open, prairie feel of the neighboring Coffman Pazk. Approximately 118 caliper inches of protected trees will be removed, most from the tree row in the center of the site. All existing trees must be indicated on civil engineering drawings, and a tree replacement plan drawn at a one inch to 50 feet ratio will be submitted as part of the final development plan. • Fence/Stone Wall Treatment. Primary ornamental fencing includes afour-foot, white horse fence with 3-rail detail that will be incorporated as part of the landscape buffers along Wall Street and Discovery Boulevard. The fencing will be augmented with evergreen shrubs and stone wall and pillar treatments. Segments of dry-laid stone wall will also be utilized within the buffer at the terminus of alleys and drive approaches for visual Dublin Planning and Zonir - ^,ommission Staff Report -February 17, .SOS Case 1-Page 11 Metatec Corporation. The proposed plans will modify the existing mounding and landscaping. Removed plant material will be relocated within dedicated reserve azeas at the applicant's expense, under the direction of the City. Stormwater and Utilities: • Stormwater. This development will be required to comply with all stormwater management regulations, as is stated in the development text. The existing pond at the southeast corner of the site serves as a regional stormwater retention basin for multiple properties, and will be the primary mechanism for this site. An additional pond proposed along Post Road will be used to fulfill any remaining requirements, but will largely serve as an aesthetic amenity. No alterations for the proposed boardwalk and community center may be made to the pond that will reduce overall storage capacity or hamper the function of the pond in any way. • Water Service. Water service is satisfactory for the site and will be provided from an existing 16-inch line along the south side of Post Road, a 12-inch line on the east side of Discovery Boulevard, and aneight-inch line from the south side of Wall Street. No open cutting of the existing public roadway will be permitted without specific permission from the City Engineer. • Sanitary Sewer. Sanitary sewer service includes a 24-inch main along Post Road and a 21- inch line along Discovery Boulevazd. No building footprints, including footings, will encroach upon the existing sanitary easements that cross the property. Sewer plans must be reviewed and approved by the Ohio EPA before sewer construction can be started. Signage and Lighting: • Neighborhood Identification Signs. Signage for the proposed development includes two permanent neighborhood identification signs at each primazy entrance. As shown on the submitted plans and described in the text, the signs shall be externally illuminated ground signs made of wood, wood composite or high density urethane (HDI.T). Plant material will be located at the base of each sign. The text limits the sign face area to 10 squaze feet and the height to six feet. The proposed signs aze consistent with the Dublin Sign Code. The specific color palette and lettering material shall be reviewed at the time of final development plan approval. • Street Signage. Street signage used within the development will be based on City standazds and subject to staff approval. Internal signage will be used to direct guests of residents to the community center pazking azeas and will comply with Code. • Live-Work Signage. The live-work units shall be allowed limited signage as proposed in the front elevations supplied with Exhibit C. No signage shall be allowed above the ground floor. Specific details of the live-work signage shall be reviewed at final development plan submittal. Exterior Lighting. Lighting along internal, private streets will consist of black, eight-foot high, posts with lantern-type fixtures in front of each unit in order to match the residential character and scale of the development. Other site lighting will be in accordance with the Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines. Cut sheets and specific locations shall be provided • on the final development plan. Due to public improvements adjacent to the site, no public street lighting will be required at entrances to the development. Dublin Planning and Zonir 'ommission ~R AFT Minutes -February 17, 200 Page 2 Mr. Gerber s ' that staff works azd all week, he hated to tak up their free t' on turday for the ork Session. He ked if the Work ession could be ld at the end of e M h 3 meeting ag da instead. The Co 'ssioners all a eed to the March Workshop folio g the two regul cases on the agenda. refore the Wor op session on Fe ary 26 was canc led. Mr. Bird men ' ned that the ommissioners h received invi 'ons to the Re 'onal wth/Route 33 orridor Meetin on March 9, a the Union Coun Service Cente in M vine at 6:00 p. Administra 've Business Regarding the uazy 13, 200 eeting minutes, . Saneholtz r ested that they r ect that was present. . Messineo note that he was als resent at the mee ' g. Mr. tier's motion to approve th January 13, 20 meeting minut as amended. Zimme seconded th motion, and t vote was as Mows: Mr. M ineo, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, s; Mr. Spragu , es; Ms. Reiss, es; Mr. Zimm an, yes; and Gerber, yes. (Approved 6- Re ding the Janu 20, 2005, Reiss request that the times arrived be cone ed to 6:35 She also uested that on age 21, in th bird pazagraph, 't read: He sai the difficul that might be esented is wit 's field in to s of €eul long lls going over t fence into a neighboring ds. . Gerber's m ion was to app ve the Janu 0, 2005 meeti minutes as am ded. Mr. Z' erman secon ed the motion, and the vote as follows: Messineo, es; Mr. Sane ltz, yes; Mr. ague, abstain; s. Reiss, yes; Zimmerman, ;and Mr. Gerb yes. (Appro d 6-0.) For the recur Mr. Gerber s that the Pl 'ng and Zoning mmission is dvisory boazd to City Counci when rezonin of property az under conside ion. In such c es the City uncil will recei recommendat s from the Co fission and co uct another pu 'c hearing to rove or disapp ve the rezo ' In some oth cases the. Co 'ssion has the ision makin responsibility, ch as approvin specific develo ent plans bas on a prior rez g. Anyone ho intends to a ess the Comma ion on any of t e cases must b worn in. Mr. Gerber ounced that the plicants for C s 1, 2, 3, and 5 d consented to a conditions fisted in the sta report. He pu Cases 1 an from the Con nt Agenda bec a it was ' icated that there ere Commissio issues to be di sed regazding use cases. The rder of the enda was Case 3, 1, 4, 5, and The minutes r ect the publish agenda order.] 1. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 04-0282 -Homestead at Coffman Park Mr. Gerber .announced that this is for review and approval of a rezoning/revised preliminary development plan that was tabled at the January 20, 2005 meeting after much discussion. Dublin Planning and Zonis 'ommission Minutes -February 17, 2005 AFT Page 4 Mr. Grabill said the main roadway and turning radii had been redesigned at the request of the fire department. He did not think the fire department would find backing vehicles into that roadway acceptable. He also said it lost the sense of community they were trying to create. All the units have porches and living azeas oriented towards the streetscape with no garages shown from the street. He said the site was nazrow and it did not provide much freedom to plan it any other way. Ms. Boring asked if the landscaping could be restructured between the garages and Wall Street. Jim Burkhart, Jim Burkhazt and Associates Landscape Architects, said they were proposing a continuous solid hedge along that street. He said they proposed that it be evergreen material to provide a living evergreen fence. Ms. Boring stated she did not care for the white fence proposed because it tends to give an impression of other communities rather than Dublin. Mr. Burkhart said they had no objections to dazkening the fence or using something other than a three- or four-rail horse fence. He said it could be split rail. He said the white horse fences had been a theme for Homestead Communities, but they had no objection to using something else. Ms. Boring asked for a suggested fence that would be different yet still have Homestead's theme. Mr. Burkhart said instead of using the usual 1 by 6, three- or four-rail system, they could use a round rail or something that would provide uniqueness, but still maintain the image. Mr. Grabill mentioned they were trying to Dublinize this site with the dazk green shutters with shamrocks. He suggested a dark green fencing, if acceptable. Mr. Burkhazt said he knew of a fence company in Massachusetts that makes a sophisticated fence with round rails. He wanted to class up the fence, still toning it down. Ms. Boring asked if the Commissioners felt comfortable leaving the fence type and color subject to staff approval. Mr. Gerber suggested Condition 7: That fencing be of a certain design and a color other than white, subject to staff approval. Ms. Boring added to Condition 7: ...as discussed in this meeting. She stated she did not want to design the fence. Ms. Devlin noted that fence detail will return for the Commission's review and approval at the final development plan stage. Mr. Burkhart said several different alternatives will be presented at that time. Ruth Reiss asked if a diversity matrix for the color palette was needed so two units next to each other would not be the same color. Dublin Planning and Zonir ~'ommission Minutes -February i 7, 20t,,, Page 6 2) That no alterations for the proposed boardwalk, community center and or walking path be made that reduces overall storage capacity of the pond, subject to staff approval; 3) That all utility connections meet or exceed Division of Engineering Standards; 4) That all required general warranty deeds for parkland dedication be submitted to the City of Dublin prior to recording of the final plat; 5) That complete and revised civil engineering drawings and tree replacement and relocation plans drawn at an appropriate scale, subject to staff approval, be submitted as part of the final development plan; 6) That the final development plans show the extension of the walkway from the pond to connect to the existing bike path in the northeastern area of the site as described in the development text; and 7) That the fencing be a certain design and color other than white, as discussed at this meeting, subject to staff approval. Mr. Zunmenman seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Ms. Reiss, yes; Ms. Boring, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, no; Mr. Messineo, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Approved 6-1.) Amended Fin Development n 04-066AFDP Perimeter Of i Centre 2 - 59'~0- 000 Venture D ' e Mr. rber swore in F Shepherd, wh represented the a licant and othe who wished to testify i egards to this c 1 Mr. Shepher greed to the con 'tions listed belo .Gerber made emotion to app ve this amended ~ al Developmen lan because it m is the ew Planned ' trict regulatio and the revis condition will ow the propos develo ment to meet intent of the pr 'ously approved erimeter Center velopment text, with two onditions: 1) That C dition 1 from .approved Recor of Action dated 1y 15, 2004 be re ~sed to read "That doc entation be p vided verifying at the proposed fice developmen has been incorporat ~nto the existin Perimeter Offic Centre Condom 'um Association, to the satisfaction of fP'; and 2) at all docume tion of the C dominium Dec ation Amendme sand Contract r A ition to Condo 'um be provid rior to building ermit issuance. Ms. Reiss conded the moti ,and the vote as follows: Ms. oring, yes; Mr. ~mmerman, yes; Mr. Spr e, yes; Mr. San oltz, yes; Mr. sineo, yes; Ms. eiss, yes; and Mr. erber, yes. (Approv 7-0.) 3. mended Final D elopment Plan -175AFDP - T tan West, Secti 1(Subarea ~ Mr. rber said this an application for approval review of an ended Final Develop ent Plan fora ebo with a mec 'cal room wi 'n the building tback along Hyland-Cr Road. _ ~ - - ~ ~ - - S 7 - ' _ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 , ~ ~ nEUOUOUS iREE i - _ - ~kw~' ~ ~.t{ i ~ + _ =i~ - - 1 - _ 1 s - r ORNMIENTAL TREE ~ ~ _ y-. ~ - _ ] EVER61~H1 TREE ? ' _ ~ . ~ - ~Y~. - _ ~ aasTrw voRO ~ - O St1N10RMAHENTN. TREE OR l.AR6E SIIRU6 ~ _ _l EVER6REfJlsxw~ - =1 0 ~ouous sx~ue ~ ~ ~rtoiuiowvei =i j i - I ~ Jr ' ~ • a w +eo ~ a. .oo ~a• ~ - a / ~~ortrN srxe ~i-aQ 040282 Homestead at - Coffman Park PfP(~D E~i~A~~111~iTY ~~~~R ~~~-~~?T~ CCITIiVUED a1 - ~ ap rrr~ n~c aorc • srrrc~wNCSr - rt - worn r~o~ i. - - ~ ePS wMrat r~ ca - a~rr®s+o~ rare i - r~ au~ sEaE - EAST Ei.EVATION ~a..~•~ aa.~ sorE a..~ i - - ~ooFr~c w~rua~ ~ ar I t- _ _ - a/iPwmNeorr - - wow.rRw ert Coosa _ e ~~®i~l7~E rMi1 v ~ . e _g~1~~1I1~~, -iwAM.tEIO- _ - . i ',1r~Ei~NC aorC Q!®]ItiE ~ ItTl7~S0~ ~ - - - Q4-0282 Homestead at WEST aEVATIOM Coffman Park PF~OP~D ~iVEi1~1lO~K EIEVA ~ lOt~l~ I - - 1 - - UNIT FRONT ELEVATION ~ ~ - ~ C~ ~ ' ~ Q~ - 04-0282 Homestead at _ _ UNiT ReAR . HLBVATION _ ~ _ . _ ~ - paw Pf~flPQ© EP~IT#~AN~E S~~~i E~E!{ATt~t ~-r / ~i ; ~ - ~ a' tJ ~ a ~ ' s r. r in 1 _5. :n n i _ ~ 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Trams - Associates - MEMORAr1DU1vI TO: Barbara A. Cox _ City of Dublin Division of Engineering ` -FROM: Doyle R. Clear, Jr. - Trans Associates Engineering Consultants, Inc. ° - DATE: February 3, 2005 SUBJECT: Homestead at Coffinan Park -~:<:x=~~ Traffic Engineering Issues ' - In res nse to our r uest, I have calculated the volume of traffic that could be po y ~ w - generated by the planned Homestead at Coffman Park development. I have also compared this trip generation level with the volume of traffic that we assigned in the r`. f' Coffman Park Expansion study project -which is the latest comprehensive traffic study ' of the roadway system serving the Homestead tract. The purpose of this memorandum is . to summarize this information. `j;Qj`;_ Proposed Development It is my understanding that the development plan for the subject project includes the } following: • 66 single-family detached condominium units rz~ 1 • 3 live/work units It is understood that each of the 66 single-family detached units will contain between 2,000 and 2,200 square feet and have at least atwo-car garage. These condominium units = are intended for "empty-nesters" or "move-down" buyers. Some may be the summer `~'V^ homes of residents. While the size of the homes is significant, the second and third ~ bedrooms are likely to be used by visitors or for computer rooms, studios, etc. The lots of the development aze small yielding small yards. As such, it is quite likely that the volume of traffic generated by this component will be less than that generated by the typical - single-family home with children_ - - It is further understood that the three livelwork units aze set up for apartments with some cornmerciaVoffice space. For vehicle-trip generation purposes, there are two potential - development scenarios, as follows: • Maximum residential scenario - - 0 6 apartments - 0 3,768 square feet commerciaVoffice space - - • Maximum commercial space scenario 0 3 apartments 0 6,246 square feet commerciaUoffice space RECEIVED - ~E~3 oa-o2sz ~ Homestead at _ Transportation Solutions for Today Coffinan Park Offices in Pennsylvania an Homestead at Coffman Park Traffic Engineering Issues February 1, 2005 Page 3 of 10 the traditional AM and PM commuter peak hours. These calculations are provided in the following tables. Table 2 Traffic Volumes Generated b Sin a-Famil Co Went TTE Description AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Code Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total 210 Sin a-Famil (66 DUsj 12 38 50 42 25 67 230 Condominium (66 DUs) 5 24 29 23 11 34 Average of 210 &230 9 31 40 32 18 50 (Since there isn't a trip rate that exactly corresponds with the proposed land-use, the average of the two rates defined above may present a more realistic estimation of traffic generated by this component.) Table 3 Traffic Volumes Generated by Live/Work Units Scenario A: 6 artmeats and 3,768 sf Office S ace TTE Description AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Code Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total 220 A artments (6 DUs) 1 ~ 2 3, 3 1 4 If 715 General Office (3,768 sf) 6 1 7 1 6 7 ff 720 Medical Office (3,768 sf) 7 2 9 4 10 14 Maximum for Scenario A 8 4 12 7 11 18 Table 4 Traffic Volumes Generated by Live/Work Units Scenario B: 3 A artments and 6,246 sf Office S ce TI'E Description AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Code Enter Exit Total Eater Exit Total 220 A artments (3 DUs) 0 2 2 2 0 2 If 715 General Office {6,246 sf) 8 3 11 2 9 11 If 720 Medical Office (6,246 sf) 12 3 15 6 17 23 Maximum for Scenario B 12 5 17 8 i7 25 Table 5 Potential Maximum Vehicle Tri Generation b Homestead Develo meat Description AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Sin a-Famil (6b DUs) 9 31 40 32 18 50 LiveJWork Units (Scenario B) 12 5 17 8 17 25 Totals 21 36 57 40 35 75 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park "Homestead at Coffman Park Traffic Engineering Issues February i, 2005 - Page 5 of 10 • Office (951,880 sf) • Day Care Center (7,000 sf) • Auto Retail (71,000 sf) • Industrial (402,610 sf) • Hotel (100 rooms) These developments would generate about 2;365 vehicle-trips during the AM peak hour {with 1,975 entering and 390 exiting) - aad about 2,375 vehicle-trips during the PM peak hour (with 505 entering and 1,870 exiting). As can be seen, the volume of traffic generated by the subject site would compose two to three percent of the total volumes generated by the designated sub-area In the Coffman Park Expansion study, future traffic volumes were derived for key intersections within the Post Road/Perimeter Drive study area. These traffic volumes were based on full development of the study area and it was assumed that this "build-out" would be reached by year 2020. The resultant 2020 traffic volumes at the study intersections nearest the subject site are shown in Figures 1 and 2. (It should be noted that the study area roadway system includes the bending of Post Road into Commerce Parkway as defined in the preferred Coffman Park Expansion plan.) A recommended roadway improvement plan was defined for the area roadway system based on these traffic volumes. Impacts of Site Generated Traffic Volumes As stated previously, the subject development could generate as much as 57 vehicle-trips during the AM peak hour and 75 vehicle-trips during the PM peak hour. Figures 3 and 4 show the assignment of these traffic volumes to the local area roadway system. A comparison of these volumes with respect to those shown in Figures 1 and 2 illustrates the relative minor impacts that site generated traffic will have on the area roadway system. Summary Development on the subject site was considered in prior studies -both in the Community Plan and in the more recent traffic study associated with the Coffman Park Expansion project. In the Coffman Park Expansion study, the subject site was assumed to contain 72 condominium dwelling units (as permitted under current zoning). The planned Homestead at Coffman Park development could generate 57 vehicle-trips during the AM peak hour and 75 vehicle-trips during the PM peak hour. These values are based on the following assumptions and factors: 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park i- 70 PosT aa~ Reasa6on 170 ~ cenlar 40~ SITE W~sr~ U w ~ O U 5 N~AN ~~5 O~~ ~ZOJ ~~L ~ ~~~.i-5 -Ifr 15-~~tr 565-- o~~ ~ ~ N N Q V9~t111RE ORNE ~~4~ us ~+sR 1s1 ~o~crra. a,e~,oo.oiooe CTrans ~ 2 HOMESTEAD AT COFFMAN PARK N Associaites T~ T~ ~a T ""E PROJECTED 2020 TRAFFIC VOLUMES oa T a~•~ art ~~1.s~asao ~ ~ `die` PM PEAK HOUR ~a SGY~ ILTS (~}-02gZ Homestead at Coffinan Park TARAHLLD~ 18% ` H i- 4 ~T ~iD ~ r SITE & ~ w~u.s~r o ~ J ~ d. ~ o °O ~ 5 ~ L 12 3,'; JAL'- ~ .~sL~ ,o~ -qtr -~~tr 5 ' 10 ~ ~ r, aY 1796 ~ owvE lJS 33J SR 161 X96 oiRECnoww asrnreunoN aaa~crNa. oue~~oaaaoe CTirans ~ 4 HOMESTEAD AT COFFMAN PARK N Associates Transpataeon soY~lons torToday and Tamonow SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES oa~L_ ~ PM PEAK HOUR ~ SCAL$ tITS. 040282 Homestead at EXISTING PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN oQ-a~~ ~~P~RO~EO t ~ ~ _ . ~ .1...~.=- . ~ ' ~ ~ e ~ e . ice; ~ ~ ~ . _;:w;..,_ ` ~ s • r i - a g • • E i - ° ~1_L--------- i~ s ~ • s e A o e • ` 11 ~ 't Y • • s • • ~ e _ _ Cs ~ • • O Y 9 e 6 e e 0 • _ L~ ~ • • • O - K ~ . 1 . ~ TMaI Sis Mrc t32Af ac ~ A. !!iw Paoja: rry 1 ~ _ ' 3 iwall•fRcadarial Units 70 8_ Mayor Fe~ee - - _ ~ ~ jj a:..u:c w C. Co~aailr Gsta - = ~ I ~ ~ } +l ra V:. a O. CirafWak!hits (7'siaY) ~ ~ ~ j ' - W 11 , E Yila~eGnna 1 l _ R l GmasUaaai7r x3.13ddar_ - F_ PtwateAioeff } ~ j t! ~~i tL70 sc G. Pavaie I,tats ~ Opo Space Woq. sat.a-.a li_ AwleGaal.~',_ ~ ~ i i ~i i aa.:e. an. tan 1. Sax Wad ~ j~ ~ ~ s Opat Spaoc Ppo.-. sitYl'3_!i FwwaiA + _ . aa..~.....•...:.<•:..cer..rawr~.,.....e~«n K Co~wrir RaacaGuwG~ar ~ a - ' 4 StAaink x •..:.~ooi..r.. wctr:. M- OatOvakak Orlli~al~!'~"t^a~~t~.~rf r.aaa tvaLtriarb~ra~.r w / Ttldusa-rtrse~ N_ ParifitrO+etWol ~ R _ _ _ aca.t:~raa•... O_ PtwtA fotaran i l ' _ P_ feel s ~ i.~. - 04-0282 Homestead at Cof~nan Park EXISTING TEXT C. Sma{i scale studios for art, crafts, antiques, and photography a the salt as - w+dl as display of products is permitted_ U_ Smal{-scale real esfate, insurance, and iavestment/Fuiactcial advisocs_ E- A watl~c-up, irritding mounted ATM machine is pezniitted_ F No "drive-tiuu° facilities shall be pemitted_ l.traitatiorcr on single tertanl sip No sicagte aonue~ccial tenant, other than The Homestead Community Facilities, shalt eaceeed 120© net usable square feet_ fliri?tafioas oK lotarl amount of corrttrur'cial space: The maximum number of mug spa,oes available Eor commercial use is 57. Of these spaces 6 are designated foe the Homestead Community Facilities_ The remaining S 1 spaces wilt facilitate a maximum of 7,G50 net square feet of commercially lease able ice- _ Definitions: LivelWock Buildiag shalt consist of a building with residential or +oommercial uses on the street level and residential or commercial uses on the upper levet(s)_ Small scale shall mean no greater than t 200 square feet of net (ease able space_ Coadittonai Uses: Conditional uses shall not be permitted in sub-area B-2_ Conditiona! uses are required in sub area B ~ for all uses not expressly designated in the- pcdimiaary devetopcnent plan_ Uses which are not included in the initial condominium development statement must also be approved by the condominium association. Any consideration for conditional use must consider that the proposed location and use will not adversely affect adjacent property and/or public health, safety, and general welfare_ I,ot Co~rera~e_ Percentage of lot coverage for the combined sub-areas B-2 & B ~ shalt not exceed 75 percent Yards and Setbacks and Building Scparations~ See Table l for building and pavement setback requirements. Table 1 - 13uildin~ Setback Pavement Post Road !00'-0" 100,-0" Wall Street 40'-0" 1 S'-0" Mctatec 13oulcvard 50'-0" 2S'-0" The minimum perimeter building setback shat! be 10'-0"_ The minimum building separation shall be G'-0"_ . 04-0282 _ - Homestead at Coffman Park EXiST1NG TEXT - 2_ Comrrrcxcial tenant waste and refuse will be containerizAd and placed within a screened area enclosed on three sides by a wall a fence that extaids 1' -0' above the highest point of the container, and with an opaque gate oa the fourth side_ The design shall be compatibte with the adjacent buildings in materials aitd color Stotrx~e and Equipment. ~ _ 1. Materials, and equipment rreeessary for the firactioniag of buildings, such- as oondet:~ing units, utility pedestals, etc_, are permitted. - . 2_ Materials, supplies, equipment or products not permanently ins~alied shall not be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of a parcel or outside a permitted structure for more than i2 hours_ 3. Except as provided for in "Accessory Structures", no materials, supplies, equipment or products may be permitted to r~emaia on any-portion of a parcel or outside a permitted structure_ This shall mean that swing sets, individual above ground pools, flagpoles, satetlite dishes, radio antennae, and/or television antennae are not permitted_ 4_ Additional restrictions will be set out in the condominium development staterrient_ Landscaping: All landscaping shall conform to all Code requirements regarding landscaping_ Description of Site and Landscape Amenities: Homestead at Perimeter Center will. provide amenities to various groups of users- These groups can be identified as; Any resident of Dublin, any resident of the Homestead at perimeter Center {common areas within the condominium), and for each resident {limited common areas for each building). I.ffncenities jot Dublin and its residejus; A. Improvements to existing 3.8-acre pond_ As shown on the "Preliminary development Plan -Preliminary Landscape plan", a _ significant amount o~ new plant material is being added atouud the south and east sides of the pond. Along the west side street trees are being added as well as reseeding for grass. A pedestrian walking path will be constructed along the south and east sides of the pond, with four benches located along the path. The northwest end of the pond, which fronts the L,ive/Work center of the project, has aleck/overtook as well as a Pavilion overlook at the ponds edge_ B_ Post Road Crontage; Along Post Road will be a series of well -feed ponds connected by streams that reduce in elevation from the western pond to the eastern pond_ This step down in elevation will create small waterfalls that will be visible from Post Road_ The existing bike path ~+nl! be reconfigured to compliment the ponds and allow users of the bike path to enjoy the waterfalls and ponds_ Along the small ponds will be two areas where stone steps will come down to the waters edge from the Village Greens - within die community_ At the center of the projects' Post Road frontage there will be a "pedestrian Badge ova the streams that 04-028Z Homestead at Coffman Park EXISTING TEXT B_ Walls & Fences: Walls and fences will be pcrmiited around dwelling units to cxeate private spaces and to de6ae some boundaries between public and private areas. -Each dwelling unit wiU have some soot of walland/or fence to define these private areas_ 'ihe type of wall andlor fence will be selected from an approved palette of styles. Architecture: The design of the Homestead at Perimeter Center is inteudeci to create a European village feel Stone, stucco, beadod siding, stone fences, wrought iroa fences, village greens, fountains, steps to waterfatlls aad ponds, and "winding" streets are all components that will create a unique sense of place Sub-~rrea B 2; Residetctial At learnt four different house types will be offered for sale_ They will include a single story reach, a 1-Y::story style and atwo-story style. Each style will have standard options such as screened porches, sunrooms, and throe car garages. The houses will be oriented both parallel and perpendicular to the street, which would allow the same house to be - built inclose proximity but with a different orientation_ Diversity and interest will be maintained by no allowing the same house in the same orientation to be built twice in a row_ The developer wilt assign exterior colors to each home location to further assure diversity and oompahbility_ Materials; _ Facades: Manufactured stone (Ohio Limestone "Buff')_ Stucco, (to be compatible with the stone) Cement Fiber Hardboard siding (Hardiplank) painted ofd white, beige or gray)_ Wood trim (plytrim) painted white. Windows, vinyl single and/or double hung. Roof: Asphalt shingles Roof slopes will be min 6/12 to maximum 10/i2_ Sub Area B 3: Live/~York The LivelWorl: area of the Homestead at Perimeter Center is intended to serve as a village cer?ter_ The community facilities are located here and the small azea of commercial activity is also here_ The LivelWork buildings aze intended to provide an opportunity for a small business owner to own a shop space at street level and to Live in a condominium above their shop_ It may also provide a place for business to operate in a small neighborhood setting with the residents above being unrelated to the busiaess activity_ These buildings will have details and texture on all four. sides of the buildings, creating four-sided architecture_ materials; Cacades: Manufactured stone (Ohio Limestone "Buff')_ Brick (from the approved Perimeter Center Palette) Stucco (to be compatible with the stone) Cement Fiber Hardboard siding (Hardiplank) painted ofr white, beige or gray)_ Wood trim (ptytrim) painted white_ Windows, vinyl single hung on upper levels_ Wood Store-front at street level (compatible with store -front ai Perimeter Cenier Retail)_ Roof: Asphalt shingles Rear and Sides: Cement fiber hardboard siding with cultured stone 040282 - Homestead at Coffman Park EX~ST~NG TEXT telephonc or fax numbers, intcmet addresses, or boars oCoperation_ The color shall be complimentary to the wall and projecting signs- 5_ Address plaques-at residential entrances shall be wall mounted These may show property address and residents names_ D. SUb-area B 2: ~(aximucn are_ a for residential address and resident identification signs shalt be 2 square feet. - 04-0282 _ Homestead at Coffman Park C ION PLANNING AND ZONING 011+IIVIISS RECORD OF ACTION T JANUARY 20, 2005 2. Rezoning - Revi4ed Preliminary Development Plan 04-0282 -Homestead at Cofl'man Park (Continued) 5) Method to restrict non-owner occupancy. ~ Clarification of commercial floor area of liveJwork units in text. 7) Diversity matrix. The 15-Day Rule will. not be imposed Provided the requested information is submitted by February 2, 2005, this case will be placed on the February 17, 2005, agenda. The Commission is to be updated by staff at the February 3, 2005 meeting as to the progress of this case. STAFF CERTIFICATION Daniel D. Bud, AICP Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning Page 2 of 2 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zonir ~-ommission D Minutes -January 20, 200: Page 4 3) That no alterations for the proposed boardwalk, community center and or walking path be made that reduces overall storage capacity of the pond, subject to staff approval; 4) That all utility connections meet or exceed Division of Engineering Standards; 5) That internal signage specifying areas of one-way travel and prohibited and allowable parking areas be installed subject to staff approval; 6) That the applicant provide street names, subject to staff approval, and a digital site plan for addressing purposes prior to submittal of a final development plan; 7) That any additional future home models for use within the development be submitted, subject to staff approval; 8) That all required pazkland dedication fees and general warranty deeds be submitted to the City of Dublin prior to recording of the final plat; 9) That the construction of ail amenities planned for the reserve Area B and C are completed prior to the initiation of Phase II and those planned for Area A are completed prior to the initiation of Phase III; 10) That complete and revised civil engineering drawings and tree replacement and relocation plans drawn at an appropriate scale, subject to staff approval, be submitted as part of the final development plan; 11)That the applicants consult with the City Forester prior to the final development plan to verify that Ash trees remain the preferred species of street tree along Wall Street; 12) That the walkway leading to the pond be extended to connect to the existing bike path in the northeastern azea of the site; and 13) That the applicants revise the 87 pazking spaces referenced in the text to reflect the 86 spaces shown on the plans. Ben W. Hale, Jr., representing the applicant, Homestead Communities said Pat Grabill, a Dublin resident had become an investor in this development. He said that Nationwide actually owned this site. He said Mr. Grabill had made some significant, but important changes to the original approved site plan. Mr. Hale said the architecture of the units had been upgraded and the location of the live/work units had been also been changed. Mr. Hale said they had met with their neighbors who he thought would speak favorably about this development. Mr. Hale said the live/work units were relocated onto Discovery Boulevazd and had slightly more square footage (7,500 versus 10,000 squaze feet). He said the previous fire accessibility and garage access issues have been addressed with this site plan. Jim Burkhart, James Burkhart and Associates, Inc., said they were initially concerned with the Post Road azea. He said a previous landscape design showed what he thought were insignificant, small ponds. Mr. Burkhart said Dublin stone walls have been added at the entranceway and aesthetically between the housing units for screening of any vehiculaz use azeas, i.e. the alleyways. He said a public shelter or gazebo would be added which would be related to the bikepath. Mr. Burkhart said they might add white columns, instead of the typical cedar square to the shelter. He said the rafters might be white and it might have a shake roof. He said where the original mounding was located, they propose a mass of cheery trees at the intersection. He said semi-circulaz walls would visually connect the homes and provide visual screening of the 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zonis- ^,ommission ~ RAFT Minutes -January 20, 200.. Page 6 Mr. Gerber said this case was tabled April 1, 2004. The Conservation Design resolution was passed in June 2004. He asked given that timing sequence, does the resolution apply to this application. Jennifer Readier, said the Law Director's office had reviewed the issue, and determined that given the time the application was filed, and the passage of the Conservation Design resolution, that the applicant was vested under the standards that apply at the time of the filing. Therefore, the Conservation Design resolution would not apply to this specific application. She provided the Commissioners a memo outl;nin_g the reasons why they came to that conclusion. Mr. Gerber requested and Ms. Readier agreed that the memo, dated January 19, 2005, would become part of tonight's record. The Commissioners had no questions or comments about the memo. Mr. Saneholtz asked about the proximity of the homes on the north side of Post Road. Ms. Devlin indicated that the closest home, near Open space B appeared to be approximately 100 feet. One is set back approximately 300-400 feet. Anne Wanner reported that all the homes on the north side of Post Road to the east had been acquired by the City. Ms. Devlin, looking at the drawing, estimated that the closest residence to Post Road on the north side was 250 feet. Mr. Saneholtz asked how close was the two-story building on Achill Court and Schoolcraft Drive to the corner of Sells Mill and Muirfield Drive. Ms. Devlin did not have that information, but per Mr. Saneholtz's request, agreed to provide it later. Mr. Saneholtz was not in agreement that this property is transitional. He said this was commercial property, while he realized it is not currently zoned Commercial, there are other commercial developments much closer to residential properties than this proposal. Mr. Saneholtz said he was having a hazd time using that as justification for this residential development on the south side of Post Road. He said there were many other neighborhoods near commercial property. Mr. Saneholtz asked if there was sufficient parking for the work/live units. Ms. Devlin said staff believed there was sufficient parking for the work/live units. She said there were 32 spaces within 300 feet of the live/work units, as well as the garages for the residents of those units. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Pazk Dublin Planning and Zonir "ommission Minutes -January 20, 200., Page 8 ~ ~A FT Mr. Saneholtz asked if they would meet the 2,000 square foot living space requirement. Mr. Hale said it was an inconsistency in the text. He said the 2,000 square foot applied to the detached single-family units. He said the live/work units are not 2,000 square feet apiece. He suggested that the text needed to be clarified. Mr. Gerber interpreted that Section 2, A2 discussed limitations on single-tenant size, with some exceptions. Mr. Saneholtz questioned the limitation on the net leaseable space on the livelwork units at 1,800 square feet. He guessed from the footprint sketch that the first level is 1,700 square feet. Ms. Devlin had scaled them out to be about 1,800 square feet. Mr. Saaeholtz asked if even the limitation on the net leasable space on the liveJwork units was at 1,800 square feet, was not the full level 1,700 square feet. Mr. Hale said they would have their architect make sure the text is internally consistent. He said it could be made a condition of approval, if desired. Mr. Saneholtz noted that 32 parking spaces were proposed within 300 feet. He asked if 300 feet was the general standard. Ms. Devlin said 300 feet was derived from the rule from churches, where as long as all the parking is within 300 feet, it does not necessarily have to be on the same parcel. Mr. Hale said they had 85 non-gazage spaces that could be used throughout the area. Mr. Saneholtz was concerned that the parking for the liveJwork units would be disruptive to the residents. Mr. Gerber asked if the traffic flow had been studied. Ms. Devlin said there had been no indication of traffic flow issues. She said on-street parking, other than the pazallel spaces indicated, will not be allowed because there is not sufficient width. She said the spaces in the vicinity of the live/work units have been concentrated for the purpose of confining the pazking to that azea, and not dispersing live/work parking into the residential azeas towards the rear. Ms. Devlin said there were 16 in front of the live/work units, 6 across the street, and four east of the units along the main roadway. Mr. Saneholtz noted that in the immediate proximity of the live/work units there were 22 parking spaces, and 34 spaces were required. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonis ",ommission L RA F~ , M'inutes -January 20, 200:, Page 10 Mr. Hale read Page 10, paragraph G of the proposed text, and Mr. Gerber said the language of the proposed text assures that the Commission will have that review. Mr. Hale said they would reference in the text the signs Mr. Grabill used in Oid Dublin because that is what he intends to do oa this project. Mr. Gerber said the Community Plan indicated that Post Road was a rural road and it was the aim of the City/Community Plan to keep that character. He said part of tbe rural character was the gateway feature (stone). He asked that how the materials and designs of the structures comport with the rural character. Mr. Burkhart said the connection between the buildings with the semicirculaz walls and the old- type gates were very rural. Architecturally, he thought the buildings had a lot of rural character. Mr. Saneholtz noted that there was an existing commercial contemporary looking building on the south side of Wall Street. He said that the nearby daycare building did not look rural. He said only the north side of the street looked rural. Ms. Reiss noted that a few of the residential units had garages facing Post Road. She said the Commission was trying to avoid that, especially facing a main street. Mr. Saneholtz asked which phase the live/work units would be built. Ms. Devlin said the live/work units would be built in Phase 3. Mr. Grabill said the drawing of the .four live/work units elevations showed them all in one line, not how they would sit on the street. Mr. Burkhart said the park azea and mounding will screen the gazages facing Post Road. Ms. Devlin said the mounding was approximately three feet high. Mr. Zimmerman said he had visited the development at Scioto Reserve. He asked for a comparison of the width between those units and these. Mr. Hale said it was about the same -12 to 14 feet between the units. Mr. Zimmerman said he liked Scioto Reserve - it was different. He asked if the public would have total access azound the lake. Ms. Devlin said there would be a public walking path around the entire lake. Mr. Gerber asked if there would be a sign saying it was public. Ms. Devlin said there could be a sign. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zonis ~ommission ~ ~~FT Minutes -January 20, 2005 Page 12 Ms. Devlin said both the Engineering and Fire Departments had commented on this plan. Revisions were made accordingly. Barb Cox said she needed to check her 1999 report on the original project to see if a complete traffic study was completed. She recollected that the previous zoning was an office/mdustrial type use. Ms. Cox said any previous modeling would have had that kind of land use on it, based on the Community Plan. She said going through a residential use is a less intense use. She said the traffic generation off this project is going to be enough since the commerciaVoffice use that would have been on it would have had a bigger impact versus residential use. Ms. Cox said the Post Road access has been a big issue over the years. She said that had been eliminated from this plan. She agreed to check files for a traffic study and what the thought process was. Ms. Cox said the Code regazding emergency vehicle access had changed since this project started. Chief Alan Perkins, Washington Township Fire Depaztment, said their issues regazding emergency vehicle access and turning radii had been addressed. He said having emergency access within 150 feet of a dwelling is generally reserved for commercial projects, but they looked at that, particulazly with the rental properties. Chief Perkins said because of the close proximity of these buildings, they wanted to make sure they could get to them, particulazly the street going down the center was very critical for the fire department, to be able to make the turns, have the proper hydrants, etc. He said for the most part, the applicant met all that the fire department required for this project. Mr. Saneholtz referred to the proposed text, Section B, Item 7 -Density, Height, Setbacks: Minimum pavement setbacks shall be ten feet... He continued to the next page and said something was inconsistent in the text. He asked Ms. Devlin to clarify. Ms. Devlin said the minimum that has been shown on the site plan is l0 feet. She said there aze other areas of pavement where that setback is exceeded. Ms. Devlin said that statement said that the minimum that has been shown on the site plan is ten feet, but there aze other areas of pavement that is exceeded. In most other cases, the pavement setback is the same as the building setback, except neaz Buildings 55 and 62. She said that is the only place where the building and pavement setbacks aze not the same, other than in those azeas where it is ten feet. Ms. Devlin said one of the conditions was that the applicant submit either additional language or an exhibit showing the exact pavement setbacks. Mr. Saneholtz asked if the pavement setback for Building 62 encroached into the right-of--way. Ms. Devlin said neaz Building 62, the pavement setback was more than ten, but less than the 30 feet that is shown for the building setback. She said the statement was confusing, and that is the reason for the condition for an exhibit that graphically displays all of the parking setbacks, or that additional language be added to clarify. 040282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonis ".,ommission = DRAFT . I~nutes -January 20, 2003 Page 14 anything but commercial buildings and offices. He thought that was the best use for Dublin as a whole. Mr. Zimmerman expressed his opinion that the commercial use parking will take away from the residents. He was not just concerned about the four live/work units, but the parking for the entire development. Mr. Zimmerman needed more information about the commercial livelwork units. Mr. Saneholtz asked what was transitional about this development. Mr. Gerber explained there was not anything transitional about the development, but that was not the issue before the Commission tonight because a prior City Council approved the rezoning and this Commission cannot undo that. He said Conservation Design does not apply. Mr. Gerber said the product had been approved since the development was last seen. Mr. Gerber said if the Commissioners needed more information to make an informed decision, this case needed to be tabled. Mr. Gerber said he was not comfortable going forward tonight without the information, some of which was fundamental for every preliminary. He said a traffic study and the affect on the surrounding area of the live/work units and what traffic they may or may not generate day in/day out is something he would like to know before moving forward. He explained that this applicant is entitled to this project by law. Mr. Saneholtz requested a more detailed plan than the 8 % x 11 one provided, showing the current zoning because he was completely unfamiliar with it. Mr. Gerber suggested that Mr. Saneholtz meet with Ms. Devlin to go over the history, the Council and Commission minutes and those original plans to learn how this project got to where it was tonight. Ivlr. Gerber suggested either a tabling to get more information or to vote on this application. Mr. Bird concluded that the Commissioners were favorably disposed to the use, but additional information is necessary to complete their deliberations. Mr. Gerber said four Commissioners were supporting this project, three needed more information, and another was not sure this was proper. Ms. Reiss' preference was to vote on this case tonight. Mr. Gerber said he could not support it tonight because he did not have enough information. Mr. Hale agreed to a tabling to provide the additional information. Mr. Gerber said the ODOT-type of traffic study was necessary. Anne Wanner said these roads were designed for office use, and knowing that the use has been downgraded, engineering has determined that road improvements in place are adequate for the 04-0Z8Z Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zonis `:ommission ®©A Minutes -January 20, 2003 ~ n Page 16 Mr. Bird suggested it might be helpful to the applicant if the Commission would waive the 15- day Rule but provide staff adequate time for routing of the information. Mr. Gerber requested an update from staff at the February 3 Commission meeting regarding the submittal of the requested information. Mr. Gerber made the motion to table this rezoning application/revised preliminary development plan for the purpose of collecting additional information as it relates to a traffic study addressing both internally and externally surrounding property and the affect of parking and traffic as it relates to the live/work units, waiving the 15-Day Rule requirements so that the case can be heard again on February 17. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Saneholtz, no; Mr. Messineo, yes; Ms. Reiss, no; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Tabled 3-2.) 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Mutn~ of n++~ Cily-Gourd ~ Meeting a.A..e.w...c.c~,n,-.a _ - field - - ~ - --Febn~ry/ 17.2004 - - - Page 8 ~i Ms. ''g~by msp«bed that fhe oubGc and - xeas w~ be ieentified, and access i - ~'ae~6e provided to ~e public sites bacepath. staiF can provide a next meetq,g showing the pr~fific versus - pa,,dar,ds. There was ra tuAher 'l . 1 There w~ be a hearing at the March 1 'meeting. 1~ ~ efo 'i 10-04 Project ~ the Lowest and Best t3id f landscape Instanation Right-of i! Mrs. Boring introduced the _ Ms. Brautigarn stated that excellent bid was recenred for this from !I Pavirg in the 118,239. The budgeted amax~t for project was 5138.000 ?i ; and the cost was 5128.000_ Staff is acceptance d the bid at the 1 Council meeting. be a second reada~g/publ'ic hearing March 1 Courx~l meeting. CODE AMENDMENTS ~j OMinance 11-04 ~ I, Amending Section 76.02 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances arding the Posting of Handi Parking Fine Amount, and Oecia an Emergency. y Ms. Satay in the ordinance. ~i Ms. stated that to view of the fad that a not five members present i; requir passage of the ordnnance by , staff recommends this be held o , dt 1. ~ . Brau6gam stated that in late of 2003. Cound passed legisla ' i~ P~~9 of signs rogaMing ~e S mirdrnum fine fa parking in ha spaces throughout the state law changed in early the arclinances I ' were recodified, the was not tnck,ded in the ih~blin .This ordinance wilt address this. I~ There wll second teading/public gearing at rch 1 Counctl meeting. ~j U ance 12-04 J~ ~ ending Sections 93.03 (20j, 93 rivate Fire Hydrants) and 150.19 ore Hydrant Permits) of the Cod mantes of the City of Dublin. i~ Ms. 8rauti9am stated that d~atrge is brougtrt forward as a recent Courxdl i disausions regard' to fore hydrants. it incorporates Code the changes ~ 1, requested by indttdrrtg yeariy inspection and fill reports. The infomration 1, was pre Sara Oft, Training and Aocredita ' from the Service I' !I She is ava~at~le to respond to q a will be a second readirgfpubGc at the March t Counal meeting. REZONlNGS ~ Ordinance 13-04 i, Providing for a Change in Zoning of 22.657 Acres Located on the Southeast Corner 1, of Metatec Boulevard and Post Road, From: PUD, Planned Unit Development DistHd, To: PUO, Planned Unit Development Distrid. (Case No. 04-028Z - i~ Homestead at Coffman Parkj Ms. Salay introduced the ordinance and moved referral to Planning 8 Zoning Cornrrassion. Mrs- Boring seconded the motion. is Vote on the motion: Ms. Sa I' lay. yes: Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, Yes: Mr. LedcC~der, yes. i; i OMinance 14-04 i Providing for a Change In Zon 6.87 Acres Located on the of Eiterman Road, Southwest o Post RoadlUS 331nterchange om: R. Rural and RI, Restricted Industrial To: PCD, Planned Comore istrict. (Case No. 04- i' is 0212 -Gateway Prof Center) 1' Ms. Salay in the ordinance and moved ref the Planning 8~ Zoning Mrs - seconded the motion. . J on the motion: Mr. Reiner. yes: lay. Yes; Mrs. Boring. Yes; Mr ' . i; 04-p28Z Homestead at Coffman Park PLANNING AND ZONING CON'IIVQSSION RECORD OF ACTION May 1, 2003 1~'C1' OF llt8~.t11 rwisiN ~f ~lii . "~~"ISlia-6~c Wi ~ ~ 43111-1?3f re t#!-I1~~it0 f~c gN~IiSK k6 Sic ww~c The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting. 5. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 02-1372 -Homestead at CoRmaa Park Location: 22.462 acres located at the southeast corner of Metatec Boulevard and Post Road. Ezisting Zoning. PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Perimeter Center plan). Request: Review and approval -of a revised preliminary development plan under PUD provisions of Section 153.056. Proposed Use: A smgie-family condominium development of 68 detached residential units and 3.77 acres of open space. Applicant: Patrick Grabill, Continental/NRI Office Ventures Ltd., do Homestead Communities, 150 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215; represented by Ben W_ Hale, Jr. and Jack Reynolds, Smith and Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Suite 725, Columbus, Ohio 4321 S. Staff Contact: Carson C. Combs, AICP, Senior Planner _ MOTION: To disapprove this revised preliminary development plan because the proposal is inconsistent with the Community Plan and sound zoning, Planning and design techniques, and the development does not incorporate a mix of land uses with proper relationships to surrounding land uses and structures. VOTE: 6 -1. RESULT: This revised preliminary development plan was disapproved. It will be forwarded to City Council with a negative recommendation STAFF CERTIFICATION ^ ~ ~ - z _ 'j'~! Barbara M. Clarke Planning Director - 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zoninb .:ommission Merging Minutes -May 1, 2003 Page 8 color treatment is all- crCme with accent colors for , doors and window boxes_ The dedicated park includes the Post Road frontage and retention pond, and this leaves an offset of 0.4-acre that will be resolved with park dedication. The park boundary should be adjusted to acxAmmodate building overhangs. No more than half of the Post Road frontage should be inchrded to meet the Code requirements. The pond will have a looped public path system with benches, a pavilion and a boardwalk across the pond. Post Road will have a series of landscape treatments, including a pond and waterfall system. 1Vir. Combs said asix-foot solid fence is proposed along the daycare site, and staff recommends extending the Wall Street ornamental fence and evergreen detail. Around the Columbus Laser (SO) site, the plan shows a solid row of evergreen trees. Based on elevation changes, the staff recommends designing a naturalized planting-scheme. He said staff recommends plantings to augment the northeast corner of the site to enhance the buffer and as opaque evergreen screen at the south edge of the pond to screen the service area. 1VIr. Combs said the signage needs to be more residential in character and scale. Mr. Combs said this density is slightly lower at 3.03 units per acre. The previously approved plan included a density of 3.12 units per acre, plus 7,650 square feet of commerciaUretail space. Staff believes this is a needed alternate housing type. He said the proposed landscaping and mounding treatments will better blend into the park and stream corridor across Post Road. Mr. Combs said the level of architecture is high, and it meets a number of the Community Plan goats. This proposal will have less impact on traffic, than the uses in the adopted Community Plan.. He said staff recommends approval with the eight conditions: 1) That no more than fifty percent of "Open Space A" in "Exhibit A" be counted toward parkland dedication requirements, and that the proposed reserve boundaries be no less than two feet from proposed building footprints, with no encroachments permitted; 2) That all required pazkland dedication fees be paid to the City of Dublin prior to approval of the first building permit and that the construction of all reserve areas be completed no later than Phase II of the development; 3) That the following landscape buffer modifications be made, subject to staff approval: a) That the proposed daycare buffer be modified to utilize the proposed horse fence with evergreen and stone pillar h+eatment; b) That increased evergreen buffering be provided along the flex office site to the south; c) That additional augmentation of the eastern treerow along Post Road be provided; and d) That alternative buffering utilizing naturalizing shrubs or other similar alternatives be provided along the Columbus Laser Center site; 4) That additional evergreen plantings be substituted with deciduous species along Post Road; 5) That the proposed text be modified to indicate all minimum alley/parking setbacks, as noted in this report; ~ That any required access easements to maintaining the stormwatex pond be granted, and the east sidewalk connecting open space area. A and B be modified to provide increased separation, subject to staff approval; ~ That nay firture home models meeting the approved development text and architectural style be administratively approved; and 040282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zoning .ommission Meeting Minutes -May 1, 2003 Page 10 Ms. Clarke said the 1997 Community Plan stated "office" or "mixed uselemployment emphasis" i for the whole area. This land was already zoned for those purposes in 1997, and those uses were reflected at that time. Last year, City Council asked for some revision of the Future Land Use Map for Brand Road, and the staff also made several other housekeeping changes to update it, such as the Metro Park and Ballantrae. She did not know if the map had been updated for the residential zoning for Homestead. Ms. Clarke noted that staff recommended disapproval of the initial concept plan for the Homestead residential PUD because it did not conform to the Community Plan_ The Commission and City Council approved it, and the staff has worked with the applicant on the text and design since that point consistent with that land use decision. The PUD rezoning was later approved which included live/work units, or some commercial features. At the final development plan,. however, those features were removed, and the Planning Commission disapproved the plan, It stated that this factor plus other plan changes moved it away from the approved preliminary development plan. The staff has been told that the live/work project is not commercially viable. Somewhere between the applicant and the City, and appropriate economically viable development must now be found. Ms. Boring said there was a lot of discussion in the minutes that the elements originally in the plan that had convinced the Commission initially, were taken away. Mr. Dogger said this is not a request to rezone for office. 'There are houses to the north of this undeveloped site. This is clearly a transitional area and appropriate for a condo development. Forest Gibson described the land uses in the area from an aerial photograph. He said it is only a question of where the transition occurs between residential and commercial uses. Mr. Saneholtz complimented the applicant on an attractive design, but said this about land use. Mr. Sprague said they have been through this discussion previously. He believes this is a good plan, but it is a question of whether it is an appropriate plan. Mr. Gerber agreed. Mr. Ritchie said there is a lot of screening and buffering in this plan, in fact on all four sides, and that points to a basic compatibility problem. He said it is designed like a fortress and everything faces internally. There is no street presence. Ms. Boring said one of the concerns is with adjacent industrial properly and the need to protect this development in some way. Mr. Dogger noted that slightly to the west of this site, there are condominiums to the south of Post Road This proposal is also appropriate. Ms. Boring said she was concerned about the undeveloped property to the south. If this site is appropriate for condos, there might be a request for the southern site also. 04-028Z Homestead at Coffman Park PLANiYI[NG AND ZONING CONIIVIISSION RECORD OF ACTION March 21, 2002 .~cmf c~ ot;su~ - siN ~ Nib oi~.t a a:aeiiaz~i l~d1~i1N1aif90 F~ci14~AiiK MaLSi~~w~r~irtiiais The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 5. Final Development Plan 00-127FDP -Perimeter Center, Subareas B 2 and B-3 - Homestead Communities Location: 22.462 acres located on the southeast corner of Metatec Boulevard and Post Road. - E~usting Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Pernmeter Center Plan). Regaest: Review and approval of a final development plan under the PUD provisions of Section i 53.056. Proposed Use: A development of 70 detached single-fanuly residential units, a clubhouse, and 3.99 acres of open space_ AppGcaat: Jonathan Kass, ContinentaVNRI Ventures LTD_, P.O. Box 712, Dublin, Ohio 43017; represented by Gus Cook, Homestead Communities, 150 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Warren Campbell, Planner_ MOTION: To disapprove this final development plan because it fails to comply in all erects with the previously approved preliminary development plan_ voTE: 7-0. RESULT: This 5na1 development plan was disapproved after much discussion. The reasons include, but are not limited to, the gateway entry feature design, the redesign of the wet pond, redesign of the building footprints, redesign of the traffic flow, redesign of pocket parks, changes of the type and number of units, and alteration of the site amenities and overall design. STAFF CERTIFICATION Barbara M. Clarke Planning Director 040282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonin ommission ' Minutes -March 21, 2002 Page 18 8) That the proposed entrance signage be revised to meet the text and Code for height and shape and that no commercial signage (Subarea B-2) be permitted unless the eight livelwork units, or whatever portion of the plan is approved through a fugue revised final development plan; 9) That the pointed caps on the wrought iron fence be replaced with blunt caps to meet the Dublin Fence Code; 10) That some form of subgrade treatrnent be added to the southern portion of the green space located in Tallaght Court to handle the load imposed by emergency vehicles passing across the island, subject to staffapproval; 11) That the design of all private drives, parking areas, drive approaches, stormwater management, utilities, and sewers meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Engineering Division; and 12) That plans reflecting the conditions listed in this staff report be submitted at the time of building permits. Mr. Sprague said the Commissioners had received several letters of support for this case. Gus Cook, president of Continental Communities, the construction arm of Continental Real Estate, said they are presenting a neo-traditional streetscape design by Andres Duany. He said it was a unique opportunity for Dublin. Mr. Cook said this plan is residential in feel and centered on the idea of neighborhoods. It keeps all the traffic and parking to the rear off alleyways. They have developed three similar communities. The base houses begin at $240,000. The amenities include a clubhouse, fitness center, paths, pocket parks and pool. He had been the master developer for Craughwell Village. Removing the work/live units reduced the commerciaUretail use by 8,000 square feet from the original preliminary development plan. The seven basic models will range from 1,500 to 2,100 square feet. They are one, story-and-a half, and two story. All have basements. No garages front the streetscape or main center court. He showed a color palette and basic building materials proposed. He said Hardi-plank siding would be used with a 30-inch stone watertable around all houses. -He said they would have optional stone veneers. The facade of the clubhouse is all stone. True dimensional shingles by Certinteed Independence are proposed. Options include patios, screened porches, Florida rooms, and finished basements. There will be a variety of exterior door and shutter colors from the Williamsburg color brochure. Mr. Cook said much time and effort had been spent on the landscape plans. It was the most thorough and intense landscaping package he had ever seen. Substantial changes had taken place even since the submittal. They moved the entry farther away from Post Road and that pushed houses closer to the road. Additional landscaping features had been put at Metatec Boulevard and Post Road. The intensive landscaping at the entry feature will provide a nice buffer. An access onto Wall Street was added. They also straightened out the roads and the pocket parks for emergency traffic and access. Mr. Cook said the elimination of the live/work units was a market driven decision. Mr. Cook said they have the same number of residential units as before. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zonir 'ommission Minutes -March 21, 2002 Page 20 Ms. Boring said that when it originally was approved, it was discussed that this would be something different and new_ The work/iive units were a huge selling point. Now it is just a high density subdivision azound the shopping center. It may be a beautifiil plan, but it was not what was originally approved. Mr. Fishman said he would like to see the two additional units eliminated and have the two pocket parks usable. A half-acre is not lazge enough for any recreation. Mr. Fishman said concessions needed to be made by the developer in the density if the concept was being changed. Mr. Cook did not agree that this was a change in concept. It still is a very unique development that offered condominiums. It offers a neo-traditional feel and a maintenance free exterior. Mr. Eastep said a final development plan is not a concept plan, it is a plan which must match the preliminary development plan. This does not. Ms. Boring said this was approved as a preliminary development plan with abusiness-type use available in a PUD. She thought it would need to be rezoned without the business use. Mr. Campbell said the elimination of the commercial units could be looked upon as within Commission's discretion. Ms. Boring argued that the use was being changed. The work/live units were being dropped. Mr. Banchefsky said this decision, in terms of whether the final development plan being presented tonight is a detailed refinement of the approved preliminary plan, is the Commission's. He read one of the code criteria for approval. Beth Amirault, owner of a Place to Grow Daycare, said she was only told of this project this month. She said the plans were beautiful, but she had concerns about the children at her daycare center. If construction takes place adjoining her property (eight to ten units), the children could not play outside because of the airborne debris, and health and environmental issues. Ms. Amirault requested a prohibition against construction on the particulaz units closest to her playground during June through September. She said construction continues all year. She said 70 percent of their summer business is based outdoors, and parents have already expressed concern regarding the airborne debris. If this project was not limited in some way, they will have to close their doors. Ms. Amirault said a fence was proposed halfway up the north side and about one-fifth of the east side of the project. By Code, it can only be four feet tall. She said the community that Homestead is proposing is beautiful. She said she signed a 12-yeaz lease, and she would like to be a part of it. She hated to see a fence separating them and suggested shnibbery instead. Ms. Amirault said a concrete sidewalk was proposed the entire length of Wall Street, stopping at the entrance into the daycare parking lot but it doesn't continue to the stop sign. She asked that the sidewalk and street trees be continued to the stop sign. 04-028Z Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonir ^.ommission Minutes -March 21, 2002 Page 22 _ Mr. Cook asked for approval of this final development plan. He asked if the original preliminary development plan stayed in place if the final development plan is disapproved. Ms. Clarke said the zoning would still be in place until such time as the land is rezoned. The applicant would have the opportunity to resubmit another final development plan. However, at some point later if no one wants to build anything that looks similar to the original plan, the zoning is useless. She understood from the Commissioners' comments that the new plan does not look enough like the preliminary development plan to satisfy several of them. Mr. Banchefsky said there is no magic time period whereby the underlying approved preliminary development plan goes away under the current code. Mr. Cook said they feel it is in keeping with the first plan. He said they would at least look at the possibility of reconfiguring it so that units will not be lost. Mr. Eastep said the pond has been there for 15 years or more. Putting a private structure in the City's pond will create a pedestrian stopping point for the rest of the residents of Dublin. It is one of the nicest ponds in Dublin as faz as plant, aquatic, and animal life goes. He said the pond has to be accessible to the public. Mr. Cook said there was a gazebo in the pond under the approved preliminary development plan. Mr. Eastep and Mr. Fishman agreed and said it was discussed, but it would need to be public and there would be a sign saying "Open to the Public." Mr. Gerber asked if the bylaws could state that this is a public pond. Mr. Banchefsky said in terms of the condominium bylaws, yes. Ms. Boring asked if the pond was public, why was there a private clubhouse on it. Mr. Sprague asked if the pool would have a substantial detrimental effect on the ecosystem. The pond has been surrounded and the only vistas unobstructed were off the deck of the pool. In essence, they have incorporated the pond into the development instead of making it a public resource. In the preliminary development plan, it is more open, public, and accessible. Mr. Cook said he understood the point, but he did not think a reconfiguration is out of the question. The deck is infringing on the boundary of the pond in both plans. Mr. Fishman did not want to lose the Post Road water feature. Comparing the two plans, he said the first is much more creative. Mr. Cook said the only difference was in the rendering. Sprague said it was more than just the rendering; this is a different design. Mr. Fishman said his concerns were the size of the pazks, pool locatioh and the water feature prominence. Mr. Cook said if the pocket pazks were increased in size, density might be lost. He said they have expanded and contracted the pocket parks repeatedly, and this is a fairly optimal, 70-unit plan. He said they could look at a possibility of two-unit structures, but it will be very difficult to get the 70-unit yield and expand the pocket parks. 04-0282 Homestead at Cof&nan Park Dublin Planning and Zoning "~mmission Nfinutes -March 21, 2002 Page 24 Mr. Sprague made a motion to disapprove this final development plan because it fails to comply in all respects with the previously approved preliminary development pion. The reasons include, . but are not limited to the gateway entry feature, the redesign of the wet pond, the redesign of the footprints, development, redesign of the traffic flow, redesign of pocket parks, and changes of the type and number of units. Mr. Eastep seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Boring, Yes; Mr. Messineo, yes; Mr. Fishman, Yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Eastep, Yes; and Mr. Sprague, yes. (Disapproved 7-0-) 6. Final Develop nt Plan 02-006FDP - well Trace PUD - rthwest Corner of Post and Avery O ces - 6759 Avery Ro . Eastep made the tion to table this case requested by a 1 m the applicant_ Fishman second the vote was as ows: Mr. Gerber, ; Mr. Messineo, y , Mr. Sprague, Yes; immerman, yes; Mr. hman, yes; and Mr. ,yes. (Tabled 7. Wing 02-0072 - 'ards Furniture - 63 Old Avery Road to the late hour, thi was postponed the April 11, 2002 ends. There was no ussion or vote tak Mr. Sprague ad' ed the meeting at :45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Libby azley Administrative Secretazy Planning Division . J~ 04-028Z Homestead at Coffman Park DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMNIISSION 3 RECORD OF ACTION July 6, 2000 2. Rezoning Application 00-0302 -Preliminary Development Plan -Homestead Communities (Continued) ~ That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated once to the satisfaction of staff; ~ That the text be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning sigaage, condi6oaal uses for Subarea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfaction of stag 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no parking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff; 10) That the applicant work with staff and fire officials to meet all health, safety and welfare issues regarding the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches; 11) That no direct vehicle access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; _ 13) That all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; i 5) That street names be provided to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 1~ That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials `be submitted with the final developmeat plan; 1~ That two units be eliminated; 18) That the applicant utilize dimensional shingles or a mix of shingle types, subject to staff approval; 19) That stucco be eliminated from the proposed materials; and 20) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council_ x Gary Gray agreed to the above conditions, except Condition 11. voTE: 1-5_ RESULT: The motion failed_ - 04-0282 Homestead at Page 2 of 4 p~ DUBLIN PLANI~TING AND ZONING C011+IINHSSION RECORD OF ACTION daly 6, 2000 2. Rezoning Applicatioe 00-030Z -Preliminary Development Ptaa -Homestead Commaaities (Contiaaed) 13) That all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and ~taadards of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; i4) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15~ That street names be provided to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduCmg for City Council; 1~ That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; 1~ That two units be eliminated; 18) That the applicant utilize dimensional shingles or a mix of shingle types, subject to staff approval; 19) That stucco be eliminated from the proposed materials; and 20) That ail applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council_ Gary Gray agreed to the above conditions, except Condition 1 l _ VOTE: 42. RESULT: This application was approved. It will be forwarded to City Council with a positive recommendation. STAFF CERTIFICATION Carson Combs Planner 04-0282 Page ~ of 4 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and 7oninr ^ommission Agenda - Juiy 6, 2000 Page 7 Mr. Combs said the "T'-shaped site is located oa the south side of Post Road and includes the existing retention pond. Recently completed Wall Street, rugs along its south border. Mr. Combs said the iivelwork units are next to the pond_ Many amenities are proposed. The tree line in the center of the site will be removed. This is very near Coffman Park and the pads along the North Fork. Buffering along Wall Street includes stone walls and evergreens. The Post Road Buffer will be reconfigured and landscaped more heavily. A water feature runs along the length of Post Road. The applicant will work with the daycare on buffering. The Post Road ponding must look natural. He said staff requests that the plantings be replaced.. Mr. Combs said the architecture mimics Perimeter Center. Four-sided architecture is proposed for the live/work units. The materials include stucco, Hardi-plank, and manufactured stone. The 60 houses will be a nux of ranch, 1 %2 story and two-story buildings. The azchitecture will define the streetscapes and village greens_ A variety of stone walls and fences will provide a continuous pedestrian environment_ The density proposed is 3.2 du/ac with a maximum of 7,650 square feet of net leasable space for offices or commercial uses within the livelwotic area. The Community Plan recommends office or mixed use with employment emphasis. The Plan holds residential use to five du/ac_ He said Wow! Elements were incorporated. A i00-foot building and pavement setback along Post Road is proposed. The Wail Street setback is 50 feet and along Metatec Boulevard, 25 feet. He said staff has expressed concern about buffering. He said the Landscape Inspector confirmed that the are 151 caliper inches on this site, and staff recommends those be replaced according to the Tree Preservation Ordinance_ The openspace requirement for this site is 4.41 acres_ This will include 1.9 acres for the Post Road buffer and 1.3 acres along the existing pond_ Mr. Combs said in the past, the required setback usually got one-half credit toward the park requirement. Based on this, the plan is 1.21 acres short of the required park space. The 24-foot wide streets are proposed to be private_ Post Road would receive access for bicycles through the existing bridge, linking it to the bikepath system. Mr. Combs said this is a unique mixed-use environment. It emphasizes azchitecture and is compact and pedestrian-oriented. It has quality materials and detailing_ The Community Plan recommends office, but this will have a lower traffic impact. The plan also incorporated Wow! features. Staff recommends approval with 17 conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code to the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to show the location of specific species and meet all Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) That plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; 6) That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated to the satisfaction of staff and that plans be revised to reflect the same; 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zonin~ '~mmission , Agenda - Jnly 6, 2000 Page 9 Ms. Boring said at tunes, a condo association wants to maintain control, schedule its trash pick ~ times, etc. She did not think it was City policy to give 50 percent cr+eciit for sacks and buffers: Mr. Combs said when amenities are added to those areas, consistent with developed parkland, the staff has endorsed giving park credit. There are ponds, waterfalls, landscaping, a stone bridge, pedestrian links, etc. The frontage is 1,400 feet. The park area will be dedicated to the City but maintained by a forced and funded homeowners' association _ Ms. Boring said the pool is at the east edge, and inconvenient to most residents. There needs to be limited colors, without pink, blue, and white houses as seen in Florida. Colors should be subject to Commission approval. Mr. Combs said the color palette will be determined .later. House elevations will be assigned from that approved color palette. The chimney material was not specified. The Metatec setback is 50 feet; Wall Street is 40 feet; and Post Road is 100 feet_ All internal setbacks wil! be 10 feet. Ms. Boring said she favored stone fencing strongly over wrought iron Ivir. Combs said there is an internal sidewalk along both sides of the internal roadway. Ivlr. Combs said the concept plan had a Post Road entrance, and it caused a lot of debate. Staff has consistently tried to de-emphasize Post Road by encouraging alternative access. Ms. Clarke said the Post Road access shown on the concept plan was a very big problem and inconsistent with a variety of adopted plans and policies. She did not recollect that the Commission shared that view, at least after hearing that the neighbors supported it. lvir. Combs said the substantial grading needed will remove the tree row. The staff supports the land use and plan_ It has been redesigned and includes many amenities. It does not match the Community Plan, per se, but it will have a lower impact than an office. Mr. Fishman noted staff has changed its recommendation since the concept plan Ivls. Clarke said this site was never rated as a prime office site, and it now has almost no architectural controls. Aflat-roofed office building along Post Road could not be disapproved based on current zoning. Given that, staff considered this redesign and architecture as it related to Post Road and the impact on the neighbors. This seemed to be a very good alternative_ Staff supports the density of 3.2 du/ac. Ms. Clarke said the Community Plan was based on impacts, and offices have higher impacts, especially in peak hour traffic, than residential uses_ Staff believes this is an acceptable change from the Community Plan Mr. Fishman asked about the lack of parkland within the development. 1vls. Clarke said there is limited on-site park, but Coffinan Park and the parkland assembled along the Indian Run are very close. Those provide for a wide range of recreational experiences. She reported that Council recently bought the 14-acre Halloran property just to the north on Post Road. Mr. Eastep and IVir. Sprague said it would make a wonderful park. Mr. Fishman said it is too dense with nowhere for children to play. Mr. Eastep agreed and predicted that the future residents would demand a tunnel under Post Road. 04-028Z Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonir `ommission , Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 11 Gary Gray, Homestead Communities, showed proposed Site amenities include a Dublin dry-laid stone wall, an archway and a trellis along Wall Street This is a condominium project for empty nesters, and the buildings will cost S 100-51 SO per square foot to construct The pool is located away from the residenfial to avoid noise from visiting grandkids. He said accessory structures are permitted such as a greenhouse, tool shed, and woodworking shop. The first two bays of the iivelwork building will be the community center that includes a cafe, a living room, a fitness center, and two private offices for business and sales. Mr. Gray said the square footage in the text has been limited to be low impact He said the origuial play had 7S units, plus 1S commercial spaces. The commercial space had the greatest impact due to how the parking cuts into greenspace. Seven commercial spaces were cut. The - plan now has 72 total units with eight commercial units. Mr. Gray said they agreed to all the above conditions, except 4 and 17. They asked that the full landscape plan be submitted at the final development plan. Regarding Condition 6, they would like to relocate the trees along Post Road to the pond area. This- is needed due to regrading, and if the trees are moved twice, they might not survive. Ms. Newcomb said the trees are part of the Post Road Buffer. Staff does not want them moved twice, but to be relocated elsewhere along Post Road. Mr. Gray agreed, but said half of the trees are already dead He proposed that new trees be planted also on Post Road. He agreed to put the existing trees where staff wanted. Ms. Newcomb agreed. - Mr. Gray said regazding Conditions 8 and 10, they can meet the Fire turning radii standards, but Dublin's standard may be higher. They want to maintain an appropriate scale and will work with staff and the fire department on this. Regarding Condition 11, they want vehicular access onto Post Road. Staff recommended removing it, and they complied. Now, however, Mr. Gray said they definitely want Post Road access. He said adding a left turn stacking lane on Post Road will change the roadway character and increase traffic. Mr. Gray said private streets for a condominium project make sense. It is very difficult legally to convert a private street to a public one. Mr. Fishman disagreed and said the homeowners cannot afford to maintain them. There was additional discussion on this issue. Mr. Gray said the homeowners' association would be fully funded_ Ms. Salay said the decision of public or private street is a City Council decision. Mr. Gray said the building colors will be similar to those in Perimeter Center, probably limited to three or four earthtones. The same color will not be used on side by side buildings. He said there is no stucco, only stone and Hardi-planl~ The street side of the houses will be stone. The walls that divide yazds will be wrought iron with a few exceptions. He said the 2,000 square foot units will average 5300,000. Mr. Gray said it would be about one-third stucco stone to two thirds Hardiplanl~ There will be a . stone water table or a stone gable with siding on the sides. There aze no chimneys; any fireplaces will be direct vented and on the same elevation as the electric and gas meters. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zotun• xamission - , Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 13 Mr. Leckiider asked about signage on the awnings. Mr. Gray agreed to work awning signage out with the Code and staff. The GveJwork units, per the text, will have one sign parallel to the street, a smaller sign perpendiculaz and nothing on the awning. Mr. Gray said proposed conditional uses will be better defined in the text Mr_ Combs said ooaditional uses needed to be listed by category. Mr. Gray wilt work with staff. Edith Driscoll, representing Post Road residents, said she had previously conveyed the neighbors' support for this proposal, and they enthusiastically welcomed this high quality residential expansion on Post Road It is slightly distressing to heaz some of the Commissioners' speculation about the future of Post Road. This development would be a tremendous asset to the community. She said one nearby resident was concerned about when the dumpster would be serviced. She said the Post Road residents would like the Commission to approve this. Chris Cline, Post Road resident, said they strongly favor this proposal. The site will never have an A or Blass office. This is very appropriate and nicer than flat roof offices. Mr. Cline said the Post Road access was very important. He said in his letter (distributed to the Commission), they need a project to relate with Post Road. The residents want the highest quality feasible and a project that is tied into Post Road He said there were no de5nable standards for a left turn lane. There should be a rational, reasonable, and measurable reason for it. A left turn lane should result only if the traffic justification is famished for it_ ' Mr. Cline said the Wow! Ordinance shows this site as Dublin Model, not River Heritage_ Mr. I,ecklider preferred no left turn lane. However, he was concerned about the curve heading west. Mr. Hammersmith said that was somewhat away from the site. Mr. Lecklider wondered if a left turn lane could be created at Metatec Boulevard as an alternative. Mr. Hammersmith said no, not for this site. Mr. Fishman opposed Post Road access, especially if Engineering says a left turn lane is needed_ He expected the other entrances to be beautiful, and the fewer breaks on Post Road, the better. if the Post Road access is approved, a left turn lane is needed, but he opposes Post Road acccess_ Mr. Eastep and Ms. Boring agreed that there should not be a Post Road access. Mr. Sprague hated to lose the greenspace, but he thought Post Road access was okay and that it did not necessarily require a turn lane. There needs to be a study. Ms. Salay agreed She did not expect much traffic impact from 70 units using three entrances_ Mr. Fishman-said it was a safety issue, and reaz end collisions can occur with only a few units_ ' Mr. Gray said there are three entrances and agreed to do a traffic study. Ms. Boring said the developer should construct the left turn lane now. Otherwise, Dublin will have to pay for it later. If people do not want a turn lane on Post Road, it should not have Post Road access. She said connectivity is provided by bikepaths. 'Ihe Post Road access and left-turn lane issues were discussed at length. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonir 'ommission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 15 Ms. Boring made the motion for approval because it protects and enhances the scenic character of Post Road, provides a transition between Perimeter Center uses and the residences, includes quality architecture, pedestrian amenities and "Wow elements, with 20 conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code to the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to meet Code requirements for screening and perimeter Plantings; 5) Thai plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff 6) That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated once to the satisfaction of staff; 'n That the text be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subarea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfaction of staff; 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no parking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff; 10) That the applicant work with staff and fire officials to meet all health, safety and welfare issues regarding the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches; 11) That no duect vehicle access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 13) That all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stonmwater Regulations, and that stonmwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 1 S) That street names be provided to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 16) That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; 1'n That two units be eliminated; 18) That the applicant utilize dimensional shingles or a mix of shingle types, subject to staff approval; 19) That stucco be eliminated from the proposed materials; and 20) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council. Mr. Fishman seconded the motion. Mr. Gray said his partners would withdrawn their application if the Post Road access were not included. Ms. Boring noted that the applicant had the staff report and recommended conditions for a week. She said this was a power play after three hours of discussion. Mr. Gray disagreed_ Post Road was a critical part of this application. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park DuWinPlanning aad Zonin~ 'ommission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 17 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to meet Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) That plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of constructioq to die satisfaction of staff; ~ 'That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated once to the satisfaction of staff; 7) ~ That the text be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subarea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfaction of staff; 8) That the development meets all fuming radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no parking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff 10) That the applicant work with staff and fire officials to meet all health, safety and welfare issues regarding the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches; 11) That no direct vehicle access be permitted onto Post Road; i2) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersectioa Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 13) That all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standazds of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15) That street names be provided to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 1~ That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; 17) That two units be eliminated; 18) That the applicant utilize dimensional shingles or a mix of shingle types, subject to staff approval; 19) That stucco be eliminated from the proposed materials; and 20) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council. Mr. Leckiider seconded, and the vote was as follows: Ms. Salay, yes, and she favors a vehicular connection on Post Road. Mr. Sprague, yes, and he favors a Post Road connection. Ms. Boring, no. Mr. Eastep, no. Mr. Lecklider, yes, and he favors access on Post Road. Mr. Fishman, yes, and he resented working for three hours to resolve issues in the best interest of Dublin followed by threats from the developer. He noted the drawings reflect no access_ (4-2 Approved) 3. Final Plat 00-01 -Westbury Sec ' n 5 -Lots 147 throu 55 This case was po ned due to the late our without discussio r vote. 4. ised Final Develop nt Plan 00-067FDP - offman Park - 5600~ost Road case was postponed a to the late hour wi ut discussion or vote . 04-OZ8Z Homestead at Coffinan Park RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS i~a~s of - - - lJvblin City CouacR Mediog P>8c 6 1{dd S, ~ r...t.K t ~ttm _ , wilt be 6r less traffic impact than that which would be generated by oiTioe nsa As DubGa oontiraues to experience traffic problems, this becomes an important ooatidaatiat. Mcs.l3oring asked if lhrblin has asod aub arts t4 tower the spend of traffic. Riverside . Drive has many sub arts, but k does not seem w lower the spend. Ms Clarke respondod stated that highway enginoers indtatc sub arts generally slow traffic, bat tmtittg movement ina~ accidents. It has not bey the City policy W asc sub arts W stow traffic. Mayor Kraostiuber asked for clarification about ~e number of votes needod for approval of the [eaomng, in view of Mr. Rcinds absence and Mr. McCash's absferttioa, and how many votes would be needod to add the sub art amendment for Post Road. Mr. Smith respoadod that ~ r+ezomng requites four votes of Council m approve, and an amendment would require a tnajocity as well. (`•arv (+ray Homestead Communities stated that they have met wilt the neighbors in the acre, and have submitted letters of support from several ootpcxate employers supporting the divctsrty of horsing offered. The immediate commercial neighbors have also ~rbmittod letters of support They have worked wiW the neighboring properties regarding lattid use, buffering and tcaffiic patterns. Their targd market is the over 55 group who is looking for diversified housing options, and these 70 units constitute less than five percent of the potential market in this area. He noted that the Indian Midge rezoning for multi-6miiy was removod last year and rezoned for the Cardinal Health projax, so there aduatly has been a reduction in approved multi-family proJaxs m lhtblin. These units ace totally detached Waits with full basements and attached garages which will cost bctweea 5270,000 to 5280,000. There are 10 live/wotk units designod for an office; space and livtag quarters above; We test are detached amts of approximately 2,000 plus square foot They are grouped arotmd village greens which feed into the linear water feature along Post Road. The plan was enhanced subsequent to the Planning Commission review as Ms. Clarke has described. The exposure and visibility along Post Road were inct+eased. He clarified that the applicant desires a sub cut on Post Road, bat the Enginoaing staff has indicated that it would require a turn lane. 'that turn lane would be detrimental to We Post Road water feature, so they gave redesigned their projoct to have the entrance at another tocatioa He then desaibed other feaarres of the plan. Edith DtiseolL 6230 Post Road stated that she represents the residents of Post Road. Council has received a copy of their pdifion which supports this rezoning. The issue is with the sub art on Post Road and the related left turn latrc. She reviewed the real-end collision records from 1991 through L998 between Emerald Parkway and Avery Road along Post Road. There were four such incidents during that period of time. This indicates drat not adding a left turn lane at this sub art would not result in a safay issue. Residents of Post Road support this development as an asset to the residential nature of Post Road. The residents support access along Post Road, and believe that the accident records do not justify adding a left rum tone at this location. Qlri~ Gins. 6060 Post Road stated that dte applicant had pt+evionsly ittdicatai to them that the sub art oa Post Road was an important factor to the viability and quality of the proled That sub cut was includod itt the concept plan which was approved by Council The residents aro ooncernod with traffic on Post Road, and the detuity of this projed is actually lower than portions of Waterford V"tllaga It is not fair to call this amulti- ~Y l~l~ on that basis. This kind of project produces a low traffic bad and at off- peak times. With all of the entrances to the project, the Post Road sub art would not be sigtufiamt The appGcaat had a traffic study done and the applicant also applied the pp(7f statudsrd t+elatcd to a roquir+tmertt for a left turnlane - all of the formulas indicated tltcre is no lassos for this. The Post Road entrance will make this development tnor~e a pact of the existing neighborhood. This rezoning makes sense as a traasiriooal 040282 site to the raidenfiat neighborhood. The Post Road neighborhood previously had HOmeStead at Coffinan Park - - RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS - - Mtmates of Dnbim Qty Coaneii Meiling Page 8 -fib Held c T,~...,u,.r S, ~mn turn hme. A left bum lane was eequic+ed for toe Roc Center. VVhiie them have Leon few accidents along this stretch of roadway, the risk will ina+ease wim the higher traffic - vohmtea. If fhe Qty does not require this project to have a left tam hare, it may be difiYwlt to c+egwre others is the futiue_ Mrs. Boeing noted that she had gtapplod with the land nse change, bert believes this crerbea a nice area al~g Post Road with a good buffer between the newer and the older areas. She will support this rezoning- Mr. Adamek stated that this is a elrraltty product, and he has >ro concern wim the:land use - change. He believes that Council needs w abide by the recommendation of the professional staff in regard w me kft hand rum lane for the nub cut. The appliamt was prudent is beautifying the Metatec entrance in order to ealrance the neighborhood fed. lie oomplimants the developer for integrating me n,aghborhoods into this plea. ' ~ Mayor Kravutuber stated to the residents should be aware that the change by Council from income tea producing land use tb cesidenaal is an extraordinary one, and does not conform in what was recommended in the Community Plan. FIe believes in supporting PdcZ and staff is their recommendations. vote on me Ordinance -Mrs: Boring, yes; Mr. Peterson, yes; Mr. Adamek, yes; Ms. Chimica-Zueicher, yes; Mayor Kranstuber, yes; Mr. McCash, abstain. - Ordinance 107-00 An Ordinance Aath as Employment ntnet for the Ckrk of Cone Mr. Pdetson veil to table this anal the September Council meeting. - - Mrs. nded me motion to -Mayor .Yes: Ms. Chronic h«, yes; Mrs. • yes; _ Peterson, yes; Mr. A ek, ya_ OD & - ORD rdinance 109-00 - Ordinance Aatlro ' ' Distribatioa to We lin - - Conveafion nail V' ' rs Bareaa (DCVB) zexss of the'Ir+eaty a Penent Alloated in A ce rdth Section 35 0[ the Codified O antes of the City of Dablia to a Assistaace forth elocution of the 's Operations. Mr. Adamedc ' the ordinance Mr. FIansl stated that this o eefleds the motion ed by Council - based a recommendation of Finance Commi - ML Finance Garr mac Ms. lrigsby's summaries the 'on at mooting. the addia funding can be pro 'oil through the boil funds. Chinni«-Zrrercher that me ordinance es into accamt tlu which took place ac the prcwi Council meeting, that there be a windfall - - a+eated in the eveini bed tax revenues uch higher than pro Mr. Hensley peYiraps Council d consider adding envy language at me second as the But+eau enter into a lease b upon this funding assurance. - Mr. A moved to amend the 'Hance to add em language. - Ms. 'd-Zuercher aeon motion. V lion -Mrs. yes; Mr. M es; Mr. Adamdc, yor yes; Ms. '-Zuer+cher, yes. Ordiaaaee 110-0A - Ordinance Accep ' g We Lowest and Bid forthe - Stormwater Man emeat System Main aace Program, as acing as Emergency. Mayor introduced the _ Mr. Flans scatod that a detailed was provided by and Council' is ' that Council - the public and treat this as •..s~-~°-~. - - on sD that the can be implemeuted_ M Kranstubet moved dispense wim the hearing and foe em (~-028Z - Homestead at Coffman Park PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION FEBRUARY 17, 2005 ®~A~~ CITY OF DUBLIN_ Land Use and ng Range Phmaing 00 Shier-Rings Road iblin, Ohio 43016-1236 Phone: 614-410-4600 Fax: 614-4i 0-4747 Web Site: www.dubFin.oh.us The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 1. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 04-0282 -Homestead at Coffman Park Location: 22.66 acres located at the southeast corner of Discovery Boulevard and Post Road. Existing Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Perimeter Center pl@. Request: Review and approval of a revised preliminary development plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.053. Proposed Use: Asingle-family condominium development of 63 detached residential units, 3 live-work units, a community building and 4.37 acres of open space. Applicant: Patrick Grabill, Homestead Communities, LLC, 109 S. High Street, Dublin, OH 43017; represented by Ben W. Hale Jr., Smith & Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Suite 725, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Danielle M. Devlin, AICP, Senior Planner. Contact Information: Phone: (614) 410-4649-E-mail: ddevlin@dublin.oh.us. MOTION: To approve this rezoning/preliminary development plan because it provides a needed alternative housing type for the community, its uses serve as an appropriate transition from the commercial uses to the south and the residential properties north of Post Road while preserving the intent of the Community Plan by allowing a "live-work" element, it lowers the density from the existing zoning standards, potentially reducing off-site traffic impacts, the landscape treatments and pedestrian amenities will substantially increase the visual quality of the Post Road corridor, and will blend with the proposed expansion plans for Coffman Park, and the appearance of a regional stormwater retention pond will be enhanced, with seven conditions: Conditions: 1) That the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches meet Engineering requirements for strength, durability and geometrics; 2) That no alterations for the proposed boardwalk, community center and or walking path be made that reduces overall storage capacity of the pond, subject to staff approval; 3) That all utility connections meet or exceed Division of Engineering Standards; AS SU6MfTTED 10 COlA1l~. 3- 9- os 3-1y- oS Page 1 of 2 fi0R MEETINQ OA1.r..._..._ PLANNING~CORD OF C IONMISSION FEBRUARY 17, 2005 1. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 04-0282 -Homestead at Coffman Park (Continued) 4) That all required general warranty deeds for parkland dedication be submitted to the City of Dublin prior to recording of the final plat; 5) That complete and revised civil engineering drawings and tree replacement and relocation plans drawn at an appropriate scale, subject to staff approval, be submitted as part of the final development plan; 6) That the final development plans show the extension of the walkway from the pond to connect to the existing bike path in the northeastern area of the site as described in the development text; and 7) That the fencing be a certain design and color other than white, as discussed at this meeting, subject to staff approval. * Patrick Grabill, the applicant, agreed to the above conditions. VOTE: 6-1. RESULT: This rezoning/preliminary development plan application was approved. It will be forwarded to City Council with a positive recommendation. STAFF CERTIFICATION Danielle M. Devlin, AICP Senior Planner Land Use and Long Range Planning Page 2 of 2 STAFF REPORT DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 1'~, 2005 CITY OF DUBLIN_ lad Use and g Rage Pkaning i0 Shiw-Rings Road diq Ohio 43016-1236 Plane: 614-410-4600 Fax: 614-410-4141 Web Site: www.dubbaoh.us 1. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 04-028Z -Homestead at Coffman Park Location: 22.66 acres located at the southeast corner of Discovery Boulevard and Post Road. Existing Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Perimeter Center plan). Request: Review and approval of a revised preliminary development plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.053. Proposed Use: Asingle-family condominium development of 63 detached residential units, 31ive-work units, a community building and 4.37 acres of open space. Applicant: Patrick Grabill, Homestead Communities, LLC, 109 S. High Street, Dublin, OH 43017; represented by Ben W. Hale Jr., Smith & Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Suite 725, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Danielle M. Devlin, AICP, Senior Planner. Contact Information: Phone: (614) 410-4649-E-mail: ddevlin@dublin.oh.us. UPDATE On January 20, 2005 the Planning Commission considered this preliminary development plan and zoning request and determined that additional information was necessary in order to arrive at a recommendation. The Commission identified the following issues for further clarification: a) Traffic analysis b) Parking analysis for live-work units c) Walking path material d) Density e) Non-owner occupancy restrictions f) Text clarification of live/work units floor area and permitted uses g) Diversity matrix The applicants have submitted additional information relative to the above items, and have modified the proposed preliminary development plan and development text as more fully described below. Dublin Planning and Zones Commission Staff Report -February 17, 2005 Case 1-Page 2 Traffic analysis. Dublin Engineering Staff has reviewed traffic data and has forwazded a report for the Commission to review (See report dated February 8, 2005 in the packet overview materials). A summary memo from Engineering states that the proposed project will not adversely impact the surrounding network as it is designed to accommodate the higher traffic generated from the office%ommercial uses originally proposed for this area. The cover memo states that the applicant has complied with codes regazding internal circulation and safety access. Parking analysis. The applicants have removed one live-work unit and prepazed an analysis of the parking needs of the three remaining live-work units based on either a residential or commercial development scenario. This analysis is part of the text and is based on Code requirements for pazking spaces. The maximum commercial scenario for the three live-work units requires 37 spaces and the maximum residential scenario is 31 spaces. Thirty spaces aze directly adjacent to the live-work units and 10 more are within 300 feet of the live-work units. The garages of the live-work units provide six additional spaces. The applicants plan for the eventual owner of the building to determine the allotment of garage space to the tenants. The pazking provided in the development overall has increased from 86 to 99 spaces. Text clarification. Section II (A) (2) of the text describing the uses permitted within the live- work units has been clazified. The words "service retail" have been replaced by the words "commercial use." Commercial use is then defined as general, professional, medical or dental offices or small scale real estate, insurance, investment and financial advisory. The retail element has been restricted to small scale studios for arts, crafts, antiques and photography where the sale, as well as display, of products is permitted. Staff believes these uses aze appropriate for the live-work concept. Walking path material. The applicants have agreed to consider an alternative material for the walking path such as compacted gravel or a chip and seal surface. Section II (E) (7) of the text mentions both options. The final development plan will specify the exact material for the review of the Commission. Density. The applicants have removed one live-work unit and thus reduced the potential number of residential dwelling units from 71 to 69. This unit reduction has increased the amount of dedicated open space to 4.37 acres. The removal of a unit has also reduced the required open space to 4.25 acres, thereby removing the need for fee in lieu of land dedication. Non-owner occupancy restrictions. The applicants have attached a document from the by-laws of another Homestead condominium community as Exhibit F. This language is used in the by- laws to restrict the use of the units and provide a condominium character that is "primarily a housing community for owner-occupants." The by-laws leave the specific number up to the Condominium Board. Diversity matrix. The applicants have attached a model matrix to illustrate the concepts discussed in Section D(3) of the development text to ensure unit diversity. The matrix shows that same unit types are not placed directly across a green or private street from each other, but may be opposite each other across an alley. For additional diversity, homesites will have Dublin Planning and Zoni commission Staff Report -February 17, 2005 Case 1 -Page 3 available options such as porches, decks or lazger gazages, subject to final development plan approval. BACKGROUND: Case Summary: The site was originally zoned PCD, Planned Commerce District, in 1988 for office and industrial uses as part of the Perimeter Center plan. In 2000, a PUD preliminary development plan (rezoning) for the site was approved that included 60 detached units and atwo-building "live- work" component comprised of twelve residential flats and eight office/commercial units that totaled 7,650 square feet (see Record of Action 00-030Z). Copies of the approved site plan and text have been included in the packet overview materials and illustrate the zoning currently in place for this property. In Mazch 2002, the Planning Commission disapproved a subsequent final development plan (see Record of Action 00-127FDP), indicating that the final plans did not comply in all respects with the approved preliminazy development plan. The Commission cited inconsistencies that included building footprint modifications, elimination of the live/work component, entry feature and pond amenity changes, alteration of traffic flow, change in the type and number of units, and general reduction of amenities and overall design quality. The Planning Commission heazd a request for a revised preliminary development plan in May 2003 (see Record of Action 02-1372) with a modified text and plan featuring 68 single-family detached units and a community center. The Commission recommended disapproval, citing inconsistency with the Community Plan, an absence of sound zoning, planning, and design techniques, and a failure to incorporate a mix of land uses properly related to its surroundings. This case was forwarded to the City Council and was tabled per the applicant's request on June 23, 2003. In August of 2004, the City Council removed the case in order for the current revised preliminary development plan application (Case #04-0282) to proceed. The current application was initially placed on the April 1, 2004 Planning Commission agenda, but subsequently tabled at the applicant's request. The applicants now wish to present a revised preliminary development plan and text more similar in nature to the approved zoning plan currently in place for the property. This plan proposes to construct 63 single-family detached residential units, three "live-work" units and an 1,800-square foot community center at the edge of the existing pond. A gazebo, a walking path and aretention/detention pond with two fountains aze among the amenities proposed along the Post Road frontage. The live-work units could provide for up to two dwelling units for a potential of 69 dwelling units on the site and a density not exceeding 3 units per acre. Case Procedure: The new Planned Development District (Ordinance 75-03) was approved by City Council on May 3, 2004, and went into effect on June 2, 2004. As described in Section 153.050, the purposes of the new Planned Development District regulations are to: 1) Provide an opportunity for a mix of land uses otherwise not permitted within the standard municipal zoning district classifications; Dublin Planning and ZoniL~, .;ommission Staff Report -February 17, 2005 Case 1-Page 4 2) Allow the creation of development standazds that respect the unique characteristics, natural quality and beauty of the site and the immediate vicinity and protect the community's natural resources by avoiding development on, destruction of, sensitive environmental areas; 3) Enable greater review of design chazacteristics to ensure that the project is properly integrated into its surroundings and is compatible with adjacent development; 4) Assure compatibility between proposed land uses within and around the Planned Development District through appropriate development controls; 5) Pursue the housing and economic development goals of the City; 6) Promote economical and efficient use of land and reduce infrastructure costs through unified development; 7) Provide for supporting community facilities; 8) Establish objective criteria for development plan review that ensure conformity to community and district standards and allow for consistent treatment throughout. 'The procedures established for the new Planned Development Districts continue to provide for proper site planning in a coordinated and comprehensive manner, consistent with accepted land planning, landscape azchitecture, and engineering principles, using imaginative azchitectural design and flexibility in building styles. The new PUD process may 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). A concept plan shall be forwazded to the Planning and Zoning Commission when the project is complex, comprises more than 25 acres, or does not comply with the Community Plan. Otherwise, a preliminary development plan shall be reviewed by staff and forwazded to the Planning and Zoning Commission for review and action. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the application to determine compliance with the approval criteria set forth in 153.055(A) and repeated below. Upon review the Planning and Zoning Commission shall ultimately forwazd the plan to City Council with a recommendation for approval, a recommendation for approval subject to conditions or a recommendation for disapproval. City Council shall review the proposal and conduct a public hearing before rendering its decision. Adopting the plan shall constitute a rezoning of the property and allow the applicant to proceed with detailed preparation of the final development plan. Review Criteria: In accordance with Section 153.055(B) Plan Approval Criteria, Code sets out the following criteria of approval for a preliminazy development plan (rezoning): 1) The proposed development is consistent with the purpose, intent and applicable standazds of the Dublin Zoning Code; 2) The proposed development is in conformity with the Community Plan, Thoroughfaze Plan, Bikeway Plan and other adopted plans or portions thereof as they may apply and will not unreasonably burden the existing street network; Dublin Planning and ZonL _ commission Staff Report -February 17, 2005 Case 1-Page 5 3) The proposed development advances the general welfaze of the City and immediate vicinity and will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding azeas; 4) The proposed uses are appropriately located in the City so that the use and value of property within and adjacent to the azea will be safeguazded; 5) Proposed residential development will have sufficient open space azeas that meet the objectives of the Community Plan; 6) The proposed development respects the unique characteristic of the natural features and protects the natural resources of the site; 7) Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, retention and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. 8) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress designed to minimise 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 lazger 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 pazking azeas, 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 standazd development regulations included in the Dublin Zoning Code or Subdivision Regulation, and that any such deviations aze 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 aze consistent with the Thoroughfare Plan and aze sufficient to service the new development. CONSIDERATIONS: Site Characteristics and Zoning: • Site Description. The subject property is 22.66 acres and is located on the south side of Post Road. The "L" shaped pazcel includes 1,450 feet of frontage along Post Road and surrounds a 1.7-acre office development. The parcel has 250 feet of frontage along Discovery Boulevard and 1,700 feet of frontage along Wall Street. The site includes mounding along Post Road, and a tree row runs from Post Road to Wall Street through the Dublin Planning and Zoni~ commission Staff Report -February 17, X005 Case 1-Page b center of the site. A 3.86-acre regional stormwater pond comprises the southeast leg of the site. Zoning. The site is currently zoned PUD for 60 detached, single-family homes and two "live-work" buildings that include twelve residential units and eight commerciaVoffice spaces. To the north across Post Road are two single-family lots and portions of Coffman Pazk zoned R-1, Restricted Suburban Residential District. The site surrounds an office building along Post Road zoned SO, Suburban Office, and to the east and southeast aze office buildings zoned LI, Limited Industrial District. Office, printing, and office-flex uses are located to the south across Wall Street. To the west aze a daycare center and the Innovaris building west of Discovery Boulevard. Community Plan & Other Applicable Regulations: Land Use. The Future Land Use Map in the 1997 Community Plan recommends "office" and "mixed-use with employment emphasis" uses for this site. The land was rezoned from PCD, Planned Commerce District, in 2000 for residential uses that featured a "live-work" element and served as a transition between the office commercial uses to the south and the residential uses to the north. The cunrently approved density is 3.12 du/ac with an additional 7,650 square feet of commerciaUoffice space. The proposed rezoning reduces the density to 3.0 du/ac and includes a potential of approximately 6,246 square feet of commercial space. Staff believes that the proposed reduction in density is appropriate, and the proposed uses and layout continue to provide a transition between the office and commercial uses south of the site and the residential uses and park land north of Post Road. • Scenic Designation. The Community Plan designates Post Road as a scenic road and encourages increased building setbacks along such roadways. It also recommends fording strategies to retain the rustic character of these scenic rural roads through sensitive building layout, landscaping, and setbacks. City Council approved the Coffman Pazk Expansion Plans in 2003, which emphasized enhancing the visual character of this passive section of Pazk along Post Road. The proposed plans provide landscape amenities and a bucolic setting that will visually blend with the adjacent pazk and stream corridor. The existing bike path will be preserved and additional pedestrian walkways will be added to access the water and architectural features provided and will serve to carry over the pazk-like experience across Post Road. Right-of--way. No additional right-of--way dedication is required with this application. All surrounding public streets currently have appropriate right-of-way, based on the adopted Thoroughfaze Plan. • Conservation Design Resolution. The application for revised preliminary development plan was received prior to the adoption of the Conservation Design Resolution. However, following the adoption staff has evaluated the site for suitability to conservation design and determined that given the narrow shape and configuration of the lot, as well as the size and location of the existing regional detention pond, a conservation design proposal is not feasible for this site. • Residential Appearance Code. The Residential Appearance Code (Ordinance #59-03 Amended) was adopted by City Council on November 3, 2003. The ordinance includes minimum standards for such design elements as chimneys, foundation treatments, window, gazage doors, etc. This development will be subject to the residential appearance standazds and submitted elevations appear to generally comply at this preliminary stage. Dublin Planning and Zonu_D Commission Staff Report -February 17, 2005 Case 1-Page 7 Development Standards: • Building Setbacks. The text and plans show a proposed building setback along Post Road of 60 feet and along Discovery Boulevard of 50 feet. Minimum building setbacks along all other property lines are described in the text and shown on the plans at 30 feet. Pavement Setbacks. Proposed pavement setbacks for all property lines noted in the text match those illustrated on the site plan. Pavement setbacks along Post Road aze 60 feet and along Discovery Boulevazd are 50 feet. The Wall Street pavement setbacks are 10 feet. Access and Circulation: • Curb Cuts. This development plan includes two primary access points on Discovery Boulevard and Wall Street. A secondary access point is also shown along Wall Street. No vehiculaz access is permitted or shown on Post Road. • Streets and Pavement Widths. All streets within the development aze proposed as private but meet City standazds with a width of 22 feet, back-to-back of curb. The text specifies that all private streets, pazking azeas, and drive approaches must meet Engineering ' requirements for strength, durability and geometrics and will provide sufficient turning radii for waste hauling and emergency vehicles. Recent plan revisions have addressed fire code requirements concerning fire-fighting accessibility and have been reviewed and approved by the Washington Township Fire Department. Street names used on the plan are for reference only and the text specifies that street names shall be determined with Land Use and Engineering staff approval prior to final development plan submission. Alleys and Driveways. The proposed development includes service alleys for attached, reaz-loaded gazages. All alleys have a minimum width of 16 feet to accommodate one-way traffic. Drive approaches have a minunum of 18 feet in accordance with City code. The text specifies that `One Way' and `No Pazking' signage will be placed where necessary within the development, as requested by the City. • Parking Requirements. The Zoning Code requires a minimum of two pazking spaces per dwelling unit. All proposed units, including the live-work units, provide a two-caz gazage and optional third-car addition. The site plan shows 99 additional on-street parking spaces provided throughout the development for guest parking. Of those 99 spaces, 40 spaces are within 300 feet of the live-work units and 25 spaces are within 300 feet of the community center. In compliance with Code, these areas include two ADA accessible spaces each. The text specifies that the Community Center is for residents' use only and limits the number of users to 50 at one time. Staff believes that based on the internal orientation and low-impact nature of these facilities, the provided pazking will be sufficient. Architecture: • Architectural Details. The development utilizes a traditional azchitectural style for units that will be one, one and a half, or two-story models with optional basements. Other optional elements will be available following final development approval of a "homesite plan." The homesite plan will showcase the nature and location of potential additions such as rooms, porches, decks and patios. Exhibit A of the text indicates the limits of the buildable area. for each unit. The applicants wish to have all the potential options approved by the Planning Commission at final development plan review in order to simplify the permitting process. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report -February 17, 2005 Case 1-Page 8 • Building Design and Materials. The applicants have submitted elevations for three potential models of home and the live-work units. The elevations and the text require that building materials shall consist of natural materials such as stone, cultured stone, wood and horizontal siding in a unified beige color scheme with colored trim accents. The possible accent colors specified aze midnight green, burgundy red, midnight blue, and black. The units will feature self-sealing dimensional asphalt roof shingles with a 25-year warranty. A minimum 50 percent of the exterior surface of buildings facing a public or private street or a courtyard shall be stone. The text specifies that any additional future home models will be submitted for staff approval. [Similaz projects aze under construction at Scioto Reserve in Powell, Highland Lakes in Westerville, and The Preserve in Gahanna.] • Community Center Design and Materials. Elevations of the community center have been provided as Exhibit D of the text. The building materials will include stone, cultured stone, wood and simulated-plank siding in a barn red color. Final color approval will be required at the final development plan review. The center features a covered deck that overlooks a boardwalk component of the pedestrian pathway circling the lazge retention pond. Architectural Diversity. Architectural diversity will be maintained by prohibiting the same elevation of a model within one home on either side, and one home on the opposite side of the street/pedestrian green. All unit frontages along a public or private street or along a courtyard area will have 50 percent stone veneers. Typical applications of stone for each of the models have been indicated in Exhibit B of the text. Models will have options such as expanded first-floor master suites, sunrooms, screened porches, decks, and other elements as approved on the final homesite plans to further vary azchitecturai appearance. An illustrative model matrix has been attached to the development text as Exhibit E. Building Code Requirements. All building options and additions must provide a minimum separation between structures of 12 feet to comply with Building Code requirements. The potential building envelope for each model is attached as Exhibit A. Homesite plans with available options will be reviewed as part of the final development plan. Open Space and Pedestrian Amenities: • Open Space Dedication. Required parkland dedication for the site is 4.25 acres based on a total site azea of 22.66 acres and 69 potential residential dwelling units. This proposal incorporates 2.55 acres along Post Road (excluding a 30-foot setback required by Code) and 1.82 acres surrounding the existing pond (excluding required stormwater azea), to exceed the requirement at 4.37 acres. The text dedicates all open space reserves to the City and provides for on-going maintenance by a forced and funded condominium association. However, the City will retain responsibility for the stormwater functionality of the existing pond. Post Road Dedication. Consistent with past rezonings, no more than half of open space areas along Post Road can be counted towazd parkland dedication requirements. The submitted plans break this area into Reserve Areas A and B because the existing office building development divides the Post Road frontage area. The provided calculations for both areas indicate 2.55 acres will be dedicated along Post Road. Pond Dedication and Pedestrian Amenities. Consistent with past proposals, the azea surrounding the existing pond, excluding stormwater capacity, is included in open space calculations because of proposed public amenities. Additional landscaping, a looped Dublin Planning and Zonis. ;ommission Staff Report -February 17,1005 Case 1-Page 9 sidewalk and benches will be installed in addition to an 1,800-square foot community center overlooking the boardwalk and the north end of the pond. The community center is for the use of residents only but the attached boardwalk provides full public access to the sidewalk planned to circle the pond and connect to the bike path along Post Road. Access easements will be required as needed at the final development plan stage. The text specifies that the walkway leading to the pond be extended to connect to the existing bike path in the northeastern area of the site but this is not clearly indicated on the preliminary plan. Final plans should clearly show this connection. Staff believes that the proposed amenities will improve the aesthetics of the pond and will add to the bike/pedestrian network of the City. Post Road Pedestrian Amenities. Landscape amenities proposed along Post Road transition from a gazebo at the northwest corner of the site nestled within a grove of flowering cherry trees and flow into a rolling, naturalized setting that continues the landscape themes approved north of Post Road in the Coffman Park Plan. A retention/detention pond will be constructed at the eastern half of Area A along Post Road. Two fountains and a supplemental water source will ensure the pond retains a desirable aesthetic quality. Mounding in this area will be reduced to enhance the view from Post Road. The pond will lie between the existing Post Road bike path and a proposed compressed gravel or chip and seal walking path that ties into the internal sidewalk system. A sequence of pedestrian and auto courtyards are located throughout the development to create architecturally defined spaces and visual links to Post Road from within the development. Repeated architectural elements of dry-laid stone walls with book ends and three-plank, white horse fencing provide a backdrop to the pedestrian area and create a transition from the public space to the interior units and courtyazds. This theme is carried along the Wall Street frontage where it is supplemented by low-lying vegetation. Phasing of Amenities. A phasing plan has been submitted with the preliminary development plan but does not specifically address phasing of the amenities. The text, however states that the amenities planned for Reserve Areas B and C will be completed prior to the initiation of Phase II and those planned for Area A will be completed prior to the initiation of Phase III. Landscaping and Tree Preservation: • Tree Preservation. A preliminary tree survey and preservation plan has been submitted. The site has scattered trees along Post Road (including a 12-inch hackberry) and a fencerow along the east property line that will be preserved. Other trees along Post Road in Areas A and B will be relocated in order to continue the open, prairie feel of the neighboring Coffman Park. Approximately 118 caliper inches of protected trees will be removed, most from the tree row in the center of the site. All existing trees must be indicated on civil engineering drawings, and a tree replacement plan drawn at a one inch to 50 feet ratio will be submitted as part of the fmal development plan. Fence/Stone Wall Treatment. Primary ornamental fencing includes afour-foot, white horse fence with 3-rail detail that will be incorporated as part of the landscape buffers along Wall Street and Discovery Boulevazd. The fencing will be augmented with evergreen shrubs and stone wall and pillar treatments. Segments of dry-laid stone wall will also be utilized within the buffer at the terminus of alleys and drive approaches for visual Dublin Planning and Zoning i ommission Staff Report -February 17, 2005 Case 1-Page 10 variety and to limit headlight trespass. The same treatments will also be used to create architectural definition in courtyard areas facing Post Road. Day Care Buffer. The Code requires asix-foot high, continuous screen with one shade tree every 40 feet along the daycaze site. Previously, asix-foot, solid privacy fence with stone pillaz treatment was proposed along the entire daycaze boundary. However, the daycaze site has mounding and landscaping along this azea, and staff believes that a solid fence is inconsistent with the overall character of the development and the intent of the Fence Code. Therefore, the horse fence treatment augmented with ornamental trees and shrubs has been proposed to better coordinate with the existing landscape mounding and still provide separation and safety. The proposed parallel pazking spaces in this azea must be screened to vehiculaz use azea requirements. Trellises and Arbors. The proposed text includes the potential for the use of trellises and arbors, as well as the limited use of privacy screening. The exhibits for such elements will be determined at the time of the final development plan in the homesite plans. • East and South Buffers. The text requires landscaping to meet Code, which mandates asix- foot high continuous screen with one shade tree every 40 feet along the adjacent office and light industrial uses azound the pond. The site includes an existing natural treerow, and additional mounding and evergreens have been provided to the south as part of the flex office development. Meeting Code requirements while providing proper grading, amenities, and pedestrian access, as well as preserving trees, is not feasible. Staff believes that providing visual and physical access to the dedicated open space amenities and tree preservation aze more important and recommends that additional buffering be provided to further screen the service azeas of the flex office site to the south and that the north end of the eastern tree row be augmented along Post Road, to meet the intent of the Code. The submitted preliminary landscape plan reflects this concept and it will be detailed at the final landscape plan stage. • Columbus Laser Center Buffer. The Code requires asix-foot high, continuous screen with one shade tree every 40 feet along the Columbus Laser Center on Post Road. The adjacent property drops in elevation and is further screened by a mound and shade tree planting. Given the specific topographic issues and intended chazacter of the Post Road corridor, staff suggests the use of a naturalized, deciduous buffer with fencing or other landscape options to match the pazk chazacter along Post Road. The preliminary plans reflect this suggestion and show deciduous and ornamental trees placed along the horse fence treatment in this area. Vehicular Use Screening. Code requires a minimum 3.5-foot high screen azound all vehiculaz use azeas. Minor landscape modifications may be necessary in limited locations to comply with Vehicular Use Screening and Interior Landscaping Codes for the final development plan. Plant species will also be noted at that time. • Street Trees. The approved street tree for Wall Street is the Summit Green Ash, and for Discovery Boulevard, the Green Mountain Sugaz Maple. The Red Oak has been approved for Post Road. Instead of uniform spacing, street trees for Post Road will be clustered to blend with the adjacent pazk and Indian Run corridor. Due to recent infestations, the applicant has agreed to consult with the City Forester prior to the final development plan to verify that Ash trees remain the preferred species. Post Road Buffer. The original approved Perimeter Center plan includes existing landscaping and mounding along Post Road as part of a TIF agreement with the former Dublin Planning and Zoninb commission Staff Report -February i 7, 2005 Case 1-Page 11 Metatec Corporation. The proposed plans will modify the existing mounding and landscaping. Removed plant material will be relocated within dedicated reserve azeas at the applicant's expense, under the direction of the City. Stormwater and Utilities: • Stormwater. This development will be required to comply with all stormwater management regulations, as is stated in the development text. The existing pond at the southeast comer of the site serves as a regional stormwater retention basin for multiple properties, and will be the primary mechanism for this site. An additional pond proposed along Post Road will be used to fulfill any remaining requirements, but will largely serve as an aesthetic amenity. No alterations for the proposed boazdwallc and community center may be made to the pond that will reduce overall storage capacity or hamper the function of the pond in any way. Water Service. Water service is satisfactory for the site and will be provided from an existing 16-inch line along the south side of Post Road, a 12-inch line on the east side of Discovery Boulevard, and aneight-inch line from the south side of Wall Street. No open cutting of the existing public roadway will be permitted without specific penmission from the City Engineer. • Sanitary Sewer. Sanitary sewer service includes a 24-inch main along Post Road and a 21- inch line along Discovery Boulevazd. No building footprints, including footings, will encroach upon the existing sanitary easements that cross the property. Sewer plans must be reviewed and approved by the Ohio EPA before sewer construction can be started. Signage and Lighting: • Neighborhood Identification Signs. Signage for the proposed development includes two permanent neighborhood identification signs at each primary entrance. As shown on the submitted plans and described in the text, the signs shall be externally illuminated ground signs made of wood, wood composite or high density urethane (HDtn. Plant material will be located at the base of each sign. The text limits the sign face area to 10 squaze feet and the height to six feet. The proposed signs are consistent with the Dublin Sign Code. The specific color palette and lettering material shall be reviewed at the time of final development plan approval. Street Signage. Street signage used within the development will be based on City standards and subject to staff approval. Internal signage will be used to direct guests of residents to the community center pazking azeas and will comply with Code. • Live-Work Signage. The live-work units shall be allowed limited signage as proposed in the front elevations supplied with Exhibit C. No signage shall be allowed above the ground floor. Specific details of the live-work signage shall be reviewed at final development plan submittal. Exterior Lighting. Lighting along internal, private streets will consist of black, eight-foot high, posts with lantern-type fixtures in front of each unit in order to match the residential character and scale of the development. Other site lighting will be in accordance with the Dublin Exterior Lighting Guidelines. Cut sheets and specific locations shall be provided on the final development plan. Due to public improvements adjacent to the site, no public street lighting will be required at entrances to the development. Dublin Planning and Zonir "ommission Staff Report -February 1 i, ..JOS Case 1-Page i 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes that the proposed residential development will provide a needed alternative housing type within the City at a lower density than the currently approved residential plan for this site. The plans include a mix ofhigh-quality, traditional azchitectural building styles and site elements that will blend with the rural character of scenic Post Road and the Indian Run corridor. The proposal will enhance the visual quality of Post Road with pedestrian linkages to the future expansion of Coffman Pazk and amenities that will- aesthetically improve an existing regional detention pond. Staff recommends approval of this rezoning request with the following six conditions: Conditions: 1) That the design of all private drives, parking azeas, and drive approaches meet Engineering requirements for strength, durability and geometrics; 2) That no alterations for the proposed boardwalk, community center and or wallcing path be made that reduces overall storage capacity of the pond, subject to staff approval; 3) That all utility connections meet or exceed Division of Engineering Standards; 4) That all required general warranty deeds for parkland dedication be submitted to the City of Dublin prior to recording of the fmal plat; 5) That complete and revised civil engineering drawings and tree replacement and relocation plans drawn at an appropriate scale, subject to staff approval, be submitted as part of the fmal development plan; and ~ That the final development plans show the extension of the walkway from the pond to connect to the existing bike path in the northeastern area of the site as described in the development text. Bases: 1) The proposed development provides a needed alternative housing type for the community. 2) The proposed uses serve as an appropriate transition from the commercial uses to the south and the residential properties north of Post Road while preserving the intent of the Community Plan by allowing a "live-work" element. 3) The proposal lowers the density from the existing zoning standards, potentially reducing off-site traffic impacts. 4) The proposed landscape treatments and pedestrian amenities will substantially increase the visual quality of the Post Road corridor, and will blend with the proposed expansion plans for Coffman Park. 5) The appearance of a regional stormwater retention pond will be enhanced. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission RAFT Minutes -February 17, 2005 Page 2 Mr. Gerber sa' that staff works and all week, he hated to tak up their free ti on turday for the ork Session. He sked if the Work ession could be ld at the end of e M h 3 meeting ag da instead. The Co issioners all a eed to the March Workshop folio g the two regul cases on the agenda. T refore the Wor op session on Fe ary 26 was canc led. Mr. Bird men ' ned that the ommissioners h received invit 'ons to the Re 'oval wth/Route 33 orridor Meetin on March 9, a the Union Coun Service Cente in M vine at 6:00 p. Administra 've Business Regarding the uary 13, 200 eeting minutes, .Saneholtz re ested that they r ect that was present. .Messineo note that he was als resent at the mee ' g. Mr. tier's motion to approve th January 13, 20 meeting minut as amended. Zimme n seconded th motion, and t vote was as Mows: Mr. M sineo, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, s; Mr. Spragu , es; Ms. Reiss, es; Mr. Zimm an, yes; and Gerber, yes. (Approved 6- Re rding the Janu 20, 2005, Reiss requeste that the times arrived be cone ed to 6:35 She also quested that on age 21, in th bird paragraph, 't read: He sai the difficul that might be esented is wit his field in to s of fertl long lls going over fence into a neighboring ds. r. Gerber's m ion was to app ve the Janu 0, 2005 meeti minutes as am ded. Mr. Zi erman secon ed the motion, and the vote as follows: .Messineo, es; Mr. Sane ltz, yes; Mr. ague, abstain; s. Reiss, yes; Zimmerman, ;and Mr. Gerb yes. (Appro d 6-0.) For the recor Mr. Gerber st d that the Pl 'ng and Zoning mmission is dvisory board to City Counci when rezonin of property ar under conside ion. In such c es the City uncil will recei recommendati s from the Co ission and con uct another pu 'c hearing to rove or disapp ve the rezoni In some oth cases the Co ission has the cision makin responsibility, ch as approvin specific develo ent plans base on a prior rez 'ng. Anyone ho intends to a ess the Comma ion on any of t se cases must b worn in. Mr. Gerber a ounced that the plicants for Ca s 1, 2, 3, and 5 d consented to a conditions fisted in the sta report. He pu d Cases 1 an from the Con nt Agenda bec se it was i icated that there ere Commissio issues to be di ssed regarding ose cases. The rder of the ends was Case 3, 1, 4, 5, and The minutes r ect the publishe agenda order.] 1. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 04-0282 -Homestead at Coffman Park Mr. Gerber announced that this is for review and approval of a rezoning/revised preliminary development plan that was tabled at the January 20, 2005 meeting after much discussion. Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -February 17, 2005 Page 3 Mr. Gerber asked that the presentation from the last time not be repeated, but that an update be given. Mr. Gerber swore in those who intended to testify in regards to this case. Danielle Devlin said she would show the slides with the updates to this plan. On the updated open space slide, she noted showed the area where the number of live/work units from four to three. The parking has been increased in the area by adding spaces on two sides of the live/work units, thereby creating 40 parking spaces within 300 feet of the units. Other parking has been increased to total 99 spaces within the entire development. Removal of the live/work unit increases Area A open space slightly to 1.55 acres. Open space totaling 4.37 acres is to be dedicated, which exceeds the Code requirement of 4.25 acres. Ms. Devlin said the Cherry grove and gazebo still remain on the plan. The frontage amenities also remain the same. Elevations of the live/work units and text clarification of them has been submitted concerning the square footage and permitted uses. The word Retail has been removed and Commercial has been defined to include the sale and display of goods for studios. Ms. Devlin said staff recommends approval of this revised preliminary development plan with six conditions: 1) That the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches meet Engineering requirements for strength, durability and geometrics; 2) That no alterations for the proposed boardwalk, community center and or walking path be made that reduces overall storage capacity of the pond, subject to staff approval; 3) That all utility connections meet or exceed Division of Engineering Standards; 4) That all required general warranty deeds for parkland dedication be submitted to the City of Dublin prior to recording of the final plat; 5) That complete and revised civil engineering drawings and tree replacement and relocation plans drawn at an appropriate scale, subject to staff approval, be submitted as part of the final development plan; and 6) That the final development plans show the extension of the walkway from the pond to connect to the existing bike path in the northeastern area of the site as described in the development text. Applicant Pat Grabill, president of Homestead Communities, said they had responded to the seven issues the Commission had at the last meeting. Mr. Gerber asked Mr. Grabill to address each of the Commission issues after those who wished to speak in the audience spoke. Edith Driscoll, 6230 Post Road, representing the Post Road residents, stated her support of this development. She said at their January meeting, Mike Spitale, president of the Post Road Civic Association indicated that they were 100 percent in support of this development. She said she and her husband would be pleased if the Commission forwarded this application to City Council for its consideration. Cathy Boring asked about flipping Units 26 through 34 around so the alley and garages would not be in front of Wall Street. She said the fronts would then face Wall Street. Dublin Planning and Zonii,b Commission Minutes -February 17, 2005 ~ R ~ F T Page 4 Mr. Grabill said the main roadway and turning radii had been redesigned at the request of the fire department. He did not think the fire department would find backing vehicles into that roadway acceptable. He also said it lost the sense of community they were trying to create. All the units have porches and living areas oriented towards the streetscape with no garages shown from the street. He said the site was narrow and it did not provide much freedom to plan it any other way. Ms. Boring asked if the landscaping could be restructured between the garages and Wall Street. Jim Burkhart, Jim Burkhart and Associates Landscape Architects, said they were proposing a continuous solid hedge along that street. He said they proposed that it be evergreen material to provide a living evergreen fence. Ms. Boring stated she did not care for the white fence proposed because it tends to give an impression of other communities rather than Dublin. Mr. Burkhart said they had no objections to darkening the fence or using something other than a three- or four-rail horse fence. He said it could be split rail. He said the white horse fences had been a theme for Homestead Communities, but they had no objection to using something else. Ms. Boring asked for a suggested fence that would be different yet still have Homestead's theme. Mr. Burkhart said instead of using the usual 1 by 6, three- or four-rail system, they could use a round rail or something that would provide uniqueness, but still maintain the image. Mr. Grabill mentioned they were trying to Dublinize this site with the dark green shutters with shamrocks. He suggested a dark green fencing, if acceptable. Mr. Burkhart said he knew of a fence company in Massachusetts that makes a sophisticated fence with round rails. He wanted to class up the fence, still toning it down. Ms. Boring asked if the Commissioners felt comfortable leaving the fence type and color subject to staff approval. Mr. Gerber suggested Condition 7: That fencing be of a certain design and a color other than white, subject to staff approval. Ms. Boring added to Condition 7: ...as discussed in this meeting. She stated she did not want to design the fence. Ms. Devlin noted that fence detail will return for the Commission's review and approval at the final development plan stage. Mr. Burkhart said several different alternatives will be presented at that time. Ruth Reiss asked if a diversity matrix for the color palette was needed so two units next to each other would not be the same color. Dublin Planning and Zoni commission Minutes -February 17, 20~~ Page 5 ~ A~T Ms. Devlin said all of units are proposed to be beige, so the color palette would only refer to the trim. She said the text stated that no two trim palettes would be the same. Mr. Gerber asked if the red barn was the red as depicted in the drawing. Mr. Grabill said it was about the same dark red as his building at 109 South High Street, and an approved color in the Historic District.. Mr. Grabill thought a metal standing seam or wood shingle barn roof would look more authentic than the asbestos roof preferred by staff. Ms. Boring agreed with Mr. Grabill that the red barn would look better with the different roof material. Mr. Gerber said this would be seen again at the final. Ms. Reiss asked about homeowner's association maintenance of the barn roof. Mr. Grabill said standing seam would last longer than the composition roof. He leaned more towards the wood shingle because it was a softer look. However, he wanted time to study it. Mr. Gerber said that would be fine since this would be seen again by the Commission. Ms. Boring referred to the Architectural Diversity section of the Staff Report where it stated that the frontages needed to be stone, etc. She asked about wraparound requirements. Ms. Devlin said wraparound was a requirement of the Architectural Diversity Code, and it would be included. Ms. Boring noted that all the garages shown were two-car garages. She asked about the option for three-car garages. Mr. Grabill said he did not think many buyers would take that option. He said the two-car garages are oversized. Mr. Grabill agreed to the seven conditions as listed below. Mr. Gerber made the motion to approve this rezoning/preliminary development plan because it provides a needed alternative housing type for the community, its uses serve as an appropriate transition from the commercial uses to the south and the residential properties north of Post Road while preserving the intent of the Community Plan by allowing a "live-work" element, it lowers the density from the existing zoning standards, potentially reducing off-site traffic impacts, the landscape treatments and pedestrian amenities will substantially increase the visual quality of the Post Road corridor, and will blend with the proposed expansion plans for Coffinan Park, and the appearance of a regional stormwater retention pond will be enhanced, with seven conditions: 1) That the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches meet Engineering requirements for strength, durability and geometrics; Dublin Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -February 17, 2005 ~ ~FT Page 6 2) That no alterations for the proposed boardwalk, community center and or walking path be made that reduces overall storage capacity of the pond, subject to staff approval; 3) That all utility connections meet or exceed Division of Engineering Standards; 4) That all required general warranty deeds for parkland dedication be submitted to the City of Dublin prior to recording of the final plat; 5) That complete and revised civil engineering drawings and tree replacement and relocation plans drawn at an appropriate scale, subject to staff approval, be submitted as part of the final development plan; 6) That the final development plans show the extension of the walkway from the pond to connect to the existing bike path in the northeastern area of the site as described in the development text; and 7) That the fencing be a certain design and color other than white, as discussed at this meeting, subject to staff approval. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Ms. Reiss, yes; Ms. Boring, yes; Mr. Sprague, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, no; Mr. Messineo, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Approved 6-1.) Amended Fin Development n 04-066AFDP Perimeter Of Centre 2 - 59'4~0- 000 Venture D ' e Mr. rber swore in F Shepherd, wh represented the a licant and othe who wished to testify i egards to this c Mr. Shepher greed to the con 'tions listed Belo .Gerber made emotion to app ve this amended 'nal Developmen lan because it m is the ew Planned 'strict regulation and the revise condition will ow the propose develo ment to meet t intent of the pr iously approved erimeter Center velopment text, ? with two onditions: 1) That C dition 1 from t approved Recor of Action dated ly 15, 2004 be re 'sed to read "That doc entation be p vided verifying at the proposed ce developmen has been incorporate 'nto the existin Perimeter Offic Centre Condom ium Association, to the satisfaction of ff'; and 2) hat all docume ation of the C dominium Dec ation Amendme sand Contract r A ition to Condom' 'um be provide rior to building ermit issuance. Ms. Reiss conded the moti ,and the vote w as follows: Ms. oring, yes; Mr. 'mmerman, yes; Mr. Spr e, yes; Mr. San oltz, yes; Mr. sineo, yes; Ms. eiss, yes; and Mr. erber, yes. (Approve 7-0.) 3. mended Final D elopment Plan -175AFDP - T tan West, Secti 1 (Subarea .n Mr. rber said this an application for approval review of an amended Final Develop ent Plan for a g ebo with a mec ical room wit 'n the building tback along Hyland-Cr Road. ..~a._.. O f e o 0 0 .Yt saaT- e wvas uc .laic wrs f I ~ 1 ~ tw an NdtM lGlB YAM 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Q ~i ~ ~~~fl ~~~~~1~t~~Y ~~#~~~1~~~ ~~1~1 i ^3 - _ v air + _ i .1 l~~ .l - - f _ { i t ____________p _ 7 ~ . PLAN-! lE6END - ~ j~', ~ i DEGDUWSiREE ,i ! ORNAMENTAL TREE ! . ~ i ~ ~ - ~ - ~ EVERGRE.FJI TREE ' t_ . t{ _ • - 1 O yYa t E7USi1NG P'ONO SMALL ORNAMENTAL TREE OR LARGE SNRUt4 EVERGREEN SHRUB - _ 4 333.. ° _ DELWUOUS SHRUB i _ f - ~ 6ROUNOI:OVER ~f ~ l i _ ~ i ~ i i ~ t i~._ ~ 7 J 1 I I )J/ t _ ; ' / y I - ' ~ 1 / ~ 0 10 ~ p 100 NO X00 ' ~ b - ' - J N01[IH 9GlE 11:00' , . 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park PRQF'`O~ED CO~~i~tiT1( d~~R ~~~~I~T1fl~~ g1 _ CY~9aE C~ OBOaMI A71W.7 !~B MW QA@ 0001®i~® jNDOIr M~ 1[i. Q = MOYr.IF/b~ .v - - _ moo. car a~wr~ me ..~~a we wmwa a~ oars NORTH B:EYATION aw. a..a ~x iaa..Er• ~1 GOOF ~FA[? CIL~ tft7E ~.F.~~ p~ML A7N~t1 ~8 ~B CUD A® !4 . x~ t +roM~itan Q~ ~woE w~ ~ _ ago Dora w6 woow - s rYOE wNC at _ _ - _ ~ ~ was urt .i ur - i a~w®srort rus - ~ urF my ~ rx anoQ ~ wewuc ~arrt parrs 90UiH H.EVATION 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park = PR4~~~D C~1V~~UNITY C~~1T~R ~LE~~T ~1TIR~UED I l~f ~OOF~6K NYl ~6f t IMF QAI[ ME ~f Q/IOO® M~OOM A~1 ~8 -i ~ v-r wear. trs~ aae~ri wswrr = fdaB w~wE w~ ac wort ~o~ _ ~ers.pua~ wF _ cir _ a~~ sao~ rwa _ u.t s ~V . ~ _ _ _ _ _ - - iil RDQt f1<711® 51UE EAST EtE1fATlON a~a..~,~ i i 'a~~ a..~ ~ _ ~ _ - ,P - - - - vr wartwn I ers •mBa - 4 C~ttr®s~aE tMa D ~ wcs weE/r~ - - wrs - - - Yr0- w-1i~'°~~ rrroe wNC ao~c ;,ao~+~ - acwu~ a~ - _ - _ 04-0282 Homestead at Y~ST B.EVAT1~1 Coffman Park t=~OtWT ELE`/ATiQ#VS ~E t{~PQ~ED RE~tDENCE~ ~ _ - , 1 -e~~ - - - ~ a_- ~~P-$ ~ ~.~.n ~ • ~ ~ - ; i -L====- --=~`-~iti~ 1 ~ ~____=====3 w~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ 040282 Homestead at Coffman Park Pi~OPO~ED LiVE11~VORK EIEV~?TiON~ a { r I _ I - UNIT FRONT ELEVATION ~ 1 0o Qo oa ~o 04-0282 _ _ . UNIT REAR - HLBVATION _ _ - Homestead at _ - tii1 - - ~ Coffman Park P~QPQSED PAST ~OI~D ~Pt}~T~1G~ ~~.~~AT1dS - - . ~ ~ aPVntaK tAQ1~16 FJIST - _ - ~..E.,.~ , ..~~..e.~ SELiIOq: T1pd1 t1011N0 u futr~~ l(.~ J• E~M~Y t 1~[lli~lw ' 4, €LEYAiION= lO0gN6 501liN ~.u, sa.erte ww~tasa ~ r~~ _ _ -n _ `~rfaosfa[ruaa~ 1Z _ = - svoss~c wa ~ - p~6~~uws ~aot ELEVAiI(AI- LOOKING SOUf11 ~ frwcrri sru~swe.n.~ ~ `~f -i ~ N _ - ' A° e.~...e..~ wvw ~56LilON: iI1R11 P'ON© u au.tr~~ ~ - _ _ i ~ ..i~ea..~.. U4-028Z ~---a aEV~~ i~oo?a~e ~r psc~ v~u Homestead at so~cr+! - Coffinan Park P~OF't~D E.~tTR~NCE S~G~V Eat=VATtQ~V ~--r i ~ ' i, ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ , _ n 4 -5' n _ _ _ ~ ~ 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Division of Engineering 5800 Shier Rings Road • Dublin, OH 43016 Crnr OF DUBLn~I Phone: 614-410-4600 • Fax: 614-761-6506 Memo To: Danielle Devlin, Senior Planner From: Bazbara A. Cox, P.E., Assistant Director of Engineering - Development~~ Date: February 8, 2005 ~_U Re: Homestead at Coffman Park 04-0282 Response to Planning and Zoning Commission Concerns on Traffic The Homestead at Coffman Park project has had a multitude of combinations of land uses and site plans over the past several yeazs. The original rezoning, approved in 2000, changed the land use from offices and industrial to the current residential uses. This type of land use change typically yields a reduction in the site-generated traffic volumes, especially at the peak hours. Therefore, during the original rezoning, a detailed traffic study was not requested. The main issue at that time was the location of access points from the roadway network as the site has frontage on three public streets. After much discussion at both Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, the current access configuration was agreed upon. Based on the request of the Planning and Zoning Commission during their review of this project at the January 20, 2005 meeting, the Division of Engineering has had our transportation-planning consultant review the trip generation and the resulting impacts for the current proposal. Please find attached a memorandum from Doyle Clear with TransAssociates summazizing his review of this project. According to the worst-case scenario that Mr. Clear could develop for the trip generation, this project will not adversely impact the surrounding roadway network. The roadway system in the area has been constructed to accommodate the original land uses (office/industrial) on this property. Therefore, no off-site mitigation measures will be needed with this project. Regazding the internal circulation on this project, it is our understanding that the applicant has fully reviewed the appropriate codes, appropriately applied them in their site plan and has worked with the staff of Land Use and Long Range Planning and the Washington Township Fire Department for review of the layout. The Division of Engineering performs a cursory review on the internal vehicular layout of commerciaUmulti-family projects. A detailed review is performed on asingle-family subdivision project that consists of publicly dedicated streets. These streets not only provide access to the single-family homes, but also provide vehicular connectivity throughout the City and will be maintained by the City. The Homestead at Coffman Park site plan is more dependent on the required setbacks, parking spaces and fire access. We trust that this information is helpful and if there are any additional questions, we would be glad to provide a response. RECEIVED Cc: Paul A. Hammersmith, P.E., Director of Engineering/City Engineer FE~ ~ 9 Jean-Ellen Willis, P.E., Assistant Director of Engineering -Transportation 8 2 ~ ~ Kristin K. Yorko, P.E., Civil Engineer CITY OF DUV S aN Ben Hale, Jr., Smith and Hale P IAN N I N G D 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park _ ?'raps Associates MEMORANDUM TO: Barbara A. Cox - - City of Dublin Division of Engineering FROM: Doyle R. Clear, Jr. - Trans Associates Engineering Consultants, Inc. DATE: February 3, 2005 SUBJECT: Homestead at Coffman Park Traffic Engineering Issues cam. In response to your request, I have calculated the volume of traffic that could be a ' generated by the planned Homestead at Coffman Park development. I have also compared this trip generation level with the volume of traffic that we assigned in the ~ Coffman Park Expansion study project -which is the latest comprehensive traffic study m , of the roadway system serving the Homestead tract. The purpose of this memorandum is t to summarize this information. Proposed Development . ~ It is my understanding that the development plan for the subject project includes the following: _ • 66 single-family detached condominium units - • 3 live/work units It is understood that each of the 66 single-family detached units will contain between 2,000 and 2,200 square feet and have at least atwo-car garage. These condominium units are intended for "empty-nesters" or "move-down" buyers. Some may be the summer homes of residents. While the size of the homes is significant, the second and third bedrooms are likely to be used by visitors or for computer rooms, studios, etc. The lots of the development are small yielding small yards. As such, it is quite likely that the volume of traffic generated by this component will be less than that generated by the typical single-family home with children. It is further understood that the three live/work units are set up for apartments with some commercial/office space. For vehicle-trip generation purposes, there are two potential - _ _ development scenarios, as follows: • Maximum residential scenario - 0 6 apartments 0 3,768 square feet commercial/office space • Maximum commercial space scenario a 0 3 apartments = 0 6,246 square feet commercial/office space RECEIVED _ 04-0282 ® ~ ~ Homestead at _ Transportation Solutions for Today Coffman Park Offices in Pennsylvania ar Homestead at Coffman Park Traffic Engineering Issues February i, 2005 Page 2 of 10 The small-scale commerciaUoffice space is likely to be used by professionals dealing with insurance, tax consultation, architecture, art studios, etc. It is also possible that the space could be used as medicaVdental offices. Vehicle-Trip Generation Rates Given our understanding of the types of development being proposed, we referenced the Trip Generation manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers for typical trip generation factors. The average trip rate factors given for representative land-uses are provided in Table 1. Table i Vehicle-Tri Generation Factors TI'E Description Peak Trip Rate Enter/Exit Code Hour Distribution Enter Exit 210 Sin le-Famil Detached Housin AM 0.75/DU 25% 75% PM 1.O11DU 63°6 37% 220 A artment AM 0.51/DU 20% 80% PM 0.62/DU 65% 35% 230 Residential Condominium/Townhouse AM 0.44/DU 17% 83% PM 0.52/DU 67% 33% 715 Sin le-Tenant Office Buildin AM 1.80/1,000 sf 89% 11% PM 1.73/1,000 sf IS% 85% 720 Medical-Dental Office Buildin AM 2.48/1,000 sf 79% 21% . PM 3.7211,000 sf 27% 73% It should be noted that the TTE manual does not contain land-uses exactly as being proposed for the Homestead project. The single-family trip rate (associated with TI'E Coded 210) really applies to residential units in a standard residential sub-division of single-family homes. The trip rates given for residential condominium (TI'E Code 230) really relate to residential units that are attached to at least one other similar unit. In other words, the manual does not have a category for "single-family detached condominium" - or a category that includes "single-family empty-nester" housing. Likewise, the manual does not have a category for "live/work units". Vehicle-Trip Generation The volume of traffic likely to be generated by the planned development was calculated based on the trip rates given in Table 1. A couple of different scenarios were investigated to gain estimates of the potential maximum traffic volumes generated by the site during 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Homestead at Coffman Park Traffic Engineering Issues February 1, 2005 Page 3 of 10 the traditional AM and PM commuter peak hours. These calculations are provided in the following tables. Table 2 Traffic Volumes Generated b Sin a-Famil Co nent TTE Description AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Code Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total 210 Sin a-Famil (66 DUs) 12 38 50 42 25 67 230 Condominium (66 DUs) 5 24 29 23 11 34 Average of 210 &230 9 31 40 32 18 50 (Since there isn't a trip rate that exactly corresponds with the proposed land-use, the average of the two rates defined above may present a more realistic estimation of traffic generated by this component.) Table 3 Traffic Volumes Generated by Live/Work Units Scenario A: 6 A artments and 3,768 sf Office S ace TTE Description AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Code Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total 220 A artments (6 DUs) 1 2 3 3 1 4 If 715 General Office (3,768 sfj 6 1 7 1 6 7 If 720 Medical Office (3,768 sf) 7 2 9 4 10 14 Maximum for Scenario A 8 4 12 7 11 18 Table 4 Traffic Volumes Generated by Live/Work Units Scenario B: 3 A artments and 6,246 sf Office S ace 1TE Description AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Code Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total 220 A artments (3 DUs) 0 2 2 2 0 2 ff 715 General Office {6,246 sf J 8 3 11 2 9 11 ff 720 Medical Office (6,246 sf) 12 3 i5 6 17 23 Maximum for Scenario B 12 5 17 8 17 25 Table 5 Potential Maximum Vehicle-Tri Generation b Homestead Develo went Description AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Sin le-Famil (66 DUs) 9 31 40 32 18 50 Live/Work Units (Scenario B) 12 5 17 8 17 25 Totals 21 36 57 40 35 75 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Homestead at Coffinan Park Traffic Engineering Issues February 1, 2005 Page 4 of 10 In other words, the planned Homestead at Coffman Park development could generate 57 vehicle-trips during the AM peak hour and 75 vehicle-trips during the PM peak hour. These values are based on the following assumptions and factors: • The single-family detached housing will generate traffic at levels about half- way between those associated with a standard single-family home and those associated with a residential condominium/townhouse. • The three live/work units have the maximum office%ommercial space permitted (6,246 sf) -yielding three dwelling units. • The 6,246 sf of office%ommercial space is used for medicaUdental offices. • The three live/work residential units are apartments. Relationship to Prior Studies Development on the subject site was considered in prior studies -both in the Community Plan and in the more recent traffic study associated with the Coffman Park Expansion project. In 1997 when travel demand modeling was performed as bases for the creation of the Dublin Thoroughfare Plan, future land-uses were estimated for year 2020 and full build-out of the area bound by Avery Road, US 33/SR 161, I-270, and Post Road. In 2002, the land-use packages were re-defined based upon more detailed information regarding actual development patterns, land-use types, and densities. Thus, the projections of future conditions became more accurate and reliable. With a significant shift of retail space to auto retail and with significant reductions in office and industrial space, the volume of traffic entering and exiting the immediate study area will be much less than calculated in the Thoroughfare Plan studies. The revised land-uses and densities were used as bases for the Coffman Park Expansion study. In the Coffman Park Expansion study, the subject site was assumed to contain 72 condominium dwelling units (as permitted under current zoning). In that study, the volume of traffic likely to be generated by the subject site was calculated based on condominium trip rates. In other words, the study considered the site to generate about 35 vehicle-trips during the AM peak hour and about 40 vehicle-trips during the PM peak hour. (These values are less than the values presented in Table 5 -about 20 fewer trips during the AM peak hour and about 35 fewer trips during the PM peak hour.} While the prior study utilized smaller traffic volumes generated by the subject site, the site generated traffic is a very small component of the trips generated within the study area. The Coffman Park Expansion study considered build-out of the Perimeter Drive area by year 2020. The study area zone bound by Wilcox Road, US 33/SR 161, I-270, and Post Road was assumed to contain the following land-uses: • Residential Condominiums (72 DUs) -the subject site • Justice Center {45,000 sf) • City Hall (80,000 sf) 04-0282 Homestead at Coffrnan Park Homestead at Coffman Park Traffic Engineering Lssues February 1, 2005 Page 5 of 10 • Office {951,880 sfl • Day Care Center {7,000 sf) • Auto Retail {71,000 sf) • Industrial {402,610 sf) • Hotel (100 rooms) These developments would generate about 2,365 vehicle-trips during the AM peak hour {with 1,975 entering and 390 exiting) -and about 2,375 vehicle-trips during the PM peak hour (with 505 entering and 1,870 exiting). As can be seen, the volume of traffic generated by the subject site would compose two to three percent of the total volumes generated by the designated sub-area. In the Coffiman Pazk Expansion study, future traffic volumes were derived for key intersections within the Post Road/Perimeter Drive study area. These traff c volumes were based on full development of the study area and it was assumed that this "build-out" would be reached by year 2020. The resultant 2020 traffic volumes at the study intersections nearest the subject site aze shown in Figures 1 and 2. (It should be noted that the study area roadway system includes the bending of Post Road into Commerce Parkway as defined in the preferred Coffman Park Expansion plan.) A recommended roadway improvement plan was defined for the azea roadway system based on these traffic volumes. Impacts of Site Generated Traffic Volumes As stated previously, the subject development could generate as much as 57 vehicle-trips during the AM peak hour and 75 vehicle-trips during the PM peak hour. Figures 3 and 4 show the assignment of these traffic volumes to the local area roadway system. A comparison of these volumes with respect to those shown in Figures 1 and 2 illustrates the relative minor impacts that site generated traffic will have on the azea roadway system. Summary Development on the subject site was considered in prior studies -both in the Community Plan and in the more recent traffic study associated with the Coffman Park Expansion project. In the Coffman Park Expansion study, the subject site was assumed to contain 72 condominium dwelling units (as permitted under current zoning). The planned Homestead ai Coffman Park development could generate 57 vehicle-trips during the AM peak hour and 75 vehicle-trips during the PM peak hour_ These values are based on the following assumptions and factors: 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park TARAF~~ 70 r 3s ~ 145 ~ cenoer ~0-+ ° ~ SITE wnu. sr~ET W N ~a 0 O U x-125 L ov o ~ 435 ~ rn °co 555 J j L ~ 15 PFR~~~ ~ ~ L i- 25 t r ~ J -I t r 750 N o ~n 430 v7 rn ~ 180 ~ ~ ~pY vErfrufzE owvE US 33J SR 161 PRO,~CT f10. DuBUDO W00e CTi-ans ~ f ~ HOMESTEAD AT COFFMAN PARK H Associates Transport ion sohfions for Today and Tomorrow iris: PROJECTED 2020 TRAFFIC VOLUMES oa ~ c~.rra~, aRc +~i(~~ ass-r.~o ~ ' AM PEAK HOUR ~KT~- 04-0282 Homestead at TARAHRLORiVE 225 i-- 70 posT aa~ Reaeaeon 170 Cenoar 40~ ° ° SITE wnu sTREET 0 ,u w o 5 N rn N ` 515 0 ~ 205 ~ ~ 475 ~~L X20 J~Li-5 65-~ qtr ,5~~fr 565-- 2U ~ 5 N N ~,etlP~ VQ v VENTURE DRNE ~~rQT US 33/ SR 161 a~crNO. oueuoo.o~aae CTrans ~ 2 HOMESTEAD AT COFFMAN PARK N Associates Transpor[ffilon sohAions for Today and Torrarrow PROJECTED 2020 TRAFFIC VOLUMES oe. sT carna~,~ a~ ~i(~J ~ra~o ` ~ fQS PM PEAK HOUR ~a ~KT~ 04-0282 Homestead at r. _ CL__ n.._i. TARAfi0.3.0~ H i- 2 Posy Bono cen6er 4~ r SITE wnus~ W W 3 Q O d U 5 2 ~ _ s~ -Itr -~~tr 2- ~ ~ 2N PY 17% oQ~ ~ US 33/ SR 161 LEGEND Xi6 DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION PPoO,~Ci N0. OUBLgo~o1008 FIGINiE CTi~ans ~ P 3 HOMESTEAD AT COFFMAN PARK N Associates _ Transp«tation Sdudons for Taday and Torrbn~ow SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES oa~'r _ ' AM PEAK HOUR ~ ° ~ ~ 04028Z Homestead at (~'nffman Parlr TARAF~1-[IRNE 98% H 4 POST Roan Reaeaoion ~ r SITE wAUST~ x 0 w 3 o U ao 5 4 9U -Ifr-~~tr 5~ 10~ -i 2; PY 17% ~ae~ vErrtv~ oFVVE US 33/ SR 961 tF X% f-? niREC7tor~ai oiS-rRleuTtoN ~aoictrNO. o~suooaooe CTrans ~ 4 HOM~STEAO AT COFFMAN PARK t~1 Associaites _ Trar~portadon soaxions t« roday end T«?~orrow TmE: SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES oB.~ ~ oM.srt?i~su~,s~~sria cB. ~ a PM PEAK HOUR SCALE: N.T.S. 04-0282 Homestead at r_rr____-- n- Homestead at Coffman Park Traffic Engineering Issues February 1, 2005 Page 10 of 10 • The single-family detached housing will generate traffic at levels about half way between those associated with a standard single-family home and those associated with a residential condominium/townhouse. • The three live/work units have the maximum officelcommercial space permitted (6,246 sf) -yielding three dwelling units. • The 6,246 sf of office%ommercial space is used for medicaUdental offices. • The three livelwork residential units are apartments. When the site generated traffic volumes are assigned to the area roadway system, the resultant volumes will have relatively insignificant impacts on overall traffic operations. As such, it will not be necessary to make any improvementslmodifications at any of the public road intersections to properly accommodate traffic generated by this proposed development. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park EXISTING PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN c~SE oQ-z A!'~~'ROVED 9/5f~ -i - j " - _ _ t ~ - e ~ s ° 1-1----------- - • F® H t ~ • • s • ARF~ Q-2 t ~ ~ b ' • • ® F • C ' , ' _ Cs ~ Y- 6 ~ 6 ~ • • 8 • ® 8 • 8 9 9 6 9 C7 ~ ~ • Y D ~ • - ` i ,i 1__ ,ate ~ e • ~ _ , . .1 _ N . 1• 6 _ 1 ~ l\ : ~ ~ 1 ' 'Sae 1hh= ~ ~ ~ f raal Sie ~ .'t22_!6 x. w. Maa P~ojti: ~ J j. ' ~ raal~•fRaidcerial Uwhs 70 e. w,lcrfd~c - - _ < , rw u:w a O. l.i~r/Wak~?aiu p'~Y) _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Gross OaKim 13.12 du/K - f- P"°'k ~O~ ~ q ap4s~w,y. :l.w,~ G- P^~~ ~ s s; a~.ne: m-:n 1. SWrc w,r C'6' awvage t~gt-) ~ ~ , <1pdSPaorPmr. ~.i3R=3.lI 1. Eanuii ~ . .a.a......~....<..w.Yr•+••~ar....aQ+o+or n F~ Cown.mitr Rernrat:m Cass ~ a ' l.- Sidera6: ~ ~ - •.t:imc.::.v.RV:. M. Deck O.odonl: _ _ _ ;--Y - - .a:sa.~e...:..~.4..:..r:.r.as~.v:i.r - _ - _ _ - *_wcrwaa•u~.a:q~. ~ N_ Pavillion O•ulool ~ - _ a.+sw.x.re-. O. Pad farar~ 1 P- Pail ~ = - - - Q- fcaoe ~ "'~`~w~- - ~xuf~r ~l~ P~~ 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park EXl STI N G TEXT March 31,2040 ~-Q.~Q~ Revised May 20, 24.04 - - Rewisod June 20,20t1~ ~~~~Q~E~ . Homestead At Perimeter Center (Soh-area B-2 & B-3) Background information; The development being proposed for this area is a mixed-use community_ Homestead at Perimeter Goiter wit! be a condominium with a small amount of commercial space integrated into a residential community. Within a condominium form of o4vnership all streets ate private; and services such as leash picl: up, snow removal, exterior building maintenance, wind lawn care are provided by the condominium association This translates into Less demand on public services_ Within a condominium the buyers wilt be purchasing individual dwelling and/or working units_ individual lots, as in a traditional single-family subdivision, do not exist After a unit has been purchased the condominium residents association must approve any changes to the exterior of that unit, including additions or alterations to any buildings and any significant changes to the common areas_ Development Standards Sub-areas B-2 & B ~ shall be a Planned Unit Development_ The sub-areas shat! comply with the general sub-area development standards as contained in the original Perimeter Center zoning (general, signage and graphics, lighting and Perimeter Center primary identification signage design criteria) unless otherwise indica-led in this text or by the approved preliminary development plan- Pcrmitted Uscs: Sub-Area B-2; Within sub-area B-2 only residential and accessory uses are permitted. Residences are detached except for four locations shown on the preliminary development site plan, where two units share a garage wall_ ' Sub Area B-3: _ Permitted uses within sub-area B-3 shat! include; - Resiclentiul Uses: These shall include single and multiple d«cllinL units, with a maximum number of G dwelling units per building_ Sorne, or all, of the dwelling units may be configured in L,ive/Work Buildings- Conrrrrercial Uses= These shall be limited toe A_ Homestead community facilities including communih~ lounge, community - living room, community kitchen facilities, community sales offices communit fitness facilities, community maintenance office and facilities, a vlh~ u~s covered by the condominium association fees- ~ ~ Ii_ Small-scale general and professional o[Tices_ 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park EXISTING TEXT C_ Small scale studios for art, crafts, antigucs, and photography where the sale as well as display of products is permitted. D. Small-scale real estate, insurance, and iavestmentlfinattcial advisocs_ E. A wallop, building mounted ATM machine is permitted_ F No "drive-thru" facilities shall be peztnitted_ Llirutalions on single letianl size: No single commercial tenant, other than The Homestead Community Facilities, shall exceed 1200 net usable square feet_ ~arita!ro~u on arnourr[ of commer«al space: The maximum number of parking spaces available for commercial use is S7. Of these spaces 6 are designated for the Homestead Community Eacilities_ The remaining S l spaces will facilitate a maximum of 7,650 net square feet of commercially lease able Defuutions: LivdWock liuildiag shall consist of a building with residential or commercial uses on the street level and residential or commercial uses on .the upper level(s). Small scale shall mean no greater than 1200 square feet of net tease able space_ Coaditiona( Uscs: Conditional uses shall not be permitted in sub-area B-2_ Conditiona! uses are required in sub-area B-3 for alt uses not expressly designated in the. preliminary development plan Uses which are not included in the initial condominium development statement must also be approved by the condominium association Any consideration for conditional use must consider that the proposed location and use will not adversely affect adjacent properly and/or public health, safety, and general wetfare_ Lot Covera~c: Percentage of lot coverage for the combined sub-areas B-2 & B-3 shall not exceed 7S percent. Yards and Setbacks and Buildin Scparations- See Table 1 for building and pavement setbacl: requirements_ Tablc 1 i3uildina Setback Pa~~cmcnt Post Road 100'-0" l00'-0" Wall Street 40'-0" I S'-0" Mctatcc lioulcvard SO'-0" 25'-0" The minimum perimeter building setback shat! be 10'-0"_ The minimum building separation shall be G-0"_ 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park EXISTING TEXT Height Requirements Sub-Area B Z; Buildings in sub aces B-2 shaQ be limited to two stories and 24' in height, as measured to the average height of the highest pitched roof from finished floor. Sub-area B-3; Buildiags in sub-area B 2 shall be limited to t~vo stories and 30' in height, as measured to the average height of the highest pitched roof from finished floor. Accessory Structures; Accessory uses and structures will be permitted in both sub-area B 2 & sub area B provided that they meet the following criteria; 1. The structure must be for use by. all residents of the condominium association. 2_ The area-shall not exceed 400 square feet. 3. The architectural style and character must be consistent with the residential dwellings. Similar scale, similar materials and similar colors. 4_ The height shalt not exceed t S'_ 5. Permitted accessory structures shall be; A. Greenhouse 8_ Garden tool shed C_ Gazebo D. Tretlislarbor E_ Swimming Pooi (Condominium association use only). . Parking and Loading: i_ The Dublin Zoning Code shall regulate all parking requirements. 2_ Limited on street guest parking will be pennitted_ Circulation: t. Ati public roads on the perimeter of these sub-areas are completed. Improvements are limited to curb cuts, aprons, utility connections, and landscape improvements or replacement 2. Although project streets are private, they will meet requirements of fire and police departments to assure access for emergency vehicles. 3_ Project streets shall be a minimum of 24' in width (as measured from back of curb to back of curb) . Alleyways shat( be a minimum of 12' in width. This allows for very limited traffic and no parking in the alleyway- 4_ Driveways shall be a minimum of 9' in width. S_ Opposing curb cuts on Wall Street shall be offset no less than 100' (as measured from the driveway's centerline) or directl}~ aligned whenever possible. Waste and Rcfusc: 1 _ Ail waste and refuse shall be containerized and Cully screened from view by a fence or solid wall. The design shall be compatible with the adjacent buildinus in 040282 materials and color. Homestead at Coffman Park EXISTING TEXT 2_ Commercial tenant waste and refuse will be containeciz~ed and placed within a screened area enclosed on three sides by a wall or fence that extends 1' -0"above the highest point of the container, and with an opaque gate on the fourth side. The design shall be compatible with the adjacent buildings in materials anti color Storage and Equipment: - 1. Materials, and equipment necessary for the functioning of buildings, such as condensing units, utility pedestals, etc_, are permitted 2_ Materials, supplies, equipment or products not permanently installed shall not be stored or permitted to remain on any portion of a parcel or outside a permitted structure for more than t2 hours_ 3. Except as provided for in "Accessory Structures", no materials, supplies, equipment or products may be permitted to remain onany-portion of a parcel or outside a permitted structure_ This shall mean that swing sets, individuai above ground pools, flagpoles, satellite dishes, radio antennae, andloc television antennae are not permitted_ 4_ Additional restrictions wilt be set out in the condominium development statement Landscaping: All landscaping shalt conform to al! Code requirements regarding landscaping- Description of Site and Landscape Amenities: Homestead at Perimeter Center will. provide amenities to various groups of users_ These groups can be identified as; Any resident of Dublin, any resident of the Homestead at Perimeter Center (common areas within the condominium), and for each resident (limited common areas for each building)_ I.Aneereities jor Dubti~e aced its residents; A. Unprovements to existing 3.8-acre pond_ As shown on the "Preliminary development Plan -Preliminary Landscape Plan", a significant amount of new plant material is being added around the south and east sides of the pond_ Along the west side street trees are being added as well as reseeding for grass_ A pedestrian waltang path will be constructed along the south and east sides of the pond, with four benches located along the path. The northwest end of the pond, which fronts the LivelWork center of the project, has a deck/overtook as well as a Pavilion overlook at the ponds edge_ fl. Post Road Crontage; Along Post Road will be a series of welt -feed ponds connected by streams that reduce in elevation from the western pond to the eastern pond_ This step down in elevation wilt create small waterfalls that will be visible from Post Road_ The existing bike path ~vitt be reconfigured to compliment the ponds and allow users of the bike path to enjoy the waterfalls and ponds_ Along the small ponds will be two areas where stone steps tvitl come down to the waters edge from the Vittage Greens - within the community_ Ai the center of the projects' Post Road frontage thecc drill be a "tx~destrian [3ridge" over the sircams that 04-028Z Homestead at Coffman Park EXISTING TEXT conncxts the Homestead to the community bike path system and -Post Road. - 2. Amenities jor residenrts ojthe homestead Conndomucium. There are three major landscape and site amenities for the residents of Homestead at Perimeter Ccxiter, A_ [mprovement of the existing pond into a village center feature. As part of the village gathering space an emphasis on integrating the - pond into the community fife of Homestead at Perimeter Center is achieved by creating the Deck overlook, and the overlook pavilion as well as tocatirig the community swimming pool near the pond Community fitness facilities will be housed on the street level of the northern Live/Work building along with the community center, which includes a living room and kitchen for parties, and a small lounge%afe for small group meetings_ B. Three village greens within the residential sub-area. Village greens of different sizes and character are evenly dispersed along -the Post Road frontage. Dwelling units surround each Village Green Each wilt have a different character_ The eastern village . green is strictly pedestrian and has access the waterfalls and ponds by stone steps down to the waters edge. The center village green is more formal with a sculptur~il fountain at the south end of the green access to the pedestrian bridge across the waterfalls and ponds to Post Road_ The western green is planted more densely and has more homes facing the green. It also has stone steps down to the waters edge at northern end C. Streets create vistas; we have arranged the streets so. that views end in something special rather than going on forever_ Small offsets have been created in the street pattern to establish a backdrop of beautiful landscaping and architecture for views down each street_ While the offsets and greens may make the streets seem more . difficult to maneuver, they create a sense of place and scale that is intimate and controlled_ - D_ In the common areas along streets; as part of the condominium association there are "Common Areas" which will be under exclusive control of the condominium association_ These areas wilt be landscaped and maintained by the association. This creates consistency and quality of the materials. The association assuring the highest quality of appearance and materials will constantly maintain fences, gates, flowers, trees, shrubs and the exterior of all buildings. 3. "limited common areas"; alonb the sides and rear of each dwelling unit there wail be areas designated as "limited common areas"_ These are areas where residents can have their own landscaped areas, patios, or iawns_ Within these limited common areas the association will maintain the grass but the resident will care for any plant materials placed by the resident_ Gardens are encouraged_ A community greenhouse will promote early starts of flowers and other plants_ . A_ Stone fences, andlor wrought iron fences, will enclose limited common areas and define private spaces for individual dwelling units_ Wlule there are no "Lot Lines" within the condominium development, 040282 private areas will be def ned by using walls, fences, trellises, arbors, Homestead at and small accessory structuces_ Coffman Park S EXISTING TEXT B. Walls & f ences: Waits and fences will be permitted around dwelling units to create private spaces and to define some boundaries between public and private areas. Each dwelling unit will have some soot of wall and/or fence to define these private areas. The type of wall and/or fence will be selected from an approved palette of styles. Architecture- The design of the Homestead at Perimeter Center is intended to create a European village fee!. Stone, stucco, beaded siding, stone fences, wrought iron fences, village greens, fountains, steps to waterfalls and ponds, and "winding" streets are all components that will create a unique sense of place Sub-~rrea B 2; Residential At least four different house types will be offered for sale. They will include a single story ranch, a 1 story style and a two story style. Each style will have standard options such as screened porcthes, sunrooms, and three car garages. The houses will be oriented both parallel and perpendicular to the street, which would allow the same house to be built in close proximity but with a different orientation. Diversity and interest will be maintained by no allowing the same house in the same orientation to be built twice in a row. The developer will assign exterior colors to each home location to further assure diversity and compahbility_ Materials; _ Facades: Manufactured stone (Ohio Limestone "BufF')_ Stucco, (to be compatible with the stone) Cement Fiber Hardboard siding (Hardiplank) painted off-white, beige or grayy)_ Wood trim (plytrim) painted white. Windows, vinyl single and/or double hung. Roof: Asphalt shingles Roof slopes will be min 6/12 to maximum lO/i2_ Sub Area B-3: Liv~Yorlc The Live/Work area of the Homestead at Perimeter Center is intended to serve as a village center. The community facilities are located here and the small area of commercial activity is also here. The LiveJWork buildings are intended to provide an opportunity for a small business owner to own a shop space at street level and to live in a condominium above their shop. It may also provide a place for business to operate in a small neighborhood setting with the residents above being unrelated to the business activity. These buildings will have details and texture on all four sides of the buildings, creating four-sided architecture. 1V~ateriats; Facades: Manufactured stone {Ohio Limestone "Buf~")_ Brick (from the approved Perimeter Center Palette) Stucco (to be compatible with the stone) Cement Fiber Hardboard siding (Hardiplank) parted oft=white, beige or gray). Wood trim {plytrim) painted white. Windows, vinyl single hung on upper levels. Wood Store-front ai street lcvel (compatible with store -front at Perimeter Center Retail). Roof: Asphalt shingles Rear and Sides. Cement f ber hardboard siding with cultured stone 040282 - ~ - Homestead at Coffman Park EXISTING TEXT The storefront system will be designed in an historic style using windows with mullions and raised panel details. The roof slopes shalt be 6/i2, 8/12, 10/i2, or 1?Jl2 pitch depending on the pitch of the roof element The rear areas of the development shall be given appropriate treatment so as to present a pleasant aQpearance to surrounding buildings. Graphics- All signs shalt comply with the sign code unless varied by this text or accompanying drawings. A Main entry identification signs: There shaft be main identification signs for the project along Post Road, Wall Street, and Metatec Blvd_ i = A total of three main entry identif cation signs shall be permitted These shall meet the following criteria; A Height not to exceed 6' _ B. Width not to exceed 12'. C. Maximum area of SO square feet per sign face. D_ No more than two faces per location. E_ .Externally illuminated. F. Sign base materials to be the same as those on the structures with colors to match G_ Area of sign base is not to exceed the area of the sign face. The base shati not be included in the overall area permitted for the sign face. B. Street signs, and traffic regulation signs will meet the Dublin Code for dimensions and text styles. Colors shall be compatible with the structures. C_ RetaiVCommercial signage in Sub-area B-3. The LiveJWork Units signage shall comply with the following criteria; i _ All wall and projecting signage shall meet City sign code relative to permitted sign face area and wail signs shall not hang higher than 12' above finished floor. 2_ Each tenant storefront shalt be limited to one wall sign, one projecting sign, and one awning sign. Wall sign faces shall not exceed one square foot in area for each one lineal foot in store frontage, not io exceed IS square feet. 3_ Each tenant shall have one(() projecting sign of uniform design and size as illustrated by the accompanying drawing. The projecting sign faces shall not exceed three square feet in area on each face. Background color of projecting sign shall. match background color of that particular tenants wall sign. 4_ Awning signs shall be permitted per code for property addresses, names of occupants, and year business established. Atiming signs shall not testate product names, tag lines, pictures of products, hours of operation, 04-0282 Homestead at y Coffman Pazk EXI-STING TEXT telephone or fax numbers, internei addresses, oc hours of operalion_ The color shall be complimentary to the wall and projecting signs_ S_ Address plaques at residential entrances shall be wail mouated_ These may show property address and residents names_ D. Sub-area B 2. Maximum area for residential address and resident identification signs shall be 2 square feet_ 04-0282 _ Homestead at Cof~'man Park PLANNING AND ZONING CONIII~IISSION RECORD OF ACTION JANUARY 20, 2005 CITY OF D(lBLIN_ ~T W Us..d tl~,R~.D. ~~9 S fix-~"iaDs Rani D , Ohio ~3O1~1236 Mime: pN10aW9 fm~ X14410-47~T Mkb Silo ¦wrdahCa.ohas The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 2. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 04-0282 -Homestead at Coffman Park Location: 22.46 acres located at the southeast corner of Discovery Boulevard and Post Road Existing Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Perimeter Center plan). Request: Review and approval of a revised preliminary development plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.053. Proposed Use: Asingle-family condominium development of 63 detached residential units, 4 live-work units, a community building and 4.3 acres of open space. Applicant: Patrick Grabill, ContinentaVNRI Office Ventures Limited, 109 S. High Street, Dublin, Ohio 43017; represented by Ben W. Hale Jr., Smith & Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Suite 725, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Danielle M. Devlin, AICP, Senior Planner. Contact Information: Phone: (614) 410-4649/E-mail: ddevlin@dublin.oh.us. MOTION: To table this Preliminary Development Plan for the purpose of collecting additional information, and waive the Commission's 15-Day Rule for additional information. Ben W. Hale, Jr., representing the applicant, agreed to the tabling. VOTE: 3-2. RESULT: This Preliminary Development Plan was tabled after much discussion. Information addressing the following issues was requested by the Commission: 1) Traffic study analyzing internal and external traffic patterns. 2) Parking analysis for live/work units. 3) Chip and seal surface for walking path. 4) Decreased density. Page 1 of 2 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park AND ZONING COMIVIISSION PL,~~NNING RECORD OF ACTION T JANUARY 20, 2005 2. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 04-0282 -Homestead at Coffman Park {Continued) 5) Method to restrict non-owner occupancy. ~ Clarification of commercial floor area of live/work units in text. 7) Diversity matrix. The i 5-Day Rule will not be imposed. Provided the requested information is submitted by February 2, 2005, this case will be placed on the February 17, 2005, agenda. The Commission is to be updated by staff at the February 3, 2005 meeting as to the progress of this case. STAFF CERTIFICATION Daniel D. Bird, AICP Director of Land Use and Long Range Planning Page 2 of 2 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zone ;ommission Minutes -January 20, 2005 DRAFT Page 3 2. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 04-0282 -Homestead at Coffman Park Mr. Gerber said this case was tabled on April 1, 2004, at the request of the applicant. He said this is a request for review and approval of a Revised Preliminary Development Plan for asingle- family condominium development of 63 detached residential units, four live/work units, an 1,800 square foot community building, and 4.3 acres of open space. He said this rezoning application sets up specific standazds that will be binding. This meeting is a recommendation hearing. At a later date, City Council will schedule a public hearing, and a vote to approve or disapprove the proposal. Danielle Devlin presented this case. The site is located centrally within the City, south of Post Road, and east of Discovery Boulevazd. She showed on an aerial slide the 22.46 acre site, the office development to the south, the park, recreation center, the residential development to the north, and the stormwater retention pond on the site. The site is zoned residential, PUD, Planned Unit Development. Sites to the south and west aze zoned PCD, Planned Commercial District. The azea to the east is zoned LI, Limited Industrial District, and to the north is residential, and PUD, Planned Unit Development District. Ms. Devlin said the four live/work units aze located at the primary entrance at Discovery Boulevazd and Post Road. Sixty-three detached single-family units are to be accessed through the alleys into reaz load garages. The streets within the development are private. The 4.31 acre open space shown on the plan is in Area A, Area B, which continues along Post Road, and Area C, which circles the retention pond. The openspace required is 4.36 acres, but the developer has agreed to a fee in lieu of the dedication for the remaining .OS acres. Ms. Devlin showed slides of the landscape plan and the proposed amenity treatments. A gazebo will be nestled into a flowering cherry grove, and then will open up into a prairie azea and a lineaz pond feature. An existing bikepath will connect to a proposed gravel walkway that will continue along Area B and circle the retention pond. The clubhouse will overlook the retention pond. Slides of the elevations of the frontage amenities proposed showed the gazebo area, the cherry trees, the dry laid stone wall treatments, and the pond area. Slides of the elevations of the proposed community center and the live/work units proposed. Ms. Devlin said the lower floor of the live/work units can be either retail or office/commercial uses. She said the upper floor can be either two dwelling units or a dwelling unit and an office. Slides of the proposed single-family unit elevation and of an elevation at an existing development (Scioto Reserve) were shown. There aze two primary entrances to the development with one sign at each entrance. Ms. Devlin said staff is recommending approval of this Revised Preliminary Development Plan with the following 13 conditions: 1) That the proposed pavement setbacks specified in the text specifically match those shown on the plans; 2) That the design of all private drives, parking azeas, and drive approaches meet Engineering requirements for strength, durability and geometrics; 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zoni 'ommission D Minutes -January 20, 2005 Page 4 3) That no alterations for the proposed boazdwalk, community center and or walking path be made that reduces overall storage capacity of the pond, subject to staff approval; 4) That all utility connections meet or exceed Division of Engineering Standazds; 5) That internal signage specifying azeas of one-way travel and prohibited and allowable pazking azeas be installed subject to staff approval; 6) That the applicant provide street names, subject to staff approval, and a digital site plan for addressing purposes prior to submittal of a final development plan; 7) That any additional future home models for use within the development be submitted, subject to staff approval; 8) That all required parkland dedication fees and general warranty deeds be submitted to the City of Dublin prior to recording of the final plat; 9) That the construction of all amenities planned for the reserve Area B and C aze completed prior to the initiation of Phase II and those planned for Area A are completed prior to the initiation of Phase III; 10) That complete and revised civil engineering drawings and tree replacement and relocation plans drawn at an appropriate scale, subject to staff approval, be submitted as part of the final development plan; 11)That the applicants consult with the City Forester prior to the final development plan to verify that Ash trees remain the preferred species of street tree along Wall Street; 12) That the walkway leading to the pond be extended to connect to the existing bike path in the northeastern azea of the site; and 13) That the applicants revise the 87 parking spaces referenced in the text to reflect the 86 spaces shown on the plans. Ben W. Hale, Jr., representing the applicant, Homestead Communities said Pat Grabill, a Dublin resident had become an investor in this development. He said that Nationwide actually owned this site. He said Mr. Grabill had made some significant, but important changes to the original approved site plan. Mr. Hale said the azchitecture of the units had been upgraded and the location of the live/work units had been also been changed. Mr. Hale said they had met with their neighbors who he thought would speak favorably about this development. Mr. Hale said the live/work units were relocated onto Discovery Boulevazd and had slightly more square footage (7,500 versus 10,000 squaze feet). He said the previous fire accessibility and garage access issues have been addressed with this site plan. Jim Burkhart, James Burkhart and Associates, Inc., said they were initially concerned with the Post Road area. He said a previous landscape design showed what he thought were insignificant, small ponds. Mr. Burkhart said Dublin stone walls have been added at the entranceway and aesthetically between the housing units for screening of any vehicular use areas, i.e. the alleyways. He said a public shelter or gazebo would be added which would be related to the bikepath. Mr. Burkhart said they might add white columns, instead of the typical cedaz square to the shelter. He said the rafters might be white and it might have a shake roof. He said where the original mounding was located, they propose a mass of cherry trees at the intersection. He said semi-circulaz walls would visually connect the homes and provide visual screening of the 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zonv "'ommission ~ ~A Minutes January 20, 200 Page 5 vehicles. He said gates would provide character to the stone walls. Mr. Burkhart said his new landscape plan was simple, but elegant, and he had made it "Dublin." He thought this would be an asset to the community. Pat Grabill, Homestead Communities, LLC., said he had been contacted by many people who wanted to be on a waiting list for these units. He said this represents the diversity of housing that current Dublin residents aze looking for -something close, in a condominium format, but detached. It is close to the recreation center and close to shopping. Mr. Grabill said they had followed through with previous comments made to have the majority of the street facing facades to have Dublin-type stone veneer. He said a benefit of this community to him was that it was the fourth generation of the communities they had done, so they were able to refine the floor plans and a community center for gatherings, etc. in the bazn- iike building. Ms. Devlin said two letters from interested parties were provided on the dais to the Commissioners tonight. Chris Cline, 6060 Post Road, said since 1980, they had been interested in the development of this property across from their home. He reiterated the two issues he had stated in his E-mail distributed to the Commission. He said it was very important that this was a compatible land use, not just in the case of being a transition between residential and commercial, but also visibly compatible with both the residential feel and the pazk nature of Post Road. Speaking as a member of the Coffinan Pazk Taskforce, they were very interested in a similaz concept which was a pazk-like feel for all of Post Road. They wanted private residential and public areas that would begin the feeling of entering into the Coffman Park azea to the east. Mr. Cline said he felt this concept did that. He said they supported this development and warranted the Commission's approval. Mr. Cline said they have always wanted to preserve Dublin's rural heritage and do rural feeling things in Dublin. He said this project has a rural feel. He said tying this project with the white Orr barn, the Kinman's resident, and possibly the old Coffinan Fazmhouse, would provide a theme on Post Road. Gary Kinman, 6080 Post Road, said they supported this development. He said they had 600 feet of contiguous property. He felt this would be an excellent buffer between his residence and the lazge buildings across the street. He said he thought the landscape design was good. Mr. Kinman said they supported this project 1,000 percent. Michael Spitale, 6313 Post Road, president of the Post Road Neighborhood Association, stated that he felt the entire street fully supported. He said Mr. Grabill and Mr. Thomas both had discussed this project with them and asked him to visit their Home Road project. Mr. Gerber was not sure he agreed with the staff report that Conservation Design could not be done on this site, and it was an issue for discussion. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zoni• Commission ~ Minutes -January 20, 200 Page 6 Mr. Gerber said this case was tabled April 1, 2004. The Conservation Design resolution was passed in June 2004. He asked given that timing sequence, does the resolution apply to this application. Jennifer Readier, said the Law Director's office had reviewed the issue, and determined that given the time the application was filed, and the passage of the Conservation Design resolution, that the applicant was vested under the standards that apply at the time of the filing. Therefore, the Conservation Design resolution would not apply to this specific application. She provided the Commissioners a memo outlining the reasons why they came to that conclusion. Mr. Gerber requested and Ms. Readier agreed that the memo, dated January 19, 2005, would become part of tonight's record. The Commissioners had no questions or comments about the memo. Mr. Saneholtz asked about the proximity of the homes on the north side of Post Road. Ms. Devlin indicated that the closest home, near Open space B appeared to be approximately 100 feet. One is set back approximately 300-400 feet. Anne Wanner reported that all the homes on the north side of Post Road to the east had been acquired by the City. Ms. Devlin, looking at the drawing, estimated that the closest residence to Post Road on the north side was 250 feet. Mr. Saneholtz asked how close was the two-story building on Achill Court and Schoolcraft Drive to the corner of Sells Mill and Muirfield Drive. Ms. Devlin did not have that information, but per Mr. Saneholtz's request, agreed to provide it later. Mr. Saneholtz was not in agreement that this property is transitional. He said this was commercial property, while he realized it is not currently zoned Commercial, there are other commercial developments much closer to residential properties than this proposal. Mr. Saneholtz said he was having a hard time using that as justification for this residential development on the south side of Post Road. He said there were many other neighborhoods near commercial property. Mr. Saneholtz asked if there was sufficient parking for the work/live units. Ms. Devlin said staff believed there was sufficient parking for the work/live units. She said there were 32 spaces within 300 feet of the live/work units, as well as the garages for the residents of those units. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonir 'ommission ~ RAFT Minutes -January 20, 2005 Page 7 Mr. Saneholtz understood from the staff report that gazages were included as commercial pazking spaces. Ms. Devlin said the gazages were not counted as commercial parking spaces. Mr. Gerber referred to the text, Section 2, Paragraph 2, C, items I forward, and asked what type of retail was being considered. He said the uses looked proper on the face, but he wanted to make sure that a dry cleaners or something more consumer-oriented that would increase traffic flow would not be permitted. He said the text might need to be revised to effectuate that. Mr. Messineo envisioned an azchitect or law office, or some sort of professional office. Mr. Gerber asked if the owner of the building will also be residing in the same building, or would an unrelated person run the business. Mr. Hale did not believe there were any restrictions, however he thought some people would do that. Mr. Grabill said under the traditional live/work concepts in an urban environment, theoretically, there could be an azt studio downstairs, and the artist would live upstairs. He said that is not what this is going to be. He said it is going to be an insurance agency downstairs and perhaps a college-aged son upstairs, or it might be used as a rental investment. Mr. Grabill believed it was for a retail use such as an azchitect, engineer, insurance agent, or interior designer, not a pizza shop or dry cleaners. He said it would be single ownership. Mr. Grabill said as designed, the front unit could either be offices that could be incorporated with the downstairs, if needed, or as a second residential unit. Mr. Saneholtz understood there could be three unrelated occupants in the unit. He read from the proposed text under Section 1 B-Existing and Proposed Land Uses: The existing site is undeveloped land zoned as PUD, Planned Unit Development. The applicant proposes to construct 63 single family detached homes and four live/work units to be maintained in perpetuity in a condominium association with private street system. Each unit will have a two car garage and shall have a minimum living area of 2,000 square feet. He asked if the commercial space was living azea. Ms. Devlin said the commercial space is restricted to 1,800 square feet and was not living azea. Mr. Saneholtz noted that the units were proposed at 3,400 square feet. Ms. Devlin said the residential units will have a living area of 2,000 squaze feet. Mr. Saneholtz referred to the live/work units, and asked if the first level was rented, could the upstairs be 2,000 square feet of living space in a 4,000 squaze foot building. Ms. Devlin said the proposal is for the upper level to be either an office and a dwelling unit, or two dwelling units. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zone ',ommission Minutes -January 20, 2005 Page 8 ~qFT Mr. Saneholtz asked if they would meet the 2,000 squaze foot living space requirement. Mr. Hale said it was an inconsistency in the text. He said the 2,000 squaze foot applied to the detached single-family units. He said the live/work units aze not 2,000 square feet apiece. He suggested that the text needed to be clarified. Mr. Gerber interpreted that Section 2, A2 discussed limitations on single-tenant size, with some exceptions. Mr. Saneholtz questioned the limitation on the net leaseable space on the live/work units at 1,800 squaze feet. He guessed from the footprint sketch that the first level is 1,700 square feet. Ms. Devlin had scaled them out to be about 1,800 squaze feet. Mr. Saneholtz asked if even the limitation on the net leasable space on the live/work units was at 1,800 squaze feet, was not the full level 1,700 squaze feet. Mr. Hale said they would have their architect make sure the text is internally consistent. He said it could be made a condition of approval, if desired. Mr. Saneholtz noted that 32 pazking spaces were proposed within 300 feet. He asked if 300 feet was the general standard. Ms. Devlin said 300 feet was derived from the rule from churches, where as long as all the parking is within 300 feet, it does not necessarily have to be on the same pazcel. Mr. Hale said they had 85 non-garage spaces that could be used throughout the area. Mr. Saneholtz was concerned that the pazking for the live/work units would be disruptive to the residents. Mr. Gerber asked if the traffic flow had been studied. Ms. Devlin said there had been no indication of traffic flow issues. She said on-street pazking, other than the parallel spaces indicated, will not be allowed because there is not sufficient width. She said the spaces in the vicinity of the live/work units have been concentrated for the purpose of confining the parking to that area, and not dispersing live/work pazking into the residential azeas towards the rear. Ms. Devlin said there were 16 in front of the live/work units, 6 across the street, and four east of the units along the main roadway. Mr. Saneholtz noted that in the immediate proximity of the live/work units there were 22 pazking spaces, and 34 spaces were required. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zoni; :ommission D ~A FT Minutes -January 20, 2005 ' Page 9 Mr. Hale said most residents would be working while the businesses aze open, so there should be plenty of pazking. Mr. Saneholtz said he thought who got the garage and front parking spaces should be addressed. Mr. Gerber wanted to make sure the pazking capacity could handle retail uses. Mr. Zimmerman said the spaces in the area aze also available to other tenants and homeowners. If the garage space is filled, the street must be used to pazk. This is not a typical commercial site. He said the closest units to the east were walk units, and to gain access you must go a couple of hundred feet to the end and park at the street. He asked the applicant if he was steadfast with putting alive/work unit scenario in this development. Mr. Hale said if the Commission wanted residential and not live/work units, they would do that. Mr. Gerber said the live/work unit concept made sense since many residents worked at home. Mr. Saneholtz felt the commerciaUretail aspect of this was an attempt to make this transitional, not just a condominium complex. Mr. Gerber wanted to see information on traffic flow and parking issues from staff. Ms. Reiss said signage for the live/work units was not well addressed in the text. Mr. Hale said the sign shown on their drawing was similaz to those at Perimeter Center. Ms. Devlin said the signage is referenced in the text, and it will be further addressed at the time of the Final Development Plan. Mr. Gerber said the Commission's first mission on a Preliminary Development Plan was to set boundaries, ensure traffic flow, general concepts as it relates to landscaping, azchitecture and building materials, and text. He said the signs and colors will be tweaked at the time of the final development plan review. Mr. Gerber asked if investors could buy two or three units at a time. Mr. Hale said these units were too expensive to buy as an investment to rent. Mr. Gerber wanted to limit the ownership as had previously been done with condominiums. Mr. Hale agreed. Ms. Reiss wanted to make sure the Commission would have the ability to modify or review the items promised in the text at the final development plan stage, such as the signage on the live/work unit. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and ZoniLa .:ommission ~ ~A ~T - Minutes -January 20, 2005 Page 10 Mr. Hale read Page 10, paragraph G of the proposed text, and Mr. Gerber said the language of the proposed text assures that the Commission will have that review. Mr. Hale said they would reference in the text the signs Mr. Grabill used in Old Dublin because that is what he intends to do on this project. Mr. Gerber said the Community Plan indicated that Post Road was a rural road and it was the aim of the City/Community Plan to keep that character. He said pazt of the rural character was the gateway feature (stone). He asked that how the materials and designs of the structures comport with the rural character. Mr. Burkhart said the connection between the buildings with the semicircular walls and the old- type gates were very rural. Architecturally, he thought the buildings had a lot of rural character. Mr. Saneholtz noted that there was an existing commercial contemporary looking building on the south side of Wall Street. He said that the neazby daycare building did not look rural. He said only the north side of the street looked rural. Ms. Reiss noted that a few of the residential units had gazages facing Post Road. She said the Commission was trying to avoid that, especially facing a main street. Mr. Saneholtz asked which phase the live/work units would be built. Ms. Devlin said the live/work units would be built in Phase 3. Mr. Grabill said the drawing of the four live/work units elevations showed them all in one line, not how they would sit on the street. Mr. Burkhart said the park area and mounding will screen the garages facing Post Road. Ms. Devlin said the mounding was approximately three feet high. Mr. Zimmerman said he had visited the development at Scioto Reserve. He asked for a comparison of the width between those units and these. Mr. Hale said it was about the same -12 to 14 feet between the units. Mr. Zimmerman said he liked Scioto Reserve - it was different. He asked if the public would have total access around the lake. Ms. Devlin said there would be a public walking path azound the entire lake. Mr. Gerber asked if there would be a sign saying it was public. Ms. Devlin said there could be a sign. 040282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zonu~a commission D Minutes -January 20, 2005 Page 11 Ms. Reiss returned to the garage issue. She said because there were alleys in this neighborhood, she wondered if those units facing Post Road could be flipped since the alley was their only access. Ms. Devlin said some of the units front onto a pedestrian courtyazd azea, but they aze all accessed by alleys, through the garage. Mr. Saneholtz suggested the garages on the eight similar units fronting onto Wall Street could be reoriented to make the garages internal instead of external. Ms. Devlin said it was felt by staff that the proposed orientation creates a neo-traditional type of streetscape or a main street. She said when the auto orientation is to the rear and away from the main street, it creates more of a pedestrian orientation. Ms. Devlin said staff believes that with the landscape plan, there will be adequate screening. Ms. Devlin said the existing bikepath is along Post Road and will remain. She said the applicant is proposing to add a gravel walkway to connect to the existing bikepath and to the courtyards. The gravel walking path will circle the pond and provide another connection to the bikepath at the eastern boundary of the property. Mr. Gerber asked about the purpose of the gravel paths. Mr. Hale said they also could do blacktop and tar and chip the path so it would look like gravel. He said the idea was to have an informal walking path which would be aesthetic. Mr. Gerber asked if there was another material that could be used. Mr. Burkhazt suggested shoot and chip (asphalt and stone). Mr. Grabill said the paths would be maintained by the homeowners, and did not expect maintenance would be an issue. Mr. Zimmerman said there needed to be a distinction between the public and private paths. Ms. Reiss asked where would the trash be picked up. Mr. Grabill said trash will be collected in the alley of each unit or at the end of the street. Mr. Saneholtz referred to the correspondence received from Nationwide and asked what was their interest in this project. Mr. Hale said they owned almost all the property nearby and this parcel. Ms. Reiss asked if the Fire Department had reviewed the alley for emergency vehicle access. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonu_~, .;ommission ~ Minutes -January 20, 2005 Page 12 Ms. Devlin said both the Engineering and Fire Departments had commented on this plan. Revisions were made accordingly. Bazb Cox said she needed to check her 1999 report on the original project to see if a complete traffic study was completed. She recollected that the previous zoning was anoffice/industrial type use. Ms. Cox said any previous modeling would have had that kind of land use on it, based on the Community Plan. She said going through a residential use is a less intense use. She said the traffic generation off this project is going to be enough since the commerciaVoffice use that would have been on it would have had a bigger impact versus residential use. Ms. Cox said the Post Road access has been a big issue over the years. She said that had been eliminated from this play She agreed to check files for a traffic study and what the thought process was. Ms. Cox said the Code regarding emergency vehicle access had changed since this project started. Chief Alan Perkins, Washington Township Fire Department, said their issues regazding emergency vehicle access and turning radii had been addressed. He said having emergency access within 150 feet of a dwelling is generally reserved for commercial projects, but they looked at that, particularly with the rental properties. Chief Perkins said because of the close proximity of these buildings, they wanted to make sure they could get to them, particulazly the street going down the center was very critical for the fire department, to be able to make the turns, have the proper hydrants, etc. He said for the most part, the applicant met all that the fire department required for this project. Mr. Saneholtz referred to the proposed text, Section B, Item 7 -Density, Height, Setbacks: Minimum pavement setbacks shall be ten feet... He continued to the next page and said something was inconsistent in the text. He asked Ms. Devlin to clarify. Ms. Devlin said the minimum that has been shown on the site plan is 10 feet. She said there aze other azeas of pavement where that setback is exceeded. Ms. Devlin said that statement said that the minimum that has been shown on the site plan is ten feet, but there aze other azeas of pavement that is exceeded. In most other cases, the pavement setback is the same as the building setback, except near Buildings 55 and 62. She said that is the only place where the building and pavement setbacks are not the same, other than in those areas where it is ten feet. Ms. Devlin said one of the conditions was that the applicant submit either additional language or an exhibit showing the exact pavement setbacks. Mr. Saneholtz asked if the pavement setback for Building 62 encroached into the right-of--way. Ms. Devlin said near Building 62, the pavement setback was more than ten, but less than the 30 feet that is shown for the building setback. She said the statement was confusing, and that is the reason for the condition for an exhibit that graphically displays all of the pazking setbacks, or that additional language be added to clarify. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonu.a .:ommission D Minutes -January 20, 2005 Page 13 Mr. Zimmerman asked if a diversity matrix will be required on this development, similaz to any other residential development since the housing styles vary. Mr. Hale said they do a diversity matrix so that the buildings side-by-side and across the street are not the same unit. He agreed to submit their matrix at the time of the final development plan. Ms. Reiss said because so much of this pazcel will be of impervious surface, the stormwater issues are very important due to the proximity of the South Fork of the Indian Run. Flooding, because of stormwater runoff from here of Coffman Pazk or the neighbors to the north of Post Road should be avoided. She would like to see a few units removed so there is less impervious surface and more green space (not necessarily public). She said this was a very intense use of the property. She liked the project. Mr. Gerber reiterated the seven issues discussed tonight as: • Text consistency. Owner/operator issue as opposed to investment. Clarification of language as it relates to the live/work units with respect to the size and square footage. • Pazking issue as it relates to the live/work units and the effect of that to the surrounding azea daily. • Chip and seal pavement on wallcing path. • Overall traffic study. • Diversity matrix. • Density Mr. Gerber said additional information is needed and suggested a tabling. Mr. Hale said most of the issues could be addressed with staff, but the density cannot be redone at the time of the final. He said assuming that the old zoning went away, this property is zoned office/industrial, which would have a 70 percent lot occupancy. He said this occupancy is much less than the original. He said their understanding of the basic engineering for this project was that there is more than adequate storm maintenance already in place as part of the original development plan. Other stormwater facilities should not be needed. Mr. Gerber said a traffic study is an important part of the Commission's review of the preliminary development plan. How the live/work units fit or do not fit needs to be determined. Mr. Gerber said he was not comfortable going to a final with that option open. If commercial, it would be a more intense use. He was in favor of this project, but he needed more information before it went to the final development plan stage. Mr. Saneholtz did not think this was good planning for this area. He said it should be commercial property. He said he would not vote for residential housing on this property. Mr. Saneholtz said there was nothing in this new proposal that changed his mind. He said the issue for him was proper overall planning. He did not believe the south side of Post Road is rural in any way. Mr. Saneholtz said he did not believe the bulk of what is in this section of Dublin is 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zoni~ ^.ommission ~ ~A T Minutes -January 20, 200 ¦ Page 14 anything but commercial buildings and offices. He thought that was the best use for Dublin as a whole. Mr. Zimmerman expressed his opinion that the commercial use pazking will take away from the residents. He was not just concerned about the four live/work units, but the parking for the entire development. Mr. Zimmerman needed more information about the commercial live/work units. Mr. Saneholtz asked what was transitional about this development. Mr. Gerber explained there was not anything transitional about the development, but that was not the issue before the Commission tonight because a prior City Council approved the rezoning and this Commission cannot undo that. He said Conservation Design does not apply. Mr. Gerber said the product had been approved since the development was last seen. Mr. Gerber said if the Commissioners needed more information to make an informed decision, this case needed to be tabled. Mr. Gerber said he was not comfortable going forwazd tonight without the information, some of which was fundamental for every preliminary. He said a traffic study and the affect on the surrounding azea of the live/work units and what traffic they may or may not generate day in/day out is something he would like to know before moving forwazd. He explained that this applicant is entitled to this project by law. Mr. Saneholtz requested a more detailed plan than the 8 % x 11 one provided, showing the current zoning because he was completely unfamiliaz with it. Mr. Gerber suggested that Mr. Saneholtz meet with Ms. Devlin to go over the history, the Council and Commission minutes and those original plans to learn how this project got to where it was tonight. Mr. Gerber suggested either a tabling to get more information or to vote on this application. Mr. Bird concluded that the Commissioners were favorably disposed to the use, but additional information is necessary to complete their deliberations. Mr. Gerber said four Commissioners were supporting this project, three needed more information, and another was not sure this was proper. Ms. Reiss' preference was to vote on this case tonight. Mr. Gerber said he could not support it tonight because he did not have enough information. Mr. Hale agreed to a tabling to provide the additional information. Mr. Gerber said the ODOT-type of traffic study was necessary. Anne Wanner said these roads were designed for office use, and knowing that the use has been downgraded, engineering has determined that road improvements in place aze adequate for the 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Pazk Dublin Planning and Zoni; .:ommission ~ Minutes -January 20, 2005 Page 15 site. She apologized if that was not directly stated in the staff report. She said that could be addressed if this case is tabled. Ms. Wanner said other iterations of the plan included access onto Post Road, and a left turn lane. S since that access is not there, there aze no traffic improvements required along Post Road. Mr. Gerber said the City had taken a natural east/west connector and downgraded it. He said if that was the City's objective, the Commission wants to understand what kind of impact it will have. Mr. Hale asked about the 15-day Rule requirement. Ms. Wanner said the time allows staff to route the new information to the entities within the City. Mr. Hale asked if they should take the live/work units out of the proposal. Mr. Gerber said yes, because he had a feeling an impact will be seen in this azea that both the applicant and the Commission will not like. Cynthia Kinman, 6080 Post Road, said there are beautiful pazk azeas being developed with this project which should be used by people. She said if commercial development on the other side of Post Road is what is being savored, then she thought the park development was going to go for naught. She said these residential developments are vital to the community, and the neighbors that will benefit from the park usage. She said now, there was a very abrupt division between the north and south sides of Post Road with residential on one side, and commercial on the other. Ms. Kinman said Post Road was very unattractive now and had aghost-like atmosphere because of the commercial development. She said warehouse parking lots across from Post Road are not attractive or appealing. She said Post Road was a designated, beautiful corridor, and commercial along the south side will not enhance the beauty - it will bring more warehouse look and parking area. Mr. Gerber reiterated that this property had been rezoned for residential. He said the issue before the Commission is: Does this particulaz plan fit? He said it was not to go back to square one to ask the question: Should this be residential or commercial? It is rezoned for residential, therefore by law, it is going to be that. Ms. Kinman said she was sympathetic because the applicant had worked very hard on this project. She said there have been ordinance and Fire Code changes which the applicant has complied with, but the line keeps being put farther and farther back. She thought there needed to be some fairness to these developers. Mr. Gerber explained that the Commission was discussing on what agenda this case can now be placed. He said more information regarding traffic flow in the azea and how it will affect the other surrounding area was being requested. Mr. Gerber said the consensus regarding azchitecture, gateway features, and issues relating to the bikepaths around the pond seemed to be satisfactory. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonis commission ~ Minutes -January 20, 2005 Page 16 Mr. Bird suggested it might be helpful to the applicant if the Commission would waive the 15- day Rule but provide staff adequate time for routing of the information. Mr. Gerber requested an update from staff at the February 3 Commission meeting regarding the submittal of the requested information. Mr. Gerber made the motion to table this rezoning application/revised preliminary development plan for the purpose of collecting additional information as it relates to a traffic study addressing both internally and externally surrounding property and the affect of parking and traffic as it relates to the live/work units, waiving the 15-Day Rule requirements so that the case can be heard again on February 17. Mr. Zimmerman seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Mr. Saneholtz, no; Mr. Messineo, yes; Ms. Reiss, no; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Gerber, yes. (Tabled 3-2.) 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park - PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION APRIL 1, 2004 CITY OE DUBL[N_ ~3a ~f Pl~iy f (4~ a dial301f-1236 tionrl100: ANIO-If00 fmc614-If1~56b - Neb SAe: wwcdah~ali~rs The planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 2. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 04-028Z -Homestead at Coffman Park Location: 22.462 acres located at the southeast corner of Discovery Boulevard (former Metatec Boulevard)-and Post Road. F.,zisting Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Perimeter Center plan)_ Request: Review and approval of a revised preliminary development plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.056. Proposed Use: Asingle-family condominium development of 68 detached residential units and f3.77 acres of openspace. Applicant: Patrick Grabill, ContinentaVNRI Office Ventures Limited, 150 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215; represented. by Ben W_ Hale Jr., Smith & Hale, 37 West Broad Street, Suite 725; Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Casson C. Combs, AICP, Senior Planner. MOTION: To table this rezoning application as requested by Mr_ Hale in writing. VOTE: 6-0_ RESULT: This rezoning application was tabled as requested_ STAFF CERTIFICATION Frank A_ Ciarochi Acting Planning Director 04-0282 Homestead at _ Coffrnan Park RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Niggles of -Dublin City-Couna7 Meeting-- - ~ - -Fetxuary 17, 2004 _ p~ 8 - Held 20 ~ _ Ms. GG ' responded that the public and areas wfil be identified, and access ~ y~~be Provided to the twblic sites b8cepath. Staff can provide a ma next I meeting showing the public versus a parklands There was no further publictestimony- 1 ~I There will be a rng/public hearing at the March 1 'I meeting. I ~ B/D ~i Ordi ,0.04 j "ng the Lowest and Best Bid f Landscape Installation Right-of- j~ ProJecL 11 I Mrs. Boring introduced the ordi Ii ~ Ms. Brautigam stated fhat exoeflent bid was received for this p from Miller Paving in the 118,239. The budgeted amount f~ project was $138,000 'i and the estima 'ed cost was $128,000. Staff is ndirg acceptance of the 1 bid at the 1 Counal meeting. 1j There be a second reading/public hearing March 1 Council meeting. CODE AMENDMENTS ~j Ordinance 11-04 j! Amending Section 76.02 of the Dublin Codified Ordinances garding the j; Posting of Handica Parking Fine Amount, and Oecla ' an Emergency. ~ Ms. Salay introd the ordinance. ~i ~ Ms. Bran ' stated that in view of the fact that are rwt five members present requir or passage of the ordinance by eme ,staff recommends this be held o i, rch 1. . erauti am stated that in late su r of 2003, Coundl assed 9 p legislate arding , I; posting of signs regarding the $ minimum fine for parking in handi parking spaces thrarghout the n state law changed in earty the ordinances were reoodfied, the ge was not inducted in the Dublin .This ordinance will i; address this. There will second reading/public hearing at th rch 1 Counal meeting. ~I O ance 12-04 i~ ~ ending Sections 93.03 (20), 93 rivate Fire Hydrants) and 150.19 rye 1 Hydrant Permits) of the Cod finances of the City of Dublin. i~ Ms. Brautigam stated that change is brought forward as a yes recent Council ~ I discussions regard' to fire hydrants. It incorporates in Code the changes requested by C , inducting yearly inspection and fili reports. The infom~ation l; ~ , was prepay y Sara Ott, Training and Acaedita ' Hager from the Service ij Depa nt She is available to respond to q ! a will be a second reading/public he at the March 1 Coundl meeting. REZONINGS j Ordinance 13-04 is Providing for a Change in Zoning of 22.657 Acres Located on the Southeast Corner l~ of Metatec Boulevard and Post Road, From: PUD, Planned Unit Oevelopment DisWct, To: PUO, Planned Unit Development District, (Case No. 04-028Z - Homestead at Coffman Park) Ms_ Salay introduced the ordinance and moved referral to Planning & Zoning Commission. ~s Mrs. Boring seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Salay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr. Reiner, yes; Mr. Ledclider, yes. i, Ordinance 14.04 i Providing for a Change in Zonin 6.8T Acres Located on the Ea rde of 1? Eiterman Road, Southwest of Post Road/US 33 Interchange om• R, Rural and RI, Restricted Industrial To: PCO, Planned Comme istrict_ (Case No. 04- i° 0212 -Gateway Prof Hal Center) Ms. Salay in the ordinance and moved ref the Planning & Zoning Commissi Mrs. seconded the motion. ~ on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; lay, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Mr ' 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ----~L"nrttrs of DrlblIQS:lty~ilaG"t Meeting June 23, 2003 Held 20 _ 1) Mayor called the Oubfm nal meeSng of ,June 23 to order at 7:00 in Council t~arnbers Dublin Municipal Bui ' Ms ici-Zuercher led Uie edge of ANegiance. 1! Rolf CaU I; Council members pre t were: Mayor McCash ice Mayor Boring, Ms. " nid- ~ ~1 Zuercher, Mr. L er, Ms. Saiay and Mc R ' r. Mr. lCranstuber was ent (excused). , Staff mem present were: Ms. Bra um, Mr. Smith, Ms. Gib , Mr. Ciarochi, Mr. McDaniel, f Epperson, Mr. Hardi , Mr. Hammersmith, Mr, n, Mr. Gunderman, ~ Ms. C N, fvls. Puskardk, Ms. and Ms- Heal. royal of Minutes of Jun , 2003 Regular Meetin yor McCash noted a ce ction to Page 17 - fast G - It should state, °Comm rty Deveompment Committ of CounciP instead of Co unity Services Advisory I Commission. Mr. Reiner moved proval of the minutes as nded. Ms. Chinnici-Z er seconded the moG _ Vote on the lion: Ms. Chinnici-Zuer r, yes; Mr- Reiner, yes; .Boring, yes; Ms. Salay, y . Ledclider, yes; Mayor cCash, yes. Co spondence Clerk reported that there s no correspondence r icing action from Council Special Recognition Mayor McCash pres ed a prodamation to the ublin Scioto High School ys Lacrosse Team, in recogni ' of their recent state cha ionship. Assistant Coa AJ Auld; Jeff - ~ Schneider, S r, and Adam Milnor, Juni accepted the prodamati n the team's behalf. The anked Coundl and the unity for the support a involvement in their l season- jl CIT N COMMENTS i'• lace Maurer 7451 Dubli Dad addressed Councl r arding a problem that is Ij ndemic to Dublin and to er cities across the Doan He questioned the sho erm wisdom of an ordinan pproved by Councl in that allows enforcement the parking restrictions i istoric Dublin. The subj is traffic, and there see always to be a catch up, knee' reaction to the problem. he lwo symptoms of the ffic problems ` are parking a peeding, and a more o rc solution may be need in the last 10 years, he never personally had diffi in finding a parking s anywhere in the Columba rea, even at the busiest ' s of day. He drives do to his destination, someti es on the outskirts of the a, and then walks the re finder of the way. He av ' the center part of the pa g areas in the shoppin nters and downtown as I. is not certain how this ca a translated into an ordi ce, but perhaps Counci n sder a way to make p ing more than an exace ting search for aspot- SECOND READING/PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCES 1. 1 ZONING Ordinance 09-03 Providing. for a Change in Zoning for 22.462 Acres Located on the Southeast Comer of Metatec Boulevard and Post Road, From: PUD, Planned Unit Development li District, To: PUD, Planned Unit Development District. (Case No. 02-13TZ - i' Perimeter Center Subarea N -Homestead Revision) Mayor McCash noted that the applignt has requested that this be tabled. He asked if the - request is to table until a date certain. i Nick Cavalaris. Smith 8 Hale, representing the applicant stated that Mr. Hale faxed a letter of request to table the ordinance. If possible, they are requesting it be tabled indefinitely due to business problems of the company. Time is needed to work out these matters. Mayor McCash noted that if it is tabled indefinitely, there must be a motion at a future - meeting to remove it from the table and to set a new hearing date. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher moved to table Ordinance 09-03 indefinitely. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Mr. Reiner, yes; Mrs. Boring, yes; Ms- Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Mr. Ledclider, yes; Mayor McCash, yes. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION May 1, 2003 CCfY't)d~ llt:B~l1 iaa ~ r`! Siia-mss bad Id fI:a4301~-123 aMe~fO~ tt4~114~~iAA foc ~t~-1f1iSK Ieb Ste: rrww~ui~aa.ia The planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 5. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 02-1372 -Homestead at Coffman Park Location: 22.462 acres located at the southeast comer of Metatec Boulevard and Post Road. Ezisting Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Perimeter Center plan)_ Request: Review and approval ' of a revised preliminary development plan under PUD provisions of Section 153.056. Proposed Use: Asingle-family condominium development of 68 detached residential units and 3.77 acres of open space. Applicant: Patrick Grabill, ContinentaUNRI Office Ventures Ltd., c!o Homestead Communities, 150 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215; represented by Ben W_ Hale, Jr. and Jack Reynolds, Smith- and Bale, 37 West Broad Street, Suite 725, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Carson C. Combs, AICP, Senior Planner MOTION: To disapprove this revised preliminary development plan because the proposal is inconsistent with the Community Plan and sound zoning, planning and design techniques, and the development does not incorporate a mix of land uses with proper relationships to surrounding land uses and structures_ VOTE: 6 -1 _ RESULT: This revised preliminary development plan was disapproved. It will be forwarded to City Council with a negative recommendation. STAFF CERTIFICATION ~ Barbara M. Clarke Planning Director 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonu.~ bmmission Meeting Minutes -May 1, 2003 Page 7 Ms. Boring rt was should be that the street will be install y the developer d ~ this should a condition. Mr. reviewed the 'fional conditio and Mr. Dagger to them. .Gerber mad motion to app a this prel' plat because it seeds the park uirements, hes the rezonin mmitments, pro " es neighborhood nnections, and ' rporates Waal e~ments along c Summitview Ro with 13 conditi 1) That alt the existing be kept to a um to keep the character topograp of the land, subj to staff approval- 2) That a applicant " left turn lane street lighting to a satisfaction of a City eer with the ini " phase/section of subdivision; 3) t the site sto water managem is in compli with the c Stormwater Regulations, to satisfaction of ity Engineer, 4) That the ap t work with s to install a Ova line looped co tion to Trails E Drive, unl determined to easible by the Engineer; 5) That landscape plan street tree plan revised to -into rate the cowmen from bo and the Co ssion, including ping and augur g the fencerow getation ng Summitview ad, diversifying tree species, and ' cluding the Ovate within the omeowners' as ation's Basemen tc.; That a tree y, a tree preserva ' n plan, and tree acement plan be miffed with each residential "ding permit for is 5, 6, 20, 21, 2 1, and 32; 7) That ev green screening or mounding led on the s th side of S ew Ro across from the a ce, within 60 s of the installa " of base paving o ovine ' e, subject to fiel acement and w er conditions; 8) t the sign and one walls be pl outside the visib' triangles as det ed by the City Engineer, 9) -That the int tion rights-of- be revised on th lat to reflect the ents in this report; 10) That a lot be elimina ong Lots 35-39 that the applic ork with staff to lace it a ewhere in the su vision without c ging the roadway any changes in roadway ll need to be app ed by the Plannin and Zoning Co ion); That the gazebo f be changed to ding seam metal f to match the b ; 12) That the exis ' g field tiles be ins fed and maintain as warranted; an 13)That the t trees be install y the developer. Mr. Ri 'e seconded the otion, and the v e was as folio Mr. Messineo, s; Mr. Z' rmau, yes; Ms. B g, yes; Mr. San oltz, yes; Mr. Sp e, yes; Mr. Ritc ' ,yes; and .Gerber, yes. (Ap ved 7-0.) Mr. Gerber call a short recess at 0 p.m. He reconv ed the meeting at .OS p.m. 5. Rezoning -Revised Preliminary Development Plan 02-1372 -Homestead at Coffman Park Carson Combs distributed several documents from the previous rezoning approval by City Council and final development plan disapproval. Mr. Combs indicated the adjacent commercial and residentiaUpazk uses. The proposed development uses a village concept. The proposed 040282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonin~ ;ommission Meeting Minutes -May 1, 2003 Page 8 color treatment is all- crime with accent colors for shutfers, doors and window boxes. The dedicated pazk includes the Post Road frontage and retention pond, and this leaves an offset of 0.4-acre that will be resolved with park dedication. The park boundary should be adjusted to accommodate building overhangs. No more than half of the Post Road frontage should be included to meet the Code requirements. The pond will have a looped public path system with benches, a pavilion and a boardwalk across the pond. Post Road will have a series of landscape dents, including a pond and waterfall system. Mr. Combs said asix-foot solid fence is proposed along the daycare site, and staff recommends extending the Wall Street ornamental fence and evergreen detail. Amund the Columbus Laser (SO) site, the plan shows a solid row of evergreen trees. Based on elevation changes, the staff recommends designing a naturalized planting-scheme. He said staff recommends plantings to augment the northeast corner of the site to enhance the buffer and an opaque evergreen screen at the south edge of the pond to screen the service area. Mr. Combs said the signage needs to be more residential in character and scale. Mr. Combs said this density is slightly lower at 3.03 units per acre. The previously approved plan included a density of 3.12 units per acre, plus 7,650 square feet of commerciaUretail space. Staff believes this is a needed alternate housing type. He said the proposed landscaping and mounding treatments will better blend into the park and stream corridor across Post Road. Mr. Combs said the level of architecture is high, and it meets a number of the Community Plan goals. This proposal will have less impact on traffic, than the uses in the adopted Community Plan. He said staff recommends approval with the eight conditions: 1) That no more than fifty percent of "Open Space A" in "Exhibit A" be counted toward pazkland dedication requirements, and that the proposed reserve boundaries be no less than two feet from proposed building footprints, with no encroachments permitted; 2) That all required parkland dedication fees be paid to the City of Dublin prior to approval of the first building permit and that the construction of all reserve areas be completed no later than Phase II of the development; 3) That the following landscape buffer modifications be made, subject to staff approval: a) That the proposed daycare buffer be modified to utilize the proposed horse fence with evergreen and stone pillar heatment; b) That increased evergreen buffering be provided along the flex office site to the south; c) That additional augmentation of the eastern treerow along Post Road be provided; and d) Thai alternative buffering utilizing naturalizing shrubs or other similar alternatives be provided along the Columbus Laser Center site; 4) That additional evergreen plantings be substituted with deciduous species along Post Road; 5) That the proposed text be modified to indicate all minimum alley/pazking setbacks, as noted in this report; ~ That any required access easements to maintaining the stormwater pond be granted, and the east sidewalk connecting open space area A and B be modified to provide increased separation, subject to staff approval; ~ That any future home models meeting the approved development text and architectural style be administrafively approved; and 040282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zone :ommission Meeting Minutes -May 1, 2003 Page 9 8) That the proposed sign standards be revised to permit a maximum height for sign posts of eight feet and a maximum permitted sign face of nine square feet, and that the text clearly indicate the placement of one sign at each entrance, subject to staff approval. Mr. Combs said the current zoning is PUD for a density of 3.12 units per acre with an additional 7,650 square feet of office or retail space for live/work units. The plan included 60 single-family detached units, with an additional two live/work buildings. Mr. Ritchie asked if they have discretion on land use. Mr. Combs said this is a rezoning, so everything is under discretion. He said the Community Plan shows this area as office, and the pond is mixed use with employment emphasis. Mr. Combs said the plan is reduced from 75 units to 68 units. Glen Dugger, attorney, said this is a 68-unit single-family condo plan, and the density is reduced from the prior rezoning. They believe the livelwork units become commercially unviable. Mr. Dugger said this area is underserved by this type of housing. This will not generate children. Most buyers will be older, and the average price per unit will be $280,000. It is close to Perimeter Center and the park. These will have no-maintenance exteriors. Forest Gibson, Schmidt Land Design, said the access is from Wall Street primarily, with the community center on the right. It will be a traditional streetscape, and the architecture will be clapboard siding. He said there is a community green that will be heavily planted with an English Tutor style garden. Nine homes front onto the community green. There will. be pavers at the entrance and visitor parking. The area along Post Road will have a waterfall feature. There are some existing trees along Post Road, and they intend for the bikepath to meander on both sides of the mound. He said they have worked with the staff to create a landscape plan that blends with the surrounding properties. Forest Gibson said the Wall Street treatment screens the view and has athree-rail horse fence with evergreens behind it. Stone walls are at the vehicular termini. Pat Costello, President, Post Road Civic Association, said residents welcome this development. Mr. Dugger said the retention pond 5.6 acres. Mr. Ritchie asked why are they considering this residential use since the Community Plan recommends office uses, and this does not match that. Mr. Dugger said the property is currently zoned PUD for residential use. At some point it was the decision to zone this site residential. They are not interested in office zoning. Mr. Ritchie asked if they have discretion of land use. Mr. Banchefsky responded that the Community Plan recommendation is not binding. It is a flexible document, and the Commission has discretion on land use. He agreed that the land has residential zoning. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonir_ 'ommission Meeting Nfmutes -May i, 2u03 Page 10 Ms. Clarke said the 1997 Community Plan stated "office" or "mixed use%mpioyment emphasis" i for the whole area. This land was already zoned for those purposes in 1997, and those uses were reflected at that time. Last year, City Council asked for some revision of the Future Land Use Map for Brand Road, and the staff also made several other housekeeping changes to update it, such as the Metro Park and Ballantrae. She did not know if the map had been updated for the residential zoning for Homestead. Ms. Clarke noted that staff recommended disapproval of the initial concept plan for the Homestead residential PUD because it did not conform to the Community Plan. The Commission and City Council approved it, and the staff has worked with the applicant on the text and design since that point consistent with that land use decision. The PUD rezoning was later approved which included liveJwork units, or some commercial features. At the final development plan, however, those features were removed, and the Planning Commission disapproved the plan. It stated that this factor plus other plan changes moved it away from the approved preliminary development plan. The staff has been told that the liveJwork project is not commercially viable. Somewhere between the applicant and the City, and appropriate economically viable development must now be found. Ms. Boring said there was a lot of discussion in the minutes that the elements originally in the plan that had convinced the Commission initially, were taken away. Mr. Dugger said this is not a request to rezone for office. There are houses to the north of this undeveloped site. This is clearly a transitional area and appropriate for a condo development, Forest Gibson described the land uses in the area from an aerial photograph. He said it is only a question of where the transition occurs between residential and commercial uses. Mr. Saneholtz complimented the applicant on an attractive design, but said this about land use. Mr. Sprague said they have been through this discussion previously. He believes this is a good plan, but it is a question of whether it is an appropriate plan. Mr. Gerber agreed. Mr. Ritchie said there is a lot of screening and buffering in this plan, in fact on all four sides, and that points to a basic compatibility problem. He said it is designed like a fortress and everything faces internally. There is no street presence. Ms. Boring said one of the concerns is with adjacent industrial property and the need to protect this development in some way. Mr. Dugger noted that slightly to the west of this site, there are condominiums to the south of Post Road. This proposal is also appropriate. Ms. Boring said she was concerned about the undeveloped property to the south. If this site is appropriate for condos, there might be a request for the southern site also. 040282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zoning ~;ommission Meeting Minutes -May 1, 2003 Page 11 Mr. Gerber said the Commission disapproved the final development plan before because it lacked the live/work feature, and this is basically the same plan. Mr. Sprague said the design of the pond is not pedestrian friendly and accessible. He is torn on this issue. Mr. Ritchie said he has a land use problem and a lot of issues with the site plan_ There was discussion about framing a positive or negative motion. Mr. Ritchie made a motion for approval, seconded by Mr. Zimmerman. The motion was withdrawn. Mr. Ritchie made a motion to disapprove this revised preliminary development plan because the proposal is -inconsistent with sound zoning, Planning and design techniques, and the Community Plan, and the development does not incorporate a variety of land uses with proper relationships to the existing land use and structures. Mr. Zimmen~nan seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Boring, yes; Mr. Saneholtz, yes; Mr. Sprague, no; Mr. Messineo, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; and Mr. Ritchie, yes. (Disapproved 6-1.) 6. Revised D lopment Plan/Co ditional Use 03- RDP/CU - Cro Kia Carwash - 6400 Pe ' eter Loop Road [Ms. Bo ' recused herself this case and le a dais.] J e Adkins said this ' a revised develo ent plan to add a ash for Crown 'a. She said e site is zoned P ,Planned Co ce District for au dealerships and i eaz Perimeter Center and Cra well Village. proposed carwash ~ 1,560 square fee a east and west openings ve overhead doo .Some parking removed. Ms. said the mate ' s would match existing building. a existing over d door replaced with ~ to match the exi g building and are to be reloca Mr. Gerber ask about Code com ance. Ms. A ~ said previous co tions aze either complete or ' process. There ' still constructio activity. She sal according to C Enforcem the conditional o upancy is to exp' at the end of May that should give time to lve any issues. . Gerber said he cars on stands an ey aze still unto g cars on the stree Mr. John One Architectural Alli ce, representing C Motors, said proposal will hel complete three buildings an sites in the C campus. Their a1 is to unify all into on development wi nsistent materi ,colors, cross p g, circulation, 1' ting, si e, and landscapin a unloading can w be done on site. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffrnan Park PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION March 21, 2002 ..~c:ln• of ucBU M~~~~ asp-lr.~r...~ a .d:uol~-lt~i 114/10-Ii00 F~c i1NgiSK Ne6Sre: ~w~Ja6iiiax The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 5. Final Development Plan 00-127FDP -Perimeter Center, Subareas B-2 and B 3 - Homestead Communities Location: 22.462 acres located on the southeast corner of Metatec Boulevard and Post Road Eaistiag Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development District (Perimeter Center Plan). Request: Review and approval of a final development plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.056. Proposed Use: A development of 70 detached single-family residential units, a clubhouse, and 3.99 acres of open space. Applicant: Jonathan Kass, ContinentaVNRI Ventures LTD., P.O. Box 712, Dublin, Ohio 43017; represented by Gus Cook, Homestead Communities, 150 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Staff Contact: Warren Campbell, Planner. MOTION: To disapprove this final development plan because it fails to comply in all respects with the previously approved preliminary development plan. voTE: 7-0. RESULT: This final development plan was disapproved after much discussion. The reasons include, but are not limited to, the gateway entry feature design, the redesign of the wet pond, redesign of the building footprints, redesign of the traffic flow, redesign of pocket parks, changes of the type and number of units, and alteration of the site amenities and overall design. STAFF CERTIFICATION C~ Barbara M. Clarke Planning Director 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zoni ~onunission Minutes -March 21, 2002 Page 17 Mr. Land to the conditio listed. Mr. Z' seconded the 'on, and the vote was as ows: - Mr. Eastep, ; Ms. Boring, Yes' . Messineo, yes; .Sprague, Yes; Mr Fis ~ yes; Mr. Zimme yes; and Mr. Ger r, yes. {Approved 7 .Boring said she ped this would ope a azea up to office velopment. It was to see it happening. She : ' ed them luck. Mr. Spragu ounced the 11 0' k rule again, and Case 6 was tabled. 5. Final Development Plan 00-027FDP -Perimeter Center, Subareas B-2 and B-3 - Homestead Communities Warren Campbell presented the final development plan for this 22 acres. He said the approved preliminary development plan included 70 residential units and eight liveJwork units. He said the eight live/work units had been dropped from this proposal. He showed several slides. This site is zoned PUD, and is in .Subareas B-2 and B-3 of the Perimeter Center plan. Properties on throes sides are zoned PCD, with residential properties along Post Road. Mr. Campbell said more single-family footprints now replace the live/work units. The swimming pool was relocated. The Post Road frontages remain. Instead of the reaz access alleys previously shown, there is a full service curbcut to give better traffic flow through the site. Mr. Campbell said Condition 1 referred to two units at the northwest corner of the site. There had been a lazger greenspace with a pond wrapping azound it. He said that staff recommends dropping two units neaz the openspace. This will restore the entry feature appearance that was shown on the preliminary development plan. Mr. Campbell said there would be a curbcut on Metatec Boulevard and a shrub and pillaz treahnent along Wall Street. He said the mounding and plantings between the Laser Eye Center and Metatec Boulevazd will be removed and replaced with the pond and waterfall treatment_ Mr. Campbell said-staff recommends approval of this final development plan with 12 conditions: 1) That the two units closest to the Metatec entrance be removed and the pond and landscaping treatment approved at the preliminary plat be incorporated; 2) That a plan showing the exact location of each building envelope, by coordinates or distances, be provided at the time building permits aze requested, subject to staff approval; 3) That open space be fine graded, seeded, and dedicated to the City, prior to the issuance of the first building permit; 4) That all landscaping comments contained in this staff report be met, to the satisfaction of staff; 5) That site lighting meet the Dublin Lighting Guidelines; ~ That protective tree fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; 7) That new street names for Clondalkin Lane, Clondalkin Court, and Tallaght Court be approved prior to submission for building permits; 040282 Homestead at ~`..~w.~r, Parlr Dublin Planning and Zone >ommission Minutes -March 21, 2002 Page 18 8) That the proposed entrance signage be revised to meet the text and Code for height and shape and that no commercial signage (Subarea B-2) be permitted unless the eight live/work ' units, or whatever portion of the plan is approved through a future revised final development plan; 9) 'That the pointed caps on the wrought iron fence be replaced with blunt caps to meet the Dublin Fence Code; 10) That some form of subgrade treatment be added to the southern portion of the green space located in Tallaght Court to handle the load imposed by emergency vehicles passing across the island, subject to staff approval; 11) That the design of all private drives, pazking areas, drive approaches, stormwater management, utilities, and sewers meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Engineering Division; and 12) That plans reflecting the conditions listed in this staff report be submitted at the time of building permits. Mr. Sprague said the Commissioners had received several letters of support for this case. Gus Cook, president of Continental Communities, the construction arm of Continental Real Estate, said they are presenting a neo-traditional streetscape design by Andres Duany. He said it was a unique opportunity for Dublin. Mr. Cook said this plan is residential in feel and centered on the idea of neighborhoods. It keeps all the traffic and parking to the reaz off alleyways. They have developed three similar communities. The base houses begin at $240,000. The amenities include a clubhouse, fitness center, paths, pocket parks and pool. He had been the master developer for Craughwell Village. Removing the work/live units reduced the commerciaUretail use by 8,000 square feet from the original preliminary development plan. The seven basic models will range from 1,500 to 2,100 square feet. They are one, story-and-a half, and two story. All have basements. No garages front the streetscape or main center court. He showed a color palette and basic building materials proposed. He said Hardi-plank siding would be used with a 30-inch stone watertable azound all houses. -He said they would have optional stone veneers. The facade of the clubhouse is all stone. True dimensional shingles by Certinteed Independence aze proposed. Options include patios, screened porches, Florida rooms, and finished basements. There will be a variety of exterior door and shutter colors from the Williamsburg color brochure. Mr. Cook said much time and effort had been spent on the landscape plans. It was the most thorough and intense landscaping package he had ever seen. Substantial changes had taken place even since the submittal. They moved the entry farther away from Post Road and that pushed houses closer to the road. Additional landscaping features had been put at Metatec Boulevard and Post Road. The intensive landscaping at the entry feature will provide a nice buffer. An access onto Wall Street was added. They also straightened out the roads and the pocket parks for emergency traffic and access. Mr. Cook said the elimination of the liveJwork units was a market driven decision. Mr. Cook said they have the same number of residential units as before. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zon commission Minutes -March 21, 2002 Page 19 He said the lazger pocket parks were 20,000 square feet each. They are not used in the openspace calculation. Mr. Cook said the target market was not geared towards children, so there is no tot lot. They expect mostly young professionals or empty nesters. He said the pocket parks would be adequate. Mr. Cook said there was a defencicy in greenspace because there was no credit for the pocket parks or green areas. The density has decreased and they are still at 34 percent lot coverage. He said one pond leg was removed from the preliminary development plan, but it does not detract from the appearance from Post Road or Metatec Boulevazd. Mr. Cook said they had considerable support from quite a few groups, including the Post Road residents and contiguous property owners, and Davidson-Phillips. He said they wanted to keep this revised plan. They will work with the daycare center to mitigate as much construction noiseJairborne debris or dust as possible. They can not limit themselves to construction only during the fall and winter months, but they will work with the daycare. Mr. Cook said the landscape and buffer plan, which had the Wow! elements made this a special project. He hoped they could move forwazd and not change it. Ms. Clarke said the colored ridgeline of the gable shown on the site plan did not match the elevations. Mr. Cook said they were just typical footprints of the buildable envelopes. The rooflines actually show a two specific models but they also showed the package elevations and footprints of everything on the models used. Ms. Clarke asked if they would use all of the model types in the photographs. He said no two models that are exactly the same will be next to each other, and the colors are varied. He said the ridgelines run both ways. Ms. Boring said when a previously reviewed planned unit development came before the Commission as a preliminary development plan, they were told that the Commission could not change it because it had been approved. She asked how the developer could make so many changes from the approved preliminary development plan. Mr. Banchefsky responded whether the applicant can do it or not was up to the Commission. The Commission's standard of review was whether this final development plan matches the preliminary. Mr. Fishman agreed with the comments made by Ms. Boring. Mr. Banchefsky said there was still flexibility in the layout. At the preliminary stage, land uses, the density, and type of housing are being approved. Ms. Boring said she had previously been advised differently. Mr. Messineo asked if the density was the same between these two plans. Mr. Land said it was actually less on the second plan. He said they lost 8,000 square feet of "work" space. Mr. Fishman said there was an incredible amount of previous discussion about the wet pond. It was for public use. He said the pool was not near it before, and now it and the clubhouse sat right on it. It gives the impression that the pond is for this community only. Mr. Fishman said there was also a lot of discussion about the water feature wrapping around the corner, and now two units have been added right there. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zoni ,,ommission Minutes -March 21, 2002 Page 20 Ms. Boring said that when it originally was approved, it was discussed that this would be something different and new. The work/live units were a huge selling point. Now it is just a high density subdivision around the shopping center. It may be a beautiful plan, but it was not what was originally approved. Mr. Fishman said he would like to see the two additional units eliminated and have the two pocket parks usable. A half-acre is not lazge enough for any recreation. Mr. Fishman said concessions needed to be made by the developer in the density if the concept was being changed. Mr. Cook did not agree that this was a change in concept. It still is a very unique development that offered condominiums. It offers a neo-traditional feel and a maintenance flee exterior. Mr. Eastep said a final development plan is not a concept plan, it is a plan which must match the preliminary development plan. This does not. Ms. Boring said this was approved as a preliminary development plan with abusiness-type use available in a PUD. She thought it would need to be rezoned without the business use. Mr. Campbell said the elimination of the commercial units could be looked upon as within Commission's discretion. Ms. Boring argued that the use was being changed. The work/live units were being dropped. Mr. Banchefsky said this decision, in terms of whether the final development plan being presented tonight is a detailed refinement of the approved preliminary plan, is the Commission's. He read one of the code criteria for approval. Beth Amirault, owner of a Place to Grow Daycaze, said she was only told of this project this month. She said the plans were beautiful, but she had concerns about the children at her daycare center. If construction takes place adjoining her property (eight to ten units), the children could not play outside because of the airborne debris, and health and environmental issues. Ms. Amirault requested a prohibition against construction on the particulaz units closest to her playground during June through September. She said construction continues all year. She said 70 percent of their summer business is based outdoors, and pazents have already expressed concern regarding the airborne debris. Tf this project was not limited in some way, they will have to close their doors. Ms. Amirault said a fence was proposed halfway up the north side and about one-fifth of the east side of the project. By Code, it can only be four feet tall. She said the community that Homestead is proposing is beautiful. She said she signed a 12-year lease, and she would like to be a part of it. She hated to see a fence separating them and suggested shrubbery instead. Ms. Amirault said a concrete sidewalk was proposed the entire length of Wall Street, stopping at the entrance into the daycare parking lot but it doesn't continue to the stop sign. She asked that the sidewalk and street trees be continued to the stop sign. 04-0282 Homestead at Cof&nan Park Dublin Planning and Zoni commission Minutes -March 21, 2002 Page 21 Pat Costello, Post Road resident, said they had looked forward to this project for several years. He said it is a tremendous addition to the residential feel that the Post Road residents aze trying ' to accomplish. He urged the Commission to approve this plan_ . Mr. Gerber understood that if someone deviated from a prelinunary development plan, the Commission had the authority to approve or disapprove it. Mr. Banchefsky agreed. Mr. Gerber said if the final application looked like the preliminary, the Commission could not tweak it and do other things. Mr. Banchefsky agreed. Mr. Gerber asked if under this circumstance, they had the right to accept or reject the changes and to say that they wanted the original plan. Mr. Banchefsky said, within reason, that was true. He said the Commission had broad discretion to determine if it matches. If it is radically different, then it will require rezoning. Mr. Gerber asked why the pool location was changed. Mr. Cook said he did not know. The pool now takes advantage of the location by the pond. He said there was some discussion of trying to at least have some ability to utilize the path system and have this be asemi-public space. It will be dedicated to Dublin. The community center is supposed to be a focal point. Ms. Boring said previously, the developer told them that the community center was not wanted close to the pool because of the noise. Mr. Eastep agreed. Ms. Boring said the Commission did not want the pool location shifted. That location was proposed by the applicant. Mr. Campbell disagreed and said there was a shift between the concept plan and preliminary development plan. Noise would be less bothersome here. Mr. Cook said they also wanted to take advantage of the location next to the pond just because of the Wow! factor. They like the way it sets up as an amenity. Mr. Fishman said they discussed in the eazlier plan that there was a great deal of openspace next to the retention basin. He said now, the houses are right next to the pond. Mr. Cook said the only building jammed up to the pond was the clubhouse. Everything else is across the road. Mr. Sprague said -the on the new rendering it seemed as though the pedestrians would be impeded a lot more. The landscaping is more open in the initial plan. Mr. Gerber said it looked like there were more trees on the second plan than the first. Mr. Fishman asked if the applicant was willing to make any concessions in this new plan. Specifically, would he eliminate the two lots to bring the water feature around like the old plan? Mr. Cook said. the elimination of the two units is a big problem. He said they need 70 total units. A reconfiguration could happen but they aze at a point where a decision needs to be made. If they lose units, this project does not make any sense for them. Mr. Fishman said if they are not willing to negotiate, the original preliminary development plan could be built. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zoni- Commission Minutes -March 21, 200 Page 22 - Mr. Cook asked for approval of this final development plan. He asked if the original preliminary development plan stayed in place if the final development plan is disapproved. Ms. Clarke said the zoning would still be in place until such time as the land is rezoned. The applicant would have the opportunity to resubmit another final development plan. However, at some point later if no one wants to build anything that looks similaz to the original plan, the zoning is useless. She understood from the Commissioners' comments that the new plan does not look enough like the preliminary development plan to satisfy several of them. Mr. Banchefsky said there is no magic time period whereby the underlying approved preliminary development plan goes away under the current code. Mr. Cook said they feel it is in keeping with the first plan. He said they would at least look at the possibility of reconfiguring it so that units will not be lost. Mr. Eastep said the pond has been there for 15 years or more. Putting a private structure in the City's pond will create a pedestrian stopping point for the rest of the residents of Dublin. It is one of the nicest ponds in Dublin as far as plant, aquatic, and animal life goes. He said the pond has to be accessible to the public. Mr. Cook said there was a gazebo in the pond under the approved preliminary development plan. Mr. Eastep and Mr. Fishman agreed and said it was discussed, but it would need to be public and there would be a sign saying "Open to the Public." Mr. Gerber asked if the bylaws could state that this is a public pond. Mr. Banchefsky said in terms of the condominium bylaws, yes. Ms. Boring asked if the pond was public, why was there a private clubhouse on it. Mr. Sprague asked if the pool would have a substantial detrimental effect on the ecosystem. The pond has been surrounded and the only vistas unobstructed were off the deck of the pool. In essence, they have incorporated the pond into the development instead of making it a public resource. In the preliminary development plan, it is more open, public, and accessible. Mr. Cook said he understood the point, but he did not think a reconfiguration is out of the question. The deck is infringing on the boundary of the pond in both plans. Mr. Fishman did not want to lose the Post Road water feature. Comparing the two plans, he said the first is much more creative. Mr. Cook said the only difference was in the rendering. Sprague said it was more than just the rendering; this is a different design. Mr. Fishman said his concerns were the size of the pazks, pool locatioh and the water feature prominence. Mr. Cook said if the pocket pazks were increased in size, density might be lost. He said they have expanded and contracted the pocket parks repeatedly, and this is a fairly optimal, 70-unit plan. He said they could look at a possibility of two-unit structures, but it will be very difficult to get the 70-unit yield and expand the pocket pazks. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffrnan Park Dublin Planning and Zoni~ ^ommission Minutes -March 21, 2002 Page 23 Mr. Fishman said if the retail portion of the live/work units were eliminated, there would be the same configuration as was originally approved. He asked how any space would be lost. Mr. Cook said the architectural plan for the live/work unit was actually a connecting unit. He said there was an interior stairway that allowed more efficiency or studio type living. Mr. Eastep said 70 single-family units could be built as originally approved. Mr. Fishman said Jack Lucks and Frank Kass presented the original plan. Mr. Cook said they are Homestead Communities principals, plus Mr. Dargesh, Mr. Cook, and their financial officer. Edith Driscoll said she was present at the first meeting. She recalled the pool was in the middle of the residences, and the Commission wanted it moved near the clubhouse. Mr. Fishman and Mr. Eastep said they did not remember that. Mr. Campbell said the approved preliminary development plan had 60 detached single-family homes and two live/work units with ten apartments above them. To achieve the full 70 units, they added building footprints to the plan. Ms. Boring said the previous minutes reflect the Commission did not require moving the pool. Mr. Fishman said Craughwell Village has 15 du/ac, and the Commission can support a unique concept. He suggested tabling to allow the applicant to work on reconfiguring the plan. . Mr. Cook said practically speaking, if they were at a point where they could construct this project, they would work with the daycaze as best they can to mitigate their concerns. To limit their ability to build during the prime building season is an impossibility, but they can do a lot to control the dust. He said they could use water trucks to try to keep the dust down to protect the children. Some type of construction will happen on this site in the future. Mr. Zimmerman asked if the project would be phased. Mr. Cook said it was broken into two phases of 27 and 43 units. The first phase would include the clubhouse and western azea. He said they did not request the fence; it was requested by Davidson-Phillips. Mr. Messineo asked if they would be willing to remove the fence. Mr. Cook agreed. Mr. Fishman noted that Davidson-Phillips is the owner of the daycaze site and requested the fence. Mr. Cook said Davidson-Phillips supported this project. Ms. Amirault said she met with Davidson-Phillips (Roma Investments) who denied knowledge of this project. She said construction progresses as units are sold. Construction might take five summers, and her daycare center could not use its outdoor areas. Mr. Eastep understood this. Mr. Cook said they have no desire to table this application at this point. Ms. Newcomb noted that the applicants for the next case were getting ready to leave. The Commission decided not to waive the 11 o'clock rule. \ 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonin, immission Minutes - Mazch 21, 2002 Page 24 Mr. Sprague made a motion to disapprove this final development plan because it fails to comply in all respects with the previously approved preliminary development plan. The reasons include, h but are not limited to the gateway entry feature, the redesign of the wet pond, the redesign of the footprints, development, redesign of the traffic flow, redesign of pocket pazks, and changes of the type and number of units. Mr. F.astep seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Gerber, yes; Ms. Boring, yes; Mr. Messineo, yes; Mr. Fishman, yes; Mr. Zimmerman, yes; Mr. Eastep, yes; and Mr. Sprague, yes. (Disapproved 7-0.) 6. ' ed Final Develop nt Plan 02-006FDP - owell Trace PUD - rthwest Corner of Post and Avery O ces - 6759 Avery Ro . F.astep made the tion to table this case requested by a 1 m the applicant. Fishman second d the vote was as ows: Mr. Gerber, ; Mr. Messineo, y , Mr, Sprague, yes; immerman, yes; Mr. shoran, yes; and Mr. tep, yes. (Tabled 6 7. oning 02-0072 - 'ards Furniture - 63 Old Avery Road D to the late hour, thi a was postponed the April 11, 2002 enda. There was no ' ussion or vote tak Mr. Sprague ad' ed the meeting at :45 p.m. Respectfiilly submitted, Libby arley Administrative Secretary Planning Division 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION July 6, 2000 CTtY Oi! DCBU~i 1Grisio. ~f Mwiiy ii90 S1tix~s jai alp uolb-lnb t .~:~/IDO: 611-Ibl X550 Fa 614-161.6566 l~ebSik-. wwr.~u6ia.~kas The Planning and Zoning Commission took the following action at this meeting: 2. Rezoning Application 00-0302 -Preliminary Development Plan -Homestead Communities Location: 22.462 acres located on the southeast corner of Metatec Boulevard and Post Road Ezisting Zoning: PCD, Planned Commerce District (Perimeter Center Subazeas B and C). .Request: Review and approval of a preliminary development plan under the PUD provisions of Section 153.056_ Proposed Use: A multi-use development of 60 detached residential units, two live/work ' buildings containing 12 residential units and eight officeJcommercial units, and 3.2 acres of open space. Applicant: ContinentaL/NRI Office Ventures Ltd, c% Jonathan Kass, P.O. Box ?12, Dublin, Ohio 43017; represented by Gary Gray, Homestead Communities, 150 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215. MOTION 1: To approve this rezoning application (with no access to Post Road) because it protects and enhances the scenic character of Post Road, provides a transition between Perimeter Center and the residences, includes quality architecture, pedestrian amenities and "Wow!" elements, with 20 conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code to the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to meet Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) That plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; Page 1 of 4 040282 Homestead at Coffinan Park DUBLIlY PLANNING AND ZO1~tING CONIlI~IISSION i RECORD OF ACTION July 6, 2004 2. Rezoning Application 00-0302 -Preliminary Development Plan -Homestead Communities (Continued) ~ That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated once to the satisfaction of staff; ~ That the text be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subarea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfaction of staff; 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash. vehicles; 9) That "no parking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff; 10) That the applicant work with staff and fire ofLicials to meet all health, safety and welfare issues regarding the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches; 1 i} That no direct vehicle access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 13) That all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that starmwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15) That street names be provided to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 1~ That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; 1~ That two units be eliminated; 18) That the applicant utilize dimensional shingles or a mix of shingle types, subject to staff approval; 19) That stucco be eliminated from the proposed materials; and 20) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council. # Gary Gray agreed to the above conditions, except Condition 1 1. VOTE: 1-5_ RESULT: The motion failed. 04-0282 Homestead at Page 2 of 4 Coffman Park DUBLIN PLANNING AND. ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION Daly 6, 2000 2. Rezoning Application A8-tl30Z -Preliminary Development Plan -Homestead Commnai6es (Continued). MOTION 2: To approve this application with all conditions from Motion 1 listed above except Condition 11. VOTE: 3-3. RESULT: The motion failed. MO'I'TON 3: To approve this rezoning application (with no access to Post Road) because it protects and enhances the scenic character of Post Road, provides a transition between Perimeter Center and the residences, includes quality architecture, pedestrian amenities and "Wow!" elements, with 20 conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code tv the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to meet Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) 'that plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; ~ That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated once to the satisfaction of staff; 7) That the text be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subazea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfaction of staff; 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no parking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff; 10) That the applicant work with staff and fire officials to meet all health, safety and welfare issues r.,gazding the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches; 11) That no direct vehicle access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 04-p28Z Homestead at Page 3 of 4 Coffman Park DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECORD OF ACTION July 6, 2000 2. Rezoning Application 00-0302 -Preliminary Development Plan - Iiomestcad Communities (Continued) 13) that all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15) That street names be provided to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 1 ~ That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; 1~ That two units be eliminated; 18) That the applicant utilize dimensional shingles or a mix of shingle types, subject to staff approval; 19) That stucco be eliminated from the proposed materials; and 20) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council. Gary Gray agreed to the above conditions, except Condition 11 _ VOTE: 42. RESULT: This application was approved. It will be forwarded to City Council with a positive recommendation. STAFF CERTIFICATION Carson Combs Planner 040282 Page 4 of 4 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zoning ,mmission - - ~ Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 6 Mr_ F' was concerned ut the precedent, ut he felt this estab hed business sho be su rted. He is not g the business wo and will be impro ' g the looks of the He d a body shop is a n sary business. Th andscaping will im ve the appearance Ms. Boring said it ' not their job to wo about the market roes. Those fo 'ght suggest housing at 12 per acre, and they ould follow the unity Plan. Mr. hman said that would only true on a vacant site Mr. p said Dublin's C directs the Commi ion to disapprove nditional uses whe the con ' onal use is not appli le in that zoning ' trict; the applicant evelopment stare ds are no met; the proposed evelopment is not accord with th area plans; it wi ve an desirable effect on a surrounding area; it is not in keepin 'th land use c er. Mr. Fishman m a motion to appr a this conditional because the tan ing treatment respects the roughfaze Plan, the very Road ap ce will be subs ally improved, and the right-of- y conforms to the oroughfaze Plan, th five conditions: t) That a applicant reconfi a the front parkin t; 2) Th the applicant no to er use and properly ispose of the exis ' g paint booth; 3) at the applicant p vide a site plan i luding the recd ended landscaping or staff approval; That landscapin installed by O ber 15, 2000, an that project be co eted in one month, subjec o staff approval; 5) That exha vent be painted to end unobtrusively th the rest of the b ~ ding. Mr. Irel reed with the con ~ ions as stated. Mr. tep seconded, the vote was as ollows; Ms. Salay no; Mr. Sprague, s; Mr. ider, no; Ms. Bo ' g, no; Mr. l:astep, s; Mr. Fishman, ye (Disapproved 3-3.) Mr. Lecklider m a motion to dir t staff to explore process for establ' 'ng a Dublin zoning desi 'non these Indus al and commercial roperties along Av Road corridor_ Ms. Salay nded, and the vote as as follows; Mr. rague, yes; Ms. Bo ' g, yes; Mr. F.astep, yes; Mr_ F' an; yes; Ms. S y, yes; Mr. Lecklid ,yes. (Approved 6- . Mr. klider announced a eleven o'clock ru . r. Lecklider called short recess at appr imately 10 p.m._ 2. Rezoning Application 00-030Z - Preliminary Development Plan - Homestead Communities Carson Combs said this is a rezoning through the PUD preliminary development plan for a multi-use development of 60 detached residential units and 12 tive/work units_ The site also has 3.2 acres of openspace. The concept plan was approved in December 1999/January 2000 for 60 detached, and 15 multi-story live/work units. The Commission. was supportive of the project, provided it would have sufficient buffering adjacent to PCD uses to the south and west_ The Commission also indicated a desire to reduce the proposed density. He showed a few slides. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zonin?, ommission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 7 Mr. Combs said the "J"-shaped site is located on the south side of Post Road and includes the existing retention pond_ Recently completed Wall Street runs along its south border. Mr. Combs said the live/work units are next to the pond. Many amenities are proposed_ The tree line in the center of the site will be removed. This is very near Coffman Park and the park along the North Fork_ Buffering along Wall Street includes stone walls and evergreens. The Post Road Buffer will be reconfigured and landscaped more heavily. A water feature runs along the length of Post Road. The applicant will work with the daycare on buffering. The Post Road ponding must look natural. He said staff requests that the plantings be replaced. Mr. Combs said the architecture mimics Perimeter Center. Four-sided architecture is proposed for the live/work units. The materials include stucco, Hardi-plank, and manufactured stone. The 60 houses will be a mix of ranch, 1 %2 story and two-story buildings. The architecture will define the streetscapes and village greens_ A variety of stone walls and fences will provide a continuous pedestrian environment+ The density proposed is 3.2 du/ac with a maximum of 7,650 square feet of net leasable space for offices or commercial uses within the livelwork azea. The Community Plan recommends office or mixed use with employment emphasis. The Plan holds residential use to five du/ac. He said Wow! Elements were incorporated. A 100-foot building and pavement setback along Post Road is proposed. The Wall Street setback is 50 feet and along Metatec Boulevazd, 25 feet. He said staff has expressed concern about buffering. He said the Landscape Inspector confirmed that the are 151 caliper inches on this site, and staff recommends those be replaced according to the Tree Preservation Ordinance. The openspace requirement for this site is 4.41 acres. This will include 1.9 acres for the Post Road buffer and 1.3 acres along the existing pond. Mr. Combs said in the past, the required setback usually got one-half credit toward the park requirement. Based on this, the plan is 1.21 acres short of the required park space. The 24-foot wide streets aze proposed to be private. Post Road would receive access for bicycles through the existing bridge, linking it to the bikepath system. Mr. Combs said this is a unique mixed-use environment_ It emphasizes architecture and is compact and pedestrian-oriented. It has quality materials and detailing_ The Community Plan recommends office, but this will have a lower traffic impact. The plan also incorporated Wow! features. Staff recommends approval with 17 conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code to the satisfaction of staff; 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to show the location of specific species and meet all Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) That plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; 6) That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated to the satisfaction of staff and that plans be revised to reflect the same; 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Plaaning and Zonis. 'ommission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 8 'That the tent be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subarea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfaction of staff; 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no parking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff; 10) That the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Engineering Division; 11) That no direct vehicular access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 13) That all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standards of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15) That street names be provide to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 1~That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; and 17) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council. Mr. Combs noted it was about 10:00 p.m., and he asked; for the benefit of the remaining applicants, if the Commission was willing to waive the 11 o'clock rule. The Commission discussed the issue and deferred its decision until 11:00 p.m.. Mr. Eastep said he continues to have a problem with the density and too little pazk being provided. A payment instead of part of the parkland is being offered which seems inappropriate. He did like the Wow elements that were incorporated. He thought several buildings should be eliminated and turned into park. Mr. Combs said the site is quite small and very linear. The stormwater pond cannot be moved. It is very hazd to find adequate appropriate land to meet the Code park requirement. Ms. Clazke said ideally, eliminating buildings would be good, but those economics do not work. Staff thinks this is a good project with a good site plan. Staff has tried to be consistent with its recommendations on other sites for park location and credit given. A combination of land and money to meet the park requirement is appropriate for this site. Ms. Boring asked about the community gardens previously shown along Post Road. Ms. Clazke said not everyone liked that concept. Ms. Boring wanted more open space. Mr. Fishman thought more open space should be added near the ponds_ It looks too dense. He could not support the extensive length of the private road shown for this project. Future residents always want them converted to public streets. This has happened several times. Mr. Combs said the streets would be 24 feet in width, and this is consistent with the design intent _ of the plan. Engineering has agreed to this plan. Mr. Hammersmith noted that private streets need to meet the public street standards, including full curb and gutter section. Ms. Clarke said the advantage of a private street is that building setbacks wil! not apply. Mr. Fishman was concerned that Dublin may own these streets in ten years because a homeowners' group was unprepared to pay for major street maintenance. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zone. '.ommission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 9 Ms. Boring said at times, a condo association wants to maintain control, schedule its trash pick- up times, etc. She did not think it was City policy to give 50 percent credit for setbacks and buffers: Mr. Combs said when amenities are added to those areas, consistent with developed parkland, the staff has endorsed giving park credit. There are ponds, waterfalls, landscaping, a stone bridge, pedestrian links, etc. The frontage is 1,400 feet. The park area will be dedicated to the City but maintained by a forced and funded homeowners' association. _ Ms. Boring said the pool is at the east edge, and inconvenient to most residents. There needs to be limited colors, without pink, blue, and white houses as seen in Florida. Colors should be subject to Commission approval_ Mr. Combs said the color palette will be determined .later. House elevations will be assigned from that approved color palette. The chimney material was not specified. The Metatec setback is 50 feet; Wall Street is 40 feet; and Post Road is 100 feet_ All internal setbacks will be 10 feet. Ms. Boring said she favored stone fencing strongly over wrought iron. Mr. Combs said there is an internal sidewalk along both sides of the internal roadway. Mr. Combs said the concept plan had a Post Road entrance, and it caused a lot of debate. Staff has consistently tried to de-emphasize Post Road by encouraging alternative access_ Ms. Clarke said the Post Road access shown on the concept plan was a very big problem and inconsistent with a variety of adopted plans and policies. She did not recollect that the Commission shared that view, at least after hearing that the neighbors supported it_ Mr. Combs said the substantial grading needed will remove the tree row. The staff supports the land use and plan. It has been redesigned and includes many amenities. It does not match the Community Plan, per se, but it will have a lower impact than an office. Mr. Fishman noted staff has changed its recommendation since the concept plan. Ms. Clarke said this site was never rated as a prime office site, and it now has almost no architectural controls. Aflat-roofed office building along Post Road could not be disapproved based on current zoning. Given that, staff considered this redesign and azchitecture as it related to Post Road and the impact on the neighbors. This seemed to be a very good alternative. Staff supports the density of 3.2 du/ac. Ms. Clarke said the Community Plan was based on Y impacts, and offices have higher impacts, especially in peak hour traffic, than residential uses_ Staff believes this is an acceptable change from the Community Plan. Mr. Fishman asked about the lack of parkland within the development. Ms. Clarke said there is limited on-site pazk, but Coffinan Park and the pazkland assembled along the Indian Run are very close. Those provide for a wide range of recreational experiences. She reported that Council recently bought the 14-acre Halloran property just to the north on Post Road_ Mr. Eastep and Mr. Sprague said it would make a wonderful park. Mr. Fishman said it is too dense with nowhere for children to play_ Mr. Eastep agreed and predicted that the future residents would demand a tunnel under Post Road. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zoning ..,ommission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 10 Mr. Combs said the detention pond was part of the total site acreage and density calculation, but it was not counted as open space. Ms. Boring said the layout looked tight_ Mr. Fishman asked if the pond at Perimeter Center counted for openspace. Ms. Clarke said no, but it is a largely commercial development without a parkland requirement. She noted that the ponds at the Asherton Apartments were included in the gross density. Mr. Lecklider said the pocket parks at the golf course were comparable with other parkland nearby. There is a bikepath to Coffman Park from here, and these residents will probably not have young children_ Ms. Salay agreed, and said people can make an informed choice in buying here. She said this is not a typical Dublin development. Mr. Eastep thought that the upcoming Emerald Parkway bridge over US 33 will improve this as an office site. This is income-producing land, and it should remain that way. He considered this to be a spot zoning and detrimental to Dublin. Mr. Fishman agreed. Mr. Lecklider disagreed and said this is a transitional use. He hoped it will keep the commercial traffic off Post Road. Mr. Eastep said commercial traffic has no access to Post Road. Post Road is being de-emphasized. Mr. Fishman wanted buildings eliminated neaz the pond. He could support this plan if the space was opened up next to the retention pond. Mr. Lecklider asked if the live/work u[uts were moved from the entrance at .staffs suggestion_ Mr. Combs said yes due to higher traffic impact and direct access right from Wall Street. Mr. Combs said pazk should be dedicated. A 100-foot setback along Post Road and the area around the pond would be included. The proposal is about 1.2 acres short of Code for pazk, and the fee for this would be $45,275. The internal village green spaces were not credited toward the parkland, and half of the 100-foot Post Road setback was credited. Mr. Sprague suggested the pool and community center be sited closer to the comer (Columbus Laser Surgery). The 1.2 acres should be put into greenspace, and he did not support accepting a fee instead of land. They should eliminate some of the units and move the live/work units_ He said the residents deserved a pazk. Ms. Salay did not oppose re-siting the community center and pool. She noted other subdivisions were approved with Wow elements that affected density. This proposal "Wowed" her. Ms. Boring said this area is classified as a River Heritage, but this design is European_ It contrasts with the existing older neighborhood She said the Wow identification should be carved all the way through. The design conflicts and needs modification. Ms. Clarke encouraged the Commission to be clear about. any problem observed in the architecture, layout, or design. She noted the program has not yet been adopted. At about 11 p..m. o'clock, Mr. Lecklider took a straw poll on waiving the 11 o'clock rule. The Commissioners were split. Steve Caplinger said NUi Homes would accept being deferred until the next meeting. Mr. Lecklider said it would be the first case on Juiy 20. 040282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonis ~mmission - Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 11 Gary Gray, Homestead Communities, showed proposed renderings. Site amenities include a Dublin dry-laid stone wall, an archway and a trellis along Wall Street. This is a condominium project for empty nesters, and the buildings will cost $ i 00-$1 SO per squaze foot to construct_ The pool is located away from the residential to avoid noise from visiting grandkids. He said accessory structures are permitted such as a greenhouse, tool shed, and woodworking shop. The first two bays of the livelwork building will be the community center that includes a cafe, a living room, a fitness center, and two private offices for business and sales_ Mr. Gray said the square footage in the text has been limited to be low impact. He said the original plan had 75 units, plus 15 commercial spaces. The commercial space had the greatest impact due to how the parking cuts into greenspace. Seven commercial spaces were cut. The - plan now has 72 total units with eight commercial units. ' Mr. Gray said they agreed to all the above conditions, except 4 and 17. They asked that the full landscape plan be submitted at the final development plan. Regarding Condition 6, they would like to relocate the trees along Post Road to the pond azea_ This is needed due to regrading, and if the trees are moved twice, they might not survive_ Ms. Newcomb said the trees are part of the Post Road Buffer. Staff does not want them moved twice, but to be relocated elsewhere along Post Road_ Mr. Gray agreed, but said half of the trees aze already dead. He proposed that new trees be planted also on Post Road. He agreed to put the existing trees where staff wanted. Ms. Newcomb agreed. Mr. Gray said regazding Conditions 8 and 10, they can meet the Fire turning radii standards, but Dublin's standard may be higher. They want to maintain an appropriate scale and will work with _ staff and the fire department on this. Regarding Condition 11, they want vehicular access onto Post Road. Staff recommended removing it, and they complied. Now, however, Mr. Gray said they definitely want Post Road access_ He said adding a left turn stacking lane on Post Road will change the roadway character and increase traffic. Mr. Gray said private streets for a condominium project make sense. It is very difficult legally to convert a private street to a public one. Mr. Fishman disagreed and said the homeowners cannot afford to maintain them. There was additional discussion on this issue. Mr. Gray said the homeowners' association would be fully funded. Ms. Salay said the decision of public or private street is a City Council decision. Mr. Gray said the building colors will be similar to those in Perimeter Center, probably limited to three or four earthtones_ The same color will not be used on side by side buildings. He said there is no stucco, only stone and Hardi-plank. The street side of the houses will be stone. The walls that divide yards will be wrought iron with a few exceptions. He said the 2,000 square foot units will average $300,000_ Mr. Gray said it would be about one-third stucco stone to two-thirds Hazdiplank. There will be a . stone water table or a stone gable with siding on the sides_ There are no chimneys; any fireplaces will be direct vented and on the same elevation as the electric and gas meters. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zonir 'ommission - " Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 12 Mr_ Gray said two units could be eliminated, leaving 70 units. They would like to move a commercial building near the entrance. Mr. Fishman wanted more water frontage. Mr. Gray said the openspace is not all green. It includes a plaza space. He feels this development is higher quality and better than anything he had worked on in Dublin. Mr. Sprague said this is obviously high quality with a lot of thought given.. He said the live/work concept was interesting. Mr. Gray said they were being pioneers in the industry, but they have received much positive response from potential residents_ Mr. L.ecklider said it made sense to locate the pool away from the residences due to the noise. He saw merit in an access at Post Road and liked the live/work units. Because this is a residcn6ai development, it related more to the north side of Post Road than to the commercial development along Wall Street. It will not generate much traffic_ Ms. Boring was still concerned about the layout. She liked the Post Road Buffer plan as a good transition. She said she did not think the residents on Hirai roads wanted another curbcut. Ms. Salay said access becomes a physical connection to those homes on Post Road_ Ms. Boring said this would be true if it were a standard single-family neighborhood on public streets. It has a pedestrian connection, and no vehicular connection is desirable. Mr. Lecklider said the Post Road access was originally acceptable to most of the Commissioners at the concept plan. Ms. Salay said the condominium developments near her neighborhood have 70 to 90 units and a car is never seen, regardless of the time of day_ Mr. Lecklider preferred to see dimensional shingles. Mr. Fishman noted that Donato's was required to have shake roofs. Mr. Gray said they were too expensive, and they would rather put that money in the stone walls. Mr. Fishman suggested using artificial slate or something that gives dimension and high quality. Mr. Gray said they might be able to do something on the two work buildings because they were larger. Mr. Fishman said if shake shingles are put on properly, they can last 50 years or more. Mr. Gray agreed, but said the initial cost is extremely high. Mr. Fishman said standing seam roofs might be used. Mr. Gray said the Elkline slate-look shingle with three different layers and a thick shadow line was proposed for the single-family units. - Paul Hammersmith said staff would only support the proposed access on Post Road if it includes a westbound left turn lane. Mr. Fishman agreed. Ms. Salay and Mr. Sprague did not think the left turn lane was needed for 70 units. Various Dublin examples were then discussed by the Commission. Mr_ Gray said stucco would be eliminated as a material from the text. The buildings will be of stone and Hardiplank with wood trim. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffman Park Dubl"in Planning and Zoning .,ommission " Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 13 Mr. Lecklider asked about signage on the awnings. Mr_ Gray agreed to work awning signage out with the Code and staff. The livelwork units, per the text, will have one sign parallel to the street, a smaller sign perpendicular and nothing on the awning. Mr. Gray said proposed conditional uses will be better defined in the text. Mr. Combs said .conditional uses needed to be listed by category. Mr. Gray will work with staff. Edith Driscoll, representing Post Road residents, said she had previously conveyed the neighbors' support for this proposal, and they enthusiastically welcomed this high quality residential expansion on Post Road. It is slightly distressing to hear some of the Commissioners' speculation about the future of Post Road. This development would be a tremendous asset to the community. She said one nearby resident was concemed about when the dumpster would be serviced. She said the Post Road residents would like the Commission to approve this. Chris Cline, Post Road resident, said they strongly favor this proposal. The site will never have an A or B-class office. This is very appropriate and nicer than flat roof offices. Mr. Cline said the Post Road access was very important_ He said in his letter (distributed to the Conunission), they need a project to relate with Post Road. The residents want the highest quality feasible and a project that is tied into Post Road. He said there were no definable standards for a left turn lane. There should be a rational, reasonable, and measurable reason for it. A left turn lane should result only if the traffic justification is famished for it. ` Mr. Cline said the Wow! Ordinance shows this site as Dublin Model, not River Heritage. Mr. Lecklider preferred no left turn lane. However, he was concerned about the curve heading west. Mr. Hammersmith said that was somewhat away from the site. Mr. Lecklider wondered if a left turn lane could be created at Metatec Boulevard as an alternative. Mr. Hammersmith said no, not for this site_ Mr. Fishman opposed Post Road access, especially if Engineering says a left turn lane is needed. He expected the other entrances to be beautiful, and the fewer breaks on Post Road, the better. If the Post Road access is approved, a left turn lane is needed, but he opposes Post Road access. Mr. Eastep and Ms. Boring agreed that there should not be a Post Road access. Mr. Sprague hated to lose the greenspace, but he thought Post Road access was okay and that it did not necessarily require a turn lane. There needs to be a study. Ms. Salay agreed. She did not expect much traffic impact from 70 units using three entrances. Mr. Fishman said it was a safety issue, and rear end collisions can occur with only a few units. Mr. Gray said there are three entrances and agreed to do a traffic study. Ms. Boring said the developer should construct the left turn lane now. Otherwise, Dublin will have to pay for it later. If people do not want a turn lane on Post Road, it should not have Post Road access. She said connectivity is provided by bikepaths. S The Post Road access and left-turn lane issues were discussed at length_ 040282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zonis. .ommission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 14 The Post Road access and left-turn lane issues were discussed at length. Ms. Salay said Post Road access makes the existing neighborhood more viable. Mr. Lecklider preferred the access from Post Road. He could not support it over the objections raised by staff about a turn lane. Ms. Clarke said the only case where staff could not recommend adeveloper-funded sum lane was a recent "site plan review" in an R-4 District on Martin Road. The site was zoned for 20 years, and there is no Code or policy basis to require anoff--site improvement in a site plan review. This, however, is a rezoning applicatioq the appropriate point of the process to include needed off-site improvements_ Part of the PUD process is to show how a project fits into the overall system. This is a two-lane road with roadside ditches, asub-standard road, which requires a left turn lane for new development, to avoid reaz-end collisions, etc. Ms. Salay noted Metatec has no left turn lane. Ms. Clarke said it was the first commercial building on the south side of Post Road, 15 or more years ago, and it predates this policy. She said there is no stacking lane at Commerce Pazkway because it was designed to be converted at some point to a cul de sac, with no connection with Post Road. Ms. Boring said the Recreation Center and Gorden Farms have left turn lanes. Ms. Clarke said if a left turn lane akeady exists, no left turn lane is required of a new development. This is usually included at the preliminary plat or rezoning of the property_ Mr. Harnmersmith said he and Balbir Kindra concur that this development needs a left turn lane, if access to Post Road is approved. Post Road is a collector with a lot of traffic. The golf course has the same requirement. Ms. Salay said those are lazger developments. Ms. Boring said the policy saves the City from doing future improvements. It makes good sense. The policy is to get the road improvements with the developments. Mr. Gray said they still want the access and would like to study it with the City Engineer. If it is a matter of public safety and liability, they will build a left turn lane. Mr. Fishman thought it was better for the Post Road residents without the north entrance. He wanted Post Road to be as green as possible, and it is dangerous to go against the Engineer's recommendation. Mr. Leckiider agreed. There was more discussion on the access issue. Ms. Salay said she would like to see quantifiable evidence for left turn lanes. It should not be arbitrarily required without a traffic count and study by the applicant. Mr. Lecklider referred the left tum lane issue to staff. He said Conditions 4, 6, 8, 10, and 17 had been addressed and resolved. Mr. Gray said any exterior chimneys will be masonry. ,i Ms. Clarke said the access issue did not need a determination now. It could be decided at the final development plan. However, she said it was necessary that the developer be put on notice that it may be required, due to its cost. Mr. Gray understood. 040282 'City ojDublir~ Division ojPtanning. 5800Shier-Rings Raced Dublin. Ohio 4316-1236 Homestead at TelephonellDD_ 614/761-6550 FAX- 614/761-6566 Coffman Park Dublin Planning and Zoning commission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page i 5 Ms. Boring made the motion for approval because it protects and enhances the scenic character of Post Road, provides a transition between Perimeter Center uses and the residences, includes quality architecture, pedestrian amenities and "Wow elements, with 20 conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code to the satisfaction of star; 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to meet Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) That plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fencing be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; 6) That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated once to the satisfaction of staff; 7) That the text be revised regazding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subarea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the ` satisfaction of staff; 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no pazking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of staff; 10) That the applicant work with staff and fue officials to meet all health, safety and welfaze issues regarding the design of all private drives, pazking azeas, and drive approaches; 11) That no direct vehicle access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 13) That all utility connections andlor extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standazds of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stormwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15) That street names be provided to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 16) That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; 17) That two units be eliminated; 18) That the applicant utilize dimensional shingles or a mix of shingle types, subject to staff approval; 19) That stucco be eliminated from the proposed materials; and 20) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling for City Council. Mr. Fishman seconded the motion. Mr. Gray said his partners would withdrawn their application if the Post Road access were not included. 1vls. Boring noted that the applicant had the staff report and recommended conditions for a week_ She said this was a power play after three hours of discussion. Mr. Gray disagreed. Post Road was a critical part of this application. 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zoning ~:ommission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 16 Ms. Clarke said this is a PUD, and the Commission has three choices: approve, approve with modifications, and disapprove. She said the modifications do not need to be accepted by the applicant_ The applicant can withdraw the application at any time. Mr. Gray requested a vote, and agreed to the above conditions, except Condition 11. Mr. Lecklider asked what options exist for Commissioners who favor Post Road access; the above motion rules out Post Road access. Ms_ Readier said if there is a tied vote, Council can make the decision by a majority vote. It can include the conditions it wants, and the applicant can make the same argument at Council. Mr. Gray apologized. He said they are not asking for the curbcut without a rum lane. The curbcut was very important to the project. He asked that the entrance issue be considered separately. Ms. Boring said the drawings presented to the Commission show no Post Road access. If this is pivotal to the applicant, it should be on the drawings and/or announced much earlier, not at the time of the motion. The Commission should not be blamed for the meeting running until 1 a.m. when applicants play games. The vote: Mr_ Sprague this was a great project with much improvement. He said the project would be good without the access point, but he voted no. Ms. Salay wanted the access resolved and would like the condition reworded. She preferred having Post Road access and voted no. Mr. Eastep, no. Mr. Lecklider did not favor Condition 11. Because he otherwise favors the ` project, he voted yes. Mr. Fishman favored the application but disliked the tactics. He did not want a safety hazard by ignoring City Engineer's recommendation and voted no. Ms. Boring voted no. (Motion failed 1-5.) Mr. Spague made a second motion to approve this application with all conditions and bases above except Condition 11. Ms. Salay seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Eastep, no; Mr. Fishman, no; Ms_ Boring, no; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms_ Salay, yes; and Mr. Sprague, yes. (Motion failed 3-3.) Ms. Readier said for the record, the two motions failed, and this application will be forwazded with no recommendation. Ms. Clazke said no conditions were recommended. Ms. Salay said it is a wonderful project. Mr_ Fishman it needs a compromise on the turn lane. Ms. Boring made a motion to adjoum due to the tactics used and the late hour. There was more discussion. Mr. Eastep seconded, and the vote was as follows: Mr. Fishman, no; Ms. Salay, no; Mr. Lecklider, no; Mr. Sprague, no; Mr. Eastep, yes; and Ms. Boring, yes. (Motion to adjourn failed 2-4.) Mr: Fishman made a motion for approval (with no access to Post Road) because it protects and enhances the scenic character of Post Road, provides a transition between Perimeter Center and the residences, includes quality azchitecture, pedestrian amenities and "Wow 1" elements, with j 20 conditions: 1) That required open space be dedicated to the City; 2) That the buffer along the daycare meet Code to the satisfaction of staff; 040282 Homestead at Coffinan Park Dublin Planning and Zoning, Ammission Agenda -July 6, 2000 Page 17 3) That the design of River Heritage Character "Wow!" elements be detailed at the final development plan stage in conformance with the drafted guidelines; 4) That the landscape plan be revised to meet Code requirements for screening and perimeter plantings; 5) That plans for the tree preservation ordinance reflect a total of 151 replacement inches and that protective fene'uig be utilized throughout all phases of construction, to the satisfaction of staff; 6) That existing landscaping along the Post Road buffer be relocated once to the satisfaction of staff; 7) ~ That the text be revised regarding pavement setbacks, height, residential signage, awning signage, conditional uses for Subazea B-3, and that signage details be submitted to the satisfacfion of star 8) That the development meets all turning radius requirements for fire and trash vehicles; 9) That "no parking" signs and "one way" signs be provided to the satisfaction of stag 10) That the applicant work with staff and fire officials to meet all health, safety and welfare issues regazding the design of all private drives, parking areas, and drive approaches; 11) That no direct vehicle access be permitted onto Post Road; 12) That the site comply with the Division of Engineering Administrative Policy for Intersection Visibility Triangles at all proposed access points; 13) That all utility connections and/or extensions meet or exceed the requirements and standazds of the Division of Engineering and that no buildings or structures encroach upon required easements; 14) That the site comply with Stortnwater Regulations, and that stormwater capacity for the existing pond be preserved; 15) That street names be provided to the satisfaction of staff prior to scheduling for City Council; 16) That palettes for building elevations, fences, shingles and other materials be submitted with the final development plan; 17) That two units be eliminated; 18) That the applicant utilize dimensional shingles or a mix of shingle types, subject to staff approval; 19) That stucco be eliminated from the proposed materials; and 20) That all applicable conditions be met prior to scheduling-for City Council. Mr. Lecklider seconded, and the vote was as follows: Ms. Salay, yes, and she favors a vehicular connection on Post Road. Mr. Sprague, yes, and he favors a Post Road connection. Ms. Boring, no. Mr. Eastep, no. Mr_ Lecklider, yes, and he favors access on Post Road. Mr. Fishman, yes, and he resented working for three hours to resolve issues in the best interest of Dublin followed by threats from the developer. He noted the drawings reflect no access. (4-2 Approved.) 3. Final Plat 00-O1 -Westbury Sec ' n 5 -Lots 147 throu 55 This case was po ned due to the late our without discussio r vote. 4. used Final Develop nt Plan 00-067FDP - offman Park - 56tN,,Irost Road case was. postponed a to the late hour wi ut discussion or vote/ 04-0282 Homestead at Coffinan Pazk RECORD OF Pi20CEEDliVGS Minutes of Dublin City Council Mating Page 5 Hdd s~mn , r~ Mr. McCash moved amend the ordinance ' searon of the -after the wood' "and interpreted-" Mayor sooorrdcd the V - Mr. Adamek, , Mayor Kransdrber ,Mrs. Boring. Yes; Chianic' ,yes; Mr. P n, Yes; Mr. M V - Mr. Peterson, Mr. McCash, Yes; Mr. Adamek, yes; M r Kranstuber, Yes; 'ci-Zrrerrher, yes. Ordinance 59-00 - An Ordinance Providing for a Change in Zoning for 22.462 '~Aeres Looted oa the Soatheast Corner of Medrtec Bealevard and Post Road, From: PCD, Planned Commerce District, To: PUD, Planned iTait Developaieat {Homestead Commanities/Case File No. 00-030Z) (App4cant: ContiaeataUNKI Office Ventures LTD., cJo Jonathan Kass, P.O. Box 712. Dublin, OH 43017; represartod by Gary Gray, Homestead Communities, 150 Broad Strtiet, Columbus, OH 4321 ~ Mr. McCash indicated that he will abstain on this matter and left Council Chambers. Ms. Clarke noted that this is a rezoning for property currently zoned for office use on the south side of Post Road. The proposal is for a residential condominium development which would not be permitted under the cr,rr~tly zoned PCD district This concept pion was favorably reviewed by Council in January. It includes 72 units on 22 acres. Ms. Clarke showed slides of the site and the surrounding area. Their plan has been amended slightly since the Planning Commission review -the one in the Council packet shows a broader setback from Metatec Drive and two units were dropped from a boilding. These are condominium homes with emphasis on a linear water feature to be constructed along Post Road, with a br7cepaW connection from this new residential community, and access from two points on Wall Street and one on Metatec. The most contentious issue was whether this site should also have access from Post Road. The application before Council does not show access from Post Road, which was the recommendation from Planning Comm;~cion after several motions during the debate. The Commissioners were divided on this issue, but the prevailing vote was that the development should not have access to Post Road, a position tbe staff supported. The residents along Post Road endorsed an access on Post Road. This application does not conform with the land use recommended in the Community Plan. However, after design modifications over several months of meetings wiW the applicant, staff recommended approval Planning Commission recommended approval as well, with 20 conditions as listed in the P&Z Record of Action of July 6, 2000. There was a split vote of 42. There was genera( agreement among the Commissioners Wort this did provide for an appropriate character on the south side of Post Road, with very attractive architecnrre, and substantiated a deviation from the Community Plan which recommended o6ce use. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked why staff recommended that there be no curb cuts on Post Road? Ms. Clarke stated that under the Perimeter Center text, all of tbe land being developed Were, with the exception of acouple ofsingle-family houses, is oriented toward We new internal road system, so that new trips are not generated onto Post Road. Over We last 15-20 years, We speed and amount of traffic on Post Road has beat an issue. To take We densest housing in We area and provide access onto Post -Road was cuuntetproductiva The density for We project is at 3.2 units per acre. Mrs. Boring noted that at We concept plan stage, Council recommended lowering We _ density, but this has not happened. Council had previously expressed concern aboat the approximately 30percent ofmulti-family zoned property in the development pipeline, and this may impact that percentage. Ms. Clarice stated that what she heard during We Community Plan process was the desire to remforcesingle-family neighborhoods and to assure long-term stability in the . community. Post Road is dill a single-family neighborhood and these are virtually ao architectural controls for this land. This is a better plan for the neighborhood, and Were 04-028Z Homestead at Coffinan Park RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Mm+rtesof - _ -_Meeting Dublin esty Council Meeting 6 Held ~ S, will be far less traffic impact than that which would be geaaated by office use. As Dublin continues to expa~ience traffic problems, this becomes an important considaatioa. Mrs. Boring asked if Dublin has used curb cuts to lower the speed of traffic. Riverside Drive has many snub cuts, but k does not seem to lower the speed. Ms_ Clazke responded stated that }righway engineers indicate curb arts generally slow traffic, but turning movement ina+eases accidents. It has not been the City policy to use curb cuts to slow traffic. Mayor Kraasdrber' asked for clarification abort the number of votes needed for approval of the tenoning, is view of Mr. Refiner's absence and Mr. McCash's abstention, and how many votes wouM be needed W add the stub cut amendment far Post Road. Mr. Smith responded that the rezoning t+equires four votes of Council to approve, and an amendment would t+equire a majority as welt. ('.a~,y C*rav Ho cad Communities stated that they have met with the neighbors in the area, and have submitted letters of support from several ootpotate employers supporting the diversity of housing offered. The immediate commercial neighbors have also submitted letters of support They have worked with the neighboring propertres regarding land use, buffering and traffic patterns. Their targd market is the over 55 group who is looking for diversified housing options, and these 70 units constitute less than five percent of the potential market in Wis area He noted that the Indian Ridge rezoning for multi-family was removed last year and r+eyoned for the Cardinal Health project, so there actually has been a reduction in approved multi-family projects in Dublin. These units are totally detached units with full basements and attached garages which will cost between 5270,000 to 5280,000. There are lO five/work units designed for an office space and living quarters above; the rest are detached units of approximately 2,000 plus square feet They are grouped around village greens which feed into the linear water feature along Post Road. The plan was enhanced subsequent to the Planning Commission review as Ms. Clarice has described. The exposure and visibility along Post RoaEd were increased. He clarified that the applicant desires a curb cut on Post Road, but the Engineering staff has indicated that it would require a rum lane. That sum lane would be detrimental to the Post Road water feature, so they have redesigned Weir project to have the entrance ax another location. He then described other features of We plan. Edith Driscoll 6230 Post Road stated that she r+epr+esents the residents of Post Road. Council has received a copy of Weir petition which supports this rezoning. The issue is wiW We curb cut on Post Road and the related left turn lane. She reviewed the rear-end collision records fivm 1991 through 1998 between Emerald Parkway and Avery Road along Post Road. There were four such incidents during that period of time. This - indicates that not adding a left rum lane ai this curb cut would not result in a safety issue. Residents of Post Road support this development as an asses to We residential stature of Post Road. The residents support access along Post Road, and believe that the aceident records do not justify adding a left turn lane at this location Cht+s Cline= 6060 Post Road slated that the applicant had previously indicated to them that the curb cut on Post Road was an important factor to We viability and gaafity of the project That cunt cut was included in the concept plan which was approved by Council The residents are concerned wiW traffic on Post Road, and the density of this project is actually krwer than portions of Waterford Village. It is not fait to ca11 this a multi- " family project on that basis. This land of project produces a low traffic load and at off- peaktimes. WiW all of the entrances to We project, the Post Road caub cut would not be significa~. The applicant had a traffic study done and the applicant also applied the ODOT standard related to a requirement for a left rum lane - all of the formulas indicated there is no reason for this. The Post Road entrance will make this development more a part of the existing neighbocliood. This rezoning makes sense as a traasitiooal 04-0282 site to the residential neighborhood The Post Road neighborhood previously had Homestead at Coffinan Park RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Mtmtoec of nublin ~y Council Meeting Page 7 Held Cmtrmhrs S 7rVV1 . ro9~ no nub arts on Post Road from the Perimetier Center development as that was a hmd use not compah'ble with thew crtidattial area. This development with low density - nsideatial is compatr~le with rhea ndghbochood. It is the right land use for this site. Mr. Peterson stated that, in trading PdzZ minutes, it seems the plan as proposed did not i~lude a Post Road nub cut That the Commission ~teRained a number of motions and conditioat, all of which wati agreed to, exaXrt that there wouM be no Post Road curb cut. He asked for clarification of whether the applicant is t+equesting the arrb cut Mr. Gray stated that they now agree with ail of the conditions, inchuling no Post Road curb art However, iftlxxe were a way that a Post Road access could be obtained without a kft hand rum lane, they would ague to that as we1L Mr. Cline stated that the applicant wanted a nub art on Post Road at the outset, but they could not obtain staff approval without trtttoving that nub cut from the plan. For this reason, the applicant is willing to aaxpt no nub art on Post Road. Mayor Ittanst»ber staled that than are three scenarios: a nub cut with a tun lane on Post Road, a nub cut without a loft tun lane, oc no nub art on Post Road. He asked the applicant to atI'um that he does not have a problem with including a nub cut on Post Road, but objects to the requiranenL of a left rum lane which impacts rho water feature. Mr. Gray confirmed that this is corrrct Ms. (atinnici-Zuercher asked where the nub art along Post would be. Ms. Clarke trsponded that it would be at the pedestrian bridge location Mr. Peterson confirmed that the bikepaths and sidewalks are connected to the water . feature even without a nub cut Mr. Gray confimted this. Mayor ICranstuber stated that the minutes reflect that PBcZ grappled with this issue and 5nally endorsed the no access on Post Road version of the Plan. Ms. Clarice stated that the Engineering division cannot support Post Road access without a left turn lane, as Post is considered a substandard road with ditches oa both sides. This recommendation is consistent with what has been done in other developments. Mr. Hensley asked why the neighbors support the nub cut on Post Road. Ms. Claclce responded that they believe it reinforces Post Road as a viable residential neighborhood. - Mrs. Boring noted that she has had several phone conversations with Mr. Gray regarding this issue. The policy of the City has been that a developer pays the cost of a left rum lane needod to serve a development She cannot suppod the project with a nub cut on Post Road. The connectivity to the Post Road neighborhoods is provided via the bikepaths. Mr. Adamek asked for clarification from the applicant about the enhancement of the Metatec entrance. Mr. Gray clarified that the intact of enhancing the Metatec entrance was to provide more visibility to Post Road by removing two houses at that end of the site. They have added more water at this end of the site as well Mr. Cline noted that the residents do not want a nub cut on Post Road if a rum lane is required. Ms. Chinnici Zuerrher asked Engineering to explain their justification for this recommardation. Mr. ICindra stated that the site ahrady has three other nub arts and typically, this type of site would be allowed two curb cuts. This site wilt generate aibout 700 vehicles per day 04-0282 and is close to the nave on Post Road. In these cases, Cite policy has been to add a left - Homestead at Coffman Park RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS - ) d Dublin City Coancii Meeting Page 8 _ _ M~°g Held Sr= t~nhrr 5,100_ - tam lane. A left rum lane was nequirod for the Rec Center. While there have been few aocideats aloog this stretch of roadway, the risk will irrer+ease with the higher traffic - volumes. If the City does not require this project to have a kft turn larie, it may 6e difficult >b roquu+e others in the futune_ Mrs. Boring noted War she had grappled with the land use change, but believes this creates a nice area along Post Road with a good buffer between the newer and the older areas. She will suppod dris re~onrng. Mr. Adamdc stated that this rs a quality product, and he has no concern with the land use change. He believes that Council creeds to abide by the recommendation of the professional staff in t+egatd in the kft hand turn lane for the curb cart. The applicant was pcudeat in beautifying the Metatec entrance in order to enhance the rtdghborhood feel He compliments the developer for integrating the neighborhoods into this plan. - Mayor Ktanstubec stated to the residents should be aware that the change by Council from income tax producing land use W residential is an exttaordinazy one, and does not conform to what was nxommeaded in the Community Plan. He believes in supporting P&Z and staff'rn their recommendations. Vote on the Ordinance -Mrs: Boring, yes; Mr. Peterson, Yes; Mr. Adamek, yes; Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, yes; Mayor ICranstuber, yes; Mr_ McCash, abstain Ordinance 107-00 An Ordinance Aath g an Employment ontraet for the Clerk of Coan ' Mr. Peterson ved to table this o until the September Council meeting. Mrs. Bo ' nded the motion. t o 'o -Mayor ,yes; Ms. Chronic uercher, yes; Mrs. B - yes; .Peterson, Yes; Mr_ A ek, yes. O & ADING - RD rdinance 109-00 - Ordinance Aatlto ' Distribation to the lire Convention and V' ' rs Bareau (DCVB) zcess of the Twenty ve Percent A1loated in A nee vrith Section 35 of the Codified O 'antes of the City of Dabiin to a Assistance forth eiocation of the D 's Operations. Mr. Adamek ' aced the ordinance Mr. Haosl stated that this o reflects the motion roved by Council based a recommendation of Finance Committee. ' ML Finance Chair that Ms. Grigsby's emo srun~na.;~r_c fhe 'on at 'meeting. 'The additi funding can be pro ' ed through the bed funds. . ~rinnici-Zuercher that the ordinance es into account the 'on which took place at the previ Council meeting, an that there wr t be a windfall created in the event bed tax revenues uch higher than prv ed. Mr. Hansley perhaps Council aid consider adding agency language at dre second g, as the Bureau ho o enter into a lease b upon this fimding assurance. Mr. A moved to amend the 'Hance to add emer language. Ms. 'cr-Zu~+cher second motion. V e do - Mrs. B yes; Mr. M es; Mr. Adamek, y ayor ber, yes; Ms. ci-Zuercher, yes. Ordinance 110-00 - Ordinance Accep ' g the Lowest and B Bid for the _ Stormwater Man emeat System Maia ante Program, an edaring an Emergency. Mayor -introduced the o ' . Mr. Haas stated that a detaited emo was provided by and Council is t+equ that Council _ 'di the public h and treat this as - on so that the pro can be imptanented. Kranswber moved t .dispense with the c hearing and for em (~02gZ e. Homestead at Coffinan Park ~fJ~~c,;y Department of Development Division of Planning 5800 Shier-Rings Road • Dublin, Ohio 43016 CITY OF DUBLIN Phone: 614-410-4600 • Fax: 614-410-4747 Memo TO: Members of Dublin City Council FROM: Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager ~o~-,~.~• J ~ DATE: February 11, 2004 INITIATED BY: Gary P. Gunderman, Assistant Pla~pf Director RE: Ordinance 13-04 Homestead at Coffman Park (Case #04-0282) SUMMARY: In 1988, the 22.462-acre site at the southeast corner of Post Road and Metatec Boulevard was zoned PCD (Planned Commerce District) for office and industrial uses as part of Perimeter Center. In 2000, the City approved a PUD preliminary development plan (rezoning) for a mixed-use development of 60 single-family, detached units and a "live-work" component that included two buildings comprised of twelve residential and eight office/commercial units. In March 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission disapproved the final development plan citing inconsistencies with the preliminary development plan. Following this disapproval, a revised preliminary development plan (rezoning) was submitted in 2003 that included a total of 68 single-family detached condominium units, On May 1, 2003, the Planning and Zoning Commission disapproved the modification to the PUD zoning, and the application was not forwarded to Council. This is a second request for a revised preliminary development plan of 68 single-family detached condominium units for the site RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the proposed preliminary development plan (rezoning) be forwarded to ~ the Planning and Zoning Commission for a recommendation.